#butch discourse | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

high-voltage-rat · 7 months ago

Text

Okay rvb gang real talk for a sec. I think y'all should put a little more thought into the way you draw and characterize Captain Butch Flowers. Specifically with regards to the widely accepted facecanon having native-coded features.

Facecanons in rvb generally fall under 2 categories: the ones based off of information about the person's race and background we receive in the canon, and ones that are purely headcanon, based on vibes. For example, we're told Simmons is Dutch-Irish, so it's common to draw him as a white redhead. Tucker being black is as close to directly stated as we ever get re: any of the reds and blues' races. But Sarge is often drawn as a white man despite no information being given about his race- it's usually chosen by the headcanoner based off the vibes we get from his behaviour.

So when it comes to Flowers, let's think for a second about how the fandom generally interprets his character. In canon, we see him on blue team making his soldiers a bit uncomfortable with his overly familiar behaviour, having a cheerful and upbeat demeanour. We also see him in PFL working with Wyoming to do recon, then getting hit with a tomahawk, throwing it back at the enemy, and then using his grenade launcher to bring down a crane and kill chain guy and girl. Later he's in charge of choosing soldiers to place in blood gulch, where we see he has no problem feeding soldiers through the fodder machine and covering up for Freelancer- including essentially killing Jimmy. What we see in fandom, though, is a guy who is cheerfully menacing, casually hyperviolent, bubbly facade, likes knives, 'probably has a torture basement', etc.

So I would like us to think for a moment about why, exactly, people took those vibes, that interpretation of his character, with the more violent aspects overinflated, and decided to draw him with native-coded features. I would like us all to take a second and consider the connotations behind the pile of art out there where a brown man with long dark hair in a braid is splattered in blood. To me, this particular choice just feels like another "native s*vage" trope, and I think it has really not been thought through.

Indigenous headcanons in rvb are admittedly pretty difficult. Rvb is a problematic media through and through, and there's always going to be something offensive in the way a character is portrayed. I myself hc the Grifs as kānaka maoli, due to them being from Hawai'i and Kaikaina's name- but between Grif's laziness and Kai's hypersexuality, it definitely falls into some other offensive stereotypes about indigenous people, and particularly native Hawaiians.

But to me, the distinguishing thing is that these are facets of their characters that have something deeper behind them- there are reasons for these traits that are explored both by canon and the fandom meta. Grif's laziness is a result of his personal struggle with having to care for his sister alone, as well as his general disdain for the army as an institution. Kai's sexuality is her way of seeking fun and connection in her life, likely in part due to feeling abandoned by their mother, and then by her brother. In the case of the Grifs, fandom treats them well by taking these established character traits, and not overinflating, but contextualizing them, and treating them as part of a larger whole. Grif is loyal to his friends, he's clever and observant when he's willing to show it. Kai is independent, business-savvy, and assertive. These other character aspects exist in the fandom portrayal, so their depictions don't feel like a glaring stereotype. In the right hands, with enough care and love, their negative traits can even be used to explore the impact of colonialism- how the stereotypes are based off the conditions and circumstances forced on us by its influence.

Flowers, on the other hand, has a fandom portrayal that feels like an artificial exaggeration of a single aspect of his canon character. There's very little depth behind it, no real contextualization- he hasn't been fleshed out by fandom, he's almost been reduced by it. Naturally, contextualization is going to be harder because he's a minor character and we don't hear much- if anything- about his background. But it is still an active choice by people who make fan content of him to emphasize certain traits, and it's thus far been the traits that fall into some very harmful tropes.

So my suggestion, as an indigenous person, is this. You don't have to change your facecanon, necessarily- but put some thought into it. Whether you're depicting him as an explicitly native person, or just with native-coded features, consider the connotations. Reconsider exaggerating his violent side so much: technically speaking, we've seen him kill 2 people somewhat indirectly, in the same mission that North killed like 5 in a similar manner and Tex literally murdered C.T. with a tomahawk. Do you emphasize their violence in the same way? Why did you choose to do so for Flowers? If you want him to be unsettling, his enthusiastic facilitation of PFL's activities in blood gulch and lack of qualms about using and discarding sim troopers is there to work with- something non-violent but no less sinister, something less aligned with common harmful stereotypes when applied to indigenous people, and much more founded in canon as a distinguishing part of his character.

Just stop to think "is this portrayal a reinforcement of the "native s*vage" trope?", and "is this really that founded in canon?". Think about whether someone with no experience in rvb fanon would look at your content and see more than a native guy in mystery blue guy's armour doing gratuitous violence for no reason.

Consider the less explored but canonical aspects of his character, flesh them out with headcanon. Sure, he killed chain guy and girl, but he also yanked a tomahawk out of his arm after falling from height and kept fighting- explore his resilience, what drives him. His strategic mind, using the environment against his enemies, carefully balancing the illusion surrounding blood gulch and constructing specific social dynamics. Hell, even delve into why he believes in Freelancer enough to do what he's done without issue. Flesh out your portrayal, dial back the singularity of the vibes you give him.

Indigenous people aren't exempt from being awful, or violent, or complicit in corrupt systems- but if you portray a native character that way without any depth or reason behind their choices, you often end up reinforcing a stereotype.

...and if gratuitous violence is what you want, if you like that creepy knife-obsessed murder guy, then yeah. Maybe consider changing your facecanon. Cause I'm a little tired of seeing characters who look like my people always soaked in blood and acting like they have innate uncontrolled urges to kill. Depictions like that about us were part of what formed the justification for our genocide, so please try not to perpetuate that.

#something something swinging bat at a hornet's nest #this isn't about any one particular piece of art btw just a trend I've seen that makes me uncomfy #I'm not looking to start 'blue eyed tucker' discourse 2.0 but it has been. on my mind.#ali watches rvb #not video games #late nights with ali #red vs blue #rvb #agent florida #florida rvb #flowers rvb #captain butch flowers

173 notes · View notes

moonlightsapphic · 6 days ago

Text

— sapphic allyship handbook —

✨ Sapphics! 🗣️

Contemporary radfem (TERF/TIRF) rhetoric may permeate your 🫵 algorithm! Stop 🛑 and think 🤔 when you see 👀 content such as:

⭐️ Lesbianism is the most politically correct sexuality to combat patriarchy due to its exclusion of men. Therefore, other queer women should not “roll back their queerness” by dating men during the current climate. Who you date should not be made political, and to demand this from an individual for their participation in feminism is authoritarian conversion rhetoric. Sexual orientation (and who you love) is not a choice; it is a morally neutral natural human identity. A queer woman is not less or more queer due to her current partner, and a straight or bi woman in a relationship with a man is not automatically a lesser feminist. “Political lesbianism” during second-wave feminism ultimately invalidated lesbianism as an authentic romantic and sexual orientation, and caused devastating sapphic culture erasure.

⭐️ Lesbians and trans women are minoritised even within the LGBTQ+ community and can therefore never cause tangible harm to bisexual women and trans men respectively. This is because lesbians and trans women do not hold any power over bisexual women and trans men under cisheterosexism. This generalisation does not account for intersectional systems of oppression across race, nationality, class, disability, etc. Privilege (or lack thereof) is not quantitative and depends on context. Additionally, lateral phobias across different minoritised groups can cause harm. A lesbian can be biphobic, or participate in monosexism (a historically enduring system that causes alarmingly high levels of documented life-threatening harm to bisexuals), despite not systematically oppressing bisexuals under cisheterosexism. A trans woman can be transandrophobic/transmisandrist towards a trans man, despite not holding systematic power over trans men. Obviously, bisexuals can exhibit lesbophobia and transmascs can exhibit transmisogyny as well.

⭐️ Queer women who switch away from the lesbian label, and/or choose to date men rather than being loyal to WLW encourage lesbophobia by implying to men that lesbians can be corrected by “tradwife” culture. When formerly lesbian-identified women say they feel “healed” by discovery of their fluid sexuality or by a specific partner who happens to be a man, it actively harms lesbian visibility, validity, and safety. Victim-blaming a bi+ woman for the behaviour of bigots is known as bimisogyny. It buys into the radfem (and patriarchal) belief that men are innately subhuman monsters that only exercise restraint when when women demonstrate puritanical abstinence, rather than acknowledging men are fellow flawed humans taught to be violent under patriarchy. A woman who consensually engages in sexual and romantic relations with men is not responsible for sexual assault culture from men. That would be slut-shaming. Queer folks of any gender/sexuality are allowed to proudly find comfort in their identities and partners, as this is the goal of LGBTQ+ movement.

⭐️ Real lesbians (and who lesbians are really attracted to) are appropriately feminine, must identify as women, use she/her pronouns, and never want to be known as “boyfriends” or “husbands”; otherwise you’re just bisexual. Non-men who present masculine, don’t identify as women, or are attracted to non-feminine non-men genders “invade” lesbian spaces. This is lebophobia, butchphobia, and transandrophia. Butches, mascs, gender non-conforming women, genderqueer folks, and transmascs (including some trans men) identifying as lesbians are not only perfectly valid but also a well-documented historically important part of lesbian community.

⭐️ It is by default unfeminist for a woman to cater to the male gaze and male pleasure, because it will thwart feminism. Even fem(me) lesbians who pass as straight center the “male gaze”. This is once again misogynistic slut-shaming and victim-blaming, and leads to villification of sex work. The patriarchy depends on maintaining authority over women’s sexuality; attempting to oppose that using further suppression is just compliance to and repackaging of patriarchal purity culture. The feminist goal is women’s sexual liberation. Femininity and feminine sexuality are a complex performance done for the self, for other women (the female gaze), and also to contrast/complement/seek admiration of masculine partner (who may also be a non-man). It can be conforming or non-conforming to conventionally patriarchal standards. All of these effects are highly subjective and context-dependent. To imply fem(me) lesbians center men due to their femininity is lesbophobic and ignorant of lesbian culture. A more coherent feminist goal would be to advocate for more women to have agency over their own sexuality under the patriarchy, as actual sex workers are often the most underprivileged women.

⭐️ Formerly lesbian-identified trans men and bi women purposefully chose new identities that conform to and offer more privilege under the patriarchy. Because of their greed and/or brainwashing, exclusive lesbian community is disappearing. Bi women and trans men are hardly “privileged” in the cisheteropatriarchy, and are subject to similar phobias as lesbians since all oppression is linked. An individual’s coming out into their authentic identity is cause for celebration. Queer identity is often in flux; it is normal and healthy to reevaluate identity through multiple LGBTQ+ letters within a lifetime. No one owes their gender and sexual identity to feminism, nor do they have a choice in these identities; to dismiss an individual’s intelligence and demand otherwise is authoritarian bimisogynistic/transandrophobic conversion rhetoric. They will always be part of our community, even if they no longer identify with a certain subcategory. Lesbian community is smaller now because lesbianism by definition used to include more mspecs and genderqueers. Resources such as the “Lesbian Masterdoc” (whose very author now identifies as bi) are useful to some, but may cause others to not identify as lesbian if they face gatekeeping. Lesbian community can be grown by avoiding exclusion of those who are (or are dating) “excessively” mspec, fem, masc, or genderqueer folks.

⭐️ Cis women are biologically fragile and should be separated from everyone else in sports for their own safety and to avoid being dominated by trans women. Trans folks should have their own category. Scientifically, gender is one of the least logical ways to universally divide physical sport categories to maintain “fairness”, but the practice has held strong due to patriarchal stereotypes based on binary beliefs of biological sex (ignoring and invalidating intersex folks completely). Each sport requires a unique set of ideal physical characteristics. Cis women are statistically at least equally as capable as cis men in many sports. Currently, transfems who are allowed to play professionally in women’s sections have to pass strict physical exams that even cis women are not subjected to. Trans women statistically cannot dominate women’s sports. This line of exaggerated transphobia is dangerous as it aims to gatekeep normal human experiences from trans folks, especially trans kids.

⭐️ Gender-neutral bathrooms, and trans people in women’s bathrooms, are dangerous for cis women as this may invite predatory men. Gender-neutral bathrooms are not uncommon in global cultures, and public bathroom hypotheticals are a historical vehicle for bigotry, such as when bathrooms were segregated by race in the US. It is transphobic to misplace blame and police trans peoples’ existence for potential bigoted cis men.

⭐️ Trans sapphics are men in disguise trying to invade lesbian spaces. Trans lesbians encourage the idea that lesbians are also attracted to men. Real lesbians have a genital preference for vulvas, but trans sapphics decieve cis lesbians into dating them anyway. These are transmisogynistic and lesbophobic stereotypes. Trans women are women and are not responsible for the existence of any bigoted men. Transfems with penises are not interested in dating anyone who is not attracted to them; many lesbians also do not have a genital preference, as the definition of lesbianism includes all non-men. While having a “type” is normal, publicly announcing and imposing it with no relevant context is body-shaming, and, in this case, transphobic, regardless of your personal internalised reasons. (You would not keep repeating how you wouldn’t date a fat person and no one else should either, because that would be fatphobic.) A good way to ensure lesbian community growth is to wholeheartedly accept transbians.

⭐️ Lesbians who have never been with men or someone with a penis are more queer and superior to those who have. “Gold-star gay” rhetoric is harmful to all queer and trans folks, and misogynistically implies a woman can be tainted by a penis. This is lesbophobic and transmisogynistic purity culture.

⭐️ Cis bi women with boyfriends are invading lesbian spaces. Bisexuals should create their own communities rather than invading gay and lesbian spaces. Bi women shouldn’t bring their boyfriends to Pride. This is generally a hypothetical issue, as the vast majority of in-person lesbian events and bars depend on attendance numbers to survive, and all sapphics, often along with friends and plus ones, are welcome regardless of their labels. The most important requirement is to be polite and present good allyship. Due to the nature of bisexuality, bisexuals have historically participated in gay and lesbian spaces as well as their own, and it is monosexist to demand their exclusion from a culture they were fully involved in building. Many bisexuals are in bi4bi M/F relationships, and their queer partners belong at Pride. Bisexuals should also bring their straight partners to Pride as LGBTQ+ community is small, and we need dedicated allies to show up for our movements.

⭐️ Bi women inevitably center men because their sexuality is inclusive of men. Bi women cannot love women the way lesbians do since only lesbians have fully decentered men, and it’s valid for lesbians to find it repulsive to date bi women who have been with men. WLW relationships are not by default more queer whenever the participants are exclusively lesbian, as bi women are not “tainted” by men; that would be a bimisogynistic purity culture stereotype again. Just like lesbians, bi women also have to unlearn compulsory heterosexuality, alongside additional monosexist androcentric stereotypes. Bi WLW demonstrate unique devotion by choosing sapphic love despite having other, more convenient options under patriarchy. WLW exist regardless of any alternate attractions, not in spite of them. There are many bi and straight women who happen to have men as partners but are well-involved in women’s and queer coalition, mutual aid and activism. On the other hand, there are lesbians whose activism consists of entirely hypothetical online identity discourse centering the exclusion of men, rather than focusing on building sapphic community.

⭐️ Most bi men are secretly gay and will never be satisfied with a cis girlfriend, it’s valid for women to be repelled by a man who has dated or has attraction towards other men. This is an androcentric biphobic stereotype and another manifestation of patriarchal purity culture. Many bi men identify as gay to avoid poor treatment, so the opposite is actually true. Bi men are not “tainted” by their relations with men, nor are they less masculine simply due to their sexuality.

⭐️ Bisexuality is a stepping stone to being gay and non-binary is a stepping stone to being a binary trans individual. This is based in monosexism, and the opposite is often true—gay men and lesbians often come out as fluid, and trans men and women often come out as non-binary. The creator of the lesbian masterdoc herself now identifies as bisexual.

⭐️ Validity discourse is a redundant non-issue distracting from real LGBTQ+ rights crises. Affirming the queerness and belonging of perceived liminal LGBTQ+ identities such as the bi+, aro/ace, and non-binary spectrums is crucial to preventing well-documented and life-threatening hardships faced by these groups. This is an important part of LGBTQ+ movement.

⭐️ Lesbians are always prioritising les4les because they are biphobic. Women are harder to date than men.* Like trans folks who feel most comfortable and understood in T4T relationships, lesbians are valid for seeking out les4les. Highly marginalised groups prioritising relationships with one another is not automatically a slight against outside identities. While monosexism is a real issue within the LGBTQ+ community, there are many women open to dating any sapphics. Sapphic dating under the patriarchy may be difficult, but it is a misogynystic stereotype to proclaim women are by default “higher maintenance” than men.

⭐️ Most lesbians are biphobic, most bi+ sapphics are lesbophobic, most trans men are transmisogynistic, most trans women are transandrophobic, and so on. Just like all humans, small fractions of LGBTQ+ subcommunities are very loudly phobic on the internet, amplified by algorithms that prefer rage bait. They often unknowingly adopting divisive radfem ideology with limited knowledge of queer history. Internet exclusionists are symptoms of wider issues, but are not representative of the real life vast majority of these groups, who are incredibly kind, empathetic, and inclusive.

⭐️ Everyone is a little bit bisexual.* This generalisation can especially lead to lesbophobic stereotypes. Monosexuals do exist, and this is disrespectful to the severe challenges lesbians withstand to realise their sexuality excludes men under the patriarchy’s compulsory heterosexuality. Self-identified queer folks should be wholeheartedly believed. Expressing suspicion towards an individuals’s identity is violating.

⭐️ Bisexuality is a TERF identity because it implies the existance of binary gender, and doesn’t include trans, genderqueer and non-binary folks. You should use “pansexual” or other terms instead. Bisexuality includes all genders, as the “bi” refers to “two or more genders”. The bi+ or multisexual spectrum contains many MOGAI identities, including pan. Every queer person should choose the term that they personally feel fits best.

⭐️ Kinks do not belong at Pride because no one consented to seeing public sex acts, it is offensive to folks on the asexual spectrum, and children will also be present. Public sex is not being performed at Pride. Some queer folks wear kink-representing outfits that are no more revealing than regular outdoor summer festival wear. Puritanical respectability politics based on exaggerated sexualization is a tool to erase LGBTQ+ folks from public life, by dividing and conquering one “bad” group at a time.

⭐️ Butchfemme culture historically belongs only to lesbians. Other identities should use masc/fem. Femme4femme and butch4butch are less queer than butchfemme. Butchfemme is not by default superior to other sapphic dynamics. Historical lesbian butchfemme identity and spaces were inclusive of all sapphics (including bisexuals) before lesbian separatism. Decades before that, butchfemme originated in ballroom culture that included BIPOC men-aligned queers. Bi+ sapphics can perform lesbian butchfemme, and all other LGBTQ+ identities can also use these terms.

⭐️ “Bi/pan/mspec lesbian” is a recently-invented label for invading lesbian spaces and stoking lesbophobia by validating to men that all lesbians are attracted to them. “Bi lesbians” do not exist. They are lesbian TERFs because they believe lesbians don’t include trans women in their attraction. Or they are bisexuals with internalised biphobia as they don’t believe in bi fluidity. Lesbian identity is exclusive and can never be used by those who are mspec. “Bi sapphic” should be used instead. “Bi lesbian” is one of many valid LGBTQ+ labels that may appear complex, contradictory, or trivial. Statistically, a portion of lesbian-identifying women are mspec; bi lesbians make this part of their own identity explicit but do not intend to establish or imply that all lesbians are mspec, as it is lesbophobic to impose attraction to men on lesbians. However, it also remains bimisogynystic to hold queer women’s identities (such as “bi lesbian”) responsible for the potential bigotry from men. Before the establishment of political lesbianism (by mainly cishet white women), “lesbian”, was a universal umbrella term for all sapphics rather than an exclusive label. It functioned similarly to the word “gay”, which can refer to an exclusively gay man, but can be used by anyone. “Bi lesbian” is a historically significant identity that emerged as resistance to the destructive effects of separatism on lesbian community. Prominent activists identified explicitly as bisexual lesbian to take pride in their bisexuality when purity culture-based bimisogynistic monosexism was rife in the community. There are many valid reasons one may identify as a bi lesbian today, including limited non-actionable attraction to men, affirming trans/genderqueer identity (of the self and/or partner), or intimate connection to lesbian sexuality, gender, community, history, movement and lifestyle. While most contemporary bi+ sapphics choose to no longer identify as lesbians, they are not obligated to surrender lesbian terminology to radfem ideology; mspec sapphics have a right to lay claim to lesbian culture and identity, which they have equally partaken in for all history.

⭐️ Second-wave radical feminism isn’t bad because it actually did include BIPOC. Second-wave feminism was a complex, white-dominated movement that ultimately died due to its divisive and exclusionary ideology. There were many oft-erased marginalized BIPOC second-wave feminist voices, including queer Black women who favored intersectionality/inclusion and wrote excellent texts about it; for example, Bell Hooks critiqued the pervasive harmful rhetoric within the movement.

⭐️ LGBTQ+ identities are meant to be exclusive, with orderly definitions that are essential for meaningfully gaining relevant rights for each subcommunity. We reserve the right to correct or ignore people who misuse labels. Preserving lesbian spaces for monosexual lesbians only will achieve the eradication lesbophobia under patriarchy. LGBTQ+ identities have historically been based in complex shared experiences by multifacted individuals. For example, historical lesbian spaces were comprised of bi+ women, genderqueer and non binary folks, trans women, and trans men alongside exclusive cis lesbians. Imposing a queer person with labels they do not identify with is violating. Labels (and identities) are not definitive categories, and are meant for individual comfort and communication with no assigned “right” and “wrong” usage. The only “misuse” would be by a bigot specifically using a label to harm the subgroup, which is an arbitrary hypothetical. Safe spaces for minoritized groups with similar experiences, backgrounds and identities are important for recuperation and rehabilitation, but overall separatism is to the detriment to LGBTQ+ survival. The community at large is minoritised, and subgroups alone do not have a loud enough voice or visibility within the patriarchy. Historically, surviving queer spaces have welcomed all to even label-specific events.

Queerness is in opposition to patriarchy, which limits individuals in divisive assigned roles and separated classes. Queerness, by definition, is messy, complicated, and a celebration of unique individual agency. Movement cannot be sustainably achieved without intersectional inclusion and coalition—alongside those you do not relate to, and even those you may not agree with on all politics. This may require you to step out of your comfort zone, but that’s okay!

*not necessarily radfem rhetoric but still important!

Questions? Please read my sources! :)

🩷❤️🧡💛💚🩵💙💜

Disclaimer: I am a cis demisexual, bisexual femme WLW of colour. Colonialism has erased historical sapphic cultures in many countries, including my own. As the US has established cultural dominance, my understanding is based off western texts and studies. LGBTQ+ experiences are diverse, but we also reproduce patterns of existence and resistance globally, even without historical context. Unfortunately, this includes our mistakes, like succumbing to divisive rhetoric. Thanks for reading and kind suggestions & corrections are appreciated! :)

39 notes · View notes