#also if you feel the need to call yourself bi just to include nonbinary people you should realize that nonbinary people exist outside the

[fussypaws]

idk what the deal is with people suddenly wanting to include men in lesbianism but dni if you are or support mspec/bi/pan lesbians

[our-lesboy-experience]

hiii!!! so uh, this is sorta about 'contradicting' (?) identities in general, but i only recently found out about, like, lesboys and gaygirls and all of that, but what is it exactly? like how does it work? or is that weird to ask? i'm trying figuring myself out but a lot of stuff i've seen doesn't exactly... explain it (or explain it well), and while i guess i do get why, it's just kinda hard to understand it myself for my own identity

also, probably a question you get a lot in a hating way, but isn't the definition of lesbian nonman loving nonman? so then how does lesboy work? like is it for people with more complicated gender identites, like fluctuating genders and bigender? just genuinly confused, my apologies...

sorry for not getting to this sooner- been busier lately and didn't have the time to collect everything I needed to respond!

About what it exactly means to be a lesboy or a gaygirl ('turigirl' is the more common term, 'turi' meaning turian, another word for gay attraction to men. so I'll be referring to it as that from now on), there isn't exactly....one right way to call yourself such. it really depends on the person, but I can give you a basic definition and a list of common reasons someone may call themselves such

im gonna put a read more because this ended up being super long so sorry

lesboy is a term for any lesbian who may have a connection to manhood and/or masculinity. turigirl is just the opposite of that, a gay person (mlm/nblm) who may have a connection to womanhood and/or femininity. common reasons I've seen are:

being multigender or genderfluid

being cusper/in between trans and cis gnc (in between trans man and cis gnc woman, in between trans woman and cis gnc man)

being a system who uses lesboy/turigirl as a collective identity or when identities blur together

a person who uses man/boy or woman/girl as a means of masculine or feminine gender expression but not actually identifying as such

being a trans man/ftm or a trans woman/mtf who still identifies as lesbian or gay for personal reasons

those are far from all the reasons, everyone has their own unique experiences, but the gist is these people may have some sort of connection to manhood/womanhood while still having a queer attraction. personally, I'm multigender, genderfluid, and transmasc. lesboy I find is a nice label to express being both my bigender self and being a lesbian, as it forces people to acknowledge both without separating the two. it's cute and makes me feel validated!

as for "nonman attracted to nonmen" definition of lesbian......it has its issues. it's received criticism all around from all sorts of lesbians in the community. this definition is very new - it emerged only in the recent years, and someone on twitter had date searched it and found it didn't even really exist before 2019. and having that as the one and only official definition that every lesbian has to abide by, when lesbian is a centuries old word with so much history behind it, is a bit ignorant. people who are multiple genders or ftm or bi being lesbian is not even remotely new, going back decades upon decades, and it never stopped existing too. It's a bit weird to have a whole new definition that doesn't include all sorts of lesbians that have been here for so long and just tell them they're not welcomed anymore, right?

that's not even close to the only issue there is with it. it's been disliked for centering lack of attraction to men, or defining lesbian in relation to men, rather than who we're actually attracted to. putting nonbinary people in a new binary of either being "men or nonmen," which not all feel comfortable putting themselves into. especially when considering a definition of gay being "nonwomen attracted to nonwomen," man-woman bigender people are simultaneously excluded from being both lesbian or gay. It inherently overlaps with mspec identity ("attraction to nonmen, which is more than one gender" and "any orientation that involves attraction to more than one gender" kinda obviously overlap), despite people insisting that a lesbian can never be mspec. people have found multiple loopholes in it, (which I can elaborate on if someone wants me to, for the sake of trying to make this as short as possible), and lastly, and term "nonman" (and nonwoman) were found to have existed before to describe the degendering of black people in society. this isn't the only source I've seen for this, but sadly I can't exactly find it (or find it without going back to that hellsite called twitter and I'm not doing that to myself)

oh and as the link points out, defining lesbian by these words also ends up excluding a lot of two-spirit people from ever identifying as lesbian, myself included. which is also really racist. I don't know how you're gonna end up excluding a whole cultural gender that's common for indigenous americans to describe themselves with and try to prove it somehow isn't racist, to be honest

and lastly, some surveys/polls have shown that the definition isn't the most widely accepted by lesbians as people make it out to be. there's this simple poll that someone posted asking how lesbians felt about the definition that received 1,529 responses, and 61.1% of voters said they disliked it. comments gave lots of reasons I've stated already. there was another survey put out that received 211 responses that for any lesbian who had a genderqueer or unique relationship with gender, and one of the questions asking opinions on the "nonmen loving nonmen" as a definition. the average among the group was slightly negative (average 2.838), and reported that the group who tended to feel the most positively about it didn't consider themselves to be trans, with the other positive leaning group considered themselves to be somewhat cis. the group that felt the most negatively sometimes considered themselves to be trans. and of the multigender participants, the average opinion was 2.255 (more negative than the overall average). When concluding, the original poster stated, "When divided by gender, the only groups to feel positive about this definition were "not trans" and "somewhat cis" participants. Multigender participants felt especially negative about this definition"

all of this shows that this definition isn't nearly the best for everyone who considers themselves a lesbian. I know it's been a way to include nonbinary people who are lesbian in it's definition, but I think it really misunderstands why nonbinary people are included in lesbianism in the first place, and just assumes that all nonbinary people aren't men and fails to recognize that multigender/genderfluid people are nonbinary too. and it's not like lesbian has to only have on definition- it can definitely have multiple and depend on each person's experience with it. if someone personally defines them being lesbian around being a nonman attracted to nonmen, and takes pride in not being attracted to men, that's totally fine. what becomes a problem is forcing all lesbians to define themselves like this and make it the standard, or else they're "not real lesbians." it is ahistorical and ignorant to require this or else you'll strip them of their lesbian status, and is really at the end of the day, lesbophobic. especially as a requirement that primarily exists in online spaces. im sure the lesbian who is not at all connected to these circles doesn't particularly care about strict requirements or whether someone is a "nonman" or not. in conclusion, it is not the best nor most accepted definition of lesbian, and deciding which lesbians are valid or not based solely on that definition is pretty exclusionary and ends up policing a lot of lesbians, myself included

[decaffeinatedgalaxyprince]

ground rules: default safeword is 'safeword' or stoplight colors 'red' or 'yellow light', or if i need to communicate something but don't feel the need to stop the scene entirely, i'll use parentheses to (talk like this) sometimes

(updated sept 2024) i'm a switch, age early 30s, central US time zone, nonbinary they/them trans & bi. gender neutral terms usually preferred, or androgynous-masc, or ask. i love interaction; anons, asks, reblogs, and replies are all good! dms not so much, the msg system doesn't like me, and i prefer keeping things semi-public here until i know someone better. introduce yourself & share your limits too, especially titles and pet names. i fucking love those

i have an omo server on discord called the cuddle puddle. main rules: 18+ obviously, no age regre/ssion kinks, no ince/st kinks, no abuse kinks, no 'momm/y' or 'dadd/y' titles or roleplay, no sexualizing littles or fictional kids, no 'bab/yfur'. introduce yourself to get access to the main channels. invite here: https://discord.gg/9pZXvB2N2A

top tier fantasies: being denied permission to pee, especially if it's until i beg/admit that i'm going to have an accident if i don't get permission. being told what to drink. being told to hold it all 'or else'. being told to leak a little. having to ask permission to cross my legs or hold my crotch. being told if i can't hold it/obey whatever holding rule, i'll be punished: i love funishment oh my god. i love being threatened with no toilet breaks or with lots more drinks and nowhere to relieve myself. praise! praise + humiliation!

also great: bondage. sexual omo. sharing fantasies. someone describing accidents or their own relief to make my desperation more urgent. talking about how full i must be and how much i'd love to pee. multiple doms giving me attention. multiple subs holding with me, competing for attention. sensory play. pressing or massaging my full bladder. mild intox.

good: being told what to wear. teasing about waterfalls, water sounds, etc. fantasies about consensual public stuff. golden showers. light s&m. sounding. humiliation. holding contests. peeing somewhere besides a toilet. holding a long time. rapid desp. making me admit/explain what i want in detail.

ok: 'you only want to pee, you don't need to.' some ws. measuring capacity (it's a lot. and therefore kind of a pain to measure)

ask first: 'you don't need to pee, you're not desperate, you just think you are' gaslight type teasing. unrealistic hold goals. holding indefinitely without a goal. short term no touch. pleasure denial / joi. piss drinking. overstim.

no: diap. actual oppression or abuse dressed as kink, including under/age inc/est & non/con. orgasm denial. most hard s&m.

i'm a fat transmasc with a fat trans dick and a sopping wet cunt. my ass is cute too (and very fuckable). gender neutral, masc, or androgynous language prefered. you can switch it up, i'll let you know if i like/dislike something or you can ask. i love talking to people, even if you don't want to talk about sex or bdsm explicitly. i live in an apartment so i can't really do jumping jacks at 3am.

i have a wand vibe, several toys and plugs, a stand to pee funnel, and a decent amount of bondage supplies that you should also feel free to ask me about

other kinks, rough tier list of things that i do like:

S: omorashi, bondage, begging, voice, praise, wholesome, humiliation, DP, clothed sex

A: d/s, roleplay, anal, oral, frottage, dry humping, sounding, wax play, temperature play, sensory play, boots, masks, exhibitionism, leather, terato, science/lab roleplay

B: ws, uniforms, object insertion, body worship, lingerie, dacryphilia, light intox, jeans

C: petplay, feet, s&m

now go forth and tell me to hold my pee 🥰

[will80sbyers]

THANK you, bisexuality has always meant attraction regardless of gender 🙌 people can call themselves what they want of course and every pan person I’ve met has always been well-meaning but sometimes it annoys me that we have to keep clarifying this… bisexuality is attraction regardless of gender, there’s definitions of bisexuality dating all the way back to the 70s that state this… meanwhile pansexuality was coined Way later and it was initially defined as ‘attraction to men, women and trans ppl’ which implies trans ppl are another category not included in regular labels, which is so transphobic. I know the definition has shifted to many things now in an attempt to not be transphobic but all any new definitions keep doing is implying the other labels are something different than they are. Like saying pan is for when you’re also attracted to nonbinary ppl? Wrong, anyone can be attracted to nonbinay ppl, including straight ppl, bc you can’t tell if someone is nonbinary by just looking at them… There’s no need to create an entire new label for the inclusion of nonbinary ppl when other labels never excluded them in the first place... Or saying pan is when gender is not a factor in attraction whereas bi is when gender IS a factor? Well attraction doesn’t work like that, it’s not a mathematical equation, and also here we have again a case of the pan label redefining other labels in order to define itself. Anyway sorry for this rant bc you probably already know this. I really don’t want to upset pan ppl and I think they can obviously call themselves whatever they want, if the word pan feels more like them then obviously that’s beautiful❤️ I’m just pretty tired of anyone trying to redefine MY label in the process of trying to define their own. Like bisexuality is attraction regardless of gender and if that’s how you understand pansexuality then congrats, they’re the same, and don’t yell at me to “get educated”, educate yourself first, I ask this kindly… Anyway. I know they mean well so I feel like an asshole but this has been bugging me and many of my bi friends for a while. If this hurt anyone I’m sorry but I’m tired of having to bite down my frustration in being misunderstood all bc it might hurt pan ppl meanwhile no one cares if it hurts ME to be misunderstood like this. I hope the pan ppl reading this know this: I rlly don’t hate you , we are siblings in queer solidarity, I love you, but please try to understand us❤️

And Dani thank you for making me feel heard ❤️

Yesss absolutely, same I have no problems with people that feel like the pan label is more appropriate for them but I think it's important to remember that bisexuality has always included us non-binary and trans people... and also all the other micro labels of bi+ like "regardless of gender" or with varying degrees etc etc are all under the bisexual umbrella, that's inherently included and I don't feel any need to go outside of the bi definition even with all the stereotypes on our community that may make us want to not take that label to avoid being stereotyped as cheaters or evil etc

Personally the label that feels most me is bisexual and I love it, glad to know you're feeling heard!! Always be proud ✨

[stormysapphic]

I don't use the term bi lesbian myself, but I am bi sexually and lesbian romantically? when I first saw it I thought that was what people meant? I feel a bit alienated from all the different communities because I'd have to exaggerate or lie/closet parts of myself to fit in. I think micro labels are, broadly speaking, bad but I also think encouraging people to hide parts of themselves is not great? I wish I could just say I'm bi and have that be understood to include my perspective, but I've had some pretty nasty experiences with that being used to exclude me or as an excuse for being cruel within a wlw context, and I guess I understand the impulse to try and stop people from seeing you as that stereotype they think is okay to judge/malign etc when that doesn't reflect your reality. Ultimately I think that that's on other ppl for being biphobic, so I won't cave to that pressure personally. At the same time it would be accurate to say I'm bi, and that I'm gay/lesbian, depending on how you understand those terms, and I can see why someone would want to not have to choose or to be selectively hiding one all the time.

I do just wish we didn't really lean so much on stereotyping/'identity politicals' as a stand in for political action/ understanding identities and each other, I think it may often do a lot of harm and be a way that desire for material political change becomes sublimated/transformed into infighting to the benefit of our oppressors... shrug emoji

that's something i almost included as an aside in my post! the acknowledgement that i do understand people may want to carry "all of themselves" with them all of the time, being "bi lesbians" 100% of the time instead of being a "lesbian" in lesbian contexts and "bi" in bi contexts. however, i wasn't ever really talking about having to do that, having to actually hide yourself/parts of yourself in any situation. take my example of a lesbian support group: when i say that a bi woman could go to a meeting like that and sort of "adopt" the lesbian label while there, i don't mean that they would have to hide that they're actually bi. in my experience, the vast majority of lesbian resources/events/etc. are welcoming of openly bi people... but there most certainly are also those that aren't. and i don't think there's anything wrong with having lesbian-only - or bi-only! - spaces for peer support and such, but if you only have resources to host one thing, it probably should be open to everyone who needs it. anyway, that "centering one of your identities for the time being but still not hiding the other(s)" thing applies to more casual situations too, in my own experience - if i'm hanging out in a group of my bi and lesbian friends and one of us says "look at all of us lesbos <3", everyone present knows who's "actually" bi and not lesbian, but no one (hopefully) has an issue with that remark referring to them as well, in the context of a bunch of wlw having fun together. the bi people present are still fully seen and appreciated as bi (and obviously i wouldn't want to, even casually, call a bi person a lesbian if they felt it was indeed erasing their identity). same way, i can be genderqueer and alternately take on the social role of "woman" or "man" when/if i want to, even if my internal sense of gender is the same throughout (and i mean, you don't necessarily even have to be genderqueer/nonbinary to do that). however, i definitely recognise that my current situation irl (at least for the most part) is very fortunate - i've been able to surround myself with people who share my values, such as wlw solidarity across identities. i'm really sorry that you've faced vitriol and felt like you couldn't be fully yourself in your communities. that's the stuff i'm probably most worried about when it comes to "bi lesbian discourse" - the vitriol between our communities and/or bi lesbians feeling like they don't fit in anywhere anymore just because people who don't know what they're talking about are saying some shit like "if you're dating a man you can never ever ever show up at an event that's labeled 'lesbian' - or, if the event is in fact open to people who date men despite it being a 'lesbian event', then they're in the Wrong too". thanks for sharing your thoughts! <3

[panstories]

Sunday Editorial: I Am Not Bisexual

I used to be bisexual.

When I was 15, I discovered the label pansexual for the first time, and it opened my eyes. I think it won’t be surprising to many pansexual people that my discovery that I was genderqueer was tied heavily to pansexuality, and to the idea that nonbinary gender identities weren’t just an afterthought or something to be folded into the binary when discussing attraction, but worthy of consideration on their own, worthy of a label to specify you were attracted to everyone, because some people might not be. It’s a story I’ve heard many times from many genderqueer pan people.

I called myself bisexual before that, because it was the only word I knew to describe attraction to multiple genders. I knew there were more than two, and I knew that bisexuality encompassed attraction to more than two, but there’s a unique kind of radicality to pansexual, the way it openly defied bigots’ expectations, the way I’ve had exorsexists try to tell me I can’t be pansexual because my label’s etymology itself fundamentally disagrees with their entire world view.

That is what drew me to the label when I was 15. And it is partially what’s kept me here. I do still technically fit the definition of bisexual, and I always have fit it, but I am fundamentally no longer bisexual. There are people who are simultaneously bi and pan, but I am not one of those people. My experience of being queer, especially as a pansexual person, is completely irreconciliable with the concept of me being bisexual.

Author’s note: It’s worth noting before I go into this bit that this is by no means a blanket statement about all bisexual people. The bi community is full of many lovely and supportive people who uplift other mspecs. This section is not about them. While it’s unfortunate that a few bigots have ruined an entire label and community for me, that does not mean the label or community itself is bad, just that I cannot see myself identifying with it.

That being said, I have never felt any sense of belonging to the bi community, or support from it. Maybe if I had lived in an era where pansexual and bisexual communities were considered one, where pansexual people were explicitly included in bi activism and bi organizations, I might have felt differently. Maybe I would have also identified as bi, or considered myself part of the “bi umbrella”. But when I have spent my entire time in the queer community being told I am taking bi resources, that I am not free to celebrate bi awareness days and weeks or I am “invading” bi spaces or bi positivity does not extend to me, it is impossible to feel that way. The bi community does not want me, and I do not want it. I have gotten hate and threats from people with bi flags in their profile pictures and “battleaxe bi” in their bios, and I have never felt safe around bi people and in bi spaces, even inclusive ones, because there’s always the thought in the back of my mind that someone hates me, or wants me dead, or has friends who feel that way and sees no problem with it. This isn’t just a difference of opinion. It’s a matter of safety. I can’t be in bi spaces, because there are people there who see no problem with suicide baiting or threatening violence against me and my community.

There is so much focus in queer spaces on reassuring bi people that their identity is whole and complete, and they should not feel less queer than monosexual gay men and lesbians. But I think less focus is given to assuring pan folks of this fact, and of assuring them that they do not have to be bi to fit into the broader community. So I am here to tell you exactly that. If you are pansexual, you are complete. You do not need to use any labels you do not want to. You do not need to call yourself bisexual if you don’t want to. You have a community, and you have a culture, and you have your own history. You’re enough.

[sealbf]

A Breakdown Of Why QTIPAL+ Is Total Horseshit 

For context, the QTIPAL+ (pronounced “cutie-pal” 🤢) image was posted by @UnicornMarch on twitter 15 hours ago as off the time this post was made, August 6th 2020. 

This is infantalising, unncessary, sterotypical and overall fucking stupid. Analysis of the problems with each letter (except for T) and the pronunciation will be under the cut. I am a nonbinary bisexual, so if people of other sexualities and genders want to comment on the issue then go for it

Q, QUEER/QUESTIONING: I want to make one thing absolutely clear which is that I honest to god do not care if you call yourself queer, all the more power to you. However, many LGBT individuals have been called that as a slur and do NOT feel comfortable being called queer, calling themselves queer, or being classified as queer in any capacity. Therefor, classifying those LGBT people as Queer in this new acronym is BEYOND insulting, insensitive and rude.

I, INTERSEX: Time and time again intersex people have asked not to be included in LGBT acronyms because being intersex does not make somebody inherently LGBT, as it is a medican condition. For the sake of clarity because this site’s reading comprehension could use some work overall: This is not to say intersex people CANT be LGBT, just that being intersex does not make them LGBT. As I am dyadic, it is not my place to speak further on this. if any intersex people would like to comment, please feel free. 

P, POLYAMOROUS/BI/PAN: Lumping polyamory and multi-gender attraction together is NOT a good look, its stereotyping bisexuals and pansexuals. There’s a very well known stereotype that bisexuals are slutty, will fuck anything that moves, and are always down for a threesome. This is like common knowledge. By putting polyamory and bi/pan together under the same letter, UnicornMarch has implied that all bisexuals are polyamorous which is, you know, a biphobic stereotype.

A, ACE/ARO/AGENDER/ALLY: Why the hell are the ‘allies’ considered LGBT now? They’re not! If they’re allies to LGBT people, they are not LGBT. Thats like the whole point of being an LGBT-ally. You support being LGBT while not being LGBT. Like this one is just common sense but im wrting it down anyway (Also, not as big a problem as EVERYTHING ELSE, but “agender” is a nonbinary label, and therefor falls under transgender.)

L, LESBIAN/GAY: Gay people and Lesbians need separate labels because their experiences are unique to them. While there is overlap because each lable is just same-gender attraction, women loving women and men loving men are two entirely different things. Having them both under the same letter, L, makes absolutely no sense in the slightest. It’s reductive to the experience of both gay men and lesbians. Additionally the L stands for Lesbian, why the hell are gay men being put under ‘lesbian’ like theyre not. theyre men. 

+ ALL OTHERS WHO NEED IT who the hell else is there? youve already included people that should in no way be included in the LGBT community. this is a rhetorical question for the love of god do NOT start shit with me about this.

The Acronym QTIPAL+ and Pronunciation To me it is very VERY clear that UnicornMarch wanted to make a cutesy UwU acronym and pronunciation more than they wanted to make an inclusive, functioning acronym (because LGBT is already inclusive and functioning. what a fucking surprise! /s). UnicornMarch most likely thought up the cute name and added letters to fit what they wanted, which led to frankly nonsensical and insensitive ‘groupings’ of sexualities into letters. This was done to be trendy and fun without fully thinking about the ramifications of their actions, and the effect it would have on LGBT people. 

Furthermore, the actual pronunciation of “cutie-pal” is infantalising and infuriating. It’s ridiculous. Calling LGBT people “cutie-pals” would make us look immature and silly- there is NO other way I can explain this like I’m mad about this. What the fuck? Like if you would willingly call yourself a cutie-pal then sure I guess! Good for you, like genuinely. But it should under no circumstances be used to categorise an extremely diverse group of people just because it ‘sounds cute’

In Conclusion

[nitewrighter]

Saw ur post about bi/pan stuff and just wanted to share my thoughts - but feel free to delete!

I'm a nonbinary trans guy who used to be VERY attached to the pan label because of the biphobic stuff people say about bisexuality not including trans people. But that's not the history of bisexuality AT ALL and it makes me really sad that myself and so many others have been led to believe that bisexuality is inherently transphobic. After spending the last 5 years studying LGBTQ+ history and theory, I can confidently say that it's not transphobic at all and never was!!! You can find examples of transphobic individuals, but the bisexual community as a whole has always been a better ally to trans people than any other group out there. These days I'm more likely to call myself bisexual even though I also consider myself pansexual because quite frankly the distinction no longer matters to me now that I'm better versed in LGBTQ+ history.

Pansexuals need to realize that bisexuals are our sexuality siblings and that we should be working together to combat hatred towards the LGBTQ+ community, not constantly fighting each other!

Oh, man, I get it, and I really appreciate this ask.

I get like... having this concept of sexuality in your brain where it's like, "man, every concept of sexuality is limited by our cultural concepts of our time." Like... on a pure "Getting straight people to 'Get It'" level, I identify as bisexual, even though there are definitely massive overlaps in my sexuality with people who identify as pansexual. But like... at the same time it's like... theres this fucked up element of trauma manifesting as ahistorical perceptions of self. You do not have a positive concept of how history will perceive you so you make something new--you break new ground. And then that ahistory ironically manifests as straight up rejection of older members of the community. And like... yeah, it's funky. On a cultural level, queerness has occupied this space of simultaneous humor and horror--you want to be yourself, you don't want to be the monster or the butt of the joke, but in terms of media, that's the space you often find your closest analogues--but god, I cannot express how important it is to be around older members of the community IRL--the people who lived through that shit when they were our age. Understanding our history is one of our strongest means of unity.

[tyrannuspitch]

“comphet” isn’t real you’re just describing attraction

okay, i’m not sure i’d go that far.

there is a real phenomenon of repressed gay, aspec and transhet people in denial convincing themselves that they are attracted to people they actually aren’t. you can experience this kind of denial without any other individual pressuring you into it, without any awareness that it’s happening, and all while think that if you WERE queer you’d be totally fine with it. you just aren’t, obviously!

there’s also something that can happen to gay, aspec and transhet people who know about their own identity but haven’t fully come to terms with it yet - basically the bargaining phase - where they can’t shake the feeling that they just need to try harder and then they really will be comfortable being cishet, and/or that their identity is a phase that will inevitably pass.

all of these experiences are real. i just don’t like the framework of “compulsory heterosexuality” for them. i think it’s opaque, and it doesn’t help people analyse why they’re feeling this way, which leaves it open to misinterpretation and misuse.

i would call these experiences denial and internalised (cis)heteronormativity, and there the problem is clear: you haven’t come to terms with your identity yet. you don’t believe yourself about who you are. these feelings are the product of fear and shame, they’re hollow and qualitatively different from real attraction, and if you trust and accept yourself, you can work through this.

“compulsory heterosexuality”, however, frames this as essentially a universal experience (or at least, one anyone could be experiencing.) some mysterious outside force is compelling you to feel a certain way against your will, and those fake feelings aren’t treated as distinct from other people’s real feelings. you’re definitely a homosexual, but you are, somehow, “experiencing heterosexuality”. so you can’t trust your own feelings, you can only trust your politics. afaik this is a radfem/political lesbian framing, and it shows - while this might help some people, the “helpless deluded victim of the patriarchy” framing is not a very healthy approach imo. it treats your feelings as something to be purged and purified, not explored and honoured.

it also just doesn’t really accommodate the possibility that you can be in denial of your own queerness without being cis and gay. like, a lesbian cis woman, a bi trans woman, a straight trans guy, a gay trans guy and an aro/ace nonbinary person might all try to convince themselves they’re straight women, and that might include pretending to be comfortable in relationships they don’t want, but that’s going to look different for all of them. a one-size-fits-all approach isn’t going to work. 

(and speaking as a gay trans guy who thought i was making up my attraction to men for years because i really couldn’t be happy as a cishet woman, but who nevertheless genuinely likes men, a cis lesbian framework just isn’t going to have all the tools to unlock all these people’s specific identities.)

basically: does this framing help some people? absolutely. is it the best framing that can provide the most help to the most people? definitely not. 

and, like, i’m not going to speculate on individual strangers’ identities because that’s not my place at all, but as a general trend... i think telling people to trust their politics above their feelings using a framework that is very hard to disentangle from political lesbianism is kind of inevitably going to lead to some people thinking they’re lesbians when they’re not. so... it’s not everyone, and we can’t and shouldn’t predict who it will be, but there definitely are some people out there who are saying “comphet” when what they really mean... is just attraction.

[rotationalsymmetry]

Reading through a argument around “is queer a self defined thing or is it something where you have to check off at least one specific named identity and tell people what that is thing?” And there’s a 17 year old who expressed concerns about the idea of queer being a self identifier thing getting his ass handed to him. Which, I have to say, my initial reaction (safely saved to drafts) also involved a lot of swear words, and not colorful background swearwords either.

Fuck off. My initial reaction was to tell him to fuck off. And that, never mind about hypothetical straight fakers, I didn’t want him at my queer events.

But...I can understand, being young, probably being new to the community, possibly not having any offline community at all, how someone might find themselves arguing that position.

I mean, we got a lot of gatekeeping of various types on this site and in online queer spaces in general. It’s a thing someone could pick up without really questioning it, just because other queer people are saying it. And, you’re new, you’re unsure of yourself, you want to fit in. I can see it.

So, the kind gentle explanation, for anyone who needs less fuck off and more patiently explaining. (If I get replies/asks about this I’ll attempt to continue with the patient version.)

The acronym isn’t fixed. It’s fluid, and the categories within it are fluid.

For example: Marsha P Johnson in her life didn’t call herself a transgender woman. She called herself a transvestite and a gay man, even though she used she/her pronouns. Now, we look back on that and think “well, the language changed over time, someone who lived the way she did would almost certainly call herself a trans woman now, and the modern queers who identify with her most tend to be trans women.” Categories are fluid, in that now we’re inclined to see “trans woman, cross dresser, gay man” as entirely separate categories that aren’t especially related to each other (and het crossdressers might not be seen as queer at all) but they used to have much more overlap.

As another example, “non-binary” wasn’t really a thing when I hit adulthood. There were people who would now call themselves nonbinary, but they used different terms, like genderqueer. Stone Butch Blues talks about “he-she’s”, a term that straddled “butch lesbian” and the modern “transmasculine”, and which definitely isn’t in common use any more.

And that’s just in recent American history! If you look at how queerness is conceptualized across time and across cultures, it varies so much. Some cultures have more than two genders that are universally recognized within that culture. Some times/cultures see homosexuality as being dependent on whether you’re topping or bottoming or about gender roles: a guy who bottoms or takes on feminine gender roles is gay, while one who tops is just a normal straight guy. Sometimes a culture has fairly set gender roles, but people who are biologically male or female taking on the opposite role and having a same-sex partner is completely normal and unremarkable.

The alternative to “a queer person is someone who says they are queer” is to have a fixed definition. You are queer if you check at least one: gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, (asexual, intersex, two spirit, whatever else we want to explicitly include on the list.) But that would require “queer” to have a fixed definition and for all the sub-types of queer to be fixed.

What about when people don’t know for sure: a woman who knows she’s lesbian or bisexual but not which, a person who might be trans but isn’t quite sure, someone who might be asexual but again isn’t quite sure, but perhaps is quite sure they don’t feel comfortable when straight people talk about sex and romance. (And then there’s what happens when you’ve always thought of yourself as gay, but your partner is transitioning so what does that make you?) Hanging out in queer spaces with people who are queer makes sense for all of those people, even ones who might eventually decide they’re not actually queer after all.

And I’ve been writing paragraphs and paragraphs, but I think I missed the main point, which is: the alternative to “queer is self-defined” is “someone else gets to tell you whether you’re queer or not.” Which gives strangers permission to ask all sorts of invasive questions. (Especially if the given reason for defining queer is to keep people who aren’t queer out of queer spaces! That can only happen if you actually ask people coming into a space what they are!) There’s no way to define queer other than “someone who says they’re queer” or “someone who thinks they fit in with other queer people” that doesn’t open the door to those sorts of challenges.

And, in turn, to gatekeeping out people who might not be “queer enough” (ie, close enough to exclusively gay or lesbian) — in practice, trying to define queer leads to defining queer in a way that excludes aces or some trans people or all trans people or bi/pan people with opposite sex partners, or all of the above.

(Not entirely happy with how I’m using the term “sex” here, because I get “biological sex” can be a complex and very loaded concept for many trans people. If someone sees something they’re uncomfortable with and can suggest a better alt phrasing let me know.)

So, people tend to react to “queer shouldn’t be self-defined” in exactly the same way they’d respond to ace exclusionism or terf talk. Because...in practice, insisting queer has to have a fixed definition (or telling people to not use the word) tends to be round one of a game that ends with exactly those things. Even if you personally didn’t mean it that way, the rest of us don’t know that. We react to it like anti-racist activists respond to “All Lives Matter” — maybe it could be innocuous confusion, but it comes from a place of malice often enough that people do tend to assume malice.

Because the idea of fakers who are really straight infiltrating the community...that’s a terf idea and an exclusionist idea, and it doesn’t really fit with any robust and self-consistent understanding of queerness other than those ideologies.

[lunarssong]

i'm kinda hesitant to post the scs bc they're like my age and i don't want to callout-post them, but ohhhh my god i had. such an interaction the other day. like, peak exclus hypocrisy to the point it almost circled back around to hilarious

cw for queerphobia, biphobia, panphobia, transphobia, transmisogyny and also just misogyny in general, ableism, enbyphobia, etc

highlights include:

they took issue with me saying queer and were going "q slur" but. their url literally has the f slur. hello??

"i'm not being transphobic" as they spout dogwhistles, and also just

i got told i'm gay and not bi because i'm not attracted to women.... less than one post away from an ask mentioning a point i brought up using gender labels as an example where their response has an implied claim they support nonbinary people. how do you manage to acknowledge nonbinary people in one breath and then define them out of existence in the next

and then as a follow up somebody came in their inbox and called me biphobic because of some shit about feeling the need to label preferences. buddy i don't think completely not being attracted to a gender is a "preference" but okay. (also has the vibe of "your orientation isn't actually that, you just have internalized phobia")

also "well i'm autistic too so this gives me the right to insult my perception of your tone (i apologized in advance bc i get told a lot i sound hostile when i'm not) [shits on tone indicators like they're not sometimes helpful to even neurotypicals]", "bi isn't an umbrella term" (when it very literally is, both in reality and by any incorrect definition that acknowledges even just one nonbinary gender)

and of course. "hey so this ideology you bought into is literally part of the radfem/terf indoctrination/recruitment shit, like. a shit ton of them have seriously publicly admitted that it was a step for them" "you sound like a fucking cunt (actual quote), i'm not being transphobic and how dare you just toss around those words. anyway all nonbinary people are inherently included in gay men's attraction, you're wrong about your own orientation, fuck you you're blocked. moving on! time to rb a post about how it's very important to educate yourself on transmisogynistic dogwhistles—"

i think i'm probably going to put the screenshots in a reblog to this post with their url partially censored? and go through each one individually because there are just.. so many problems, holy shit, and they're posting this shit publicly anyways so. i feel like they've lost their right to not getting reposted by a peer whose orientation they directly tried to redefine lmao

[polyamorouspunk]

topic: transmasc lesbians? i see a lot of people online saying "you can't be transmasc and a lesbian" but i mean historically there's been a lot of overlap between butch lesbians and trans men and like if you've identified as a lesbian for 20 years before realizing you're actually transmasc it might feel weird to call yourself straight after that yknow? im just saying gender/sexuality is complex and they dont exist in a void and it makes me angry when ppl pretend they do

It is! Gender is fluid! Sexuality is fluid! And people will be like yeah yeah and then you say something like that and they’re like wait no-

There’s a right way to be queer-

And that ain’t it chief-

Which is bullshit you know.

People be like pronouns don’t equal gender and then if someone who IDs as a girl uses He/Him they’re like wait no that’s not the right was to be queer.

People will be like “I ID with two terms so I’m going to combine them” and people will be like that’s not how words work like ready? Because I just used the word “they’re” which is a combination of 2 words-

And like people will be like “Lesbian has always included nonbinary people” like some lesbians won’t dump their partner after they come out as nonbinary or trans... like that’s why terms like bi lesbian exist...

Also who cares? It really doesn’t effect you.

“If men think lesbians are attracted to women then they’ll use that as an excuse” no men are going to use any excuse whether or not it’s that and also stop blaming other women for shitty men.

“Your gender is why people don’t take my gender seriously” no it’s not? There are plenty of people who are accepting of trans without accepting things like “star gender” even within the queer community? Even some people in the community are transphobic and won’t accept your trans gender?

“These identities are harmful” people having fun with “made up genders” to call themselves similar to making up a nickname for yourself is harmful?

“You need to go outside no one in the real world is going to call you those things” and I’m not expecting them to?

I mean really if you explain to the random stranger on the street that you’re a transmasc lesbian they’re just going to be like okay? I don’t care? Or they’ll ask and you explain and they’re like okay cool and move on with their life. People are a lot more accepting than you would think, that, or they know how to keep their fucking mouths shut and not be fucking rude about it? Like normal people? Don’t bully others for kicks? Most people are naturally kind? I’m sorry that’s hard for exclusionists to understand because they always want to be the victim while also blaming other members of their community for the outside oppression they face (victims blaming).

People be like “stop using out words” and then we make our own and they call them fake and tell them that we just need to use their words for ease....

Gender and sexuality aren’t a science they’re a social construct. They’re imaginary. You cannot hold them in your hand. It’s just not that hard to respect that people have different experiences? Like just because you don’t experience something and you can’t understand it doesn’t mean it isn’t real to someone else. Idk man. Stop blaming other people for your problems. Words are not perfect. Either people get mad because terms like “lesbian” are too broad and so we use them or they’re not broad enough and so we make more and they’re like no that’s too complicated now why can’t you just use lesbian. Also historical context? None.

Anyway this blog supports “contradictory” (not contradictory) identies like “bi lesbian” or “transmasc lesbian” or “nonbinary male” or “genderqueer guy” etc.

[earthmoonlotus]

Are you anti bi lesbians?

I mean...kinda yeah. It’s the rare type of discourse where I can kinda see both sides (like, I can see why someone might want to use the label and have a valid claim to it if they’re attracted to women as a group and also nonbinary people as a group; like, I’m a lesbian and I am attracted to some nonbinary people, but I wouldn’t say I’m attracted to “nonbinary people” as a category because I’m only attracted to the ones who experience gender in a sapphic or woman-alligned way, whereas if someone wasn’t attracted to men but was attracted to both women and nonbinary people who aren’t woman-alligned or sapphic at all, I could see them wanting to use “bi” to indicate attraction to multiple genders and “lesbian” to indicate a lack of attraction to men), but I’m against the insistence that a lot of pro-”bi lesbians” have on the idea that lesbians can be attracted to men.

Like, seeing men actually use the existence of so-called “bi lesbians” as a way to try to get lesbians to sleep with them, and also seeing people insist on things like “I’m happily married to a man but that doesn’t make me any less of a lesbian” honestly make me really furious and disgusted. There’s already a lot of pressure from straight society to get lesbians to be into men, and when LGBTQ communities propagate the idea that you can be a lesbian who’s genuinely into men (like, not just experiencing unwanted attraction or coercive heteronormativity, but like...actually wanting to pursue men genuinely), it’s super harmful to lesbians and I don’t see how someone with any level of empathy or compassion towards lesbians would think otherwise.

I’ve also seen some defenses of the label where it includes the idea that a lesbian who previously thought she was into men, or had been with them in the past but now exclusively wants to pursue women, could have the term “bi lesbian” applied to them and like...no....like, that’s a fairly common lesbian experience, and saying that instead of calling it what it is (coercive heteronormativity) these people should label their sexuality in a way that honors this past, coerced attraction, as if it’s an actual part of their sexuality, is...just plain fucked up. It’s also a form of gatekeeping because like, if you used to think you were into men but have now realized you’re not, you shouldn’t feel like you can’t call yourself a lesbian and instead need to call yourself a “bi lesbian”, as if the coercive heteronormativity somehow tainted your lesbianism in a way that it can never be full and genuine, and you have to wear that coerced, unwanted attraction like a badge wherever you go, because the “pure lesbians” wouldn’t want you as part of their community. Like, that’s literally gatekeeping. People say it’s gatekeeping to criticize the “bi lesbian” label and the rhetoric around it, but in reality it’s gatekeeping to deny the label of “lesbian” to people who have certain experiences that pro-”bi lesbians” say would make someone a “bi lesbian” instead. (There are other experiences that pro-”bi lesbians” would include for which it would be gatekeeping to deny the label of “bisexual” to the people who experience them, like the experience of being into all genders but mostly women.)

I’ve heard bi people talking about the “bi lesbian” label being harmful to bi people too, and I don’t have as much authority to speak on that and am not quite as educated about it (since I don’t have personal experience in the same way), but I can see how it would be harmful to bi people to insist that bisexuality and monosexuality can both exist in a person at the same time.

So yeah I guess, all in all, I’m pretty much against it. I think it’s especially harmful for promoting the idea that lesbians can be into men. The only way I can see the label potentially being acceptable is for women or woman-alligned folks who are into both “women” as a group and “nonbinary people” as a group (without it being exclusive to sapphic nonbinary people).

[nonbinaryresource]

My boyfriend and I are both bi and I’m non-binary. He doesn’t like me calling attention to what makes me different in front of some friends who have different political views (we live in a rural area so school and work friends are not always progressive). He says it’s to protect me from “unwanted arguments”. If these people wouldnt accept me as I am I’m not sure I’d want to keep hanging out with them but I don’t want to ruin his friendships with them. How do I handle this?

When he makes decisions like this without actually asking for your input, he’s not protecting you - he’s protecting himself. It is not okay for him to police your identity and claim that acknowledging your own identity is just “attention seeking”. You are not asking him to talk about his own identity with his friends. You just deserve the right to talk about your own identity with whomever you want.

If he is closeted, he has a right to stay closeted - but him staying closeted inherently means you also have to stay closeted, at least as nonbinary. That’s a big ask. He has a right to stay closeted - but you have a right to decide that you don’t want to live this way, which would mean this relationship is not compatible right now. People can deeply love and care for each other, but sometimes a relationship needs more than just that to work out.

So talk to your boyfriend. Have an open conversation with him about your needs and wants and ask about his needs and wants. Both of you should encourage each other to make “I” statements instead of assuming each other’s mental health or wants or needs or boundaries. IE, you are allowed to say “I don’t like having to limit what I say about my identity or how open I can be with it” and he is allowed to say “I am afraid to get into queer identities too much with my friends because I’m not ready to have to face potentially losing these friendships yet”. But you shouldn’t say “You should stop hanging out with your friends if you can’t be open with them about our identities”, and he shouldn’t say “You shouldn’t talk about your identity in front of my friends because you might get hurt”. Because you each get to decide your own boundaries and then decide if those are compatible boundaries with each other.

You are allowed to have your own boundaries, and that includes not wanting to be closeted or misgendered by your partner’s friends. Sharing how you feel and that you’re uncomfortable with being treated like a secret isn’t forcing himself to do anything or ruining his friendships. It’s having your own opinion about your own mental health and your own desires.

Where you each go from there will be up to you all. He might decide that he still doesn’t want to be open with his friends. You might then decide that means you don’t want to hang out with them or even that you don’t want to continue this relationship. Or you might decide that you want to be more open about your identity. He might then decide that means he wants to keep his relationship with you separate from his from his relationship with his friends or even that he doesn’t want to continue this relationship.

If you are choosing to stay in this relationship, that is also fine, and 100% (both of) your choices. Don’t get me wrong - I’m not advocating you do/must/should break up; I’m just spending more time on it because I already know that you know staying is an option, so I don’t think as much needs said here. I suggest looking through our coping tag for coping mechanisms, which can help you cope with dysphoria, being closeted, and being misgendered. As well, set boundaries for yourself about what you need in order to deal with this. That might mean that you no longer want to see his friends or that you don’t want to hear details of when your boyfriend hangs out with them or maybe it means that you take a self-care day away from your boyfriend after you hang out with him and his friends. What is it you need to be most comfortable with navigating this relationship? Work on doing that.

No relationship can thrive - or even survive - without open and honest communication, though. You can respect his decision and decide you’re fine compromising for now and still get to have feelings about all that. (Which doesn’t mean “unload your upset on your boyfriend after every time he hangs with his friends” - it just means that you each speak plainly and honestly about this with each other and come to an understanding rather than each of you sitting in silence and letting hurt and upset fester and grow.

I just don’t want you to forget that you also have a voice, and it’s okay for you to set boundaries for yourself and how your identity is treated.

I hope you can work this out in a manner you’re both more comfortable with. Good luck.

~Pluto

[raichukfm]

To a confused anon: I’m here to offer my assistance, as best I can. As a fair warning, I have a bad habit of shoving my foot right in my mouth and coming off as an ass, but I promise that’s not what’s intended here. Also, I spent a lot of words on all this. If you don’t want to read a lot of words, scroll down past the break a bit and read the bolded bit, because that’s the most important part, I think. Also, anybody seeing this because they’re following me, this is here to show somebody else, so you can read it if you want but keep that in mind I guess.

Step one, as I am a real trans woman who happens to be gay, I can speak pretty authoritatively that this is gay. Because I’m a woman, and I like women. So it’s gay when I like cis women, and equally as gay as when I like trans women. If I hypothetically liked a cis man or a trans man, that wouldn’t be gay, and also I’d find out I was bi I suppose. If I liked someone that wasn’t a man or a woman I’m not really sure what word I’d use for that, but that’s not really the point. Sexuality, sexual orientation, and sexuality are complicated things. But, generally, what you are attracted to is someone’s gender. You may also be attracted to their sex, or you might not. It’s possible to be attracted to someone’s sex and not their gender. It’s possible to be attracted to someone because of an incorrect perception of their gender. It can be messy; real life is messy. Generally, people will define their own sexual identity in regards to their gender, because that’s what most people care more about in their identity. Usually, that aligns with sex, which is pretty cool, but when it doesn’t for someone, the person generally thinks of themselves as that gender that they are. That’s... kinda the point. So, if you were exclusively attracted to women, you would think yourself straight if you’re a man, and lesbian if you’re a woman, regardless of if you were cis or trans. Similarly, most people are attracted to gender; specifically, gender presentation. It’s by definition more visible than gender identity or sex, and also coincides with both, most of the time, though it can coincide with only one or neither, in other cases. You sort of have to learn or infer those. However, people don’t only care about gender presentation. (Okay, some people probably do.) Which has two major components: 1. People almost always care about a potential partner’s gender identity. It’s just a basic interpersonal thing, even if it doesn’t impact one’s preferences. And if there is a preference, it’s not necessarily a dealbreaker, but... If you like men, then finding out someone you find attractive is actually a woman would probably tamp that down a bit. For one, they are likely (although not necessarily) going to adapt their presentation to be less masculine in the future, but even beyond that... They’re a woman. That in itself can put you off. It’s also possible for that to interface with romantic attraction more than sexual attraction. And that’s okay. A good thing to keep in mind is that your feelings are just feelings. It’s possible for them to go against your self-concept, or have unfortunate implications. Feelings aren’t conscious beliefs. So if you’re attracted to someone for their sex, but aren’t attracted to their gender identity, that’s just an awkward coincidence. No more, no less. Don’t let it get to you, and don’t be a creep or jerk about it. If someone’s gender identity changes, or they come out to you as a different identity than you had previously thought, and that’s not congruent with your sexual or romantic orientation, that’s okay. It can definitely be worthwhile to stick together and see if it works out, because it genuinely might. But it’s also entirely legitimate to split up because of it. The thing is, if this was someone who you cared about, that shouldn’t go away even if your attraction does, so be kind and supportive. They might need distance, or you might, I’m no relationship expert, but do your best to help both of you through something like that. 2. People often care about a potential partner’s sex. This is not a controversy-free take, but it is entirely legitimate to be attracted or not attracted to a sex regardless of gender. That’s fine. Feelings are feelings. There is however, as in all things, an onus not to be a jackass about it. If you are attracted to cis women, but not attracted to trans women, just treat them decently, and turn them down nicely when you must. If you’re attracted to cis men, but not attracted to trans men, just treat them decently and turn them down nicely when you must. If you have a strong preference for or against a certain kind of genitalia or other sexual characteristic, that’s legitimate. But if you’re together with someone and then find out they’re not what you’re attracted to in some respect, you still have to be a good person about it. You don’t owe anybody affection, romance, or sex, but you have to be decent. That goes for physical features the same way it goes for habits, beliefs, anything else. I think what leaf brought up with the fetishizing thing is that a lot of the time the people who (loudly) care about a trans person’s sex treat this as, well, a fetish. And while I think it’s fine to fetishize whatever, a lot of the time that fetishization of a concept involves treating real, actual people shittily, reducing them to objects or . It’s not an inherent quality to caring about someone’s sex I use “care about” a bit broadly there, such that it doesn’t necessarily mean “have a preference about”, because some people genuinely don’t have preferences about gender identity, or about sex, or about either, but still wouldn’t really disregard those. This is maybe muddying the water a tad, but oh well. This is mostly focused on binary gender identities, because the whole straight/gay etc. terminology is mostly focused on those, but the general principles also include nonbinary people. I’d elaborate, but I think it’s pretty straightforward how they fit in. The short of it: If you’re attracted to someone, whether that attraction would be classified as “straight” or “gay” is most respectfully contingent on your respective gender identities. It may be useful to understand your own sexual attraction as contingent on the other person’s gender presentation or sex instead, when it’s not congruent with their gender identity, but I’d stress that’s only for understanding your own feelings. Whatever horny part of your brain might not get the relevant nuance, but you’re a whole intellect, so you don’t get that excuse. If you’re romantically/sexually attracted to somebody you intellectually wouldn’t consider a romantic/sexual partner, that doesn’t invalidate your orientation, but it doesn’t invalidate their identity, either. That’s a bit long for something I’m calling “the short of it” but brevity has never been among my skills. As for another point that apparently came up in asks, about the very nature of gender identity as a thing, I’m going to do my best to crack that nut. I think there is a very simple case to be made: Gender identities exist. If you ask someone, there’s a likely chance they’ll feel pretty strongly that they have one. They might tell you they’re a man, or a woman, or something else. People who don’t believe they have a gender will probably feel fairly strongly that they don’t have one. Even people who don’t believe in transgender or nonbinary people almost always believe in this, even if they want to call it something else. Your gender identity is the gender, if any, that you identify as. We’re just defining the term as that. It turns out, people generally tend to identify with genders (or at least sexes), so we have a term that refers to an idea and correlates with observed reality, so... We have a real thing! Score! I belabored the point a bit, but that’s just the thing. The argument against transgender or nonbinary people tends to be that gender identity isn’t a real thing, that it’s denying reality, or that it’s . But... You can verify it exists. It has to. And it doesn’t obey any restriction to only being two genders, because you can see a sizeable amount of people whose stated identities don’t obey that restriction. I mean, you can disbelieve this, you can think essentially everyone is lying, but that’s a bit of a reality denial position. So the question isn’t “Does gender identity exist?”, because that question has an answer you can’t actually reasonably deny. The question is “Does gender identity matter?” and, um... Again, I’ll invoke the argument that most people care about it. Cisgender people usually care about their gender identity, including those that think it inextricably linked to their sex. Transgender people certainly care about it. What grounds is there to think it doesn’t matter? The arguments I see all tend to rest on this assumption that this is a made up thing, but... It’s not, as earlier stated. It’s based on thinking gender identity must necessarily align with sex, but; you have to just arbitrarily assume that; there’s no justification for this other than it appears to be obviously true to some people. But “It’s obvious, duh” isn’t really an argument. “It’s basic biology” also isn’t an argument. Sex is a fairly basic biological idea, although it’s itself considerably more complicated than just XX chromosomes = biologically female and XY chromosomes = biologically male. But gender identity is a thing to do with your mind. Ergo, it’s your brain, and as it happens, that’s considerably more advanced biology. There’s no obvious reason why a mental self-conception should necessarily correlate with biological sex, and the observable evidence doesn’t point to such a necessary correlation, since transgender and nonbinary people exist. Given that gender identity exists and people care about it, I think there’s a pretty clear case to make that you should respect other people’s gender identities: They want you to. It’s kind. It’s at best rude not to do it, and being rude is one of those things generally agreed to be bad. It’s a whole archetypical way for things to be considered bad, in fact. Any argument in good faith based on psychology will pretty easily come to the conclusion that it should be respected, because that’s the field consensus. The studies show it helps people deal with gender dysphoria to be treated as the gender they identify as. All the anecdotal evidence in the world is there to show you people overwhelming prefer to be treated as the gender they identify as. And the utilitarian counterarguments are... that it poses logistical issues? That’s okay, those can be addressed. That it makes some people uncomfortable or annoyed? It’ll probably be easier for them to get over that and adjust to the way things are. That accepting it will lead to some disastrous consequences? Well that’s... I mean it’s already largely accepted. Last I heard, there hasn’t been any disastrous wave of disastrous consequences here to foreshadow the coming storm. So, to put this aside, if you don’t understand gender identity: That’s okay. It’s messy, but relatively simple. People feel like they are a certain gender, and want to be accepted and treated as that gender. (Or feel they have no gender and want to be accepted and treated accordingly.) That’s the same for cis and trans people. Whether or not that gender correlates to any physical or biological feature in them isn’t really the point of it, because it’s a mental thing. No physical part of you directly correlates to what your name is, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t important to you, for instance. (And, as a last note, if you’ve seen a statistic that the rate of suicide attempts don’t fall after one transitions, it’s being grossly misrepresented. Every time I have seen that with its actual source given, if you follow said source, you find the statistic is from a question being asked about whether the person ever attempted suicide in their life. So, someone who was suicidal pre-transition who lost those suicidal tendencies after transitioning would still answer “yes”, and thus be marked down as such and post-transition. Therefore, the fact that the percentage was roughly the same for pre- and post-transition people says exactly jack shit about the effectiveness or lackthereof of transitioning for suicidal ideation. Every other piece of evidence I’ve seen points to transitioning, and more generally affirming someone’s gender, helps with the negative effects of gender dysphoria. Of course, don’t listen to me. Look it up. But I implore you, basically never trust someone’s summary of the research, at least not totally; the media all too often sucks at summarizing science, and average people are often worse, and that’s without an ideological axe to grind. Find the source if you can. You don’t necessarily have to read the whole thing, but check the abstract or such. As an example, I had a college textbook claim that “Women use their whole brain during conversations, while men use only half”, with a citation to an I think Wired article that restated a BBC website article that incredibly poorly reported on a paper that was actually about putting people in MRI machines listen to books on tape. Women had more activity across both hemispheres of the brain while men had activity more centered around one. It was about strokes and how signals travel across the brain, not communication. Professionals can cock stuff up bad. I’m not saying “Don’t trust the news” or “Don’t trust anybody”, but it doesn’t hurt to check into things as much as you can, and that goes doubly so for research and science.) 

[radfem-moira]

This never happens

I’m 19, back from a year abroad, ready for a fresh new start after a bout of depression. I spent my whole summer coming out to be people. It’s not that coming to a sudden realization during my depression made me want to scream it from the rooftops. It’s that literally every single of my parents friends’, my relatives, the neighbours, my high school friends, keep making that same joke. “Did you meet a nice foreign boy over there?” No. No I didn’t. I met a nice foreign girl. It didn’t go anywhere. I regret being such a coward. But I’m not a coward anymore.

I start college again, with a new direction. I’m a brand new person now. I know where I’m going in life (or so I think). I know what I can and cannot do. I know what I want and what I don’t want. I feel so self-confident, so done with this pushover doormat bullshit I used to pull as a way to avoid responsibility.

It takes a full semester before I try joining the GSA again, like I did before my gap year abroad. I'm apprehensive, but since I know most of the old members have graduated, including the one who’s been haunting my nightmares for over a year now, I feel relatively okay going in. I meet new people. New friends. New friends-of-friends.

Some of those friends-of-friends are trans. There were only three trans people in the GSA back when I left, but now almost a third of the membership identifies that way. Mostly “AFAB” nonbinary people and transmen. I think nothing of it. My LGBT etiquette is decent, I think. I know what’s fashionable to say and what’s not. The first time I hear someone call one of our members, a lesbian, a “TERF” for stating that she could not have sex with someone who has a penis, I stay quiet. I don’t think the other lesbian ever came back.

-

I’m 20. One of our senior executives at the GSA is another lesbian. But then one day, at an educational panel which I’ve organized (I was elected president by that time) at the request of a teacher, she suddenly declares, to an auditorium of over 100 people, that she’s actually “homoflexible”. She tells the whole 100 people that lesbian is the label that she’s “most comfortable with”, because most people “understand it right away”, and anyway she doesn’t think it’s likely she’ll ever date a man again, but she likes to “keep an open mind”, because “you never know”.

A cold feeling of betrayal invades me. I ask myself why. Why? Why not “bisexual”? What’s wrong with “bisexual”? Why do you have to do this to me, and to other lesbians? Why do you have to launch yourself on a diatribe explaining why you, as a bisexual woman, feel more comfortable telling everyone that you’re a lesbian? When actually, you’re perfectly aware that you’ll be a lesbian until the right man comes along? You’re literally playing right into dangerous stereotypes that make existing as an actual homosexual woman a living hell!

Three years later, I’m 23, I have a minor disagreement with a bisexual friend on Facebook, over some unimportant semantics. We’re settling it quite calmly, like adults. Enter homoflexible girl, barging in, berating me for saying something she perceives as “biphobic”, accusing me of “transphobia”. Through that interaction, I learn that homoflexible girl is now dating a “pre-operative trans woman”. Her friends join in for a good old-fashioned dogpile. Eventually, I have to block all of them.

-

I’m 19 again. One of the friends-of-a-friend I’ve met through the GSA is a transwoman. Well, our GSA has two transwomen. But the other one is different, and we don’t interact much. She’s “straight”, for one (as in, she’s a transwoman who dates men), and lived as a gay man for years before starting her transition. She passes better (because she’s been transitioning for longer, and also because she’s very invested in replicating femininity), and I feel like I relate more to her, although I can’t put my finger on why. I now know that it’s because I related to her same-sex attraction and experiences of homophobia.

The other transwoman is a “lesbian” - she only likes women. Specifically, she likes lesbians. Particularly cis lesbians. I don’t really know how to respond to her awkward, even creepy attempts at flirting (she follows me to the train station multiple times). She’s clearly very nerdy and very socially awkward, and so am I. But beyond that, I can’t find it in me to return the affection. I know I should be able to experience it, but I never could. I just can’t do it. No amount of reading about terfs and genital fetishism and transphobia and how wrong and sick and worthy of death all this is can make me right. I desperately want to want her. I know I should be able to.

The school year ends. Summer comes. I meet my first girlfriend on some dating app. By the time I’m back to school, I’m unavailable. The transwoman switches her attention to someone else, to a new, younger lesbian. I say nothing.

-

I’m 23 again. Every single girl who called herself a lesbian back in my GSA day is either dating a man, dating a transwoman, or is now openly calling herself pan/bi. One of them berates me on Facebook for objecting her demands that we relabel the LGBT community as the “Queer” community. Continues to call me queer and dyke throughout the discussion despite my repeated expressions of distaste for the slurs. One of her friends jumps in and calls me “privileged” for being a "cis lesbian”. The former lesbian blocks me after I deadname her - that’s right, she identifies as a “him” now. I didn’t even know until someone else told me later. A small loss.

-

I’m 22. It’s Pride and we’re at a gay club, so while the club is full, I’m perfectly aware that the actual ratio of gay to straight is not typical of the establishment. I’m also very aware of how I look on a clubbing night. It’s fine if someone is attracted to me, if they try to flirt with me, even if they’re male. I get it. But once I’ve stated obvious disinterest, and once you see me clearly trying to hook up with someone else, you should leave me the fuck alone.

The transwoman who shows up with my friend - apparently she’s her roommate - doesn’t understand this simple rule of etiquette. She tries to hit on me in the most awkward, pathetic way, while I’m desperately trying to wriggle away. I don’t want to hurt her feelings. Tonight is a night of celebration, and I’m not actually mean, contrary to popular belief. I’m also drunk, and I’m not sure how drunk she is, but I really don’t want to anger her. And finally, there’s this other girl. Ex of an ex. She’s a cutie. I want to tap that. But it’s hard when a scrawny boy wearing a choker and eyeliner keeps trying to get between the two of you.

All night long, the transwoman interferes in the other lesbian and I’s attempts at finding some time alone. She follows us to the atm. She sits between us when we find a table on the rooftop. She keeps trying to talk to me about the most absurdly uninteresting things while I desperately try to stay in group conversations. She’s so obsessed with herself, talking about her job, her parents, hell, even her hormones, and I’m not even sure if she even asked me anything about myself at any point, or if I ever got to spontaneously share. It may have been the alcohol, but throughout this whole ordeal, all I could think of was how heterosexual our rapport felt. She, the male, talking at me, apparently not seeing utter disinterest in my silence. Me, the female, not wanting to hurt her male feelings, quietly enduring.

Finally, we all decide to call it a night. We all need to take the last subway to go home. But as I’m about to join my friends, the girl I’ve been trying to hit on holds me back. “Wanna go dance?” She asks. She knows I’ve been wanting to, but no one else would, so I didn’t. I’m elated. I say yes.

The transwoman turns around. Looks at us. And says “you know what? I think I’ll stay.”

I don’t remember ever feeling this angry at someone in my life. By this time, she was more drunk than anyone else - she’d even been sick (in the women’s bathroom, naturally). We were responsible for her. But all we wanted was to go dance and then go home and have good old fashioned gay sex.

The night had a happy ending regardless of this “woman”’s interference. I regret not simply telling her, at the subway station “sorry, but we’re going home after this and we’re going to have sex and you’re not invited”. But there’s something terrifying about saying no to someone who is supposed to be oppressed, but still behaves like they have privilege. You know others will quickly jump to their defense if you don’t handle their feelings like they’re made of glass. And at the same time, they still have the power to seriously harm you.

-

This was just a collection of ramblings about the modern LGBT movement. There’s no conclusion to it. This is just it.