#what i'm trying to say is if you see someone use a blatant dogwhistle and then go 'oh it's probably fine' then i do not want to talk to you

[nothorses]

Alright I want to ask you this because I have thoughts but you're significantly more well read than me so maybe you'll have better insight and explanation:

I was going on a terf blocking spree, and lots of them are currently dealing with the idea that trans people are trying to say genital attraction isn't real. Now, I have heard this a few times on Tumblr, and I've heard people call it "genital preferences" and similar things, and I've seen the posts about people trying to get others cancelled for not dating them because they're trans. But for the most part I would say this is the minority of trans people?

Most of my experience with these sorts of conversations is from Reddit and not Tumblr, in these discussions people all agreed genital attraction was a real thing. Also, people (generally) agreed that sometimes trans people need to accept someone won't date them because of their genitalia (in reference to their agab genitals), yet some people will and it's not okay to be angry with someone who won't. There was also the idea that if they won't date someone with their agab genitals or after grs then there's an argument for ableism but not necessarily transphobia (although it's sometimes transphobia, not always).

I don't really know how to word the question, but basically do you have any thoughts you're willing to share on this issue? You always seem to have well thought out and historically referenced analysis of issues and provide nuance as needed, so I thought maybe you'd be a good person to ask. Of course if you don't want to answer this that's completely fine as well, it's just I can see the issue a bit from both sides and I just don't think I know enough on this subject to arrive to a conclusion yet personally, I also hope this is worded in a way where you understand what I'm trying to say

I think there’s two sides to this issue- the people making these decisions, and the people impacted by them- and my opinion really differs depending on what side you’re talking about. 

When we’re talking about “genital preference” and the people making these decisions, I honestly have to say that I don’t think this is a Thing the way these folks talk about it. I understand comfort levels with different types of genitalia, I understand having different sexual relationships with different types of genitalia, I understand finding different qualities attractive in different types of genitalia (penis size/hair/labia/etc.). But that isn’t the same as your entire sense of attraction to someone or your entire orientation being based on genitalia.

If you’re uncomfortable with one genital configuration, there are plenty of ways to have sex with someone who has it that do not involve interacting with that genital configuration in ways that make you uncomfortable. If you prefer the role you default to with one genital configuration, you can talk to a partner with a different configuration about how to accommodate that. If you find certain qualities unattractive in someone’s genitals, well, why is that so different from something like hair length?

Ultimately, “genital preference” isn’t about that. It’s just a reason for refusing to consider dating or having sex with certain people- and lo and behold, it just so happens that it’s always trans people that “genital preferences” exclude. (Ask these people if they’d consider trans people who’ve had bottom surgery & watch them scramble.)

It’s a transphobic dogwhistle used by cis people to excuse their transphobic dating habits. It’s the “socially acceptable” way of saying they don’t want to deal with their internalized transphobia, that they don’t find trans people “fuckable”. Not to mention the rampant, blatant exclusion of intersex people with conditions affecting their genitals.

Which is why, on the side of those impacted, responses are usually based on the assumption that this is about transphobia.

If someone tells me they don’t want to be with me because they have a “genital preference”, I also, in fact, have zero interest in them. I don’t want to be with someone who’s transphobic, and I don’t want to be with someone who doesn’t see me as a man.

I don’t think it’s safe or healthy for trans people to push that issue with individuals. I also don’t think it’s okay, in any capacity, to force yourself on someone because you (rightfully, in this case) disagree with the reasons behind their rejection. I also think it’s perfectly fair to point out and be upset about the transphobia inherent in the situation.

The closest thing to a legitimate “genital preference” is one founded in trauma, and as I’ve said before, these are intensely personal situations. I believe folks who’s trauma has caused this association between Danger and a certain genital configuration have a lot of healing and growing to do. They should understand that trans people may feel uncomfortable and unsafe around them until then. And they should have their boundaries respected, regardless of the reasons behind them, in the meantime.

#long post #if this starts discourse on this shit again im gonna run screaming into the forest #full-tilt naruto run sonic fast #transphobia tw #discussion of sex #discussion of genitals #Anon #Ask

[thedreadvampy]

Like idk what you want from me here. If you want to engage me in a specific question about ace/aro identities, as I've said several times and nobody has ever actually done, then ask me the specific question. Don't fuck around with vague gestures at Points of Discourse and then get cross with me because I haven't answered the Exact Question you Didn't Ask But Expected Me To Intuit.

Preface: If you don't want to answer any of these because you are allo/allo and don't have a say because its not your place, say that. In fact, I'm asking these because you seem to do have opinions on things you shouldn't based off things you have said in the past.

I also want to state that I agree fully with your points about Martin- minus the blatant aphobia. Not just acephobia, arophobia as well.

1. Do you think qprs are problematic? I believe you once made a post saying roughly that qprs are just normal friendships, or something like that, that has since been deleted. What is your current opinion?

2. Are het aros lgbt?

3. Are het aces lgbt?

4. Cis aro/aces lgbt?

5. Cishet aro/aces?

6. Do the spectrums and micro identities exist? You've implied in the past they don't, in the post about how they were supposedly created from sex positivity

7. Can aros be in or desire romantic relationships?

8. Can aces have or desire sex?

9. Does the split attraction model exist and does it benefit people?

10. Can teenagers identify as aro/ace or do you think they're too young?

11. Can you be, say, an aroace lesbian, or an aroace gay, aroace bi, etc. Idk how to phrase this one but like can you be aroace and still id with another orientation?

I could send another anon detailing the aphobia in the post, because I at least am certainly not upset about Martin being sexual, rather it was the very blatant aphobia. It could have stemmed from ignorance, and if that's the case I don't mind explaining it.

Ok this is a lot of questions, some with quite involved answers, so I'm gonna answer them chunk by chunk so it's a bit more manageable, and then I might come back to some of the surrounding message. This isn't gonna be an immediate bang bang bang, but I'll try and work through them over the next couple of days.

Question 1

1. No, I don't think qprs are problematic. I don't necessarily understand them but I don't need to understand them to understand and respect that they're a thing that's important to a lot of people. I don't know what post you're referring to, but I'm surprised that you say it was deleted, because I very rarely delete posts except, occasionally, reblogs where people have flagged up misinformation or dogwhistles or which I reblogged by accident. tbh I'm the messiest online presence I'm way too lazy to delete past posts or block people even when I probably should bc I don't like to feel like I'm ~hiding evidence~. So I'm not saying you're wrong, you're probably totally right, but I'm surprised.

I'm thinking about what posts I've made that you could be thinking of, and obviously I don't remember everything I say on here bc I say A Lot and I actively post to get things out of my head so 🤷‍♀️ but I do remember making a post a while ago where I said that it was a normal expectation of friendship to have some friends close enough that you'll live with them, raise kids with them, etc, and I'm wondering if that was the post you're thinking of? I did have qprs in mind while writing that to a degree, but only because I think 'you wouldn't do this with your friends' is a very common argument people put forward about qprs and I think it's a weak argument, because many people have different definitions of friendship, and the only argument I think is needed for any sort of I Have X Emotional Relationship To This Thing is...I Have X Emotional Relationship To This Thing. Like you can't offer a universal materialist definition of the differences between romantic, queerplatonic, sexual and platonic relationships, because the boundaries are very personal and it's really an emotional and experiential difference. so if that is the post you're thinking of, I wasn't criticising The Concept Of QPRs as much as saying that I thought trying to put hard lines around What Friends Do Vs What QPPs Do was a) counterproductive when arguing with someone who thinks QPR is Just Normal Friendships bc. if they do those things with their friends then saying NO THIS IS A QPR THING just reinforces their existing belief that you're talking about the same thing as they mean by friendships and b) to me seems to set a painful expectation to young people that you can only get these kinds of close friendships occasionally and in the form of a QPR and it will be stigmatised and misunderstood (and depending on how people talk about it, is only accessible to aspec people and allo people should only expect it to come through romantic/sexual relationships), when in fact most people of most ages I know have friends with whom they can share things like housing, deep feelings, futures, finances, who they miss if they don't see for a few days, who are mutually supportive and vital to their wellbeing. I don't think that's mutually exclusive with the existence of QPRs though - like I personally don't know what the difference is between a QPR and a close friendship, but I also don't know what the difference is between a romantic relationship and a close friendship but I know there is one and I know it's not a question of What You Do but a question of How You Feel And Interact, and that's pretty hard to define in unambiguous terms.

Like generally I don't Not Think QPRs exist, and I think it's a dick move to try and tell people they're wrong about how they experience and define their relationships because???? how are you meant to know that better than the person whose relationship it is??? but I do think the way people talk about QPRs (both from the perspective of defending them and from the perspective of attacking them) is pretty rife with problems and I don't think it's invalidating the reality of QPRs to talk about where the arguments and language around them potentially falls down or has unexpected consequences.

On the other hand, I don't know if that actually is the post you're referring to - the reason I'm calling back to that is that that and a few resultant asks are the only time I remember talking about QPRs on here in the last year or so. So like, several of these questions reference past posts, which is very fair, but I do need it to be clear that, since I don't really tag anything and I don't have a great memory, I can only really speak to What I Think Now In This Context, not to what I posted in the past and what I was thinking when I posted it. Like, this isn't too deny responsibility - I reckon I'm responsible for what I post even if I don't still agree with it, which is why I don't tend to delete my own posts on purpose - but just to deny capacity, I guess? I don't really KNOW what I've posted so if you talk about it in vague terms (and I do understand that if it's been deleted there's not a lot you can do but that) I may not necessarily be responding to the part of it that's worried you, so if I'm not speaking to something specific I've said or done, it's not because I Don't Want To, I just don't necessarily know to.

I'm waffling about this because looking through your messages there's a lot of "you said X" and like. given that the intended message of the post that's kicked this off was very different to the message people have taken from it, it feels important to me to know whether if I looked at the posts you're referencing I'd be like "ah yeah I did believe that but now I believe X" or if it's more a situation of "oh right I can see how you took X from that but my thinking was more Y".

(also sometimes when people say "you made a post" they mean "you reblogged a post" and I am a compulsive discourse scroller so sometimes I reblog a random post to bookmark my place on someone's discourse blog or I accidentally longpress the reblog button while scrolling - I try to delete reblogs that I don't agree with but sometimes I miss some, all of which to say if there's a post on my blog that doesn't seem to reflect what I say in my original posts then it doesn't necessarily mean I'm a crypto-whatever so much as I'm very lazy and messy with my blog. Doesn't mean I shouldn't be held accountable for reblogs but it's useful to know if we're talking original content or reblogs bc I'm unlikely to fully accidentally make a post. but I quite often accidentally reblog stuff. I doubt this is the case with this sitch just bc of your phrasing but I want to cover my bases)

anyway tl;dr: no I don't believe that QPRs themselves are inherently problematic, nor do I think I have at any point believed that, but I do think that a lot of the language and ideas used to talk about them are based in miscommunication or absolutist ideas about relationships and can have damaging knock on effects.

#i recognise that your past ask implied that it was somehow evasive to answer in long form #so sorry but this is gonna get loooong #but I'd rather be long and honest than say something snappy and absolutist that doesn't reflect what i actually think #so yeah this is gonna go ooooooooooon