#there were plenty of gay and bisexual men and bisexual women in our group | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

drdemonprince · 5 months

Note

Hey, I just wanted to thank you for your honesty and willingness to explain how queer spaces can be a lot less transphobic than discourse within the trans community can make it seem. A lot of the past few years for me have been spent closeted out of fear that reactions around me would be uniformly hostile. Things are obviously going to be different for me as a transfem, but I have a much easier time being optimistic now!

I am so glad! Listen, the people who post online all the time about how miserably hard it is to find a place for oneself as a trans person create a kind of reverse survivorship bias. They are the people who have already convinced themselves it's best to forever remain closeted or that forging any kind of accepting community for oneself is impossible. Often, they are also people who once harbored unrealistic fantasies about just strolling up one day into a pre-existing community that was perfect for them, not realizing that we must form our relationships painstakingly one by one (it tends to be the white eggs/unhappy lonely trans people who are most prone to thinking of community in that way). there's plenty of trans guys who are doomers like this too and they really tend to actively encourage one another to remain locked away. it's like incel kind of behavior when it's taken to its most extreme form. sometimes, it can be outwardly really nasty homophobic shit too (especially among "afabs" who complain about "cis gays" never accepting them and being super privileged). in its milder form, it's just extreme trauma brain.

The people you do not hear from so much are the people who are busy out in the world going on dates, acting in plays, getting their asses spanked in dungeons, playing tabletop roleplaying games, and going to farmer's markets with their three also transgender wives. Those are the people who know (that is to say, have learned!) how to interact with their fellow queer people, have spent some time out in the community, and in all likelihood have many rich friendships with cis lesbians, cis gay men, enbies, asexuals, bisexuals, straight ish poly people, and everybody else under our big umbrella.

I don't want to be overly pollyannaish because of course trans people have a tough time, and especially trans women have unfortunately to be on the lookout for really vile transmisogyny. But I think when people are wounded and traumatized by these things, they sometimes make the entire world sound incredibly unwelcoming, which creates a self-limiting feedback loop of isolation and mistrust. That is what trauma does! But it is not the truth. and we only learn otherwise when we give other people the chance to prove our worst fears wrong.

Like, just for an example, this Sunday I was at a silent book club at Dorothy, a gay bar on the west side that skews lesbian but is for everyone. I'd never been there before but it was an absolutely charming experience! Dozens upon dozens of lesbians draped over couches and curled up in chairs with their books, quaffing cocktails, alongside a few random dots of gay and/or trans men. Trans women were just a natural completely unremarkable feature of this environment. I couldn't even tell you how many t girls were there. It would be like counting plus sized girls or butches at this lesbian function. If it's a good lesbian function, there's gonna be a diverse crowd and it won't be weird or a big deal to anyone, they'll just be like any other women there. a lot of the big lesbian events here in Chicago (like Strapped) are organized by trans women, so of course there's a robust trans femme presence there.

And all of these groups at this function were getting laid. the couches were overflowing with women, so many that girls were grabbing pillows to sit on and huddle together with their books on the floor. Girls canoodled and cuddled on couches. I saw a cis alt girl covered in facial piercings flirting with a very prim and proper trans girl who was dressed like a victorian governness. they didnt know one another, but after the silent book club hour was done, they left for a while together, then came back with some food. across from me and my friends, i watched them gathering up on the couch, the space between their bodies slowly closing up into nothing over the course of the evening. they flirted and touched and then left the bar together to (and im no expert on body language but i could pick up on this one) fuck eachothers tits right off.

and of course plenty of other lesbians and wlw paired off or tripled off and had their fun too. again, just like steamworks, fat people, thin people, black and brown people, white people, disabled people, neurodivergent people, trans people, older people, younger people, everybody was there. like any good queer space, it was just a reflection of humanity. there is always more that can be done to make these spaces more broadly accessible to full community. but part of that is by putting ourselves there.

again i dont mean to make it sound like finding and making one's space is easy! especially not for trans women! but I also don't want people to get seduced by the hopeless jadedness that some foment online. there are spaces that some trans women I know will never go to -- even an explicitly trans affirming bookstore like Women and Children First gives many trans women I know bad vibes they cant quite explain but all feel (the store is owned and run by old white cis lesbians, it's not surprising to me that it's a little fucked no matter their good intentions) -- and ive heard people say transmisogynistic stuff at events, particularly from "ill date anybody but cis men" type t boys (my brothers, i hate you). shit can be tough. very tough. but also, the world isn't all uniformly as hostile as it's made out to be. there are people who are desperate to meet you. I hope you will come out to find them.

262 notes · View notes

jenny-from-the-bau · 1 day

Note

i totally get your struggle and am very sorry about that last part of how you denied yourself bc society makes you feel like you need to like man as a woman or as a gay man but i’m not sure that saying “I think I'm "lesbian" in a very 80s way haha like back when bisexuals were "on again off again lesbians"” is the best way to go? that sounds a little irk i can be honest! but im not judging your journey or anything like that and i get that our worst judges are ourselves and i hope you can finally let yourself feel that attraction without guilty one day <3

I feel like I don't have the words to fully express my thoughts on this.

I know that a lot of queer people like the rigidity and limitations of labels and the way that it makes it very clear that they are separate from cishet norms. It's amazing to say "I'm a lesbian" and fully 100% know there is 0% chance that you will ever be with a man. You are a woman who likes women.

however, there are plenty of people (like me) who lean into that rigidity, realize it doesn't fit, and then aren't sure what to do. I built SO MUCH of my identity around (1) being a woman and (2) being a lesbian. Literally the last 18 years of my life have been about being a lesbian. My whole frame of reference is being a lesbian.

when I started exploring my gender, I would have literally panic attacks around penises and men in any state of undress because it was too much. I was a lesbian so "ew men," but then they started being what I wanted to become. What then? Am I betraying my lesbianism by becoming a man? I can't be a lesbian if I'm a MAN. At the same time, I was NEVER going to be a straight man. I love women like only another woman can (in terms of approach, not quality. I'm not limiting other genders' ability to love women). But. I wasn't a woman anymore.

well, I'm not a man now either. My gender is none of my business, but I still connect with lesbians and revel in the feeling of seeing media where women are entirely separate from men. I still move through the world as a lesbian. I have almost all lesbian friends. My wife is a lesbian.

But. I have found my formerly repressed attraction to men coming back. I like talking about them, admiring them, writing about them. I don't think I'd ever date or sleep with a man (even if (god forbid) my wife and I get a divorce). I like women and dating women and only being with women. I'm still, functionally, a lesbian. But. I am neither entirely a woman nor solely attracted to women.

So.

I like calling myself A Butch and A Dyke because it places me in the group of "not society's woman." It puts my attraction to women at the forefront. These are both terms, though, that can be used by bisexuals. Hell, even gay men use Butch. Dykes don't always identify as entirely women.

i also call myself bisexual all the time! I use bisexual more than I use lesbian! Do I still reblog lesbian stuff? Yeah! Because I relate a lot to it, but I definitely use queer and bisexual way more.

#Ask #anon #probably the last I'll explain myself

3 notes · View notes

piqued-curiosity · 1 year

Note

"Misogyny is never okay, it is always disgusting."

Okay but how often do you or any lesbians actually confront that behavior from other lesbians? I mean, that's what this whole Thing is about right, actually taking action against the bad elements within your group?

You (plural) don't actually seem to mind much when people call bi women dicksuckers, or joke about how bi women aren't really oppressed, or joke about our "nigels" killing or raping us, or any of the other vile things people say about bi women. It doesn't distress you, it doesn't even seem to make you think worse of those people. Not a single of those replies has a lesbian challenging that behavior, in this post or any of the ones those people haunt. One of those women was literally making fun of a bi person's SA - some of their little group laughed along, and no one said shit to confront it.

At most, you decry "misogyny" in the abstract - in separate posts, never addressing specific behavior, never addressing patterns in who gets talked about this way. In your words "nothing much to add here". Or you might give them a polite and sympathetic reply that expresses gentle disagreement at most but doesn't address any of the vile things they said. That was your route here, right?

So like... I just want to understand. Bi Women are clearly rape-loving predators that can't take criticism and are committed to homophobia if they don't want to be blamed for a man's actions. Clear proof of their moral degeneracy and unwillingness to do better, and if they had any moral fiber they'd be happy to generalize bi women as predators and tackle the issue within their community.

But when gay people either simply ignore or actively laugh along to shit like "you can't reason with parasites that were born semen brained", "hope your nigel kills you", "dicksuckers aren't allies", "bisexuals need to be exterminated for the good of society", "bisexuals lie about being raped you're falling for their sob stories", and other forms of biphobia and misogyny, this says nothing about the state of the gay community and its willingness to accept conditional misogyny, biphobia, and homophobia? These were quotes from at least five different people, so don't tell me it's just one person, and there were plenty more reblogging or laughing along to those comments. No criticisms at all.

Look, I apologize for how long this got. I do get that bisexuals have privilege over lesbians, and there's more of us. I'll continue do as much as I can to confront homophobia from bisexuals when it happens, I don't want solidarity or community with people like that. But I'm not going to pretend it isn't shattering some part inside me that even when people mock our sexual assault, the ONLY reply from non-bisexuals is laughter. We may have privilege over homosexuals but we are still a sexual minority in our own right with our own struggles and I think people truly forget that if they're comfortable making, laughing to, or ignoring rape or abuse jokes about us.

See, I can actually acknowledge that myself and other lesbians can do better at calling out misogyny in our own community. I can be completely honest and admit that I’ve let it slide because my energy has been used up fighting homophobia from people who are actively hurting homosexuals on a large scale, as well as the misogyny from men that hurts women on a large scale…and I don’t have much left to be going after misogynistic lesbians who aren’t causing that same level of damage. What I’ve noticed is that this behaviour from lesbians is a response to lesbophobia they’ve faced. I don’t believe it’s a good way of expressing one’s frustration with homophobia, because you can criticise somebody’s beliefs and behaviour without degrading her on the basis of her sex. So my “route” is to usually speak with compassion and try to get to the root of the issue which is pain from experiencing homophobia, which is then expressed as misogyny towards homophobic women (which again, I do not agree with. Idk if you’ll actually believe me when I say that because you seem to be picking apart everything I say, including me saying “nothing much to add here” on an ask about this to signify that I agree with it and feel the ask covered everything I’d have said myself).

I think it’s also worth noting that if we’re going to compare lesbian misogyny towards bi women and bi women’s lesbophobia, I’ve only really seen heavily misogynistic lesbians in small online chunks of lesbians. I’ve seen lesbophobic bi women EVERYWHERE.

All of the behaviour you described is disgusting. But I can’t help but feel that this ask in particular is less “hey, let’s talk about this” and more “how dare you say this about bi women when you’re doing this? You’re worse!”.

#asks #anon

16 notes · View notes

cassandraclare · 4 years

Text

Not too spoilery, but very long!

fieidofpoppies said: I was hoping to get some clarification about the LGBT situation in TLH’s background.

What exactly is the Clave's position on homosexuality? Alec struggles with people's opinion in 2008, so I guess in 1900ish things are definitely not rosey, but to what extent? We know that being gay is considered a crime in mundane London at the time and I'm guessing that is not the case for the Shadowhunter world, so how seriously is it a problem? What does it/ would it mean for our characters to be out?

Okay, so I’ve gotten a few of this question, leading me to believe it is A Conversation that needs some addressing. It’s a complicated issue so I’m going to try to break it down in parts.

There is no “The Clave’s position on homosexuality” that is unchanging: it has changed, advanced and regressed through history just like you, know, regular human history. :) If you’re asking about the Clave’s position on LGBT Shadowhunters in 1903, we will get to that.

Just because Alec is struggling in 2007 doesn’t mean things were worse for Anna in 1903. The idea that culture moves inevitably forward towards tolerance and progressivism is an oversimplification. We see it assumed all around, so it’s easy to believe it, but actually it’s more of a two steps forward, one step back scenario. There are always periods of cultural progress, marked by periods of cultural regress. If someone had told me when I was a teenager that a woman’s right to choose would be more trammeled and in danger in 2020 America then in 1989 I wouldn’t have believed it; it is, however, the truth. We are in a more regressive period culturally now than we were ten years ago; LGBT rights are more under threat. This isn’t the first time in history this has happened and it won’t be the last: “During the golden years of the Weimar Republic [Germany's government from 1919 to 1933] Berlin was considered an LGBT+ haven, where gays and lesbians achieved an almost dizzying degree of visibility in popular culture” — but by 1934 LGBT+ Germans were being persecuted and eventually would be sent to death camps with Jews, communists, and other “undesirables.”

Alec is living in a time in which a regressive, conservative group that his own parents belonged to nearly toppled the more progressive aspects of the Clave. He already comes from a family in exile, during a time in which progressive and regressive aspects of the Clave are battling each other and the situation with Downworlders is explosive. Four years after Alec comes out, the fascist Cohort rises to power and splits the Clave in half. Nothing like that is happening in 1903: there is a progressive Consul in power, demon attacks are low, there is generally peace with Downworld.

It is reasonable that Alec would have concerns about how the Clave at large might treat him, and also have concerns about family and friends, given his parents’ past. And while Anna and Matthew etc. might have similar concerns about coming out to the whole Clave, which they haven’t, they are not concerned about their particular group of friends, and have mixed concerns about family. (Also, we have plenty of characters who have been just as worried about coming out as Alec was: Charles, Alastair, Ariadne. We don’t yet know Thomas’ attitude. Everyone who doesn’t consider themselves a “Bohemian” isn’t taking this very lightly, and even Matthew isn’t “out” to anyone except his friends. It’s not like the Wentworths know he’s bisexual.)

None of this is to say it was “easy” to be LGBT+ during the early 1900’s. It isn’t easy now. It’s to say that “Well, it sucked across the board then and now it’s great across the board!” isn’t true, and ignores the significance of context in the lives of characters — and people. There’s a great moment in the movie Colette (set in the 1890′s and early 1900′s) that focuses on Mathilde de Morny, Colette’s lover. Mathilde was assigned female at birth (academic scholars are widely divided on whether Mathile was transgender so I’m going to be gender-neutral here.) Mathilde dresses in men’s clothes, and openly romances women, but in this particular moment, Mathilde speaks about the fact that if Mathilde were not rich and titled, it might be a problem. But given Mathilde’s social status and power, and the Bohemian set of people Mathilde spends time with, it’s not. Colette herself also dresses in men’s clothes and is open about her same-sex romances, even kissing Mathilde onstage at the Moulin Rouge.

(Colette and Mathilde, 1907.)

The artist Romaine Brooks wore men’s clothes, even painting herself in them: according to the Smithsonian “By 1905, she had made a name for herself in Paris as a painter of women, some of whom were her lovers. Her most visible and lasting relationship was with the American poet Natalie Barney, who also lived in Paris.” (There’s a reason the characters are often talking about Paris or visiting Paris: being LGBT+ wasn’t illegal in France, and Paris was a gay and lesbian mecca, complete with LGBT+ cafes, high society, celebrities, and so on.)

People like Anna existed in the mundane world in 1903. It’s important to realize; this isn’t something I wrote because I’d have liked it to be true and historically accurate, it is true and historically accurate. It’s also true that even though male homosexuality was illegal in England in 1903, there were plenty of gay men who were out to their friends and community. Lytton Strachey (part of the Bloomsbury Group which included Virginia Woolf) “spoke openly about his homosexuality with his Bloomsbury friends, and had relationships with a variety of men.” Which isn’t to say he spoke openly about it to everyone — just that there have always been spaces within “mainstream” society where it was safe to be queer: Anna and Matthew, by going to the Hell Ruelle, by standing somewhat apart from their contemporaries save those they already trust, are inhabiting those spaces.

Now, if the question becomes: what happens if everyone in the Clave finds out the sexualities of the LGB+ characters in TLH? Well, first, they won’t be arrested; it’s not illegal. But that hardly covers the whole issue. We look at what happened to Oscar Wilde and think, horrors, as well we should — had he not sued the Marquess of Queensberry, though, he probably would have lived out his life with society turning a blind eye to his affairs with men. What happened to him is fucking terrible. Yet even today, there are celebrities who remain in the closet — though their queerness may well be an open secret to their friends, family and colleagues — not because they’re worried about being arrested, but because of the fear of what the damage to their career might be were it publicly known. And how is that so different from the situation Charles finds himself in? He’s pretty clear that if people knew he were gay, he couldn’t be Consul. He wouldn’t get the votes. In the same way, it’s likely that the other LGB+ characters would face societal disapproval and issues with their families. That’s not really about the “Clave’s official position” though, any more than a politician today not wanting to come out is worried about being arrested rather than losing their career. The official position is important, but it’s not the only indicator or generator of societal, systemic bigotry. (” It turns out that one of the worst times to be a homosexual - that is, in terms of being at risk from the law - was in the run-up to and aftermath of the liberalisation of the 1960s [when homosexuality was decriminalized].” )

So if you made it this far: what I’m basically saying is three things: one, that any comparison to Alec has to take into account Alec’s specific family situation, the Uprising, and who the Clave and Inquisitor are in 2007. And that I can’t say what it means for the characters of TLH to be out because it’s going to mean different things, and have different repercussions, for all of them. I can say “They won’t be in trouble with the Law”, which is true, but in terms of their family situations, their personal goals and dreams, and where they are socially, it would be different for each one of them.

And third, that we can’t assume that progress is one inevitable forward march. That things will always be more tolerant, less oppressive, in “the future” simply because it’s the future. While we can believe that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice” it’s important to remember that rights can be abridged, freedoms taken away, times of tolerance and harmony can end, bigotry and nationalism can rise. To assume progress is inevitable is, I worry, to forget to fight for it. And we can never forget to fight.

[Recommended reading: Strangers: Homosexual Love in the Nineteenth Century, by Graham Robb.]

#the last hours #chain of gold #spoilers #tlh

1K notes · View notes

dgcatanisiri · 3 years

Text

I won’t say this is my last word on the subject of Legendary Edition bullshit, because... Well, I know myself enough to be able to say that I NEVER have a last word, I’ll always want to rant again later on. But let’s just make this a sort of master post of the issues overall.

So... Is it fair to hold a game that is a good roughly fifteen years old to the standards of the present? Not inherently. So if the games were being produced in any sort of unedited format, that it was a strict translation, 1:1 ratio, of the original to the remaster... Honestly, I’d still be bitter as all get out, for reasons I’ll expound on in a minute. But it could at least SEEM justified. I could consider it the kind of thing that would be expected - if KOTOR got a remaster today, I would not expect that Carth and Bastila would be made into bi love interests, or Juhani would have her romance patched up so that it has the same level of detail and attention as the het romances. If Jade Empire were remastered, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Sky or Silk Fox’s same sex romances adapted so that the straight romances had to be closed out first. That is the kind of thing that, on a functional, practical level, I could understand. Doing a translation from old hardware, the old engine, I get the PRACTICAL reasoning for not making things better. I still object to this on the moral level, to say nothing of the representational one. But PRACTICALLY, I see why - y’know, there’s only so much financial resources going in, and changing things like romances, even if justified, means doing new writing and getting the voice cast back in, which has complications the longer since a game’s original release - actors retire or even die, the passage of time changes voices (like listen to the difference of the exact same lines by James Earl Jones between both versions of the Lion King). Even without those complications, that means paying them, which, in the production of video games, for everything that goes in, something else must go out. So that is the practical argument.

BUT!

But.

But, the thing is, even apart from everything else that I’ll get in to shortly, is that there have been a lot of claims from BioWare about inclusion. There have also been A LOT. of homophobic bullshit from BioWare and Mass Effect. And yes, I’m calling it like I see it.

Because we had the game that followed Jade Empire, with a M/M romance option, be Mass Effect, with NO M/M romance option (but FemShep and Liara could bang - the writing obviously favored the MaleShep portrayal, given that there was no marketing use of FemShep until ME3, and we had ME2 give priority to having loyalty conflicts between MALE Shepard’s romances, but not Female Shepard’s, and we even had BioWare hem and haw about how “well, the asari are monogender, so they’re not TECHNICALLY women, so it’s not REALLY lesbians...”). Because the official claim is that they just “didn’t think about it” in time to have these options included in Mass Effect 1. Because we’ve had writers now come out that Jacob Taylor was originally written as a gay man, but in the game itself was a straight man. Because there are plenty of women who throw themselves at Male Shepard, and Shepard is animated with having Significant Looks™ with these women, but not a single man who expresses any interest in him, until ME3 finally offers SOMETHING, which came to just Kaidan and Cortez.

Because we had one of BioWare’s heads, one of BioWare’s founders, say in an interview right around the release of Mass Effect 2 say “Shepard is too predefined a character to be gay.”

That is what I mean by homophobic bullshit.

And I haven’t even started on Mass Effect Andromeda.

And I’m gonna start on Mass Effect Andromeda now.

So after ME3, after Kaidan and Cortez were actually romances, we honestly gave them a lot of faith - they got the message, we said. They understood that they couldn’t just cut out M/M romance in the game, we said. They didn’t need to have the constant observation that demanded they provide good representation, we said.

And then they cut Jaal’s bisexuality, leaving him straight on release, without even a chance to flirt and be turned down, the bisexual male character who did remain not only was planet bound, he also is a character who a solid argument can be made that he falls into the trope of the Depraved Bisexual, a trope that over in Dragon Age, Patrick Weekes specifically said that they wanted to avoid and so didn’t make a character bisexual because of that. And the gay man is not only almost totally disconnected from the game (aside from one point in the plot, he can be avoided entirely and is not included in almost any other group setting among the Tempest crew), he is also an accessory in his own plot line, which was also heavily criticized for being intensely homophobic. And of these, the only thing BioWare deigned to change was Jaal’s bisexuality. (Which, personal note, I’m uncomfortable with personally, because as it’s implemented, it just feels kind of afterthought-y. Much like Kaidan’s in ME3, being unchanged from a new FemShep romance, despite the active inability to romance him in ME1.)

So it is not just a matter of “you have the ability, you’re changing other things, you should do this.” I mean, that is absolutely there - the mods exist for the original game, to the point of being able to even get the romance scene to fire right without Shepard’s gender magically changing once the clothes come off. (I have a vague memory of, at some point, probably around the “too predefined” comment, that being another excuse, that there was difficulty with having the models play nice with one another in that scene.)

But this is about addressing a pattern of behavior on the part of BioWare, that they have to be dragged, kicking and screaming, to the bare minimum that their own statements on matters of representation and inclusion claim they aspire to. That if the fans are not actively holding their feet to the fire, they are GOING to take their fans for granted - “you don’t get better quality content elsewhere, we’re your only choice!” But “only” choice is not a “good” choice. It’s not a choice with quality.

So if we don’t make a big damn deal about this now, when they have a chance - when they have a CHOICE - to make things better, to provide better representation, to correct the mistakes of the past... What will we get in the future? How will they backtrack on this in the future? How will they exclude us in the game they just announced a few months back? How will they continue to tell us that they don’t want gay people in this setting?

Look, I don’t use these words lightly. But that is, whether it’s a conscious attitude at all or not, what they are telling us. By not including us, by making us optionally involved, by making us disposable within our own stories, by cutting out our content, they are saying that they do not envision a world, a future, that includes queer men.

And anyone who does not speak up, does not condemn this, does not demand that they DO. BETTER... That is tacit approval and agreement. Because you’re saying that things as they are now - the removal and undermining of our content, of our EXISTENCE in these games - are perfectly fine and acceptable.

And yeah, I’m sure that reading that has probably made some people mad, believe I’m being unfair by saying that, because it’s going to push away allies. Thing is, and this is one of the things that always comes up in anything even tangentially activism related... THIS ISN’T ABOUT THE FEELINGS OF THE ALLIES. This is about listening to the people who are being hurt and saying “you don’t deserve to be hurt this way, things need to change.”

BioWare needs to change its approach. And, as we have seen, it does not come just because of a handful of angry queers, demanding to be represented in their games. It comes because of the community at large calling them out and saying “this isn’t right. What you have done is not right, and we are calling on you to fix it. To do better.”

Don’t just stand there and shrug this off. Because evidence tells us that if they aren’t called out on this now, the next game will not be better. And we will be in this exact same place, having this exact same argument, all over again, in a few years when the next Mass Effect game comes out. When the queer men are given the shortest end of the stick again, and people who are right now saying “what do you expect from a remaster?” will either suddenly turn around and go “I don’t know why BioWare would do something so homophobic” or, worse, “well, it’s something, I don’t see why you’re upset.”

We’re upset because we keep having this argument. And we are going to keep having this argument until people are willing to actually DEMAND that things be better. This is the chance to make things better now.

At this point, a post-release patch that includes a Male Shepard/Kaidan romance in ME1 that is tracked through to the following games is a bare minimum fix, a change done to make it clear that BioWare understands their mistakes in the past and want to make things BETTER.

It may not be easy, but genuinely fixing problems never is. But it’s work that needs to be done.

#dg rants #bioware critical #mass effect #mass effect critical #dg gets pissed #another angry queer rant

38 notes · View notes

arcticdementor · 3 years

Link

Sitting on the couch watching TV earlier this month, my wife read to me a headline from her iPhone. “Listen to this,” she said: “There are only 15 lesbian bars left in the entire country.”

“Great,” I said, “We’ll each get our own.”

Lesbian bars have always been vastly outnumbered by bars for straight people and gay men, but in the 1980s, there were more than 200 lesbian bars in the U.S. What happened? Well, a lot of them sucked. The first lesbian bars I went to in my early 20s were dank, smoky caves where women in khaki shorts and backward caps grinded on each other to Outkast. They could have been frat bars if not for the notable absence of men.

…

But there’s something else going on right now, because it’s not just lesbian bars that are disappearing; it’s lesbian as a category itself.

After Portland’s last lesbian bar closed in 2010, as Ellena Rosenthal explored in the Willamette Week, there were attempts to start lesbian-specific nights at various venues, but most avoided the L-word to appear inclusive of trans and nonbinary people. One event, called Temporary Lesbian Bar, apologized after being accused of condoning “trans women exterminationism” for using the labrys — a double-headed ax that symbolizes female strength and has long been a part of lesbian iconography — in their logo. That event still exists (or did before Covid), but the organizers make sure to advertise that, despite the name, it’s “open, inclusive, and welcoming to all people.” (Oddly, these fights only seem to occur around women’s space, not men’s. If gay bars, bathhouses, and clubs go extinct, it will be because of Covid, not because of infighting over inclusion.)

Portland may be a parody of PC, but it’s not an outlier. When I came out in North Carolina in the early 2000s, the term “lesbian” was fading and “queer” was rapidly rising. Most of my peers saw lesbians as stodgy, old-fashioned, and uncool, whereas queers were hip, edgy, and inclusive. Yet “queer” is vague enough to mean nearly anything, so the label says less about your love life and more about your politics. (I propose we all start using the Kinsey Scale instead.)

The flight from “lesbian” has accelerated since. An academic in the Southeast, who asked to remain anonymous, told me that when she mentioned to a colleague that she’s a lesbian, the colleague “reacted like I’d confessed to being a Confederate Lost-Causer. She told me that the term is outdated and problematic, and I shouldn’t use it.” So the lesbian keeps quiet about her identity: “It’s like living in a second closet.”

Not long ago, it would have been the Christian right stigmatizing homosexual women. Today, it’s also from people who call themselves queer.

…

Nonbinary people say that the identification liberates them from the prison of gender, but for others, it doesn’t dismantle gender roles and stereotypes; it reinforces them. It legitimizes the idea that there’s an intractable gender binary in the first place. Instead of saying, “I’m a woman and I reject gender roles,” NB ideology says, in effect, “I reject gender roles and therefore I’m not a woman.”

Joycelyn MacDonald, the editor-in-chief of the lesbian site AfterEllen, has seen the NB ideology pushed by well-intended people and she worries about the unintended consequences. “When we say that femininity is equivalent to womanhood, we leave no space for women, gay or straight, to be gender non-conforming,” she told me. “Butch lesbians especially have fought for the right to claim space as women, and now women are running from that instead of boldly stepping into it. It’s another way of saying ‘I’m not like other girls,’ and it’s demeaning to other women.”

This is not a popular position in some queer communities, and AfterEllen is routinely accused of being transphobic. In 2018, Rhea Butcher, a nonbinary comic, tweeted: “You don’t represent me or my friends and your website is a sham. You’re not a lesbian/bisexual website, you’re a TERF website.” (“TERF" stands for “trans-exclusionary radical feminist” and is not, to put it mildly, a compliment.) Butcher’s tweet is typical, and it’s part of what makes having this conversation so fraught.

There’s been no clear polling on the shift from “lesbian” to “nonbinary,” and so my sense that the lesbian is endangered is purely anecdotal. But there are plenty of anecdotes. After I put out a call on Twitter asking lesbians for input, my inbox filled with emails from women who said vast portions of their friend groups have adopted new labels and pronouns. But none feel like they can openly discuss it, which is apparent by the number who asked to remain anonymous: all of them.

…

Some feminists argue that women are so oppressed in society that opting out of womanhood is a way of opting out of oppression. I’m skeptical. Why didn’t women do this decades ago, when oppression was objectively greater? Besides, enbies are more likely to be Smith undergrads than, say, immigrants getting assaulted at the border.

And there’s another not-so popular explanation: that it’s a fad, a form of social contagion.

I’m aware that this will be offensive to some people. The concept of a fixed, internal gender identity has become sacrosanct, and it’s viewed as something deeply personal and meaningful, like the soul. But humans are social creatures and we are easily influenced by our peers. This isn’t a moral judgment, just a fact, and I’ve seen how it plays out in my own peer circle. First one person comes out as nonbinary, then another, then another, and then one day half the dykes you know go by “they.” Add social media to the mix, and fawning profiles of nonbinary people in the press, and you’ve got yourself a mass cultural phenomenon.

I ran this theory by a therapist who specializes in LGTBQ issues. (She asked to remain anonymous, so I’ll call her Tara.) Tara told me that while the most common complaints of her young female patients involve gender identity, it’s not an issue with older patients. The older ones struggle with their sexuality or their relationships, but aside from a few transexuals with dysphoria, gender identity doesn’t come up. And young women, in particular, are prone to social contagion. We’ve seen this in many areas: eating disorders, cutting, exercising, yawning, strange fits of laughter, and even (forgive the term) hysteria.

When I asked Tara if social contagion could be the cause of the nonbinary movement, she paused for long enough that I thought she may have hung up the phone. “Yes,” she said. “But I can’t really say that to anyone.” The professional risks are too great.

#katie herzog #substack

124 notes · View notes

hellomynameisbisexual · 3 years

Text

1. Being bisexual means different things to different people

Many people use “bisexual” as the umbrella term for any form of attraction to two or more genders.

But ask a few people about what being bisexual means to them, and you might get a few different answers.

This can make things confusing if you think you might be bisexual, know someone who is bisexual, or you’re just wondering what it means to be bisexual.

So let’s talk about some of the different factors that determine what bisexuality really is.

2. Some people see the term as reinforcing the gender binary

Does the term “bisexual” refer only to attraction to men and women? Some people see it that way.

To them, bisexuality excludes nonbinary genders, or even erases transgender people altogether.

For some, other terms like pansexual, queer, and fluid feel more inclusive.

3. While others apply a broader meaning

Historically, the term bisexual has referred not to “men and women” but to “same and different” — as in, attraction to people of your own gender and to people with gender(s) different than your own.

One popular definition was created by bisexual activist Robyn Ochs:

“I call myself bisexual because I acknowledge that I have in myself the potential to be attracted — romantically and/or sexually — to people of more than one sex and/or gender, not necessarily at the same time, not necessarily in the same way, and not necessarily to the same degree.”

— Robyn Ochs

This definition makes sense when you think about the definitions of homosexual — attraction to the same — and heterosexual — attraction to what’s different. Bisexuality can include both same and different.

4. One thing everyone agrees on: being bisexual isn’t a 50/50 split

While defining homosexuality and heterosexuality might help you understand the definition of bisexuality, don’t make the mistake of thinking that bisexual people are “half gay” or “half straight.”

Bisexuality is a unique identity of its ownTrusted Source, not simply an offshoot of being gay or straight.

5. Some people are attracted to cisgender men and cisgender women

You might meet a bisexual person who says they’re only attracted to cisgender men and cisgender women, though that’s certainly not the case for all bisexual people.

This definition can be based on some misconceptions about gender, as you can’t always tell by looking at someone whether they’re a man, a woman, or cisgender.

6. And others are attracted to people across the gender spectrum

Plenty of bisexual people are attracted to trans and nonbinary people, and plenty of bisexual people are transgender or nonbinary.

So for many bi people, there’s no question that “bisexual” is an inclusive term spanning across the gender spectrum.

7. Some people are more attracted to one gender than another

You might think you’re only “allowed” to identify as bisexual if you experience an equal attraction to multiple genders.

Don’t worry — nobody can take away your bisexual card if this isn’t the case for you.

Research shows that lots of bisexual people are attracted more to one gender than another. Their bisexuality is perfectly valid.

8. Dating someone of a different gender doesn’t make you “straight”

Getting into a relationship is another thing that might make you wonder if you’re “bi enough.”

For instance, if you’re a woman in a monogamous relationship with a man, does that mean you’re not bisexual anymore?

While you may come across people who think you’ve “picked a side” by getting into a relationship, that’s not actually how bisexuality works.

There’s even a whole movement – #StillBisexual – created just to affirm that bisexual people are bisexual regardless of relationship status.

9. Some people have different relationships with different genders

Maybe you’re more attracted to one gender than another. But what does it mean if you experience different types of attraction to different genders?

For example, you could be romantically attracted to people of multiple genders, but sexually attracted only to men. Or maybe you don’t have sexual feelings for anyone, but you do experience romantic attraction.

This is sometimes referred to as cross (or mixed) orientation: romantic attraction to one gender group(s) (or no gender group) and sexually attraction to another (or none).

It’s possible to be bisexual or biromantic, along with another orientation like asexual or aromantic.

10. Who you’re attracted to — in whatever capacity — is valid

Don’t see yourself reflected in common descriptions of bisexuality? That’s OK.

If nothing else, this shows that there are many different ways to be bisexual, and many different expressions of sexuality as a whole.

Your unique experience is valid.

11. Being bisexual isn’t a “pitstop” or a “phase”

One of the most persistent myths about bisexuality is the idea that it just doesn’t exist.

Do people say that they’re bisexual just to go through a “phase” or hide that they’re really gay?

There are many, many people who live their entire lives identifying as bisexual.

And while there have also been people who identified first as bisexual and later as gay, their experience in no way invalidates the existence of bisexuality as a whole.

12. If you find that your individual definition of being bisexual is changing, that’s OK

Does it turn out that bisexuality isn’t what you thought it was? Did you used to define it one way, and now you think of it as something else?

Welcome to the club! That’s actually how a lot of us have come to reach our understandings of bisexuality.

You’re not obligated to stick with a definition that doesn’t feel right to you anymore.

As long as you’re not hurting anyone (including yourself), let yourself explore what bisexuality really means to you.

13. And if you find that you no longer identify as bisexual, that’s OK, too

Once you’re bisexual, are you always bisexual? You certainly don’t have to be — and if you used to identify as bisexual and you don’t anymore, you’re not the only one.

Some people’s sexuality is fluid, meaning it changes from time to time.

It’s also possible that you’ve learned more about yourself and sexuality over time, and realized you were never bisexual in the first place.

This isn’t anything to be ashamed of — the journey to figure out who you are is an important one, and it’s wonderful that you’re growing to know yourself more.

14. It’s often used interchangeably with other terms, but they don’t always mean the same thing

Some people see no difference between bisexuality and other terms like “pansexual” or “queer.”

Some even identify as more than one of these terms at once.

The term they use could simply depend on who they’re talking to or what about their sexuality they want to convey.

But these terms aren’t always interchangeable.

For example, someone might have specific reasons for identifying as queer and not bisexual, so it’s important to respect how each individual chooses to identify.

15. Sexual experiences are independent of sexual orientation

Polyamorous people come in all forms of sexual orientation, including gay, straight, bisexual, and more — and so do monogamous people!

Bisexuality has nothing to do with determining how monogamous or how faithful a person is. That’s all up to the individual.

16. There isn’t really a “test” to assess your own sexuality

It might seem like everyone else has this sexuality thing all figured out — have they taken some sexual orientation test that you don’t know about?

I’ve got some bad news and some good news for you.

The bad news is that, though it might seem like it would make things easier, there is no test to tell you what your sexual orientation is.

But the good news is that you’ve already got the keys to determining your sexuality.

Just consider your attractions, your experiences, and how they may or may not be influenced by gender.

You’re the only one who can say what all of it really means to you.

17. Ultimately, you should use the identifier(s) that you’re most comfortable with

So, does this information mean that you’re “technically” bisexual — even though the term doesn’t call to you? Does it seem like you’re not actually bisexual, even though you’ve always identified that way?

You — and only you — can determine your own sexual identity.

You may prefer to call yourself bisexual, fluid, cross oriented, gay with some bisexual tendencies, multiple identities, or no identity label at all.

If you’re looking to answer what bisexual means to understand who you really are, then it’s time to look inward for your answers.

You’re on your own unique journey toward understanding yourself.

45 notes · View notes

rantingcrocodile · 2 years

Note

I still can't get over the thought that bisexuals are fine and that we oppress gay people.

It was much easier for me to accept that women were oppressed by men and absolutely no woman is lying or being dramatic about our oppression, but why can't I accept the same thing about bisexual people? It only took me a month to realize just how horrible misogyny is, but why is it taking longer for biphobia? Am I not bisexual? I'm so confused and frustrated.

Because the fact is that there are constant denials that women's class consciousness exists, even in the most right-wing spaces where women get together, they will recognise and complain about the male behaviour around them. They won't use the same terminology as feminists, but they know the same basic truth, even if they deny the causes.

When you peaked about misogyny, I can guarantee that you had your own experiences of women talking about what men are like. You'll have heard women complain about men not helping around the house. You'll have heard family members and friends describe the men in their lives as "useless" and other women agreeing about the men in their lives.

So when you already had that knowledge, when you came to feminism, all that you really needed was the connection as to why it was like that. You already had a foundation living as a woman and having interactions with other women, even if you didn't recognise what that was then. With feminism, you were given the studies, the explanations, the discussions and then it all fell into place.

Bisexuals do not have that.

There are no big, meaningful bisexual spaces. There's a denial of bisexual history, erased as being nothing but "gay" history. There's a denial of bisexuality as a unique sexuality, but as "confusion" or straight people just "lying." When in and around LGB spaces, only same-sex attraction was said to matter, so there's no discussion of bisexual attraction.

The heterosexual world wants to silence you and force you to "be heterosexual" and the LG world doesn't care about you unless you're seen to conform to LG experiences. You're told that you're basically just "straight" as default, but if you're in a relationship with the same-sex it's "trying to be oppressed" or still not as important as the LG and not to fully be trusted, shut up and just support the LG, you don't matter.

Bisexuals, on the whole, have been denied a full knowledge of what our bisexuality is, gaslit into believing we're "half-straight-half-gay" and not simply bisexual. We've been denied spaces for ourselves because we've been taught that we fall into two different categories and that our bisexual experiences don't matter and aren't enough to join us together, unlike every other oppressed group.

Then, you come to a feminist space, who claim to know about statistics, read plenty of texts, understand intersectionality, understand the complexities of oppression, and who are able to dissect so much accurately when it comes to misogyny - and then tell you to shut the fuck up about your bisexuality, that you're an oppressor. Who tell straight women that it's not their fault when men abuse them because of patriarchy and victim-blaming is misogynistic, that they don't have to accept partnering with men as inevitable, that all misogyny is wrong, that being misogynistic to any woman is an attack on all women, but then turn around and tell bisexual women that we're sluts and whores, that it's our fault that we've been abused, that we're destined to end up with men, that we're worse than straight people, that it's our fault that men do what they do.

So when you think that you've found a space that gets you as a woman, and that very same space is also denying you the truth about bisexuality, where they accept studies into misogyny but then decide that studies into bisexuality are "lies," where all other groups of women are allowed to define their own experiences and oppression, but bisexuals need to shut the fuck up and let straight and lesbian women tell us what our experiences are "really" like, and then any single mention of saying that biphobia is wrong is met with a barrage of manipulative "You're being lesbophobic!" lies to try and terrify us back into silence.

In the middle of all that, there are hardly any bisexuals actually telling it like it is. The few bisexuals that are listened to are the bisexuals that obsessively hate other bisexuals and deny, deny, deny biphobic oppression, and they're only listened to and uplifted because they're used as pawns to stop any bisexuals from actually thinking and demanding better treatment.

To be a woman is to be told to be small, quiet and prioritise men. To be bisexual is to be told that you're untrustworthy, predatory, a grotesque mongrel of heterosexual and homosexual, worse than your oppressor, and that you need to be silent at all costs, have no boundaries and allow everyone to walk all over you because you're worth nothing. Both of those things together is incredibly mentally damaging. Both of those together, without support, without others to tell you the truth and help you heal, makes it even worse and creates even more self-hatred.

And then you're told that anyone who is telling you the truth is hateful and wrong and shut up, everyone who isn't bisexual knows better. Go back to being a doormat. Take whatever anyone else gives you. You deserve it.

That's why it takes longer, and that's why you're confused. Because absolutely everyone else wants you to be confused.

As long as you're confused, you stay silent and keep letting everyone walk all over you, after all, and that's exactly what the world wants.

#crocodilian answers #I'm sorry to have to be blunt but that's basically why

5 notes · View notes

forkanna · 3 years

Link

[AO3] [WATTPAD]

The rest of the morning was spent getting dressed and ready for their day to begin. Rise only had a few of the more cliched touristy things in mind, since she had been planning it out with the whole of the Investigation Team — such as whale watching, or hitting up Okinawa World. Even though none of them were old enough to drink their fabled "snake liquor", they were all for exploring the caves that ran beneath the theme park.

When Ai had asked if she wanted her to return the favour, Rise declined. The truth was that while she desperately wanted to sate her urges, she knew they were both feeling a little out of sorts from all their exploration so far — which was why she thought the downtime would be good. Now they could sort through their feelings while sightseeing, and come back to it several hours later, hopefully having gained some kind of wisdom along the way.

Though there was one small problem…

"Will you stop that?" Ai hissed as she and Rise lingered toward the back of the group climbing the steps to the historical Shuri Castle. Yukiko was definitely the one most interested, but the others didn't mind seeing the notable sites.

"Stop whaaat?"

"Stop trying to grab me by the balls. I tried to tell you, it's not a toy!"

Pursing her lips, she pulled her closer to whisper in her ear, "It's my toy. I'm having a lot of fun with it." But then she dropped back with a giggle. "And we both know that if you didn't want me to, you'd try harder to stop me. But all you have to say is 'You need to stop' again and I'll know you're serious."

Ai pursed her lips… but said nothing. Perfect. She had a feeling she was enjoying the attention, even if not the specific form it took. "Dumb bitch," she said yet again.

"You love meeeeee," she cooed with a grin and a little bounce as they reached the top, leaning over to rest her head against her shoulder. Even though she decided not to grab for her unmentionables anymore, she wasn't going to leave her alone.

"Okay, you two," Yosuke sighed irritably as he laced his fingers behind his head. "I know you two have this whole weird 'bet' going, or whatever it is, but do you have to rub it in for the rest of us who don't have anybody? Like, look at Yukiko and Chie and Naoto; they don't have boyfriends! You're gonna make 'em feel bad, too!"

Apparently, he had thought appealing to their solidarity with other women would be more effective than pleading his own case. But Rise just giggled, because she saw the look Yukiko and Chie shared. Naoto was as stoic as ever… but she thought she noticed Kanji blushing. That would make perfect sense, those two — she just had no evidence they were also a thing.

Poor Yosuke. No chance at love unless Narukami came back, or he decided to give in to-

"WHAT A PRETTY CASTLE!" Teddie burst out in a gushy tone of voice, lacing his fingers together next to his own face as he stared up at the doorways. "Ohhh, can we live here? Pleeeeaaaase?!"

"No," Yosuke sighed very tiredly with no hesitation whatsoever. "And I thought I reminded you a whole damn five minutes ago to keep it down!"

Rise was laughing at that reprimand when her cell phone went off, making much more noise than Teddie ever had been. Holding up a finger, she stepped a little further away from the group to take it.

"Yes?"

"Miss Kujikawa."

After a brief second of surprise, she managed to breathe, "Minoru-chan! What's… I mean, hey!"

Minoru Inoue's stoic voice returned over the earpiece of her phone as she turned away from the group. "I have been trying to call you all morning. Is there an issue with your cell phone carrier? Would you like me to look into the cause of-"

"No, no, it's… it's fine." This was inconvenient, but she wanted to get it out of the way as quickly as possible. "So what's up? I'm out with friends, we're on vacation."

"Yes, about that… I'm going to send you a couple of images. Tell me if you notice anything."

So she pulled the phone back in order to check the screen. Sure enough, within seconds the images were coming in via text, and when they finally loaded…

"O-oh, you saw those!" she laughed as lightly as she could manage despite the way her heart began pounding in her throat. So many pictures! Each one featured her and it behara laughing together, walking hand in hand, arguing… only one or two showed anything that could be construed as romantic, but all of them could have been explained away as friendship if one tried hard enough. "Yep, all according to plan. It's fine! They're fine, don't… don't worry about 'em!"

"Which 'plan' was this? Certainly nothing approved by the label."

"Something I thought of on the spur of the moment. It's so easy for an idol to fade into the background, isn't it? Well… here's me, finding a way to stand out! It'll be great — you'll see!"

"There are already a lot of polarising comments on the message boards," Inoue went on, and Rise found herself glancing around to make sure nobody else could hear her. A couple of her friends — including Ai — were glancing over at her to make sure everything was alright, but they were far enough away they probably didn't catch a word. "Everyone is very invested — for both positive and negative reasons."

"See? It's working!"

"No, you misunderstand, Miss Kujikawa. The label is uncomfortable with your career taking this direction. They're considering severing their association with you."

Rise felt her blood chill in her veins. "They're gonna fire me? Because… I'm dating a girl?" She had considered adding a 'maybe' in there, but decided against it. That wasn't how she wanted to move forward with her life.

"They're considering it. There's no real official position on these matters, but businessmen tend to be more conservative. Even if they like the idea of flash and attention-seeking behaviour because it typically only helps a celebrity's visibility, if it's the wrong kind of visibility, it could eventually reflect poorly on the label itself."

"That's not fair," she immediately shot back. And then her higher reasoning skills kicked back in. "And they already know what a moneymaker my voice and my looks are, that I know how to work it. I'm cute, and I know how to be cute."

"The label wants you to be cute and available," he stressed. "They understand that most of our idols will marry eventually, but they hope to get as many men lusting after the idea of being your boyfriend for as long as possible."

"They're delusional."

"Yes, they are. But that's where the money is."

Sighing, she found a nearby pillar and leaned back against it as she thought about the entirety of the situation. Tried to weigh her options. "Well… okay, so I can ride the scandal for a while, can't I? Like, there hasn't been a lesbian idol. Not that I remember."

"Don't you think there's a reason why you can't remember? Because they aren't encouraged to be out publicly. And if they can't conduct that business in private, then the labels have no use for them."

Anger was starting to overtake her anxiety. "That 'business', huh? Maybe it's not any of their business."

"Of course it is. An idol in this country? Literally every aspect of your personal life reflects on your profession, colours public opinion. You know this as well as I do."

"Well… I don't care. Like, if they really want to cut me loose, they can go ahead, but I think they would really be shooting themselves in the foot if they don't see how this plays out first."

"They're already on point of doing that, Miss. You're already essentially 'retired' and trying to make a comeback. If there were going to be a homosexuality scandal, it would be ideally placed for when you're already riding high on the charts, or are on a slight decline — and even then, it's still very risky. So you should really start thinking about whether or not you want this comeback at all."

"Now you're starting to piss me off," she snapped. "This isn't a 'scandal' or a 'business' or any of that stuff! This is my life! Isn't the whole point for me to be entertaining? I can do that and be with a woman at the same time!" She heard him start to interrupt, but she pushed ahead, "Maybe it's about time Japan had an openly queer pop star, because there sure as hell aren't enough of us! So you can shut the fuck up until you have something a little less caveman to say!"

And she hung up on him. Deep down, she knew she was being unfair to Minoru; he was just trying to do his job, and seeing everything through that public relations lense. But she hated the fact that they were trying to tell her she couldn't even date the woman she wanted to date. Nevermind that she was serious about it, and they all thought this was either a publicity stunt, or just some random person she wanted to hold hands with for five seconds before throwing her away. Everything in the world of light music was so immaterial. She wasn't even sure she really was gay or bisexual or whichever label fit her; why did it have to be so important to everyone when it didn't even affect them?

Looking over at Ai was enough to reassure her that she had done the right thing. Even though she wasn't even paying attention to her at the moment, just looking around the brightly-coloured interior of the castle, she was still just as gorgeous as ever — and she was a woman. The only woman Rise had ever found herself thinking about as not just attractive, but as someone she was attracted to. Every time she tried to examine that and figure out if it was a fluke, she just found herself falling yet harder for the stunning upperclassman. Who wouldn't be? Plenty of boys wanted to be with her, so it was understandable.

Because at least some small part of her was lesbian. Maybe more than a small one.

As she stowed her phone, she took a look at Chie and Yukiko. Chie was cute in a playful, carefree way, and Yukiko was so elegant. Could she be into them? No, not really; she had never thought about them that way in the past and wasn't too inclined to start now. Though if she were to choose…

That was interesting. Her brain instantly whispered, "It would be Yukiko," and she didn't even understand the reason. Was she into girlier girls?! Turning her attention to Chie, she knew she was also appealing in a different way, but something about that extra-feminine… maybe it was because she associated that with Ai now. She and Yukiko were both very put together, even if Yukiko took a simpler approach to her dress and makeup and hair; more traditional.

Weird thoughts. Shaking her head out, she jogged to catch up with the group, putting on a happy face.

"What was that shit all about?" Kanji asked idly.

"Nothing," she said with a big smile, trying to put her best foot forward. "What about you guys? What's this all about?"

After a brief pause, Chie said, "It's… a castle…?"

"Well, um, yes, but are we all having fun? Come on, get excited — we're in Okinawa! Away from our parents and school and all that dumb stuff! Let's have FUN!"

Nobody could argue with that.

~ o ~

Only once they were at lunch did Ai catch up to her and confront her on trying to hide her true feelings about that phone call. After she had related the entirety of the conversation, Ai looked like she would throw her soba and chanpuru at the wall; she even threatened to pick it up and do that very thing.

"Shhh, stop that," Rise half-snickered. "It's not that big a deal."

"It is to me! That fucking asshole thinks he can push you around and tell you who to be?!"

"I know! It's so gross, and invasive, and… I just don't think it's very nice for the label to be breathing down my neck so much!"

Ai sighed as she stirred her noodles distractedly, posture slumping. "But you'd probably better think about doing as they say."

"Huh?"

"Well, you have your entire future to think about, right? I don't want to be the one holding you back. They're gross, but they're probably also just reading the room. They know what it takes to get you where you want to be, and… I ain't it."

A flash of anger welled up within Rise as she picked at her rafute. "No. You're what I need because you're my friend and you make me happy."

"Friend, huh? You do that with all your friends?" When Rise opened her mouth, she held up her hand, chopsticks still between her fingers. "Just messing with you."

"Shut UP, oh my GOD." Then they both laughed very briefly before Rise felt another sigh coming on. "Honestly, I think they're wrong about this. I've checked the online spaces myself, too — don't they think I have? Don't they think I'm better at it than those old crusty guys are?!"

"Tell them, girl!"

"Are you two okay over there?" Chie asked with a little laugh.

"NO!" they both answered, only making both tables laugh. There hadn't been enough space at any one table at the restaurant they found, so most of them ended up at the big one. Ai had volunteered the two of them to take another small one nearby — and Rise now realised the reason was this interrogation.

"Anyway, if they don't want me on the label anymore, that's that. I can find a way to pursue music without them."

Mouth full, Ai just nodded and pointed her chopsticks at her for a second until she swallowed. "YES. The internet is here and it's queer, and they're old guard who are going to die out. Viral videos are really starting to become a big part of how artists get noticed. YouTube and Niconico and stuff. Who even cares about TV anymore?"

"A lot of people," Rise sighed resignedly. "Especially in rural areas — which will also be the same people who don't want to see me dating a woman. Just not kids our age as much as we used to."

"Well… okay, yeah, that's true."

"It's okay, though. The future isn't for old people, it's for us. Me being who I am, dating who I want to date, is part of pushing forward, y'know? Not that I want to be some big activist… I don't know enough about that stuff. Not as much as you probably do. But I'm not going to hide who I am just because some old people tell me I have to; I've done enough of that for a lifetime. Now I just want to figure out the real Rise and love her, and show the world who she is."

Though she had finished and gone back to eating a moment later, waiting for Ai to respond, she never did. So eventually she glanced up to see her simply smiling across the table at her, elbows leaning on its surface as her mascara-laden eyelashes fluttered a little.

"What?"

"Nothing. Just proud of what a bitch you can be when you need to."

"Huh?! I'm not a bitch!"

"It's a compliment, dumbass. Bitches get shit done."

"Oh. Well, um… thank you?"

Ai chuckled at her for a moment, prompting Rise to kick her under the table. Then they both started flicking tiny bits of food at each other from across the tabletop until Yosuke asked what the hell they were doing, prompting a loud peal of laughter from them both. Even though at the time, Rise was mostly worried about her career and whether or not she was making the right steps, she would forever look back on that as a glorious moment she had shared with Ai Ebihara. With her girlfriend.

To Be Continued…

#we'll face ourselves #saphir de lune #forkanna writes #persona 4 fanfiction #p4 fanfic #rise x ai #jess the writer

2 notes · View notes

reading-while-queer · 4 years

Text

The Essential Dykes to Watch Out For, Alison Bechdel

Rating: Great Read Genre: Graphic Novel Representation: -Lesbian ensemble cast -Racially diverse ensemble cast Trigger warnings: Reclaimed D-slur, animal death, cheating, divorce, cancer, casual transphobia, biphobia, and ableism, difficult topics ranging from war to AIDS to 9/11. Note: Not YA; sexually explicit

If you’re familiar with Fun Home or Are You My Mother? you’ll know what I mean when I say that Dykes to Watch Out For is no entry level work - though Dykes to Watch Out For is difficult for different reasons. While Bechdel’s ruminations on her childhood, psyche, and sexuality require a decent amount of outside reading to be fully appreciated, Dykes to Watch Out For requires an equally rigorous knowledge of the political landscape of the past forty years.

But on the other hand, the more things change, the more they stay the same. The wars, elections, discourse, and protests are not so unfamiliar. If I had to pinpoint Dykes to Watch Out For’s continued importance to lesbians today in just one idea, it would be this: “Against the sweeping backdrop of history... everyday life pretty much continues” (371).

It’s not a major theme of the work, yet it is the shape of the final tapestry. Politics, discourse, trauma, and sickness make their ravages, and here we all are, much the same as we ever were 10, 20, 30 years ago: this pattern, far from intentional, emerges from the tide-like flow of 30 years of comics. But it’s why Dykes to Watch Out For is so special. And we have the privilege of going back to look into that reflection of the 80s, 90s, and 00s and recognize familiar features. The political scenery may be different (or, honestly, not so different) but has daily life changed much?

I first tried to read Dykes to Watch Out For as a curious high schooler, and my eyes glazed over. Without having absorbed enough recent history through cultural osmosis, nor having developed a taste for gray morality, I just didn’t get it. Two characters would have an argument on the page, both of them would make provocative points, and then Bechdel would refrain from telling her reader which was in the wrong. Neither character was a straw man; it almost felt like Bechdel was arguing with herself, trying to decide what was right - if there even was a right answer. I couldn’t wrap my mind around it, especially when the vocabulary and context were both tantalizingly out of reach.

Reading now, I found the once alien discourse all too familiar. The same exact discussions were being had in 1985 as are being hashed out on Twitter. One of a hundred examples is whether gay marriage is a buy-in to the privilege bestowed by heteronormativity. Bechdel asks if marriage is a patriarchal model that can be salvaged, but she doesn’t have an answer for you, just a prompt to chew on.

Another example is Bechdel’s discourse on the outliers of lesbian spheres: trans lesbians, trans men, genderqueer people, and bisexual lesbians (Would you believe that term is used in the text - and equally as contentiously?). These are conversations we are all very familiar with. However, this discourse is especially interesting in a work that took 30 years to write. The reader combs through 30 years of metamorphosis in just a handful of hours. Bechdel’s tongue-in-cheek “Whatever will they come up with next?” is printed in the same volume with genuine consternation on who is allowed to be a lesbian.

Trans women start as a punchline. But on most topics, Dykes to Watch Out For tends, eventually, to stop itself to re-evaluate. Thirty years later, one of the main characters IDs as genderqueer, finds herself meeting trans men and doing drag king shows, fights with her friends over their trans exclusivity, and in the end, ends up advocating for and co-parenting a teenage trans girl, who ends up a main character in her own right. It’s one of Bechdel’s firmer positions on right and wrong, although she doesn’t hesitate to mouth the opposite argument, too.

Plenty of sympathetic characters say transphobic things which just hang in the air, unaddressed. It’s maddening - but in sticking with the material, I got to see the characters who flubbed the pronouns and complained about gender confusion eventually get in line - changes which are not commented upon and happen so gradually in the thirty years over which the comic was written, that they mimic how change happens in real life. In our own lives, change may seem impossible, but then you blink, a decade has passed since you first came out, and half the homophobes have come around. Much the same for Dykes to Watch Out For, which is almost as much a memoir as Fun Home (albeit of Bechdel’s discourse rather than her life). I think every cisgender lesbian should read it - it’s a powerful antidote against TERFism, not because it lays down the law, but because it meets you where you are and gives you the chance to say your piece without ridicule, before taking you by the hand and showing you something kinder. If Dykes to Watch Out For has anything to teach us, it’s that hard lines in the sand make you look like a dick thirty years later. Take Sparrow’s story arc. Mo, Lois, and Ginger are thrown when their friend Sparrow starts dating a man. They say some rotten things about how betrayed they are, how they don’t know if they can trust Sparrow anymore, or her politics - but when they are overheard, the “discourse” suddenly becomes real. That’s their friend, and her feelings are hurt. What else can you do for your friend who has spent decades of her life as a lesbian, whose identity is culturally and socially interwoven with lesbianism, and who identifies as a bisexual lesbian - except love her?

A frequent lesson is that anyone can be reactionary - even the left-est of leftists. Years later, when Sparrow faces an accidental pregnancy, her friends overwhelmingly pressure her to keep the baby, not because of their politics, but because of their excitement - yet the impact, if not the intent, is anti-choice. It’s ideas like these being brought to the forefront that make Dykes to Watch Out For something special.

In her introduction to the book, Bechdel frets over both keeping up with the changing current of discourse (XVI)

...and her own role in shaping that discourse (XVII)

But her work speaks for itself: if we are to do right by one another, we must prioritize one another, not the rules. The same conversations will be had again, and again, and again, from 1983 until we all go blue in the face. We can’t control someone angrily shouting into the room (or Twitter timeline) “but WHAT about BISEXUAL LESBIANS?” and the chaos that follows - but we can accept that someone will shout it again in twenty years, and that the following chaos will be so nearly identical to the previous chaos as to challenge whether it is chaos at all, or just the universe putting on a matinee performance of the same old song and dance. Is it useful to put on your tap shoes and sing along? Or do you end up hurting the feelings of a genuine friend who just happens to be one of the outliers this time around?

Dykes to Watch Out For is thought-provoking (as you can see, my thoughts have been well and truly provoked), occasionally in poor taste, but mostly surprisingly sympathetic, both to its more marginalized characters, and to its wrong-doers - this comic doesn’t have any villains. The initial gag, that Bechdel would write a catalog of lesbians like a lepidopterist giving clinical attention to a series of specimens, works to her favor. There are no bad lesbians and good lesbians. At least, not essentially. This approach lends Dykes to Watch Out For more staying power than it might otherwise have had - it’s relatable. You know these people. You’ve had some of these arguments, and hurt each other’s feelings over them. Your friends live in the mildewy house that’s kept at 64 degrees in the winter, where you’re as likely to be walked in on in the bathroom as not, a home where everyone in the friend group feels free to stop by.

Here in the future, we have the immense privilege of watching how these parallel lives to ours play out. The Essential Dykes to Watch Out For may be a comic for a different generation, but Bechdel has given us something fascinating from both a history and literary perspective. She has put to paper a sprawling epic about lesbians growing from their twenties to their forties, getting married (or not), progressing their careers, having children, having PTA meetings, having affairs, and doing civil disobedience with their kids. Rarely do we see the map from here to there laid out so meticulously. I read this book voraciously, both the earlier chapters that relate to life as a new adult, and the later chapters, which serve as a window into what life was, and could be.

For more from Alison Bechdel, visit her Twitter here.

#the essential dykes to watch out for #alison bechdel #lesbian #great read #graphic novel #protagonist of color #not ya #reviews only

84 notes · View notes

tellthemeerkatsitsfine · 3 years

Text

Okay, so I have decided to spend Trump’s last day in office watching Frankie Boyle’s stand-up. I’m almost 20 minutes into his show from 2008, and I’m finding it absolutely hilarious but I’m also feeling the need to justify laughing at it because obviously the jokes are incredibly offensive. So I’m going to post a quick justification here so I feel better about that and can go back to enjoying it. Is this going to be a proper analysis of the nuance we’re allowed to have in our views about the media we consume, or am I just cynically trying to explain around my hypocrisy so I can enjoy something I wanted to enjoy anyway? I don’t know, it’s 2021, nothing is real anymore.

When I was a teenager, I was a girl who was very much a tomboy. I was just working out that I was a lesbian or bisexual or maybe a lesbian or maybe bisexual (went back and forth on that for way too many years before deciding it’s not a big deal to just settle into a bisexual identity even if that word doesn’t perfectly encapsulate the reality of “bi because I’m attracted to men and woman but in many ways lean more toward gay because I’d never go looking for guys to date, I mean I would be theoretically open to being with a guy but only if a really good opportunity to do so fell in my lap and when I actually picture myself being with a hypothetical person it’s always a woman”). My best friend until I was about fourteen years old was my badass hippie feminist grandmother. So the point is the even though in the mid-00s teenagers were not nearly as aware of inequality and feminism and all that as teenagers are today, I encountered enough sexism and homophobia for it to be a significant issue in my life.

I remember being thirteen years old and telling my grandmother that I didn’t like a girl I’d met who wore skirts and makeup because her dressing like that made people expect all girls to dress like that and that made life harder for girls like me. She had a talk with me about how the people making life hard for me were the men and women who put expectations on girls, not the other girls. And how feminism meant women shouldn’t tear each other down. This led to a bunch more discussions between us about the meaning of feminism and how to be a good person. And then I started learning about how people who are not like me, like people of colour and people with physical disabilities and people from low-income families, face all kinds of problems I don’t have and I would be a better person if I acted with awareness of that.

That is how I ended up having strong views about my stance on nuanced social justice issues before I started high school. In high school, I made friends (besides my wonderful grandmother) for the first time and most of them were straight guys. I decided my policy on jokes was that anything people said, no matter how offensive, was fine as long as they were kidding. I took issue with the things people did, and with the things people said when they weren’t joking. This means I fought plenty of feminist battles in high school, against other teenagers and adults who didn’t treat girls fairly. But I maintained that I had no problem with people who I knew did not actually treat people unfairly, and just made off-colour jokes.

Since then, I’ve learned a whole lot more about how the world works, and the main thing that’s changed that policy is I’ve realized that thinking people “aren’t really like that” can’t be the default assumption. One guy who was a close friend of mine from the ages of 19 to 25 used to make sexist jokes, including rape jokes, all the time. I laughed at them, knowing they were okay coming from him because he wasn’t really like that. Then he sexually assaulted my female roommate and myself and the rest of our (mostly male) friend group cut him out of our lives. We all had talks about all the jokes he’d made, all the times we’d laughed along with him and hadn’t realized we were reinforcing the ideas of someone who did actually think those things were okay.

There have been lots of other, much smaller examples of that. Friends whose jokes I thought were funny because I assumed they were just jokes, and then over the years it turned out they weren’t just jokes. At some point, I started to be automatically suspicious of anyone who makes jokes at the expense of people who are more marginalized than they are (yeah, I’m talking about the basic “prejudice + power” and “don’t punch down” theory that makes the Tumblr in Action types hate woke snowflakes such as myself). And that’s pretty much where I’m at now. I have a problem with people who make jokes that “punch down” not because I think jokes like that are always bad, but because I’ve learned not to trust that the people who make those jokes are really 100% kidding. I’ve learned how often people I encounter are really playing Schrödinger's Douchebag.

Having said that, while I’ve lost some friends over the years who have turned out to be terrible people, I am now pretty confident that the friends I have left are genuinely “not like that”. The friends I have left are people with whom I’ve had long and involved conversations about political shit, and I know we’re all the same page. Those friends are still mostly straight guys, because straight guys aren’t all bad. It’s just that a lot of the bad people out there (not nearly all of them, though, of course) are straight guys.

Okay. So. Here’s my argument to justify how much I enjoy Frankie Boyle’s stand-up. He’s got credentials. He is openly very left wing on social issues. He uses his platform to say so, and he has backed that up with good actions. None of those things mean it can’t turn out to have all been a front – yeah, it’s completely possible that it’ll come out that he really has done bad things and/or said bad things while not joking, and if that’s the case then I’ll change my stance on him. If it turns out he’s actually harassed disabled people, or even just said awful things about them and meant those things, then hearing him make jokes about disabled people will not make me laugh anymore.

But as it is, whenever he’s not joking he’s doing the right thing. And this means I can, for the moment, assume that when he is joking, he’s an example of the way I thought the whole world worked when I was younger. When I had my policy of not having a problem with offensive jokes as long as the people saying them were kidding. Before I learned that most people who say those things as a joke do actually mean them on some level as well. It seems like he doesn’t.

Also, most of his jokes actually take aim at the worst parts of our culture more than at the victims themselves. Like that joke for which he got in trouble about those two reality show-type celebrities not wanting their disabled son. The joke there is that we’ve created a world that celebrates people who are so image-obsessed that they wouldn’t want a disabled son. The follow-up joke about the cage fighter husband needing to protect his wife... yeah, when it comes to defending that one, I got nothing.

I’ve also been affected in the last few years by how stifling politeness can be. I have encountered so fucking many people who do awful things with whatever power they have, who say awful things behind closed doors when they’re not joking, but who are careful in public to not make off-colour jokes. To say the right thing. And they get away with it incredibly often. They get away with maintaining a reputation as good people just because they never say offensive shit, no matter how many bad things they do.

People like that absolutely hate people like Frankie Boyle. Because people like Frankie Boyle call attention to them. The joke that actually made me stop and write this post was his joke about pedophile teachers. I know so many people who are in positions of power and use those positions of power to protect and enable actual sexual predators of minors, but would never make a joke about pedophiles (well, not where people outside their close circle can hear them, anyway). And if they heard Frankie Boyle’s joke about how many teachers are pedophiles, they’d be furious. They’d say that’s offensive because it makes light of pedophilia. When really they’re mad because they don’t want people making jokes that call attention to how widespread the problem is.

I also learned in the beginning of his 2008 show that he used to be a care worker for disabled people, which makes a lot of sense to me. I was a PSW for people with varying degrees of disabilities for three years. My job was to physically help people who couldn’t get dressed, shower, use the toilet, stuff like that. Working that closely where the rubber actually hits the road teaches you how, for the people involved, no aspect of life is off limits. Several of the clients were paralyzed from the neck down, and based on their senses of humour I can say they’d love Frankie Boyle and especially love his jokes about disability. Not because “they can take a joke about themselves”, but because they themselves often made jokes of the kind that Frankie Boyle makes, where the point of the joke is to highlight the fact that they live in a world that hates people like them. Obviously I don’t pretend the people I knew represent all disabled people in the world, and the voice of any individual disabled person who says they’re hurt by Frankie Boyle’s jokes about disabled people is more important than anything I have to say on the subject. I’m just saying there are lot of ways to interpret it.

Okay, that’s my justification for enjoying this show. I’m not sure if it was quite good enough, but it’s the best I can do. I’m going to go back to enjoying it now.

1 note · View note

pattyg1992 · 4 years

Text

What Not Being Part of The “Scene” Means

I hear plenty of Gay and Bisexual men who say they’re not a part of the “Scene”, the larger LGBT community. Initially I believed these people were just being ignorant and self-hating but now I realize it’s more complicated than that. The heterosexual community has always been confused about the differences between sexuality (gay, lesbian, and bisexual) and gender identity (transsexual, transgender, non-binary). For the most part they’ve lumped them all together and from necessity, these different communities have come together for survival.

However, as much as these two communities overlap, they’re also separate. There are men and women who are attracted to the same gender but take on traditional gender roles (masculinity and femininity) just like there are people who identify to gender roles opposite to what they’re born as but their sexuality could be identified as straight. Both communities are just as similar as they are different. United by going against what’s considered mainstream, divided by their respective identities.

In the homo/bisexual male community, when men say they’re not part of the “scene” it means while they’re comfortable with identifying as gay or bisexual, they’re not comfortable being considered the same as men with feminine traits or others who identify as other genders or no gender at all. The LGBT community as a whole typically revolves around sexual and gender identify and there’s a subsection that wishes it would just focus strictly on sexual identity.

There are several reasons for this. Some believe the homosexual community would be more accepted by the Straight community if they focused exclusively on sexuality and conformed to gender traits and norms. Others have the same prejudices towards the trans community as their straight counterparts (similar to how racism in the LGBT community is as common in the Straight community).

I have no problem uniting the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual community with the Trans community. Many of our problems overlap together. At the same time think the world could also benefit with learning the difference between sexuality and gender identity. I’m a gay man, attracted to men, with masculine traits. That doesn’t mean I identify as a woman or want to dress in clothes outside of my chosen gender. Many people (especially in the Conservative community) consider it one in the same. For example, I’m attracted to men so I must wish I was a woman which isn’t true for everyone including me.

There should be more attempts at differentiating between homosexuality and trans identity without alienating the latter. Those who want to remain separate from the “scene” may justifiably want to have their own identity separate from the trans community, but they should be careful how to respect those who are different (whether they understand transsexuality or not). Those in the Straight community still have trouble understanding homosexuality even if it may appear to be less radical than the trans community. Both groups are united because they’re lives are considered “other” by the mainstream world, even if homosexuality is slowly becoming more acceptable.

#gender identity #sexuality #lgbt #the scene #gay community #masc #fem #trans #transgender #transexual #lesbian #gay #bisexual

3 notes · View notes

all-things-lgbtqia · 4 years

Text

Why the Nickelodeon Pride Tweet isn’t as Confusing as Everyone Says it is

On June 13, Nickelodeon released the above Tweet featuring rainbow patterns on three Nickelodeon characters: Schwoz Schwartz from Henry Danger, Korra from The Legend of Korra, and, our subject for today’s discussion, SpongeBob from SpongeBob SquarePants. The caption reads, “Celebrating #Pride with the LGBTQ+ community and their allies this month and every month”. This entire Tweet seems to have confused many a media outlet, and even if you know the truth about SpongeBob’s LGBTQIA+ status, you can’t blame the uneducated for being confused. Let’s clear up that confusion, shall we?

First of all, I really feel like the wording on this Tweet was a mistake. Don’t get me wrong, I love my allies, but pride month is about celebrating the LGBTQIA+ community, not our allies. This is kind of like wishing someone and their entire family a happy birthday. Plus, this wording has been the culprit in tripping a lot of people up. One of the ways people have interpreted this post is that SpongeBob is actually an LGBTQIA+ ally, and although I have no doubt SpongeBob would be supportive of his friends if they came out as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, etc., I really don’t think that’s Nick’s point. Plus if only three of the characters in their entire pantheon would be considered allies, that would look really bad.

So let’s take a closer look at these characters. That will really clarify the use of all the rainbows. Korra is, of course, bisexual, and this reveal at the very end of the series really [pleasantly] shocked a lot of people. Even though the last episodes premiered online, the creators could only get away with so much if their two female leads kissed onscreen, and although a lot of people see it as a copout today, it’s important to remember that this was the best they could do at the time. LGBTQIA+ representation has, for a long time in media (especially for children), been about pushing that line more and more to increase what creators could get away with. Korra is the first Nickelodeon character to be confirmed on-screen to be LGBTIA+, and we shouldn’t take credit away because her coming out is no longer up to our standards. Schwoz I had to look up, because even though his actor, Michael D. Cohen, was assigned female at birth and underwent surgeries and hormone therapy to appear more masculine (I have to say that in interviews, Cohen has stated that he does not identify as transgender, which is why I don’t say he’s transgender here, but that he did have a transgender experience; although said experience fits the definition of “transgender”, it would be wrong of me to put that label on someone who does not want it), that doesn’t mean the character himself was also assigned female at birth. I went to the character’s Wiki page and found that all his love interests were women, so I scrolled down to trivia and found that Schwoz “will be transgender in the future, according to future Ray...”. This happens in the episode “Ox Pox”, whose synopsis can be viewed here. What is important to note is that the episode premiered in 2016 whereas Cohen came out in 2019, so this likely wasn’t a jab at his identity (or at the very least I am hoping it wasn’t). Finally, the sponge himself, SpongeBob SquarePants, is asexual.

SpongeBob Squarepants is asexual.

SpongeBob’s sexuality has been up for debate for years. We live in a society where any male character that doesn’t immediately express outward affection towards a female character, he must be gay. When asked about this in a 2002 interview with The Wall Street Journal, creator Steven Hillenburg said that he believed the characters, especially SpongeBob, to be asexual. For a children’s show, that makes sense (after all, it would be really inappropriate for sexual desire to be expressed on a kids’ show). Because the article is effectively behind a paywall, you can read an article from People that says basically the same thing here. The show actually has a bit of proof of this. If we look throughout the show’s run, we can find a lot of characters end up in romantic relationships or with romantic feelings for another character, but SpongeBob doesn’t have feelings for anyone other than a Krabby patty in an episode we’d all rather pretend doesn’t exist (but click the link if you’ve somehow forgotten and are curious, I guess). Mr. Krabs, of course, develops feelings for and even enters into a romantic relationship with Mrs. Puff, Patrick develops a crush on Princess Mindy in The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie, Squidward goes on a date with a lady octopus (and SpongeBob even helps him practice), Plankton is married to his computer wife Karen, Pearl is a teenage girl and frequently fawns over various boys, and even SpongeBob’s pet snail Gary is seen crushing on other snails. It seems that Sandy and SpongeBob are the only main characters that don’t end up with love interests at any point in the show. Even if we want to pretend that “To Love a Patty” exists and totally wasn’t a shared fever dream, it’s important to note that asexual people are completely capable of falling in love and sustaining romantic relationships; they just don’t experience a sex drive the same way non-asexual people do. From what I’ve noticed from personal experience, asexual people also tend to care very dearly for their friends, which is apparent in plenty of pre-first movie episodes as well as post-Hillenburg’s return episodes. In fact, the Valentine’s Day episode is all about SpongeBob giving all his friends Valentines, and saving the best one for his best friend Patrick. All the evidence we need is in the show.

So, why the rainbow flag?

The rainbow flag represents all LGBTQIA+ identities

The original rainbow flag was lovingly dyed and stitched together by a large group of people, including lesbians (including lesbian transgender women, and don’t you forget it!), gay men, transgender and non-binary people, and yes, even asexuals. It was meant as a symbol for us all. It represents all non-hetero and non-cisgender identities. The flags that followed exist in part to help express all the unique identities that fall under the rainbow. Think of it like the United States flag. The Star-Spangled Banner represents all of the country of the United States, but every state within has its own flag. Just because I’m from New Jersey doesn’t mean I’m not allowed to fly the US flag on Independence Day. Or any day of the year because we Americans sure do like our flag. And just because Schwoz is transgender, Korra is bisexual, and SpongeBob is asexual, doesn’t mean they’re not allowed to use the rainbow flag. So no, SpongeBob isn’t a straight ally, and he isn’t gay, either; SpongeBob is asexual, and we’re proud to call him a member of the LGBTQIA+ community.

#SpongeBob #SpongeBob SquarePants #gay #asexual #Nickelodeon #Tweet #Twitter #confusion #it's actually pretty simple #Schwoz #Henry Danger #Korra #Legend of Korra #LGBTQIA #pride #SpongeBob is asexual

1 note · View note