#honestly being trans has really complicated my sexuality in so many ways and i don't always see people remember this i guess | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

nothorses · 1 year

Note

hi! this is a question about pansexuality that i fear asking. tbh i don't really care what anyone identifies as. everyone's part of my community to me. i am trying to wrap my head around bi v pan stuff as someone who is neither. i know bisexuals who are critical of the pan label because to them it distinguishes bisexuality as starkly Not being pansexuality. when definitions of bisexuality have included "attraction regardless of gender, or to all genders (and including trans and nb people)" for many bisexuals since like the 70s which is how i see pansexuality defined a lot of the time

i know that bi and pan have always been concurrent labels and they have a lot of overlap and that some ppl use them interchangeably. and i truly don't care that ppl id as pan. but i do feel weird seeing it juxtaposed to definitions of bisexuality that aren't inclusive of all bisexuals? (ie that bisexuals aren't attracted to ALL genders, just two or more.. when many bisexuals Are attracted to all genders! part of bisexual history is that people have been fighting to let others know Bisexuality is more inclusive than the literal like latin meaning of bi = two). i don't know where to stand on this divide. i love pansexuals and the pan label and the right to self determination in identity but i do understand the argument that it feels hurtful in a biphobic way to say it is inherently a distinct sexuality from being bisexual when it's. like. many bi and pan ppl would define their sexuality in the exact same way other than a difference in specific label. i feel like people hate this opinion lmao!!! please help! even if you hate my opinion too i literally feel like i need guidance KDBDBS

Tbh I think there's a lot of historical context to this whole convo, and I don't think you're alone in being confused. And honestly given the amount of info you have, I think you're in a pretty respectable spot about it. (And I say "historical" here in the sense that I am. 25. and I'm mostly talking about the things I have either seen firsthand, or read about/heard about from others.)

So like- when I was a Young Queer, it was very common for people to define "bi" as meaning "men and women" (or even "cis men and cis women"), and thus "pan" rose to popularity as an alternative to essentially mean "everyone, including trans and nonbinary people".

This was like, early 2010's? And I'm talking about other Young Queer spaces and interactions. And you kind of have to remember that in that time, it was kind of radical to tell people not to call things "gay" if they didn't like them. Joking that people were trans (usually in terms like "lol Justin Beiber is a lesbian") was common even in progressive spaces. I was stunned when a friend of mine asserted that they were just gonna stop using the r-slur, like, at all.

So I can kind of understand why "pan" might have felt like a needed thing at the time. I think it felt like a kind of shorthand for "I'm cool with trans people", and at least from my perspective, that was something you very much needed to state back then.

I think there are a lot of people my age who, if they don't still understand "bi" and "pan" that way, at least kind of "get" where that definition is coming from. And yeah, it's ahistorical as hell! "Bi" has always been inclusive of trans people. Not to mention people have been defining it all sorts of ways for a long time now; there are a ton of definitions out there, and how the word is defined often depends on who you ask.

But then you ask: if we know "bi" is and has always been trans-inclusive, why does anyone still need the word "pan"? And I think the answer is... complicated. And extremely personal, tbh.

This happens with queer language all the time; as terms are cycled out in favor of new ones, people who've been using them hang on regardless. Sometimes they don't know the language has been updated, but usually it's more than that. Usually they have more of a personal relationship with the word, and the community, that they can't just give up in favor of a new word.

Maybe some people who do understand that "bi" is not actually a transphobic term also still view "pan" as shorthand for "I'm cool with trans people", and that's important to them. Maybe they grew up with that word, formed relationships under it, and came out with it. Maybe the pan community impacted them in some profound way, and rejecting it over shifting definitions just doesn't feel right. There could be any number of reasons.

The other part of this is that much as people have come to understand the original definition of "bi" more widely now, the definition of "pan" and "bi" both have taken on multiple definitions as well. I've seen a lot of definitions that seem to exist just to differentiate the two. For example:

Bi: attracted to multiple (but not necessarily all) genders Pan: attracted to all genders

Bi: attracted to all genders, but in different ways, or with preferences Pan: attracted to all genders essentially the same

Bi: attracted to multiple (or all) genders Pan: attraction regardless of gender

I've also seen people use "bi" as the umbrella term, and "pan" as a more specific label beneath it (often with one of those pairs of definitions).

And you mention that "bi" has a lot of different definitions and understandings- so does pan! How a person understands those words, particularly when they identify with them, is going to be deeply personal and very likely very different from the next person. I think a good rule of thumb is to assume that whoever you're talking to may just have a different definition and understanding of the word they're using than you do, and try to ask them about it if it concerns you.

108 notes · View notes

genderqueerdykes · 2 years

Note

Not really about how to start T and stuff but more how to deal with it? I'm a trans-enby bisexual whos really fluid with my gender presentation. As I am now I don't feel like I'm super welcome or belong in mlm spaces, conversion and communities, since everyone views me as a woman no matter how masc I feel I am. But I'm so scared of starting T, because I dont wanna be an outcast in saphic spaces for being seen as a man. How do experience my identity without feeling guilty that I'm filling a space not meant for me?

*pats you on the shoulder* hey i'm literally right in your exact same position and i want you to know that you are in fact welcome in both of those spaces even though they can feel hostile.

historically, transmaculine people have been welcome in and have opted to not leave sapphic spaces regardless of how the identify sexually because sapphic spaces understand and accept how complicated our relationship with gender can be. if you feel safe there and have a part of you that still feels sapphic, it's your community. starting T doesn't remove you from the sapphic/lesbian community. there have been so, so so many transmasc sapphics and lesbians. please try to look into Leslie Feinberg's writings- ze was a transmasc lesbian with a very complex relationship with gender and HRT and transition. I think hir works might really help you feel more at peace with yourself.

i feel unwelcome in mlm spaces as well due to the rampant transphobia in Cis dominated mlm spaces. my recommendation is honestly seek out genderqueer, genderfluid, gnc and trans mlm spaces, because holy fuck are they so much more welcoming. i understand the cis gay community isn't evil, but the transphobia that has existed there has gone unchecked for decades and transmascs are finally speaking up about it en masse for the first time.

anyway TL;DR don't let these things stop you from taking T if you feel like you'll be happier and more complete if you do. You belong in these spaces, it's just about finding the right people within them.

it's okay to feel this way, but i just need you to know you're welcome in both communities, especially if you're genderfluid. take care of yourself, i hope you find some communities that feel like home to you!

#asks #answers #transmasc #transmasculine #nonbinary #enby #mlm #trans mlm #sapphic #wlw #transmasc lesbian #transmasc sapphic

31 notes · View notes

frostytundra01 · 1 year

Text

So I've known for a while that my identity is a sort of complicated mess. Like my sexuality is simple, I'm gay, I like men and all of that but my gender is a complex mess. It's filled with tens of fluid pronouns, quite a few static genders and a core of both xenogenders and just- male. But I've grown pretty confident in that and over time going from a snobby kid in truscum circles to this queer mess I've sort of mellowed out and stopped giving a fuck about what people identify as.

But being like this you sort of have to be aware of exclusionists and the mess that entails. Honestly though for stuff like neopronouns and gender that train has already started to die down. Like sure, there are a lot of assholes getting pissy about it but most of the people I know are fine with that stuff and aren't going to bat an eye. Like sure, trans stuff is still a nightmare and I'm not going to pretend it's not, or that it's not getting worse, especially for trans women but in the trans community itself and among a good amount of other queer people neopronouns and fringe identities are growing to be less of an issue. I can introduce myself to people with my full set of pronouns and have my list in a full pronoun page and I generally don't get harassed because people as a whole are getting better about this stuff.

Because of this and because of being more aware of this than other people I tend to pick up on other things that exclusionists do target. Mainly anyone using the 'wrong' sexuality label. While for most people new labels and new niche identities are fine, when someone has a complicated gender alignment it gets tricky when they identify as gay or lesbian. Though admittedly it usually turns up with lesbian more than often because just like with the truscum movement it tends to be us trans men cannibalizing the most.

Now for someone who's uninformed I get why this all may seem ridiculous. With such confirmed definitions how can a man be a lesbian or a woman be gay (in a non all encompassing term)? But I think a lot of people miss how important these communities can be for trans people. While I know for a lot of people this also has to do with how gender collides with sexuality and you can't discount that just because you want to be an asshole but even without that why are you trying to take people from this groups that are way safer for trans people than straight ones? When we're all facing such hard times I don't get how people ignore how devastating it can be to be driven away from these communities. Many trans men who like women or trans women that like men started in these communities and a lot of them hold on to that attachment. It's cruel to take that away just because you think those labels don't fit that person.

I think some of the same can be said for m-spec lesbian/gay people. Looking beyond the fact that sexuality is a spectrum people can fall in and out of and the fact that historical presidents exist these communities have a lot of overlap. Sure unlike with trans people they might not have fit into these communities at the start and it's not the exact same situation but these communities are still important spaces for a lot of people. When someone needs to fit in other spaces with people that have a queer attraction to men or a queer attraction to women I know these terms can be useful and while I can't say I know everything about them I still respect the hell out of them.

Beyond all of this I think the rigid separation and enforcement of labels can hurt the community more than ever help. At the end of the day we're all queer and while labels can help in confirming yourself and who you really are I don't think they should be small clubs and groups so separate from all the rest. I know from someone who has a collection of genders that's niche and probably has like 1 or 2 other people using some of them if that sort of means nothing. Obviously with a rift like that I'm not relating to anyone but I still feel it's a pretty lonely way to go about things. I just think it's better to accept people and those labels because at the end of the day that's just another queer person trying to get by. We aren't enemies, we aren't hurting each other just by existing so just let people exist with whatever labels they want. Thier definition of a label may not be exactly what you expect of that but it fits them so just let them use it and bring out a little more queer joy into the world.

Now at the end of this I do want to ask anyone who uses the terms or groups of terms I've talked about to correct me if I get anything wrong. I do have a lot of niche terms and fit into a more gender focused subset but I'm just a gay male leaning trans person so I can't get all the complexities of this topic. I just wanted to speak about something that's been bothering me so if you can help me make this better I would really appreciate it. That being said I hope everyone has a wonderful day except for exclusionists, homophobes and transphobes and I'll probably make another rant post like this some other day.

#mogai #anti exclusionist #pro xenogender #pro mogai #lesboy #gaygirl #mspec safe #mspec lesbian #mspec gay #exclus dni #exclusionists dni #fuck exclusionists #pro niche queer people #queer #solidarity #repost or comment if anything is wrong #original posts #long form posts #ft rants

9 notes · View notes

the-boy-with-round-glasses · 2 years

Note

Jesus I'm sorry you're going through that, workplace harrasment can be awful, is there an entity like HR that you could reach out to? Maybe a union? Sending you virtual hugs i hope you find a way to cope with this sitty situation

Honestly I do not know how I could put this out in harrassment to HR because it isn't exactly that because I can't prove that folks are weird around me for that reason, yes some people may think I'm a lesbian but they don't really act terribly around me or with me, they never even talk anything relating my sexuality(like asking me if I have a boyfriend, that one is highly intrusive but never happened so I can't go there for that reason!), they certainly can be weird but as long as it's through not being invasive like the example I have here it isn't something I can really bring to HR as a reason.

Problem is letting me go from work for that reason though, that's highly a practise in jobs, but there isn't much I can do about it anyway, my contract ends the end of this year, just makes me question how much opportunity do I have if they actually hire me, like what if they hire me and I work only for five months and get fired for whatever reason they can come up with to cover the reason is me being LGBT

Now with my supervisor who is weird but also is with everyone but specifically goes a lot to me, for reasons I can only think as either "keeping tabs on the newbie" or anything else really. I truly feel that trying to go anything HR gonna turn my relationship with her much more complicated and the HR of my workplace doesn't seem to really be good you know? Too many problems within them

Today I'm just irritated to be honest, one is always afraid on how much these things actually may affect your professional life you know? And I can not tell if might or not be a problem because people may not really know how to interact with someone LGBT but not have anything really against them but it's something that feels so out of their bubble world that they don't know how to be normal around someone who is, the old either ending up coming up as weirdly super supportive or trying their best to not sound offensive

The only thing I actually have as a proof as something that really makes me weirded out is how a lot of things I specifically am put to work on as my queue workline are related to LGBT, Womanhood and at times even Trans magazines/books, and accounting how this place has a lot of different magazines and books the fact that I'm almost always paired with that specific subjects just makes me slighly distressed, reason why I'm really on my nerves for some time now, is this paranoia? Am I overthinking this?

Also the folks who think I'm a lesbian are pretty alright and said that outside of the job, I didn't really feel uncomfortable but it did distress me more for professional reasons than anything outside of that it is cishet people being cishet people and their compulsive need of putting labels on anything that doesn't enter heterosexuality in their eyes. Quite annoying but not exactly something that makes me hate them but certainly makes me hate living in a world where this happens where something so silly and not at all that much, can be considered such a "big deal"

1 note · View note

zankie-enough · 2 years

Text

How Not Me is Helping Resolve My Complicated Love of BL

Ok I have been watching Not Me. I just started tumblr posting again and I've tried a few times to pull my thoughts together about this very special show. I just finished episode 7 which had me crying my eyes out and I figured I'd try to explain why this particular episode hit me so hard.

How I got Into BL

Ok I know this seems like a departure but it's important to why Ep 7 was so important to me. I'll try to make it short. I am older, in my 40s. I grew up in a time where there was not a lot of queer content. Although I was straight, I grew up in queer communities. Between my sister, who is lesbian, and her friends and all the gay male friends/trans friends I made along the way for most of my life I've been around more queer than straight people. When we were in our teens early 20s we would hunt for queer cinema. It was our thing and when we found a movie or a show it would be a celebration. We would all get together to watch. My other straight sis and I would fight to find queer shows that had happy endings or weren't about HIV or prostitution. It was so hard back then to find just happy queer representation. Everything was centered around trauma.

I first encountered BL with ITSAY so you know it's a little different from your typical Thai BL. I immediately told my friends that what we had been looking for years ago was happening in the Asian community. I then started watching other BLs and learning more about the genre and I had a complicated reaction to it.

On the one hand I love that light hearted stories of love where everyone is gay are being told. Like this is in some ways what we were searching for but because many were written by straight women for straight women some of the truth and validity for queer communities was left out or if someone like Mame got their hands on it it became completely misrepresented. I started to get really picky about what I watched and although I celebrate the variety I really missed the representation of real queer stories or even the support of queer communities.

If BL is going to make money off of queer characters it should at least lend it's popularity to actually trying to do good for the community. Then in comes Not Me!!

The Representation Thai BL Needs

Now not me is not the only BL to support queer stories and communities but is unique for Thai BLs specifically GMMTV BLs. I have really been enjoying the show overall. Even though I think White is TERRIBLE at impersonating Black and it makes me anxious every week, I think it's supposed to. If he was good at it we wouldn't have suspense. The fact that no one has caught on to him is wild to me though....just saying I don't think the show is perfect but it's willingness to add commentary about the political concerns in Thailand and specifically it's clear focus not just on BL stories but things the LGBTQ community is fighting for makes my heart so happy.

Episode 7 was a full on celebration of Queer Rights and guys I literally cried through all of part 2 and 3. The truth is when we look at minority groups disproportionately affected my socio-economic inequality, queer people are almost always part of this.

Not Me The Series took what could have been a storyline just focused on socio-economic inequality and has incorporated gay rights in a way that I rarely see in Thai BLs. I see it more in Filipino BLs honestly. Thai BL focuses on the fantasy which in some ways I love. In some ways I love the idea of this world where there is not stigma about sexual orientation and everyone can just like who they want but I think to completely ignore that this is not the world we live in yet is problematic.

For the BL industry to thrive it must use queer stories but to use their stories and not at least at some point fight for the people behind the stories feels gross. There needs to be some sort of balance and Not Me is bringing that to the forefront in a loud way. Sadly it's really a risk for the show. It doesn't fit into the neat little bubble that a lot of people who consume BL want. They want the fantasy. I get it. I'm not even putting them down. It's why I still watch Hallmark movies even though they lack any semblance of the real world. I watched them for years. I would be a hypocrite to pretend as though I don't have guilty pleasures that don't feed that need for a fantasy world but just like Hallmark was finally forced to address it's lack of diversity at some point Thai BL specifically GMMTV has to address it's lack of representation in the fight for gay rights.

This episode in particular gave an activist voice to so many and did not dance around the topic of marriage equality and gay rights. I have to admit when shippers scream "GET MARRIED!" to the actors that play their fav couple, I personally want to yell back "THEY CAN'T IT'S NOT LEGAL IN THEIR COUNTRY AND THAT'S A PROBLEM WE SHOULD ALL RECOGNIZE!" no but for real the ability to turn a blind eye to the fact that the queer community is still fighting for it's rights all over the World is not allyship and I don't know if I feel comfortable with individuals consuming queer media that don't intend to at least attempt allyship.

Not Me is in no means perfect and yes there are other shows out there trying to make a difference as well as actors and directors. I don't think the fantasy should disappear but I do think we need shows like Not Me to remind us that the fantasy is not real and there are real people who need support and their stories told.

I saw a lot of tropes dispelled in Bad Buddy and now Not Me showing activism in queer spaces I just hope to see BL in general moving in the right direction and supported by the masses. I hope it doesn't receive too much backlash and viewership goes up.

Between Sean/White and Dan/Yok the BL romance is there but it's just not provided in a neat package or a wildly inappropriate one. A suspense/thriller where the main couples happen to be gay is progress. It's a pretty big deal and still way ahead of queer cinema and film in other countries. I hope BL continues to move in this direction.

#not me the series #not me #yokdan #danyok #not me ep 7 #Not me the series ep 7 #offgun

6 notes · View notes

vampireqrow-moved · 3 years

Note

hey so I agree with a lot of the stuff in your post about the transphobia involved in the origin of the pansexual label, but I just have one question: what are the actual impacts of people with good intentions calling themselves pan? If you don't hate pansexuals and consider them bi, why type up a paragraphs long manifesto on the harms of the origin of the label if it means the same thing in the way that most non transphobic people (your audience) use it? a lot of identities can be used in transphobic ways (like bi and lesbian and anything really) and plenty of valid identities from problematic roots and evolve over time as people use them differently (queer, transsexual). so how is a person with good intentions using a not-perfect label in a way you don't like a threat to the community? if someone is using the label pan transphobically, wouldn't their bigotry exist independently? if pan people do not act in transphobic ways besides using the label pansexual, realistically what is changing if they call themselves bi beyond holier-than-thou aesthetic activism? plus, a blog on the internet isn't going to get everyone to stop identifying as pansexual, especially considering multiple prominent celebrities ID as pan. so why spend all that energy quibbling on semantics because some bi people use a slightly different word when you could be worrying about Literally anything else? just feels like you want to find something to argue about lol. extremely disappointed that I had to break a mutual

im going to respond to each thing you bring up chronologically- im not trying to nitpick or prioritize certain things you say ill just forget things if i go out of order and i dont want to miss something important. ALSO! i will be typing less formally (like keysmashes and shortening words n stuff) in this response than my og post bc its 1am as im starting to type this so im tired but i want to be clear that i am like. taking this seriously and im not like. mocking u in anyway if it could read that way?? i hope not but just in case anyways here it goes!

in terms of actual impact people with good intentions identifying as pan: honestly im not sure the full scope of the impact this has, so ill only be speaking to what ive personally seen which might not be all. but like... id argue my younger self has good intentionals iding as pan. i wanted to support trans people, even if i didnt understand a lot of the nuance involved. as a result of this, i developed a sense of superiority over other bisexuals and a mentality that bisexuality was a primitive and lesser sexuality. that mentality is harmful, and although im not sure if it affected bisexuals around me (of which there are many most of my friends are bi ajfjfjf) its still a harmful mentality and can easily hurt people even if i specifically didnt. also using it even with good intentions, which i know many people have, still spreads and further normalizes a label that imo can not be separated from its transphobic origins. this effect is not as extreme as other forms of transphobia and biphobia by A LONG SHOT. the bi community faces a lot of other issues but that doesnt mean this one isnt worth addressing if that makes sense?

if i dont hate pansexuals: ik this is part of a larger point which i will adress but i specified this in my post bc i see a lot of other posts that are negative towards pansexuality have "i hate pan ppl" somewhere in it or a close equivalent. i do not shame these ppl for their anger, i just wanted to be clear i think a lot of pan ppl are bi ppl with good intentions choosing a label they dont fully understand based on a misunderstanding of bisexuality.

why write a paragraphs long manifesto on the harms of pansexuals origin: ok 😭😭 the real reason here is that im literally just bad at summarizing. like thats literally it. i also like talking, its a bad combination. plus ive been thinking abt this for like. over a year im not even kidding and just like i have a lot of thoughts and figured if i was going to bother making my own post instead of rbing someone elses that i might as well get everything i wanted to say off my chest. ALSO BTW i literally got an ask like a week ago that was several paragraphs long asking me to explain my thoughts on why pan was harmful and some other stuff so like. this is partially responding to that and partially just me wanting to air my grievances ? idk if thats the right expression 😔😔

why write the post if my audience of people who identify as pan arent doing it in a transphobic way ? again sorry i didnt really understand the phrasing so i hope this is a vaguely correct summary!! um but like... again imo i think pan cant be separated from its transphobia and like. again imo iding as pan is like. a transphobic action/choice? obviously one transphobic thing does mean someone necessarily is like officially a Transphobe (it CAN be depending on the action but i dont think that applies here) but that doesnt mean there arent problems with what they did. this is like very complicated, but like. someone doing something harmful without the knowlege that its harmful doesnt make that person a bigot by any means it just means they didnt know. and i feel thats the case here? a lot of ppl (myself included until recently) know next to nothing abt pansexualitys origins so a trans inclusve sexuality might seem like a safe and good bet just because they dont know too much abt it, and like? i cant hate those people cause that was me for 5+ years and djgjfjdj you just dont know what you dont know!

basically i think iding with a transphobic label is inherently a singular transphobic action that doesnt make the person transphobic by itself, but is still a transphobic instance.

a lot of identities can be used in transphobic ways like bi, lesbian, etc.: this is true and a point i attempted to make on my original post, but i might not have clear enough. my issue with pan is specifically that it is a transphobic response to a preexisting identity. lesbian isnt an attempted trans inclusive indentity that replaced an identity that already existed (which have many trans ppl identifying with the og label). transphobes can use whatever labels they want, but transphobes using a label vs a label having a transphobic origin is very different. bigots use inclusive and supporting language for their bigotry all the time but language that originated with that bigotry is worse.

many valid identities stem from problemstic origins (like transsexual and queer) but the words evolve: ok my paraphrasing is a little weird there. anyways. the thing here is that. those are slurs. reclaimed slurs that can be empowering to many people, yes, but slurs nonetheless. reclaiming a slur is taking a harmful word and wearing it as a badge of pride. first off, pansexual is not a slur (ur not implying that in anyway just. saying) and it isnt being reclaimed when people dont treat it as having harmful origins. transsexual is the way some people identify but ppl acknowlege its a slur and originates from transphobia. ppl love to act like queer isnt a slur, which is an issue in and of itself, but just. factually it has historically and is currently being used against ppl with the intent to hurt them. pansexual isnt on the same level as these and other words like the f slur, d slur, etc. pansexual originates from trans and biphobia WITHIN the community and not outside of it, and most pansexuals dont see themselves as reclaiming the title because they dont think anythings wrong with it in the first place. and reclaiming it just seems unnecessary considering its history? theres no empowerment from using pan as a label as opposed to queer or transsexual, and it just divides the bisexual community for no reason.

how is a person using a not-perfect label a threat to the community? ok i dont think its a threat but still an issue if that difference makes sense? id like to reiterate a few things ive said before, but for me personally, it made me look down on bisexuals and see them as lesser, and it made people around me see pan as the "trans inclusive" sexuality as opposed to bisexuality, and basically its usage just leads to further biphobia. is this the worst of biphobia? no!!! but its still biphobia and why not attempt to target and minimize that? i have no way to singlehandedly stop biphobia, but my post might get through to my friends who id as pan and that small thing is better than nothing.

if someone used the pan label in a transphobic way, wouldnt that bigotry be different from people using it not transphobically?: someone claiming all bi ppl are transphobic and only pan is the acceptable label is obviously a lot worse than someone iding as pan and saying bi/pan solidarity but again, the second isnt not an issue because the first one is a bigger issue, its just a smaller issue in comparison. i wouldnt say the bigotry is different, one is just worse than the other, but it still has the same problems.

if pan people dont do anything transphobic other than id as pan then what changes with iding as bi over pan other holier-than-thou activism: its just one less person using a transphobic label? which isnt that big but it might lead to their friends stopping iding as pan and cause fewer people around them to see bi as a transphobic identity. which is small scale stuff, i wont try to blow it out of proportion, but thats still a step in the right direction and hopefully more people follow with it. its not terribly huge or lifechanging but something small that may only affect the people close to you is still something rather than nothing.

a blog the internet isnt going to get people to stop iding as pan: oh absolutely not. honestly i expected to get unfollowed/blocked more than change peoples minds regarding the pan label (im surprised i only lost two followers so far honestly) but again, someone literally asked me to do this and i wanted to be clear on my stance on the label, since in the past ive been supportive of it. im not expecting the post to get more than five likes, its more directed to my followers rather than the internet as a whole. im not expecting a large impact, im hoping to change the minds of my followers and friends who id as and support the pan label. thats it. if something bigger comes from it- great! but thats not what im aiming to do.

prev point + many prominent celebrities id as pan: the first name that comes to mind is someone im not a fan of for separate reasons but thats irrelevant. i mean im repeating myself a bit but some celebrities in the past validated and made me feel excited abt my identity as a pan person when they came out, and it justified the label to me, even when i had doubts. i have never interacted with a celebrity and do not plan to change their minds abt their identity. again, my post was for my friends and followers and maybe who ever was scrolling through the biphobia tag and decided to read my post.

why spend that much energy worrying abt the pan label instead of something else: ive spent waaaaay more energy thinking abt a singular meme i didnt like regarding my favourite rwby character so like. maybe i just overreact to things lol. maybe i have a lot of energy and since i cant talk my friends ears off abt my favourite fruits or the different voting methods i learned in my math class or what would dreams taste like, then i gotta put my energy into something. idk. i have a lot of energy and honestly? this didnt take that much. but i felt it weighing on me as my friends talked positively abt the pan label, when i felt guilty for the superiority i felt over my bi friends INCLUDING my best friend and favourite person in the world so like. i spent enough energy worrying abt it, and like. in hindsight since its been over 12 hours since posting it, im thinking abt it less. i was more worried abt feeling dishonest with my friends than actually worrying abt pansexuality, but i figured i owed them an explanation for why my feelings around it had changed.

just feels like you want to find something to argue about: okay i DO love arguing but im not pulling this out of my ass for fun. its in response to posts ive seen on my dash, asks i recieved abt pansexuality, and my way of letting people know my views have changed and why since i know at least some people are curious.

i am sorry to lose a mutual as well, and i genuinely hope things go well for you, but uh yeah thats that.

again, if people have further questions im willing to answer them i just might take a while bc i have school and other stuff 2 do but uhhh yea sorry if im clogging ur dash sjfjfkkf

#asks #long post #anonymous #pansexuality #biphobia #transphobia #my post

2 notes · View notes

itsclydebitches · 4 years

Note

Wait what was the mess with Ilia/queer representation? I don't usually look into these things so I probably didn't hear or see people talking about it

Happy to explain! First, the obligatory disclaimer: Ilia is a complicated case and, like anything else in RWBY, her place in the show is very much up to interpretation. I think her character arc, particularly in relation to her status as a queer character, is an absolute mess but I know others are of the opposite opinion. Many of the “flaws” I point out are perceived as her greatest strengths. So it’s subjective.

That being said, I wrote a little bit about this during Volume 5 when it was all going down. A simplified list of the primary issues includes:

Introducing your first, long-awaited queer character as a villain (even a sympathetic one)

“Redeeming” her in the span of one episode in a way that provides no punishment/responsibility/growth in the face of the horrific acts she committed

This character is left behind by the story at the end of the volume, presumably never to be seen again outside of, perhaps, a final battle that includes the whole cast

Tying her queerness directly to her villainy

It’s this last point that I take the most issue with. See, the fandom is right to point out that Ilia has motivations for her actions established throughout the volume, namely the death of her parents and the general racism that is still pervading Remnant. Ilia says multiple times throughout Volume 5 that this is why she’s going after Blake and her family. Because she honestly believes that they are a threat to the faunus’ progress. However, just because a character says something doesn’t make it true. Take Yang in the same season. She says she doesn’t want/care if Blake ever comes back to the group, which anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the show knows is BS. Rather, Yang’s emotions are functioning on multiple levels. A part of her really doesn’t want Blake to return because she’s still furious with her, whereas a larger part of her wants them to reconcile. Now, apply that logic to Ilia. It’s absolutely true to say that she’s motivated by activism and the death of her parents, however, her confrontation with Blake reveals that this isn’t the only reason for her attack. It is, arguably, not even the primary reason. Ilia gives a speech about how they need to be doing more for the faunus, how she doesn’t like to hurt people but she can’t deny that it has gotten them results. Yet when Blake challenges this part of her identity - you’re not a killer - the conversation unexpectedly takes a turn. When pushed to explain how she became this way Ilia does not reiterate her thoughts on racism or the trauma of her parents’ deaths. Instead, she starts talking about her unrequited feelings for Blake:

Suddenly, Ilia’s motivations have changed. Or rather, they’ve become more complicated. Both sets of motivations exists, but this is the one she admits to under duress, framing it as more “true” than what she’s been saying prior to this conversation. Now, Ilia shows personal motivations rather than just the generically good rhetoric of I Want To End Racism Because It’s Bad. Having Blake down on her knees, shipping her off to Adam, and killing her parents is explicitly connected to the (perceived) problem of, “You didn’t love me.” Blake is positioned as responsible for who Ilia became: You want to know why I’m like this? You were too busy looking at Adam. I wanted you to look at me that way but you didn’t. That’s how I learned that we can’t always get what we want. So now you don’t get to have what you want (your parents’ safety, distance from Adam). You get to feel what I felt when you didn’t love me back. When Blake poses the question of, “Why are you like this?” Ilia’s answer is “Because I’m queer, have unrequited feelings, and that taught me that life sucks. Now I’m returning the favor.”

Suddenly, Ilia’s actions are removed from the (already ethically dubious) logic of treating Blake this way because she believes it will help the faunus in the long run and instead are implied to stem from a desire to punish her for not reciprocating those feelings. In this moment Ilia moves from a misguided activist-turned-terrorist and instead becomes a misguided lesbian seeking revenge. She might not admit it - she never explicitly says that she’s punishing Blake for not loving her - but that’s the implication by taking the conversation in this direction; by having Ilia answer with her sexuality rather than her activist views. By drawing such an overt connection between these actions and Ilia’s admission, these things - the impending death of Blake’s parents, kidnapping her, sending her back to her abuser - are framed as things that she “deserves” according to Ilia. If you’d just looked at me with love from the start we never would have ended up here. This falls into a number of horrible tropes including, but not limited to, The Predatory Gay, The Psycho Lesbian, and The Queer Character Falling For Their (Presumably) Straight Friend.

Now, the takeaway here is not “You can never write villainous queer characters.” More often than not any statement beginning with “You can never write ____” is going to be a bad take. Indeed, there are tons of queer/queer coded villains who I adore. That doesn’t mean I want media to perpetuate that long, stereotyped history though. “But Clyde,” the world says. “That doesn’t make any sense. How can you both want and not want this setup?” To which I respond with the iconic words of Jane Lynch:

People’s identities are made up of multiple parts and those parts can read the same writing choice in different ways. As a queer person who loves the ~drama~ of a flamboyant villain I want that entertainment (like Watts). As a queer person who is disgusted by the implications tied to that trend (you’re evil, you’re unnatural, you’re sick, you deserve to be punished, to be killed) I don’t want to see our only queer character be a villain. Which is what Ilia was at the time of her reveal. She was all we had and we didn’t know if RT would ever going to give us anyone else. That was just awful to watch and worry about. It didn’t make me happy. Which sounds like a shit thing to say - This isn’t your story! It doesn’t cater to you! - but after years of waiting for queer rep it felt like a kick in the teeth to get this character in this way and leave her behind when we had a cast of five main women right there, any of which could have been queer. Ilia’s reading was made worse by the lack of rep surrounding her, but to be frank things haven’t improved much. I adore Saphron and Terra, I think they were really well done as characters, but they’re still very minor characters and we can’t ignore that, like Ilia, they were left behind by the story. Blake and Yang are not canon yet, leaving all the hints at their relationship sitting in the limbo of, “Is this just queer baiting?” If you’re someone who pays attention to queer coding, a lot of queer-coded men have been killed off in this show (Roman, Ozpin, Clover). We supposedly have one trans character… whose identity thus far only exists in a tweet.

Kudos to RT for hiring a trans voice actor - they absolutely deserve recognition for that - but it’s still not enough in this day and age. It’s 2020. Queer coding, queer minor characters quickly shuffled off screen, and queer “rep” in the form of paratextual info simply doesn’t fly. We decided that in the most vocal terms possible during the Harry Potter era, a fandom that took over most of the world and, thus, had one hell of an impact on media going forward. No, it’s not rep if you say Dumbledore is gay in an interview but never work that into the story. It’s not rep if you say May is trans on Twitter but don’t work that into the story. Not unless both characters are supplemental additions to a canon already filled with a variety of queer rep. “It’s so cool that this character is also queer! I get why you didn’t have time to work that in, so it’s a good thing we have those five other characters to identify with.” RT might do that in the future. Blake and Yang might become canon in Volume 8. May might be confirmed in the show. Saphron and Terra might unexpectedly arrive to become a part of the story again. We simply don’t know. But as of right now Ilia is one of only three in-canon queer characters out of a cast of ten bajillion (approximately lol) and out of those three she is the only one who was developed into a well-rounded character. That means nearly the entirely of RWBY’s rep rests on her shoulders. I think her queerness is fine for a cast already full of queer characters. There it functions as good diversity - “Some lesbians do join extremist groups and blame unrequited love for their murder plans!” - rather than representation for lesbians/queer people as a whole - “It’s a good thing we have these three other heroic lesbians in RWBY to balance out the message Ilia sends!” But since we don’t have that the takeaway is just what we’ve seen for decades: Queer characters are villains. Queer characters are violent and predatory. Queer characters are written out of the show.

Historically, Ilia’s characterization has problems on its own, but those problems were very much exacerbated by making her the first and, at that point, only queer rep. I - and no doubt others - would have been far more receptive to her as representation if we’d already gotten queer heroes prior to her introduction. And again, that’s a preference. Some fans want more queer villains as a way to say, “Anyone can be queer.” For me though, I’ve seen enough Ilias throughout my life. I’ve seen enough versions of my identity painted as unwanted and dangerous. I was expecting RWBY to do better and I hope that they will do better in the future.

#Anonymous #rwby #rwde #mymetas #LGBTQIA

39 notes · View notes

gettin-bi-bi-bi · 4 years

Note

so, I've been idenfying as a lesbian for almost one year, I'm just 15 and I probably don't know anything but I'm completely sure about my attraction to women and about my lack of attraction to men who look/are cis straight, i don't want to be transphobic or biphobic with my labels and the word I feel the most comfortable with is lesbian but im sometimes attracted to nb people/trans men(who don't look cis) and i don't know if it's hurtful for trans people to call myself a lesbian if my attraction is sometimes like that, should I call myself bi ? also, if I said bi, everyone would understand "she likes men and women" and i don't like men, I mean, if you look/act like a man im surely not attracted to you and right now I'm kind of confused about what the labels even mean

I appreciate your concern about these things and trying to find answers. I’m not going to tell you what label you can or should be using but there are some things you should know and be aware of when picking a label for yourself.

Regarding non-binary people: some nb people would not mind a lesbian being attracted to them, whereas other non-binary people would feel misgendered by that. So when you find yourself attracted to a non-binary person and you two actually get close then there needs to be a conversation about this. How do they feel about you identifying as a lesbian? Are they okay with it or does it constantly feel like you think of them as a woman? If your friends/family know you as a lesbian does that by extension mean they will always assume your non-binary partner is a woman? and so on.... Also note that bisexuality does NOT mean “attraction to men and women”. It means “attraction to more than one gender”. So someone who is attracted to women and non-binary genders (but not to men) can still identify as bisexual. Unfortunately there are many misconceptions about bisexuality and a lot of people still think it means just men and woman or just cis people. But you should choose a label based on what describes your sexuality well and makes you feel good - regardless of what false ideas the mainstream society has of that label. If we would have to wait for society to catch up on the right definitions of all our labels before we could use them then we’d all never get to pick a label. Not to mention that meanings can change over time. But I get that you don’t want people to assume you are attracted to men, some people identify as “bi lesbian” to express that they are attracted to multiple genders but not to men. Maybe that’d be an option for you. Or just saying you are “queer” which is a nice vague label that can mean any kinds of things along the line of “not straight” (or “not cis”).

Regarding trans men I honestly think you should educate yourself further on trans issues and gender. Because you say you are attracted to “trans men who don’t look cis” and that you are not attracted to people who “act/look like men”. I’m sure you don’t mean to harm anyone or to offend. But in saying those things you pretty much imply that you don’t think of trans men as real men. Even if they look feminine or are closeted - they are still men. And unless a trans man has a lot of internalised transphobia, I don’t see how any of them would really be okay with a lesbian saying she’s attracted to them. (There are trans men who date lesbians but those relationships are basically existing on a foundation of misgendering the trans man which is not a good thing.) Whatever a trans man “acts” like, that is the behaviour and personality of a man. Whatever a trans man looks like, that is the look of a man. And that being said: not all cis men look the same or act the same; some cis men have feminine features and not all cis men are the stereotypical fuckboi president of toxic masculinity-ville. But you only make this distinction regarding trans men? That ends up sounding like you don’t view trans men as men. You cannot say “I am not attracted to men” and then follow it up with “but I am sometimes attracted to trans men”. Those two statements cannot co-exist. Either you are attracted to men or you are not. By saying you are attracted to trans men but not cis men you are basically saying that trans men and cis men aren’t the same gender and you still think trans men are women.

Again, I know you mean well, so don’t take this as me talking down on you. I’m just trying to explain where you should dig a little deeper and learn more because I assume a lot of this is just coming from a lack of knowledge. It’s normal to not ~know~ all these things right away and we all sometimes make mistakes. Labels, sexuality, gender... those can all be complicated and sometimes even seem contradictory.

Always keep in mind that a label is supposed to fit you - not the other way round. If “lesbian” is the one word that seems right to you then by all means - keep it! But know that you can’t expect every non-binary person to be okay with this and if a non-binary person expresses that they are not comfortable with a lesbian being attracted to them then you either gotta change your label (to bi, for example) or not make any more advances towards that person and move on. And you should rethink how you view trans men and transness in general.

Maddie

6 notes · View notes

kinkymagnus · 5 years

Note

Do you have any headcanons about Magnus crossdressing? (Although I hate this term because clothes don't have a gender)

LET MAGNUS BANE WEAR A SKIRT.

and a dress. and lacy lingerie. and pretty “traditionally feminine” things.

he already does have a more traditionally feminine style sometimes–particularly season one, with the open and silky flowy colorful shirts. and his makeup. and it suits him.

but seeing him properly in like fishnets or a dress… ldfkgjkgfdhj

(also, i totally get you on clothes not having a gender. i mean, i’m a trans dude but i do like skirts/dresses sometimes? which can have some. self-esteem issues. but like. my point being a guy can like skirts/dresses and all that and not be less manly. and skirts/dresses/makeup don’t have to be “a girl thing”.)

but REALLY magnus in traditionally feminine clothing would be so good. i would pay to see magnus in a skirt, okay?

(not to mention the part of me that hardcore likes trans or nonbinary magnus is screaming at the idea of nonbinary!magnus in a skirt, ok.)

but ok okok ok ok oko kok oko kok spECIFICALLY. you asked for headcanons. so let’s do that. ok

magnus “crossdressing” headcanons under the cut:

magnus generally likes a more androgynous fashion: not super “masculine” (like, idk, dirty overalls or jeans or whatever is considered “manly”, or like even plain but nice/sharp suits and stuff) but definitely not super “feminine” either (like dresses). he tends to go for the happy middle ground. HOWEVER

that doesn’t mean magnus doesn’t like either/or. and honestly, tho he might not admit it easily, he prefers some more feminine clothing.

dresses are super flowy and nice, and he’s got great legs so

also because i project myself onto characters i like and relate to: for magnus, how the fabric feels is one of the most important parts of an item of clothing.

it doesn’t matter how nice the dress is, if it doesn’t feel good against his skin or at the very least feels comfortable, he won’t wear it.

and that kind of applies vice versa–while he has standards as to what he’ll wear in public, he 100 percent has some dresses/skirts/shirts/robes/whatever that are kind of frumpy or just look okay but are made of the SOFTEST fabric, with just the right amount of like, heft to it, and feel so nice against his skin.

anYWAY. magnus likes all sorts of dresses (i know i keep going back to dresses and that’s not all crossdressing is but look i love dresses despite being a dude so i’m gonna project ok?) but like. there’s different Moods. there’s “this is a nice dress and i feel Powerful in it” and “this is a fancy as fuck dress, look at it, it’s a ballgown, it’s heavy and swooshy, i can spin” there’s “this is light and breezy on the bits, feels nice, comfy” and “this is like a cosplay dress, i look bomb as fuck even tho i can’t wear it forever because it’s heavy and complicated” and “this is nice, i just feel a little more feminine today and it it looks good on me but it’s not uncomfortable”

magnus looks good in red and gold as well as blue and purple ok

magnus in a skirt. magnuS IN A SKIRT. androgynous fashion is great. magnus in a more masculine but kinda open shirt, maybe even a button up, and a simple black skirt (not tiny but not long either), maybe fishnets because fishnets look so good and make you feel good wearing them ok and he looks SO GOOD. long legs mostly showing off, draped over the arm of a chair as he’s just like lounging sideways in it and alec is like HOLY SHIT YOU LOOK GOOD

magnus. in a crop top. not inherently feminine by any means but still. this could mean a more masculine one or a blatantly feminine one. either way he looks good.

piercings!!! earrings. sometimes simple and subtle ones like little black beads, other times more elaborate/obvious. hoop earrings, or dangly pretty ones. whatever goes with his outfit and his mood.

magnus in lacy underwear and lingerie will always be my jam okay

he looks so good with silky/lacy underwear ok

magnus casually defying gender roles is my life

i would think that over his centuries of living he’s like. gotten more and more bold as the years went by?

this next part works better if you fly with this ‘magnus is lowkey nonbinary’ headcanon but it works for not that too

actually fuck it this is trans nonbinary man magnus now.

(nonbinary man = someone who identifies more as masculine and a man, likes he/him pronouns and they/them pronouns, etc. but is also not quite a man and like, kinda in between gender wise? nonbinary but leaning masculine? possibly me, i’m still figuring it out. but anyway.)

(also i have a lot of feelings about magnus and they/them pronouns but for the purposes of this post i’ll stick with he/him)

he started off like. when he realized who he was and was like, transitioning and stuff. he dressed super masculine, trying to like, compensate, you know?

he felt guilty that he still likes some “girly” things because it’s like how do you know you’re really a man if you like girly things? are you faking it? (spoiler alert he’s not there’s nothing wrong with a trans man liking “feminine” things, nor a nonbinary person)

anyway eventually he got more comfortable with exploring a little–some “guyliner”, maybe plain or darker colored nail polish, kohl. subtle stuff at first

he got bolder with encouragement from his friends, with like, meeting other queer people and stuff–more colorful makeup, clothing, nicer stuff

he may or may not have went through a brief phase of going way over the top

actually come to think of it the standards for masculinity have changed a lot over the years there were times when masculine was huge frills and poofy sleeves, right?

idk how to fit that in there but it does, ok

anyway the point is magnus gets more and more comfortable with himself

and right now during canon era he’s more on “boldly expressing himself but still has tons of issues so maybe not completely or as openly as he’d like”

aka he wears makeup and jewelry and more feminine clothes but he tends to wear more “risky” things in private/with close friends only. (as well as not being super open about being nonbinary and/or trans. some other queer downworlders know, particularly baby ones who are like also trans/nb and magnus is more than happy to help with like, glamours and potions or a person to talk to and shit)

the first time catarina sees him in a dress lounging in his apartment looking fabulous she doesn’t bat an eye she’s just like “damn that’s good where’d you get it” and he lights up (she doesn’t fail to notice his shoulders relax a little) and starts talking about this fabulous little shop in france run by a friend of his

ragnor is probably the only person he’d ever openly and directly talked to about this, one night earlier on when he was rather drunk and he saw a skirt he really liked but he was afraid to get

ragnor bought it for him later

anyway

quick detour on they/them pronouns. magnus usually uses he/him because he likes those pronouns just as much and it’s just easier in so many ways but cat, ragnor, and some of his other close adopted family members often use they/them because they know magnus doesn’t hear it enough and he likes those pronouns too

alec finds out about him being nonbinary/enjoying they/them pronouns and magnus is a little worried because he knows alec is Gay but alec is like. so accepting and understanding. and even days where magnus feels more nebulous and less masculine alec is like “babe i love men yes but i love you MOST, on days were you’re a man and days when you’re not” because a) sexual attraction =/= love and b) alec loves magnus not his dick (although i have feelings about being trans + magical transitioning and believe it is fully possible magnus could potentially be pretty much biologically male with enough powerful magic ok)

anyway alec uses both he/him and they/them with magnus depending on what he’s comfortable with that day and magnus is so happy ok

BACK TO CROSSDRESSING (you’re right, that is a stupid term–especially since i’ve detoured into nonbinary man magnus because im dumb and now the “cross” part even MORE doesn’t work)

ok but once canon era is over and malec are happily married and immortal

magnus now has several friends (i mean he already had that but now one of them is gone–although we can easily say ragnor faked his death i mean–and he has a few new ones. like. simon is immortal so. just saying.) AND a loving husband who loves and supports him so much

who are there to support and encourage him

so magnus might get more and more open and possibly wear skirts and stuff even in public

and yeah he gets some assholes who are dicks about it but he also gets the occasional shy teenager complimenting him on his skirt or a grown woman being like “oh my god THE COLOR where did you GET THAT”

generally the downworld is pretty supportive

and if anyone’s a dick about it i mean

while magnus can defend himself

catarina, raphael, alec, or one of his many other supporters is probably gonna get there first

#magnus bane #malec #alec lightwood #shadowhunters #catarina loss #ragnor fell #nonbinary magnus #trans magnus #nb magnus

60 notes · View notes

evilelitest2 · 6 years

Note

What do you think are some of the pitfalls of modern day feminism and how can we improve feminism? I don't think the current feminist movement does enough to help lower class women who are more likely to deal with things like sexual assult, domestic violence and restricted access to abortions. I think the transition from an academic setting to the blogosphere has lead to a lot of feminist terms being misused or overused. What do you think?

Fun fact, I tried to answer this question three times and every time something happened and I lost all my writing. But yes, great question, but sort of difficult because there isn’t one form of feminism, my critiques of Second Wave Feminism are totally different from my critiques from 4th Wave, or my critiques of Marxist feminism, its like having a single critique of every form of goverment, technically possible but the specifics matter a great deal. Some forms of feminism focus exclusively on lower class women, others do in fact ignore them. That being said, there are a few broad critiques I can make of the movement, but a few caveots i want to make clear first.

Firstly, every movement, regardless of its ideals, are going to have stupid people, simplistic people, and bullies within its ranks, and there is no real fix for “some feminists online are dumb”. The question when it comes to a movement is “are these just idiots attached to the wrong cause” or “is the cause itself rotten” which isn’t true of feminism the way that White Natioanlism is fundementally broken

Secondly, every movement interested in human rights struggles with intersectionality, it is not a uniquely feminist thing, intersectionality is hard both practically and psychologically, and that is something I think all of the movements are struggling with, feminism has done better than some with its active efforts to incorporate queer efforts into its larger movement.

Ok so actual critiques

1) Branding. Feminism has major major problems with its image, one thing I notice constantly is that various feminist ideas and terminology might be easily accepted by people because they are objectively useful, but when people hear that they are feminist, suddenly people are like “eww no” . Feminism really needs to rebrand itself to try to be more approachable, especially in regards to the usefulness of the ideas, because many of these concepts are just make life objectively easier to understand, but also there need to be active attempts to countermand the way feminists are depicted in the media, especially that sort of man hating militant

2) Clarify terms: THis is actually for the larger left wing movement, but the reason why the right can so easily strawman/co-op our rhetoric is that we aren’t specific about it . I mean take privilege for example, the fact of the matter is every person on the planet has some privilege in some context, a trans lesbian lower class black women in the Us still has privilege of being able bodied, or American citizenship. A wealthy white man might still have down syndrome, privilege isn’t like a bioware morality system with most privilege vs. least, its a complicated interconnected system of power relationships.

Or the Bechdel test, it isn’t just a scoring system for sexism, its a way of measuring an observable reality of the film industry, its a measurement of a larger trend rather than a condemnation of any specific movie. The more vague these terms are, the more they can be strawmanned and approprated by reactionaries.

3) Tell Terfs to fuck off: Terfs suck, end of story

4) Drop the moon goddess shit: This is more of a 2nd wave feminism issue, but i notice a lot of people perception of feminism comes from things like feminist fantasy or the sort of 2nd wave rements online, and its just utterly absurd. All of the sacred femininity, primordial matriarchy, feminine nature magic stuff is extremely dated and makes the whole movement come off as a neo pagan nonsense movement. Facts are on the side of feminism, embrace those

5) Embrace complexity. Again this doesn’t really apply to academic feminism, but more the way it is understood by tumblr folks, but we need to be more comfortable with larger complexity. Bad people can make good art, somebody can be problematic in one regard and useful in another, simplicity remains as always a tool of the right, so that needs to just be abandoned.

6) Explain utility: How is Feminism useful to me? Yeah this one kinda sucks, because when it comes to basic human rights, there is something kinda upsetting about having to be like “oh yeah, these people are being fundamentally oppressed but here is how caring about their plight can help men” like that fucking sucks. Problem is though, a lot of people are selfish, and if we can’t get them to support this cause, they will drift towards reactionary causes. Fact is, for men, it is beneficial to them to support sexism on the surface, they benefit from it, and feminism is never going to win out if you don’t draw more men away from opposition. So as much as it sucks, feminism needs to explain how patriarchy hurts men, how toxic masculinity is actually really destructive for men, how many of the issues that MRAs pretend to care about are issues caused by patriarchy rather than by feminists, how embracing gender equality is actually better for everybody involved.

7) Finally and maybe most importantly, embrace humor, I think the “humorless angry feminist” sterotype is one of the greatest weapons of the reactionary right, so we need to drop it. I admire what Anita Sarkeesian is trying to do but beyond the fact I think her videos are simplistic, she is really really boring and utterly without humor. Which i think weakens the movement as a whole, if feminism is funny and approachable, it can win adherents, cause again, the facts are on itself, it doesn’t need to hide its core identity the way that reactionary movements do.

Bonus Round: Feminism should not be equated with other causes, feminism isn’t necessarily communist or pacifistic,

Edit:

Ok one thing I think I should add here, and this isn’t really the task of feminism but I think this needs to happen for Feminism to figure out where it go next. There needs to be a clearer way for men to relate to the world feminists hope to build. Now I don’t mean that in the sense of “oh no feminism hopes to oppress me and leave men obsolete” and all that conservative nonsense, I mean that when patriarchal gender norms are challenged and broken down (as they should be) it isn’t necessarily clear where men should go. And many times they return back to reactionary hyper conservative gender norms, because those are simply and easy ad all that jazz. Like, this isn’t the fault of feminism, its more of an unintended consequence that happens when change comes a calling, like how ebay has been putting malls out of work. But while men should be able to come up with their own purpose once masculine identities are torn down, creating new identities based upon themselves rather than vague socialist expectations...that clearly isn’t happening, so feminism would do well if they could offer suggestions and try to address those anxeities. Which....isn’t fair. I mean its totally not fair at all that feminists have to both care for the needs and interests of a systemically oppressed under class....AND spend time trying to address the emotional needs of the oppressive class but you know...life isn’t fair. And its just easier, if men, episodically young boys, can’t find a new purpose and identity, they are going to drift back to conservatism, this is how MRAs recruit.

Honestly, a Men’s movement focusing on how to address men’s issues within the context of feminism and addressing the legitimate issues facing men (suicide, toxic masculinity, sexual insecurities etc) would be a really great thing, but that has largely been co-opted by MRAs as a way to recruit troubled young men into a reactionary hate group. It shouldn't’t be feminist job, but finding answers for the anxieties of these young men will help them greatly in the future, its just more practical to address that from the outset rather than let them be corrupted by simplistic conspiracy theory narratives about the castration addicted matriarchy bent on white genocide.

#ask evilelitest2 #feminism #social justice

29 notes · View notes

claroquequiza · 6 years

Note

Hey, I never did this and I don't know where else to go with my question. I'm a 20 year old Muslim woman. And I don't know what the fuck my sexuality is. It's mostly straight, I think? BUT YOU CANT BE MOSTLY FUCKING STRAIGHT. I like men. I think men are hot and cute (yes I would date a trans guy), I think men are strong and protect me. But then I also like women, but not in the same way. I am attracted to women, not by their bodies (which I do not find hot at all) but more by their personality--

-- their interlect, their voice, their smile. I usually crush on women that are stronger and look like they could bench me, but rarely pretty women. I don't know what's wrong with me. Am I being selfish? Am I being ignorant or fucking stupid? Youre like 30 so you have to know something right? Please it's making me really confused, and I honestly don't know what to do. Hopefully this question is not the dumbest thing you have ever heard.

So--

It’s hard for me to offer advice, because this is simultaneously a lot of info and no info, LOOOL, but first and foremost I’d say it’s okay to be confused--you’re young, and sexuality is both complicated and fluid. If you don’t know what exactly you are, that’s fine! There’s plenty of time to figure it out!

I would say try to step back and breathe and think a little without overanalyzing it. If you like men, that’s fine, and if you like women, that’s fine, and it really can be as simple as that. It doesn’t really matter if the attraction is “different”--everyone has types, and so long as those types aren’t rooted in prejudice, there’s no harm in that.

If you want my non-expert and completely non-qualified opinion, your attraction to women may feel different because you want an emotional connection rather than a physical connection with them--you describe men as hot and cute, but like a woman’s intellect, voice, and smile. Many wlw (Women who Love Women) have said that this was a stage in acknowledging their attraction to women--they had been socialized all their lives to be physically attracted to men but could never form an emotional connection the way they could with women. Once they acknowledged that, many found that the physical attraction followed once it was “allowed”--and some didn’t, because human sexuality is just like that sometimes.

That’s not to say you’re definitely not sincerely attracted to men, but that did stick out to me, so that may be something to consider.

Two things, though:

One, I have no idea how your faith might be impacting this. When you say you’re Muslim, that could mean almost anything--there’s 1.8 billion of you! And religion is almost as complex as sexuality!

If you come from a conservative background where alternative sexualities are actively discouraged or condemned, then that will have an impact on your journey and how free you may feel to think through, explore, and accept your sexuality. Seek out the most accepting and affirming branch of your religion that you can find so you have a safe and healthy environment to grow in, and try to find as much material by Muslim wlw and Muslim LGBT+ activists as possible so you know you’re not alone AND to see if any of it resonates with you!

But if you cannot find that safe and healthy environment in religion, you may need to consider leaving it altogether. I turned out to be an atheist, but that was my journey--you are you, and if you find or are already in an Islamic sect that supports you, then I am or will be super happy for you! But religion doesn’t always pan out for some people, and while it can be a painful process, it can ultimately be very rewarding--but the most important things are to find what helps YOU be the most healthy YOU and to have the freedom to be who you are, and some religions/sects are absolutely stellar at helping that happen!

Two, I do want to caution you about the way you speak about trans men--I’m completely cis, so I don’t claim any “authority” on whether this is a valid appraisal or not, but saying that you’re attracted to men and specifically commenting that “yes I would date a trans guy” may be a good intention that unnecessarily singles out trans men. Like, it’s good that you would! But outside of a conversation that specifically concerns trans men, pointing that out serves to reinforce a sense of “otherness” rather than of inclusiveness. It’s possible to read an unspoken “even” in that sentence when it’s offered out of context, as in “yes I would even date a trans guy,” which I am completely sure you did not intend!!! But that’s a possible conclusion when it’s offered out of context.

But again, I am no authority on this--and I say it partially because when someone says “I like men!”, I think it should be a given that that includes trans men because trans men are men! So if you like men, then they’re included! By default! So, for me, specifying that you’re attracted to trans men should only happen in the context of a conversation addressing when trans men are excluded from being considered men--but I am well-aware that that is faaaaar from being universal or even well-accepted, so my feelings and thoughts may not be applicable.

If so, I apologize! And I want to stress that I don’t think it was your intention to be disrespectful! It’s just another detail that stuck out to me that was potentially dubious.

Last of all, I offer you my most sincere wishes for your happiness and safety no matter where your self-discovery takes you! Thank you for the message!!

#asks #personal #Anonymous

17 notes · View notes

sometimesrosy · 7 years

Note

Sorry for the heavy question, but how do you feel comfortable with your bisexuality? I try to get away from the biphobia, and I don't get hate anons from CLs anymore, but every so often I see one of the ppl I follow get a biphobic anon (they seem especially prevalent today) and I'm right back down to where I was. I just suck at hearing stuff like this, I always take comments about bisexuality so personally. Idk if I'll ever be fully comfortable, since I can't ever come out as bi back home.

I never felt I ‘counted’ as bisexual, although I’ve known I was attracted to women for 26 years. I’m mostly attracted to men, so it felt like to identify that way would be cheating. But I recognize that bisexuality is a spectrum, and that includes those who are closer to the heterosexual end of the spectrum. So that includes me. So that means I count. I’m still learning what that means for me, and I’m perfectly fine with the discovery. I don’t need to pin it down.

To be honest, I might also be slightly agender too, but I haven’t explored that yet. Or maybe I did, I spent a few years “allowing” myself to be feminine, without realizing what that meant about my identity. It was a kind of important thing for me in the 90s, making peace with my very feminine appearance while not feeling that way inside, but at this point, not so much anymore. Despite the REALLY weird experience of being pregnant and what that means about being a woman. Again. Done with that, so no longer have to bother.

I accept LGBT people of any type. Gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans, asexual, agender or anything on the spectrum or anything I don’t know about yet or haven’t learned about yet… which is lots because human sexuality and identity is SO much more complicated than the basic binary. And that means I accept myself.

I might have an easier time accepting people outside of the basic binary because I am mixed race, and I have accepted and understood that I am not (and people are not) simply one thing OR the other, but very often a combination or spectrum of identities. I simply don’t think that way.

I’m also not particularly out irl, where I am in my life right now. I don’t need to talk about my sexuality with my mom or my kids, and I’m not being real social right now, so it’s not an issue. And as a demi ace, I really don’t care? IDK. It also might be something about being only slightly bi, and demi ace, and just a little bit agender. Even being a light skinned POC. Like people always think I’m the dominant type. They just assume I’m “normal.” But I’m not and never have been. I don’t fit. I never have. I’m not trying to pass, but unless I bring it up, people assume. At some point, you make peace with that, with not being like other people. So when you find out you’re even more not like other people you’re like, “eh. what else is new?”

I don’t really have answers about my personal sexuality and how I move through the world, because I hadn’t really identified it aside from not really feeling straight my whole life. I’m okay with it. And because I’m not taking action on dating, and no one is pressuring me to because, hello, traumatized single mom here, I’d rather just ignore it. I’ll get to it eventually. It’s a kick. I kind of like being demiace. It takes so much pressure off me. Just being me. And that’s the thing. Finding out your identity is about YOU. Not them. Not the community. I’ve seen so many people who were so anxious and unhappy before they understood or came to grips with who they were. But once they do, it’s like they stop pretending and get to be THEMSELVES. This is a WONDERFUL thing. And it often takes some time because we live in a homophobic society. THAT’S why we need a LGBT community, to combat the homophobia, lesbophobia, biphobia, transphobia and acephobia. Sadly, something has gone wrong with that.

As for the internet hyenas? I am HORRIFIED by the tumblr lgbt community. HORRIFIED. How they focus on gatekeeping and making LGBT people feel wrong and stigmatized and invalidating them? This is the OPPOSITE of what the LGBT community is supposed to be. But, I guess, the gatekeepers feel enough power from their position as dominant identity in the community, that they enjoy diminishing other LGBT people. This is not right.

They are wrong. They are silencing people, and making them afraid to join communities or enter into the conversation. Making them feel ashamed and alone. I barely talk about myself because of this. (But apparently if you ask a question, I will, because it’s about you.) I am confident in my identity, as late as I found it, because I was welcomed into the LGBT community in the 90s and 00s. Thank you to all my gay and lesbian friends and family. OMG, I had my stonewall era gay roommate trying to figure out how I was gay back in 1992. He couldn’t figure it out. But he knew it was something. Lol. It only took me 25 years.

I’ve been harassed really badly on this site for being a “lesbophobe” because I was sharing my abuse experience and relating to CL, and treating that relationship like an actual relationship rather than a fantasy. And I also got accused of biphobia, called a ‘fake bisexual’ and was slutshamed for a fic I wrote. How did I deal with it?

Honestly nonny, I know know who I am, and anonymous bullies on the internet can’t tell me I’m wrong. It’s LAUGHABLE that they keep trying. It’s taken me 47 years to figure out who I am, and some nasty comment doesn’t get to change it.

I see them for the weak, insecure bullies they are. And I simply don’t give a shit about their opinions.

How do you do it? Figure out who you are. Find your community– and it may not be the community you expect it to be. If they treat you badly because you are bisexual, tell them to go to hell. Find a different community who does accept you. Grow into yourself. It’s a process. No one gets to tell you how it works.

#identity #sexuality #it turns out i'm not gay but i am queer #and i like it that way #biphobia #tell them to go to hell #no one gets to tell you who you are

6 notes · View notes

laynemorgan · 7 years

Note

I'm not trying to be dense here I honestly don't know the answer and never had the guts to ask anybody. Wouldn't all "traditional"(I guess you could call them outdated) sexual orientations be transphobic? I mean the definition of lesbian and gay both reduce the other partner to their genitals which is transphobic. How can I claim an orientation that is at its core transphobic even if that's all I've ever known? Wouldn't that mean the only general orientation that isn't problematic would be Pan?

Not dense at all, this is a great question! I’m not sure I’m fully equipped to answer it because, since I’m not trans, I’m not exactly an authority on what is and isn’t transphobic. So I’m going to start this by tagging @geekdawson and @rileyjaydennis so that they can either add to this answer or correct it or so you can talk to a trans guy or girl directly about this.

As far as identity goes, and as far as the LGBT community, I do think there’s a lot of terminology and a lot of definition that is, at it’s core not good enough for lack of a better way to put it. It either wont’ cover the right bases or by definition is harmful or reducing. BUT that said, terminology is ever changing. What we have for information and how we talk about it within our community is always changing and growing. It’s crucial that, as a community, we learn to expand our definitions and or word choice and what those things mean to us. I’m sure, in many ways and for many people, sexuality and their identity is wrapped, by definition, in a person’s genitals. However, identity and sexuality are beginning to expand in their definitions and as a community we’re altering the way we think and talk of these things because of the knowledge we have that gender =/= genitals. For example, I identify as gay. I don’t believe that my sexuality is transphobic because for me, being gay has nothing to do with the genitals of my partner and everything to do with my desire to date and be with women, which includes trans women.

The most simple answer to your question I have, I guess is that sexuality can be transphobic if a person is conflating gender with genitals. But if we’re inclusive in our definitions of sexuality and how we talk about gender and sexuality and genitals as a community, we become more inclusive of the trans people in our community. As an entire community it is really important that we learn to talk to listen to explain to empathize and to do our best to understand that there are a number of different people with different experiences and different identities than ours. These conversations and definitions and labels are complicated and are going to be complicated and changing and growing for a long time as we learn more and begin to talk more. You just need to take all of that complicated stuff and be willing to grow and learn and expand along with it.

#Anonymous

20 notes · View notes