Tumgik
#so labels as in like societal labels
saitamastamaticsoup · 10 months
Text
Hobie “i hate labels” brown would not hate relationship labels I fear y’all aren’t understanding what he means by that in a punk way
93 notes · View notes
shmaroace · 1 year
Text
don't get me wrong, i love all the positivity around being aro, like "be proud of being aro!! love who you are!!", but we never talk about how hard it is to reach that spot. so here's to the aros who are still trying to understand themselves, who aren't proud of who they are yet, who are still coming to terms with their new identity.
8K notes · View notes
knifearo · 5 months
Note
beloved aro blog thank u for that response to the anon who didnt know how to tell if they were aro (it says asexual, but maybe that was a typo?). i generally use the aro label for myself because it fits 95% of the time but that 5% is when the doubt comes in and i feel like im "faking it." but that anon u answered has Cleared the Cobwebs of Doubt. youre Right. Amatonormativity is So Prevalent. the paragraph about wanting romance bc romance, or wanting romance bc society says u need a romantic relationship to get xyz thing from life Hit Me So Hard. i think i will come back to this post every time i feel Unsure about my label. so thank u for placing your words in that order for me. love loses. love wins. violence. have a great day homie
first of all. i'm ur beloved aro blog 🥺 nd yeah i do think it was a typo haha
second of all i'm so glad that it helped out for you :) the thing about amatonormativity is that you will constantly go "it can't be doing ALL of these things." but then it IS. EVERY TIME. you look up and amatonormativity is warping your ideas of self-worth and your plans for the future and your interactions with friends and family and holding society as a whole in a fucking vice grip and it's fucking. stealing your lunch money too. idk. that bitch. you know how it is. anyway that 5% is so real and you're so real for feeling it and it is NOT silly or cringe to take a few seconds in the bathroom mirror telling yourself "you ARE aromantic. and it's okay." if that's something that'll help. and also yada yada "aromanticism is not one uniform experience and arospec identities are valid and you can call yourself aromantic even if you experience romantic attraction sometimes as long as it feels like a label that's relevant to your experience" all the things that i'll say anytime someone is coming to me saying that they don't know if they're Really aro haha. just to get it out of the way. sounds like you've got stuff in a good place rn and i'm so glad that you're feeling that way :) hell yeah brother love loses!!!!! aromanticism forever and ever 🖤
24 notes · View notes
bravevolunteer · 5 months
Text
ngl every time i see the "cis" in michael's bio it feels. Wrong. like i see it and i go "i'm probably gonna non conform his gender one of these days"
17 notes · View notes
nnycap · 6 months
Text
I hate society and how it treats and categorises (non-familial) relationships.
Society says "only platonic, romantic, and sexual" and completely ignores everything else. Says those are the only types of attraction you can feel. No nuance, no nothing. It all can be categorized into those categories. Not to mention of course it feels like platonic ones must always come second to romantic/sexual ones.
That's cool and all, but what if I have attraction that doesn't fit any of those things? What then?
Let me be clear, I know love isn't always romantic. But that's what the term is mainly connected with and I don't want that confusion even if I clarify it. But my view on relationships and attraction are so far disconnected from society's norm that if I try to talk about how I feel I'd always have to cater how I explain what I'm feeling to the people who follow the norm. And that's the problem. I can't.
Society has no words for how I feel. How can I describe what I feel without being forced to say "love" ? I don't want to use that word because of its connotations, but society doesn't care about anything else so we only have "love." How am I supposed to explain what I feel without the fear of it being misinterpertated? As an example: How do you tell someone that you want to be physically intimate with them (hugging, cuddling, kissing; all traditionally romantic things) and would also partake in sexual activities with them despite not being romantically or sexually attracted to them and not feeling that you need to be in a relationship with them to do those things?
And of course fuck monogamy and exclusivity being the standard.* Can I not show my affection to friends in relationships? Obviously I understand that they may be uncomfortable/not want to do some of the things I previously mentioned but why something not inheritly romantic/sexual like physical contact have to be restricted for people in relationships?
(*If people prefer or are happier this way, good for them. What I'm saying is I wish open relationships were more normalized, not that everyone has to be poly.)
I'm just tired of trying to fit myself into society's strict boxes. I don't want to try and explain what I feel as "romantic," "platonic," or "sexual." I need words outside of "love" to explain deep connections to people not associated with being platonic or romantic. I wish it was normal for people to be more open like that. I'm tired of trying to fit in just in general. I don't feel human. I feel like an alien among what is supposedly my own species.
Derailing a bit from the main topic but: Society just wasn't made for people like me. If you don't fit an overly specific image of "normal" society just says to go fuck yourself. I know this post is mainly geared for a-specs, but this last part can apply to basically anyone.
We are not obligated to fit ourselves into those boxes. But it's really hard to reject societal norms and feel comfortable doing so.
11 notes · View notes
viksalos · 6 months
Text
in about 5 sessions with my therapist we went from "you can't possibly be autistic because you're not like the nonverbal high support needs teenage boys i worked with in the early 2000s," to me digging up my childhood psychological records from the early 2000s and convincing her, to her presenting my case to her supervisor and her supervisor being like "yeah you had an undiagnosed autistic client on your hands and she needs to be transferred to someone qualified to handle that" lmao
4 notes · View notes
metanarrates · 1 year
Text
basically: not using the aromantic label cause I don’t think it’s crazy applicable to my life (i feel like my weird relationship to romance is more easily chalked up to me being autistic polyam and a lesbian) but I believe in their beliefs
15 notes · View notes
musical-chick-13 · 8 months
Text
UGGGGHHHHHH
4 notes · View notes
perenlop · 7 months
Text
Finished Rubyfruit Jungle like a week ago, which I was studying for class, and ngl... I tried very hard to view the book as a product of its time, where things that are considered poor taste today probably weren't viewed that way back then, but most of the time I kinda just got a "I'm not like THOSE lesbians" vibe from it
3 notes · View notes
mejomonster · 9 months
Text
As I get older and older I more tangibly realize why queer individuals in older generations than mine might prefer words I wouldn't use for myself, and likewise why younger generations preferences would be different too. Like it was always clear you know, a person knows their identity best and what labels they prefer best and even if you don't get it you should respect it. But I guess the older I get the more I realize I really don't know and never can know the background another person has for their perceptions and meaning for labels and why something in particular helps them to use or not
#rant#lgbt#...........................................................................................................................................#i just. so im alive in the time i guess when i saw trans identities barely discussed like even in educational material i didnt#hear about gender identity until i dug deep. to people now using transmasc and transfemme as labels. labels i dont understand and know#i dont. i presume they mean trans people who identify with masculinity or femininity? but i think im probably wrong#because ive seen transmen call themselves transmasc and it confuses me. because a transman can be a very feminine person who loves makeup#so. one cannot say transmasc and actually Mean all trans men. a transfemme does Not include all transwomen because transwomen can be butch#and reject femininity. so like... from my outdated perception i see it as the cis straight societal gender expectations of men MUST be masc#women MUST be femme which. i hate. becayse i specifically feel all people should and can be whatever they want.#any man can be feminine any woman can be masculine any person can be any range on that and change daily and do what they want#and their gender is still valid. and then like. theres ppl like me. im nonbinary. im a pretty feminine guy#im a fairly masculine woman. i dont think i could even fit into transmasc or transfemme labels.#i do think those labels help and suit people who like them. if i met a nonbinary lipstick lesbian perhapa#transfemme would help her xommunicate how she feels. but those words dont help me they are boxes i cant fit inside#and i get why they exist but its like. cool. now i get why transman needs to be preserved Outside of transmasc. because feminine trans men#still need space. i get why masculinjty and femininity need to mean something clearly Separate from gender itself or we loose the ability#to express the range of gender expression in qll areas. i dont know what transexual means but now i realize why a person older than me#may LIKE that label and cling to it. because it may communicqte something For Them that helps them in a#way that was lost to understanding by my generation. in a way that the terms no longer useful for my self identity but is for them.#in the way that trans man and nonbinary fit me but i could never be fit within the labels of transmasc or transfem etc#and in the way that for some people transmasc etc labels will fit Them and Help in a way a label like transman never can. and so on
5 notes · View notes
jorvikzelda · 6 months
Text
love takes so many forms. theyre all so fucking beautiful. I love humans and the way we contain so many multitudes
3 notes · View notes
electrosquash · 2 years
Text
I feel more and more like i've been severely misdiagnosed
5 notes · View notes
Text
This song has been stuck in my head since lunch.
3 notes · View notes
Text
i respect fuck all labels in a “all humanity is on a spectrum and we can never define the experiences and emotions of every person ever with this identity into one neatly drawn box” or a “i don’t feel like labeling myself because it makes me feel contained and i know who i am and don’t need to define it just for the sake of other peoples comfort” way but i do not respect fuck all labels in a “im using this as an excuse to reject and invalidate labels other than my own worldview of the norm and condescend to people who are using a label that i don’t perceive as valid” way. stop it.
2 notes · View notes
allseeingdirt · 10 months
Text
i NEED to get more narrative foils
#rian is too soft i need someone scuffier and potentially MORE bedraggled n snippy to go on rants#rian is good for heartfelt and/or heartbreaking rants. i need someone to be angry cunty#but not as one of rians debate partner#they dont have deep personal history and/or stakes in engaging w one another they actually share views most of the time.#rian just thinks the others too hard n the other thinks rians too soft. so they dont interact much they just in each others radar as#Vaguely (Prickly/Mushy) Ally#mayb hes either Not an accursed but similarly ''cast out'' from the label human or hes accursed but#by choice not by forced inheritance like rian#foils etc etc#anyways i watched OSP's new pinocchio plot video and now i have Thoughts. on Humanity. and lack of#rians story is like avsolutely drenched in the question of Humanity Or No. rian as an accursed n described as former-human never-been-human#former in the societal sense. the second he becomes accursed society has deemed him Not human. but since he was younger#being human has always felt an alien concept to him. vexing. confusing. mainly bcuz of his particular brand of neurodivergency#maybe hes never been human. in that rian found it sorta like a relief when he became an accursed. he doesnt need to fit in a human mold. he#cast out. he doesnt need to. im not human. may never have been. and thats not so bad is it. type of thinking#n then he meets how other accursed have interpreted that inhumanity thing#one person whos devastated about it. tries to appeal to the standards of humanity. tries to reject what made them an accursed.#someone who hated what humanity has done to them. hated humanity. rejected and spit at the thought of humans.#a sorcerer who is accursed 'by choice'. by practicing magic was cast out of humanity yet will never gave up their magic.#compare n contrast. rians thinking w other accursed's#hes soft abt it tho#kinda want someone else to be rian version pissy. rians too heartfelt abt everything even anger. kinda want someone snarky to have his back#views at least. someone who understands him. and in that understanding disquietness. to know someone else knows your insides intrinsically.#in his eyes ur laid to bare like a gutted fish. because with his eyes hes looking in the mirror.#yeayy thot of more ways to complicate the relationship. the mortifying ordeal of being known#idont think hes in the support group-which is just rians friend group. might b apartment neighbors tho#tank top baggy pants messy cut short hair untrimmed stubble. like if rian was masc LOL#an under the radar accursed or not accursed at all. still dont know
0 notes
thechekhov · 3 months
Note
Did you seriously reblog a post defending the sanctity of life of pedophiles?
You did not read that post.
I understand that it might be difficult, because of the knee-jerk reaction we all have when it comes to this topic. I admit I also had the emotional first-response of disgust. But I urge you to go back and try to read it again, when you are cool-headed.
Stating that 'murdering people we find disgusting is not the moral high ground it feels like', is not the same thing as 'defending the sanctity of life' of anyone.
And while it feels good to emotionally say 'we should kill all (people who do bad things that cause harm to others)' this does not actually accomplish what our brains think it does.
From the post:
denying the humanity of people who do horrible things accomplishes exactly three things:
give cover to people who haven't been caught yet by allowing them to use their humanity as "proof" of their innocence
silence any criticism of societal structures and institutions that facilitate those horrible things by putting the focus on individuals who are assumed to be so uniquely monstrous that the ways it was made easy for them are irrelevant
provide a shortcut to dehumanize anyone you feel like killing: simply accuse them of doing a horrible thing
Listen, to me, listen:
I know that we are all human and when we see someone committing evil things, we feel justified and good, and we want to use our teeth and claws to rip them to shreds. I KNOW it feels incredible to reply to pain and harm with equal violence.
But on an ideological level, if you EVER hope to understand how emotional manipulation and dehumanization on a social level works, you NEED to be prepared to unwrap this delicious i-can-murder-that-person-and-feel-rightous burrito.
You need to understand why it is not the swiss knife of justice that it feels like.
You need to know that it can and will be used to kill innocent people who don't deserve it, and you will not even notice.
Because if you can justify murder with a simple 'if you fit into this category you automatically don't deserve to live' then you are supporting an authoritarian regime, who can and WILL happily take the easier job of convincing you that some person that they need dead fits the description (of a person you've already agreed doesn't deserve anything but a swift and unquestionable death).
This is why, when they needed the gays to be feared and hunted, they labeled them 'pedophiles'. This is why they're now doing this to trans people. This is why dehumanization is a tool of oppression, not justice.
There is way to fix injustice in the world and protect children without becoming easier to manipulate and trick.
2K notes · View notes