#including 'bi women that aren't really oppressed'

[bisolationist]

What are you trying to say with that screenshot? Are you anti-febfem now?

I'm all for bi women being female exclusive.

I'm against how the febfem label seems increasingly like a panic response to not be called a "bihet" because they have absorbed the idea that bi women are not meaningfully different from straight women and deserve to have their experiences ridiculed and mocked.

#sorry I'm not trying to stick my nose in things but I'm not blind either #like I think it's very illuminating that there's people saying bihet means all SORTS of things #including 'bi women that aren't really oppressed' #like........ that should be concerning sorry

[olderthannetfic]

I do think a lot of the problem and the reason that more people (like the ones who seem to think that "top/bottom as myers-briggs personality types" jokes are exclusively coming from female-centric fandom spaces rather than gay male offline culture - which, btw, ignores that a whole bunch if not most female fanfic writers are themselves queer and there's a similar set of jokes and stereotypes in the lesbian community, but I digress) don't seem to understand what offline queer culture is like on here is that way too many of the people setting the tone for this in The Discourse on Tumblr are very young people who are newly out. In particular, a huge amount of the gay men on here who are telling people how very Problematic this is (when they're getting it from gay men and not circular discourse among other women in fandom who are claiming to speak on gay men's behalf) is coming from young gay men who don't have much of a community offline, and especially young gay trans men who often aren't yet presenting as male outside of the Internet. It's really hard to talk about, because it so easily risks saying those people's identities aren't valid - and like, we've seen TERFs weaponize that discourse to suggest that gay trans men involved in fandom are just straight women who identified too hard with their blorbos or something, as well as the endless use of "passing privilege" to suggest that bi people in F/M relationships are "basically straight" - but I think one thing people need to understand better is the difference between "your identity is valid, your personal experiences with homophobia/transphobia/etc. are valid" and "your judgments about the larger community that your identity makes you a member of are valid." Like, you do actually have to participate in a community to be able to be able to talk about what the consensus in it is, what the cultural norms are. You have to actually look up the history in order to know that history. If you're going to speak on behalf of All Gay Men you probably should know some beyond yourself - including ones who are not Very Online and/or aren't active in fandom - and that goes for both cis and trans gay men. (And the same is true for every subdivision of LGBTQ+, I've seen similarly bizarre takes about "lesbian culture" from 17-yro lesbians who clearly haven't talked to any outside of Tumblr and insular, dramatic Discords.)

Like, to use an analogy here to another kind of oppression: say you have a black person who was adopted by a white family very young and lived in an exclusively white neighborhood and doesn't know any other black people. Obviously, they are still black, and obviously they still experience racism (probably especially because they're an outlier in that community). Obviously, their own understanding of their identity and their experiences with racism are valid. But they aren't necessarily going to have any better of an understanding of the broader black COMMUNITY - cultural traditions, history, etc. - than a non-black person who was similarly not exposed to that community. They can only speak for themselves. And someone who isn't black but grew up near/in black communities (for instance, perhaps another transracial adoptee who was adopted by a black couple? or even just a non-black person who grew up in a heavily black neighborhood) might actually have a better sense of that broader community/culture than they do.

And this isn't a hypothetical. I've heard stuff like that about feeling like outliers in black American culture from everyone from the aforementioned transracial adoptees; to multiracial black people who were raised primarily by their non-black family; to black people who are recent immigrants from Africa rather than descendants of slaves; to black people from Europe or other parts of the Americas, who have some similarities in their culture but it's not completely 1:1. And especially from people who are some combo of the above. They have an understanding of themselves as black and of their relationship to race and racism, of course, but don't really feel like they have a particularly strong understanding of The Black Community or The Black Experience as we understand it in the USA.

I think what a lot of people don't understand is that newly-out queer people are often like that. A lot of other marginalized identities - like being a cis woman (this applies less to trans women unless they've known from early on) or being a POC - are ones where you grow up with an understanding of what that means and often a connection to a broader community that gives you some kind of consciousness of what it means to be A Woman or Black or Asian or whatever. But with queerness, it's usually not something you fully understand about yourself until adolescence or adulthood, and even when you do, you don't necessarily have access to a "community" around that until that age because you're probably being raised by cis straight people. You have to take time to discover that community and learn about it, and the culture and history that goes with, and when you start out you're going to be just as ignorant as a straight cis person who is similarly isolated from queer communities. (And frankly, a straight person with a lot of gay friends might know better than you do at first! As a lesbian with a lot of gay male friends, most of whom couldn't care less about my slash fanfic hobby if they even know about it, that's precisely why I know that these takes on Tumblr are so bizarre)

(Disability is the interesting one because it sometimes overlaps with this, sometimes doesn't - and one of the big divides in the community IME is around people who have lifelong understandings of themselves as "disabled" vs. came to it more recently, whether because the disability itself is a new thing or just their diagnosis of it. A lot of people in the second group can have very similar experiences and act in similar ways to newly-out queer people, and I know because I've lived both myself, lol.)

I think people have taken the idea of "everyone is the best expert on their own experience with oppression and their own identity" and distorted that into some weird essentialism where being gay or bi or trans or whatever gives you automatic understanding of "queer culture" or "queer history" without having to do the actual work of talking to people, participating in that community, studying history, etc. but that's just not true. Anyone can study that history and get to know those people. And yeah, as a queer or trans person you'll have a better opportunity to really deeply know and be part of that community than straight cis people with queer friends ever will, but you still have to like. Actually put yourself out there! You're not going to find it by just discoursing in a vacuum of ignorance.

--

Sadly, to all the Olds, this is very, very obvious, but there's no way to make it obvious to the people doing it. It's a matter of experience.

[cardentist]

As a nonbinary/genderfluid biromantic, demiromantic asexual, literally every part of my gender identity and sexuality has been subject to the same "you could EASILY pass as cishet, so can you REALLY say you experience oppression when you could simply CHOOSE not to" and "you're not REALLY oppressed for being XYZ, you're only oppressed when people mistake you as cis fem/trans fem/gay/lesbian/any other identity we think is ACTUALLY important." My existence in online queer spaces has been hounded constantly by people trying to tell me what my lived experiences are and what they mean, shouting me down about how I can't speak about Insert Issue/Topic Here because sure maybe I'm queer (and to some, I don't even have the right to call myself that) but I'm at the bottom of the Who Is Oppressed More Hierarchy, I am only Oppressed in the way that sometimes I experience what they deem to be a different group's oppression. Not even my oppression is my own! I am too much of an "aberration" to find community and a place to speak amongst the general populace, and I'm too privileged to have a voice in the queer community, even about things that affect me.

And now, I'm watching that same rhetoric being used against transmen and transmascs. I remember when people on this site started really exploring queer headcanons for characters, everyone cheering "let's make X character gay! Y character is trans! Z character is a lesbian!" but if you dared to suggest "can Q character be ace?" you'd be met with "... that's boring." I remember how quickly ace exclusion devolved from "aces are boring" to "god, aces are annoying" to "when you think about it, aces aren't even really oppressed, so they aren't queer, so they should just shut up." And then it wasn't just aces, it was bi folks. And then it was enbies too. And now. Here we are.

This is the only site where people will blog about how "Gender is a sandbox! It's fucky! Men can be women, and women can be men! I'm a boygirl kind of girlboy! There are genders and sexualities in all sorts of shrimp colors you can dream of!" but in the same breath, they'll still act weird about he/him lesbians. They'll still claim that ALL masculinity is toxic. They'll still say that men are boring and annoying and-- Oh? You think that's kind of hurtful? You want to use this as an opportunity to talk about your own lived experiences and vent your frustrations courteously and privately on your own blog? Why do you have to make everything about you?! You're lower down the Who Is More Oppressed ladder because, wHeN yOu tHinK aBouT iT, no man can be oppressed for being a man! Even trans men! So you and anybody even vaguely masc aligned should just shut up and stay out of the conversation and let the queers who experience REAL bigotry talk!

... They could at least say something new instead of reusing the same rhetoric they've used for aces and aros and bi/pan folk and enbies and masc/butch lesbians and countless other queer identities.

All that to say, as someone who has been subject to all this for every part of my identity, I stand with you. Trans Unity! Queer Unity!

Context: [Link 1, Link 2]

I know Exactly what you're talking about !

I was around in inclusionist spaces 10 years ago at this point, before I'd fully crystalized what I Had Going On.

I Remember it being pointed out that ace exclusionists were stealing talking points from radfems directly, up to and including ripping off entire posts and just swapping out "trans women" with "asexuals."

I Remember people warning each other that normalizing these kinds of talking points, convincing people that that Mindset is a valid one, would then make it easy to swap out the Target of said mindset.

and it Has happened, over and over and over again. people are Always looking for the marginalized people that nobody wants to stand up for. that people don't understand, that people don't see as Needing support, that people already have negative feelings about even if they don't recognize Why.

it'll only ever stop when people examine the talking points Themselves and throw them out. when people are willing to stand in solidarity with people Regardless of whether they understand them or not.

if someone is trying to convince you that class of people As A Whole are undeserving of support, are lesser than, shouldn't have their voices heard or considered, Question It ! when they hold people up in Comparison to say that their pain is Lesser and therefore doesn't Matter, Question It !!

#discourse #queer unity #trans unity #transandrophobia

[ihopesocomic]

As a bi and nonbinary person i feel like lgbt media that doesn't make romance ina homophobic society or a coming out story is geniunely refreshing. Im really tired of the same old stories that are like that. So i really like i hopeso a lot better than mypride... Like

If you guys want homophobic or transphobic "realism" idk go watch mypride or whatever. Im geniunely tired of having to experience and having media reflect real world prejudice that has an effect on people.

So anyways ihopeso is really good in terms of being an lgbt friendly comic. I hope more stuff like yours comes out soon.

Also I don't know how they did it but they seriously wrote nothing and hover with the charisma of an obligatory heterosexual couple in every piece of media ever. Thats all ill say on all of that

Thank you! Just based on personal experience, enjoying a thing without it having to be bogged down by rampant bits of bigotry just makes it all the more enjoyable. Right from the start I wanted to make it absolutely clear that homophobia/transphobia/ableism/etc was just not a thing in this world. Not only do the readers not have to stress out about whether it's gonna happen, but look at that, the main couple also has a brief Romeo & Juliet moment. But it's because they have different cultures, and not because they're two girls who are romantic.

Since there's no "cishet default", there's no "corrupt religion", so why include something that only exists because one sector of humans decided to hide behind religion to justify oppression? Starts not making sense when you think about it.

Unless the point of someone's story is to deconstruct discrimination or just generally speaking about one's experiences, there's no reason to include it. Animals or fantasy or whatever. Your fantasy world has Off-brand Catholicism in it to justify discrimination against queer people? Then why are you boring, that's my question. It just especially doesn't make sense with animals. It's a good fuckin way to take any queer readers you have right out of the story. Most days I just put it down and never look at it again cuz I'm fuckin tired. It's 2023, queer tragedies are old hat, no one cares.

And if someone's one of those people who thinks it doesn't make sense to not include it, then you need to assess why you think this way because it's not normal. Or if you don't wanna do that, then yeah, go back and watch MP, cuz an off-putting amount of people bug us about why characters aren't ableist or homophobic. Y'all want homophobic lions, go watch MP. That's clearly what some of you want LOL And you're not gonna get MP 2.0 out of IHS, as much as people want it to be.

As for Nothing and Hover, there's a strange phenomenon in queer media where they have to include one or multiple bad sapphic tropes. Specifically where one is the "meek feminine one" and the other is the "boistrous masculine one". Essentially making them a poorly-written cishet couple. MP just has the extra bonus of Nothing being disabled and Hover being ableist. They complete each other/sarcasm.

And to go on a bit of a tangent, homophobia and ableism doesn't even make sense in the context of My Pride lol I know what they were trying to do, but in simplest terms, woman-haters don't worship women. And it just becomes even stupider when you remember that they're trying to explain "realism" in lion behaviors. - Cat

#ask

[bonefall]

I don't understand he/him lesbians, I'm friends with a few lesbians and they all say it's harmful to lesbians for someone who identifies as male to call themselves a lesbian, is this right? If you're not comfortable explaining that's ok! I just saw you answered an ask with it and I wanted someone else's opinion? I'm not too keyed in on sexuality and genders and stuff (I'm a bi cis woman) but I'm trying to learn more to be more considerate to the people around me and stuff

Hey, if you're reaching out and seeking advice on the topic, that is good for me!

I will not do this very often though just because I want this blog to be a place for funny battle cats and general celebrations of queerness, but for you, I will give you a brief rundown and some good links to further reading if you'd like to learn more.

So this sentence is aimed at everyone who is not this anon; my stance is not negotiable and the block button is my best friend. Do not use this post to argue. Thank you.

It is not correct that people who identify with masculinity cannot use the term lesbian.

Queerness isn't about rigid boxes and fitting ourselves into them, that's what we're supposed to be against!

Lesbians are people who identify in some way with femininity and have sapphic affections for other feminine people. I've met agender (no gender) lesbians, genderfluid (gender isn't rigid and shifts like liquid) lesbians, demigender (sort-of feels gender but not much) lesbians, multigender (identifies with multiple genders possibly including masculinity) lesbians, so on.

I have even known a transgender man who found the label better described his relationship to women than the term 'heterosexual.' When asked why, he described it as, "I don't love women the way other men do." Even though he was no longer a woman, he still felt a connection to femininity that he felt was best described as sapphic.

A person's relationship to gender can be a very complex and multifaceted thing. In fact this complexity is why I personally use the term genderqueer.

When a homophobic chucklefuck says, "Uhuhuh im a lesbian like u because i also like women what now" What they're doing is being disrespectful. That is what is harmful about that. They do not care that you say, "Ah, well, a lesbian is only women who like other women!" because now you've given them a foot in the door to shave women down into rigid boxes of femininity to fit stupid binary rules.

TERFs have used this in the past to divide our community. Our enemies do not care that our terms "make sense." They just want us gone.

Pronouns don't always equal gender.

Just like how I mentioned that there are masculine people who can identify in some part with femininity without being women, the same thing can happen with people who are women and feel a connection to masculinity, or something else entirely.

Lesbians using he/him pronouns goes back for decades, even centuries. Some would use these pronouns to pass as men (and may have been what we'd call transgender men with modern terms), while others feel a strange relationship to their assigned gender through their sexuality, and some simply prefer he/him.

He/him lesbians, they/them lesbians, xe/xir lesbians...

Discomfort is not the only reason to change your pronouns. Disconnect is not the only way we explore ourselves. Sometimes it's pleasure!

PLEASE GO READ

(CW: The following literature is intended for adults and discusses sexuality and queer history, including oppression, violence, racism, etc.)

Female Masculinity by Jack Halberstam Talks about the history of masculinity in the lesbian community. Important book. Please read.

Butch, Femme, Dyke, Or Lipstick, Aren't All Lesbians The Same?: An Exploration Of Labels And "Looks" Among Lesbians In The U.S. South, a thesis by Denielle Kerr While this one isn't about history, it's a really good introduction to the discussion in general since you specifically mentioned not knowing much about these issues. It touches on a bunch of popular queer theories in a way applicable to lesbians specifically, like performance theory, bodywork, intersectionality... Just follow the citations when you see something you'd like to know more about.

#I am happy to educate those with good faith questions but in the future-- #--I will only take these questions off-anon so that I can respond to you privately #Only because I would like for this blog to remain a place for me to just have fun and be focused on Warrior Cats #I'm just a funny little gay with a cat blog #Queer #Genderqueer #He/Him Lesbians #gender #Bone Babble #Before you reply think very carefully about if it is worth it #Because if I see something clowny I will not read it and block you immediately #Don't make me be Mr. Bad Bones. #I really prefer being Mr. Nice Bones #All this for He/Him Lesbian Tigerheart

[akajustmerry]

is this really a thing most bi people go through? feeling they're a fraud, that they feel like they're faking their attraction to both genders? I go through this in my mind all the time and I still don't really know if I'm bi or not, although I have been in love with women a couple of times and want to be with women but then I wonder whether my mind has just tricked me into it bc so many people online are queer and I want to belong so what if I'm not actually bi but then I realize how unhappy I would be if I wasn't able to date women and on and on. Idk do I sound insane or do other bi people go through this as well?

hi there <3 look I want to preface this by saying that the only thing you need to do to be bi is experience attraction to multiple genders. that's it. if you do that then you're bi. there's no other criteria. secondly, I don't make a habit of telling people who they are. all I can really speak from when it comes to being bi is my own experience and the experiences that I've read/seen/known over the years. because of the dominance of heterosexuality in the world, it's really common for people who aren't straight (including bisexuals, lesbians, gays, etc) to feel like their desires are illegitimate and unreal. when the world is invalidating and oppressing you in so many ways, it's hard not to question yourself. BUT. if you, as you say, know that not being able to be with people of a similar/same gender to you would make you unhappy then that's the most authentic indicator you have that you aren't straight and that your desires are real and effect you. put it this way, if you were pretending, you wouldn't question whether you were pretending. you're not alone in feeling this confusion either. most people with marginalised sexualities experience this phase of doubt in one way or another, not just bi people. the only thing that really helps is exploring your feelings and accepting them. wishing you the best with it ❤️

#anon

[bi-sapphics]

bi women whining about lesbians having boundaries is the REASON some lesbians prefer les4les relationships smh

okay, i said i didn't wanna get into this too much, but this ask is kinda pissing me off because it's yet again dismissing us calling out the very real and harmful treatment we face as "whining." i'm going to put effort into this answer, because i haven't seen anyone talking about it outside of twitter and i'd like a post i can fall back on for reference.

ANYWAYS.

what boundaries though, anon? please do specify. because i've heard plenty of reasons for deciding to go les4les float around many times now, and they've never expanded out of the following criteria (and anything related):

Bi Women Bad™

bi women are tainted by men

(potential) attraction to men ruins a relationship where no men are involved

bisexuals cheat (yeah, still, it's a belief)

all bisexuals are polyamorous, dirty, liars, uncommitted, etc.

bisexuals inherently can't be gold stars, which, matters for some clean purity reason i guess??

bi women "don't understand" what it is to live a life solely dedicated to women and other sapphics (+ to exclude men), and/or somehow "couldn't provide" a lesbian what they're looking for in a relationship. this has NEVER been elaborated on, especially the latter idea. and theoretically speaking, lack of experience doesn’t make for worse or lesser support.

if a bisexual identifies as butch or femme, it ruins the unnecessary safety illusion that all butch/femme relationships will be les4les without fail. it's literally just the same TERF rhetoric as the safety illusion that all WLW relationships will be AFAB4AFAB. no, really, unpack that. what makes you feel safer about knowing your partner isn't transfem, or, y'know, bisexual (also one is much more conceptual than the other, which is more materialistic. so like. yeah. what's the point.)

bi women aren't apologetic to lesbians for who they are 24/7 and therefore oppress them

bi women "are homo/lesbophobic" (see: not tolerating biphobia & harassment, using butch/femme, being dykes, using the term "sapphic", using the ⚢ symbol, sharing a history with lesbians without needed permission, daring to ask for a community of solidarity with lesbians, not exclusively dating women in their own personal lifestyle choices, etc.)

the false and generalized assumption that *all* bi women are *actually* homo/lesbophobic (see: forcing lesbians to like men, claiming comphet can't be real because it makes one bisexual instead, erasing canon lesbian characters, derailing lesbian posts, being ignorant towards lesbian issues, and/or otherwise treating lesbians really shitty and not including them where they belong, etc.) ─ including this one because for some reason, it's a one-way street and the reverse is bad-faith, bigoted, and exclusionary.

ETA: bi people don't talk enough about mspec lesbians, apparently (even though they do so pretty much all the time on twitter but ok)

keep in mind that these are all things that i have ACTUALLY SEEN being used as arguments consistently over time with my own eyes, unironically. and yes, they are always about bi women. who else would it be, pan women? other mspec women? who else could be a potential romantic/sexual partner to lesbians? who else is les4les designed to be a protective shield against?

i've never seen a good faith reason that isn't either biphobic, misogynistic, a combination of both, or two-sided in a way that acknowledges bi women can't oppress lesbians, despite how much we try to add that when we agree that lesbians don't oppress bi women either. or even anything that doesn't exclude the fact that, behaviorally, we can do anything that you can too (not regarding inherent attraction).

i guess i'll address bi4bi while i'm at it. i'm not a hypocrite, i think the same thing goes for us. lesbians can't oppress us, lesbians can do whatever another bi sapphic can, yes lesbians can be biphobic but it's not a trait they all share in one big hivemind ─ and it's certainly not enough in numbers to consider a bi separatism movement for radical purity reasons (*cough* lol lmao), etc. i've seen some people say bi4bi is acceptable because mspec hatred within the queer community is so much worse than monos get within their own rightful spaces, which, i see where they're going i guess (because we do face the highest statistics from both sides), but i disagree because in the LB dynamic neither letter has more power over the other in the real world, and certainly not enough to unbalance ourselves into inconsistency like that.

the other thing i want to say is, i don't inherently have a problem with any random les4les or bi4bi relationship picked out of a hat in a lottery. i even headcanon some of my favorite ships as such sometimes. also, factually, some fictional ships and even real relationships are one of those two, or bi4les/les4bi. as i said in the tags you're responding to, anon, these types of relationships aren't inherently flawed, especially if they form by chance and not intentional setup. in fact, those like t4t, aut4aut, ace4ace / aro4aro / aro4ace*¹, blk4blk, disabled4disabled, and the like actually have a systemic and structural reason for setting their preferences. but doing this just to avoid other sapphics? the "safety" reason is absolute bullshit, and just creates a further unnecessary divide among mono and mspec sapphics that really shouldn't be created. we're not a danger to each other, we're both in danger from everyone else ─ namely, the straights™.

hell, i would even say casually looking for a partner who shares your orientation labels is totally valid, even though the preference would have no real basis or weight if it's not in bigotry. and then if you fall in love with someone and they don't meet that expectation, so what!! who cares!! it'd be a really dumb loss of opportunity to say no due to that minor and irrelevant difference despite the fact that you both seemed ready to commit to each other as partners. that, and actively excluding harmless groups of people, making it your life mission at all costs, especially for a few twitter discourse points™, is such a waste and only hurts real people's feelings, yourself included.

you're welcome to send another ask just to mock me or say i'm wasting my time proving your point by whining about “the mean angry oppressive lesbians”, or whatever i dunno. but i just want you to ask yourself what really makes these particular "boundaries" so important to you. what makes you feel threatened? we're not forcing you to go date a bi woman right the fuck now or else you're Biphobic, i'm just asking you why you would (hypothetically, of course) reject a bi woman as a potential partner at the top of your list upon finding out she's not a lesbian. i answered why this matters so much to us, but i actually do want to know, why does this matter so much to you? just wondering.

*¹aros & aces absolutely do not share the same rivalry and discourse among each other like they do with the rest of the queer community. aro4aro people have never made it a point to exclude ace people, but rather alloromantics as a whole, and vice versa. that is why they are not comparable to the sapphic side of _4_ discourse, as generally speaking, unlike aros & aces, lesbians & bisexuals treat each other far too often on a wider scale like enemies rather than sisters in sync (which is what we should be doing instead).

#chase answers #les4les #bi4bi #les4bi #bi4les #t4t #aut4aut #blk4blk #bi tag #biphobia #biphobic lesbians #lesbophobic bisexuals #homophobic bisexuals #les/bi dynamic #les/bi solidarity

[gettin-bi-bi-bi]

I'm not really sure where else to ask this, so I hope it's okay to ask here. Is it okay for someone to reclaim or use a slur that was never used against them?

I can only give you a vague answer here since you aren't specifying which word you are thinking of and I don't wanna make it seem like there's a one-size-fits-all answer to this. But I assume it is some type of slur that has been or is still used against queer people.

I'm gonna give you an example of an argument that I've seen a lot on tumblr which is that bisexual women cannot reclaim the word "dyke" because it's a derogatory word for a lesbians only, not bi women. but that argument falls flat for two reasons: 1) it ignores the real history of the lesbian community, which bi women where a part of until lesbian separatism pushed bi women out of it ("lesbian" used to be defined as any woman who has sex with women, i.e. including what we now call bi or pan women). 2) it acts as though homophobes care about targeting only the "correct" group of people. as if bi women aren't also affected by lesbophobia and as if a homophobe would care if you replied "actually I am not a lesbian, I'm bisexual" and then they would take the slur back and apologise? because homophobes... umm.... love bisexuals? nope.

A lot of the time these slurs are "misdirected" in the sense that the strict definition might not fit you but the queerphobe who used the word doesn't care. Why? Because they don't even care about the differences and intricacies of our different labels and identities. To them we are all the same and they want to hurt us.

Addind to this is that you, as an individual, do not have to prove to anyone that you have experienced being called that slur by someone and thus you have received the licence to reclaim it. No. If you are queer, then your existence in a queerphobic world means you are subjected to queerphobia. Some of us are luckier than others and experience it less, but we all do to some degree. It is enough that you know these words are used in a hurtful way against people like you, so that you are also hurt by this. Even if it hasn't been said to your face. Language is one tool with which oppression operates against us.

However, language is also a tool with which we can fight back - thus why reclaiming slurs is a common and popular practice. One I support wholeheartedly. Because whether a word is derogatory can very much rely on context and intention. Any label and word that queer people use to describe ourselves is a "bad word" in the eyes of people who hate us. But a cis straight person who is an ally and supports queer rights? When they say the word "queer" to refer to a person who is.... well... queer, then it's not derogatory, is it? It's just a straight cis person using a correct label for someone.

That's all I can say without knowing which word you mean. Hope that helps. If it doesn't, feel free to specify.

Maddie

[menalez]

did you see the homophobic rants sailor-moon-rage posted about lesbians? :/ everyday a radfem pulls her homophobic mask off and like i can't be mad at anyone who's had enough. this is one of the worst. she called lesbians a "niche" and that of course the average radfem is homophobic and the lesbians don't have the right to be like "schoolyard bullies" for homophobia. nor have i ever seen a lesbian call a woman a "cum guzzler" but it gets even worse...she even said gay oppression isn't that bad because gays and bis have never been enslaved like poc for ssa.

they really really hate us and think we deserve to suffer and homophobia is just a mild inconvenience because "heterosexual women aren't bad as men" and don't "rape or commit violence against lesbians" i feel pretty done with radfems. almost as shitty and delusional libfems and conservatives with their vitriol for gay women.

yeah i checked after you sent me this. i expected worse when reading what you wrote but it was still really questionable to me. i don’t like how radblr’s response to this has been one of the following: 1. lesbians are evil and misogynistic and all like to degrade other women 2. homophobia isn’t that bad and if u take issue with it then ur pathetic 3. heterophobia is real and OSA is very persecuted and hated 4. actually there’s nothing with calling women terms like dick sucker because ummm they do suck dick so it’s just the truth!!!

all 4 takes are terrible and all are either misogynistic or homophobic. i wish people would stop justifying one while insulting another … they’re all bad and none should be acceptable to any woman on here. i don’t think you’ll be the first to be sick of radfems and give up on radfeminism after this… they’ve been great at accommodating and fighting for the most privileged of women but absolutely terrible in doing the same for minority women. woc, immigrant women, lesbians, disabled women, etc .. none have actually been fought for well on radblr but you won’t struggle to find posts basically saying “it’s ok to be straight! it’s ok to be white!” on here :/ it’s confusing to me bc we can oppose all hatred of women, including privileged women, while also fighting for minority women… but i only see the hatred of privileged women opposed and the hatred of minority women belittled constantly.

[rabbitindisguise]

Pansexuals are cool. I keep seeing people misinterpreting the history of it, assuming it's cis people being faux progressive and fixing a word problem that isn't actually even there, rather than of trans people being rejected by bisexuals because of transphobia and choosing to take up the word pansexual instead (especially to find people who categorically could not exclude trans people from the dating pool on the basis of their orientation)

I don't believe all bisexuals or bisexuality itself is transphobic, but at the same time "we're not inherently transphobic" feels a sloppy apology for decades of cis people going ew yuck a trans person bi people don't date transsexuals- and while that's not the main reason I'm not bi it's certainly not encouraging when bi cis people still ignore that history to claim to be Super Allies like transphobia being said by cis bi people never was a problem

And like I'm polysexual so the only horse I have is how much it sucks when people get pissy about newer identity terms. But nonetheless it's really annoying as an observer when people are using queer history for some kind of exclusionary agenda to justify saying pan people are transphobic somehow (???). Pansexuals are fundamentally a group just trying to either be kind to their trans partners and trans people, or trying to find potential people who will date them as a trans person without outing themselves first. That's an important safer space like T4T is an important safer space, it just includes trans people not willing to swear off dating cis people entirely.

And for bi and trans people who aren't afraid of some random bi person getting transphobic with them, I have infinite respect for that specifically. I wish more bi cis people understood that the rest of us aren't interested in playing transphobia chicken though. It's not personal. I don't think bi people are transphobic because I'm mspec but not bi. I think pansexuals want to advertise that they're willing to put in the work to date a trans person even if they're cis, and trans pansexuals want to be flagging that they're T4T, and non-binary pansexuals want an option that doesn't even suggest binary language applying to something so personal about themselves. I think as a polysexual I'm not interested in seeing if I'm attracted to men and women, or even if I'm attracted to men or women. To call myself bisexual and potentially just not be interested in binary women or binary men would be super confusing.

We all have good reasons that not be bi, and even if they were bad reasons we'd still not be bi because it's about what we pick to call ourselves. I'm not pansexual and no one has had a problem accepting that so far, so it's disappointing to keep getting heckled by cis people that I'm not bi. It's especially frustrating because basically all bi people I know in real life and even online are totally accepting of all my weird complex labels and totally lovely, so this is an obscure phenomenon like radical feminism is in the grand scheme of feminism as a whole. It's also disrespectful to bi trans people to reduce systematic oppression to pansexuals existing and I hate that they're using tackling biphobia as the mouthpiece of exclusionary rhetoric.

(Of course there's also people who are like "lav this is a lot of thoughts on a topic I wasn't even aware existed before reading this post" and thank goodness for that)

#personal #sexuality #pansexuality #m-spec #multi gender attraction #polysexual #queer history #pansexual

[nothorses]

honestly the cripplepunk discourse sounds exactly like the way ace exclusionism started and it scares me. it's all a bunch of 'this group is not as disadvantaged as me and now they're invading my safe spaces and being (homophobic)(ableist)..... the only way to keep my safe spaces safe is to ban an entire category of people, and this will totally work, because everyone who really belongs in the community has exactly the same experience and cannot ever be laterally aggressive, of course' like. man. it's exactly the same, right down to the surface-level claim of being about who can and can't reclaim a slur. I'm just really disturbed that a bunch of people I've trusted are buying it. so far you seem to be the only one who isn't

I don't think it is, actually.

Ace discourse started because queer organizations started including aces. It was immediate, reactive backlash to inclusivity. They harassed the Trevor Project employees en masse to a) bully them into not supporting ace teens, and b) tie up their phone lines in order to prevent them from helping other suicidal teens until they complied.

The "queer" reclamation discourse was not saying, "only these people can say 'queer'" (though that argument was and has been around too), it was saying, "queer is a bad word that nobody should say", because the word inherently allows broader inclusion.

Compare to this discourse: the conversation that started it was one person telling another that ND people are less accepted by society than physically disabled people, and the other person saying, no, they're both not accepted, please stop trying to compare the two and please stop telling me my experiences aren't real.

That's not backlash to inclusivity, that's backlash to actual oppression olympics. Which is itself a tool of exclusionary politics.

The "cripple" discourse is not "nobody should say cripple", it's "who should call themselves a cripple?". That's still a type of conversation I don't particularly like, but I don't think it's the same as the "queer is a slur" stuff, either.

I have seen the people on "the other side" of you say, repeatedly, that they're not trying to keep anyone out of the disability community. They're not trying to police who calls themselves disabled, or even physically disabled.

The argument that I've seen has been, "there is reason to have spaces for physically disabled people", in the same sense that there is reason to have spaces for transmascs, and spaces for transfems, and spaces for bi people, and spaces for a-spec people... etc.

That's different from saying, for instance, "this is a space for women, no men allowed"; the language there excludes a category of people and necessitates gatekeeping (i.e. checking that nobody who's there is a man, however you, specifically, define man).

But saying "this is a space for physically disabled people; you're allowed as long as you consider yourself physically disabled, and we're not interested in questioning you on why you do" (which is the stance I've seen most often) is a way of creating a space for a group of people that does not require gatekeeping- and, in fact, discourages gatekeeping!

That's what most inclusionist spaces for specific groups of people do, actually! That's the same way I run my transmasc server; you're welcome so long as you consider yourself transmasc (or closely relate to the experiences), we're not checking, we're not asking why.

Look, there are absolutely people here and there making shittier and more exclusionary arguments. I have seen that, too. It's not okay. The randos crawling all over the notes of every single post saying shit like "ND people aren't really disabled", or harassing people involved over nothing- that sucks. And I don't think everyone's been acting the best way they could be in this argument, either; the treatment of other humans has been incredibly shitty, and I have seen so many unnecessary bad takes and reactive language, and I am fucking tired of it.

It's also not the fault of the people who essentially just said "physically disabled people do not have it better than mentally disabled people" and then, in trying to make that point, were misunderstood as exclusionary; by people who have a history of being harassed by exclusionists, and have been trained to see exclusionist rhetoric everywhere- including shit that is not exclusionist rhetoric- in order to keep themselves and their communities safe from harm.

Anyway I think I said it better on discord a while ago:

To be crystal clear: I'm not Declaring Alliances. The shit's nuanced, and a lot of people are operating purely out of panic and trauma. That's all I'm saying.

#I know everyone's gonna hate that 🤷‍♂️ #perhaps I will turn anon back off lol

[transmasc-wizard]

hey fuckers, it's spring cleaning time: trans edition

trans women are women, trans men are men, nonbinary people are nonbinary, gender is a spectrum.

you don't need dysphoria to be trans. i say this as an extremely dysphoric individual.

the only thing you need to be trans is... to identify partially or fully as a different gender than your AGAB. it's that, it's basic

"TIRFs" are not a thing, full stop. Gender essentialism is just as shitty as biological essentialism

trans people have the ability be transphobic to other trans people, in any direction (including being transphobic to their own specific trans group)

trans people are not, however, systemic oppressors of other trans people. transphobia coming from other trans people is lateral aggression and bad on a personal level, but systemically it is cis people who oppress us.

example: i as a genderqueer person have had bad interactions with binary trans people who were ceterophobic, but systemically, binary trans people aren't above me or active oppressors. Cis people are.

I really don't think people fake being trans. At least, not on a level that matters. Maybe, like, 1 in 200 people do. But so what? I'm not going to gatekeep the other 199 just because one person might be faking. Believe it or not, cis people don't just go "Hey, you know what would be neat? Being more oppressed!"

(this applies to my views on "queer faking" in general, tbh)

Neither bisexuality, pansexuality, or other mspec labels are transphobic. Bisexuality is not ceterophobic and pansexuality is not transphobic just becaue some cis bis/cis pans are shitty.

neopronouns and xenogenders are cool as fuck and absolutely real.

it/its pronoun users deserve respect.

multigender people exist, and we are not a footnote to be ignored, thanks. This includes people who's multiple genders aren't just Man + Woman.

it is transphobic to ignore transfems' wishes not to be called "dude" "bro" "guy" and similar terms, to ignore transmascs' wishes not to be called "sis" "queen" "girl" and similar terms, and to ignore nonbinary people's discomfort with some/all/any gendered terms.

if you're getting pissy at this list, just block me. Any hate asks will be posted and made fun of.

#ive gotten hate asks over this stuff before so! might as well compile them all here #spring cleaning #ive caught some assholes thinking theyre welcome here before so this is to remind that no. you're not <3

[khizuo]

the day when mcyt fans stop pretending that being marginalized for being a woman/queer/disabled on the internet is the same as being marginalized for race is the day I will find peace.

this is not to say that we should stop discussing internet misogyny or queer and disabled marginalization at all. we should be discussing it constantly and calling it out and trying to make a more welcoming space for women and queer and disabled people in the community. however, I never see mcyt fans extend that same consideration to cc's who are marginalized due to their race, especially black and brown cc's, and I'm honestly kind of tired of it.

and the fact is that internet racism and algorithmic colorism is a huge fucking issue that mcyt fans feel happy to ignore because "oh look I watch a bi woman streamer! my content intake is diverse!" and yes watching women and queer and neurodivergent people in the mcyt community is absolutely better than only watching a neurotypical straight white men all the time, but that does not excuse the community from scrutiny if all the most popular queer women streamers also... happen to be white.

I also see this happen a lot where fans will jump to the defense of neurodivergent streamers by using the marginalization that comes from their neurodivergence as a shield. newsflash: your white male cc having adhd does not make them just as or more marginalized than poc, especially neurodivergent/disabled poc, and thus it feels a little... :// when people constantly try to use their adhd as a shield when these white male cc's get into controversies. (as a person who is not neurodivergent as far as I know, I welcome people who are neurodivergent to make this point of mine better! please tell me if I am being insensitive.)

again, this is not to say that we should ignore ableism in the community and stop trying to make disabled and neurodivergent people feel comfortable as cc's and fans; or that we should demonize neurodivergent behaviors which the cc's exhibit. it's really fucking important to make the community as safe as possible for neurodivergent and disabled people. it's just that again, that same consciousness of marginalization should be extended to people of color in the community. we should be trying just as hard to make poc, especially black and brown people, feel welcomed in the community. and that isn't happening.

the fact is that white supremacy and white privilege are the foundation of the shitty modern world as we know it, including internet communities. the mcyt community is not exempt from this conversation just because it's more welcoming of queer and disabled people. in fact, it's extremely important to have this conversation in the context of intersectionality — how marginalization and oppression works at the intersections of race, queerness, womanhood, and disability. and those conversations aren't really happening rn.

so basically: please let's make mcyt less white.

disclaimer: I am a queer, mentally ill Asian person. I am not neurodivergent as far as I know, although I suspect I may be. If I have said anything here that is insensitive or harmful to a community, especially a community I am not a part of, please let me know and I will edit my mistake and take accountability immediately.

#discourse tw #mcyt discourse #this also applies to class but I'm not going to go there right now #my text #i'm sorry i've just seen too many lists of 'diverse' cc's where some people are listed on there for being a woman #oh boy we haven't even touched on anti-blackness and racism among white women and in queer communities huh #this scrutiny absolutely applies to me as well btw #I watch a number of queer creators of color but not in mcyt unfortunately

[rantingcrocodile]

I feel like a fake bi because a lot of people say that the only way a bi person could experience homophobia is when we are actively dating and openly showing off our same sex relationships to the public eye. Otherwise we can pass for straight. But I don't pass for straight in the least, even when I am utterly single. I've had women drop me as a friend because they think I'm hitting on them when it wasn't the case. I've had men assume that I was gay and would say things like, "Please remember that not all men, you need to give us more chances, you need to go to therapy to get over your hang ups with dicks and men, I know a lesbian in my life maybe I can introduce you two" and so on. I've had men accuse me of being a lesbian even while dating them. I've felt unsafe in a couple of previous jobs because a female manager thought I was trying something and it made the atmosphere very hostile and threatening. I was and still am single in all of those situations, I wasn't making out with another woman in those situations, and I don't think I had a certain "gay look" in the way I present myself, so what could it be?

Stop listening to the people that say we "experience homophobia."

The only way that we "experience homophobia" is being abused when we're out as part of a same-sex couple - and that includes when there are same-sex bisexuals in a couple, because society has decided that that's called homophobia.

Otherwise, we experience biphobia. Anyone that says that anything else that we experience is "homophobia" is just lying and being biphobic. I'm sorry to have to be blunt here, but it's really important to understand.

The concept of being "straight passing" is also incredibly offensive, and ends up being homophobic, too.

If a butch lesbian and a femme lesbian are out in public, but others see them as a man and a woman holding hands, are they "straight passing" and do they have "straight privilege"? Are single gay men and lesbians "straight passing" and have "straight privilege"? No. But suddenly, it's used as an attack against us, and it's said deliberately to deny that biphobia exists and to deny that we're oppressed for being bisexual individuals.

It also promotes the biphobia that says we're not people, but objects who are only validated by a romantic partner, which is disgusting.

What you experienced was biphobia, because your sexuality was denied and you were harassed as "really being gay," like you were lying, like your bisexuality isn't real.

I am so sorry that you went through all of that. I know it sounds trite, but you aren't alone and I sincerely recommend connecting with other bisexuals and getting more support for this. You are not a "fake bisexual" in any sense, I promise.

#crocodilian answers #<3

[rosalesbeausderholle]

Man I wish we could encourage more women to not get married or give birth to kids/sons. There's no reason it couldn't change social conditions if more did this. I wish we didn't think of it as a thought experiment and could talk about supporting each other through personal sacrifice and social striking. Like the Icelandic women who stayed home from work and refused to have sex with their male partners to enact legal changes.

We should have these convos and yes, while i don't think it would magic patriarchy away, it could bring some social change in some specific cases BUt the point of my post was not whether or not women should be separatists or not (bc my opinion on that has always been, to each their own!) that post was straight up blaming het/bi women, and not men, for the continued existence of patriarchy, saying that they could just stop it, and choose not to bc they're selfish. That's misogynistic as hell and just straight up vile!

There's a difference between "sex strikes have been a thing women have done as a feminist action", as well as general strikes (tho personally, while i get the whys of it, ideally sex shouldn't be politicized in that way) and "it's actually het/bi women's fault there's patriarchy bc they aren't separatists" which was what the post I referred to basically said. Like yes, things such as sex strikes and the like could and have motivated political change, just like a myriad of other feminist actions that have done the same. There's a difference between pointing out how such a tool can be used politically against the patriarchy and basically victim blaming the majority of women in the world for their own oppression.

At the same time though, my personal goal is not "all women should do X or Y" bc of political purity, but rather our overall freedom and happiness. I want to live in a world where the women who are separatists can have the chance to live that lifestyle while the ones who aren't aren't abused and constantly hurt by the men in their lives. Like, that's it really.

Also, call me problematic or libfem, handmaiden or whatever but we all live in this shitty af world and I'm not gonna blame women for seeking happiness within it, which yes in the case of het/bi women is just going to include male partners sometimes!

#this is messy bc im abt to go to sleep but #while i get your point #it is totally possible to raise these questions #and then have women come to the realization of hey id be happier being a separatist #and not having kids a husband and w other women supporting me #which i totally support! #and acting like you want to say that but what you're actually doing is victim blaming women #don't victim blame women that's all

[bi-sapphics]

Ok so following up where you said that talking about and standing up for bi issues is important for lesbians to do...I have a hot take that my community isn't going to like lol. Alot of lesbians that aren't les4les instantly lose respect for bi girls when they say their bi4bi cause that means they can't date them. That isn't ok because your respect for a person shouldn't end when you can not date them. That's some objectifation bullshit. If your a wlw fucking act like it. Love should be accepting and unconditional.

sorry for taking so long to get back to you, i had to get a biweekly prescription injected into my thigh to help with my eczema and it SUCKED. >:/

yeah it doesn't make any sense, especially when they are les4les. there's this super weird hypocritical idea that les4les is perfectly acceptable (which it is if done right) because of lesbophobia from bi women in particular, but bi4bi is not acceptable because of biphobia from lesbians in particular. the reason for this is that lesbians either think that biphobia isn't real, and/or they think they're not capable of perpetuating it because they're the most oppressed and the "real" gays and also bisexuals usually deserve it.

but yeah, usually bi4bi only ever upsets them after having previously established that they would never date one of us because it means we're denying them rightful accessibility to people whom they see as lesser, which is WEIRD because they should know how that feels when men do it to them!! obviously it's not the same kind of misogyny but it's still misogyny nonetheless and they're not above upholding that harmful cycle. i mean ffs they literally stan catradora and then insist they can never be abusive on the basis of being lesbians, c'mon.

but anyway that "i have a right to you" dynamic is simply about control and nothing more. that's the only reason why they would turn a compatible response to biphobia that flows nicely into something that interrupts their narrative. if they don't want to date bi women, and they insist that no lesbian they respect ever would, why do they care what we do? it's because they believe we're not good enough to deserve our own autonomy and happy fulfilling relationships. the whole "bisexuals are incapable of ever living through or speaking on any LGB experience without the presence of a real gay person there" is pretty much the explanation for that. we don't need the LG to be bi4bi and love ourselves, although it really doesn't help that we don't 'cause it'd sure be nice. we don't need the LG to take charge of a wlw relationship for us if both women are bi. if it's not about control, why do they show time and time again that this is exactly how they feel? why do they project so hard and act like we're claiming they oppress us (even though we don't) if they don't wish that power imbalance was real like they always openly say they do? it's not a secret that apparently lesbians are supposed to be able to oppress bisexual women despite the fact that they can't and don't just because it would satisfy them to keep us silent (’cause y’know bisexuals already do oppress lesbians since we can just throw their existing but less-valid SGA out the window /s).

something i'd like to note here is that i do understand some bi women are very homophobic about les4les and i'm not gonna be a hypocrite and deny that. the truth is, it just sucks when you're not included in something and you're not given access to people you want to be around. it's really easy to take that personally, and i think those feelings are valid to some degree. but it does need to be understood for both groups in both directions that it isn't personal and it doesn't inherently assume that you as an individual are biphobic or lesbophobic, even if those preferences are decidedly solidified and strict (i for one am not that way, i'm both bi4bi and bi4les but i have a very heavy preference for and hope to end up being bi4bi. i'm really only bi4les just in case i end up being that deep in love someday because my morals and boundaries aren't worth hurting and screwing myself over for imo). people are allowed to have boundaries and if it's understood that you can, then so can they. i also understand from experiences the frustration of bi4bi being seen as less legitimate than les4les because it's been accused of being a copycat method in addition to its reasoning for existing being dismissed as fake. but hating bi4bi over prejudiced assumptions doesn't make les4les wrong and hating les4les over implied homophobic feelings from being left out doesn't make bi4bi wrong. we're both shunned for our dating preferences, not just the latter, and it's because anyone can be misogynistic and a specific type of anti-wlw homophobic that only applies to sapphics of either kind.

that's why les/bi solidarity is so important these days, now more than ever, because we really do hurt each other the most more than anyone else, and that reason is that we have more in common than anyone else. sapphophobia hurts from straight people and gay men, sure, but it cuts deep when it comes from your own. pick-me bisexuals, boot-licking lesbians, they're both understood by their individual respective communities to cause real internalizing damage. why is interactive sapphophobia not just unrecognizable, but also completely acceptable, especially on the biphobic lesbians side of it?

#chase answers #serpentspiritqueen #biphobia #bimisogyny #lesbophobia #misogyny #bi4bi #les4les #bi4les #les4bi #les/bi dynamic #les/bi solidarity #sapphophobia #biphobic lesbians #homophobic bisexuals