#bi people want their own spaces to talk about their attraction to all genders and biphobia

[gayvampyr]

ace discourse is pathetic actually

[scretladyspider]

Asexual and aromantic are not “spicy straight trying to be special LGBT”.

This argument, much like “you’re not really bi/pan if you are with someone of the opposite gender”, asks for visibly performative queerness then ignores the inherent queerness in these experiences.

If being straight is being allosexual, heterosexual, heteroromantic, alloromantic, and cisgender, all at once, then a person only needs to not be one of these to call themselves queer if they want to.

This always ruffles feathers, but..cishet isn’t the inherent opposite of queer.

Allosexual — not ace or under its umbrella

Alloromantic — not aro or under its umbrella

cisgender — aligning with your gender assigned/designated at birth

Heterosexual— sexual attraction to the opposite gender

Heteroromantic — romantic attraction to the opposite gender

If all aces and aros were cishet, which we’re not but just for the sake of this example, how would this detract from the queerness inherent in asexuality and aromanticism? Each are complex spectrums of a fundamentally different experience than the world teaches us we should have.

Aces, aros, and bi/pan people in “straight passing” relationships are often lumped into cishet as a way of delineating “not queer”, regardless of other factors. But this dismisses queerness and asks for specific, unnamed perimeters to be met for it to be recognized.

When presented with ways that experiencing little to no sexual attraction, or little to no romantic attraction, are in fact in opposition with the expectation for everyone to have both (allonormativity and amatanormativity or amanormativity respectively), people don’t accept it. Or rather, they don’t accept it as a thing on its own. Sometimes this means getting treated as if you’re just trying to be edgy, as if proclaiming you’re part of a marginalized group gives social media clout or something. Other times it’s just not treated as enough on its own by other queer people.

This happens in ace and aro spaces too. Cishet is used often as shorthand for “not queer”, directly pushing away aspecs who may be cishet and also ace and/or aro. It doesn’t seem intentionally exclusionary, but unintended exclusion is still exclusion.

This reflects, also, the expectation of performative queerness that is thrown at bi and pan persons both in and out of queer spaces. There are also many aces and aros who are bi and pan, and who may or may not be cisgender.

The reality however is there is no way to “perform” queerness that is satisfactory to all who demand it. The result this odd sort of existence where when one appears queer “enough”, that is used as weaponry against them, but when it isn’t, it’s used to exclude queer people from queerness.

And the real kicker is asexual and aromantic are enough. Bi/pan folks are still their orientation regardless of what their relationship looks like. Gender is it’s own thing, separate from the others, but related because this all ends up being a pile of queer identity spaghetti.

Regardless of how queer a person appears to you, or if you understand their individual experience… Ace is enough. Aro is enough.

The demand for performative queerness is used to try to defend from harm, but it ends up attacking anyone not visibly queer enough to the beholder.

We need to be more explicitly inclusive — especially in our own spaces, but also outside of them when talking about how queerness operates. If someone else’s queerness makes your idea of queerness more complicated, that’s not a bad thing. Learn from that, and let them be.

If you see someone is ace or aro and then see they’re more like you than you thought they could be, or that they don’t engage with it how you expected, that’s not a reason to be exclusionary. It’s a reason to try to expand what you include in your idea of queer.

Once, you needed someone to include you to feel comfortable in your queerness.

Set your ego aside and extend a hand to those you don’t quite understand. Be inclusive. Especially if someone’s relationship to their queerness challenges what you thought was possible.

thank you for reading if you like this please consider contributing to my moving expenses, there’s $425 to go and anything and everything helps

you can also find my blog, my links, my socials, read/listen to interviews, or just say hi here on my linktree

thank you again for reading and remember to be inclusive! Other queer people are not your enemy. have a nice day!

[gay-otlc]

to preface this ask: im not trying to be rude or disrespectful, im just trying to learn/see where you’re coming from.

how can someone identify as a mspec lesbian? the definition of lesbian is non-men loving non-men? if someone is mspec, it implies that they are attracted to men. the whole point of lesbianism is to not include men. someone can’t be a lesbian if they are a man or attracted to men, can they? i understand that sexuality is fluid, but if a person is currently at a point where they are a non-man loving only non-men, then that person could identify as a lesbian. is it not lesbiphobic to imply that lesbianism has anything to do with men, when the entire point of it is that it doesn’t involve men?

I'm not an mspec lesbian, but I've been researching and involved in discourse for about a year now, so I'll give it a shot. @bi-lesbian has a lot of good information on faer blog if you want to check that out.

(1) The non-men loving non-men definition is... not something I'm a fan of. That throws the complexity of gender out the window and comes off as equating nonbinary lesbians to Basically Women. This definition leaves out multigender lesbians (like me!), nonbinary lesbians with a partial connection to maleness, or genderfluid lesbians who are sometimes men. The definitions I like that are more inclusive are "queer attraction to women" or "women, or those with some connection to womanhood, who love women (or those with some connection to womanhood)."

(2) The "whole point" of lesbianism is NOT to not include men. The "whole point" of lesbianism is ✨women✨. I don't want to define myself around men, full stop. I'm a lesbian because I love women and whether I'm attracted to men or not has nothing to do with it. Not everything has to be about men, jfc tumblr. (Anger is not necessarily directed at you, anon, just the partriarchy that taught us we have to talk about men all the time constantly).

(3) See point (1) for someone identifying as both a man and a lesbian, and as far as being unable to identify as a lesbian and also being attracted to men... pre-1970s, the term lesbian included all women (and transmasc/nonbinary people though the terminology wasn't quite there yet) who loved women. Bisexuals and other mspecs, totally included. Then, radfems- because it's always radfems- decided "eww man icky" and pushed anyone associated with men out of their community. Bisexuals were excluded from lesbian spaces and had to form their own community, but lesbian used to include all WLW (functionally how we might use sapphic now) and some people want to reclaim the historical definition.

(4) Sexuality is fluid, and complex. Much like dividing gender into "men" and "non-men" doesn't work, dividing attraction into "attracted to men" and "not attracted to men" doesn't really work either. The split attraction model (different romantic and sexual orientations) allows for the possibility of someone being biromantic homosexual or bisexual homoromantic- both bi and a lesbian. There are also forms of alterous attraction- sensual, aesthetic, queerplatonic, etc. Orientation is typically defined around sexual/romantic attraction, so if someone is a lesbian in those attractions but is alterously attracted to men and other genders, they could fall under mspec lesbian. It's also possible to be unsure if you're attracted to men and include yourself with both communities, or feel attraction to men so little the lesbian experience resonates with you, or feel attraction to men but only form relationships with women. Like I said, you really can't divide it into attracted to men or not.

(5) Mspec doesn't necessarily mean attracted to men, either. Polysexuality is being attracted to many but not all genders. So by your definition, non-men attracted to non-men, lesbians can be attracted to all genders that are not men. Which is a lot of genders, if you're not transphobic and think nonbinary is Basically Woman. A woman who loves women and nonbinary people is attracted to multiple genders (mspec) and attracted to non-men (lesbianism), so your own ask already confirmed that this is possible.

(6) It's not lesbophobic. It's just people living their lives and describing themself in the terms they think fit best. No one's saying all lesbians have to be attracted to men. The entire point isn't that it doesn't involve men, the entire point doesn't surround men at all. The entire point is loving women, regardless of the inclusion or lack thereof of other genders. It's much more lesbophobic to force lesbians to talk about men in every aspect of our identity than to let lesbians like men or not like men or just live our lives loving women.

Hope this helps, and taught you something

[redheadbigshoes]

Heyyyy! I want your thoughts on lesbian solidarity and why other non-lesbian queer woman/nbs are so against lesbians being united?

My friend and I were talking about it the other day and it was just a dead end conversation…. (She’s a non-lesbian queer woman and I want to try to explain to her why lesbians NEED lesbian ONLY places that do exclude non-lesbian queer people)

Kind like how straight and bi woman need lesbians to make woman centered spaces but then hate us lesbians bc they can’t have access to the lesbian community’s and cultures bc of their attraction to the opposite gender that also gives them a lot of privilege. (Of course I am not saying all straight and bi woman have this attitude, I know a lot of bi and straight woman who are strong ally’s to lesbians and who would stomp a bitch who’d try to hurt a lesbian or impose themselves into lesbian spaces)

Idk completely where I am going with this but my friend just doesn’t understand, I wanna give her the benefit of the doubt and try to explain everything to her again. Idk what are your thoughts on all of this? You always speak facts!!! (Sorry if this is a little jumbled I haven’t been able to put my full thoughts into tangible words yet) ❤️

Hii

I believe a lot of non-lesbians don’t like lesbians having own our spaces for more than one reason. I think it’s a mix of lesbophobia + bi erasure because on one side they absolutely hate whenever lesbians bring up the fact we’re not attracted to men (and they don’t like recognizing that aspect of our identity is just as important as or attraction to women/nb people), and bi erasure because of how lesbian has been used as an umbrella term for all sapphics so they immediately think we’re being mean by excluding non-lesbian sapphics because in their mind we’re excluding them from a space that is theirs.

I think you have to see if said friend of yours is actually open to listen to you because if she is if I were you I would explain to her more about how not being attracted to men has a huge impact on what we are and all the struggles that come with it.

[bilesproblems]

Common mistakes made when arguing with exclus (and how to respond properly)

Hi mspec lesbians today I'm gonna talk about some things that exclus say often, the common responses that get nowhere, and how to properly respond (all joking btw)

#1: "Lesbians can't be attracted to men. If you're attracted to men in any capacity, you can't be a lesbian"

Incorrect reply ❌: Actually, I'm not attracted to men, I just recognize my attraction to multiple feminine and neutrally aligned genders as mspec

Correct reply ✅: (HEARTS, DIAMONDS,) I CAN DO ANYTHING!

Exclus don't care about reason. Make deltarune references instead. Especially if you are an mspec lesbian attracted to men

#2: "I just don't get it though how does that work"

Incorrect reply ❌: *An actual detailed response explaining mspec lesbians*

Correct reply ✅: The FitnessGram™ Pacer Test is a Multistage Aerobic Capacity Test...

There are dozens of resources on mspec lesbians. This reply is especially helpful for when you've already tried explaining. They just won't get it if they don't wanna.

#3: "Maybe lesbian USED to include nonexclusive attraction, but that's in the past now!"

Incorrect reply ❌: While some bi people did choose to leave themselves, a lot of us were forced out by Gold Star lesbians instead of just by natural language progression. If you guys wanted or needed your own spaces, you should have made your own. I have a right to be here.

Correct reply ✅: When single shines the triple sun, what was sundered and undone, shall be whole, the two made one, by Gelfling hand, or else by none.

When you explain things to exclusuonists, they plug their ears and ignore what you said. When you say cryptic shit, they have to think.

#4: "Why do you have to make everything so complicated with your identity?"

Incorrect reply ❌: I do not feel a single label properly explains my identity, and I feel all these labels fit my experience.

Correct reply ✅: Gotta catch 'em all

"Abro lesbian, I choose you!" *throws PokeLGBallT*

#5: "Just pick one!"

Incorrect response ❌: I can't just pick one. These labels all have a meaning to me and picking one feels like I'm picking between parts of myself.

Correct reply ✅: I don't have to. I don't have to do anything I don't want to do. Vice Principal Nero likes me best and there's a special beef and bean burrito with a little ribbon on it just for me.

You don't have to just pick a single label. No one fits neatly into one little box, and those of us who like boxes anyway are building our box forts. You don't owe an explanation to exclus beyond "I don't want to."

#6: "Liking women and nonbinary people doesn't count as mspec!"

Incorrect reply ❌: Yeah it does. Way to be transphobic and biphobic in one sentence.

Correct reply ✅: I consider that a dignified argument. Not really, it was actually quite pathetic. *aggressive banjo sounds*

Self explanatory why this reason sucks. 2+ genders = mspec. Even if those 2 genders are girl and demigirl, you can consider yourself mspec.

#7: "Mspec lesbians harm real lesbians and erase the meaning of the word lesbian"

Incorrect reply ❌: I am literally just existing

Correct reply ✅: Oogalie boogalie bitch

You can't fix stupid and convince them we don't hurt anyone. Embrace being the destroyer of lesbianism.

#8: "Just say homosexual/homoromantic if you use the SAM instead of lesbian, because lesbian is exclusive to people not attracted to men in any way"

Incorrect reply ❌: Not only do you not really mean that, because you actually only draw the line at sexual and romantic attraction, but that's the most ridiculous level of gatekeeping. No other lgbt label in the world has a requirement on both sexual AND romantic attraction except aroace and other -rose labels, but those are specifically combos FOR romantic and sexual attraction. No one should have to call themselves homo- instead of lesbian just because their romantic orientation is different than their sexual orientation. Plus that definition means every aroace woman and nonbinary person is a lesbian.

Correct reply ✅: How about no. *then you waddle away, waddle waddle waddle.*

Again, you owe nobody an explanation. You don't have to. Just say no.

#9: "Mspec lesbian labels contribute to real lesbians being harassed, assaulted, and (r-word that I won't type until I learn how to censor)"

Incorrect reply ❌: You're beyond hope. Someone who would assault someone either doesn't care about their orientation or is doing it specifically because they think the person isn't attracted to them and needs to be fixed. It is their own entitlement, ego, and lack of care for other people that leads to that happening, not teens identifying as bi lesbians. Let's pretend all straight men think all lesbians will like men. Not even straight women like every man they see. No one will claim "well because I am a lesbian who likes men, you now have to date men." That's the single stupidest thing a person could ever think. You'd be smarter unironically believing 2 + 2 = 5, the Earth is flat, and MH370 was hijacked by Russians than believing unironically that a single lesbian who doesn't like men at all would be forced to date men because a different lesbian did. Some lesbians like nonbinary people and some only like women, and the ones who only like women aren't forced to date nonbinary people. You single handedly bring down the average intelligence of all humanity by a significant margin.

Correct reply ✅: For a clownfish, you really aren't that funny.

Anyone stupid enough to believe this can't be reasoned with and they will hopefully never be in charge of anything. Don't waste your energy.

I can't think of a 10th so that's all folks

[riddlemethisjeremy]

"But its fine to be LGBTQ+ in Australia in 2024 Australia is such an accepting country"

Get away from me.

Here is an itemised list of shit that i see around me/has happened to me. Just in my little sphere of observation I'm not talking about online or anything just circling around fucking me. Organised from shit that bothers me the least to shit that fucks me off to an unbelievable extent:

All the shallow "LGBTQ+ safe space !!!!!!!" Stickers i see at places like target (I am not talking about actual queer spaces like Dangerfield oh my god i will never ever get over the time that the person at Dangerfield asked if i would like to see their "masculine selection" like holy shit ???? Yes i would love to see the "masculine selection" thank you for not making me a man in this store- anyways) it just makes me a little mad that they just have to put a little sticker in the window and suddenly they're a "safe space" like come off it mate no one's buying your shit

Those people who say they're like supportive and then go and bag out a highly minoritsed section of the community (example taken from my current home) "I support trans people i believe trans people should be able to live and be whoever they truly are" "if my child ever told me that they wanted to use "they/them" pronouns i would assign them a gender myself" "I think all these little "microlabels" like pansexual and aromantic are fake theyre just kids looking for attention" "well apparently you can identify as a tree these days lol I'll just tell them i identify as a dog and cock my leg on them"

Other generally passive homophobic comments such as "oh you're pansexual? Does that mean you're attracted to pans?"

Walking into class and getting slurred or called an "it" or being spoken about like I'm a creature rather than a person: "Sir, can you take that thing outside" "Its not a part of this classroom" "Someone should really put a muzzle on that thing" "oh, sorry, "IT". Got my grammar mixed up."

Possibly the more upsetting part of that is the teacher, who is aware of me being trans and has been since he took our class, has not done a thing about this despite stating that he was going to do what he could to support me.

The casual biphobia/complete erasjre of my bi identity that happens like literally daily? Like hello i like both ?

The younger queer kids being targets of creeps and harassment because theyre just "attention seeking queers" and no one would believe them if they said anything

Being clocked by customers at work and having to deal with harassment surrounding my entire identity despite the fact that I'm not even out and having to pretend to have a laugh about it with my coworkers while im literally shaking and like on the verge of an anxiety attack

People fetishizing drag queens/critisizing them for not doing drag in a "traditionally correct" way. Like ?? She's not bopping he bussy for anyone but herself fuck off

My own friends not believing me/taking me seriously when i try to talk about the harassment/abuse that I face at school/at work because "its 2024 and these places are safe places and they literally said they weren't trying to be offensive"

Being outed in the workplace because i was trying to help my gf get a job (which i didnt realise was a whole thing at the time) and then being punished for not telling people about our relationship to begin with (neither of us are very out and I didn't want to put either of us in an uncomfortable position so I didn't mention it because its not their business?) my gf is no longer getting a job and i am significantly less likely to get the promotion they were talking about giving me

The sheer amount of homophobic/transphobic parents that i know of in the area (mine and my gfs included) and the fact that "allies" don't seem to understand why we won't tell these people about ourselves (especially those of us with notably abusive parents (myself and my gf included))

"Well she can't like you very much if she's not willing to tell her parents" "i just don't think she really cares about you if she's keeping you a secret" shes literally let me give her kisses at the bus stop guys she just wont tell her mom fuck off

The fact that if her parents find out they could report me to the police for grooming because even if the age gap is literally eleven months she's still a minor and the courts are more likely to convict me because im queer. This would literally end my life.

the fact that im being encouraged to leave the fucking love of my life because its "too dangerous" and if my life is ruined by her parents its her fault some how so i need to protect myself ???? What the fuck ????

And finally "You cant save everyone you know" like ???? I know that doesnt mean that the people I CARE ABOUT should have to suffer to keep ME safe. Thats fucked up.

[inkstaindusk]

hi! I hope you're having a happy aro week! feel free to ignore of course but I was wondering if you had any advice for questioning if you're aro? strange question I know, I'm just feeling very lost is all. maybe if you dont have any advice, how did you realize?

Hi! No worries, I'm happy to answer. I'm not sure I have any advice necessarily but I can certainly talk about my own experience! General disclaimer that my personal experience is my own and does not speak for everyone, etc, but I hope something here resonates with you

If you've been on my blog for really any amount of time you know that I like romance. I was dreaming of romance as a kid and I thought I really wanted one. I got invested in romances to a point that I think some of my classmates hated me for it which was valid honestly lol. For a while I thought I was bi (shoutout to the bi -> aro pipeline) because I thought thinking anyone of any gender could be attractive was the same as actually being attracted to them.

There was one year where I was asked out twice by two different people. I was happy both times until I realized that there were expectations to dating, and then I promptly avoided my way into getting out of those situations. The year after that, I suspected a friend had a crush on me and it made me anxious. Nothing ever came of that suspicion but it did lead me to think a lot about my feelings and what romance is apparently supposed to feel like.

It's hard to explain/describe the absence of a feeling you've never had, but I started to realize the only times I "had feelings" for other people was only when they liked me first, and those feelings faded quickly. I liked the idea of romance more than I actually wanted it for myself, and I liked being liked more than I wanted (or was able) to reciprocate. After that, I went through a period of just calling myself queer before deciding I'm aro. I had to come to terms with the fact that romance wasn't on the cards for me, but once I did, I was mostly just relieved. I didn't have to try to match anyone. (Since then I've asked alloromantic friends to describe their feelings to me but I never understand it. What does "it's more intense" mean? Seriously.)

Now, personally, I do want a partner in the future. A lot of what I like about romance has to do with the acts that come with a partnership. I want to be close enough to someone to share our space and make plans together and idk simply be a unit - not in a romance way and differently from how I interact with my friends. Queerplatonic relationships sound perfect to me for this reason.

This may not be the case for you. I'm just one person who enjoys companionship, but plenty of aros don't want partnership at all. If there are any non-partnering aros reading this, please feel free to weigh in!

I think that's all I have. I hope something I said here helps!

[coolspork]

I hate to defend men but uh. Sometimes when I (bi butch transmasc) am in sapphic or afab dominant spaces/around other xlw queer ppl the misandry gets a little out there and then they hit me with the "don't worry tho when I'm talking about men I don't mean *you* you're different" right after spending like 20 minutes saying some of the most objectifying and dehumanizing blanket degrading statements about not just men but ppl who are attracted to men?? And it's never about any of the actual toxic masculinity or dangerous gender roles they're quickly brushing past to just dunk on men as a category.

Like yea sure I'm not a cis guy but it's weird to me that you're drawing arbitrary lines in the sand that divide the human population between morally pure genders and morally corrupt genders. I think you have a problem

Editing this so no one gets the wrong idea: the point of this post is that trying to assign morality based on gender identity is literally how TERFs target transfems and to a much lesser extent transmascs. Transwomen, transfems, and amab non-binary people are actively harmed by this kind of arbitrary line drawing because it legitimizes the TERF idea that there is a valid reason to be suspicious of someone based on their gender. TERFs don't care how you identify, they're bioessentialists. Validating their belief that one gender is inherently more trustworthy or morally upright than another just opens the door for them to try and claim that someone belongs in the "bad" category because of "biology". The vilification of masculinity has been used over and over again against queer folks even by other queer folks. Transfems and sapphics are almost always on the receiving end. The point of queer liberation is to decouple ourselves from cis het ideologies about "masc strong and violent and scary, fem weak and helpless and innocent" the latter is easily more visible because feminism really shines a spotlight on it. Femininity, regardless of its wearer, is ascribed traditionally as weakness, and feminism seeks to combat that stereotype. On the other hand though Masculinity is getting the opposite treatment and while there is certainly not as much stigma around masculinity the idea that femininity can be decoupled from gender roles while masculinity must remain rigid basically just gives terfs, racists, and anyone else who wants to find a way to put ppl down a new box to throw folks at. Allowing masculinity to become an innately oppositional identity means throwing a lot of people under the bus whether or not they choose to identify with it. Anyone that straddles eurocentric gender lines is at risk. The point here is not "oh no men oppressed" the point is that in seeking our own liberation from labels and tradition we shouldn't put someone else further back into that box because the existence of the box means there's somewhere for bigots hiding behind our communities to try and dispose of members they don't like.

You want to escape the meat grinder? Great. Now get rid of rhe meat grinder all together so no one uses it while you're not looking. And maybe don't throw other people into it while you're escaping.

TL;DR: Demonize the patriarchy, not the masculine.

[the-official-account]

Is it just me, or does lesbian fandom have a problem?

My name is Edil. I've been a medium-sized name in several small fandoms, especially podcast fandoms. I am also a women appreciator, and enjoy media that centers on women. I'm going to mostly be talking about my experiences in two fandoms: The Strange Case Of Starship Iris and Pasithea Powder, both podcasts with central wlw ships, though I've also seen these same issues in Goncharov (1973) of all places.

When I go into fandom I go hard. My brain, which is very autistic, breaks down information of small details for fun. It's the reason why I wrote a dwarnian (TSCOSI's fictional alien language) dictionary for the podcast. The reason why I have a massive notes document on all of Pasithea's season one and the reason the wiki...looks and reads like that. It isn't owned by me, but most of the formatting, fonts, content: yours truly.

And I'm proud of these projects, which took time and effort and skill building to do! But I haven't finished or caught up with either of these podcasts, and that's because the online spaces that center around them have been overwhelmingly hostile.

I have a strong emotional connection to this issue — of whether or not sapphic fandoms tend to be more hostile to diversity, especially race and nuerodivergance — so I can't make a distinct analysis, not without more distance and more information. That's part of why I am making this post.

Mods and members of the TSCOSI discord circa 2020 will know me, and know why I left. That being a series of unwarranted criticisms and bad faith readings that left me with anxiety even interacting with the fandom I loved.

I am probably a lot less known in the Pasithea fandom, because I wrote fewer fics for it and left more quickly. After TSCOSI, I recognized resentment faster. But the Pasithea notes document that I've posted here before and the wiki, three fics, fan art and that one comic that's still to this day the only comic I've drawn: me.

This is not a callout post, not for individuals or for groups, and I don't have screenshots. I am only trying to open a discussion.

See, the pattern that I am seeing is that fandom spaces centering on wlw ships attract fans who are wlw. And while nothing is inherently wrong with that, issues in the lesbian community start to become very obvious.

Firstly, the lack of diversity in sexuality among most of the fan base (As I suspect bi and gay people have largely more popular media that attracts them, and lesbians have to dig deeper for smaller spaces like these podcast) starts to feed this sense of possession among fans. As if there is a correct, normal, or standard way to be sapphic. A set of rules stating that anyone who doesn't obey it hates lesbians.

From Pasithea, I got this in comments about how I was drawing the characters "ugly" (Jane is canonically fat and has a scar, which I made very visible...because I wanted to. I gave her strong Hispanic features because it appealed to me. Sophie is butch, and canonically has or had a buzz cut. Which is what I drew. — The "appearance" section of the wiki? Yup. I wrote that.)

These comments, which were themselves problematic, came from a place of implying I was lesbiphobic for drawing these wlw as "ugly". When in fact, I was drawing the type of characters that would appeal the most to me, and hopefully to others like me.

These expectations of skinny, eurocentric appearing, usually feminine characters... Well it reflects a lot of issues with TERF-y feminism and lesbianism at large. Lesbianism on the internet has an issue with gender essentialism that isn't universal but is incredibly worrying. And when WOC are often masculinized because of their non-white features, that transphobia becomes anti-butchness (or strict standards of butchness) and racism.

While TSCOSI fans were more receptive to my designs, I was drawing in a less realistic style where "ugly" was less of an issue — and, to be frank, The main ship being Southeast and South Asian made it hard to draw them "ugly" from a eurocentric perspective. Realism there would just be...exotic, I guess.

However, with TSCOSI fans there was still a sense of possession around how these characters were interpreted, especially in headcannons, that lead to me deleting more than I posted as time went on. Some of those were genuine issues on my part ("what if the Jewish guy was a vampire in a au haha!" I said. Then went to bed, woke up, googled it, and went "NOPE! NOPE!!! SORRY.") Others were just unnecessary, such as comments on how silly head cannons were "unrealistic", and how I should write more cannon compliant work, rather than what I was doing for fun.

Ultimately these are the ONLY things that made me stop listening to these podcasts. The ONLY reason I put down the projects I poured consecutive hyperfixate weeks into. Part of me thinks it was this enthusiasm in the first place that was the biggest threat others reacted to in how I spoke and acted.

For instance, in trying to write for both the TSCOSI and Pasithea wikis, I had folks try to change my methods of research and writing to a style that worked best for them. When I said they were welcome to work that way, there was no offers to assist. And communication with those who had established work was either non-existent or hostile. I've had people question if my passion projects were necessary, berate me for meaningless mistakes, and treat what could be fun collaborative work like a pissing contest. For TSCOSI, none of this occurred on the wiki, and mostly around documents I owned for my own note taking. Even then, the hostility of Wikipedia culture is an unnecessary and hurtful thing to bring into fandom wiki culture.

The TSCOSI people went on to make a wonderful wiki that I deeply admire, but I still wish I could have been part of that project in its infancy, instead of being pushed away. (I may have made the navigation system if I remember correctly, but I'm not certain. So this is not to say I was not allowed any input whatsoever.)

I love sapphic media, it's my bread, butter, pride, joy, and favorite past time. But time and time again I have found far safer social spaces for media that centers around gay men, even if it isn't my personal first choice.

As a non-white, non-allistic, non-lesbian, not-skinny fan...I have concerns.

I know you all want sapphic media to get more attention. I want that too. But unless you start actively searching for and calling out bigotry in those spaces, it absolutely cannot and will not happen. So much of fandom is powered by autistic people with time on their hands, and I want there to be space for people like me. Who get TOO excited, TOO far from cannon, TOO analytical about race and class and fatphobia and whatever else.

Sapphic media obviously has issues reaching fans that aren't the fault it's its current audience. But the good thing about being part of or close to a problem, is having the power to make incredible, effective change.

I refuse to leave these podcasts behind, I love them more than anything, and the projects I got out of them are still my beloved brain children (The alien calligraphy from the random writing system I made for dwarnian is still up on my wall. "It is what. It IS what, keeps us from the abyss.") I refuse to be shoved aside my racist fans and random people who assume they can act rudely to strangers because they treated characters or lore differently. I refuse to be sidelined from conversations just cause I can act weird.

But I also refuse to spend so much of my beloved labor on people who turn up their noses and belittle it.

This all has had a lasting effect on how I interact with fandom, a legitimate fear-responce to the idea of trying to engage deeply with women-centered podcasts. Something I'm trying to unlearn and overcome.

So. There's my explanation of why I don't do tscosi anymore, which I mentioned on the minibang I'd eventually follow up on. And a criticism of sapphic fandom which, I'll be real, I have a few more essays worth of commentary about, and it's also another expression of how I stare longingly at Pasithea every time it comes up on my dash.

But, most importantly, this is my question of whether anyone else has found themselves in a similar place. If it's a trend or an anecdote.

If you have thoughts, please reblog with them. I'd love to know what you have to say.

[will80sbyers]

I want to try to explain this better even if I probably can't elaborate as well as I would like to because my English is not perfect, forgive me for any mistakes and I hope this is understandable!

My tone is meant to be colloquial and not angry at all:

when I read some posts (not all) about why people think Mike is gay most of the ones I've read are worded as ''it is the absolute truth and you are wrong if you don't think that'' not as ''it is my opinion'' and that already is a bit off-putting to me because nothing is confirmed when we are talking about headcanons (we are not talking about the text of the show but the subtext for now, so you can't have facts on this, only interpretations)

but for that I don't care that much I just ignore the post and go on with my day, you are free to have your opinions at the end of the day and that is not a big problem

what becomes a bit of a problem to me, and starts feeling invalidating for my own identity (even if I'm sure you don't mean to do that!!! I'm not trying to attack anybody here, I'm explaining my reasoning) is when the reason for that thought process is that '' he didn't like any other girl except El, so this means he is gay 100% no doubts because his relationship with El is not working out''

why does this feel invalidating? Because saying that is inherently implying that bi or queer people in the bi spectrum have to show attraction a lot to a lot of different people to be valid in their identity, which I find dismissive because in reality you can have different levels of attraction for different genders without it meaning that you can't identify as bi

As I said, if Mike actually did like only El but likes more men than women, that shouldn't mean FOR SURE that his bi identity is not valid and that his crush on El is just comphet

Mike could definitely be gay, he could be experiencing comphet and extreme internalized homophobia and I will never dismiss this because it would just be wrong to in my opinion, but on the other side of the fandom I see that people do not leave ANY space for doubt

and not leaving space for a little doubt when nothing is confirmed and basing this ''not having doubts'' on putting down real feelings and things bi or queer (because he could definitely not be exactly into labels etc) people go through in real life is not a good thing to do if you want to be accepting of ALL queer identities (ace ones too)

like, what I think personally about the show does not matter for this discourse, it is about keeping in mind different possibilities

also this is not about one single post or one single person, I've seen the same take over and over in different parts of the byler fandom - here, on twitter and tiktok too

and if you think Mike is more likely to be gay that is a completely valid take, what I want to ask of people in the byler fandom is to try to not invalidate different opinions or perspectives especially about identities because it is as much invalidating as someone saying that you can't possibly experience something that feels like a crush on the opposite gender if you are gay and I know for a fact that people in this fandom get angry (rightly so!) if you say it's impossible so I think the same feeling of regard should be extended to everybody until the show confirms or denies one of the two options

[casualavocados]

talking about ep6 and how much it means to me is...hard actually. sometimes. because there are so many reasons. reasons that feel silly to me on occassion and reasons that have all been said before but i have to say again because it will never not get to me, how rare it is to see any of this. rare in a bl and rare in entertainment in general tbh.

i can’t believe this show is allowed to have lines like “when there are other people around, talking to you feels like a matter of life and death.” / “what can we do? we’re just born this way.” and have the context not be about homophobia. the way pat and pran get to go out to the market and get groceries together like it’s nothing, be told they look cute together in passing without consequences, experiencing those things they missed out on in high school - which alludes to the way queer ppl irl share many of those domestic moments later in life. the way pran comes downstairs when pat rings his doorbell and hangs back and watches their parents confront is explicitly a metaphor for wanting and being drawn to something you know you should not or cannot have, mixed with the feelings of being something “different” than what your parents want for you.

these moments just hit so hard. they are so small. and yet they mean so much. 

then ofc there’s the huge focus on communication this episode - the way pat hurts and struggles and tries over and over to reach out to pran, slowly learning to meet pran where he is, all along respecting pran’s boundaries enough to not cause a scene himself but also not backing down from his own needs. it’s simply something i dont see often enough in romantic relationships in television. so much that’s portrayed to the world focuses on miscommunication and dishonesty rather than how worth it vulnerability can be. 

something that also stands out to me that started in this ep in particular (that’s why im bringing it up), is the way any sexual implications that arise are never used for jokes that play off the fact that pat and pran are a mlm couple. they’re taken seriously instead. like i’m not sure how to say this right, but the sexual tension feels so real because attention isn’t called to it. it’s just something that happens. and a lot of this also has to do with the fact that neither pat nor pran ever devolve into heteronormative, misogynistic gender roles as well (which i could talk about forever especially in the context of bl but i wont here). there are no onlookers pushing their own agendas onto the main characters ever in this series, not romantically, and not sexually. 

(not even korn in ep9 feels that way to me, because he comes across as a goofball who wants the best for his friend(s), an observer rather than someone trying to push his way into business that isn’t his. also imo he’s speedrunning his bi realization in that ep as well so he gets a pass and a pat on the head). 

and because of all that, to my astonishment, i have never once felt any second hand embarrassment watching pat and pran. whether it's a serious scene like the newspaper game in ep6 or a silly scene like the one in pat’s room in ep7 - everything feels like it’s just for them. not catering to the audience. they’re allowed to be goofy, they’re allowed to be serious, they’re allowed to be visibly attracted to each other - without the show making a big deal out of it. and to me, that makes it a big deal. the fact that it is so normal. and ofc so much meta has been written about the casual physical intimacy in this show - the fact how on the other hand, not every touch between them has sexual undertones. that they can just exist in each other’s space and it be normal.

(and i feel like that’s where a lot of disagreement comes from, from a minority of audience members. i’ve seen takes where people thought pat and pran acted more like friends than lovers once their relationship actually became romantic - and i feel like not only does that point to the twisted societal pressure to differentiate between what classifies as “romantic” and “platonic”, but also the stigma that every act between same sex couples is inherently sexual, and therefore “dirty”. so simply put, the people who have those takes just don’t understand what this series has done.)

because for real, any other bl would have shown the physicality of pat and pran’s affection and interest in each other very differently. 

idk it just really gets to me. it’s spread throughout the rest of the show ofc but i specifically remember watching ep6 for the first time and being so shocked by how subtle the difference i saw in this series was - and also shocked by how much it meant to me to see it.

so yeah, this is just a silly romcom. but also no, it’s so much more than that. and episode 5 might be the ep that began that shift, but episode 6, for me at least, is the one that solidified it. and the rest of the show just continued to do the work to prove that.

[anotherghoul666]

i saw the ask about being bi and i just wanted to get some perspective on my situation since you have such good advice!

i’m going on 5 years into a relationship with my boyfriend and i’ve been kind of freaking out about my gender lately. i’ve been struggling with it for as long as i can remember but i had a lot of shit going on and there was never really time to think about it seriously until recently. i’m realizing now that i’m non-binary leaning masc. i just can’t bring myself to tell my boyfriend. we’re very serious, living together and all but i know that he isn’t attracted to guys and i feel so stressed about doing things like binding and asking him to not use feminine words for me. but it also makes me sad thinking that i might never come out. sorry about the rant i just really don’t have anyone to talk this through with so i’ve just been ruminating about it for a while

Oooh, ok, this is touchy. Because I don't know you and your situation and the nuances of it. Because this is a very nuanced thing. I can't judge based on just this ask how strongly you feel about your gender identity versus how strongly you feel about your relationship. This is a decisional balance situation. You'll have to weigh your options against one another. And the weight of each thing can and will change over time. It's a tricky thing to do. I can only give you some perspective and talk about my own experience with my gender and my primary relationship.

Tough love incoming. If you're not ready to take it or hold space for it, feel free to not read. Or let me know in another ask to delete, and I will delete this message for you.

My main thing in regards to relationships is and will always be this: if you can't be yourself, truly, completely yourself within said relationship, why are you in it?

Now, I recognize I'm an all or nothing person. I see the world in black and white. I handle being alone and solitude very well. I'd much rather be on my own and happy about myself, then in a relationship where I can't be myself. I'm saying that now, today, in my current headspace, as a 31 year old with lots of therapy and self care and growth behind me. And lots to come still. I don't know how old you are. But. Ten years ago, would my answer have been the same? Absolutely not. Ten years ago I stepped all over myself and bend myself every which way people asked to fit in their tiny little uncomfortable boxes of what they wanted me to be. I DESTROYED myself doing that over decades. Destroyed. Wrecked. Reconstructed. Rebuilt. I will never do that again. I am me. I am unapologetically me and, as much as I recognize in situations like work etc. I do have to conform into societal norms, those are not relationships I chose. Unfortunately in our capitalist society you cannot choose to not work and still survive. But relationships like a couple, a partnership, friendships, family, etc. I choose fully. I refuse to choose to be in a partnership where I won't be able to be myself.

If you're scared to have these conversations with your boyfriend, to me that's a red flag. That's a bell that needs to ring and be heard. Why are you scared? Is it inner anxiety? Or did he react in the past negatively or aggressively towards similar subjects? Is it your brain assuming he won't like it, or did he clearly state he doesn't believe in gender or some shit like that? There's a world of difference between what your brain tells you and what may be the truth. A lot of times we assume and project emotions and thoughts onto people, and it turns out to not be their emotions or thoughts at all. Be wary of projection. Ask yourself why is it that you're afraid to tell him about your discoveries, your pronouns. Why are you afraid to bind. Find the source of the fear. From you, or from him. If it's a fear from within, evaluate that. Sit with it. Ask your boyfriend directly. Have the difficult conversations. You will never know for sure unless you ask and talk it out. Get his real feelings out in the open. Now, if he did say transphobe things for example and that's why you're scared, maybe he's not a great partner to keep, you know?

You have the right to come out. You have the right to be recognized as who and what you are. You have the right to be fluid and change in your identity, and anything else. By the sheer nature of your existence you have this right. Your boyfriend has the right to his own opinions and beliefs too. You'd need to know what those are tho. Not assume. Ask and know for sure. Then you have to decide.

There's four ways I see this conversation can go. 1) he's actually more fine with it that you thought and you two can flourish and continue your life path together with acceptance and love all around. 2) he's not down for the NB shit and you choose to sacrifice yourself and your identity for the sake of this relationship. That might last a few years. My prediction is you'll self destruct eventually because of the repression and it'll be a worse break up in many years than it would have been at 5 years in, because you'll have harmed yourself immensely in the process of denying who you are. 3) he's not down with the NB shit and you decide that the relationship is not what you want to continue living in. It doesn't matter if you live together and have life plans, you'll know in your heart if your identity is worth more to you than to move out and start over. 4) then there's the option of, maybe the gender discovery was not what you thought, because gender is messy as fuck and it fluctuates so much. That I can't answer for you, you have to know within if NB is really what you are or if you're just trying out pronouns and a label, see if it feels good, feels better. You have the right to try labels and pronouns in spaces other than the home if home doesn't feel safe for it. With friends, while going out, in queer spaces, online, etc. See how it feels. Does it feel strong enough and a big enough part of you to turn your life upside down for it. It might. It might not. That's up to you to decide. But live your truth.

Never settle. Settling, swallowing it down, brushing it under the rug, that might seem like the best option right now. It's the easiest. It's the avoidant option. It will catch up to you I can guarantee it. Under the rug is where things go to die and rot and fester. The pungent smell of rot will catch up to you. It will be unavoidable one day. If you ignore stuff for months or years even, I can guarantee one day, ten years from now maybe, this gender shit will come back up with a vengeance and it might harm you. Where are you gonna be in ten years? What if you ignore your gender today, ignore who you are, buy a house with this boyfriend, get married, maybe have kids if that's something you want. What then? When in ten years, what you've been repressing this whole time comes back to kick your ass. Are you gonna be able to destroy everything then to live your truth? Its gonna be way more difficult if you have legal attachments like a marriage contract, a mortgage or a kid. 5 years is a long relationship, but honestly in the scope of your life it's not that long. To stick with something that's not right because of how much time you've invested in it is not a good reason. It sounds like one. That's called the sunk cost fallacy. Or fallacy of time invested. "The human tendency to stick with endeavors in which we've already invested time, money, or other resources even when changing course would be the more logical choice." Look it up.

My sincere hope for you two is that it will go better than you assume. I was scared to tell my partner too when I started to understand what I'd felt all my life towards my body was disphoria. When I started to realize how I relate to gender was different than most people. When I wanted to see if I was trans (I don't consider myself trans, tho some NB people do and that's absolutely valid too) and I tried the masculine pronouns and identity for a while. Didn't fit perfectly right. Some things and words fit, some days it fit more than others, but some days it didn't feel right at all. The journey to land on NB she/they with a preference for they and gender neutral words was a long one and I'm honestly still not sure about the label or the identity. The only things I know for sure after two years of exploration of gender is I'm not just a woman, and I'm not just a man. That's it. It will change.

When I told my partner about the disphoria and my inkling that I had some gender fuckery going on, she still identified as a lesbian. My partner is a cis woman and for decades her identity was very very rooted in the "I am a lesbian" thing. My gender identity made her reconsider things too. I was worried that she wouldn't be into me anymore because she was such a lesbian back in the day and I wasn't a woman anymore. But the thing is, I was never a woman at all. She fell in love with me and we agreed on a life partnership and a life path together while I wasn't a woman. Because I never was. I just didn't have the right terms to describe myself with before. I didn't have the vocabulary, the knowledge. My partner had to evaluate for herself was she in love with a woman, which would have made us incompatible, or was she in love with me. She figured out she was in love with me. She was supportive about all my pronouns try-ons and label changes through the years and to this day she's my absolute rock and most supportive cheerleader ever. She takes it in stride, makes a point to ask which pronouns I want for that day, asks how I want her to refer to me to specific people, etc. She asks permission before she outs me to someone as NB by using gender neutral terms. She cares. Cause she loves me. And I love her. And we choose every day that we're gonna build our life together. If one day something incompatible comes up, and either one of us wakes up and cannot make the choice that day, cannot choose the other that day, then we'll talk about it. Have the gut wrenching conversations and decide what happens with the relationship there. But I know for a fact if she wasn't down with my gender exploration, I would have brought it up. Assuming she would have been super closed minded about it and refused my gender identity, I would have had to talk about breaking up. Cause I'm not gonna live my life with someone I'm afraid of. I will not share my life with someone whom I can't be my true self with.

Will you?

[bilesproblems]

can i ask a question, that i genuinely want to understand, about the bi lesbian label and lesbian spaces? do ppl who id as bi lesbian for different reasons believe that mono lesbians shouldn't have our own spaces, separate from bi lesbians, and that wanting them is exclusionary? (in ADDITION to shared spaces. please read on!!)

i've seen a lot of bi lesbians say it's exclusionary not to want bisexuals/pansexuals/etc in lesbian spaces, or monosexual spaces in general (and i don't mean wlw spaces that encompass all of us, or like self-described lesbian bars, cuz those are ofc actually for all wlw, even bisexuals who don't also identify as lesbians, those should always be mspec inclusive of course!!! i'm talking small support groups in lgbtq centers, stuff like that).

everyone i've personally seen so far has ignored that there are experiences of being a woman/woman aligned and exclusively attracted to women/women aligned people, to the exclusion of men, that we sometimes need to talk to other people who understand about. just like there should be spaces available for people attracted to all genders, or to multiple genders including men, that it's okay to not include monosexuals in!

as someone who fits that description, it has really helped my wellbeing to talk to other lesbians who understand those experiences, in addition to of course sharing space w mspec wlw and nblw!! i know you can't speak for everyone, but since you're a bigger blog i wanted to reach out. in your opinion, is it problematic to want to have individual spaces AS WELL AS shared spaces? would the solution just to be to clarify that they're for mono lesbians?

(i'm asking on anon cuz i'm worried about being harassed when this is published. i tried asking before and got called a bigot and vagueposted about just for asking, and my question was ignored :( i genuinely want to know the answer, or i wouldn't have sent it in!)

In my opinion, no. I think having spaces for exclusive lesbians and spaces for mono lesbians (they aren't the same thing) is fine. It gets exclusionary and bigoted, however, when:

These spaces are just called lesbian spaces. They could be called lilae lesbian spaces or rosae lesbian spaces, or be specified to be for lesbians who are exclusive with their lesbian attraction or exclusively attracted to women without the cooler but lesser known names

Those spaces say the lesbians they aren't made for aren't "real lesbians," and they want their "real lesbian spaces"

Those spaces exclude men (multigender men and men who have funky genders belong in lesbian spaces, they're not predators and they're not gonna force you to sleep with them, they've got similar experiences to you or else they wouldn't be calling themselves lesbians.)

They're made in bad faith like vixenamoric ("oh, I just feel like I don't belong in lesbian spaces anymore now that a very small amount of mspec people identify as lesbians." *still tries desperately to take away the lesbian label from people who they don't see as real lesbians*)

The need for separate spaces is used as a reason to exclude mspec lesbians from being lesbians and tell us that we're hurting them and invading their spaces

In my personal opinion as a bigender girlby, it's also bigoted if the space is labeled as mono lesbians only but includes attraction to women and elsegender people (so monosexual wow that's not enbyphobic at all /sarcasm) OR if they're labeled for exclusive lesbians and say "no mspec lesbians"/are perfectly okay with someone with my exact attraction until I dare call it bi

There has never been a problem with having separate spaces for people who are exclusive with their attraction. The problem with making lesbian spaces exclusive is that lesbian itself hadn't been exclusive for a long time. Exclusive lesbians wanted their own space and instead of making one, they took "lesbian" away from bisexuals. Nonexclusive lesbians deserve a place in lesbian spaces because it was stolen from them. Telling bi lesbians they can't be in lesbian spaces because exclusive lesbians need their own space is bullshit because it was never yours in the first place.

I'm sorry about how you were treated when you asked last time, but I think some of the reaction is due to the fact that the need for separate spaces is an bilesbophobic dogwhistle often times. Exclusive and mono lesbians do deserve spaces for them, it's why lilaen was coined and it's why I created rosaen, but that's usually not spoken of in a way that lets mspec lesbians still be lesbians, and doesn't exclude us from all lesbian spaces. It's usually spoken of in a way that tells us we're invading or taking away their spaces, invalidating their lack of attraction to men (even though a good chunk of us aren't even attracted to men), oppressing them, etc. and so many people hear that and immediately read this as an exclusionist who's dressing up what they say to be nicer. It's like when mspec people get told they're straight passing while dating someone of the opposite gender. Even if it's technically true that you'd look at them and think they were straight, that line is always used to say mspec people aren't queer enough, or that they don't belong in queer spaces if they're dating someone of the opposite gender, or they shouldn't be allowed to bring their opposite gender partner to queer events.

So, in short, no it's not wrong to have different spaces for exclusive lesbians, mono lesbians, and all lesbians, but it is wrong to just call the exclusive or mono lesbian spaves "lesbian spaces" and say mspec women don't belong.

[whatinthetomfuckery]

i was going to comment but i know i have a lot to say, and when to politely make my own post

i've seen posts about how much hating men is talked about in sapphic spaces. and while that's true and a problem, it bothers me when it's followed by "that doesn't happen in gay spaces", bc that's not true, at least in my experience, it just looks different.

i'm a trans man who is trying to be out and fit into traditionally male gay communities, (older men in the case of the leather community but it's not just them) i get comments from gay men all the time. i get pulled aside, i get side comments about icky girl parts and it kinda all boils down to "you're not really like us and understand why i'm not attracted to you and never will be bc you're trans so you get it wink wink nudge nudge tee hee vaginas are so nasty but i'd let you peg me haha but I would never touch you grossss cooties"

(women in and around these communities also get comments like this said to them or about them, as well as lots of generalizations about women but i'm drawing from my own experiences here)

i can either argue or i can not cause a scene. they're testing their beliefs. but they're also alienating me with or without knowing it. i get "trans people are so aggressive/defensive" about being misgendered or highly offensive comments about my body bc i try to be polite. i'm expected to be an ambassador but not to get upset.

i'll say "yeah, i get upset too" and start a dialogue when i can, bc sometimes they try and the communities i'm entering have a reputation for transphobia that proceeds them.

but sometimes i just want to sing showtunes in a bar with my boyfriend, and hang out with gay people.

my point is that i'm exhausted. why do i need to make myself smaller? answer to questions and assumptions about my dysphoria or plans for my body? (i would say or lack thereof but the expectation is that i hate and intend to change everything about myself and why wouldn't i?)

why do I need to reject everything remotely associated with femininity to be real?

for the record while i would love to, i don't really flirt with men in these spaces because of this. i expect nothing, i don't impose or join in the rampant flirting and i still get all of this. even in kink spaces! which is a whole other topic.

anyway I love them but a lot of our communities have a lot of gendered bullshit to unpack and it falls on trans people more often than not. i know for a fact my trans sisters have lots to say about how the "ew men" mentality in sapphic spaces affects them. it affected me when i thought i was cis and bi, i can't imagine it's better.

if you're a terf just do us both a favor and block me

[theangryjikooker]

just read your last anon and I’m usually just a silent reader, and tbh as someone who believe Jikook are a think I disagree with you a lot, but anyways I like reading your blog you seem very down to earth and I like that and I get your frustration. it’s not the first time that I see similar messages and i know I’ll get bashed for saying this but I don’t even believe half of the ppl out there pretending they’re queer (what does that even mean at this point) are anyway. I’ve been in shipping spaces for a long time, I share this "hobby" with a friend of mine and so many "cishets" as they say use the queer umbrella as a shield because we know damn well rps mlm shipping has been thrown upon (sometimes for good reasons, and often times due to misogyny, but that’s just my opinion ). I know some ppl are gonna get mad at this and call me names, not sure why I even send this but as a "cishet" (I usually refuse to use the word cis but that’s another can of worms I won’t open here) I’m seriously done with this mindset. i’m free to make assumptions and ship whoever I want or deny any ship I want to deny like anyone else and being part of the lgbt community is not a requirement to ship, what’s with people acting like the thought police here… ha sorry I needed to vent I guess, that post made me mad

Yes, it's fine to disagree with me! A lot of people who are following me don't agree with everything I have to say, if any at all. The only reason why I know this is that I've seen some familiar names interact with bloggers I 100% would not get along with, but that's really none of my business. I'm not here to change minds.

I think those followers tend to be curious about what I have to say about some aspect of Jikook. Sometimes it'll make them think; most of the time they think I'm full of shit. I have my own critiques of hardcore shippers/supporters, so I fully expect that my existence throws a wrench in all of that and incites aggression in others. All I do is talk about how I feel. Anyone who chooses to interact with me are doing so of their own volition and are responsible for their own actions.

I don’t even believe half of the ppl out there pretending they’re queer (what does that even mean at this point) are anyway. So this POV is a bit of a slippery slope. If we cast doubt on everyone and everything because a fraction of one's community is encouraging those feelings, it doesn't help anyone. Personally, I haven't "met" general ARMYs or shippers who have pretended to be queer, but I've read about this happening. I think the real culprit is the anonymity of the Internet and what kind of behaviors that's enabled over the years, but that's another can of worms I don't want to get into.

To be fair, I understand queer shippers who are tentative about shipping occurring amongst cishets, which is valid, but the way some of them go about protecting what they consider an exclusively LGBTQ+ activity can be extremist and nonsensical, in my opinion.

(Part of me also suspects that this overly passionate dedication amounts to how important fandom is to a person. I prioritize and cherish my real life more than I ever could about fandom, but fandom is also a much needed escape for others, so I can see how that might play a part in people's motivations and how they might go about protecting their safe space.)

Male, female, non-binary, gay, straight, bi, asexual, whatever your sexual or gender identity–don't be an asshole and don't be an idiot, that's all I'm saying. If you're cishet and shipping two males/two females, just be mindful about how you're going about it is all. Shipping because you genuinely care about the individuals involved and believe in who they are as human beings vs. fetishizing them (unintentionally or otherwise) can get a little blurry. (Fetishization is not the only issue that occurs in this cishet vs. lgbtq+ in fandom discourse, but it's the most common and most talked about.)

In my opinion, attraction isn't so discerning; sometimes people just gravitate to whomever they like. If cishets can recognize that attraction is just a feeling that can occur among and across different genders and sexualities, I don't see how this is a bad thing at all.

__

* Sorry, I talk about "cishets" like I'm othering them, and I don't really care much for that attitude, but for distinction purposes, it is what it is.

[thebreakfastgenie]

obviously it's your own blog and you can post what you want, I was just saying that as someone NOT attracted to men, it's maybe not your place to talk about the experiences of bi people. And also please miss me with talking about bi experiences like you understand them.

Anon, I spoke about this recently, but I identified as bisexual for five years. I was openly bisexual during part of high school and part of college. I believed I was attracted to men and even acted on that perceived attraction. I was very concerned about bi issues and reblogged a lot of posts about it. I was fully in that sphere. I don't claim to have full understanding of bi issues, but I do think those years of lived experience mean something.

I actually think not being attracted to men gives me a useful perspective on this, because when you're a woman who isn't attracted to men you realize just how powerful the message is from society that you're supposed to be. It took me years to work that out even after I realized I was attracted to women and it's something I still untangle feelings about to this day.

You say "bi people," but this is mostly about bi women, and whatever set of nonbinary bisexuals who are not women but are frequently perceived as women by society. Bi men are told it's wrong for them to be attracted to men, because society is homophobic. I fully support gay and bi men celebrating their love for and sexual attraction to men. But the discourse as I've been seeing it isn't really about that, because it's not talking about internalized homophobia. It's this unnamed bogeyman who's telling you men are bad and being attracted to them is bad no matter what your gender is and like... who is this bogeyman??? Not even all TERFs agree that being attracted to men is always bad TERFblr has separatism discourse like once a week.

What I think most of these posts are getting at is the same old "bi women are still queer enough" thing, which I have had many different feelings about over the years. I have seen spaces be less than welcoming to bisexuals, especially when they want to talk about their opposite sex attraction or partners. I'm very empathetic to this. But, and I mean this in the gentlest possible way, I think a lot of the "queer enough" stuff is imposter syndrome. My experience is that the vast majority of queer women I meet are bisexual women with boyfriends. Where are you going that these experiences are silenced? Because where I am, they're everywhere. And that's okay! I mean, seeing even the queer women love men so much is somewhat alienating for me, but that's a good reason to seek out lesbian spaces. Those women are as much a part of the broader community as I am and they have a right to speak about their lives in full.

What I see a lot on tumblr are posts about some very personal anxiety that gets externalized into this Thing that we need to be Very Worried about. And then it gets picked up by people who haven't really thought about it and gets tons of notes and copycat posts and here we are. So the question I always ask is: who is telling you it's wrong to be attracted to men? If someone's posts about their experiences--either negative experiences with men or positive experiences with a lesbian--make you feel bad about yourself, that doesn't mean they did anything wrong. "Go outside" isn't meant as an insult. Recognizing when discourse is making you feel bad and getting away from it and also literally getting fresh air is an important skill. And for what it's worth, this seems like an online issue. I've never heard any discourse about whether being attracted to men is inherently Bad in real life, and I graduated from Smith College.