#all my xlx terms

[eldorr]

Charoitean

A juvelic orientation where one is primarily a xenic non-binary man, primarily attracted to xenic non-binary men. However one may sometimes be other genders and also be attracted to other genders.

This includes: (Examples of being other genders, where one never identifies as a woman)

A genderfluid individual who is primarily fluid between xenine, masculine, and neutral genders. However one is also fluid between other kinds of genders. (Such as Genderfluvi)

A demigender individual who is partly a masculine+neutral+xenine gender, and partly genderfluid.

A multigender individual who is more masculine, neutral, and xenine genders versus other types of genders.

This includes: (Examples of being attracted to other genders, not attracted to individuals who primarily ID as women)

An individual who prioritizes their attraction to masculine, neutral, and xenine gendered individuals. This could include someone who is attracted primarily to Xenoboys/Xenboys, or otherwise xenic non-binary men. However one is also attracted to other genders.

Being abro-oriented but however primarily being attracted to masculine, neutral, and xenine genders. This could include an abro individual who prioritizes relationships with those with these kinds of genders.

Being attracted to masculine, neutral, and xenine genders; however entering relationships without caring much about your partner(s)’s gender(s). This can include Cupiospec or Pan individuals.

Chaoritean can be described as being primarily MLM, MLN, MLX, NLM, NLN, NLX, XLM, XLN, XLX.

However Chaoritean can include any sort of combination of Gender-Loving-Gender terms, such as MLK, NLAG, XLGF, AGLN, GFLN, KLM, etc. (AG = Agender, K = Kenochoric, GF = Genderfluid)

This term can be comparable to Violaen / Violae Veldian, as the focus is queer love between men and anyone who doesn't primarily identify as a woman. However Charoitean has the added aspect of it being queer love between xenic/xenine/xenogender (nonbinary) men. Chaoritean individuals may identify as women or be attracted to women VERY rarely, or under super specific conditions.

.

This term was originally posted September 22nd, 2022.

Anyways I coined this to explain my orientation as a polyfluid (multigender genderfluid) abro-oriented person. I’m usually attracted to men so I prioritize that, however I’m T4T/N4N, so add the spicyness of being non-binary onto that, plus being able to talk about xenogenders with potential partners? Yes please. :)

Like the term I coined earlier (Xenaeli), this is to explain my own experience. I primarily ID as an abro plypan veldian (flexible-like with Violaen/Uranic) due to how my orientation works, but kinda wanted a catch-all term for something like that, therefore this term was born.

Generally I’d describe my gender as being M,N,X + K,GF + Weird Fem genders, and my orientation being M + N,X + K,GF,W. Basically I’m a Xenaeli individual attracted primarily to non-binary (xenic) men, however if they’re also kenochoric, genderfluid, a woman, etc. along with those genders then yeah I’m attracted to them. However I’m also aspec and pan/omni-oriented at times, so I pretty much enter relationships without really caring much about gender, but in concept only rlly attracted to men + those who primarily ID as men.

The name and flag are based off the gemstone Charoite.

EDIT: The feminine equivalent is Zoisitean.

[reverse-queer-dictionary]

hi!! i was wondering what label suggestions you might have for someone who is nonbinary and romantically attracted to multiple genders? (i'm aware that bi and pan technically fit this, but they don't feel right for me)

Hello!

(I’m assuming you’ve already read the disclaimer in my pinned post, so I will not restate it /lh)

Since you said bi and pan don’t really fit, I’m guessing these won’t either, but here are a few more well-known labels that have to do with being attracted to multiple genders:

Polyromantic (Attracted to various/multiple/many genders—definitions vary)

Omniromantic (Attracted to all genders)

Multiromantic (Attracted to multiple genders)

I couldn’t find a term that specifically describes a nonbinary person that is attracted to multiple, non-specified genders. However, I was able to find several labels that a nonbinary person who is attracted to specified genders:

There is diamoric, which is an umbrella term that describes a nonbinary person feeling attraction in a nonbinary way. It does not specify what or how many genders you are attracted to, though.

Here are a few diamoric terms that do specify which genders you’re attracted to:

Terraric (Nonbinary attraction to other nonbinary individuals exclusively)

Marsic (Nonbinary attraction to men and masculine-aligned individuals exclusively)

Venusic (Nonbinary attraction to women and feminine-aligned individuals exclusively)

Enbian (Nonbinary attraction to other nonbinary individuals, exclusively or non-exclusively)

Toric (Nonbinary attraction to men, exclusively or not)

Trixic (Nonbinary attraction to women, exclusively or not)

Tiric (Nonbinary attraction to men and women, exclusively or not)

There are also Juvelic orientations, which are orientations that specify what gender you are and what gender(s) you’re attracted to. They follow the xlx format (e.g. wlw, nlm, etc.) You can find a full list here that includes orientations for man-aligned nonbinary people/nonbinary men and women-aligned nonbinary people/nonbinary women. Here are the ones that are for non man-aligned or woman-aligned nonbinary individuals, though:

Carnelian (Nonbinary attraction to men and other nonbinary individuals; nlm + nln)

Brownitian/Ametrian (Nonbinary attraction to women and other nonbinary individuals; nlw + nln)

Jaspian (Nonbinary attraction to men, women, and other nonbinary individuals; nlw + nlm + nln)

Scapolitian (Nonbinary attraction to men and women; nlm + nlw)

All underlined terms have a link to an article further describing them! Hopefully I was able to at least somewhat help, and remember that it’s perfectly fine to use no labels or umbrella labels if there aren’t any specific labels that fit! (It’s also perfectly fine to use multiple labels/specific labels if they do fit!)

[its-bi-yearning-bestie]

hi!! soooo, i follow a lot of mlm accounts but i realised there aren’t really any xlx (x = all/any, idk if there’s a proper term lol). i’m a guy/ transmasc so all of my posts will be coming from a xlm perspective - also ofc be aware that is am a guy, incase ur blog is w/nblw/nb only!

i’m gonna make bi positivity posts, and hopefully some bi yearning posts :3c

- a quick about the admin!

i follow from @jaxsspamwoooooo !

he/they, 17 (bday in july), white

[bebbls-craft-blog]

I don’t know if any other Agender peeps feel like this but, I decided to make some terms/flags for Agender people who feel alligned!

Venus Agender:

For those who feel they have no gender but consider/refer to themselves as girls, are comfortable being viewed as girls, somewhat identify with being female/a girl. This identity can be presented anyway, masculine (tomboys), feminine (traditional), and androgynous (both/neither)!

Venus Agender people view their attraction to women/feminine people as gay, their attraction to men/masculine people as straight, and attraction to other genderless people as whatever they please!

Mars Agender:

For those who feel they have no gender but consider/refer to themselves as boys, are comfortable being viewed as boys, somewhat identify with being male/a boy. This identity can be presented anyway, masculine (traditional), feminine (janegirl), and androgynous (both/neither)!

Mars Agender people view their attraction to men/masculine people as gay, their attraction to women/feminine people as straight, and attraction to other genderless people as whatever they please!

Neptune Agender:

For those who feel they have no gender whatsoever and are only comfortable being seen as genderless, and not identifying with anything at all. This identity can be presented anyway, masculine, feminine, and androgynous.

Neptune Agender people view their attraction as simply just attraction. They don’t feel gay or straight or anything really. Often just use terms like xlw, xlm, xlx, etc.

Mercury Agender:

For those who feel they have no gender but consider/refer to themselves as anything, are comfortable being seen as anything, and somewhat identifying anything. This identity can be presented anyway, masculine, feminine, and androgynous.

Mercury Agender people’s attraction could be however they please! Gay towards both, straight towards both, nothing to either, it really depends! Some Mercury Agender people’s identities with attraction may even be fluid!

I’m not saying these terms have to be used nor do they apply to everyone. But it’s just a quick thought I had. I know these aren’t perfect but I felt that my relationship with being Agender may not be the same as others, hence why I made these!

I would appreciate Reblogs/credit for these flags if they are used though!

[queerso]

Honestly if you know a term for xlm, xlx and xln I’d love to know 👀 And possibly,, a gender related to cherry blossoms for my dumb kinnie heart — Endy 🌸

I can make some for all if youd like :0 !! 💗🌸🌸

@flowerfallsyndrome

[faunmoss]

1,2,8,10,15,16

Omg so many :O

1. Who (if anyone) was your first non-binary crush?

idk if this counts bc in both cases I’m pretty sure the person didn’t identify as nb, but I had a crush on an androgynous kid when I was like 12-14 from the school next to mine. I crushed on them specifically bc they looked to me like (and I hoped they were) neither a boy nor a girl. I never talked to them and kinda didn’t want to bc I was worried that they’d turn out to be a girl or a boy after all.

The other person was Brian Molko, singer of Placebo :) I had a huuuuuge celebrity crush! again not really sure how Brian identifies, but my crush was specifically bc of androgynous looks and a feeling of exhilaration that there were people who aren’t easily definable as either. 

2. Which acronym do you prefer for enbian; nblnb, xlx, nln nbwnb or other?

I’m not sure I only found out about this really today so uhh idk! I think they’re all really cool and I’ll probably end up using whichever is the most common. I also don’t really know what nbwnb stands for? (nonbinary with nonbinary? maybe?)

8. If colours were genders what colour/s would your gender be?

omg ok not to be extra but like galaxy print

10. Are you a star enbian or a sun enbian? 

The sun is also a star so I don’t have to choose between these! 

15. Where would you take a partner on an ideal date?

A botanical garden or greenhouse! The ocean...... A museum about the north sea, or an archaeological museum c:

Oh oh oh wait I have the perfect date: Swimming in the ocean at midnight during a full moon, being in total awe of the bioluminescent comb jellies around us.

16. Do you use the term “Gay” to describe yourself?

YES absolutely! It’s just, very true imo? like there are also other terms I use like bi/pan, queer; and sth I learned today is diamoric. 

The really cool thing about being genderqueer imo is that, no matter who I’m going to be attrated to, it’s always going to be really really gay :>

[frabjous-fragment]

a critique of lesbian discourse from a nonbinary perspective

(saw something that upset me enough to want to get my opinion out there, so here i am, turning to my tum blur dot com poe eh tree blog to engage in lgbt discourse. happy pride)

I am an agender person designated male at birth. I consider myself pansexual with asexual characteristics, but historically, I have mostly been romantically involved with people who could be painted broadly as transfeminine. Because of this, binarism that tries to divide me from the lesbian community has always stuck out to me more. I hope to illustrate to people who will keep an open mind how the dismissal of individuals identifying themselves as bi lesbians is rooted in binarism.

This carrd seems like the most comprehensive and mainstream formulation of the argument I could find, so I'll go down it point by point. Before diving in, though, I want to point out that the author, an asexual and nonbinary dfab lesbian, feels so strongly about this issue that they operate a blocklist of people who identify as bisexual lesbians on Twitter. Bear the fact that people feel strongly enough about the issue to draw lines in the sand through the community in mind, as we dissect the causes, effects, and purposes of this issue's hot button status.

tl;dr: There is no antagonistic conflict of interest between bisexual women and lesbian women.

"Lesbian is not an umbrella term." It's not surprising to me that the carrd opens like this, since the entire argument requires this prior, but the formulation here is actually very weak and even concedes things that weaken it further. "These simplifications of people's sexuality were grown out of as queer people started to create labels and spaces that more accurately described them." Buckle up, because most of the rest of this post rests on this very loaded throwaway sentence. This is a simplification of the truth and overlooks some pretty unfortunate history. The fact of the matter is that bisexual and asexual people were included in the discourse of the gay rights movement from the very beginning. The Asexual Manifesto was written in 1972, and Donny the Punk, founder of the first LGBT student movement, identified as bisexual (recorded in writing earliest in 1972- incidentally, when he discusses his break with elements of the gay liberation movement, due to his treatment after falling in love with a woman in 1970). Therefore, the argument that people simply used weak terminology like "homophile" in the early days because there was not more specific terminology available to people lacks something. The cruder truth is that it was all people needed for compatibility, to go to gay hookup spots, make friends, have sex, and maybe find a long term relationship. Bisexual, transgender, intersex, asexual, and further subcommunities arose with the rise of gay identity politics, and conflicts of interest within it. Who would these conflicts of interest be revised out of our community's history? The answer is simple and unfortunate- sexism. Donny was far from the only individual met with the sentiment that he was a gender traitor- lesbian separatism, an unfortunate reaction to real issues the early gay movement had with representing lesbians, swept through lesbian spaces in the 70s, devastating bisexual and transgender women and bolstering the nascent bisexual and transgender movements. By the end of the decade, TERF queen Janice Raymonds included "testimony" from other bigots against two named trans women existing peacefully in lesbian spaces, in her hate screed The Transsexual Empire, quoting another TERF's writing as saying "I feel raped when Olivia passes off Sandy ... as a real woman." This is an obvious appropriation of the language of personal rights to justify bigotry, judgment, hate, and exclusion. All manner of feminists and lesbians have attempted to whitewash the darker sentiments of this period by dismissing the proponents of radical, genocidal propositions like Valerie Solanas' SCUM Manifesto as "just venting" or "fringe lunatics". (To not get too into it, Solanas went back and forth on whether or not her work was satire, in a manner I find eerily similar to what reactionaries do when they put 'this account is satire' on their Twitters.) This is easy to prove incorrect; non-buzzword, actual, political misandry had reached the highest levels of feminist leadership and academia. Observe what one of the first professors of women's studies in the world, Sally Miller Gearhart, had to say on "the male question": I) Every culture must begin to affirm a female future. "The future is female" is a phrase that has been effectively neutralized and recuperated by less radical elements, which I am all for. It is vague enough to work to better ends than the next two points by itself. II) Species responsibility must be returned to women in every culture. Here it becomes more clear that, in the minds of many prominent feminists of the 1970s, women would have to be supreme over men. There isn't much of another way to interpret the statement that women must bear all responsibility for humanity. III) The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race. How would this be done? The only answer is eugenics through selective abortion imposed by the state, and genocide. Clearly, even from just a perspective of women's rights, this is inadmissible to anyone who is genuinely pro-choice on the

subject of women's bodies, even though this is not a situation we usually think of. The very suggestion of this is fascistic. Make no mistake that the modern sentiment against bi lesbians is not rooted in the same fascist gender essentialism. One denies that "benign" anti-bisexual and anti-transgender sentiments still predominate in lesbian and gay communities at your own risk. Not only are you speaking over the lived experiences of people like me, you are speaking against the statistics. Not only do incredible majorities of 88.5% of gay men and 71% of lesbian women, compared to 48% of bisexual and similar people, still exclude trans people from romantic and sexual considerations due to the subliminal sexism they learn from both mainstream society and their LGBT communities, but surveys show that gay men and lesbian women respectively distrust bisexual men and bisexual women's attraction to them and affiliation with their communities. (Also widely*... couldn't resist pointing out the common eggcorn.) "Lesbian used to be the term that described all sapphics, but isn't anymore, and that's a positive thing. Having more specific labels has allowed for people's bisexuality and pansexuality to not be erased in common language, and was a step towards getting rid of the pressure for people attracted to multiple genders to 'pick a side'. The emergence of terms like 'bi/pan lesbian' and 'bi/pan hetero' reinforces the notion of needing to 'pick a side', and obscures the common definitions of all the sexualities involved" This is that concession that I mentioned earlier. Credit where it's due, it's an elevation of the discourse to actually admit this when other people won't even do that. But it again ignores why these pressures exist, and incorrectly presupposes a demand for terminology that could be argued to be divisive without looking into why such a demand exists in reality. In a world without these terrible and stupid issues of sexism, people would simply say "I am both gay and straight" and everything would be dandy. Nobody has ever called themselves "bi/pan hetero" and I'm almost not even being hyperbolic. It's not an identity community. Proposing this just sets up the writer's argument that the terminology of "bi/pan lesbian" (and its more accurate parallel, "bi/pan mlm", which I have seen- putting aside my qualms with the limitations and binarism of xlx terminology even when the left operator is nb) divides the bi/pan community. This is the same logic battleaxe bisexuals who view the pansexual label as biphobic and attack people they see as bi (and yes, pan people are also bi by definition) use for their argument that the pansexual label divides bi people, when the only people that I see it "dividing" are the same people getting pissy about trifling points of queer theory that nobody else cares about for no proven reason. In real spaces, nobody tries to get bisexual people to line up on one wall and pansexual people to line up on the other. Pan people do not engage in biphobic discourse. The issue is empty; a non-issue. This it shares in common with the bi lesbian discourse, where the issues are not directly with the communities under fire, but instead vague, abstract, unsubstantiated and unfalsifiable notions of "omg you'll make the straights think [blank]!!" It seems like a theme where, even within LGBT, majorities attack their negations and accuse them of being divisive for asserting themselves and asking for some solidarity in return for the solidarity they provide in the community; you see this with asexual and trans people as well, but that's not what this post is about. Since the entire argument is built on this first point, I could honestly stop here, from a logical perspective. But people have strong emotional responses to the subsequent points, and without going through those, people will change "is not" to "ought not to be" and carry on.

"Making Distinct Spaces for Different Sexuality's Unique Experiences is Important." Around here is where the carrd really starts to resort to trying to twist truisms against their opponents, and on the briefest reflection this doesn't work. The idea that the term "bi lesbian" erases the distinction in between bi women and lesbian women seems to me to commit a category error by defining lesbian women as exclusively homosexual women and then pointing out the obvious truth that these women are distinct from bisexual women. The truth is, bisexual women and lesbian women are not categorically different in really any way other than their relationship to heterosexuality, a distinction easily expressed by- you guessed it- the label "bi lesbian". To reiterate and combine into earlier points: There is no antagonistic conflict of interest between bisexual women and lesbian women.

"Woman Aligned Nonbinary People are Included in Lesbian Attraction". Another truism. Let's move on to the single clause of the single sentence that contains the actual argument- "implying otherwise by wanting to separate that attraction into a new label is enbyphobic invalidating lesbian attraction" So, hi! As a woman aligned nonbinary person, I am here to tell you that this is not correct! I think this is a lot easier for dfab nonbinary people and dmab binary trans women to say than is it for dmab nonbinary people like myself to say. When your identity is as arcane as "I am not a woman but I identify with women because I am of a marginalized neutral gender", a lot more people decide not to take you seriously. If you take out the bolded words, this statement becomes correct, so we're going to focus on them. The only people saying anything about non-binary people not being included in lesbianism by default are the antis and the radfems they unwittingly serve, who actually do believe that point and see it as a good thing. But unfortunately, as a dmab nonbinary person who does not get sorted as a woman under binarism, my experience has been that I am already excluded from lesbianism in practice. If you get sorted as a woman under binarism, good for you! But to say that all lesbians do is obviously incorrect, when you consider all the budding trans women who still have beards and face largely similar issues in the lesbian community. To say that this state of affairs is fine is harmful to trans people; to say that this is different from what people like me face is arbitrary, and arguably binarist. Sapphism needs to look deeper than the surface and accept a foundation built on ties of solidarity and identity with no tests of purity.

"Having a Lean or Strong Prefrence Does Not Make You Any Less Bisexual". (Preference*, firstly.) I am not sure what this truism is doing here. Even many bi lesbians would agree that preferring other women is not what makes them lesbians, their membership in the lesbian community is what makes them lesbians. Refer to the above point; each community should be built on nothing more than solidarity and identity.

"Lesbians Don't Have Attraction to Men or Men-Aligned Nonbinary People, Even When on the Split Attraction Model". Here it is, the Big Chungus of arguments in the bi lesbian discourse. This is one that is seen often that people feel very strongly about, and probably the most contentious, since the implication that bi lesbians facilitate abuse of lesbians seems to motivate how a lot of people feel on the subject. Who has the power here? The insinuation that bi women have more privilege than lesbians is silly and biphobic. Clearly, it's the abusive men who have all the power in this arrangement. So how is the presence or absence of bi lesbians going to change what abusive men, who don't believe in sexual orientation, let alone care about it, decide to do? It can only change the excuses they use, which are chosen at convenience. This is a trick that patriarchy has played on us to get us to attack each-other instead of the enemy. For such a common and spicy point of rhetoric, I'm surprised I didn't write more against it here, but I really feel that the argument against it is that simple. I'll add a personal note here, and say that the dismissal of the divergent opinions of people sorted as males under binarism, alleging that we're "rapey" and want to appropriate things that aren't ours rather than participate in solidarity, is incredibly harmful to those of us who happen to be lesbians, even by the strictest trans-inclusive definition.

"Trans Women are Women". Truism. This is by far the weakest point. Nobody is advancing "bi lesbian" as a trans-inclusive label, though as I said above, it's a statistical fact that bisexual people are much more trans-positive than homosexual people, and therefore, as a transgender person, I tend to feel more welcomed around them. Of course, that's not a categorical distinction, but an unfortunate tendency.

"A Lesbian isn't Less of a Lesbian for Previously Dating Men". Truism. This is a stronger point, but only because it is closer to real rhetoric supporting the idea that bi lesbians are "real". Bisexual women will answer the question of "would you be open to dating a man again?" in the affirmative, and homosexual women will answer in the negative. Some members of the lesbian community do not completely rule out the prospect of dating men, even though it is not something they currently pursue.

The above are the reasons why the community should not fall into the bi lesbian discourse, and the refutations to its arguments. In order to be in full solidarity with fringe members of our sub-communities against bigotry, we must not fall into needless categorical division of groups when our interests are the same. There is no antagonistic conflict of interest between bisexual women and lesbian women.