gnc-sideblog-is

[gnc-sideblog-is]

I saw that anyone who likes harry potteer should not interact, and i feel like that could be a bit problematic. If you like harry potter but don't support JK rowling it feels (i dont want to say stupid but its the only word i can think of rn) to not let you interact with the blog. That's just my opinion and its not like i like harry potter (i dont) anyways it just feels like an odd specification

Don’t like it; don’t stick around. Feel free to block.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

So what I’ve learned from the past couple months of being really loud about being a bi woman on Tumblr is: A lot of young/new LGBT+ people on this site do not understand that some of the stuff they’re saying comes across to other LGBT+ people as offensive, aggressive, or threatening. And when they actually find out the history and context, a lot of them go, “Oh my god, I’m so sorry, I never meant to say that.”

Like, “queer is a slur”: I get the impression that people saying this are like… oh, how I might react if I heard someone refer to all gay men as “f*gs”. Like, “Oh wow, that’s a super loaded word with a bunch of negative freight behind it, are you really sure you want to put that word on people who are still very raw and would be alarmed, upset, or offended if they heard you call them it, no matter what you intended?”

So they’re really surprised when self-described queers respond with a LOT of hostility to what feels like a well-intentioned reminder that some people might not like it. 

That’s because there’s a history of “political lesbians”, like Sheila Jeffreys, who believe that no matter their sexual orientation, women should cut off all social contact with men, who are fundamentally evil, and only date the “correct” sex, which is other women. Political lesbians claim that relationships between women, especially ones that don’t contain lust, are fundamentally pure, good, and  unproblematic. They therefore regard most of the LGBT community with deep suspicion, because its members are either way too into sex, into the wrong kind of sex, into sex with men, are men themselves, or somehow challenge the very definitions of sex and gender. 

When “queer theory” arrived in the 1980s and 1990s as an organized attempt by many diverse LGBT+ people in academia to sit down and talk about the social oppressions they face, political lesbians like Jeffreys attacked it harshly, publishing articles like “The Queer Disappearance of Lesbians”, arguing that because queer theory said it was okay to be a man or stop being a man or want to have sex with a man, it was fundamentally evil and destructive. And this attitude has echoed through the years; many LGBT+ people have experience being harshly criticized by radical feminists because being anything but a cis “gold star lesbian” (another phrase that gives me war flashbacks) was considered patriarchal, oppressive, and basically evil.

And when those arguments happened, “queer” was a good umbrella to shelter under, even when people didn’t know the intricacies of academic queer theory; people who identified as “queer” were more likely to be accepting and understanding, and “queer” was often the only label or community bisexual and nonbinary people didn’t get chased out of. If someone didn’t disagree that people got to call themselves queer, but didn’t want to be called queer themselves, they could just say “I don’t like being called queer” and that was that. Being “queer” was to being LGBT as being a “feminist” was to being a woman; it was opt-in.

But this history isn’t evident when these interactions happen. We don’t sit down and say, “Okay, so forty years ago there was this woman named Sheila, and…” Instead we queers go POP! like pufferfish, instantly on the defensive, a red haze descending over our vision, and bellow, “DO NOT TELL ME WHAT WORDS I CANNOT USE,” because we cannot find a way to say, “This word is so vital and precious to me, I wouldn’t be alive in the same way if I lost it.” And then the people who just pointed out that this word has a history, JEEZ, way to overreact, go away very confused and off-put, because they were just trying to say.

But I’ve found that once this is explained, a lot of people go, “Oh wow, okay, I did NOT mean to insinuate that, I didn’t realize that I was also saying something with a lot of painful freight to it.”

And that? That gives me hope for the future.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

I know you aren't responible for my mental health, I had sent that while in a panic, I'm sorry, I should've made that clear, I am trying to find more spaces, again I'm sorry to put that on you, and thank you being here for me before this all happened

Apology taken.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

I may not be in the right place exactly, but I see you answering some questions regarding aromantics and asexuals. I’m neither, but have had the honestly confusing and good experience of being appealing to both. It’s hard for me to understand what has happened in my life because of this. I thought the result would be friendship.

I understand there are different types and degrees of aromantic and asexual. That was made clear to me. I thought I knew what I was doing but humans are complicated.

I started getting red roses and love notes from someone who told me they were arom. I tried to tell myself it was not meant romantically. After a heated exchange about how thick-headed I must be, it was obvious that these were def romantic gestures.

Something similar happened with a very out asexual person, though I was told they were behaving sexually aggressively because they thought I’d like it, not because they felt like that.

I am now so attuned to the variety within each group that I am one confused gnc dude. I feel paralyzed socially.

Everyone has the right to change and learn about themselves. This possibility of changing over time, sure, that could make sense for some.

I understand you’re not here as some kind of love column. At least that’s what I think I understand. Do you have any general advice on how to proceed after two misunderstandings like this? We communicated, I swear. We said we were being open. I wish it didn’t but both times it hurt.

If I’m not asking the right people, do you know someone who could guide me away from whatever I did wrong, if I did? Everyone is different, maybe that’s the answer, but I did not expect this. Maybe things change fast? I’m lost.

I can’t say we’re a love column at all, and honestly, I’m none too sure how to answer this. For future reference, please don’t come to us asking for relationship advice.

Talk to your aro friend and your ace friend and make what you expect clear, and learn what they want. That’s all I can tell you. Good luck.

@aro-culture-is @ace-culture-is might help a little more? perhaps also ask people around you, or friends of these two.

- Mod Rob

[gnc-sideblog-is]

Sissification, also known as forced feminization, is a fetish with a few key themes.

1) The feminization and forced transition of men

2) female domination

3) men with smaller genitals or effeminate traits are women/should be women/are lesser men, and men with larger genitals are “real men.”

4) sexuality/gender play- in this case, “turning” a straight man into a straight woman, or into a man who has sex with other men.

While there are accompanying traits found in this fetish, I do not feel comfortable fully diving into them.

Frankly, while I am sure there are people who have fully come into their identities through this kind of play, it makes me and Jack rather uncomfortable. We have a post in our pinned as to why it does. That post could probably be worded better, and is a little out of date. I, Mod Rob, am now an adult. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a record of what was under the cut for posterity.

I hope you don't mind me asking but what is sissification?

Oh boy.. It is a sexual fetish surrounding a few different power dynamics. For the sake of the people who don’t want to see the definition following us, I am putting a more detailed description under the cut, so they don’t have to.

Sissification, also known as forced feminization, is a fetish with a few key themes.

1) The feminization and forced transition of men

2) female domination

3) men with smaller genitals or effeminate traits are women/should be women/are lesser men, and men with larger genitals are “real men.”

4) sexuality/gender play- in this case, “turning” a straight man into a straight woman, or into a man who has sex with other men.

While there are accompanying traits found in this fetish, I do not feel comfortable fully diving into them.

Frankly, while I am sure there are people who have fully come into their identities through this kind of play, it makes me and Jack rather uncomfortable. We have a post in our pinned as to why it does. That post could probably be worded better, and is a little out of date. I, Mod Rob, am now an adult.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

hey if you call people traumascum or sysmeds you probably shouldn’t be following us.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

the post about the terms "sysmed" and "traumascum" from the main blog's pinned post appears to have vanished into thin air. could you re-explain those terms for the ones in the back?

Ah! Skill issue on my end. Here’s the archived version of that link; I’ll fix the pinned post.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

forgive me for asking, but why is sysmed transphobic? ik traumascum is bad for obvious reasons, but sysmed is defined as those who see systems as an exclusively medical thing right?

Yep! it’s the particular way it’s used in the intracommunity context and the way it’s likened to transmeds ( they’re often lumped together ) and you… can see why saying that being transgender and/or transsex is a mental illness is transphobic, i’m sure. The two simply aren’t comparable phenomenons when it comes to medicine.

No harm in asking! it’s not always a widely known thing, and requires a context that I hope I could provide.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

Do you support endogenic systems or do i need to unfollow?? Sorry, I can't seem to determine if these recent posts mean you're against endo systems or if you just don't like the terms traumascum/sysmed

I dislike those terms. With regards to endogenic systems, I believe that they do exist, that they are experiencing something, but the “endogenic” label is damaging— The overall community seems to be rather toxic, and anti-recovery. Whether or not these systems exist isn’t the issue, if you think there are multiple people in your body, there’s definitely something happening.

Take that however you will.

mod rob

[gnc-sideblog-is]

Hey, not prev anon, but I want to thank you for speaking up about this. As a survivor of several types of abuse I tend to feel incredibly unsafe in online spaces because of the romantization of the exact trauma I've experienced, so knowing you are against this kind of thing makes me feel safer and reassured, so again, sincerely thank you

This is a safe place for trauma survivors, I am glad we could make you feel more safe.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

Panic anon here, I think you misunderstand me, I'm not afraid of you going anywhere, I was panicking because you'll eventually block me and I'll lose what I gained from this blog, I saw your post about pro-shippers, and while I've never referred to myself with that label, I know I count as one, I'm against shipping purity culture and believe in the validity of portraying toxic and abusive relationships, this blog is my home and I'm just waiting for the day I'm kicked out, that's why I panicked

I will apologize for the cruelty in my tone, and will not go on a tirade about how that term, “purity culture,” was co-opted from cult survivors to describe people being uncomfortable with supporters of incest and abusive relationships. Not today, at least.

This blog has always avidly been against people who support and celebrate incest pairings, pedophilia (not a 17 and 19 year old. A child and an adult.), and abusive relationship dynamics.

There are very compelling reasons to write about dark subjects, but they have to be treated seriously. If someone constantly makes light of one partner abusing another, even in fiction?!That affects real people. That prevents people from seeking help, or recognizing their own behavior as bad. the stories we tell each other matter. The stories we tell eachother teach lessons- And I cannot in good consciousness accept people who teach the lesson “this harmful thing is okay, this will make you feel better, make you happy.”

I don’t want you here; you pose a legitimate danger.

That said, I am sorry that you are being kicked out, as every human being deserves a home.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

Gnc culture is having a panic attack because of the looming threat that this blog, the only place that you can feel like you, can be taken away at any moment, trapping you back in your life you were living before finding this group

This is the ask I had referred to earlier, and I will answer as if I was not aware of the context.

I am sorry that you feel so distressed, and there will always be spaces for you. As I said earlier? This blog is going nowhere. This goes for everyone who reads this.

I do need to make it perfectly clear that you all cannot rely on us to be responsible for your mental health, though.

- Mod Rob

[gnc-sideblog-is]

Reminder! This is not a pro-shipper friendly space! GNC or not, you are unwelcome here.

While, undoubtedly, there is merit in dark fiction, and exploring themes of abuse and harm? Explicit celebration and romanticizing of incestious, abusive, and pedophillic ships, is not welcome here, and is not excusable.

( That doesn't mean you cannot have conflict, or that pairing a 17 and 18 together is somehow disgusting, it means that when one party is unequivocally harmful to the other, or will cause longlasting trauma, and you support and celebrate that? We don't want you here, and will remove you from our spaces. )

This is, intentionally, and purposefully, a safe place, and proshippers are not what we consider to be safe.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

hey i was wondering exactly what you meant by pro-ship? like shipping characters in general? or just shipping abusive/incestous things

Shipping incestous/abusive/pedophillic relations. Shipping itself? Fine and dandy. I think it can be a wonderful tool for character analysis and a fun way to relate to and interact with the text.

- Mod Rob

[gnc-sideblog-is]

Reminder! This is not a pro-shipper friendly space! GNC or not, you are unwelcome here.

While, undoubtedly, there is merit in dark fiction, and exploring themes of abuse and harm? Explicit celebration and romanticizing of incestious, abusive, and pedophillic ships, is not welcome here, and is not excusable.

( That doesn't mean you cannot have conflict, or that pairing a 17 and 18 together is somehow disgusting, it means that when one party is unequivocally harmful to the other, or will cause longlasting trauma, and you support and celebrate that? We don't want you here, and will remove you from our spaces. )

This is, intentionally, and purposefully, a safe place, and proshippers are not what we consider to be safe.

[gnc-sideblog-is]

Okay. I of course, agree with you 100% that discriminating against trans people is the definition of transphobia, and is therefore extremely bad. My understanding of the word 'transmed' is that it indicates a trans person who discriminates against other trans people for experiencing their transness in a different way to them; for example, not experiencing dysphoria, not wanting to completely transition to a different binary gender, or for being gender non-conforming. /gen

There's more depth to it than that; a tenament of the ideology is that being transgender is a disorder. Which, while it WAS included in the DSM, so was homosexuality, and I think we can all agree being gay is just... something that happens. That, because it's a disorder, means the only paths are misery forever and ever, or transition, and that anyone who is transgender and/or transsex who doesn't experience dysphoria.. isn't transgender, but claiming to be for reasons unknown, and also, nonbinary people can't exist because of this, or were lied to and manipulated. But, I digress. So, yes, essentially! But you can see, hopefully, why I do think that transmeds are transphobic. Being transgender isn't a choice, or morally charged, or a disorder, it's just something that /is./

[gnc-sideblog-is]

wait ppl like??? seriously use the term “traumascum”???? i thought that was like,, parody?? like the only time i’ve ever seen it in use was by an anti endo on a parody account so i figured that was all it was?? like a term used to make fun of ppl who say sysmed?? but it’s a real term????? /gen (also is it ok to keep following if i usually say anti endo m, and only use sysmed in very specific and private contexts? /gen)

yes, it’s real. And, no, it is not. - Mod Rob