#IS ITSELF a function of biphobia??

[lith-myathar]

.

[yallemagne]

Okay, that's good to hear.

The queerbaiting accusation is ridiculous. If this game were advertising itself as a gay dating sim then sure, but that's never what it claimed or set out to be, and that's apparent in the execution. I felt some queer vibes of course, but with the game taking place over only a week, I don't think it would be possible to have Rody get over both his obsession with Manon and internalized biphobia and fall in love with Vince. He's still down bad for Manon in every single ending. Not to mention, for these two to have a dynamic even approaching functional, they'd need so much therapy prior... and we know neither of them would touch therapy. That's why fanfiction is fun because fans can either play with the timeline to make a romantic plot more plausible or just throw caution to the wind and have the men kiss out of nowhere.

I got conflicted because it was said that the story would have played out the exact same even if they weren't queer. I'm kinda of the opinion that if you write a character to be queer, it affects the story no matter what. That does not mean the story must suddenly revolve around romance or sex or gender, but that the story and characters would have a slightly different feel to them if they were straight instead. You totally could write the same story with an entirely straight cast but it would feel different. I really can't separate Vincent from his queerness, but at the same time, that does not mean I view every action of his under the lens of him being a lovestruck yandere. His motivations are much more complicated than "Rody <3". I feel like him being gay and Rody being bi shape the narrative but just not in a way that leads to a romance.

Since you confirmed Rody and Vince as both queer, I was wondering: did you write them with the idea of them being queer in your head, or was this an afterthought bc of the fan’s reactions?

Their sexualities were already a part of the characters back in February 2023 long before the game was developed and released. For example Rody being bisexual was always there as a fact as shown in the screenshot below which is from my private discord server where I store character infos/drafts:

Their sexualities weren't brought up in the game because it wasn't relevant to the story + they are characters who just happens to be queer and regardless of their sexuality the events in the game would still happen/remain the same, one doesn't effect the other. Instead of heavily highlighting it we wanted to treat it as another piece of fun fact since their sexualities doesn't define their character/personality.

We will never change or add anything to our characters or narratives just because of fan's reactions or suggestions, we only tell stories we want to tell!

[vampish-glamour]

Hiya! I'm new to your wonderful corner of the internet, and I hope you don't mind if I ask a lot of questions lol. Firstly, what do you think of pan vs bi? The only satisfying answer I have gotten as to the differences (besides subjective stuff like feeeeeeling like you value their gender or whatever) is that a pan person would f*ck intersex/enbies, while bi people wouldn't. I'm curious what you think. Second, do you think that the LGBs are ever going to have a satisfying split from the Ts/the gender fandom? What kind of steps would we take to accomplish that?

Hi, and welcome! I don’t mind questions at all. 😄

I’m strongly against the concept of pansexuality.

I believe that the label is rooted in biphobia and a misunderstanding of bisexuals.

The main arguments for the difference between bi and pan (off the top of my head) are as followed;

Bi means two, pan means all. Bisexuals are only attracted to two genders but pansexuals are attracted to all.

Bisexuals take gender into consideration when it comes to attraction. Pansexuals don’t.

Bisexuals care about parts, pansexuals care more about somebody’s personality. (“Hearts not parts”)

Bisexuals won’t date trans people, pansexuals will.

These are all either based on a misunderstanding of sexuality, or of bisexuals.

For the first one, I do agree that bi means two. But it means the two sexes, because sexuality is based off of sex (hence it being called SEXuality).

In the same way homosexual means same sex attracted, heterosexual means opposite sex attracted, and asexual means attracted to neither sex... bisexual means attracted to two/both sexes. And since there’s only two sexes, “pansexual” meaning “attracted to all sexes” is functionally the exact same thing as bisexuality.

Even if you believe in more than two genders (which I don’t), the attraction is still based off of sex characteristics... and on a biological level, there would be no difference in how a pansexual experiences attraction and how a bisexual experiences attraction.

For the second one, there are many bisexuals who don’t care about gender. There are many who have a preference. To say that all bisexuals have a preference is a misunderstanding of bisexuality. And, to say that preferences dictate sexuality is a misunderstanding of sexuality. Preferences or no preferences—it doesn’t change what sex(es) you are attracted to. If you are attracted to both sexes, you are bisexual. Your preferences or lack thereof don’t make or take away from your bisexuality.

For the third one, I just find this argument disgustingly biphobic, and in general an arrogant thing to say—that only one sexuality, pansexuality, cares about one’s personality over their body. Especially when the idea that bisexuals and homosexuals are obsessed with sex is a stereotype that has been fought against for years.

And once again, it’s a misunderstanding of sexuality. A straight woman who is more interested in sex than a guy’s personality isn’t suddenly a different sexuality. So why is this the case for bisexuals?

I believe it’s to escape the negative stereotypes that cloud over bisexuality. The idea that bisexuals are sex crazed and greedy, and only care about genitalia. It’s not a coincidence that pansexuality makes its entire brand off of distancing itself from these negative stereotypes.

It would be like if a bunch of homosexual women started calling themselves “samesexual”, and claimed that they’re different than homosexual women/lesbians because unlike lesbians, samesexuals aren’t predatory.

That sounds insanely homophobic, yes? If we can accept that creating a whole new “sexuality” to distance oneself from negative homosexual stereotypes is homophobic, we have to accept that creating a whole new “sexuality” to distance oneself from negative bisexual stereotypes is biphobic.

And the fourth argument, there’s not much to say here other than that this is plain transphobia. It separates trans people from cis people, placing trans men and women into a separate box away from “man” and “woman”

On top of this, being attracted to or not being attracted to trans people does not make a whole new sexuality, because trans people are not a third sex.

It’s also another misconception about bisexuality—because never have transsexuals not been in the bisexual dating pool.

Onto the next topic;

I don’t support “drop the T”.

This isn’t to say that I don’t think separating LGB and T for certain causes is helpful. For example; fighting for same sex marriage is an LGB issue, while fighting for accessible and affordable medical care for gender dysphoria is a T issue.

To be fair, I’m almost of the opinion that the large grouping itself isn’t really necessary, considering how different the experiences of homosexuals, bisexuals, and transsexuals are. But, I can understand why they’re all lumped together for a rights movement, especially because homophobia impacts everyone in the LGBT acronym. So since it’s here and it’s been here for a while, I’m in support of the full acronym being LGBT.

But as far as completely dropping the T goes... I believe that the push for this comes from a misunderstanding of transgender people, likely from the terrible representation they are given from people who aren’t actually transsexual.

Because the Ts and the gender fandom are two incredibly different groups, and although the distinction isn’t made often... it’s incredibly important for exactly this reason—that they get mixed together and it leads to hatred of trans people.

Transgender people/transsexuals are people who experience gender dysphoria. The goal of most trans people is to live a normal life as the gender their brain recognizes them to be. They have medical and mental health needs that are important to their quality of life. This is the crowd where you’re likely to find people who simply want to live their lives in peace.

The gender fandom, at least who I think you’re referring to, are people who don’t experience gender dysphoria, and often treat gender as an accessory, a performance, a fashion or political statement, etc. This is the crowd where you’ll find the neopronoun users, the obscure labels like “genderfluid”, and are unfortunately typically the people who get the spotlight over actual trans people.

Please do not confuse the two!

Look, I get it. Watching the second group run around and make LGBT people look like a joke is painful. But it is not the fault of transsexuals. Many trans people are just as annoyed as everyone else is, especially because they are directly being misrepresented (shown by how you and many others consider them to be one and the same with things like MOGAI).

So I won’t be advocating for dropping the T.

However, I do fully support from separating from MOGAI (or the “queer community” as many of them like to say), and I think the way to do that is to make a clear distinction between LGBT people, and QIA+ people. And making it clear that the T only includes dysphoric trans men/women.

It’s not about dropping the T. It’s about dropping everything after the T, and restoring the T to its original meaning.

We need more LGBT people to stand up against how the “queer community” is representing us, and to make it clear that the acronym is LGBT, and that the LGBT movement is a civil rights movement, not a “let’s all party and share our pronouns” movement.

Thanks to the “queer community”, LGBT people aren’t taken seriously. Thanks to the “gender fandom”, transsexuals are seen as a joke and a burden to the LGBT community. Both the “queer community” and “gender fandom” need to be separated and made distinct from the LGBT community, and this should be done with all four letters, not just three.

Tl;dr:

I’m against the pansexual label, and I believe it is inherently biphobic and often transphobic.

It also perpetuates harmful stereotypes about bisexuals and homosexuals.

I don’t support the “drop the T” movement.

The T gets a lot of misrepresentation, and I believe that misrepresentation is part of where the “drop the T” movement comes from.

It’s important to make a distinction between the LGBT movement and the modern day “queer community” if we ever want LGBT people to be taken seriously again.

[toomanyopinionss]

Ok, so I’m gonna be real with y’all...

I gave this slow the benefit of the doubt, DESPITE the ugly trailer, the whitewashing, etc. I really REALLY tried. But then I realized what they did wrong:

Bloom. I’ve seen this all TOO often. When the main girl has all of these issues and problems, and then the supporting characters... OH NO SORRY, the other MAIN CHARACTERS... have no CHOICE but to drop everything and and help her out. I mean, there was this one moment when they were in class, and Aisha was struggling with this assignment. Bloom had succeeded and I THOUGHT that she was gonna help Aisha out. Boy, was I wrong. This bitch made it all about her, everyone else’s problems be damned. She even went so far as to be upset when Aisha was trying to study and wasn’t listening to her complain about one thing or the other... my girl, THE WORLD DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND YOU. Ugh, so selfish.

Riven. What exactly is his character? At first glance, he seemed like a harmless bisexual guy who’s never sober and doesn’t like responsibility. But then he latched onto Beatrix (who we will get to later) and it’s like the show didn’t even know what to do with him!!! His friendship with Sky is forced at best, toxic at worst. His relationship with Dane brought to light the blatant biphobia, as well as homophobia in the show. Round of applause. I mean, in the beginning, riven told Beatrix that the only reason he was getting close to Dane was to embarrass him because of Dane’s SEXUAL ORIENTATION???!!! (please tell me if I read that wrong, I hope that I did. It’s 2021, what the fuck.)

The WiNx GiRlS. Wow. I don’t even know where to begin. So let me just list them off:

Stella is too Regina George for my liking, with no character development. Yes, I’m aware she had the entire situation with her mom, but I’m talking about her relationship with the girls specifically. When did she become friends with them?! Anyways...

Flora. Oh SORRY! Terra. I get what they were trying to do. Fatphobia still exists in the media today. I mean, I’m plus sized! But the way they portrayed her. The way they made her look like the most annoying girl in the room whenever she so much as opened her mouth. The bullying she received from people she was friends with in the past (I’m so serious. Apparently riven used to be friends with her or something, and then he was so quick to insult her... I don’t even know). I felt myself cringing through the entire series as her friends would consistently comment about how she’s “too much” or “her outfits aren’t it” or how “she’s so dramatic.” Disappointing.

Techna. Oops sorry, forgot. NEXT.

Musa. So... she’s an empath. An emo-empath. I don’t exactly know how to feel about this. I don’t even call her musa in my head, tbh. Where is her personality? Where is her backstory? Her opinions? Her beliefs? This show portrays itself as such a forward-looking, women empowerment type of show, but at the end of the day, it’s all talk no show. Musa’s entire character was defined by 3 things. Her powers. Her boyfriend. And her headphones.

Aisha. WHAT THE ACTUAL HELL. You’re really gonna sit there and tell me that this girl... the only girl who functions on COMMON SENSE, mind you... is supposed to be a main character. When she thinks about herself, for once, she’s selfish. When she does the right thing, she gets hate. Her powers are only used to assist bloom. Her exist is only used to assist bloom. This girl got A WHOLE ASS JOB IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SCHOOL YEAR to assist bloom. Three words: fuck. this. show.

Beatrix...

So anyways... that’s the show. If u want me to rant more, let me know. I’ve got a looooot of anger in me.

[eroticlizardfiction]

It's so hard to criticize pansexuality as a label a lot of the time because you'll say that the label itself comes from a place of biphobia and people will automatically get defensive like "oh well I'M not biphobic so clearly you're wrong" but it's like, yeah maybe you're not consciously biphobic, but you're either misunderstanding what bisexuality is or have some other sort of internalized biphobia to work through since you're choosing a label that is functionally the same. And on the one hand I want to say "pick the label you're most comfortable with" but such a large part of my experience with bisexuality (and hell, with any kind of LGBT identity) was working past that same discomfort. If you're uncomfortable with the term bisexual, it's worth considering WHY that is. So while I understand that a lot of pan people (especially younger ones) aren't coming from a malicious place, and I don't necessarily have an issue with pan people as individuals since I don't like getting upset at individual people figuring out their identities, the instant shutdown of any criticism towards the label itself is just frustrating. (sorry for the rant, I saw you talking about this and it's been on my mind lmao)

Yes exactly!! I absolutely don't think that everyone who identifies as pan thinks bisexuality is shallow or actively is trying to erase bisexuality. There's a lot of misinformation about being bi so I don't blame people for not understanding it and thinking pan is better but I still think we should talk about why pansexuality is becoming more mainstream and why so many people feel so uncomfortable with the label bi.

[thedreadvampy]

this is going to sound like a very weird and random question but: pansexuality, do u think it’s biphobic?

Can I be honest? This doesn't sound like a very weird and random question so much as it sounds like either a trap or an accusation. I don't love being asked to answer a question to which either answer would be hurtful to a lot of people.

Which being said, I don't think pansexuality is biphobic per se, but I do think a lot of the justifications of pansexuality being meaningfully distinct from bisexuality are biphobic, transphobic or both (for example, ideas like 'if you're attracted to trans or nb people you're pan not bi' or 'pan people are attracted to souls bi people are attracted to genders'). But I don't think it's like... inherently biphobic to identify with pan as a label, no.

I do however think, and this is just my own opinion, that it does us all (bi/pan/mspec/whatever) a disservice as a community to keep insisting on rigid subdivisions and narrowing and narrowing and narrowing the definitions. I have as much in common experientially, socially and politically with any given person who IDs as pan as with any given person who IDs as bi, so as somebody who thinks the primary values of LGBTQ+ identity labels are a) to clearly communicate a sense of your experience to others and b) to organise and build community around, I have some problems fitting terms like pan (which has a range of conflicting definitions often based on narrowing the definition of other identities, and which is materially as far as I can tell indistinguishable from commonly accepted bisexual experiences) into a function-led model.

I don't think I see the use at all of insisting that pan, poly, omni, mspec, whatever are meaningfully distinct from bisexuality, and I think a lot of the hostility towards pansexuality from within the bi community is built around the past decade or so of people trying everything to separate Pan from Bi as a meaningful political class, and therefore attempting to erode and narrow the breadth of how people use the word bisexual. But that isn't an inherent issue with pansexuality as an identity, it's an issue with the intracommunity sniping and nitpicking and Discoursing that unfortunately seems to be central to a lot of people's relationship to their own queerness. Pansexuality isn't an issue, but I don't think I've ever seen someone successfully make an argument for pan and bi being meaningfully separate communities without actively diminishing or denigrating bisexuality. It's for sure not biphobic to identify as pan but it's what you do with that identity that may or may not be biphobic.

This is a very wordy and wanky way of saying I don't see any problem with people finding pansexuality useful to discuss their specific emotional experience of themselves, but I do think it creates needless problems to treat pan and bi as materially separate classes rather than as, effectively, synonyms which resonate differently with different people. For me, I used to identify as pan, but I drifted to IDing as bi because I think it's the label around which the past century of activism and community building has coalesced around, it's the most commonly-understood label, and it explicitly includes every part of the ideas about pansexuality that I found useful and not offensive (examples of an unambiguously offensive idea about pansexuality might include "bisexuals are attracted to men and women and you have to be pansexual to be interested in trans people because they are outside the category of 'men and women'," which is overtly transphobic, or 'bisexuals are only interested in what genitals someone has' which is both biphobic and transphobic).

So no I don't think pansexuality is in itself inherently biphobic, but I do think that a lot of pan people's aversion to being understood as part of the bisexual umbrella is often more to do with internalised biphobia (a fear of being associated with largely unfounded stereotypes of bi people as slutty, shallow, binarist etc) than it is with any material difference between bi and pan.

[guardsbian]

bisexual/pansexual are functionally the same and that's fine. and pretty much every sexuality that involves being attracted to people is inclusive of trans/nonbinary people anyways

the fact of the matter is, it's a moot point to debate the origins or try to argue that there's still implicitly transphobia in pansexuality when... idk how to explain it? like if someone identifies with pansexuality they just do. if someone identifies with bisexuality they just do! the fact is both are so ingrained in the lgbt community that you're 1) fighting an uphill battle 2) just making yourself out to be an asshole if you try to attack the label itself as opposed to like... actual examples of active biphobia and transphobia

your energy would be better be spent on actually trying to educate people on nonbinary inclusive sexualitities and just supporting trans people in general. if you're just getting mad at pan people because you can that's just... that's unconstructive and you have to realize that. you can't block yourself off from a demographic from that long, especially because you're going to form so many preconceived notions about this group you've purposely kept yourself from interacting with that you're going to come off as wildly ignorant in any other scenario. not because you can't pull up random documents, but because it's going to be clear you've never talked to pan people (or like, people who id with both bi/pan) who didn't support your idea of a -phobic strawman, if at all

like you can criticize the actual biphobia and transphobia present in the community... with attacking or blaming the label. like if you can understand that most lesbians aren't terfs, but transmisogyny should still be combatted in the community, then you should be able to understand the very general notion of a sexuality not being an ideology. like a community can have very pervasive issues without that being an implicit feature of the group? it's common sense but like. as per usual people find it easier to label entire groups than just condemn the much wider issues at hand because it gives them something tangible to fight and to blame

just. be considerate of others

[coffeepoweredlesbian]

Okay let’s unpack all that

Finally watched Hannibal cast reuinion and I have Thoughts. If someone wants to argue with me on this, please go watch the video itself on YouTube, starting at about 45:00 and going until 52:00

1) Straight Will aka biphobia

It is so insanely harmful to portray bisexuals with a strong preference/previous relationships with the opposite sex as “straight with an exception” (vice versa for gay with an exeption). Because Will, whose “””love story”” throughout the show is with another man, whose scenes with Hannibal carry sexual subtext (according to, once again, the director) is somehow straight?? It’s like people, especially creators, will do anything they can to avoid calling a character bisexual. Same goes for calling Hannibal pansexual but y’all aren’t ready for that can of worms ahdhshfj. (also: the devil is pansexual. just gonna let you sit with that for a hot sec).

2) The De-Sexualizing Of mlm aka homophobia

I said this when good omens came out and I’ll say it again ! There is nothing wrong with headcannoning a relationship as asexual in nature. I literally Do Not Care what people do in fandoms. But when the CREATORS THEMSELVES use such insanely homophobic hot takes like “wow their love is about LOVE PURELY.” implying that gay love that’s sexual isn’t also about love and that sex, especially gay sex makes things “impure.” I’m genuinely disgusted by his phrasing and the implications behind it. Being gay and having sex doesn’t simplify a relationship or make it “all about sex.” And if you feel “unsafe” seeing mlm in media being sexual then uhhh maybe check your homophobia.

3) Queerbaiting

It takes a lot for me to call something baiting, really. And for a while I’ve been saying that it sure is convenient that Hannigram is only confirmed outside of the show itself, aside from a one sided love (which apparently “isn’t even about sexuality”). But the relationship between Hannibal and will is queerbaiting. This is functioning under the impression that season four does not exist and the show ended at season 3. If season 4 does come out I’ll personally go and edit this post. ANYWAYS. Hannibal and will were never confirmed as in a relationship. There was heavy subtext and symbolism (both sexual and not) but there was never a confirmation DESPITE the director having multiple chances to put it in (the Almost Kiss at 3x13 ring a bell?) Where has Hannigram been confirmed? Brian’s Twitter. The fanart shirt/mug he posted pictures of. Him pointing at the orlatan scene and saying “blowjob innuendo” or the many suggestive tweets he made. Multiple panels where he called it a love story. All of this, made to draw gay viewers to the show with the promise of a gay relationship. This is the literal definition of qbaiting guys I don’t know what to say. Fuller had no plans to write an in-text gay relationship. Ever.

so yeah suffice to say I’m hurt and angry because of the bullshit being spewed during that live. I honestly don’t think I want a season 4 now that I know all the promotions of the show on brian’s Twitter were in bad faith.

Would love to hear y’all’s thoughts on this

[take-some-vampire-money-bro]

it's not always because of biphobia according to u yet you don't listen any non biphobic reasons for a bi person to to be more ""comfortable"" with the label pan..

look. Let me semi quote an instagram comment (with some alterations of wording) that made a really good point abt this subject: "the bi label has always included all genders and is a fluid identity. by making more labels you can further define what attraction you have. I've seen it referred to as the bi umbrella which includes the m-spec labels."

bisexuality is a full, all encompassing sexuality. But there's also so many different ways to experience multisexuality. So people like to use labels to be more specific on how their attraction functions. And even WITH the knowledge of how fluid and gender inclusive bisexuality is, some folks just want something that doesn't have the prefix that literally means "two." and I can understand that. As fantastic of an identity bisexuality is, it's labelled in a very misleading way. It's not that they're disgusted by the term, or want to escape biphobia (which is counterproductive seeing as how pan people experience the stigmas bi ppl face anyways PLUS a lot of added hate for having that label), they just want something that sounds more specific to how they experience attraction. I personally don't need that, as a bi dude who likes all genders. I mean technically I could ID as pan if I want to. But it's not for me. Bisexuality feels right. The glove fits. And I'm sure that's how pan folks feel abt it. I'm not denying the obvious biphobia and transphobia within their community, and I know the roots of the term itself. But those who genuinely aren't being bigoted literally just like having a term that sounds right. Not because "we like trans people too," not because "ALL BI PEOPLE ONLY LIKE 2," not because "lol bi people are fixated on genitals/are shallow." It's because it just sounds right. If the way that my bisexual identity makes me feel like myself/at home is like how pan folks feel abt their label, then what kind of person would I be to deprive them of that personal freedom that sometimes takes ages to discover. 

tl;dr: let people use what labels make them feel at home in their own body, anon. If they don't hold hurtful reasons for having them, then let them move along. 

[fbdo1986]

hey just to clarify, i’m not blocking u for the post but heres this- maybe don’t invalidate people who identify as pansexual? think about it for a second. as a bi person, i wouldn’t like it if someone said i should just “call myself a lesbian and move on” solely bc i have a preference for women. just as an example. anyways i’m not trying to be a hate anon, just wanted to shed some light on the matter. all sexualities in the lgbt spectrum are valid so that’s that on that.

but you’re not a lesbian if you’re a bi woman who prefers women. you’re Still bi. bisexuality and pansexuality have the same meaning. there have been adopted nuances since but even the preference argument becomes invalid eventually because some bi people don’t have a preference. i do, so maybe i’m not the most correct person to explain it, but there’s no need to make a sexuality based on preference. it’s not necessary. how do you even define pan anyway? the absence of a preference for gender? there are so many different definitions of pan, and you cannot group all bisexuals into saying they have a preference bc it’s not true. in fact, bisexuality doesn’t base itself on preference whatsoever honestly. there’s not a widespread definition of pan i can even use to compare bisexuality to so it’s almost hard to respond to this accurately. if we’re friends or mutuals feel free to message me about it or give me more anons, but if you’re just someone who follows me, pls consider checking out my bi tag. i know you’re bi, but being bisexual comes with an extremely rich history which pansexuality attempts to erase. bisexuality can cover the scope of the absence of a preference. when i first id’d as bi after coming out my preference wasn’t even a factor whatsoever, all i knew was i liked all genders so like... bisexuality. i’d be willing to say that most bi people don’t even think about their preference when referencing or thinking about their sexuality. pansexuality has no reason to exist when bisexuality does. if someone who is pan is uncomfortable with id’ing as bi needs to confront their internalized biphobia. any scapegoat for why someone would id as pan rather than bi just ends up being rooted in biphobia. yes, no other sexuality functions on preference so it’s hard to make a 1 to 1 comparison but like. yeah if we’re friends or mutuals id be willing to talk this out with you. i only say this is i sincerely believe that bi and pan have the same definition which literally renders pansexuality obsolete.

[flockofdoves]

I totally get ur post in re Gerard and labels but as someone who is neither cis nor het, is it wrong for me to wish they were less subtle about it? Like I wish there was a resounding "heck yeah" when "is Gerard queer/w.e" came up and not a "well they demonstrated attraction to men and attachment to the female gender but they'd rather not label themself so....." Like. There's nothing not queer about saying you don't wanna label urself but I also can't call it queer :(? IDK if I'm making any sense

i get what you mean! i feel similarly sometimes

i think its a complicated thing with like. what is it that motivates some lgbt people to label themselves or not in various ways. i don’t want to be invasive and say people Have to label themselves a certain way because i know its frustrating when people do similar to me. its inherently tricky to navigate lgbt identity in this patriarchal world because literally lgbt identity derives from not conforming to the constructs of gender patriarchy uses to perpetuate itself, so we’re in a weird place of having to navigate our lives and how we describe ourselves and are perceived by others within that same system that can’t give us any real space to begin with.

so with that in mind, even if i personally have somewhat found solace in certain specific labels for gender/sexuality for myself, i really can sympathize with how a common trend for many people is to just not even bother with that.

but then also of course there can be other factors to why people choose to do that, like internalized homophobia/transphobia/biphobia/etc, or using it as a stepping stone for testing out waters before being comfortably open about anything more specific.

and i think a lot of times multiple of those factors can exist at once (not just talking about people who don’t use labels, but the reasoning any one lgbt person navigates their identity any specific way) and thats not even to say people should dissect all that, sometimes nothings really gonna be satisfactory, but one compromise is more appealing/comfortable/safe to live with compared to other ways of navigating stuff.

so with that in mind i always think like, i can’t claim to know whats best for other people but at the same time of course theres been plenty of people throughout my personal life i’ve gotten the sense were lgbt and maybe could benefit from being more overtly aware of it or challenging certain internalized notions they had.

gerard is a celebrity i don’t know personally at all, so its a bit different (although i guess i don’t have access to extensive interviews and live footage of people in my daily life lol. so its a different set of things to get intuition from) and what i tend to think is like. i respect that they are a grown adult further along in life than me and who obviously knows themself better than any fan does. i get the sense they probably at this point in their life have more of a grasp on their own gender/sexuality stuff then they’ve let on publicly (whether that means using more explicit labels or just articulating it more abstractly) i don’t want to disrespect what i see as them expressing publicly stuff they’ve clearly put thought into (they’ve stated they don’t even like labels in other contexts, so i don’t think its entirely fair to chalk it up just to being evasive about lgbt stuff) but also i think its a pretty normal thing for lgbt people empathizing with fellow people they perceive as lgbt (whether that be peers or celebrities) to speculate beyond the surface. i think its fair to speculate that with various things theyve said and done that maybe they will open up further someday (like saying

or how the way they used to go about certain things even if they were comfortable expressing gender/sexuality related stuff in certain ways/contexts, some of it was through a lens that demonstrated some internalized stuff (like for ex. the whole concept of prison) so maybe even if thats not the only or even main reason they don’t label themself, processing that (ofc they might have already! i don’t know them. they def have in some ways comparing recent statements wrt gender vs early interviews mentioning it) could change how they go about stuff publicly)

but yeah, i’m bad at saying things briefly, but i don’t think you’re wrong to wish that they’d be more explicit about it sometimes, or to speculate that someday they might be more open about certain stuff. i feel similarly a lot. basically like. if they’re satisfied where they are now then i’m happy for them. i can’t know one way or the other what their inner life or wishes/comfort with this stuff really is and am not gonna pretend i know whats best for them, but i do know speaking as a fan, it would make me really happy to see them as a celebrity i looked up to in part as a gender/sexuality role model back when i was a tween be more open about it in a way that people would have a hard time denying. they don’t owe that to me of course, that might not be what they ever want to do, but i think its fair to say it could be a possibility, and its okay to be interested in that prospect.

edit: also ftr i think its fine to refer to them as lgbt, thats more of a general classification than a personal label. and even like. casually referring to them as like. ‘functionally bi’ or nonbinary i dont think would be a big deal unless they some day became vocally against that. bisexuality specifically has an interesting history with its use as a term to describe anyone whos actively attracted to any gender vs many people who technically fit those qualifications preferring to personally express that in different terms but not necessarily having that mean they want to distance themselves from bisexual communities/discussions/etc

[ghostmartyr]

...I have lost my temper, so this is all going under a cut despite the fact that some of it clearly needs to be shouted into people’s ears. This is pure hate for a fandom I am not part of, because I hate it. Reasonableness not found.

It’s about ship hate.

Specifically, shipper hate. And why NO.

Buckle the fuck in.

...So I don’t spend time in the fandom anymore. I hate it.

But I unfortunately have friends. So I hear stuff.

So. Uh.

I despise the Eren and Historia ship with all of my heart.

Meanwhile, the people who also hate it are so fucking loud and obnoxious that I can’t hate it in peace without feeling tainted by their inability to leave people the fuck alone.

(ETA: ...Several hours later, wow. I was not kidding about losing my temper. The below was crossed out originally, and for the sake of continuity I won’t delete it, but good grief, me. Calm down. You’re not helping.)

Stop sending people hate. You take away my ability to peacefully fantasize about my NOTP burning to a fucking crisp, and you make the general perception in the fandom that anyone who cares about queer rep in the fandom is a raving jackass.

Is that remotely true? No. Does fandom perception function on truth? Also no.

Also, when people get hate, spite becomes a motivator.

Thanks guys. You’ve made the fandom even more full of that thing we can’t stand. Wow, gee, why are so many more people in favor of this ship I hate now?

Gee, I fucking wonder.

People do not stop being invested because you send them hate. Or they do, which is actually awful. Fandom’s fun. It is supposed to be fun. Let the people who haven’t completely fallen to the hate in their hearts actually have a good fucking time and leave them the fuck alone.

I hate this ship. So fucking much. But do you know what happens when I try to hate it at the moment? I feel guilty! Because every single person who actually likes it has to put up with this crap! You people being assholes is interfering with my quiet, simmering hate, and it’s annoying.

(I got calmer as things went on, so that’s crossed out in the spirit of giving people the option of ignoring the vitriol. ...There’s. Still a lot of vitriol. But. The above is probably the worst?)

And you know what? If canon were to actually make it a thing, yeah, there would be some very serious reasons to complain. But you know what else? Right now, you’re complaining about something that isn’t canon. Because it is not fucking canon. You aren’t complaining about a worrying trope within a product of mainstream media.

You’re complaining about other fans enjoying themselves in a way you don’t like.

Does it suck that the whole fucking Historia fandom would prefer shipping her with every single male character over her ending up with a girlfriend? Yes.

Does shouting at the people who still know how to have fun change how much that sucks? Not really.

Look. I hate this fandom. With all of my fucking heart. I don’t belong in it. People don’t like me, and none of the things I care about are things that it values. I spend every second I’m forced to think about this fandom consumed with hatred for life in general. Is that healthy? No. Hence the leaving.

Don’t take away people’s joy. Ever. Even if it’s for something you hate. They need it just as badly as you need yours.

Find your joy again instead of trying to tear someone else’s down. If you succeed, you ruin someone’s day/week/life. If you don’t, they’ll probably create more of that thing you hate. Which doesn’t help you in any way, shape, or form.

I would kill to find a reasonable discussion about wanting Historia to be a lesbian and being disappointed that fandom has zero interest in that. I would kill to find a serious discussion on how fucked up it is that the manga appears to have killed her girlfriend off-screen and impregnated her. Regardless of anything else, she is queer. Hell, she could be head over heels in love with NPC Farmer Guy, and she’d still be queer, and the narrative problems with her arc as it appears would still be worthy of critical discussion.

And instead of that content existing, people keep screaming at fans of a non-canon m/f pairing.

Which, even if it were canon, would be a jerk move.

Pairings being canon means that you can shout about them without hating their fanbase. That’s really the only change, but it is a significant one. When a pairing is canon, that means shouting about it is shouting about canon. When pairings aren’t canon, shouting about them means that you are shouting at their fanbase.

One of those is okay. Unless the shouting leads to direct content with the creators. The other is straight up being a dick.

Not everyone who likes m/f is homophobic. Hell, some people just like Eren and Historia together. Is that a fun thought? No. Is Eren the only character Historia has significant canon interaction with? Pretty fucking much. People will ship anything that stands in the same room long enough. It comes down to personal preference.

Most people do not have personal preferences that lead them to f/f. It sucks. Shouting about it is not going to change that. You can talk about why that is, and why misogyny and homophobia combine with discussion of queer female characters and why that doubly sucks.

People will still ship the thing you don’t like.

At best, you might make them feel ashamed about it.

Awesome. More people feeling like they’re not allowed to love the things they love.

Historia Reiss is a queer character. The entire fandom regularly screams about how she never actually had feelings for Ymir. Currently, her arc involves her girlfriend dying off-screen while she herself is coerced into pregnancy.

So, you know. Let’s complain about how people want Eren and Historia to bang. That’s clearly the problem.

Again, I hate the ship! I hate that half its shippers appear to be following me and I have no idea why (....no offense, I’m sure you’re all wonderful people, I just have a lot of hate I’m really sorry thanks for the likes)! I hate that it’s difficult to find fans who want Historia to be gay! I hate that the one person I’ve seen wanting her to be asexual said that Ymir and Historia weren’t canon! I hate that before I left, every single damn fan of Historia who cared about Historia as a person, not an accessory, seemed to be cheering for the possibility of Eren and Historia!

But you know what I hate most?

I can’t find anyone who feels that way who has remembered to treat their fellow fans with respect. The people I know who have my preferences? I know that because they scream and shout at people. They tag their hate, they send anonymous messages, and generally make people feel like garbage for enjoying a thing.

I can’t even want Ymir and Historia to end up together without feeling guilty, because I know if that happens, everyone who happens to like a m/f ship involving Historia is going to get crapped on.

I’ve wanted Historia to be a lesbian since I started this series, and I am now in a place where I feel bad for wanting that, because the people interested in her being other sections of the spectrum get treated so terribly.

The honest truth is that I left the fandom because psychologically, I am a disaster, and everything being shouted back and forth hit too close to home. I can’t handle it. I don’t expect to ever touch it again outside of my bubble, because every brush I’ve had with it since makes me miserable.

What triggered this mess of temper was one of my friends commenting that someone I know got hate for making some kind of graphic. He used hyperbolic language about how “oh so they did this so that means they’re murdering gay people.”

I don’t hold that against him, but the reason it set me off is because the perception is that people upset with Historia being the m/f bicycle of the fandom are whiny brats who deserve to be unhappy and are overreacting to homophobia that doesn’t exist.

And it’s just... anon hate is never okay. It helps nothing, and hurts people. Including the people sending it. Putting that darkness in your soul into action is just going to make it worse.

But part of what that hate has done is... it’s made it so the loudest voices of the people upset over Historia and the problems with her treatment are anonymous haters who make people who like the wrong ship cry.

That. is not a helping thing.

Historia’s portrayal in the manga is a damn concerning thing. The fact that people still argue that she never had feelings for Ymir is a very concerning thing.

The fact that people ship her with Eren might be frustrating, and even hurtful with the reminder that the majority of the fandom definitely does not want Historia to be gay, but it is very much not the thing to be loud and worried over (especially because, again, non-canon, so you’re really just picking on the fanbase itself, which has zero point except for meanness).

Maybe I’m imagining it, since I left. Maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about, since my little corner is so distant.

But what it feels like is that people complaining about homophobia has become synonymous with whiny brats with no respect for fandom boundaries. Because the people complaining about homophobia loudest are acting like whiny brats with no respect for fandom boundaries.

And that is a problem.

Homophobia still exists. Lesbophobia still exists. Biphobia still exists. From my limited contact before I left, I know that those last two are at war instead of holding hands, because they’ve fundamentally misunderstood what each side is upset about.

(Side bar I guess: People upset about lesbophobia are upset about lesbians being treated like crap. People upset about biphobia are upset about bisexuals being treated like crap.

Not wanting a queer female character to like men does not equal hating bisexuals. Wanting a queer female character to like men does not equal hating lesbians.

Meanwhile, at this point, if Historia is ever given a canon sexual identity beyond liking Ymir, a lot of people are going to be hurt for personal reasons that have nothing to do with their respect for various sexualities. Having your hopes dashed sucks. It doesn’t mean you’re a bad person. You should be allowed to feel however you want about fiction in peace.

Which leads us back to me wanting Historia to just fucking die so that no side will ever have the option of harassing another because “ha ha we were right you all suck.”

Just. Just kill the queer. It will be so much less awful that way. Kill her now.

I need this series to end and the tags to accidentally be deleted. Or on purpose, whatever works.)

Going back to... yeah.

As much as we all like to think we’re reasonable people who use our heads, when something does not actively affect you, it is easy to start taking it as seriously as you take that thing’s spokesperson.

So the fact that the apparent spokespeople for lesbophobia in the SnK fandom are a bunch of rabid anons lacking in basic respect?

That... is really sadness-inducing.

You’ve taken an understandable pain and twisted it into a frothing hate that does nothing but hurt people.

Please don’t do that.

Be hurt. Be upset.

But be kind. For the sake of yourselves, and for the sake of the things you’re trying to champion. It’ll go better.

(...And on that note, I’m really sorry for all the yelling. Which probably made a few people who didn’t deserve it feel bad. I am just a very angry person, and. ...When I say I left for a reason, this is that reason. Every behavior I’m critical of is something I have felt a thousand times worse in my heart. I want to be a bad person more than anyone in this damn fandom.

But sorry for the yelling. I know most of you guys have nothing to do with any of this. Hell, I’m not even in the fandom, so who knows if what I’m screaming about is accurate.)

[wedontcareaboutyourbinary]

comphet is a lesbian exclusive term. other sexualities can use coercive heterosexuality though. but no one except lesbians can use comphet, that term is very important in lesbian culture and other sexualities do not have the same relationship to it.i just wanted to let you know that it's not appropriate to use compulsory heterosexuality as a term if you're not a lesbian and it's also rude to associate that term with TERFs as saying that implies all lesbians are TERFs when that is not the case.

this is the same anon who just sent an ask on comphet) also i’d like to point out i’m not a lesbian (i’m a gay trans guy) so take what i said with a grain of salt. i don’t intend to talk over lesbians, i just wanted to make that known. also if you’re not a lesbian and youve felt pressured by heterosexual society to be het youre probably experiencing some form of internalized homo/pan/biphobia

“comphet is a lesbian exclusive term. other sexualities can use coercive heterosexuality though” in spite of your attempt to not talk over lesbians, I can assure you that, as was pointed out in the posts on this subject, coercive heterosexuality is literally just an alternative term to comp het to distance it from terf associations.

I got both the fact that “comp het” has terf origins and that “coercive hete” is the alternative to distance it from those origins from literal, actual lesbians like in this post, as well as the fact I have the ability to google. Adrienne Rich was the coiner of the term, and the fact that she was transmisogynistic has been pointed out multiple times.

I don’t think I or anyone else on this blog would ever say that it’s good to be wary of lesbians. All non-straight, non-cis identities, but lesbians especially, have a strong history of being painted as predatory, and therefore it’s entirely reasonable for someone to wonder if, when someone is wary of lesbians, if it might be motivated by lesbophobia. However, never once have I or any other mods claimed otherwise.

So, short version: Saying “compulsory heterosexuality” was coined by someone who was a TERF or at the very minimum found their ideology acceptable is historically accurate (and if you’re saying pointing out any TERF influence ever is lesbophobia, then consider you may possibly need to re-prioritize here), and coercive heterosexuality is literally an alternative to compulsory heterosexuality. Seriously. That’s the only way I’ve ever seen it be used. So if you’re saying “one term is used for lesbians, the other is for other people!” Your entire argument is kind of standing on a weak knee already.

In this post, what was being discussed was primarily the phenomenon grouped under coercive heterosexuality, and the fact that while these phenomenon are typically framed as being almost lesbian-exclusive, that someone can still experience the effects of heterosexism grouped under coercive het, and it be due to another orientation they experience; that extremely similar effects of coercive het manifest in people who aren’t straight but who also aren’t lesbians. I never outright advocated for other people to start using the term- I think heterosexism functions fine. 

But one is left to wonder that, if those phenomenon can be experienced by other people, why is it just the term itself that others aren’t allowed to use? From what I can find, “compulsory heterosexuality” has also been talked about in relation to gay men and other non-lesbian identities since at least 2003 in Academia, perhaps longer in casual contexts. I’ve also found actual lesbians speak on the topic, primarily about how coercive het affects bi women by googling and using tumblr’s tags function (one of the posts explicitly mentions bi women, the other is in the bi tag so i’m left to assume it’s meant to include bi women as well). So there’s that.

This was me explaining and interpreting another post another mod reblogged at request. That person does not have an about so I cannot check to see, but for now I’m going to operate under the assumption that if they were making a post on intersectionality and how the term “comp het” ignores it, that they are a part of groups that have a right to speak on that intersectionality.

(Of course, the lesbian community is not a monolith of thought. Not everyone is going to agree with every point on this post, but, it’s clear that from the sources cited here, and what I’ve been able to find, what the blog has stated aren’t some new fangled attempt to steal lesbian terminology, and rather the things discussed on here have been around for quite awhile, and have also been pointed out by lesbians, which is the group that primarily uses the term “comp het” or “coercive het”)

Sidenote: Please be aware that speaking authoritatively on a subject and then tossing in one “take this with a grain of salt” does not negate the fact that you’re still trying to speak authoritatively on the subject. Sources are always suggested when you send an ask like this (unless you are drawing off of personal experience with a term, experience, etc. to make your argument in a conversation where yours is relevant, because there are some conversations in which personal experience and perspective can be highly important).

-Mod Sully

[felvika]

the thing that's currently pissing me tf off is comphet.

like overall society is obviously heteronormative to everyone...but when you get into the community and get beyond the introductory concepts of heterosexism, the way other queer people function within it is enraging, actually.

a man can say he is gay, and he will not get bombarded by other queer people forcing him to verify it, asking him if he's sure he's not actually bi, pushing him for why he doesn't like women. not by standard.

but from the minute i openly identified as lesbian, that's all i got. its all i witness other lesbians recieving.

there's this support for comphet within the queer community itself specifically for sapphics, that in reality is the prioritization of men. gay men are off the hook because their attraction revolves around men; but lesbians who cut out men challenge this and misogyny rears its head. people get MAD when spaces do not make room for men, much less prioritize them, and its not much better inside the community.

there's been discourse to DEATH trying to insist lesbians should not draw lines, should not exclude men; I've seen everything from "its misandry to not date men" to "if you like trans women you're not actually lesbian and can like men." gay men do not get called bigots for identifying differently from bi men, meanwhile there is neverending discourse over whether lesbians even deserve to have an identity that does not include attraction to men or whether we're horrible bigots for defining our own personal experience.

and there is cross community aggression quite frequently that affects everyone differently, yes; bi people frequently have their identities questioned and challenged, and lots of different communities face things lesbians don't.

but it frustrates me that this specific treatment lesbians recieve is mostly unanalyzed and uncritiqued by anyone but ourselves. biphobia and transphobia and etc. are issues addressed to some length even by members not of those communities - the barest mention of the blatant lesbophobia within the community however seems to get the discourse hounds howling and it leaves it a topic too volatile for anyone to want to touch but us.

and it makes me want to SCREAM because its far more intersectional than just lesbophobia; the misogyny is rampant, and god just ask trans women what it's like being lesbian when the common misconception of transness is that gender presentation is connected to sexuality and therefore trans women are all straight.

i still get anons that i usually just block, but I'm so tempted to answer every single one of them by saying "would you send this to a gay man? would you treat a gay man like this?" because its not just homophobia; its targeted at lesbians bc of misogyny.

and this is all before even dipping into the remixed misogyny becoming popular by bashing specifically afab trans people who are fem presenting on top of the classic transmisogyny we are still addressing.

y'all have not done the goddamn work of analyizing your misogyny and how it has affected your worldviews, and you think being queer is good enough education. it's exhausting.

so when are we going to have the analysis that misogyny effects the perception and treatment of queer people and lesbians face quite a lot of shit that gay men do not have to deal with

[bodacious-tatas]

I came out eight years ago. Over those years I questioned a few times due to what I understand now was trauma and a whole lot of internalized biphobia, but I always came back to what I knew is true: I’m bi. And yet I barely used the word until now. Bisexuality is one of many identities constantly policed by those within and without the LGBTQ community. I’ve heard from straight people that I must just have daddy issues, that I’m an abomination (to the person who called me that and can read this: yes, I remember), that loving women is a phase, that I’m a hot fetish for straight couples and nothing more. And then I hear from LGBTQ people that bisexuality is a stepping stone to being gay, or that it’s a pathetic attempt to pretend I’m something other than “functionally heterosexual”, or that my very identity is transphobic. And so I don’t use the word. When I tell straight people I’m bi, I afraid what they hear is “I probably cheat on my husband.” When I tell LGBTQ people I’m bi, within literal seconds I am called narrow minded based on assumptions that are all, each and every one, false. Forget what you’ve been told. Bisexuality isn’t adulterous, dated, transphobic, binary, shallow or shameful. Bi is faithful and open and timeless and inclusive and full of love and worthy of pride. I’m bi and I’m deeply committed to my husband. I’m bi and I think the gender binary can go and fuck itself. I’m bi and I believe trans women are women and trans men are men. I’m bi and I know our history goes way back and will continue onward. I’m bi, and I’m not embarrassed anymore. (at Columbus, Ohio) https://www.instagram.com/p/ByvvRmfAPON/?igshid=1nu4vz7j59jrz

[kelvintimeline]

Please, if anyone has any further questions about the discourse, my opinion on the ace community's rampant homophobia/serophobia/lesbophobia/survivor hating ways/ableism (both on tumblr and AVEN which has of course expanded to other social media and irl but primarily happens here), or asexuality in general, hmu. I used to run a semi-popular discourse blog before death threats (and other vibrant threats) and biphobia made me delete, so I have a lot of resources and links to help you reflect a lot easier.

I will warn you, I am critical of a lot of ace/MOGAI concepts (like the split attraction model, the a being for ace (which is ahistorical and harmful to LGBT people in general as a for ally is a tangible function), separating aphobia from misogyny, telling young minors it's healthy to identify as ace when not experiencing sexual attraction at that age is normal, etc), so it will come with that "bias" but it is an educated bias I have researched and discussed ad nauseam with both sides of the discourse.

All of this comes from a primary concern for how these concepts affect marginalized groups (especially LGBT people, survivors, and minors but also women, people of color, neurodivergent people, physically disabled people, etc) and even the ace community itself. Lots of young aces are manipulated by a lot of fearmongering and misinformation in the community, my past self included, and I want to combat that with education and providing some outside perspective as someone who still by all means could be considered ace-spec and aro-spec.