#Exclusionism

[imjunebitch]

i think that some people in the queer community need to learn the difference between tolerance vs. acceptance/support.

a lot of the sentiment "in support" of weird queers is really just tolerant of them. idk how many times ive seen posts like "lesboys/multigender folks/people with neopronouns/whatever might be cringe, but they're better than exclusionists! let kids be cringe!" and like. you have to see that this isn't actually supportive. it's tolerant, sure, and that's better than outright exclusion but... ok.

I don't think any of those groups are cringe. i think they're wonderful and beautiful.

i think it's awesome that transmasc folks can hold on to the label of lesbian if they like. he/him lesbians have been around for a long time. historically, some lesbians have taken testosterone, used nonbinary and masculine pronouns, preferred masculine terms... that isn't gonna stop because some people decided it's specifically cringe when transmascs do it! im mostly sapphic, and I'm fucking proud to stand with my sapphic sisters, brothers, and siblings!

multigender and genderfluid people are awesome as fuck. therians are cool as fuck. i love boygirls and fagdykes and girlfags and girlboys and genderfuckery of all kinds. don't let people treat you like a kid for wanting an identity of that kind. fuck em, you're great.

neopronouns are cool as fuck too. i keep hearing people saying that everyone who uses them is a kid, and that's sinister shit. you hear it on both sides too. exclusionists say it derisively, and people who think they're being supportive say it to defend them... but it's really, genuinely cool. people want to act like being nonbinary is only one experience, and that we have gone from there being only two genders to there now being a third gender, which is called nonbinary and uses they/them pronouns. but hey, fuck that sentiment in particular. gender is a spectrum, and it makes total fucking sense for people to want to create pronouns and terms to describe their own experiences! hell yeah!

you hear a lot of "well, these people are just kids, we should give them a space to learn," or "they're not doing anything wrong i guess," but these are not genuinely supportive statements! so how's this: I fucking love all of these people, and i hope our community gets more of them. I pray for a day when they outnumber the grim, humorless exclusionists who want to gatekeep acceptance by the thousands. fuck exclusionists, pride is for everyone.

(pre-emptive note: no this post isn't for MAPs or radqueers or anyone like that, obviously, grow up. hurting and preying on defenseless people/animals is obviously not a valid identity, don't even try to compare those things.)

[parasiticstars]

nooooo little chronically online leftist don’t fall for the media’s pervasive purity testing and villainizing that’s specifically made to divide us and keep us fighting amongst ourselves when we should be focusing on getting the boot off our throats

[crazycatsiren]

Some of y'all have got to learn the difference between "exclusion" and "this is not about you".

[currantlee]

The A in LGBTQAI+ does not stand for ally. Yeah, allies are cool and all, but the A isn’t for them. The A is for all lovely aros and aces who are just as queer as I am.

[timidsketch]

I see so many trans women who are radical feminists on this website. They don't even seem to realize they're radical feminists either, yet they act the exact same way radical feminists do. I've had to see so many trans women radical feminists at this point that I don't trust any post about trans women anymore. Nine times out of ten, whoever wrote it is a trans woman who believes in excluding other trans people from the community, being a bigot to trans men, supporting oppression hierarchies, and putting themself on top of said oppression hierarchies.

If your entire world view revolves around you being the most oppressed group in the world, which you take as allowance to be bigoted as fuck to other people, you're no different than a radical feminist. You're just a bigot who thinks playing the victim card means you can get away with your bigoted beliefs. Please care about other people for once.

[cherrytea556]

I just know the lgb will be up in arms and come at me with their pitch-knife forks if i tell them that i would genuinely be more accepted as a lesbian than as an aroace

[arctic-hands]

I keep saying this in reblogs to other posts but I'm going to say this in an original post now because holy shit

You cannot carbon copy paste queer discourse into other non-queer facets of life. Physically disabled people are not equivalent to terfs or "exclusionary" just because the cripplepunk community is for physically disabled people. This isn't any more exclusionary than a white person such as myself not being allowed to say a racial slur. Life doesn't work like that holy shit

[raccoon-living-in-the-garage]

When I was younger, I believed in an LGB hierarchy, one that not only measured oppression but general "queerness." This belief wasn't one that was pulled from thin air either, but a it was reflection of trends I saw on social media.

TIMs and TIFs were near the top, their "oppression" the most horrible, their lives the absolute worst, their voices the voices that actually mattered in discussions regarding LGB history and politics. These new, made up identities came next, the pansexual taking precedent over the bisexual, the omnisexual taking precedent over the lesbian. It all seemed to push actual LGB people to the side, ignoring us in favor of those who probably didn't even experience an ounce of same sex attraction.

Looking back on it as a grown woman, I realize just how terrible it is that the little bisexual me felt out of place in her own group because she didn't have a million and one identities that conflicted. I know I tried to prove myself to this imaginary voyeur that demanded I be "queer" instead of who I actually was. I chose a new name, new pronouns, I called myself stupid things like panromantic and asexual. All of my friends were doing it, so why didn't I?

This is to say, there is no such thing as being LGB enough. You are or you aren't. I am bisexual, I am same sex attracted. That's it. That's all there is to it.

[transfaguette]

genuinely what is the end goal of being an exclusionist. do you just like being a cop? is that it?

[bloggingboutburgers]

Some years ago I saw this online discourse about how Bi/Pan/Aro/Ace should not be part of the LGBTQIA+ group because we can "pass as straight". As a Pan, I was really hurt reading this. It felt like the one group that was supposed to fully accept me, was in fact rejecting me. It felt like if you're anything else than Gay or Lesbian, you can't be there. Since then I've been avoiding LGBTQIA+ movements, discussions etc online because I don't want to read that kind of hateful message again. But I saw your comics multiple time on my timeline and it feels like you're a great safe space for Ace and Aro. I hope you keep doing them, they're really cool. Great job :)

Yeah, I really feel your experience here TwT Same for me... The "passing" thing is bullshit (when it comes to orientation, anyone can be "passing" provided they don't look like a walking stereotype of their orientation... Right...?) and being rejected by those society collectively rejects you alongside of doubles the sense of estrangement.

My past experience with this and bullying makes it so that to this day I still have an uncontrollable anxious stomachache when preparing to go to queer events when I even dare to go, even though I know in most cases it's mostly irrational by now as there's been some progress since. It's hard to detach oneself from these past experiences.

Even this blog being the way it is now is total chance - I just decided to draw something about asexuality again one day for Asexual Awareness Week and SOMEHOW this time around people responded positively to it so I decided to double down and keep venting decades of pent-up feelings. That's really just how it went 🙈

[humunanunga]

Plurality, endogenesis and sysmedicalism.

Yeah no, I'm not done yet. Please bear with me for a word of caution.

So before making this post in reaction to seeing tulpa "systems" DNI, endo/endo-supporters DNI and non-traumagenic systems/supporters DNI across three fandom tags so far, I asked the systems I know if this was as Transmed But For Systems as it looked to an outsider. That was when I learned endo-exclusionists are called sysmeds.

Now, if you've been on Tumblr in the 2020s, you likely already know what plurality is. If you don't, it refers to an internal experience of living as multiple people who may take turns fronting– and together with whomever would be designated the "host," they are called a system. It used to be widely called split personality or multiple personality disorder, but as it stands currently, I don't think psychiatry yet recognizes a distinction between headmates, such as in plurality, and alters, such as in dissociative identity disorder (DID). The two can coexist, but not everyone with DID is plural, and not every plural has DID.

Which brings us to traumagenesis and endogenesis. Traumagenic systems or headmates, as the term suggests, have been caused by traumatic events, either acute or chronic, as is commonly the case with DID. Endogenesis, on the other hand, is a broad term for other causes. Tulpamancy, the deliberate formation of a headmate, is one example, but traumagenic systems can include endogenic headmates and vice-versa, and endogenic systems or headmates may also be caused by, for just one example, the same neurological processes that cause delusions or hallucinations. Which is to say, they're not making it up or following a trend, but the causes for endogenic plurality are more varied, and thus may simply not yet be as well-researched or as widely understood as another common cause.

So, how do you know whether someone's system is endogenic or traumagenic? Well, what if the systems themselves don't know if they're endo? What if a system who identifies as endo doesn't know they're traumagenic? How far would you be willing to invade someone's privacy to try to tell apart an endogenic system from a traumagenic system?

Before I continue, I myself am not plural, not to my knowledge. What I am is close to multiple plurals, both locally and across group chats. So I consulted them for this post:

And now that we've hopefully cleared up some misconceptions, some presumptions maybe, I'll get to the point.

I have been on Tumblr since early 2012, late 2011. Years before I knew I was trans, I was here through the prevalence of transmedicalism, and the damage exclusionism did, keeping far more trans people in the closet than were protected from radfems, by repeating the same excuses transphobic doctors give to deny resources.

Bigots don't mistreat plurals for why you're plural, they mistreat you for being plural. Whether you've been mistreated for your plurality is not the fault of other plurals.

People of Tumblr, do not do that shit again with sysmedicalism. Do not reenact 2010s Tumblr. You would not be protecting anyone if you did this, you would be acting as someone else other plurals need protection from.

[timidsketch]

I fucking hate the massive amount of assholes who make everything about trans women and erase all other trans people. Notice how this person mentioned "trans people" once but then everything else it says is specifically about "trans women" and nobody else. The person even has "TMA"/"TME" shit in its bio, red flags for transandrophobic BS. This is the trans equivalent of the assholes who make everything about disability into only being about physical disabilities.

If you want to talk about one specific group, do so. But stop using language that implies you're talking about the entire community when you fucking aren't. Stop pretending you care about the entire community when your "activism" is only about your own fucking group or the group you think "has it worst 😫" I can see through your selfish, oppression hierarchy bullshit from a mile away. You do not give a shit about anybody else, so stop pretending you fight for us all.

[intersexfairy]

daily reminder i guess that "queer exclusionism" and "online discourse" isn't just internet bullshit. it has harmful, sometimes dangerous, impacts on real people. the people you see spouting even the most vapid queerphobia are real people who go around in their lives and their beliefs hurt others. it even hurts themselves. the internet may not be a physical place, but it still a place. the people on here are still real. it matters.

if all it is to you is nothing, you're either in denial or one of the lucky ones. also queerphobia isn't less important just because it comes from other queer people or takes place online.

[rjalker]

[ID: The asexual, aroace, and aromantic pride flags next to eachother, with text over top reading, "Asexual and aromantic are umbrella terms that represent every single person who identifies with them. You do not get to tell people they don't belong just because they don't fit your personal arbitrary definitions of what asexuality or aromanticism 'really' are or 'really' include. You do not get to define other people's orientations or experiences for them. You do not get to tell someone that something is 'only' an aromantic or 'only' an asexual experience.". End ID.]

Stop telling people they're not allowed to tag their posts as "aromantic" or "asexual" or "aroace" because you have decided that their personal experiences have nothing to do with what they've tagged their own post.

You are not the arbiter of what aromanticism and asexuality "really" mean. They mean different things to every person who experiences them.

You do not get to force your arbitrary definitions of what an aromantic or asexual or aroace experience "really is" onto anyone else.

Stop trying to exclude people from the literal gods damned terms that represent the entire community because you think they don't fit into your arbitrary definitions enough to be allowed in.

If you hate the diversity of experiences in the aromantic and asexual communities, you have a personal problem you need to deal with. And you do not get to exclude anyone else because of it.

The split attraction model is not mandatory.

Stop erasing and speaking over non-SAM aros aces and aroaces. You literally do not get to define our experiences for us.

Stop excluding people from the community for failing to live up to your arbitrary and strictly defined definitions.

Exclusionism will never help anyone.

[posting-stuffies]

Original | Exclu comments

Exclus went full circle.

"I'm attracted to one gender" -> "I am bisexual". Lolgic!

[sophieinwonderland]

As a pro endo, something else i want is traumagenic system spaces that don't exclude non-traumagenic CDD systems or traumagenic + something else systems. I want CDD spaces that welcome non traumagenic CDD systems, pro endo CDD systems, spiritual CDD systems. I want spaces for traumatized systems that includes traumatized endogenic systems and other origins.

If someone wants a space for 100% traumagenic systems with a CDD who view their system in a medical way only and reject any other type of system? They should create that space! Genuinely. Create it, you can have it. But please label it correctly so the rest of us don't have to be accused of invading because you failed to realize "CDD systems only" includes a greater variety of people than you'd like.

Yes! This is absolutely a huge problem!

Als, something that I've talked about in the past is a difference between what I see as "exclusionism" and "selective inclusionism."

On the surface, this might sound like some weird double speak. But it gets at this issue with exclusionary CDD spaces. Selective inclusionism would be a community only allowing people with certain traits. Exclusionism is disallowing people with certain traits.

For example, a trans community only allowing people who are transgender in some way is selective inclusion. You are choosing a group to provide a space to and only making the space for them.

On the other hand, exclusionism is when you make a trans community and say "no asexual people allowed" or "no otherkin allowed." Now you are excluding people who the group was originally created for because of unrelated traits. And this is where things get especially toxic.

Cycling back to syscourse, a CDD community that was actually for all CDD systems is selective inclusion. It's fair to not allow people without complex dissociative disorders into that space. When it becomes exclusionist is when you decide CDD systems with spiritual beliefs or tulpas or other non-traumagenic headmates shouldn't be allowed either. And I think that's extremely problematic, and incredibly harmful to CDD systems.