#idk man like why does gender get to be fluid and sexuality has to be fixed | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

bullywug-n-mugwort · 5 months

Text

idk why people just decide they get to invalidate someone else's identity when they are not the one with that identity and therefore don't know what they're talking about. just saw someone i otherwise respect reblog a post about how bisexual lesbian is an invalid term because each term has changed over time and claiming it's lesbophobic and biphobic to use the term [something something mutually exclusive experiences]. i usually call my orientation "queer" but i often use "bi lesbian" to make sense of my own experience. the tags of this post were full of people dunking on all imagined reasons someone may call themselves a bi lesbian, none of which reflect my own experiences and reasoning.

not that i should have to defend myself, but a lot of these comments were very fixated on the experiences of "liking only women" vs "liking both women and men." these categories obviously have social significance, but to me personally, romantically and sexually, these categories aren't super helpful. i cannot isolate traits of manhood or womanhood i find attractive. i'm into femme traits until i see a hot butch. i like certain chests, certain facial features, and any genitals. these traits don't map onto coherent binary genders very well. not to mention my attractions shift with my fluid gender. if i'm looking for a consistent pattern, i'm into gendernonconformity if anything. i guess i'm far more into women than i am men unless the man is a flamboyant twink but at the end of the day i'm not into either as much as i am a very specific weird collection of queer gender markers. (and pansexual had never seemed to fit the bill, because there are also many gender expressions and markers i am certainly unattracted to.)

does that really make me a biphobic bisexual? i wrestled with more shame at the idea that i was a lesbian, a stereotype threat for the bisexual community i love. the twink i married turned out not to be a man at all. i was struggling with worries about comphet for years because i loved them but our marriage didn't feel "right," and now that we're both practicing genderqueers it does. to me, that experience made bisexuality feel less like home than it had before. at the same time, finding like two men attractive excludes me from the lesbian community. is it such a sin to have found home in a term that made coherent my knot of comphet and dysphoria?

i realized, as many lesbians with comphet do, that i would probably never be happy in a relationship with a man, as in someone who self- identified as a man and embraced manhood. i also find astarion bg3 hot as fuck. i fail to see how these are mutually exclusive experiences.

can i guarantee that no biphobia or lesbophobia has wormed its way into my brain? of course not, but it is so strange that embracing both those terms brands you as someone who hates both. it's also strange to exclude people from terms on the basis of internalized shame. why care if some people call themselves bi lesbians? does it feel invalidating to you? that's your own work-- same as women who think afab nonbinary people are really just women who are ashamed of being a woman and therefore should continue living as "women". (ie it's not my job to choose an identity that you approve of or think is free of shame. you figure it out.) are you worried it invalidates us in the eyes of the heteros? i simply don't believe in policing our own terms to make cishets see us as more valid or understandable. it's disguised respectability politics, plain and simple.

all these terms for our identities are best fits and best guesses, grasping for connections under this big lovely queer umbrella. the person who reblogged that post is a nonbinary lesbian. why do the same people who accept the concept of a nonbinary lesbian-- a thing that should be impossible if the term "lesbian" has actually calcified as the post claims-- insist that "bisexual" and "lesbian" are concrete, immovable, and mutually exclusive identities? to be extremely clear, i support nonbinary lesbianism. it's valid. and it's a weird fucking line to draw, saying that the gender spectrum can support loosely-gendered lesbianism on the side of the beholder but not the recipients.

there was also a historical argument claiming that people are misinterpreting contexts in which bisexual lesbian was used circa early 20th century. and like... okay??? i found the term in a pdf zine from the 90's which interviewed self-identified bisexual lesbians, gleaning a bunch of different reasons for the label. some fell into the assumptions of the aforementioned post, eg bisexuals who were basically political lesbians. (i don't claim to support this stance, though i do still insist people can call themselves whatever they want.) many more summarized complicated stories like mine, people who did not fall neatly into either "mutually exclusive" category because, it turns out, gender is a fluid weird spectrum. bi lesbians whose attractions are bi and gender is lesbian. bi lesbians who were literally only into women except for one "man". bi lesbians who were trying to untangle comphet and so weren't sure which label, if either, fit. bi lesbians who liked to fuck any gender but only fell in love with "women". so anyway, fuck outta here with "history doesn't work like that" narrow target practice.

and even if that's true... again, words are evolving all the time. we've made words like sapphic and achillean to make some sense of gender. "lesbian" has on-off been used as a gender term for decades. we've invited nonbinary people into lesbianism and many understandings of gender into bisexuality. bi lesbian is another evolution of our language, and people have been shitty about it since at least the early days of DTWOF-- bechdel's characters struggled with all of the above since the 80's.

and what's the point of terms? to find community, self- identity, and sometimes practical utility, eg in the dating world. were i to date again (yikes), "bisexual" would not be a helpful self-descriptor for finding a romantic partner. lesbian would. if i wanted to hook up, bisexual would be more helpful than lesbian, and i'd have to root through lots of gender expressions anyway. so in terms of my self identity and finding communities of similar folk, "bi lesbian" is a super helpful term. if you are a bisexual or a lesbian and feel frustrated or confused by my term, that's because it doesn't apply to you. maybe just realize this isn't your thing and leave our community to explore our experiences. love you, see you later in the sapphic tags where we have things in common.

so anyway, i think it's pretty silly to see a term, imagine reasons you dislike for why someone may use it, and pitch a fit. my identity's legitimacy has no bearing on yours. leave us alone.

#anyway #fuck that got long #that logic just really gets to me #obviously #i don't want to respond to the main post because i don't want to risk a stupid dogpile and days of arguing #but i'll post this in our tag so others can know i see you and you're doing great #bi lesbian #bi lesbianism #bisexual lesbian

3 notes · View notes

vacantgodling · 10 months

Note

For the Pride asks:

5. & 9. for an OC of your choice

and 20. & 21. for in general <3

this took me forever to answer but we’re here now 👀 let’s do some… tcol generally

5. How did you figure out your oc's identity?

i’ll talk about clear for this but when tcol initially came into being clear and san were supposed to end up together — which in retrospect and hindsight literal just PFFFFF WHAT. terrible. but san’s character was kind of different back then and i hadn’t quite developed the skill of nuanced character personalities and backstory yet. but when i started to write the very old version of tcol (in notebooks) whenever i wrote clear and forte interacting there was just… something there, yknow? the first person that forte talked or laughed around was clear. they naturally hung out and stuck with one another and while i wasn’t quite sure what was going on with forte i felt like something was up with clear

(this isn’t necessarily unique to clear this whole… i notice you gravitating towards a dude because if i take ANY of my older ocs who are dudes: toph, clear and darren specifically, they all started in their initial concepts in relationships with femmes but then i realized that like… yeah no that’s not it).

when i started deciding to take tcol more seriously and started worldbuilding/fleshing shit out, i then realized why clear ran away from home and his sexuality was part of the reason why. there’s something to be said about why i do make this many of my characters struggle with sex and sexuality and it’s because of so. much. xtian upbringing repression. cough. but i ended up realizing that clear liked forte more than just a friend which was enlightening (wow, he’s gay!) but then also created the: oh. there’s kind of a love angle now.

but realistically me growing more comfortable in my own sexuality and attitude towards sex helped me peel back the layers of clear to discover that he’s a gay boy with mad repression and trauma lmao. basically.

9. Are there cultural or lore specific aspects to their identity? If applicable, does their species affect it?

gender and sexuality are pretty fluid in tcol; there are some bigots who exist or people with slightly idk regressive viewpoints however: two of their deities in tcol are genderqueer (YUTARA, deity of medicine is also androgynous/nb and goes by they/them. they’re also the god of gender expression & MARTH the god of blacksmithing and alchemy is a trans man. got a whole city named after his origin story of becoming a man -> marthveil). the war goddess YLENE and YUTARA have an ages long slow burn going on (YLENE literally has a seared into her skin kiss mark on her body because she wanted to immortalize the time that YUTARA gave her a kiss on the cheek. however they aren’t “together yet” in the traditional sense because YUTARA can’t help but tease YLENE). the second king of lathsbury anele of kairos is a he/she butch and was married in a literal war enemies to lovers rival dawn nightwillow… etc etc. there’s a lot of lore of queerness in tcol basically

20. Have your ocs helped you in self discovery? How?

my preference for writing male characters and finding it easier to relate to them and get into their heads was kind of a big giveaway for me growing up. making a lot of mlm ocs also helped me kinda discover that yeah mood me too. and vice versa; the more i discovered about myself the more i was able to imbue those discoveries into my ocs

21. Free ramble card wee

i haven’t talked much about anele of kairos and dawn nightwillow bc i adore the first age of tcol quite a bit and these two only come around during the end and into the second era but their love story is supremely funny to me. basically the only time terrae had a civil war happened while these two were leaders and in part of the peace treaty they married each other. the funniest parts of their eventual romance is (1) that there was a romance at all bc the two of them were so set on just tolerating each other (2) the god of love MIRANKA was literally born out of their union and if that doesn’t say something idk what will and (3) the reason MIRANKA was born, isn’t bc love didn’t exist in terrae before them it’s because he’s also the god of relationships in general and his oracles act as magic relationship counselors LMAO. so he really was born out of hmm. y’all need relationship therapy and it’s funny to me

real enemies to lovers vibes yknow

#s: tcol #about renjamin

6 notes · View notes

multigenderswag · 1 year

Note

Apologies in advance if this is too venty or whatever. I just feel really bad because I was in a strange argument about the validty of lesbian men, vincian women, trans men who are lesbians, etc. It was honestly exhausting to go round and round, back and forth with him repeatedly (idk if purposely but I wouldn't be surprised) missing my points and arguing that yes, vincian women (for example) are mlm but they are not gay because gay= non-wome loving non women.

I probably shouldn't have engaged at all but I just get so defensive about transmultiphobia because barely anybody takes it seriously and and even less people are open minded enough to actually hear you out, even when you approach relatively politely. I just feel like I have to say something every time I see something because nobody else will and it really sucks. There's no winning against someone who's already made up their mind.

My self worth as a vincian bigender fluid woman is not based on the validation of strangers, but it does admittedly take a toll on my confidence to even call myself a gay man when it's repeatedly insisted to me that I'm not and that I should just make up my own sexuality or use labels that actually apply to me instead of "twisting preexisting ones into something they're not". Not a direct quote because I blocked but close enough-

idk man. I understand that these are unusual concepts to grasp for people that aren't already deep into these issues, but this person was, not trying to give out too much on him but he was under the nonbinary umbrella so I was really shocked when he was regurgitating the same points used against binary trans people but for trans men lesbians, vincian women, lesbian men, etc.

I just want it to get better for multigender people. Unrealistic as it is I would want nothing more for everyone in the lgbtq+ community to collectively decide not to be transmultiphobic anymore and not die on weird exclusionist hills. That's never gonna fuckin happen but still, I'm glad this blog exists because it gives me some hope that eventually people will listen.

(very sorry for not answering for several weeks jflksdajfsd)

It's ridiculous when people get so caught up in their fake progressive "non men loving non men" definition of lesbianism that they think women who are attracted to women can't be sapphic (and the reverse for mlm). It would probably be funny if it weren't so stupid. Queer people are fighting for our lives rn and transmultiphobes would rather throw a fit over people using sexuality labels that don't fit with their concept of gender as neat distinct boxes.

The "twisting pre-existing ones into something they're not" is what gets me because lesbianism has always been about attraction to women and gayness has always been about attraction to men and it's so silly to twist that into what genders they exclude. Why don't you (not anon, the exclusionists) log off and read some queer history and think about the beauty of queerness and how wonderful it is that so many of us refuse to be put into boxes and then maybe you'll feel better.

#sexuality #asks

4 notes · View notes

silvaurum · 2 years

Note

hi i saw ur ask about transmasc lesbians, sorry if i got you wrong

yk how transmascs often get called butch lesbians because. well transphobia and stereotypes gross really

i think since they've been called that as an insult they feel a different connection to it and reclaiming it as a label can be empowering

from the different side, like how some transfems reclaim the term femboy since they've been called it so often they now feel a connection to it

i hope i helped

i don't know what this is referring to specifically? but like, i think trans people can totally call themself whatever. lesbians on hrt are great, lesbians doing fun things with gender are great, feminizing or masculinizing or whatever, that's all good.

the only thing i remember saying about this is trans men, specifically, who are binary men only. which is not my wheelhouse or experience.

and my thoughts on that are like. men calling themselves butch is fine, tbh, like the black 'gay' ball culture it came from didn't really see the need to delineate explicitly like that, so, whatever.

but men who have no other connection to womanhood calling themselves 'lesbian' is like... i don't get it. even if it's been used as an 'insult', it's an identity label before it's that. like the whole 'who can reclaim what' discourse is p stupid overall, just don't call someone a label they don't like, don't use labels as insults, don't use slurs as slurs, be considerate. so i'm not gonna say anyone can or can't use whatever. i just don't... get it. you want people to see you as a man without any qualifiers, except... that you're using a term that still means 'woman who exclusively loves women?'

like that seems misdirected to me, not necessarily like "a problem" but... considering how people act around straight trans people and especially straight men, with the radfem reactionary bleed-through we're dealing with, i understand why straight trans men are hesitant to label themselves that way and it's honestly none of my business.

i just don't see how like... a man can reclaim something that isn't even really about him as a man? like that's just people being transphobic and misogynistic about gender non-conformity.

it seems to not quite match what the intent is, to me, idk. like if i had to translate it to something i personally experience, it would be like me trying to reclaim 'schizo' even though i don't have schizophrenia or schizoaffective symptoms. i've had mild psychotic symptoms before, more to do with ptsd/anxiety/depression. but... that doesn't mean i actually fully understand that experience of diagnosis and marginalization through that diagnosis. i am 'crazy' in other ways that i am comfy joking about, just not that specific one. and i think that the distinction does matter enough to question why someone would want to identify with one over the other. not necessarily because there's a "right" way to identify, but because We Live In A Society etc, and it seems more thoughtful and compassionate to really consider the impact it has.

especially when like... if people are calling trans men lesbians as an insult, it's because they are being misogynistic about gender non-conformity and see lesbianism as an invalid 'choice' or 'lifestyle' for a woman. they believe that not adhering to gender and sexual roles makes a woman worth less. which isn't directly an insult to men, other than the misgendering of that particular man. although some people do very much misgender trans men as a class for similar reasons, on the assumption that they are all misguided lesbians trying to 'trick' innocent straight women. but, again, as much as that is transphobic, it's also very much lesphobic and misogynistic.

and again, this isn't about multi-gender, fluid, non-binary transmasc people or anyone who doesn't fit neatly into the 'binary trans man' mold. i love the diversity of experiences with gender and sexuality we all have and i think it's great when people find themselves fitting under a number of labels.

it's more about... binary trans men and binary cis men are the same gender. and lesbianism excludes men. so... it doesn't add up for that small portion of men to feel entitled to the label, even if it's been "used against them". i'm not gonna tell anyone they can't, regardless, because gender is confusing and blurry and the lgbtq framework isn't universal and shouldn't be. i just don't think i'm ever going to get that particular quirk.

0 notes

sureuncertainty · 4 years

Text

i think it’s interesting how we talk so much about the fluidity of gender and how nonbinary can look like SO MANY DIFFERENT THINGS and it can be fluid and changing and nebulous and hard to pin down, and then we come to sexuality and it HAS to be ONE specific thing and FIXED and fit perfectly into a certain mold or it’s WRONG and HARMFUL

#idk man like why does gender get to be fluid and sexuality has to be fixed #some ppl are genderfluid #or bigender #microlabels are good and valid actually #sexuality is fluid too just like gender but y'all aren't ready for that conversation #win rambles #pls don't hurt me for saying stuff like this i don't wanna be dragged into discourse #i hate when exclusionary politics are framed as discourse in general #it's not discourse it's ppl's identities #you don't have to understand someone's identity to respect it #also just............. i am begging y'all to go into real life queer spaces #i really need to get off twitter huh #it's draining

7 notes · View notes

theultimatefanficwriter · 3 years

Text

Pride Month Headcanons!

So its Pride Month! And as a proud member of the alphabet mafia I wanna give my opinion on all the Danganronpa characters' sexualities! So let's go, starting with THH!

Trigger Happy Havoc

Makoto Naegi- Pansexual. I'm under the belief all protags are Pan. Transgender(ftm). So I have this whole hc that the reason his door was jammed was that the lock was quickly removed when they found out SHE was actually a HE and I just like the hc lol.

Sayaka Maizono- Straight. I just think she has a big thing for Makoto, but other than that she cares for her career more than a relationship.

Leon Kuwata- Bisexual, heavy female leaning. I ship him with Hiro, but honestly this fucker would probably take forever to admit he likes guys.

Chihiro Fukisaki- Gay. Dont really have a reasoning. Just my opinion lol

Mondo Oowada- Bisexual. He mentions trying to confess to girls, but come on. This guy is fruity for Taka.

Kiyotaka Ishimaru- Gay. This dude meanwhile is just straight homo. He's probably closeted in fear it would bring shame to his family name again.

Hifumi Yamada- Straight. I honestly dont think about the guy enough to give this enough thought, but the way he simps over Celeste proves he likes girls at least. Plus he kept calling Alter Ego she, so...yeah.

Celestia Ludenberg- Straight. Honestly I think she'd be homophobic? Idk i really dislike Celeste, sorry 😅 She just gives me those vibes.

Sakura Oogami- Bisexual. I wanna label her as lesbian, but Kenshiro exists 😒 Women leaning possibly

Kyoko Kirigiri- Bisexual. Though i dont personally ship her with any girls, I can see her going both ways.

Byakuya Togami- Gay. And it's a problem with his family, so he's closeted.

Yasuhiro Hagakure- Pansexual. He just wants to love someone, man lmao.

Aoi Asahina- Bisexual. Again, wanna label her as lesbian, but the Bad End exists, showing she willingly got with three guys. And she does ask Makoto to pretend to be her bf. But she leans heavily towards females imo.

Toko Fukawa/Genocide Jill- Bisexual. It was straight until she met Komaru. Then she realized "Oh shit. I'm gay." But she still has a small thing for Byakuya ig 😒

Mukuro Ikusaba- Straight. We pretend the thing with her sister doesnt exist, alright?

Junko Enoshima- Straight. And definitely homophobic.

Wow a lot of bi peeps lol. Alright, onto the next game!

Goodbye Despair

Hajime Hinata- Pansexual. Again all protags are Pan. Fight me, prove me wrong you literally cant.

Ultimate Imposter- Panromantic, Nonbinary, Asexual. Though I call Imposter he a lot, I think it's almost canon they're nonbinary. I just have stupid brain and type he first without thinking. I also dont really have a reason for thinking they're asexual? I just think they are. But they're probably panromantic in order to fit their talent better.

Teruteru Hanamura- Pansexual. He's so painfully pan. He even says his options are, and I quote, "pretty open." Dis bitch gay.

Mahiru Koizumi- Lesbian. Dont think I gotta explain myself.

Peko Pekoyama- Bisexual. She's totally dating Fuyuhiko, but I can see her having small crushes on other girls.

Hiyoko Saionji- Lesbian. Also dont think I need to explain myself.

Ibuki Mioda- Bisexual. RAGING bisexual. Also I can honestly see her being Gender Fluid as well.

Mikan Tsumiki- Bisexual. She honestly needs therapy more than she needs a relationship, and she probably doesnt really understand her own labels completely, but I think shes bi.

Nekomaru Nidai- Bisexual. Homeboy was a little TOO eager to be rubbed down by Teruteru 😏 Just kidding, though I do think Nekomaru is bi. No real reason honestly

Gundham Tanaka- Bisexual. He obviously has a thing for Sonia, and in a perfect world(i.e. my perfect world) he would be holding hands with Kazuichi daily. Speaking of holding hands he basically breaks Hajime's in the FTEs. Gay 🥰

Nagito Komaeda- Gay. He's very obviously gay coded, mostly towards Hajime though I dont personally ship that.

Chiaki Nanami- Pansexual. She loves everyone equally. Honestly she probably doesnt put too much work on her labels and would probably go by any pronouns as well, so maybe Gender Fluid?

Fuyuhiko Kuzuryuu- Bisexual. Like Leon I think it would take him a while to accept he likes guys, and he probably leans towards girls more, but he's definitely fruity lol.

Sonia Nevermind- Pansexual. Our girl fucks. She dont care who, she just FUCKS. 🤣 But seriously, I think she just sees love as love. As she should.

Kazuichi Souda- Gay. Transgender, (ftm). He's so very closeted, so badly even he doesnt recognize it. He probably even has internalized homophobia, probably because of his father. Not sure why I hc him as trans, I just think it fits.

Akane Owari- Straight. She probably doesnt think about it much. All she knows is she likes fighting, meat, and Coach Nekomaru.

Alright and onto the last game!

Killing Harmony

Shuichi Saihara- Pansexual, Transgender(ftm). Its. THE RULE. I didnt make it. Sue me. Also fuck it I dunno I think it fits with his whole character if he were trans. Hard to explain lol

Rantaro Amami- Biromantic, Asexual. I admittedly dont know much about Rantaro, but from what I do know, I think he would fit well with just about anyone. I dont have much of a reason for him being Ace.

Kaede Akamatsu- Pansexual. She was the protagonist first, so the rule still applies lol. But even beyond that it just fits her. Hard to explain, it just seems like it works.

Ryoma Hoshi- Straight, Asexual. I know on my ship list I said I shipped him with Gonta, but theres a reason that ship was so low. I heavily think Ryoma is straight. It's just the vibe I get from him. Maybe hes bi curious, but idk. As for the ace bit, it's really dark. I hc it's because of the trauma he endured during prison.

Kirumi Tojo- Lesbian. Idk I look at her and I think "Lesbian power. Powerful wlw moments." Dont ask me my brain just does things.

Angie Yonaga- Pansexual. She always seemed like she was flirting with Himiko and lowkey Tenko, and in the FTEs she straight up wants to get married to Shuichi so like....I dunno what you want me to say.

Tenko Chabashira- Lesbian. Literally no explanation needed.

Korekiyo Shinguji- Pansexual. Putting aside the....obvious....he finds all of humanity beautiful, so he most likely doesnt have a preference when it comes to choosing a partner. Just like with Mukuro we pretend that entire plotline never happened.

Miu Iruma- Pansexual. I see her as pretty open to everyone....Yeah. That's all I got.

Gonta Gokuharu- Bi-curious. Honestly I dont think Gonta knows what he is himself. He probably hasnt given it too much thought, if hes given it any. The best I can think of is bi-curious, assuming hes currently exploring his sexuality.

Kokichi Ouma- Gay. I dont ship him with anyone cause I personally think he'd be a bad partner to anyone he got with based off of his personality, but yeah. He gay lmao.

Kaito Momota- Pansexual. THE LUMINARY OF THE STARS IS FOR EVERYBODY! Probably took a while for him to admit he wasnt straight, but then he admitted it with his whole heart, precious thing.

Tsumugi Shirogane- Straight. Fuck I dunno I dont think about her in a positive light enough to care. Sorry I really tried 😅

Kiibo- Panromantic, Genderfluid, Asexual. Like Imposter, I've called Kiibo he all the time, including every story I put them in, but technically they have no gender. So that does make them nonbinary, but at the same time it leaves the opportunity for them to go by any pronoun they want, so I hc they go by all of them lol. I also think they just love everyone, and for the ace bit, unfortunately, robots probably dont have dicks 😔 Even if they did, I dont think he would be very interested in sex.

Himiko Yumeno- Lesbian. Despite her treatment of Tenko, her reaction at the end of chapter 3 shows she cared for her, and Angie. She probably loved them both, so, lesbian for sure.

Maki Harukawa- Straight. Kaito was probably her first ever crush, so I doubt she ever had a chance to feel out if she was anything other than straight. Even disregarding that, I dont think she'd be anything else.

Alright and those are my headcanons for all the Danganronpa characters! As a bonus, I think Komaru Naegi is a Lesbian! No real reason other than Tokomaru is top tier lol.

Now remember these are my opinions! If you dont agree that's fine! Just be kind!

And HAPPY PRIDE EVERYONE! 🥰🏳️‍🌈

89 notes · View notes

know-the-way · 3 years

Note

So Zelda definitely says she doesn’t love Faustus to Hilda, but I’ve seen some people say Zelda was never even attracted to him and it was all for show, so she probably never really liked men. Wondering your thoughts on that.

I mean, people are welcome to headcanon whatever they like. Fiction can be argued for a lot of different perspectives. But if you’re basing it purely on what we saw in the show… my thoughts are that I personally disagree with that assessment re: Faustus specifically (which is, I’m sure, why you asked lol). Like going back to season one and into season 2, up until That Really Horrible Thing happened, if we’re just talking about Zelda being attracted to him? Well…

Let’s go through these one by one.

1. Lupercalia -

So Faustus has 100% orchestrated this moment in the woods: “Oh oops, too many baskets with various romantic supplies and aphrodisiacs, and just us two here under a full moon. Damn, that’s crazy, ain’t it Sister Zelda? Wild coincidence. Would you care to lie down on this blanket with me and let me run my fingers through your hair? Ya know… for Satan? Or something idk hehe?”

And, of course, Zelda knows damn well that it’s been orchestrated (hence the cheeky grin when she swings the basket over her arm), which means she has the upper hand and she is absolutely aware of that. Also meaning, if she wanted to - she could keep him exactly where she has him, with him very clearly trying to win her back but her turning him down anyway (in order to make him work harder for it).

But she doesn’t. In fact, she barely makes him work for it at all. He basically lets out a sly “such a shame we aren’t fucking anymore, otherwise my head would already be buried between your thighs… but like, I respect your wishes and stuff XD” and that’s all it takes for her to throw her own rules out the window in order to get railed on the forest floor (“one night of carnality won’t kill us”).

Can you confidently say she allowed herself to be wooed (like homeboy actually romanced her, who knew he had it in him) that night without being attracted to Faustus at all? Without a shadow of a doubt? Perhaps, but I really don’t think so.

2. You Will Flagellate Me aND I wiLL fLagELLate yOu -

… I mean.

Her eyes literally roll into the back of her head and she can barely speak.

I could say more, but why? Speaks for itself, imo.

3. Master of The Hunt -

Once again, she has to take a shaky breath mid-sentence and smile to herself just to power through the thought of him Being In Charge. If it isn’t, at the very least, physical attraction, then Aunt Z probably needs to see a respiratory therapist ‘cause that kind of random strain on your windpipe can’t be good.

4. The Afterglow -

So to the point of it “being all for show” - in this particular moment of this particular scene, who does she need to convince or perform for? If it’s all an act, why keep it up when no one’s looking? It’s an empty kitchen until Hilda walks in and sees her usually-stern sister noticeably blissed out over breakfast.

What is she blissed out for? Well, again you could technically argue that it’s for anything. Maybe she’s daydreaming about a luxury spa or something. But considering the scene with Zelda preceding it was an impassioned kiss with the high priest on her parlor floor… AND that she does the voice-crack thing when asked what she’s up to that day (“I believe the… h-high priest is c-calling”)… something tells me that a particular dumbass warlock and what he’s able to make her body do is probably what’s on her mind.

Now, all that being said, does any of this confirm what Zelda’s “true” sexuality? Absolutely not. Maybe Faustus was an exception and she otherwise has only ever fancied women. I know Miranda herself has shared her thoughts on Zelda’s sexuality, which is that she doesn’t want to label it and she thinks Zelda could be attracted to any and all genders. No label - just as it would be for a real-life, breathing person - is 100% valid. Sexuality isn’t fluid for everyone, but it is for some and that is okay!

And if the question were just “is Zelda attracted to men” - I think that is absolutely up for fair debate and she could be written for many different identities. But the question here I more so interpreted to be “was Zelda attracted to Faustus,” who happens to be a man, and… based on observable evidence in the show (and novels, which I didn’t include here ‘cause not everyone has read them)… yeah, I think she was. And I think he really cared for her, too. Which is what makes it all so painful and sad. lol

If only she hadn’t stolen his baby and had a less destructive niece - and if only he hadn’t been such an insufferable little twat, ya know? *sigh*

#zelda spellman #faustus blackwood #spellwood #caos

66 notes · View notes

ghost0loxer · 3 years

Text

Imagine, a gender fluid teenager like myself has a favourite/feel-good film and that film is “Just One of the Guys,”from the mid 80s.

Picture this: theatre class, we watch “She’s The Man”, a dreamworks film from the 2000s. And yet, the social justice issues within the film are glaringly obvious to today’s society. Don’t get me wrong, it can be a funny film in a group setting - but then there are scenes that are just uncomfortable. Now, we discussed these themes in class, but I just can’t help but think about the film that came before it. Yes, StM (she’s the mans) is a modern day adaption of Shakespeare’s “Twelfth Night” but I was thinking about the modern day adaption before StM, “Just One of the Guys” from the mid 80s.

I love this film. For multiple reasons, which I hope to discuss.

Number one, our main character. Terry Griffith is stubborn. If she thinks something is right, she won’t let anyone say no or get in her way. Now in some cases, this is great. It’s definitely a shift in the usual romantic comedy female lead (especially for the 80s). But it’s one of her biggest flaws. In the beginning, Terry doesn’t win a contest for a part-time job at the Sun Tribune. She believes her article was amazing, but she speaks with her English teacher and he gives it to her straight. “You don’t have what it takes to be a reporter.” Her article is boring; it’s about the nutritional value of the lunch menu in the school cafeteria, of course it’s boring. But the words her teacher tells her has her convinced it’s because she’s a woman. Thus, she leaves school for two weeks and transfers as a buy to another school who are holding the same competition. Once she gives her article, she is told almost the same thing, but this time, she’s given proper feedback to improve it. Of course, there was some irony with this scene between Terry and the teacher. “Just because you’re guy, doesn’t mean you can’t be sensitive or light.” Thing is, she doesn’t give up, she strives to fix it and finds a new angle. I love her determination, I love the way she doesn’t let others push her around. Furthermore, her transition to a man. In StM, Viola as a guy is made to be cringey and comedic, you watch and think, there’s no way a guy would do that. But Terry, having grown up with a younger brother and is actually smart, manages to nail the role. Sure, she has slip-ups, but she stays afloat and she’s not being over the top. She’s chill and convincing, yet you as the audience can tell she’s trying to appear masculine. Her lines are witty and she’s sharp. Someone has something to say, she’ll be able to backtrack and answer with a joke or sarcasm quickly. I like smart characters.

Another point, the way women are written in this film. A lot of women in this film are treated like shit, but it’s probably a realistic depiction of the 80s. Everyone is talking about dating and sex, it seems to be the only topic the women in this film speak about, unless they are Terry. Terry seems to be the only character in this film whose main goal is not romance or sex. She strives to be a reporter, she wants to prove herself, and she rejects the advances upon her frequently. Whether it’s the boys asking her on dates in halls, or her own boyfriend attempting to seduce her when her parents aren’t home, she doesn’t put them above herself, yet she still lets them down easily, unless they become more pushy (case in point, her boyfriend, Kevin, in the beginning). She can stand up for herself, but she’s not the only one. Her best friend, Denise is one of the many women looking for love, nevertheless, she holds standards. I will admit, I didn’t like Denise’s acting in the beginning; she’s not a great character, but even she manages to reject men’s advances constantly. She’s not afraid to say it bluntly and she expresses her true emotions when certain guys try to ask her out. She tells it to them straight, and I respect her for that (despite her lack of empathy for some). Terry’s brother is constantly hitting on Denise, but she stands her ground. She doesn’t hit him or curse him out, she spins words around him and always lead back to the key word “no.”

This is my third, and maybe final point, (because I’m not great at writing but I’m starting to get tired) the way they handle sexual orientation. It seems if you’re going to make a film about a cross-dressing woman who falls in love with a man, you have to discuss sexuality and this film is not afraid to. That was my biggest beef with StM, when Viola confessed her love to Duke, the made it blatantly clear that it was “weird” and “unusual”; the editing and music cuts. It was done for comedic purposes, but in that moment, it just made me cringe. Even when the principal marched onto the field during the big match to expose Sebastian as “the woman he was all along,” he used a big megaphone and said to the whole crowd this man is in fact a girl. If it were to happen in the real world, and this character was a trans male, that would be traumatizing and so so insensitive. I couldn’t help thinking the way they handled the reveal in StM was poor and shitty.

But with JOotG (just one of the guys)? It’s done respectfully. Throughout the film, Buddy, Terry’s younger, sex-obsessed brother (I have thoughts on this character), often refers to Terry as a transvestite or sexually confused. They make references about her dating other women and jokes. It’s not treated like taboo, but just something people normally talk about, and as a questioning kid when I first watched the film, I really needed that. Although it was used for jokes, the fact that it wasn’t treated like a silent topic made me think more of it and discover who I was; it was media like this that made me accept myself.

Even with the reveal. Kevin, Terry’s boyfriend (or ex boyfriend by the end), stomps up to Terry after she’s wrestled with the school bully and was dumped into the waves at prom. Rick, who’s been Terry’s friend (and is the male lead) throughout her time at his high school, immediately questions who Kevin is and he responds with a harsh and sure “Terry’s boyfriend.” Of course, that doesn’t expose Terry as female, but makes Rick assume she’s a homosexual. But instead of calling her weird or replying negatively, he answers Kevin’s question calmly and says he’s just a friend. There is no prejudice, no disgust, Rick is shocked, but that’s expected. Furthermore, this reveal not only does not alienate homosexuality, it puts the center of focus on the main characters rather than have the whole audience/prom witness this exchange. Sure, the rest of the school is watching but the camera never pans over to them, and even then, Terry drags Rick away from the crowds to a secluded area to explain more.

Even once they’re secluded, Rick doesn’t yell at her or is homophobic. He just says “I understand, you’re gay.” As we know, Terry is not in fact gay and she reveals this to him in a similar fashion as StM, at least it’s not flashing a whole crowd. But the thing that hits me, is the fact that it’s not used as a joke or for comedy. Throughout the film, they’ve mentioned homosexuality and being transgender, but it was used as a light-hearted joke (nothing insulting or derogatory). In this moment, it’s not a joke, and it’s the bare minimum for a emotional scene like this, but it always hits me.

Of course, Rick gets justifiably mad that he’s been deceived and he storms off. Terry’s flaw catches up to her here, as she kisses him in front of the prom guests, stubborn to make him realize how much she cares. ( I didn’t agree with this action to be frank, I cringed ). The crowd gasps and it’s the usual reaction to a homosexual kiss and Rick just pulls back, says “It’s alright everyone, he’s got tits,” and leaves with Deborah.

In true romantic comedy fashion, life moves on. Terry gets the job at the Sun-Tribune after writing her article about posing as a guy and everyone who was longing for love in the beginning has found it, except Terry. The ending, however, is Rick coming back for her after a couple (days? Weeks? Idk all I know is it’s summer by the time he comes back, how much space between prom and summer?) and they kiss, go on a date and all is good.

Now after writing this long ass post, I’ve come to realize the main reason I like this film. Sure, Terry is a good character (not morally sometimes, but she’s interesting to watch), the way women are presented also is good, but my main source of affection for this film (in comparison to StM) is the way they handle the switching of genders. I’m gender fluid, I don’t always like being a woman or a man, I switch almost daily and half the time can’t decide if I want to grow out my hair or cut it. Seeing Terry, originally a woman, manage to convince people she was a guy made me wish I could do it too. It made me realize, I don’t always like being a woman. I want to be a guy sometimes, and I want that to be accepted. It was media like this, like Ouran High School Host Club, like Bare: A Pop Opera, that made me understand my gender and sexuality. (Even media that didn’t have any relation to LGBTQ+ helped).

When I first heard of “She’s the Man”, I had hoped it would be like these pieces of media. And it wasn’t. It was an alright film, but made me feel disappointed and somewhat let down. And that’s why I just prefer Just One of the Guys. Maybe it wouldn’t float in today’s political climate, maybe I’m wrong for seeing these points as reasons it’s one of my favorites, but its still better than StM and is one of my favourite films.

26 notes · View notes

demi-queen · 2 years

Text

So I realized I was demisexual/romantic in high school- or at least, something similar. I did my research, asked my friends, did some introspection- you know, all the things, and realized that I had never once in the entirety of my human existence ever felt any kind of sexual attraction. The closest I’ve ever felt is curiosity about why other people found that sort of stuff pleasurable and trying to fit in by proclaiming that I had a crush, when really I just picked the first guy that I figured I probably wouldn’t hate being in a relationship with. It’s been a few years and neither of those things have changed. I had my therapist ask me why I thought I was demisexual and not just asexual and the truth is that I don’t actually know. I think that I could probably get to a point where I might feel some sort of sexual attraction but I haven’t even got to the point where I’ve ever really felt any kind of attraction to someone beyond anything platonic or familial. My parents know about it and the most they’ve said is to not be caught up in labels, which I already knew (sexuality is fluid, don’t feel like you have to stick with something just because you came out as something years before. You could come out as gay and then realize later that you’re bi with more same-gender leanings or smth like that). So anywho, I decided what fit best was demi. It was a little while later, when scrolling through my character-inspiration Pinterest board to try and make some decisions about a character I was making when I noticed the numbers of how many posts belonged to each category of pictures. Now, idk about you, but when I’m making characters, characters that I like, I tend to give them more aesthetically pleasing characteristics- usually subconsciously. Now I’m not someone who has ever looked at anyone and thought man, they’re hot even in passing without any true attraction attached. I just don’t ever really register someone’s physical appearance at first. A sketch artist would probably hate me because all I would have, even if the person was my best friend and I’d known them for years, was a vague idea of what they looked like. Sure, I’d be able to pick them out of a crowd easily and I could give descriptions like “taller than me, brown hair, freckles, people often mistake us for sisters” but the minute you ask how much taller or what shade of brown I’m completely lost. I couldn’t even tell you if it was lighter or darker than mine. If someone has strawberry-blonde hair my first reaction would be to call them a red-head, even though their hair doesn’t actually look red at all.

So anywho, the point of all that was that I don’t notice physical features all that well so when putting pictures on my character-inspiration Pinterest board, I don’t even realize that I’m picking them because I think they’re objectively attractive until I go back and really think about it.

Now as someone who use the believe I was a hetero-demi, this doesn’t make much sense, does it?

679 pictures versus the 82 I have of guys? Clearly, I’m not as hetero as I thought I was. I mean, I know I have a type. Anyone who knows how to tell which character is going to be my favorite in any given show or movie would be able to tell you what my type is, but I never realized how non gender-specific it was until I noticed those numbers. And thought back to all my favorite characters (there is a great many more male characters who fit my type than females, but I think that’s more to do with gender stereotypes in media more than anything).

And this is the story of how I realized I was probably a bi-demi on top of everything else going on in my life

14 notes · View notes

gettin-bi-bi-bi · 2 years

Note

I think I might be bisexual, but sometimes I doubt my attraction to men. I would like to have sex with them, this thought isn't repulsive for me, like I've heard some lesbians describing it. I think I would enjoy it. But then when I think of men approaching me to start a relationship or whatever I get taken back, it feels weird. But when I think of the future I feel like I could date them and be happy. So idk if I'm gay or the problem is that I'm shy and just inexperienced and not ready for a relationship yet.

You know, the lines between different labels, such as bi versus lesbian, aren't as clear-cut as some people try to make them out to be. Many people have a somewhat fluid sexuality that cannot easily be put into one single box. Language always has its limits so all you can do, if you want to use a label, is to go with one that feels the most accurate right now. And change it later if it doesn't fit anymore. There's also people who use multiple labels and that's fine. Or if neither bi, nor lesbian feel close enough then try sapphic or queer or whatever.

That all being said, have you considered that maybe that attraction that you feel to men might be just be a little different from attraction to other genders like women? It is possible (and not uncommon) for bi people to have different feelings for different genders. For example your attraction towards men might be more sexual and not really romantic, which explains why you like the thought of sex with them but don't see yourself in a long-term relationship. Maybe with other genders you have a stronger romantic desire than with men. That's fine as well though and doesn't mean you couldn't identify as bisexual if you want to. Being bi just means that someone is attracted to more than one gender. It does not have to be the same type of attraction or the same amount or at the same time.

On the other hand I also want to point out that being a lesbian isn't defined as being repulsed by (the thought of having sex with) men. Sexual orientation is defined by attraction and not by action. Lesbians can very well have sex with men, they might voluntarily choose to do so out of curiosity, for fun, because they are horny and there's no lady available but a nice guy is offering his services instead, or because they want to have a child or whatever. People have sex for all kinds of reasons and sexual attraction doesn't have to be involved for it to be consensual and pleasurable. That is an individual thing of course but I just want it pointed out that just because the idea of sex with a man isn't repulsive to you doesn't mean you couldn't identify as a lesbian either, if that's what you want to. Even if you actually have sexual encounters with men you could still call yourself a lesbian because what matters is how you feel on the inside and how you want to interprete the desires and attractions that you experience.

This is all a long reply to say: I don't know what labels suits you best. Only you can know that and you might figure it out one day. It could be either of those two, it could be both, or it coule be something else entirely. Just take your time exploring but also don't get hung up on semantics. Try to enjoy your desires and just let your attractions fall where they want to fall organically. A fitting label to describe your sexual orientation might eventually show up on the way. It is very important to know that you do NOT have to label your sexuality before exploring it. And you do not have to label it to enjoy it. You can just go on dates and try things out and maybe that will even help bring some clarity.

Maddie

7 notes · View notes

rethesun · 3 years

Text

Idk it's my first and probably last tumblr post, "reading into things 2.0?"

Click this link if you would like to share the original post that prompted this. Please go like it too! I read this link yesterday, and it clarified things I thought I understood well enough already. You'll need to read the source first for my commentary to make sense. Thank you for reading.

Question: Did harry ever say that he was unlabelled?

@genuineconspiracy answered:

As far as I know, the word "unlabelled...."

Harry's quote from GQ in 2013: "Bisexual? Me? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure I'm not."

Now fast forward to a 2014 One Direction interview when Harry casually made a few pointed comments. In a separate interview on the same day, Niall scoffed at the suggestion that his next date could be a man, Harry bumped him on the knee and quipped: "Hey, don't knock it 'til you try it."

"The "unlabelled" thing comes from the time...why queer artists should be asked to subject themselves to that treatment."

1. I do not speak for everyone in the LGBTQ+ community: This section discusses why I'm not pressuring myself to label my sexuality for now/maybe forever or decide to come out as unlabeled. Whether with any intention or not, Harry has softened barriers for some things to feel less taboo/daunting. Most of us do not want to subject ourselves to different treatment, especially if it's negative. Not all of us have the privilege to do so either.

2. I agree it is not justifiable, and he's right to question them. Being open to everyone isn't easy. Now imagine yourself no less human than right now, but add millions of eyes on you. It's insensitive to assume about someone when they could be doing their best/what is comfortable—please let's stop invalidating what we don't understand.

"the line "It's not a case of: I'm not telling you cos I don't want to tell you."....his first opening band, the queer girl group MUNA...it's that he can't talk about it."

Maybe. I agree; the quotes from the opening band MUNA are telling. There is so much that is telling. Check this out? Harry said he shows how he feels about many things with his actions, more than he verbalizes. The other side of this is Harry has also said he likes that there is a sense of mystery about his life now, and he keeps as much as he can/wants(?) private. I don't blame him whether that's the sole reason or not; it's valid.

"The reporters asking...know that's a possibility for him...by setting up barriers for queer people to clear - like a formal coming out."

I entirely agree.

"I believe the last comment Harry gave about his sexuality in the Guardian interview makes it pretty clear what he meant:

Harry: You respect that someone's gonna ask. And you hope that they respect they might not get an answer. "

"He's telling us that he's not commenting on his identity...He doesn't seem to care what other people think."

He really doesn’t. I don’t perceive Harry as insulted by any genders or sexualities. He’s unbothered comfortable and accepting and I think it would be great if more people felt that way. Some people still live through a prejudice lens and use different labels as insults when they shouldn’t be at all.

"We all know that no one except Harry knows the reality, so we're all just doing the best with what we do know."

As far as labeling goes, I understand where others are coming from, and at the same time still implore we respect what is shared and what we currently know. I'm cis, so I'm not the most equipped to address this. Generally, no one should change pronouns of someone unless said person puts out a message for everyone or directly tells you. To clarify, even though other pronouns are not disrespectful by themselves, assuming Harry would want us to change his, is. So we should all keep using he/him unless told otherwise. The same is to be said about sexuality. However, words like gay queer and no known label are always acceptable because those are umbrella terms for the lgbtq+ community.

My conclusion on the above and what I learned: I also respect that people have different opinions on things in this fandom, and we won't all arrive to the same conclusions, and that's okay. It is best not to assume things if we do not fully know, and finally, if you do respect people enough to ask them, be prepared not to receive an answer or the one you prefer to hear.

More: Queer people are under no obligation to announce or owe the world an explanation and are still just as valid if they don't make their identities loud. It does not sit right with me to speak for people, so I do not think it is disrespectful to understand the topic more. Now I know how to explain better if I am ever defending him or myself honestly. (separate circumstances)

What Harry does not share or does share is his right. Someone's mental/physical health and happiness should matter more than what we may think is true. I am grateful for the things Harry has done, inspiring the world and making it better. I believe sexuality and gender are fluid, and so as I would for anyone, I support Harry without boxing him in, and that extends to career or personal things—unless he chooses to.

Off-topic, but here is a vague message as an extended ending to this post because I wrote it back in June 2021 when Harry was acting for the film My Policeman: As of late, it hurts more than usual that Harry is constantly being suffocated by crowds of people who want something from him, mainly because I know that he'd give them everything if he could. We can do better, can't we? So let's work on understanding one another. Practice extending more kindness and respect, whether it's family, friends, a colleague, social media anon, stranger/celebrity. We can all agree on one thing: Harry deserves the best this world has and to be treated as well as he treats all of us.

#chooselove #harry styles #sexuality #gender #lgbtq+#rethesun #source: me #source: other bloggers #harry styles sexuality #harry styles gender

10 notes · View notes

its-an-inxp-again · 3 years

Note

Hey

Idk if you ever got the answer to your thing. But I’m a person who is queer but regularly uses the term lesbian to make things simpler. I can tell you why I hate the phrase monosexual- it feels transphobic to me- I am not attracted to men at all, but I am attracted to women, non-binary folks, gender queer folks, and agender folks. If I was with a partner and they transitioned to be a man I would still love them. That wouldn’t change. Sexuality is fluid and calling someone monosexual seems to erase that and really put people in boxes. Everyone has exceptions. And as someone who has identified as bisexual and pansexual in the past and find those not to suit me and fit right (especially since I am not sexually/romantically attracted to people physically/based on appearances- it’s more about personality and what I could do with a person)

I don’t mean this in an antagonistic way, I really hope it doesn’t come off that way(I’m bad expressing myself sorry).

(I’m sorry, I know you’re not trying to be rude. My answer, however, will sound rude and upset because you touched upon some stuff that needs a lot of unpacking to me lmao. Just know this anger is not necessarily directed at you but at biphobia in general.)

Why do bisexual people may need to use the term monosexual?

A. It is descriptive

I see what you mean but as you said you're queer and lesbian is a term to make things simpler, right?

So I wouldnt call you monosexual because you’re clearly not attracted to only one gender (but if you want to who I am to stop you?). Monosexual is someone who is almost exclusively dating/is attracted to people of one gender. There are plenty trans people that are straight or gay that would NOT date a partner if they realized they were a different gender. For real: kat blaque made a video (here it is if youre interested) on youtube about this - she��s trans and she wants to date men and wouldnt feel comfortable on continuing dating if a partner of hers realized they were actually a trans woman all along. She wants to date guys not girls and that's FINE it just means A. She actually recognizes the girl gender, obviously B. She's straight af and that's wonderful! It’s not a box if that’s how her experience is and she likes it that way!

Also how is being monosexual transphobic? Cant a girl just like guys exclusively (both cis and trans) or like girls exclusively (both cis and trans)? It's not even enbyphobic since you dont need to be attracted to a person to support their rights. (Gay men arent attracted to women but can be 100% feminists.) Being open to fuck somebody is not the same as supporting their rights: fetishization is a thing. Again, I refer to the video Kat Blaque made.

Sexuality IS fluid but to some people (like me and you) it is more than others. Some people don’t feel comfortable dating people that dont fall into the gender theyre usually attracted to and thats 100% okay.

B. It helps in talking about biphobia and panphobia in society

Biphobia and panphobia are for the large part based on the assumption that you cant be attracted to more than one gender (not even non-binary and so on) and that if you do you're weird/disgusting/mentally ill/a sexual predator. I can tell you 100% that's the narrative both straight and gay people can and may perpetuate since I struggle w this kind of shit every single time Im attracted to someone no matter their gender (YES, EVEN IF THEY'RE A GUY, BECAUSE THE OTHER DAY I WAS ATTRACTED TO A GIRL AND NOW I FEEL LIKE A FUCKING ANIMAL THAT CANT CONTROL ITSELF, even though it makes NO sense because if it was two girls or two boys the actual number of people my hormones activated to wouldnt change, but it would make my experience not subjected to biphobia!). I’m not saying gay people are the same as straight people. But I do feel alienated BOTH from heteronormative society AND from (subtly biphobic) gay spaces because of my bisexuality. I costantly feel like I’m outside both of those worlds and you know how humans are: I just need a term to encompass it all easily, to say “I don’t identify with any of this” (which is both straight and strictly gay spaces: ie, monosexual). To me is literally the same as saying non-bisexual/non-pansexual.

I dont mean to say lesbians or gays have it easier or are just like straight people. But we do have different experiences and I need terms to express that. It honestly doesnt matter to me if you identify as lesbian or queer (though I think you’re implying you’re more queer than anything). But I do need a term to talk about how society at large treats sexuality; ie, as a monosexual thing. Another concept that’s been thrown around is bi erasure. A strictly monosexual society is bound to view a girl dating a girl (or girl presenting) as if theyre both LESBIANS and erase a queer person the moment they’re in a m/f relationship, because people cant COMPUTE that it may not be the case and that the girl dating a cis straight dude isnt betraying her queerness.To think so is basic biphobia.

In some ways, I think it’s the same as when transgender people started using the term cisgender - which is applicable to both straight people and queer/gay people. They simply needed a term which meant “not-trans” as they were saying “I dont identify with this” (ie the cisgender experience). Does it imply that cisgender people, no matter if queer, have something in common? Yeah, yeah it does. Does it imply that queer people are just the same as straight people, or face no oppression? Of course not. Seeing people being offended upon being called monosexual feels like people being offended upon being called cis to me.

Also, saying that the terms bisexual people use are transphobic is almost implying that bisexuality is inherently transphobic? Or reeks to me of that kind of rhetoric. I use the terms I need to use, just like any other marginilized group does, and nobody outside of that group has any right of denying me that. It’s like I’m trying to create a safe space for myself and people like me and yall come around to judge us YET AGAIN. And I'm just tired of hearing this bullshit. I could accept this kind of criticism only if it came from a trans person themselves, I guess? But it’s not usually trans people who accuse us of being transphobic, in fact, many trans people identify as bisexual and use bisexual terminology lmfao.

“Hearts not parts” rhetoric

Finally, about personality being superior to physical appearance. That's amazing but I do want to note that, not you necessarily, but many people who are into the “hearts not parts” rhetoric are, how can I say this. Slut-shaming people? I’m not sure if you are doing this but I feel it needs to be said just to be sure. A lesbian trans woman can be just attracted to a girl for her physical appearance and just want to fuck her - and THAT'S OKAY. That's fine. I am a sexually attracted to people and that doesnt mean I have to form a deep bond first. Sex positivity is about accepting that people can feel like this and not shame them for this. "Hearts not parts” rhetoric has in the past infantilized, sanitized or outright shamed other queer experiences. It's fine if you feel that way but dont start acting like you're morally superior because of that. That's catholicism with extra steps. My bisexuality its not the symptom of some predatory and animalistic thing that should be purified into something more palatable and less sexual. That’s the same thing they used to say about gay people and now gay (biphobic) people are using this against us. That’s also the kind of thing trans women (especially if they’re sapphic) constantly hear every fucking day. Queer people have a good part of their discrimination rooted in the shaming of purely sexual desires. Forcing ourselves to be more palatable and less sexual is just respectability politics. I’m tired of it. (This is obviously different from being on the asexual spectrum: but you dont see ace people going around pretending they’re morally superior than everybody else, and many are actually very sex positive) You would still love your partner if they were a different gender: that’s great, but that’s not how some (most) people feel, and they aren’t superficial because of this, just different from you.

Also, I think you’d really benefit from hearing a trans person say they don’t care if someone has genitalia preferences. Here it is. This obviously doesnt mean that every trans person will feel like she does, but it does mean that we can’t generalize trans experiences/preferences/what they feel transphobia is. Just like straight people dont get to say what’s homophobic or not, cis people dont get to say what’s transphobic or not. The definition of those terms relies entirely on the community that is targeted by these things.

I hope this wasnt excessively confusing but I wanted to make my point clear.

#ask #anon ask #sometimes i say stuff #tw biphobia #tw transphobia #tw panphobia #tw queerphobia #lgbt #lgbtqia

3 notes · View notes

brw · 3 years

Note

Reed and Sue for the character ask please?

REED

Sexuality Headcanon: I definitely see him as asexual!! Despite being almost 50 in canon he’s only ever really been with one person, Sue. He was only shown to have one girlfriend previously and even then their relationship for the most part seemed fairly one-sided so! Also despite being one of marvel’s oldest characters I could probably count all the times he seemed attracted to people on one hand fdcbfvhjvfbhj. he is an ace king <3

Gender Headcanon: A man but only by association <3 jk kinda but um i am fluid abt this! i definitely have written fics about him being trans or nonbinary so! but also it’s not a constant and i have plenty of cis-ish reed stories so yeah cdbdcbhjfcj.

A ship I have with said character: Him and Sue ofc is a big one :> one of the best classic marvel couples, if not the best! but ofc DoomReed is also a banger + him and Ben make a cute best friends to lovers dymanic fjhnfdv

A BROTP I have with said character: Him and Ben 2: the electric boogaloo vfjhfjfvjdv but um yeah! they have a very sweet underrated friendship??? like i’ve said, why don’t they hug more! they’re best friends and more people should remember that abt their dymanic reed is way too polite to ben jfc i’ve called my friends idiots (affectionate) at least 100 times. BUT aside from that he has a very nice dymanic with the other marvel scientists (tm), honestly “Atomic Knights Of The Round Table” how much more nerdy can you get jfc. definitely want to see some flashbacks to them playing DND cdddfhfvhfh. and finally him & jen! i find it very cute and sweet how close Reed is to random people tbh, he’s a human capybara.

A NOTP I have with said character: I dunno if I really have one? I haven’t seen anything that really made me go “ew” with regards to Reed. Most stuff is OK conceptually. I guess at a stretch (lol) that au where Natasha/Black Widow had a crush on him was kinda weird. But that’s about it dcbfdhjdfvdh

A random headcanon: IDK why but I see him as a clothes hoarder. One of those people who’s wardrobe is 80% stuff he borrowed and then never gave back from others bhcfdhbfvdh. When he does buy his own clothes they’re absolutely awful and garish <3 so he just ends up taking others. Perk of stretching; everything fits. I also think he could be good at baking but only when extremely stressed out idk why cfdchfdfdvhj.

General Opinion over said character: Legend <3 get’s a bad rep for sure. Just an autistic stretchy man who loves his family very much and is a good dad. I hope he’s having a good day. One of the Comfort Characters (tm) for me. Do wish his funko pop could like. stand up and not fall down BUT ASIDE FROM THAT. 10/10 a perfect character for my wants and needs.

SUE

Sexuality Headcanon: Bi sapiosexual <3 /hj

Gender Headcanon: Similar to Reed I don’t have anything strong however her and reed have strong t4t vibes and I like the idea a lot tbh. Easily could be marvel’s trans milf representation if they were not cowards! but um yeah fchjfcdhfdhj. nothing strong but a lot of nice concepts <3

A ship I have with said character: Yet again, her n Reed! They’re very sweet and the fact that they’ve been going strong as long as they have is an achievement! BUT ALSO her and alicia have strong Gal Pals (tm) energy so that’s also fun. I also rlly like BenReedSue for her I just think she deserves to have two handsome boys love her a lot.

A BROTP I have with said character: Her and Jan Van Dyne have such a nice cute friendship! I definitely liked when you can see them go out for lunch n stuff and gossip about their pet scientists and kick ass together they should do it more often. They’re good friends! I don’t think it’s been on panel much but I would also like to see her friendship with Wanda! They obviously talked at least once bc Sue copied her opera gloves look for a bit so they obviously are close enough that Sue felt comfortable to do that, so I’d like to see more of them too! I think they’d have more in common than realised. and OFC her and Alicia again. Very sweet and nice. I like how much they care abt each other and look out for one another.

A NOTP I have with said character: Her and Namor <3 get that shit away from me

A random headcanon: NO idea why and I think this may be a latent piece of canon in the back of my mind that I cannot recall but I think she plays guitar, specifically base and is pretty decent at it. I also think that the few movies she starred in in Ye Olde Days have become cult classics now :>

General Opinion over said character: Wife <3 one of the most powerful marvel characters in universe and i’d like everyone to remember it! More than capable of kicking ass. should be allowed to go feral more often. Also deserves to be drawn as the 50 year old she is jfc stop making her look Vaguely 20 she is the same age as Reed and Ben and I will maintain this until the day I die <3 sufferer of Eldest Daughter Syndrome but we can’t all be perfect. Marvel keeps nerfing her by having her be written by D*n Sl*tt and B*rne because if they let her be the 50 something y/o milf capable of taking out the Avengers in 0.5 seconds she’d be too powerful for them to contain.

send a character!

#THANKS FOR ASKING!#ask games} answers #theycallher-marvelgirl #💛💛💛#ch: the most powerful member of the ff

11 notes · View notes

super-nowa-art · 3 years

Text

i got angry. and when i get angry, i rant. and when i rant, i need to share the rant with the void of social media, just to have an outlet.

if you don't agree with me, i don't care. not looking for discourse.

i watched this video, for context. literally no one cares but idk

https://youtu.be/5uaJ1XyRwrU

Ok this is about to be long so bear with me.

To begin with, why are we still gatekeeping? It's 2020. Queers should stick together instead of debating who's identity is "valid" or not. Let people be who they want to be.

Also, I don't know what your views on trans people are (think you've made videos with trans folk so I'm guessing you're not intentionally being transphobic), but the preferred pronoun law is actually meant to PROTECT trans people. Which is fucking needed. In 2020 alone there have been at least 36 people killed in the US for being trans. There are probably a lot more, considering murdered trans people often get misgendered by the cops and the statistics don't include them. World wide, more than 3000 trans folk have been murdered for being trans in the last 11 years. And again, there's surely a lot more we don't know about.

The preferred pronoun law that you mock is life saving. It keeps trans people from being outed where it would be dangerous to be outed. Most trans people are killed by someone they know. Yes, the law is there to provide an encitement to use trans folk's correct pronouns because it can induce extreme dysphoria to be misgendered, but more importantly, it's there so a trans person's coworker or boss is less likely to mis-gender them and out them.

And the part where you said you can get a fine for misgendering when you make an honest mistake; no, you can't. At least, that's not what the law is for. The law is for repeated misgendering, demanding license or medical proof that you are biologically the gender you identify as, etc.

As you may have already guessed by my passion for this topic, I am myself trans. Non-binary, to be precise.

Now, I know that we as humans love to label things. I love to label things. I love labeling myself! I like knowing other people's labels! When someone identifies as merely "queer", I get this itchy feeling of: "yeah, but what ARE you?"

I get wanting to label things. What I do NOT get is aggresively stating that someone's identity is invalid. Identifying as simply "queer" is fine! If that's what you resonate with, go for it! Does it irk me that I don't know what that means exactly for you? Yes. Does my inherent need to categorise people start shouting for attention? Absolutely. But it's their identity, and that's cool! It is really none of my business, as long as I know what pronouns to use.

Now, I understand the confusion and anger around this. Before I came out as or even knew I was non-binary, I identified as a lesbian. Love being a lesbian! It's great! I really identified with that term, and I still do.

But then I realised I was trans, and thought hey, I'm not a woman, can I still label myself as a lesbian? Should I just say I identify as "attracted to women"? Say I'm gynosexual and confuse everyone including myself?

I went with just calling myself a lesbian, because that is the term I've used about myself for years. When you said that this word is very important to some people, you were right. Where you were wrong, however, was when you implied that it isn't hugely important to us, too.

Because here's the thing: gender and sex are not the same thing, and more importantly, gender and what pronouns you prefer are not always directly correlated. I know this might confuse you. That's totally fine! I'm confused about everything almost all the time, I feel you! But it is how many trans people feel. I get this tingly awesome feeling when someone refers to me as he/him, because I want to be percieved as masculine. I don't feel like a man, but I want to be seen as masculine or androgynous. I use they/them pronouns, because it's easier than explaining that sometimes I want to be called him, but sometimes not, and basically explain my entire gender to someone.

I understand this feels threatening. It feels like someone is taking away your identity that means so much to you, and that you might have endured a lot of hardship for having.

But remember, us trans people have gone through shit, too. I don't mean to in any way compare the two struggles. I don't want to sit here and say "we have it worse", because really, it doesn't really matter. What matters is this: I get misgendered every day. When you're a binary trans, you can pass for being cis and automatically be called what you want. That will never happen for me. Unless someone asks me my pronouns (which is the best, try it), they are going to assume I'm a female. And I don't blame them! I see boobs, I think girl, too.

Now, imagine you have struggled with figuring out yourself for a long time, and you finally, finally find what you are. What you identify with. And then someone says that you can't identify as that, because you don't fit the mould. News flash, I never fit the mould anywhere, ever! The one place I have always felt safe and happy is within the queer community. And that's why gatekeeping fucks me up so much. Because people like me, who have been the weirdo all their life, hating their body and not knowing why, being confused and scared, not daring to come out, not wanting to draw attention to myself, finally find a place to belong. And then you get shut down. It feels awful.

Explaining that gender and pronouns don't have a direct correlation is hard. Because you can't really explain it. It's just a statement. Like: gender and sex aren't the same thing, but even harder, since it's based on experiences and not the fact that is: trans people excist.

Now, I know that this might have been focused more on cis women who use the pronouns he/him. And yes, like you said, pronouns do indeed give a big indication on what gender identity someone has. But it doesn't HAVE to. They might have a weird or bad relationship with their femininity for various reasons, or they might just feel like a woman but not identify with the female pronouns.

For example, I have a gender I know what my feels like. But I can't explain it for the life of me. Try explaining your gender in detail! It's a lot harder than you think, and it gets even harder to explain when the words aren't even invented.

A he/him lesbian is not a man trying to make fun of your identity, I promise. It's someone who either doesn't have any other word to use (like me), feels a strong connection to the word and associated identity (also me), or a woman who doesn't want to be labeled as she/her for various reasons, but who is attracted to other women. We are not here to shit on your identity! Please don't shi on ours!

I know that probably no one will read this absolute monster of a comment, and that's ok. I got so upset I actually teared up a little bit, so I felt like I had to express myself or I would be thinking about it indefinitely.

Please, if anyone's reading: be respectful. Understand that understanding others is hella difficult, but we have to try, and that both gender and sexuality is very fluid and complicated.

I tried to be as respectful as possible, please have the same courtesy if you intend to commt on my comment, so to speak.

Sad but hopeful lesbian signing off!

#lgbt #lgbtq+#lgbtq community #pronouns #trans #nonbinary #enby #enby lesbian #he him lesbian

19 notes · View notes

daechwitamv · 4 years

Note

I just want to share my perspective! I'm bi and my best friend is pansexual, and for us the difference is that bisexuality is attraction to anyone and gender plays a factor in that attraction, and pansexual means attraction to anyone and gender is not a factor. like, they both describe attraction to anyone, but for bi, its like the packaging is a plus, in a way. for pan, the packaging plays no part in the attraction, if that makes sense. you don't have to agree but thats just what it means for me and i wanted to share!

yeah I get what u mean and that's actually how I thought about it too at first! but thing is that this differentiation is just. not so cool bc what does packaging mean? do you mean what kind of parts a person has? like. if you're attracted to anyone then what does packaging have to do with it! its basically that thing that some pan people like saying: hearts not parts. and it says in turn that bisexuals put parts over hearts whatever that even means but. its not only biphobic (bc it feeds into the very very widely spread idea that bisexuals are hyper sexual and just wanna have sex with anyone) its also transphobic which some trans people on here have explained well - you should google that maybe. anyway, what I'm trying to say is that bisexuality as I understand it from the research I have done is attraction to two or more genders, and its a wide spectrum like some people prefer women, some men, some don't give a damn about gender at all. bisexuality has always included all genders, all non binary folk and gender fluid people and whatever else people identify as. so pansexuality falls under bisexuality and it wouldn't be a problem to identify as such if it didn't help spreading biphobia like. pan people should ask themselves why they're so uncomfortable calling themselves bi. I think a lot of it has to do with the idea of bis being only attracted to MEN and WOMEN as well as being hypersexual beings of lust idk man that's my take and how I have experienced it

#mail💌#anon #feel free to tell me more tho okay im open to hearing about others' thoughts and opinions and experiences

4 notes · View notes

azirafels · 5 years

Text

on crowley, sexuality and gender-fluid representation

[pulls out pages of notes] ok so lets talk about snake boy. like god i love this fool with every inch of my being. and i do think one of the MULTIPLE reasons i and many others love and relate to him as a character is his portrayal of gender-fluidity. he presents/chooses to present biologically as male, but at the same time chooses to present himself in appearance as both male and female through the clothing he wears, his hair etc. more often presenting as feminine than masculine. and he does all this whilst still acting like a typical dude.

like what gets me so !!!!! about this is that 1) as someone attracted to all genders i find it rather ssexy of him, and 2) this is just one of those very real and relatable characteristics of genderqueer people. like you can totally be masculine in your mannerisms whilst also dressing in stereotypical feminine clothing. like why the fuck not? girls do it all the time, we’re always wearing men’s shirts, sweats, boxer shorts etc. and it isn’t really seen as something that diminishes femininity.

and YET, for some reason that is fucking beyond me, when guys wear anything other than ‘clothes for men’ and diesel scent they’re perceived as feminine. and with that feminine association, are attached to the label of being sexually queer. and it so fucking wrong. not because they aren’t queer hey they probably are, the point is that no one should have an identity pinned onto them by others, especially an identity based purely on stereotypes.

and look. im not saying that gender-fluid girls have it easy (and by ‘gender-fluid girls’ i’m referring to gender-fluid individuals that are biologically female), we definitely don’t. however, i do think gender-fluid boys get a lot more shit for it than we do.

watching crowley though, i feel like we’re finally getting the representation of this gender-fluid male type that you just never see portrayed without being attached to a sexually queer label.

you see, the thing about gender-fluid people that is often misinterpreted, mainly due to stereotypes, is the false notion that we present ourselves according to our sexual orientation. this causes our sexuality to be assumed by other people from the way we dress and present. this is why many people that see a gender-fluid man wearing tight pants will automatically label and judge that man as being gay despite not even knowing him. its why gender-fluid girls with pixie cuts are assumed lesbian.

but with crowley we don’t really make that assumption based on what he wears, only by his interactions. and the great thing about him being a non-human entity is that we can’t canonically identify his sexuality, or that he even has one. sexuality doesn’t define who he is at all. it’s his actions and how he chooses to present himself that defines him and i just really love that?

listen. i just see a very relatable person that is very balanced with both feminine and masculine energy, only instead of just presenting as the gender of biological sex (which is what WE are conformed to do in modern society), they’re just expressing themselves in a way that feels natural, not acknowledging what is expected of their biological gender whatsoever.

some people might think that his character being ‘non-human’ might actually degrade or denormalise this reality of gender-fluidity, but i think it actually elevates it. doesn’t it really go to show that all this discourse about labels and our differences just doesn’t matter, at all? if gender expectations don’t exist for ‘higher beings’ shouldn’t we as humans all strive to be more this way inclined?

idk man i just love what neil gaiman did with this. it’s such a positive representation of the natural gender-fluidity within people, so subtle and tastefully done

man, did i mention i love crowley?

#good omens #crowley #anyway thats the tea for today #im off to rewatch ep 3 so i can screencap every frame of his 60s look #aka the look that is driving me insane in the best way possible #megh.txt

77 notes · View notes