#so uh in conclusion wlw is so god damn clunky its unbelievable.

[falinscloaca]

i do find it really funny actually that lots of sapphic terminology tends to evolve as a game of "spot-the-problem" whack-a-mole

#sapphic and lesbian are arguably most un-deconstructable because they aren't like. made up of descriptive parts. theyre both names i mean #but like. 'not everyone is a lesbian -and i wont use sapphic for reasons- just say wlw!' 'not even all LESBIANS are women!' #'i define lesbians as just women' 'YOU LITERALLY INCLUDE PEOPLE WHO DONT IDENTIFY AS WOMEN IN WITH LESBIANS' #'how about including 'nblw' in with that?' 'where does that leave attraction to- ok but unless we literally write out nblw wlnb nblnb & wlw #every time we refer to sapphics as a group then thats just kinda reductive? and like also thats writing the element of lesbian-iness outta #nonbinary lesbians attraction to each other...' #sorry i just ended up wasting five minutes trying to figure out if a lesbian who uses '''male''' terminology was nonbinary enough for my ow #narrow definitions or not. i learned nothing from the exercise -having known better from the start- and wished to put that energy into SOME #sort of ranting that had a bit more to actually fucking say than 'this loser spent like ten minutes trying to vet her own definitions #against some stranger's on the internet. yeah to her self. no she wasn't even really planning on doing anything with that information.' #so uh in conclusion wlw is so god damn clunky its unbelievable.