#i feel it’s important to educate people about SGL

[colorisbyshe]

I’m so pissed at whoever came up with “nblm/nblw” like they couldn’t even be bothered to look up what wlw means before aping it lmfao

What’s interesting is it seems (though i cannot conclusively say) that WLW and MLM are both derived from “SGL” or “same gender loving,” a term created to describe and unite Black gay and bisexual people. It was created as an alternative to whiter understandings of same gender attraction.

Completely divorced from its (POTENTIAL, I do need to emphasize this, as I have never seen a direct link between SGL and WLW/MLM, though it’s… quite curious and I’ve admittedly never done a deep dive to confirm or deny) origins, as what happens with AAVE by white internet users and academics alike, people have warped it and completely forgotten what the acronyms mean and are meant to do as shorthand.

I’m gonna be honest… even when done properly (ie MLNB and WLNB as opposed to NBLM and NBLW), it really just doesn’t work within the framework of SGL OR WLW/MLM.

There is no unified experience of nonbinary people loving men or women. I, a nonbinary woman, have little in common with a “man loving” nonbinary man or even a man loving nonbinary woman who does not also love women.

WLW and MLM (and SGL) are unified by same gender attraction. That’s the fucjing point. Because nonbinary covers infinite iterations of gender and thus attraction “MLNB” covers both same and other gender attraction. There is no unification.

Loving men, loving women on their own aren’t really concrete enough to organize around or do anything with. They are so nebulous it makes little point to even separate the ML/WL aspect of it. By that I mean… it’d be more productive to focus on the nonbinary part and organize things like making sure we can marry our partners, have gender taken off government ID forms, etc, than it is to focus on loving men or women.

Instead of aping the POLITICAL reasons for SGL, MLM, and WLW to exist (and as separate things!), “NBLM/NBLW” or their more correct “MLNB/WLNB”, it just seems interested in making it nominally “more inclusive.” In a way that somehow totally leaves out bisexual people who suddenly have to use WLNB AND MLNB to describe their experiences 😭😭😭 Like suddenly bisexuality is left at the door even though SGL, MLM, and WLW were created TO BE INCLUSIVE OF US.

These terms mean nothing. And it makes those “MLM/NBLM” signs even more embarrassing because NBLM includes nonbinary women 😭😭😭

Like what does any of this accomplish. I know there is a slice of nonbinary people who do not fall under MLM/WLW because their gender can’t correlate to M or W at all, even tangentially, but I do not know what these new terms are doing for them besides making it a bit easier to say “I like men,” although it’s not even that much easier because you still have to clarify if you ONLY like men or also like other genders

Fucking embarrassingly tomfoolery all around. From the erasure of black origins (not surprising, considering how often white “NB” people don’t realize NB also means non-black), the complete lack of knowledge around how these acronyms mean Gender-loving as a descriptor of what type of man/woman you are), to the uselessness of the terms in general, even when done correctly

Also “Some people are using nblm/w to mean they’re nonbinary-loving men/women!” okay then they’re weird fetishizers cause EVERY orientation already includes attraction to nonbinary people and we’re not some monolith. There’s no good usage here.

And no one @ me. I’m nonbinary. I can bitch about this.

[colorisbyshe]

Linking to this post where @officialcisblog​ and I were speaking. I’m creating a new post because it got too long.

@officialcisblog​ said:

Wow you completely ignored the fact that I stated asexuality and aromanticism challenges societal norms!

Also the fact that I’m aspec yeah, but I’m trans/nonbinary and not straight.

You leave out the fact that being asexual doesn’t mean a person is straight. But society has a huge pressure on people to BE overtly sexual and to WANT sex. Which, on one hand is okay, but on the other hand is toxic/harmful to not just ace people.

And trying to compare ace people to just normal straight people is sort of… gross. Asexuality is an identity within itself that has unique characteristics. It’s not comparable to “some person focusing on their career” because that person will probably still be sexually attracted to people and other things that a lot of asexual people wouldn’t. In fact, as an aspec person your blatantly WRONG explanation of asexuality is.. pretty offensive.

Asexual people still have sex. Some do, some don’t. A lot of times it’s just a lack of sexual attraction WHICH IS A FORM OF SEXUALITY.

Part of the LGBT community is that we challenge the norms of society. I mean, look at the drag movement- not the modern one, but the one that occurred during the Queer Revolution/LGBT movement in the 1970’s-90’s. Trans people like Marsha P. Johnson were put out into the spotlight.

Why? Because she challenged a part of society’s construct.

And please don’t act like the LGBT community is “SGA only” because A) you’re throwing bisexual, pansexual polysexual and so on people under the bus- wether it be people who are one of these labels but are primarily attracted to/currently in a relationship with their opposite gender (if they have one) or people who feel like SGA doesn’t fit them because they’re not just attracted to one gender. I mean last time I checked, me being pan doesn’t mean I’m attracted to my same gender. I’m attracted regardless of gender and I don’t want to get lumped in with being “SGA” because it’s not the same experience.

And B) if that was the case Straight trans people need to leave the community. Sorry y'all. Nonbinary people aren’t allowed either.  

((Not to mention the term itself, SGA, is a term which has roots in conversion therapy))

The aspec community is fighting towards having what a lot of others want- like nonbinary people, pan people, and other marginalised identities want.

To be seen. To be seen as more than just a joke or a freak. To educate people on our identities and what they are and what they mean to us. We fight for acceptance and awareness like a lot of the lesser-known marginalised identities of the LGBTQIA+ community do.

And yknow, the community is supposed to pride itself on diversity and acceptance. It’s a COMMUNITY. Shoving your head up your asshole and spending more time screeching about “SGA” people as if they’re superior to the rest of us kind of defeats the purpose, and honestly gets you nowhere. Aspecs aren’t doing any harm to the community by being apart of it, just like how bi/pan/poly people who are with their opposite gender and straight trans people aren’t causing any harm by just simply existing in the community.

I want to begin by saying, no, I’m not ignoring you saying that aromanticism/asexuality challenge societal norms. I’m saying they don’t challenge societal norms. Thanks.

Rest of my response under a read more:

I don’t know why you’re listing off your identities as if they’re relevant? No one in this thread said you can’t be ace, trans, and non-straight. We’re just saying that the cis and straight aces aren’t non-heteronormativie. Neither are cis aroaces. It’s... that simple. If you can be trans non-straight and ace, someone else can therefore be... cis straight and ace. Mind boggling concept, I know.

Society really doesn’t give a fuck if you want sex. Society just cares if you have sex and if the sex you have is the right sex (between two cishet people, typically intraracial, typically everyone involved has no visible disabilities, and it should be procreative unless it’s all about the man’s pleasure). And even then?? Society stops caring if you’re dating. No one looks at elderly couples and is like “ah, there’s a chance you’ve stopped having sex. Society frowns on this.”

So, like, cis straight aces are just as straight as straight non-aces. Especially when you remember, there are aces who have/want/enjoy sex and non-aces who don’t.  There are some people so sex-repulsed they consider that an integral part of their sexuality but would not call themselves ace. They’re still straight if they only want to date the “opposite” gender or are only attracted to the “opposite” gender. Every relationship you can have to sex/romance is incorporated under “straight” if you are solely attracted to the opposite gender. (This is an abstract you, I’m not saying you are straight.) Just like if you are only attracted to the same/similar gender, it does not matter how you are attracted to them or what you want to do with them, you are gay.

I have a question for you--how is a single woman who never wants to date and doesn’t have time for sex treated differently in society that a straight woman who doesn’t feel sexual attraction and doesn’t date? What does society do to differentiate these women? How does the latter woman challenge gender norms in a way the cishet non-ace woman doesn’t?

How do cishet  ace people who have sex challenge gender norms in a way that cishet non-ace people who have sex don’t?

Gender norms aren’t based on whether or not your behaviour is motivated by attraction or not Gender norms are just based on your behaviour, motivators be damned.

If aces can have/want/need sex, what about asexuality is inherently non-heteronormative? What norms are they challenging?

To address your Marsha P Johnson statement, a. fuck you for comparing cishet aces to bisexual trans women and b. did you forget the original post?? We’ve already talked about how transness and gayness are both gender nonconforming and that’s why our activism overlaps.

Where did anyone say the LGBT community is “SGA” only?

Pansexual means “attracted to every gender,” so like... if you aren’t attracted to your own gender... that’s not pan. The only exception being if you don’t have a gender because then... yeah... you can’t be attracted to your own gender. You don’t have one.

Straight trans people are hurt by homophobia and transphobia no shit they belong. We’re talking about cis straight aces and cis araoces. Why do y’all derail posts like this????

SGA doesn’t have roots in conversion therapy. It’s root is “attracted to the same gender” which is an extremely common phrase. It IS used in conversion therapy and it stems from SSA in that case. But it also comes from SGL which is AAVE. Again, same gender attraction is a very common phrase, so it has multiple “origins.”

The ace community A. Isn’t fighting for anything. Seriously can you name a single ace organization that does activism and B. Isn’t fighting for LGBT causes.

Visibility isn’t an LGBT issue. People know LGBT people exist. The LGBT community currently suffers from something called “hypervisibility.” We suffer because people know about us and use that to oppress us.

LGBT people aren’t fighting to not be seen as jokes/freaks. We’re fighting to exist in public and not have our love, lives, sex, bodies, health be legal. We’re fighting for legal protections which we don’t currently have. We’re fighting to not be killed, assaulted, abused, and rejected.

ANY social group can be said ot be fighting for the weak shit you’re listed. LGBT activism has specific goals. Yeah, if you decontextualize it, it sounds just like the ace community’s supposed goals!!

But AGAIN, fighting against coercive sex and romance is actually a FEMINIST issue, not an LGBT one!! In a world where LGBT people are killed for fucking and loving, our goals cannot be also reminding the world “yeah but sex and romance aren’t important.” LGBT people are literally forced into conversion therapy to make them sexless and loveless.

No, we don’t share goals with the ace community.

Aces aren’t doing harm to the community by being part of it. But cishet aces, cishet aros, and cis aroaces are. Because they oppress us.

Bisexuals and straight trans people don’t oppress the community. But thanks for comparing cishets to bisexuals and trans folk. Real nice.

Fuck off.