#is this queer discourse? is this syscourse?

[moonpool-system]

there's a point where it stops being "just community infighting" and it starts being that you've become the bigot you hate and supposedly protect others against.

I'm so tired

[chaos-in-one]

Need more people to realize that "this thing wouldn't be healthy for me" or "this thing makes me uncomfortable" or even "this thing actively upsets or triggers me" does not make that thing inherently harmful, and in labeling something as inherently harmful based on your own personal experiences with it, you will end up hurting, silencing, and/or dismissing many people who do not share said experiences or even have completely opposing experiences with said thing.

Before you label things as morally wrong based on personal experience with it, take the time to consider if that experience applies to other people who have interacted with that thing by default, if the harm is actually inherent, or even has a high correlation, or if it is on an individual level.

[puhoyqueer]

Blankstance or -stance: An alternative term to blankqueer, and using the suffix -queer for terms about discourse, stances, and opinions, for anyone who dislikes the -queer suffix being used for things like shipping discourse, system discourse, and other things that aren't queer. Or just feels like the term they're coining doesn't fit accurately under blankqueer. An umbrella term for all stance terms.

Inspired by claystance by @/headbuds (deactivated) and of course blankqueer by @/mogai-pride-flags (deactivated).

Tagging: @blankqueer

Everyone ever can use this word and flag.

[discoursecallie]

[thescaryhyperfem]

what are you? a cop?

[system-of-a-feather]

You know, I honestly do think people would greatly benefit from taking some time to deeply reflect on the known idea that "one of the key point ways to radicalize into a dangerous, harmful, bigotted, and sometimes fascist (NOT CLAIMING THAT IT IS INHERENTLY, JUST THAT WE KNOW IT PLAYS A ROLE IN RADICALIZING FASCISM I DO NOT PISS ON THE POOR) is to create an 'us' vs 'them' way of thinking." Like this is tumblr dot com, yeah there are some people who don't know that and/or disagree with that, but I'd like to think the sensible majority of us who are on the trans gaysex website have heard that be said and have at least mostly agreed with it.

And yet, even then, we have some of the most pointless discourse that is fundamentally built on this "us vs them" ideology. The same "they are ACTUALLY [emotionally and morally charged claim] and are DANGEROUS to live and let be". "[Insert Group] is ACTUALLY a [insert claim that generates fear] because [semi plausible claim and/or over generalization of a few people]." "[Insert Group] wants us dead / gone / silenced and will not stop until this or that and can not be trusted when they say otherwise"

Like, I'm pretty sure this is in queercourse / LGBT discourse, proship related stuff, and all that general way too online internet discourse, but the one I'm most familiar with is syscourse so I'm going to use that as a reference and talk specifically to that audience.

If you are reading this and go "Oh you are vagueing XYZ of [this group] because they literally say those things", I'm sorry to tell you this literally had at least half of the regular syscourser names in my mind - from BOTH sides.

Honestly, I feel if we just really stopped using labels to put OURSELVES into us-vs-them categories that people can immediately box us one place or another, it'd do everyone a lot better in having productive conversations cause you'd actually kind of need to, ya know, talk to a person before you inherently decide that they are the "enemy who wants to take things away from you and silence you."

Nine out of ten times, people just want to live, want to be able to exist and have human decency, and are just generally scared. I'm sure there are some bad apples out there that explicitly do want to actively cause harm to other people for no good reason other than its funny, cause yeah, they obviously exist - but I've come to find most people, even the most aggressive and vocal people, are scared and often isolated and thus trapped in this cycle of discourse.

There is a lot of benefit to be found by taking time to sit, pull off all the assumptions you've made about a person, and just genuinely give space and time to have a genuine, best faith, private discussion about what matters and drives them. If there are people who you think you know their opinions, thoughts, and reasons for doing and saying what they do from just their online public presence, you are honestly probably humorously wrong.

And that isn't to say I'm exempt from it, cause I liberally block at the slightest annoyance which - while minimizing negativity on my dash also happens to shut down any room for any deeper understanding of a person - is good because no one is entitled to you going out of the way to understand them and their perspective, especially when they are actively putting things out that make you feel stressed, annoyed, and/or concerned.

It also isn't to say there is any reason or internal dialogue that fully excuses toxic behavior on it's own. No one is entitled to your forgiveness either, especially if they don't make amends on their own effort.

It's all just to say that I think people would benefit a lot from sitting down and spending some time thinking to themselves what it means, why it is, and how it appears chronically in social communities the "us vs them" mentality and how that ends up causing unhealthy and toxic behavior.

[sophieinwonderland]

Since DNI discourse is a thing right now, I'm going to say that I believe DNIs are inherently harmful, especially when targeted at marginalized communities.

"[Insert Marginalized Group] DNI" is inherently discriminatory. Whether the group is a type of queer person, or a person with a specific disorder, or an endogenic system.

DNI culture doesn't exist in a vacuum. Kids brought up in a pro-DNI world will be future business owners and policy-makers.

When you normalize DNIs against small subsets of marginalized people, it's not a huge leap to normalize DNIs against large swathes of them. And from there, the same logic used to defend DNIs can be used to defend discriminatory businesses.

To me, it's not a long road from normalizing discriminatory DNIs to normalizing "no queers allowed" businesses.

DNIs based on ideology are more acceptable. But honestly, I don't like those either. Like, if there was a conservative following my blog, I think that would be a good thing as it would give me a chance to change their mind. (With no additional effort on my part.) Obviously, if someone is starting arguments then you are within your rights to block them. But I legitimately don't understand the mentality of complaining that someone who follows you and likes your posts is [insert group].

[chaos-in-one]

People who post in the debate/discourse tags and then ignore &/or refuse to listen to anyone actually debating with them or throw a fit when people disagree with their post fucking baffle me

Like if you don't want to receive criticism & argument to your post... don't put it in the debating & discourse tags??? Don't put it in the tags that are made for discussion/criticism/argument/etc on the subject???????

[the-firefly-jar-system]

hot take, but i feel like so much discourse is completely redundant at this point. people aren’t arguing anymore for the betterment of their community or to further their own understanding, they’re just arguing to argue

there are so many interesting conversations to be had about these topics, but people have become so hostile and closed-minded that we can’t even have them. there are flaws in every community, and it’s so important to discuss these grey areas and conflicts. there’s very few people i’ll actually talk to about my opinions on these topics, and it’s because i know these people will listen to and discuss with me.

if we can’t realize that our opinions are not objectively correct, then we don’t have any chance of furthering progress in our communities. we are further separating our communities by the hostility we show each other. we need to listen without interrupting, speak without unnecessary hostility, and do all of this with the intention of molding and evolving our perspective. if you don’t think you can do this, then don’t get involved in discourse.

everyone who involves themselves in discourse needs to ask themselves: what their goal is, what would change that goal, and what would change their process to reaching that goal. if your goal will never change, neither will the topics that we’re arguing over. lack of adaptability means lack of evolution

this post has no DNI, but please check our DNI if you interact with the rest of our account

[unfamiliar-ghostly-system]

You don't engage in Tumblr discourse because you have a job and payments, I engage in Tumblr discourse because I have a job and payments and like tending to a blog where I talk about things that I don't talk about in my real life because it feels like logging in and letting go of the things I do talk about in my real life, and rambling about things that have little to no direct impact to my life gives me an unserious way to argue and arrange my thoughts (something that is fun). We are not the same.

[firminfollowing]

Sometimes you have to follow people you fundamentally disagree with on so many critical levels so much so that you would probably not be friends online OR in real life.

And not even just “for the enrichment” or whatever but because sometimes you need someone to say something absolutely wild.

Maybe the person you’ve labeled as absolutely antithetical to you in so many regards said something you DO agree with and yanked you have to reexamine the part of you that agrees with them. Reexamine the part of you that preemptively decides they must be wrong always because you are opposites. Reexamine the part of you that disagrees with them.

Maybe the person you’ve labeled as absolutely antithetical to you in so many regards said something you find absolutely repulsive and you have to reexamine the part of you that is repulsed. Reexamine your willingness to use words like repulsive and reexamine if it’s their words, their character, or their personhood that you’re labeling.

Maybe the person you’ve labeled as absolutely antithetical to you in so many regards said something that you could have said better and you have to reexamine the part of you that insists you could. Reexamine the part of you that insists they SHOULD.

I think being around people in a low/no stakes environment (following without interacting) can really help you reflect on your own shortcomings and prejudices.

…and sometimes they say something so fucking wild that the entertainment value of this non-interaction skyrockets lol

[strawberry-graveyard]

idk why some people get so up in arms about trans sysmates who don’t “match” with what the body “should” be. cuz it’s not even a sys exclusionist thing, that’s queer exclusionist as well. you can be afab and transfem. you can be amab and transmasc. whether you’re intersex or perisex, monogender or multigender, multiple transitions in or zero transitions in, who fucking cares!! genders are weird do whatever the fuck you want with them!!

[hottest-shipper]

I feel like p much all of my opinions abt what other ppl do come down to two main ideals:

Other people know their own experiences infinitely better that I can. If someone says they are something, I believe it and I treat them with respect. If they actually were lying or mocking, well, politely going "okay, I'm happy to use nor/mal pronouns for you" very quickly kills their mood. And if they were genuine, I responded exactly how I should've.

Unless someone is actually harming real people, it's not really any of my business. What they think, what they write, what they believe, doesn't matter unless they're using it as justification to hurt people-- and even then, the issue is the harm, not the thought/belief. (and I do mean harm, not hurt-- if someone is consensually hurting someone else, that's none of my business)

[mossy-petrichor]

Hey. Person who is far too invested in discourse. Yes you

Breathe. Take a break. This isn't at all as important as you think it is. It does not matter, and I really don't want you to look back and see how much time you've lost getting angry at people online

This is about queer discourse and system discourse and media discourse and whatever else there is out there

You do not need this. It's not good for you and it's not good for anyone else. Gatekeeping a label or a name won't change the world, it's just making it a more negative place for no reason

Make the world better. Be kind to people. Learn something. Make something. Be positive, if not for yourself then for the people around you. We don't need any more negativity

[fagsystem]

Friendly reminder that the only person that you can control is yourself.

It is truly horrible when those around us hold bigoted or harmful views, it is. And, certainly, there are many instances where you can educate them and help them grow as a person.

However, there are many instances where you cannot.

You cannot force others to grow or change or believe things they do not. As much as we all would like to sometimes, you cannot control them. The only person you can control is yourself.

So, ask yourself, what do you want to do?

For me, I choose to only engage with others I can have constructive interactions with. I choose to block and completely ignore those who I know I cannot. I choose to surround myself with like-minded people who understand things the way that I do.

[spectruminterests]

Holy fuck. I’m aroace and haven’t had this experience (thank god I wasn’t online much as a teen), but that might have been because as part of a non-disordered System* most people who knew about my sexuality (or lack thereof), knew about me as distinct from my Headmate, and thus already had a socially acceptable reason to hate me.

My sister is bi and identified as lesbian for a long time, but our family and friends have been accepting, so she didn’t face much homophobia. A few years ago she said that maybe she shouldn’t be allowed at pride events, because “it’s not like she suffered for it.” Like, no???? No! I’m not accepting the idea that you have to meet a certain level of trauma to be queer. Most LGBT+ people not having queerness-related problems is kinda the goal here? And when people talk about their issues, you don’t say “your issues aren’t big enough.” Telling people they’re not hurt enough to join doesn’t keep your community safe, it just fucks people up.

*If you’re curious: we don’t know for sure why we’re Plural and if it was caused by trauma or not, and our experience doesn’t seem to fit with DID or any diagnosis we’ve heard of, but it’s pretty goddamn clear to us and almost everyone we’re close with that we’re distinct selves and Not Singlet. We have a few mental health issues, but we don’t think being a “we” is one of them.

idk can we stop…treating a.ce disc.ourse like it’s some haha funney cringe compilation or whatever the fuck because it fucking destroyed the entire ace and aro communities. there is no solid aspec community on tumblr anymore (which was by far the biggest number of aspec ppl). exclusionists took our community and fucking smashed it to pieces and y'all treat it as this fucking stupid joke when they traumatized, gaslit, and abused an entire group of queer people back into the closet. fuck every single person who doesn’t take that seriously.