Tumgik
#same with being queer
agrebel18 · 9 months
Text
saw someone on here the other day say that we don’t need aromantic and asexual representation in media because that’s a “sanitized” identity like BITCH WHAT????? IF YOU CAN ONLY SEE ASPEC PEOPLE AS CHILDREN THAT IS A YOU PROBLEM.
8K notes · View notes
bi-booklover · 2 years
Text
repeat after me.
QUEER CHARACTERS ARE NOT PLOT DEVICES FOR STRAIGHT CHARACTERS.
30K notes · View notes
kaibascorpse · 1 month
Text
some of you people are so obsessed with having an acceptable group to ‘punch up’ at that you would rather pretend a marginalized group are Basically The Oppressors™ than listen to their valid criticisms about the fact that ‘punching up’ very rarely hits the intended target, and the majority of the actual damage of that act is suffered by fellow marginalized people in your own community. there is a significant difference between venting frustrations about privileged groups and just outright attacking anyone who (you assume) experiences that axis of privilege regardless of - and in many cases outright denying - their actual lived experiences. it goes far beyond just ‘venting frustrations’ when what you’re really doing is trying to find a moral justification to bully people you don’t like, and when your own desire for catharsis and moral superiority leads to ignoring the voices of the vulnerable people you hurt. you’re not ‘punching up’ - you just like punching people for the sake of punching.
1K notes · View notes
hussyknee · 5 months
Text
I know some dickheads have now decided that Judaism is the "bad, violent, terrorist religion" and Islam is the "good, peaceful" one, which is only to be expected of white people, but how much of an issue is it currently? Like I've seen some USAmericans sharing how the Islamic faith shapes Gazans values and perseverance (good) except with that distinct white hippie "I'm about to imprint on this like the world's most racist duck" vibe (bad), but I didn't think they're already turning on Judaism in numbers.
Do they realize that Christianity is also the same kind of comfort to Christian minorities in Asia and Africa? That it was Buddhists that genocided the Rohingyas in Myanmar and Tamils in Sri Lanka? That Hindu fundamentalists are even now trying to ethnically cleanse Muslims in India? How Hindus and Christians are terrorized and persecuted in Pakistan? That Muslims have a history of persecuting and ethnically cleansing Jews too?
Really tired of asking y'all to be normal about people's religions man. There's no religion that's inherently violent or exceptionally peaceful. It's just like any other ideology that becomes a weapon in the hands of ethnic power. Interrogate power, not religion, and respect people's belief systems insofar as they aren't in your business.
Edit: I've amended the "long history" of Muslim persecution of Jews because it might be misleading in the current political climate. Zionism and antisemitic Arab nationalism are twin births resulting directly from Christian colonization, and Islamic empires tended to actually be more tolerant of other religions compared to Christianity, especially Judaism, which was considered a sibling religion. Antisemitism wasn't ideologically entrenched in Islamic tradition. It's simply that ethno-religious power will lead to ethno religious domination and intermittent cleansing of minorities, and Islam is no exception. Humans be humaning always.
2K notes · View notes
nothorses · 11 months
Text
hot take but I think the "we're only talking about people who identify as queer when we talk about the queer community" thing was and is one of the worst arguments in defense of the word.
I am talking about you when I say "the queer community", and "queer people", and "queer studies". I'm describing a thing that a large group of people have in common, and you share that thing in common. Your individual comfort with the word doesn't change the definition of it.
I'm sorry you don't like that word. You don't ever have to call yourself that, and you don't have to like it, and I won't ever call you that if you don't want me to.
What I am going to do, however, is decide what language I use based on A) how inclusive it is, and B) how well it communicates my point to the relevant audience.
"Inclusive" here is an important criteria; this refers to the number of people who should be included, that are included, ideally without some kind of weird hierarchy (like we see in "LGBT+" and variations). The technical definition is what we're talking about here- putting personal comfort aside, could the word "queer" describe you?
There will always be someone who doesn't like a particular word for themselves- even if it could apply. Lots of people don't like "LGBT+" (I don't really), even if it technically applies to them. You're not more important than they are.
You can identify one way on a personal level, and still understand that when we're discussing the larger community of people and the histories attached to it, you're included in that- even if you don't personally identify with the specific word we're using. Your story, your voice, and your presence matters.
Y'all need to learn to distinguish "broad term for an experience I share with others" from "personal identity label I use to describe my individual experience to others". ASAP.
3K notes · View notes
yellowocaballero · 11 months
Text
Trigun 98 really is the anime of all time. It did absolutely say "Here is the biggest idiot you've ever seen in your life. It's going to be four episodes until he does anything that is not blindingly moronic and it's going to be five before he says a sentence that is not a lie. We are now going to vaguely imply that he has a dead girlfriend and that's why he's sad. You will learn ten episodes later that the dead girlfriend is his mother. In episode nine a random man is going to call him depressed and they will spend the next three episodes doing absolutely nothing important but forming an unshakable bond of friendship, and we are also going to learn that they are in space."
What are we supposed to do with any of this. Insurance agents with fifty guns and one gigantic gun respectively are the only reason we have a plot at all. An entire episode's resolution only makes sense with information we are never told and barely implied. The main character is Jesus but also a deconstruction of Jesus. I feel like the show is giving me a rabid guinea pig and leaving me to wonder why this guinea pig is on crack before telling me three hours later that he's a robot guinea pig, answering no questions and raising so much more.
2K notes · View notes
razzek · 4 months
Text
One thing that's starting to really get to me with the James Somerton stuff is a real strong undercurrent of disdain toward his fans. And yeah, I was one of them. A good scam artist isn't as easy to spot as y'all seem to think. You forget that you have all the information right now. Two days ago most of you had never heard of him and it would have kept going. Anyone can fall for a scam, nobody is immune. I would love to have had whatever resources you guys think we all should magically know about so I could have kept my sad $5 a month I really needed but thought was going to something worthwhile. Some of us can only devote so much energy into things and when you have no idea whatsoever that something is amiss of course you're not going to go digging for sources, why would you when everything is fine as far as you know? I really wish I could have seen the dissenting opinions on him but for many, many reasons that aren't just that the dissenting voices weren't widely circulating at the time all I had was the thought every now and again that "huh that doesn't seem right" and then go on with my day. And I think that happened to a lot of us. So yeah. Say what you gotta say about Somerton, he has more than earned it with the damage he's caused, but maybe don't shit so hard on his former fans because that is going to be you someday with something, it happens to everyone sooner or later.
367 notes · View notes
dennisboobs · 6 months
Text
either glenn and charlie have been trading this animal shithouse bracelet back and forth or they have matching animal shithouse bracelets
Tumblr media Tumblr media
452 notes · View notes
gayvampyr · 2 years
Text
“queer spaces should be inclusive of people who don’t enjoy sex and who have “strange”, negative or repulsed relationships with sex” and “sex is an important aspect of lgbt community, history, and activism and queer people should be allowed and able to talk freely about sex without stigma or shame” are ideas that can and should coexist.
#‘queer people were banned from and shamed for having sex and that’s where a lot of our activism stemmed from’ and#‘not liking or having sex is considered abnormal and a mental illness and also needs to be destigmatized’ are concepts that not only can but#often do coalign#it’s esp important to consider that a lot of lgbt ppl who have a tricky and strained relationship with sex are like that because of trauma#which is very common for queer folks#it’s really not an ace-only thing#like i am sex repulsed but it’s very hard to discern if it’s because i’m asexual or if it’s the trauma. either way i deserve to have those#feelings and be included in lgbt spaces and discussions about sex and treated as just another queer person with a different experience#instead of being alienated because my feelings about sex don’t directly line up with yours#im so sick of people in this community trying to pit us against each other. as an ace lesbian that shit is so toxic and harmful#my relationship with sex is fluid. im sex-positive always‚ but i often find myself sex repulsed. im otherwise neutral about it but im sick#of people acting like it’s either you enjoy sex and have it frequently or you hate it and you shame everyone who has it like youre a puritan#and it’s often aphobes who bought into that ‘aces are puritanical celibate straights who want ppl who have gay sex to die or think they’re#‘dirty’ or some shit. and it was literally 90% crypto-aphobes pretending to be aces to get people to adopt that into their belief system#the same way crypto-t/rfs pretend to be trans women who want to prey on the ‘innocent women’#and y’all will use those posts/screenshots as ‘evidence’ that whatever scapegoat you’ve selected is actually inherently bad/homophobic/#misogynistic/etc and not even#acknowledge the giant hole in your logic cuz you’re too busy trying to find a scapegoat#it’s the same tactics and y’all fall for it every time#text post#like. lesbians are CONSTANTLY getting hounded and told that we’re broken or mentally i’ll for not showing interest in (having sex with) men#for the same reason asexuality is considered bad or wrong or weird#not showing interest in heterosexual relationships or sex is why this is so important#anyone that falls outside the scope of heterosexuality is part of this community whether you like it or not
4K notes · View notes
findafight · 2 years
Text
QPR stobin in their forties, married since, like, '87, finding out about qpr language. They see someone mention it or just stuble upon it on the internet and go oh!! That's us! That's what we have! :) Because they're still involved with lgbtq activism, and are like oh!! These young people have words for what we are isn't that amazing!
I think Robin would find out that sometimes people call their queerplatonic partner "zucchinis" absolutely hilarious and never refer to Steve as anything else. He's her zucchini. Her sweet yam. Her pumpkin pie. Steve giggles at it and says "because we're fruity!"
They don't get divorced to get married to their romantic partners because that's a hassle and also they don't want to. What would happen to the children. To the cats. To the fish the cats long to eat that they are expressly forbidden from eating because their mother and father are cruel and deserve jail for a thousand years. They are each other's PERSON, no romantic relationship will change that. This causes some stir when it's revealed Steve is Eddie's partner and also Steve has a wife. Eddie Munson, beloved queer metalhead/rocker is a homewrecker?? They try to explain! They do!
Steve is like 'okay well we were best friends and soulmates and very queer in the 80's it was just easier to get married especially seeing as I wanted my parents to have nothing to do with anything incase I died, so no brainer. We already lived together, it didn't really change anything except we were able to adopt!" "But don't you want to marry someone you actually love?" "I love Robin more than anything else besides our children??" "Not...what about Eddie?" "Yeah I love him he's my partner. But I don't want to marry him I'm already married to Robin." "But you aren't in love with her" "not romantically no. We're what the kids call 'zucchinis'" "I'm sorry what" "zucchinis! It's what some people call a queerplatonic partner! Like, a life partner that isn't romantic but is still the most important person! Rob thinks it's a very funny name and I gotta say, with the unconventional nature of this type of relationship I agree it fits."
Steve gets on twitter and is like "sorry to everyone who doesn't understand platonically spending your whole life with someone but I'm different" and then logs tf off and lets people freak the hell out in the replies.
And Eddie is like yes my partner is married. No he's not cheating. Yes we were together when he got married. No I'm not jealous. Yes I knew he was getting married I know you know this I was the best man. No he's not getting a divorce to marry me now same sex marriage is legal. Yes I'm fine with it. No it's not a problem. Yes I understand ya'll don't get it. No I don't actually care you don't get it. Yes Robin and Steve are the most important person in each other's lives. No I'm not hurt by that they were like that when I met them. Yes I love him. No I'm not worried they're actually in a secret heterosexual relationship that's ridiculous and stupid this interview is over.
2K notes · View notes
biracy · 6 months
Text
I can't remember if I've posted abt this before but regardless: I'm sorry but I really and truly cannot get behind the idea that there is any wide-scale societal "pressure for trans men to be feminine" or "to be twinks" or whatever. You are either conflating a very small online community's beauty standard (usually some kind of transmasc pseudo-appropriation of "femboy" aesthetics, which yes, are often Bad and regressive and fetishized and etc.) with Mainstream Society, or confusing society not wanting trans men to transition with "wanting trans men to be feminine", which are certainly not the same thing. Ultimately if a cis person believes there is any validity to the concept of being trans (i.e. not a Posie Parker-esque "there's no such thing as a trans person" type), they are more likely to think that trans men should be like as masc and buff and hairy as possible or whatever bc that's what cis people think men look like and it's easier for a lot of people to recognize someone who Looks Masc as a man. It is difficult sometimes to see derision of trans guys who are Too Feminine and Not Hairy Enough or whatever (which is not always something someone has control over btw) as anything but "this is Skye who I think is a confused little girl because Skye does not pass" slightly restyled for 2023 "filthcore fagdykes" or whatever lol
377 notes · View notes