#it's just . STOP ERASING WILL? GAY PEOPLE EXIST?

[wilsonsmcgillsweatshirt]

brb going to start proclaiming that the term "bromance" is homophobic

[nuclearnokia]

Ok i already talked about this before but I’m gonna again.

Whenever people ship aroace characters IT. IS. ERASING. REP.

“But they could be gray-“ disrespectfully stfu. You wouldn’t do that with a gay character.

You wouldn’t say “But they could be bi!!!” To a gay character so you could ship them with the opposite gender. That would get you cancelled in five seconds flat. So why is it okay to essentially do the same thing with an aroace character? (And btw dont go “ermmm that does happe-“ I’M WELL AWARE IT DOES but this happens so much more to aroace characters without any consequences.)

If the aroace character DOES have a partner then sure. If the aroace character DOES show interest in dating then sure. If the aroace character is CONFIRMED grayromantic/sexual THEN SURE. BUT if it is NOT confirmed and they show ZERO interest in romance/sex then STOP. SHIPPING. THEMMMM!!!!!!

It is NOT that hard. Aroace characters don’t belong to you. It is so fucking infuriating to see people take the only rep we have and completely disregard it. Again, you wouldn’t do that with a gay character would you? You wouldn’t do that with a lesbian character either!!! So stop doing it with aroaces!!!

There is so many other characters for you to ship together. Just let us aroaces have our rep and stop disregarding it. The world will not end if you do, I promise.

Edit: Okay I didn’t think I’d have to clarify this because I thought it was obvious by the way I worded things, but I’m not talking about ALL aroace characters. I’m well aware there are some aros and aces who feel attraction. That’s why I specified “If the aroace character DOES have a partner then sure. If the aroace character DOES show interest in dating then sure.” I’m not talking about every aroace character to ever exist. I’m talking about the ones specifically that don’t feel attraction/don’t want relationships.

[nothorses]

I think one of the ways that tranandrophobia seems to distinguish itself from the other forms of oppression it is connected to is in the way it attempts to convince you it is indistinguishable and that transmascs are always just collateral damage to everyone else's "real" problems.

One example is the very blatent tirf claim that transphobia on its own isn't real, that it is all misdirected transmisogyny, and that transmascs only experience oppression due to our association with transfemmes.

But there is also the insistence that anti abortion laws and similar things are targeted at cis women and therefore are "women's issues" - transmascs shouldn't complain about being excluded because it "isn't about us". Same with homophobia and butchphobia. Even the terf talking point that they are just protecting "little cis girls" from making irreversible mistakes pretends that actual the transmascs being harmed is just an accident and not the goal.

Trying to talk about transandrophobia is a constant stream of "It's just transphobia. It's just misogyny. No, you can't call your experiences misogyny because that isn't about you. You can't call yourself a lesbian or a butch or compare your oppression to lesbophobia. It isn't about you. Yes, terfs hurt you, but you aren't their main target. This isn't about you. Yes, you need abortions and experience medical misogyny, but you can't talk about it because this isn't about you. You were sexually assaulted because of misdirecred misogyny. Don't make it about you. You've never contributed to the history of gay men, or lesbians, or the trans community. It isn't about you. Those cross dressers weren't trans. Stop trying to make women's history about you. You can't reclaim cunt or faggot or dyke because those words aren't about you. I don't care how many times you've been called a tranny. That word isn't about you. Why must you make everything about you?"

Because sure, transmascs exist, and we might be impacted by everyone else's oppression, but it is always thought of as a theoretical consequence of what is really going on, if it is thought of at all. Transmascs are not considered to be oppressed in our own right.

This idea gives the lawmakers plausible deniability, allies an excuse to ignore us, and feeds into transmasc erasure. If we are never the actual target to begin with, then clearly, we can't be uniquely targeted. The law makers don't need to be held accountable for their transandrophobia because it isn't like they are trying to hurt transmascs, right? We need to let the real victims speak, the ones being targeted on purpose.

Nobody ever sees the way it all piles up, and even if they do, they think "well it's just an accident, right? If we fix the main problem, then this fringe issue will go away on its own" without ever considering that transandrophobia isn't as rare, fringe, or accidental as society wants it to appear and that actual effort needs to be put into dismantling it.

It isn't that they actually believe that transandrophobia isn't real. It's that they just don't believe it is about transmascs. Because even if we are the common denominator, we are still just collateral damage and could not possibly have anything of value to say. Because as collateral damage, our issues are never our own and thus never need to be discussed on our own terms.

100%. And I think this is exactly what this sort of cycle of erasure depends on.

We are erased, our problems are erased, and our oppression is erased, which means it's easy for people to ignore us, our problems, and our oppression. There's so little evidence, so few people talking about it, and they never really see or hear anyone name us in this violence, so surely, it isn't about us at all! It must be about the people they know about already, the problems they know about, and the ones who are always readily named in these conversations.

If we're speaking up, there's no reason to believe us; if anything, we come under scrutiny for trying to talk about these issues nobody else can see. We must be crazy, hysterical, whiny and overdramatic, or perhaps malicious. We're stealing attention, stealing space, and stealing help. We might be victims, but we are incidental and unworthy victims.

And ignoring us, our problems, and our oppression means we continue to be erased. Which makes it easier to ignore us, and erase us, and easier to perpetuate violence against us. And so on.

It's understandable, in a way, for people to ignore us; most people don't know about any of this in the first place, and when they do, they're not inclined to take any of it seriously. Even if they do see convincing evidence that our problems are real and worth talking about, it's easy for that to be a one-off that they eventually forget about. Everyone else is talking about everything else, so we sort of fade away.

It's not their fault; they're not trying to ignore us. They just haven't learned to recognize violence against us, and they just don't seek us out, and can they really be blamed for that? Can they really be blamed for the violence that continues because they and others don't see or try to stop it? We're so hard to find in the first place. You know, because we've been so thoroughly erased.

There are a lot of people who've been fighting this for a long time, and even more we don't-- and probably won't-- ever know about, who've been fighting for even longer. I think it's getting better; the organized backlash against us is, imo, a sign that our reach is getting stronger and wider. But it's a hard cycle to break.

[pineapplerightsideupcake]

So.. I'm confused about something. If your beliefs in radical feminism say that trans people aren't valid in their feelings of being trans, what's stopping you from making bisexual people not part of the LGB? B stands for bisexual. What if their sexuality is just a phase? What if they are *actually* just heterosexual? For that matter what's stopping you from excluding YOURSELF from the community? At some point, you can't exclude any more people from a space that wasn't supposed to be gatekept to begin with! -Vero of CFC

You people always use that word “valid”. It’s absolutely meaningless post modern nonsense. Trans people feel that despite having a male or female body, their feelings about it change reality. I’m not telling trans people how they feel. Because you’re right, I can’t know that. What I’m telling them is that their feelings don’t change their bio sex. I’m telling them their feelings don’t supersede the rights and dignity of women. That’s not at all the same thing as being same sex attracted.

If I tell you that I am attracted to both men and women you can believe me or not. It doesn’t change my sexuality. You can’t know how I personally experience sexual attraction. But if I tell you I’m an Olympic Figure Skater, that’s something external and material. That’s something that either is or isn’t. And it doesn’t matter how true I want it to be.

This isn’t about people being invalid or valid. It isn’t about telling others I know better than them how they feel. It’s me telling them that their feelings don’t change material reality.

And we don’t get to sidestep reality because language is limited and imprecise. We create words to express ideas and categorize things so we don’t have to start every conversation from the ground up. Think of the quote “a rose by any other name”. The word ‘rose’ is made up but the flower it refers to exists in the material world. And you and everyone on earth could declare a rose a tulip but as long as people needed to specify they’d find a way to invent the word rose again. It’s why every 3 years your movement declares old terms verboten. MtF and FtM got used until people got mad it didn’t erase the reality of bio sex and people just used those terms in place of “male and female”. Then the same thing happened with AFAB and AMAB. Now we’re onto TME and no one knows what anyone is talking about because at the end of the day, people are male or female and no amount of “validation” or the right words erases that reality.

I am bisexual because I am attracted to both men and women. Lesbians are women exclusively attracted to women. Gay men are men exclusively attracted to men. Straight people are exclusively attracted to the opposite sex. The LGB community formed because the thing we had in common- same sex attraction- is punished in most societies. It absolutely was designed to gatekeep. It was a civil rights movement- not a secret club house. The LGB have no more moral responsibility to admit opposite sex attracted people than black activists have to include white or Asian people.

“Queer” has nothing to do with it. Demi flux genderoo aroallo fox kin have nothing to do with it. A group of men that believe their internal state of mind makes them literally a woman has nothing to do with it. You people overran a movement for same sex attracted people, convinced everyone to call our community a slur, and demand that we center heterosexual teens too immature for a relationship thinking that makes them the same as a Gay man.

I’m tired of arguing with 19 year olds that read too much mlm fanfiction that having short hair and wearing hoodies from the boys section doesn’t mean they’re gay men. I’m tired of arguing with those same girls that the 45 year old man with pigtails and a pink pinafore sucking his thumb and holding a dolly on social media isn’t a brave woman defying The Man. He’s just a pervert.

[ifyouknowmenahyoudontt]

i genuinely think that the shift from the old marauders to the new one where every straight ship even the canon and most important one (i.e jily) and that whole jegulus/all the other made up ships that make no sense come from a place of fetish. yall LOVE to turn characters into little stereotypes and that whole constant obsession w homosexuality is not helping any cause. most of view view homosexual/queer relationships as more angsty or interesting in a way that’s so strange to me. ships could follow the most standard plot line but still be considered angsty cus they’re queer and why is that? this fandom has taken such a strange turn.

you are making sexuality such a strong and central point in a character importance more than any other trait of their character. and those head canons just end up erasing the most important things about these characters

james potter was a strong and good man. he developed from his arrogant teenage self into a good man fighting for a good cause. but now you made him into a twink that is in love with a death eater/ a member of the family that abused his best friend all his life. james and sirius’s relationship was a central point of their characters. and james’s love for lily is a central point as well??????

sirius being turned into a overly feminine gay drama queen, even though what WAS important about him was his loyalty his strength and his honor??? but all of that was forgotten. HE CAN BE GAY WITHOUT ERASING HIS ORIGINAL PERSONALITY. stop painting him into a stereotype of a gay man.

regulus black is getting the recognition that is to be given to sirius. his character was not some brave rebel vigilante that fought for justice. he was a pureblood supremacist.he was a deatheater. yes he is important to the story but he was not what you made him.

lily evans is the most important character of the series. she’s the reason it exists. her and james’s love is the center point. but it was pushed away by you people to focus on your strange fetishized view of gay men. this MAJOR character whose love for her son and husband literally MADE the story got cast away as a secondary character.

important topics like sirius’sabusive family, lily and james’s courage and love….was remplaced by ridiculized view of characters

make characters gay cus we don’t know anything about them yes okay that’s why wolf star was a major part of the fandom. but the complete shift of every single characters identity is just bullshit.

[darksou07]

Endogenic systems are plural. They do exist. They don't deserve to be harassed and ignored.

We don't need medical proof that we experience plurality because it doesn't have to be a disorder nor a illness. Being plural just means there is more than one person habitating the body/mind/brain and these experiences deserve to be heard, accepted and understood.

If you are alterhuman and identify as anti-endo, stop and think about all the others who are part of this community you claim to be a part of. Do any other identity requires medical proof? No? Then what makes you think you can call yourself alterhuman and put yourself along with others who you antagonize?

Endogenic systems are part of the alterhuman community and always have been. You cannot exclude a whole part of it just because you don't like them. That's not how this works. They have been part of alterhumanity way before you came along. You either deal with it or stop putting yourself in a community that was made for them as well. You're not welcome if you just want to make a part of it your enemies.

A biphobic person cannot call themselves supportive of the LGBT+ rights even if they happen to be lesbians or gays. A transphobic LGB person cannot claim the same since their own rights came from the blood of the people who belong to the T part of the community.

You also cannot call yourself alterhuman if you erase a group that is and always has been part of it. Do all of us a favor and go hide with the other sysmeds. Leave the alterhuman community alone. We do not hate endogenic systems here and never will call them fakers. If you do, you do not belong here.

Leave our tags, leave our spaces.

[quietwingsinthesky]

related to current discussion: extremely weird when people’s fandom investment in ships/characters is solely because they’re queer but only the specific kind if queerness that they want. like when you get rancid discourse about whether characters are gay or bi. does it fucking matter? does it? they’re queer, and you can clearly make an argument for either, so why go out of your way to attack and put down another queer identity just to. i don’t know. validate your headcanons above other people’s? make your ship stand above another?

you know, god forbid you talk about one half of a popular gay ship transitioning. now you’re the homophobe who wants to force them to be a straight couple. hey, why is being trans considered a threat to queerness when it gets in the way of your ship! answer quickly and if you say something transphobic (you will) you get dropped into this pit of snakes!!! related: why is asexuality treated similarly? as if a character not wanting sex with the other half of their ship is taking something away, as if their queerness is an inconvenience. why is bisexuality treated the same way, especially when a guy in a popular ship say… has a few canonical past female love interests. why does their existence, even in the past, get treated like something that needs to be erased to preserve the sanctity of the ship.

i don’t have anywhere to go with this but to say. fucked up. stop it. get some help.

[sh00kspeared]

Can we talk about Johnny's bi erasure in-game? Because really, it makes me kinda mad.

Now, I'm not the kind of person who shouts 'homophobia' at everything because it's just not my way of things... but the amount that Johnny's attraction to men has been completely shafted throughout the game is really a disservice to him and to all the people who ship their male characters with him. A few examples:

Cutting or making really hard to trigger the line where Johnny says he got a lap dance from a man at a gay strip club (I've seen some people claim they experienced it, which is why I think it may still be in the game)

Johnny saying he didn't sleep with Kerry because he had a dick despite the official, director-sanctioned game guide saying that he did.

Johnny telling female V that the two are arguing "like an old married couple", yet telling male V that they're arguing "like two geezers on a park bench." (Johnny's definitely not the kind of guy to change his language depending on the gender of person he's with).

Never, ever alluding to any of his flings with male characters outside of the strip club line despite him saying that he did swing both ways now and then.

Now, why do I care so much about this? Because it's really sparked more debate than necessary. This post got hate for making him "gay" Cyberpunk 2077 on X: "Johnny Silverhand 🎤 Art by: @painperdues https://t.co/ABiBzSCZvm" / X (twitter.com) and so did this one Cyberpunk 2077 on X: "V and Johnny, Johnny and V… By: @hanbyeo0526 https://t.co/JlGNBmRYJH" / X (twitter.com) (I believe some of the comments have been deleted since because I don't see a lot of the meanest ones there anymore). Mind you, after the latter was posted, a fem V x Johnny post was made not too long afterward and it got markedly fewer hate comments. Also, funny story, my old male V x Johnny post is the third most controversial post of all time on r/lowsodiumcyberpunk at the moment (please go downvote it if possible; I wanna be first again lmao /hj).

But, all this to say, much of the playerbase sees Johnny as an alpha straight manly man when he's... well... not. While many people including me assume that the choice to keep his bisexuality under wraps is due to his addled memory in Mikoshi misremembering the fact that he canonically slept with Kerry, I just think this is a really odd thing to use to demonstrate that. Of all the things the devs could've chosen to display this, they chose one of the things that is most likely to get male V x Johnny shippers belittled and seen as the 'lesser' version of the ship for just existing.

They chose to erase a massive part of Johnny's identity, either to prove the point of his memories being addled or because they were scared of backlash. I just don't see how it would've been so hard for him to allude to some of his male flings more often, make the dicky twister line easier to trigger, and just not have him say that he didn't sleep with kerry because he had a dick. Ffs CDPR, stop being so dodgy your bi characters' identities.

[olderthannetfic]

So we're all sick of antis using asexuality as an excuse to censor sexual art and expression. But I'm also getting sick of everyone going "but lots of aces enjoy and/or write porn!" in response. We all know this is true, and it's important to not send a message to those aces types that they're doing ace wrong.

But at the same tim, we can do better for the aces who don't like smutty fanfic. Instead of telling the antis that plenty of aces don't fit their narrative, straight up tell them to stop weaponizing asexuality.

Aces who are squicked out by E rated fic exist and deserve support and respect as asexuals. When we see idiots going "this identity exists, therefore stop making art" the reasonable response is "stop being a dick" not to erase and ignore the very identity they're coopting.

We cannot allow trolls, bigots, and fundies to appropriate one queer identity in order to silence other queer identities. We cannot let them split the queer community yet again over something as dumb as the fact that some people don't like horny fanfic.

The antis who go "think of the aces!" are infantilizing and removing agency from responsible adults who filter their fandom experience to their preferences. The correct response is not to go "anyone who is squicked by sex scenes is a meany, real aces write kinky fic" but to go "stop infantilizing our fellow queers, we all know how to use an exclude filter".

Anyone who is squicked out by E rated fic on AO3 can just filter it out, no matter the reason for their squick. Every single ace I've met who doesn't want to read horny fanfic simply filters it out without making a big concern trolling stink about how it shouldn't exist. These people should be respected, not erased, when some jackass tries to pretend that you have to write less gay sex fic in order to "protect" someone who already filtered it out.

It's the same exact thing as when they go "think of survivors!" when they tell you not to write certain ships or dynamics. Yes, many survivors are the ones writing that ship in the first place, but many others are uncomfortable with the ship and just filter it out.

Note that in nine times out of ten, the anti pitching the temper trantum is neither asexual nor a trauma survivor, they're just using a convenient demographic to shame people out of making art.

--

[zeroducks-2]

Ok so I've seen this post way too many times on my dashboard not to get pissed so here's me saying this: Shipping is not aphobic, Soulmates AUs are not aphobic, having fun imagining your favorite little guys having sex is not aphobic.

"But one of these characters is asexual in the text!" 1: a character which doesn't have a canon relationship is not necessarily aspec, and 2: even if the character is canonically aro/ace, shipping them with someone doesn't erase the fact that they're aro/ace in the text, and in fact doesn't hurt anyone because IT'S FICTION. It's like shipping with an age gap, shipping gay characters with the opposite sex, shipping murderers and cannibals, shipping het characters with the same sex, any other "problematic" thing you can think of. It's fiction. It's not real, it doesn't hurt anyone, it's just some poor sod's past-time like it is yours and mine and everyone else's who spend their time shipping fictional people.

"Shipping hurts X category of people" is anti rhetoric and guess what, it's bullshit. You're just calling people aphobic instead of p3do, groomer or whatever other offensive nonsense antis say.

"But soulmate AU are aphobic!" Look, I hate soulmate AUs because they're cheesy and made with the cookie cutter, but that's just bullshit. No they don't hurt aspec communities, they simply do not cater to aromantic people. Something which doesn't cater to you simply existing does not in fact hurt you. And anyway you're free to create your own "Platonic Soulmate AU" if you so like, I promise no one is stopping you and a lot of folks would appreciate it.

"But it normalizes amatonormativity!" LISTEN. It's called amatonormativity FOR A REASON, and this reason is that it is the norm. Fandom spaces haven't normalized it, IT IS ALREADY NORMALIZED. Hetero, cis, allo and amatonormativity don't come from fandoms, they are not pushed by fandoms, and making it sound any different is the same kind of rhetoric antis use. Kinda on the opposite end of the spectrum of that specific brand of antis which claims incest in fanfictions normalizes it, whereas 8 seasons of GoT somehow don't. Like fucking stop treating fans like they hold the keys to make things widely spread and accepted, maybe? Because that's also what antis do in their attempt to police what other people like...?

In conclusion, this is an internalized anti behavior which won't help aspec people, won't help fandom and will only fuel shame in anyone who takes it seriously. It's just a very fancy brand of censorship. Fucking stop.

[yubnubforhire]

I’ve seen a lot of people decry criticism of the rwrb movie as simply either homophobic or anti-cringe, with the statement ‘let queer people have our cringe rom-coms’ a common defense. This idea is flawed for many reasons, not least of which being that this movie is like… barely queer. Sure it’s about a queer couple, but that’s about where it stops.

First off there’s the blatant bi erasure, with no discussion of Nora’s sexuality, no June/Nora/Pez, the word bisexual only being used once or twice in the whole movie, etc. Second off is the complete lack of queer education or community: where is Alex learning about the gay lib movement and feeling like he understands something new, deep within himself? Where is Henry talking about his role amongst the erased queer figures of the past? Where are the crowds supporting both of them, in the US and the UK? (the scene at buckingham where you don’t even see the crowd felt so cheap) Where was Amy’s role as queer elder and protector? Where was Luna, and Alex’s realization as to why he looked up to him so much and why his betrayal hurt so bad? Where was Alex realizing he and Liam had actually ‘had a thing’ when they were younger, and reconnecting with him as someone who can fully be himself? Where was all the support when they got outed? Where the fuck was Catherine? Where were Bea and Catherine fighting for them during the confrontation at buckingham? Movie!firstprince feel so isolated and without community, which is just SO not the world CMQ created in the book.

More broadly, the movie just felt so shallow. I completely understand the need for adaptation and translation to a new medium, but so many of the things they changed either lower the stakes or remove them entirely. Bea is a non-character, with no depth or backstory. Nora only exists to tell Alex to fuck Henry. Pez gets all of one line in the entire movie. June does not exist, which should completely change things because Alex does not act like the only/eldest child of the POTUS. We never really see the emails and a lot of them are adapted to onscreen dialogue, so what exactly was leaked? Why are they called the Waterloo letters? No one watching the movie alone will know. Who leaked them? I figure the movie implies it was Miguel, but then why have Richards be a character at all? CMQ was making a point with the Richards/Luna story, and the movie having a new side character as the “villain” is just… so disappointing. We don’t see any of the scenes of Henry acknowledging how fucked up the monarchy is (other than a few throwaway jokes), the comparison to the Empire, any of the Bea storyline, or him trying to avoid military service and renounce his royal inheritance, so the one line towards the end when movie!Henry has an outburst about the monarchy being antiquated is just completely unearned and comes out of nowhere.

They kept the line where Oscar tells Alex that ‘sometimes you just have to jump and hope it’s not a cliff’ but it’s now completely devoid of the context— that line is about Oscar telling Alex he doesn’t regret getting together with Ellen, no matter how it ended. It doesn’t work the same if Oscar and Ellen are still happily married! (Justice for Leo also tbh)

In the confrontation at Buckingham, the king (don’t get me started on the things they changed to avoid comparisons to queen liz) still suggests to Henry that they should claim the leaks are deepfakes and deny it, but Alex already gave the live televised speech in the movie timeline! It’s out already! The entire scene with the king honestly just does not work if Alex has already made the speech. Also side note, there’s absolutely no way in turbohell that Alex would make that speech without talking to Henry first.

There’s so much more I could talk about, from more script shenanigans to the Pip of it all, but this is honestly already way too long. All I want to say now is that it’s obviously everyone’s prerogative to like a movie or not, and nothing anyone else says should change the way you personally feel about a piece of art. That does not mean, however, that any criticism of said art is incorrect or unwarranted. You can like something and still acknowledge its flaws. And no, cringiness is not this movie’s main flaw.

[cl0ckworkqueerness]

[trigger warning: mention of sexual assault]

the specific breed of queer queerphobia is just as if not more frightening than non-queer queerphobia, specifically in this case as it relates to acespec/arospec people (terms which will hence be combined into "aspec" for the sake of clarity, see the tags for a quick note about this)

if it's not already clear from my posts, i am very supportive of the silenced, erased, and shunned parts of the queer community. i involve myself a great deal in breaking down the walls that queer people have decided to erect in order to determine who does and doesn't get to call themselves "queer". nothing breaks my heart more than seeing other people who experience the world in a way starkly different from perisex, allosexual, alloromantic, cisgender, heterosexual people, get shunned from a family who also experiences the world in such a difference way, simply because it's not different "enough", or not different in the way they want to be different

aspec people will always unquestionably be queer, regardless of anything else that would or wouldn't make them queer. period.

aspec people should not and should never need to "justify" themselves to attend pride, not just "as an ally", but as someone whose relationship with romance and sex (the act) differs from what is expected of a "normal" person. they are inherently different, they are inherently queer. full stop.

aphobia exists, regardless of whether or not you follow your blatant bigotry with "no it doesn't". you cannot erase your shittiness by following up your shittiness with "by the way, I'm not being shitty". and if you know you are being aphobic, and you are proud of such a thing, rethink the way you see queerness as a whole. you are a vile human being, and should unlearn the oppression olympics. you not only are an athlete in it, but you are the obstacles. you are the fucking problem.

aspec people regularly face discrimination and harassment for being aspec. the comments of "why do you refuse to give me grandkids" and "maybe you just haven't found the right person yet" and "you're broken" and "you're going through a phase" have all been said about gay people, about lesbians, and about aspec people. aspec people face violence for being aspec. aspec people face corrective rape for being aspec. aspec people face crocodile tears claws that intend to "help", aspec people face blood and claws that intend to hurt, aspec people face real, visible hatred. and even if they weren't "oppressed enough", WHICH THEY UNDENIABLY ARE, 1) there isn't an oppression goal someone needs to hit to become valid, and 2) queer people should not be defined by the oppression we face, anyway.

"b-b-but what about cishet asexual people!!!" i have never seen a sentence less scary in my life. cishet people can be queer, you know? cishet people can be intersex (if they choose to identify as queer), cis people can be asexual and aromantic, pericishet people can in fact be demisexual and heteroromantic, and guess what? they're still queer. they still differ from what's "normal". they're still allowed to pride, because pride is not meant to gatekeep.

pride is meant to celebrate our differences, to fight against those who try to suppress us, and to unite those who feel crushed by the heel of normality.

so don't fucking do their job for them.

[theflashjaygarrick]

Absolutely wild to me that with all of DC's reboots/retcons no one has had the sense to completely erase the Arisia incident (and no, I do not count Johns' whole 'Hal thought it was creepy but then learnt that her planet rotates differently so she is actually 200' nonsense. It's probably the biggest stain on the green lantern franchise (followed by the Kalmaku nickname thing) and genuinely there is no benefit to it existing.

But importantly I don't mean erase Arisia. She is a character with a lot of potential as a little sister with self esteem issues, a child who has been conscripted into a literal galactic army and is honestly just trying her best. She's adorable and had a lot of potential before Englehart made it so disgusting I stopped reading his green lantern comics my I own sanity. And I do feel like while it definitely did tarnish Hal and his reputation (and lets be real, probably should have done so for almost every green lantern in that era except John) Arisia herself was honestly a lot harder hit with being hated and erased. Which is how a lot of comic controversies - and even real life abuse cases can - go. I feel like she honestly deserves a second chance to be explicitly and overtly removed from that uncomfortable and unnecessary arc rather than just being pushed aside so people can write Hal as a space maverick male fantasy (when will Spectre Hal come back from the war).

But like imagine an Arisia year one with me (wherein the writers and the corps aren't creeps):

Arisia is a young orphaned alien girl who is still grieving when she has the responsibility and powers of a lantern ring thrust upon her. While still trying to get a hang of her new powers she is called into OA where she meets the other Green Lanterns. She begins training and becomes the (actual) little sister/kid of the green lantern corps. Crucially no one is weird about her. I would probably make it so that her home planet values really strong familial ties so that as an orphan she is desperately seeking out a family in the green lantern corps, which clashes with some of the other members who initially see the other corpsmen as work buddies at most. In this when Hal and her hang out its because he's her mentor and he radiates cool uncle vibes.

And honestly you could keep the ageing up with the ring idea but instead of making it part of a creepy romance arc it could be used to further explore her own anxieties. Maybe she feels overlooked as a kid so decides to make herself look older to feel more powerful when on missions, but it eventually it makes her feel more self conscious about what she looks like normally. Then it ends with her learning to embrace and find confidence in who she really is. You know, classic coming of age stuff. And after that Hal and Jon decide to introduce her to the Teen Titans so she can be around other heroes (roughly) her own age.

So she ends up on Earth for while where you could have a fun fish out of water dynamic whilst she explores earth life in San Fransisco. Not only is she a member of teen titans as their GL (or Teen Lantern as they probably insist on calling her). She can have a whole side plot about making friends in her civilian identity and wanting to be a normal kid (milkshakes, diners, roller skating, baby gay crushes) while also knowing that at some point she has to go back to OA and to her home sector. Back there she has to embrace this massive responsibility (honestly too big for someone of her age) that she didn't choose, but that was rather an inherited burden from her late father and duty as a member of the corps.

Ultimately it would be about finding confidence in your own heroism, a found family, and having fun coming of age moments. And rescuing a promising female character from being an embarrassing footnote in DC (and Hal Jordan's) history.

DNI INTERACT IF YOU ENJOY HAL AND ARISIA AS A COUPLE. I DON'T KNOW IF THESE PEOPLE ARE REAL BUT IF THEY ARE, LEAVE MY POST/BLOG ALONE.

[thevelaryons]

Before the airing of season 1 of House Of The Dragon, the showrunners Ryan Condal and Miguel Sapochnik said Laenor would be a good portrayal of a gay character. Then they made him have internalized homophobia. Then they had him abandon his grieving family to live a free gay life in Essos. He even abandoned his dragon because that was stopping him from being a happy gay man with his lover. As a gay person, it’s one of the worst gay representations I’ve seen in media. The showrunners made their gay character into a terrible selfish person who helps agree to kill one of his family servants so that he can run off with his lover. His allies, Rhaenyra and Daemon, are terrible people too. Laenor was just awful gay representation and ever other gay relationship from the book was erased (I’m glad about it or they would be ruined too).

To be fair, Laenor left because he craved the violence of the battlefield over the mundane life mixed with court politics (not that it’s a much better excuse), but yeah, what the show did to him is a travesty.

I think depicting stories where the gay characters have internalized homophobia is not necessarily an issue. Opinions may vary on this, but as a gay person myself, I’ve enjoyed the kind of stories that tackle the issue of homophobia, so long as it’s well written. Laenor’s story in HOTD is not well written. Especially because that internalized homophobia only exists to make other characters, like Rhaenyra, look good. The reason why Laenor comes off as bad gay rep on the show is because his character is just there to prop up others versus the book portrayal which afforded him integrity as an individual (despite him being a minor character).

That scene in season one/episode seven where Laenor talks about how much he hates himself and then Rhaenyra comforts him by saying that he is a “honourable man with a good heart” is only for Rhaenyra’s benefit. Because Laenor can say in that scene that he wants to be there for his family but then next thing we see is him orchestrating his escape. He’s basically forced out of his own life and the show frames it all as a good thing courtesy of Rhaenyra’s kindness. The window scene between Laenor and Rhaenyra even portrays Rhaenyra with a halo of light around her because it’s not just the writing on this show that’s manipulative but the direction too.

Even just the way Laenor is depicted onscreen is downright offensive. His characterization was changed completely to being a hypermasculine drunk who apparently spends all his time fucking around. He makes vulgar comments about his wife in front of others too. All of it is meant to portray him as a selfish person who is disrespectful while his wife is tirelessly suffering the burdens of having to fulfill her duty. In Fire & Blood, neither of them really gave a damn about each other or about their duty. But the show changes it so that Rhaenyra looks like the good one while throwing Laenor’s character completely under the bus.

Despite Laenor being a rather minor character in the book, GRRM actually gave him some character development. Laenor started out as being somewhat distant from his wife/kids (he was living comfortably on Driftmark while his wife/kids all faced the tense court rivalry by themselves for the most part) but after the rising political tensions between the Blacks and the Greens, Laenor is the one who makes an effort to be there for his family at last, and he did not need to sacrifice his personal life to do so:

“Do keep trying,” Queen Alicent told Ser Laenor, according to Mushroom, “soon or late, you may get one who looks like you.” And the rivalry between the greens and blacks grew deeper, finally reaching the point where the queen and the princess could scarce suffer each other’s presence. Thereafter Queen Alicent kept to the Red Keep, whilst the princess spent her days on Dragonstone, attended by her ladies, Mushroom, and her champion, Ser Harwin Strong. Her husband, Ser Laenor, was said to visit “frequently.”

— Fire & Blood, Heirs of the Dragon

Compare that to what the show did and it’s the complete opposite. Laenor has been living in King’s Landing the whole time and he’s miserable about it. After feeling antagonized by Alicent in season one/episode six, Laenor decides he wants to run away. So Rhaenyra has to tearfully admonish him for his behaviour and plead with him to stay with his family:

I’ve been saying this for a while, but the changes on the show are always deliberately done. It’s not a case of “ambiguous narrator” or “false history” when each time the changes only serve certain characters and screw over others. There’s a clear bias in the writing on HOTD.

[denimbex1986]

'It should come as no surprise that Russell T Davies, the man behind Queer As Folk, the one who first made Doctor Who tangibly gay, has returned to the franchise with what might be its queerest outing yet. But even we were surprised by quite how integral LGBTQ+ themes would be to the story this time around.

Much has been made of David Tennant and Catherine Tate's return, yet it's Yasmin Finney's brand-new character Rose who's at the heart of this Star Beast special.

Donna's daughter befriends The Meep first, and she's also the one who saves London when The Meep reveals itself to be evil. What's special about this is that it's Rose's trans identity specifically that proves key to her victory.

When we last saw her mother, Donna had absorbed some of the Doctor's energy, creating a 'metacrisis' that would have killed her if the Doctor had not erased her memories. But when she's reminded again of the Time Lord's existence in this latest episode, Donna survives intact, and that's because when she gave birth to Rose, she unknowingly split that energy between them, halving their potentially devastating impact.

As Donna's memories return, Rose's innate Timelord energy is then activated too, enabling her to stop Meep with newfound knowledge and abilities from her position on the ground.

Rose's non-binary identity stems from The Doctor's. (The show finally acknowledges them to be gender-fluid after they presented as both male and female over the course of the franchise). That means the source of Rose's power comes directly from her nature as a non-binary individual, positioning her as a hero because of her gender identity and not despite of it.

That's not to say Doctor Who shies away from the difficulties trans people face in real life. Earlier on in the same episode, bullies deadname Rose in the street and soon after, Donna's own mother, Sylvia, accidentally misgenders Rose as well, despite her good intentions.

Donna's response to all this? "I would burn down the world for you, darling," and honestly, that's how we feel after seeing some of the negative feedback these scenes have received online.

Despite scoring strong reviews from critics and the majority of fans, it seems not everyone is celebrating Doctor Who's much-lauded return.

On Rotten Tomatoes, trolls are review-bombing the episode, bringing the audience score down to 41%, which is a huge contrast from the critics rating of 89%. Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and the episode won't be to everyone's tastes, but when comments suggest the show 'needs to stop pushing talk of pronouns onto kids', it's safe to say most of these opinions are grounded in hate and ignorance.

Imagine being shocked that a show about an alien who regularly changes their body and gender would dare acknowledge such concepts?

In the days following the special, a hashtag named #RIPDoctorWho continued this backlash on X/Twitter, to which Doctor Who casting director Andy Pryor said the following:

"Just stopped by to say that on @bbcdoctor who (or any of our work) we don't work hard to cast inclusively for publicity. We do it because we like stories. & stories should speak to all of us & include all of us. And if one person feels a little less alone, then."

With more queer cast members on the way, including Neil Patrick Harris as the villainous Toymaker and Ncuti Gatwa as the new face of The Doctor himself, the future of Doctor Who is looking queerer by the day.

But it's not just the future that's queer.

To those who baulk at more inclusivity in future seasons, we can't help but wonder: What show have you been watching this whole time? Because Doctor Who is super queer — and it always has been.

Yes, even before Jack Harkness slapped a guy's arse or Bill Potts fell for a puddle named Heather, the Classic era channeled queerness with how it defied the establishment and stood up for those who need it most. It's hard to exaggerate how much stories like this resonated with LGBTQ+ people at a time when positive representation was almost non-existent on screen.

It's no wonder then that a sizeable chunk of Doctor Who's fandom identifies as queer, even if the show wasn't able to address LGBTQ+ fans directly until (queer lifelong fan) Russell T Davies regenerated the franchise in 2005.

But now, all these years later, The Star Beast ushers in a new chapter for Doctor Who where the show can finally live up to the inclusive ethos it's always striven for.

That's not to diminish the positive steps other showrunners have taken in the interim. 2015's 'Sleep No More' featured Doctor Who's first trans actress, Bethany Black, and season twelve's 'Praxeus' successfully flipped the 'Bury Your Gays' trope, although the less said about how season 13 handled #Thasmin the better.

And it's not like everything is suddenly perfect now. Rose's metacrisis abilities could feed into sci-fi tropes around trans/non-binary identities being considered "alien", plus the inclusion of Rose's deadname has garnered a mixed response from the trans community online.

While some argue this has given trolls the opportunity to use that name venomously against her character, others point out that transphobia is a reality the show shouldn't shy away from.

The moment when Rose calls the Doctor out for assuming Meep's pronouns might feel a bit-on-the-nose for some too, although if this kind of talk immediately heralds the end of the franchise for you, you might want to cast your mind back a few decades to 1972's 'The Curse of Peladon' where the Doctor and Jo discussed Alpha Centauri's pronouns at length.

But still, seeing trans and non-binary identities celebrated to this degree is very much welcome regardless, especially in a family show with such a huge fanbase like Doctor Who. This is the kind of storytelling that saves lives, trolls be damned.

And now, with the impending arrival of more trans actors and characters in Yasmin Finney's wake — including Jinkx Monsoon, Mary Malone and Pete MacHale — Doctor Who's next season promises to be more inclusive than ever before.

If you have a problem with that, remember that your hero, the good Doctor, would never discriminate against trans people, or any other marginalised group for that matter either. So why would you?'

[aroace-ventplace]

Being in fandom spaces is honestly so exhausting. Because there'll be a character who explicitly expresses disinterest in sex and romance, and most of the fandom will headcanon them as gay/lesbian. Any aspec headcanon will get called homophobic or assumed to be coming from a place of "Christian purity culture" (no I'm not a Christian, wasn't raised Christian and am not from a Christian majority country. Your assumption is racist and xenophobic actually).

Then there'll be characters who are confirmed to be aro/ace. These characters are always shipped with literally every other character and shippers would be like "but aros can still date! And aces can still have sex!" But then you headcanon a character who used to be in a relationship as angled or oriented aroace, and the entire fandom will be like "but this character has been in a relationship before, so they can't be aspec!" These aphobic double standards are infuriating.

YEAH, i've seen all of this so many times i've lost count. i understand that the people who say these things want to see themselves reflected in characters they like, but... so do aspecs. why are our headcanons and interpretations of relationships always treated as less legitimate? why is canonical aspec representation and coding so universally ignored? why does existing as aspec in fandom spaces always have to feel like an uphill battle?

(...and sometimes we get to see new and exciting variations of aspec erasure when certain (allo) creators explicitly say it's totally fine to romantically/sexually ship their aroace characters. that's been a fun one to see play out.)

i stopped interacting with fandoms a long time ago - finding other individual people who don't just tolerate but are actually EXCITED to discuss aspec readings of series has been far better than any fandom experience i've ever had. still, it sucks that larger fandom culture is so hostile to anything outside of the norm (basically: shipping two cis allo white men) that so many people have had to splinter off into their own small groups. i don't have much hope, but maybe one day we'll get to a point where aspec perspectives won't be entirely erased in mainstream fandom. maybe.