#queer hp

[gallifrey1sburning]

Hi, I've seen your reply to jalesidor's post on how fandom becomes ever more important the more one realises how disappointing jkr is. In it, you spoke about how both Harry and Draco are queer-coded in canon. Would you mind to expand on that? Or if you already have, would you mind linking that post or the tag under which I can find it? Absolutely no pressure to do so, just if you like! Thank you!

Hi anon! Sorry for the delay in answering; I wanted to do the question justice. I could have thrown some stuff at you off the top of my head, but that didn’t feel right—at my core, I am a Ravenclaw, and I could not bring myself to half-ass this. (For those who haven’t seen the referenced post, you can find it here)

Before I get into my personal analysis, I want to note that there has been a lot of discourse on this topic over the years, so many of my ideas didn’t actually originate with me, they just got incorporated into my mental cache of HP analysis. If you search the tags “canon drarry” or “drarry in canon” or any variation thereon, you’ll get a bunch of posts where people pull excerpts and explain how extremely not heterosexual the things happening in them are. @iamnmbr3 in particular has written a ton of these (which I didn’t realize were all by the same person until I started trying to track them down!), a few favorites being Arthur Weasley clearly thinking Harry’s got a crush, this hilarious list of canonical interactions, Narcissa’s very accurate understanding of how aware Harry and Draco are of each other, and that time Harry got beaned in the head by luggage because he was watching Draco change. Others classics include when @big-draco-energy got an ask about how Harry assumed that Draco must be a Death Eater if he was preoccupied enough to not care about their rivalry (and was right) and when @northward had a great observation about their obsessions with each other.

Seriously, this scene, y’all!

Possibly the most quoted line in Drarry fandom

And now, on to my own thoughts!

So first off, I want to say that some of the things that I’m going to flag as unintentional queer coding are rooted in stereotypes, and that that doesn’t mean that I believe in or condone said stereotypes. However, media often uses stereotyping as a lazy shorthand, and I think that that should be taken into account in this context, because it means there’s a reasonable assumption that people would interpret some character traits and scenes through that lens.

Secondly, so much credit to my amazing friend @mxmaneater, who actually HAS A FOLDER of photos of super gay moments from the books, which saved me a lot of time trying to dig up quotes that I knew existed but wouldn’t have been able to easily track down.

And finally, these are my personal interpretations. I’m not any sort of academic, and we’re all aware that JKR does not believe that she wrote Harry or Draco as queer. I’m hoping folks can be chill and take this in the spirit that it’s intended: as one possible reading. Your beliefs about the series and the characters are your own, and I’m not here to tell you you’re wrong just because they aren’t mine, so please extend me the same courtesy!

Now, without further ado, here we go:

Let’s start with Harry, because that’s the easier lift here. The Harry Potter books are written from a third person limited perspective, which means we only see things from Harry’s point of view and are privy to his thoughts. I can’t find a link, but I know that it’s widely quoted that JKR at some point used the fact that the books are from Harry’s perspective as justification for the ways in which some people or events were portrayed. The answers on this Quora post about pro-Gryffindor bias in the books do a good job of explaining the idea of Harry’s point of view skewing the point of view of the series.

So if we accept that the books reflect Harry’s thoughts and feelings about things, we’re left with the unmistakable fact that he frequently observes how handsome various boys and men are. We have physical descriptions of Cedric Diggory, Bill Weasley, Sirius Black, and even Tom Riddle that clearly illustrate admiration. Additionally, although it’s largely unflattering, it’s often noted amongst fans that we get full physical descriptions of Draco extremely regularly—we know his hair and eye color pretty much from the get go and hear about them often, as well as his outfits, his swagger, his smirking and ‘leering’ (yes, she really uses that word), etc.

Some very heterosexual observations on men from the perspective of one Harry James Potter

Sure, Harry never explicitly says he’s into men, but let’s keep in mind the time period the books were placed in and the type of family that Harry was raised by: there is a very real chance that Harry wouldn’t have been aware of the idea of bisexuality and therefore would never have questioned his own orientation. Because he knew he liked girls, so of course he wasn’t gay! To many folks who later realized they were some form of not-straight, particularly bisexual and/or pansexual folks, this is a pretty common experience: not really registering that checking out people of multiple genders is not actually something that everyone does. *Stares vaguely into the distance while pondering all of the girls I didn’t realize I was crushing on until many years later*

Plus, as I’ve mentioned before, there’s the symbolism of the whole ‘literally being raised in a closet, abused for being a ‘freak’, and forced to keep his truth a secret because the people he lived with were ashamed of him’ thing. To queer people raised by homophobes (or anyone who knew people in that situation), this isn’t even the slightest bit subtle, and the fact that JKR either didn’t notice or is in denial about it is truly bizarre to me.

Draco is a little harder to pin down without delving into stereotyping, so I’m just gonna go for it: Draco is a textbook Drama Gay™. He’s performative in his speech, using a lot of flamboyant gestures; he constantly performs over the top reenactments for his friends; he makes buttons and sews costumes and does drawings and generally just goes through a lot of effort to pick on his ‘rival’. The only scenes where we see him in something that could be read as a heterosexual romantic relationship are with Pansy Parkinson, whom he doesn’t seem remotely interested in; she reads more like a prop that he puts up with to project a particular image. Also, at one point we see him flopped across her lap to have his hair pet, which is definitely a thing that I remember happening during rehearsals back when I was involved in high school theater (and almost never by people with compatible orientations).

And then there’s this scene:

Someone once made a post about just how gay this whole thing is: pointedly grabbing the biggest bowtruckle, whispering in Harry’s ear, smirking over his shoulder while walking away, etc. (If anyone can find it, please send me the link and I’ll add it to the list of other people’s thoughts that contributed to all of this.)

So, that’s what I’ve got for you! Someone could probably write a whole research paper on this (and hell, maybe they have), but hopefully this at least somewhat explains my assertions of queer coding. As a reward for reading all of this, please enjoy a bonus scene of Harry NOT being attracted to a man:

Poor Ron. Maybe next time, buddy.

[dreams-of-klag]

the houses as trans allies

hufflepuff: will correct others on trans people's pronouns even (especially) when the trans person in question is not present, happy to test run different names and pronouns with their trans friends, sends links to trans fanfics, waits in line with trans friends at the DMV to get their license updated, turns it into a little party, and then buys celebratory hot chocolate afterward.

ravenclaw: genuinely excited to learn more about their trans friends' experiences, asks questions, reads up on gender theory in their spare time, watches trans youtube just to learn, realizes when a question they asked early on was inappropriate, follows up to apologize and then does better, has the etymology of the singular "they" ready to recite at any moment just in case.

slytherin: purposefully puts themselves in between transphobes and their trans friends, will go to the bathroom with their trans friends and keep up a chatty conversation making sure that nobody gives them any shit, invites trans friends to family dinner which turns out to be a table full of queers with lasagne, visibly recoils at the mention of terfs.

gryffindor: will fight anyone who even looks at you wrong. someone deadnames you? theyll punch them in the face and YELL your proper name at you in affirmation. will pretend to be your mom on the phone with the school principle if they're giving you a hard time. eggs a transphobe's car. see that sword? thats their terf stabbin sword.

[bisexualharrypotter]

You know that wholesome trope in shows where one partner is proposing to the other but they get so overwhelmed with emotion that the other partner also kneels and they propose to each other through happy tears and broken sentences? Totally (bi) Ron and (bi) Hermione.

Okay but listen. Listen.

Ron goes out for drinks after work with Harry and George, and after a few glasses of red currant rum Ron blurts out that he’s planning to propose. Harry’s eyes go wide when he says it, but he reigns it in before buzzed Ron notices. George sees it though. When Ron goes to the bar for the next round, George rounds on Harry. “What’s up, mate?” Quickly Harry tells him that when he and Hermione were out with some Ministry coworkers she also said she was planning to propose. George breaks into a huge grin but shushes him as Ron returns. George waggles his eyebrows in a we’ll talk about this later type way as they take their refilled glasses.

When they do talk about it later of course Ginny overhears and wants in. She’s the one who hatches the scheme to have Ron and Hermione pick the perfect times to propose... that just happen to be the exact same time. In the end it takes several favors from Ginny’s Chudley Cannons friends, a line of experimental Weasleys’ Wizard Wheezes products, entry to the Perenelle Flamel Magical Reserve, and getting Percy to keep Hermione tied up at the office and off their trail, but it’s absolutely worth it. The co-conspirators show the video of the proposal at Ron and Hermione’s wedding reception. (Ron leans over to kiss his wife’s jaw and to conveniently hide his reddened face in her hair.) They laugh and love along with everyone else in the room, embarrassed but so very happy.

- Mod Snafu

[anxietylord]

This is your reminder that Nymphadora Tonks is Nonbinary and JK Rowling can eat my entire ass

[gingertodgers]

Asexual James Sirius Potter

My headcanons for asexual James Sirius Potter:

Having an asexual uncle was a bit of a mixed blessing for James. On the one hand James heard the word ‘asexual’ from a young age and as soon as his mum and dad sat him down for The Talk James was able to tell them that he thought he was “maybe a bit like Uncle Charlie”.

Which made dad’s face do a squidgy proud thing and then mum gave James a massive hug and (finally) promised to take him to Romania next summer.

The problem was that he also grew up hearing what his family said about Charlie when Charlie wasn’t around. James saw the way Granny Molly fretted that Charlie was lonely.

He saw the way Bill and George speculated about the Ravenclaw who dumped Charlie in 5th year and if that was what had “put Charlie off the whole business” and Victoire teasing Dominique that if she didn’t get a boyfriend before the end of Hogwarts she’d “end up like Uncle Charlie.” 

Although he did also see Rose tell Victoire off for “being an idiot” and he saw Uncle Ron telling Bill and George to “shut it” and he even saw Aunt Hermione tell Granny Molly to “stop mithering”.

But when James’ mum insisted on signing him up for the school’s Sex Ed classes it made him feel shaky and sick.

He tried to tell her that he didn’t want to go and when she insisted anyway he got so angry that he accidentally snapped the dragon-fang pendant Uncle Charlie gave him. Harry got home to find James furiously flying loops in the garden and Ginny furiously regrouting the bathroom tiles.

It took a lot more tears, shouting, and angry flying before James accepted that his mum was just being careful. “I remember what it was like at Hogwarts,” she said, smoothing James’ fringe back from his forehead.

“Half the parents won’t let their children attend the classes, so it’s nothing but gossip and speculation. I don’t want you to be one of the ignorant boys who thinks periods are gross or that you don’t need to use a condom for blow jobs and-”

“Muuuuuum! Staaaaaaaaap!”

Even though James spent the rest of the summer complaining that hearing his mum say the words “blow job” had scarred him for life he did go to the classes. And when Neal told James that girls couldn’t get pregnant the first time they had sex? Well. James had A Lot To Say About That.

Even later, James is glad that all those years ago someone had taken the time to tell him that yes, asexual people sometimes experience sexual attraction,  and that no, it doesn’t have to change how he feels about his sexuality or how he relates to his partner. Teddy’s rather glad about that, too.

Some other things James is glad about:

Being the youngest Captain the Gryffindor Quidditch team ever had.

Then becoming the youngest Chaser that Puddlemere ever signed.

Early mornings when his mum joins the team practice and (still) gives him a run for his money.

Holding his baby girls for the first time.

Al turning up to meet the girls with two tiny onesies, embroidered with ‘my dad is ace’ across the front in slightly wobbly stitching that can only be Granny Molly’s work.

***

I already had most of this mapped out when I wrote Harry Potter and Draco Malfoy, 75 Years of the Golden Couple. It features asexual athlete and father James Sirius Potter and I was gutted not to be able to fit in more of his backstory.

Then I saw an amazing post by @bafflinghaze​ about asexuality in the Drarry fandom and I thought, why not share the love?

[percy-weaslxy]

harry potter aesthetics: wlw couples; pansy&ginny

Whispers “Take me in” Soft skinned covered shells Hearing distant bells In to the atmosphere

[dictacontrion]

hello there this is an odd question but i'd really want some perspectives so. do you think it's weird as readers to have a preference for who tops/bottoms in a pairing (mostly m/m but could be f/f too)? i know quite a few people shun it because it's considered to create a tropey heterosexual dynamic which is, yikes. but personally i cannot, "explain" the preference that way, like it's not about who is more feminine/shyer/shorter(🙄) / etc. can such preference have any deeper implication to it?

Hey @trangedy! I think this is actually 5 questions, so hoping you won’t mind if I break it down and answer it that way.

1) Is it weird to have a preference for who tops or bottoms?

I’m not inclined to call any type of sexual preference weird, and this one doesn’t seem to be unusual, inasmuch as that matters. Human sexuality is expansive and varied, and people have all kinds of preferences and turn ons. 

2) Does topping or bottoming have to be tied to heteronormativity?

No. And that’s important! Topping != being ~manly~ and bottoming != being ~feminine~. But there is a long history of topping/bottoming being treated that way, and even if that’s not how individual people see/want to see it, we can’t ignore or erase that history or pretend that those stereotypes don’t have weight and consequence.

3) Do preferences exist without explanations?

So, personally, I don’t think so. There are explanations we might not be able to articulate, and I don’t think we have to be able to articulate our enjoyment for it to exist and be okay and be, you know, enjoyable. But I do think there are reasons there, even if we can’t see them. And I do think it’s worth reflecting on/being aware of those reasons when we can, both because it gives us an opportunity to avoid recreating harmful stereotypes and systems when they come into play (not necessarily by avoiding them, but by finding non-harmful ways to engage them) and because articulating what it is about something that turns us on makes it easier to find what we’re looking for. (and, full disclosure, because I think introspection is good)

4) Do preferences exist without deeper implications?

Sometimes I wish they did but...nope. Imo, nope. So many of those implications are implicit to the point that we don’t even notice them, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t there. It’s a different ethical question, I think, for people who are creating fanworks vs people who are active and vocal in fan communities vs lurkers, bc your audience and impact change the weight of your actions. But creating or popularizing a certain type of narrative has weight, and it matters.

5) Can you exercise a preference without deeper implications?

Tbh, I think it depends on how the preference is exercised. Like, in this case, if you exercise that preference by writing/reading/reccing pieces that complicate heteronormative narratives, or if you read a wide range of stuff, imo that’s different than if you only read things where the person who bottoms is stereotypically feminine and the person who tops is stereotypically masculine. (Or if you’re one of those people who leaves comments that are just about your preference for topping and bottoming, which, omg please don’t be that person.) And it’s also different if you have your own preference vs if, like, you ask writers to tag their fics with who tops and who bottoms, and thereby ask them to participate in a system that makes that central information and uses fannish language that conflates who people are with the sexual positions they enjoy (which top!character/bottom!character do, the same way that saying that a fic has auror!harry or leatherpants!draco tells you that [trait]! is something really important to know about the character)(and one thing I love about the language in your ask, @trangedy, is that you’re not doing that, and I think saying “I prefer it when Joe tops” is different than saying “I prefer top!Joe”). I don’t know, though, that it has any huge impact on anything if, like, you prefer something in fic, and you look for that, and read it, and leave kudos and comments about what you liked about the story generally and just, like, do it in a chill way. And relatedly, it’s not at all the case that having preferences is bad! It’s just that what we do with them matters.

I hope that helps some. Also I’ve talked more about topping and bottoming here and here and here and have a tag about it here, if folks are interested. Would be interested to hear more people’s thoughts! 

[dyketonks]

my fav jily thing is them being the Bi Power Couple(TM)

[bisexualharrypotter]

Agender, grey-biromantic asexual Hermione who spends hours upon hours looking up queer terms and identities until they find the ones that fit them. They help bi ace genderfluid Ron and bi aro demiboy Harry figure their identities too.

[queery-potter]

Anonymous said:

lesbian mcgonagall  (Made by Em)

[dykerheights]

another queer wizarding world headcanon

okay so pretty much all queer people are familiar with the whole idea of gaydar but did you know it was actually a product in japan?

“In the early 2000s, an electronic device based on the Japanese Lovegety wireless dating device was marketed as 'Gaydar', and reported on widely in the media.[29][30] This was a key-chain sized device which would send out a wireless signal, alerting the user via a vibration, beep or flash when a similar device was within 12 m (40 ft). This let the user know that a like-minded person was nearby.” (x)

imagine if there was a gaydar charm you could cast which would somehow alert you (like tingling fingers... or other bits) when you were within a distance of another witch, wizard or nonbinary magical person who had also cast the charm.

imagine dean and seamus both casting the gaydar charm without telling each other and then thinking they had done it wrong bc it wouldn’t stop signalling but really they were just never more than 40 ft apart (kinda like how ron thought his sneakoscope was broken but it was just detecting scabbers). imagine dean realising what might be happening and plucking up the courage to ask seamus. imagine them laughing about it after but never removing the charm because they love knowing that their boyfriend is always close by.

[aroacehogwarts]

Asexual trans girl Hannah Abbott loves sneaking up to the boys’ dormitory to cuddle with her best friends Ernie MacMillan and Justin Finch-Fletchley.

- Ravenclaw Mod

[brilliantsnafu]

The aros and aces of Hogwarts do more than support, awareness, and pride events. They also enjoy just being together and having fun. One day they have a pick-up game of quidditch.

It’s the Ace-romantulas vs. the AroManticores.

(Bi ace Ron really doesn’t want to be on the spidery team though. He and bi aro Harry end up switching.)

[dictacontrion]

can you please not use the term 'genderbend' as it's very transphobic

Hey anon! I’m glad you brought this up. The answer got way longer and more involved than I expected (I’m sure my followers are shocked) so I’ve put it under a cut. Transphobia is something I take very seriously, as is the idea of participating in it, so I’ve given this a lot of thought and hope you’ll read all the way through.

I welcome more (civil, productive) discussion about the entire topic (and p much anything that falls under the broader lgbtq+ umbrella), so also want to say that responses are welcome.

Under the cut: Why would the term “genderbend” or genderbent fic and art be considered transphobic? Does the term “genderbend” reinforce the idea that gender is binary? Does genderbent art or fic reinforce a binary? Is it harmful to explore gender in a way that’s predicated on a binary system? Are other terms better? What is the role of epistemic privilege in this debate? What does one do when there are competing interests? And ffs, Dicta, what are you going to do?

First, a quick note about how I’ve approached the question. I saw someone get a similar ask yesterday or the day before and started thinking about it and reading about it then, and have done some more reading and thinking since getting this ask this morning. I’ve tried to educate myself - on this specific topic and in the sense that reading and writing and thinking about gender/sex/sexuality/embodiment/representation/expressions of identity has a lot to do with my rl work. Generally, I believe that language is important, and also am attentive to how language changes over time, and have had a lot of thoughts lately about the changing content and tone of discourse around identity labels. So not coming to this without thought, education, and reflection. In relation to this specific issue, I’ve seen a few arguments repeated over and over. I’m going to rephrase them here as questions, and share my own answers to them.

Why would the term “genderbend” or genderbent fic and art be considered transphobic?

Drawing from a few different sources: it reinforces the idea that sex and gender are the same thing, it reinforces the idea that sex and gender always have to align, it erases non-binary options, it erases trans people, it reinforces cissexism, it always relies on changes from one cis gender to an ‘opposite’ cis gender, it is binaristic, and it’s offensive to trans people.

(Sources: “The alternative spelling of ‘genderbend’ is ‘casual transphobia’”, shiphitsthefan, askanonbinary, “On ‘Genderbending’“, a couple of reddit threads that I’m intentionally not linking to because they weren’t especially civil or productive.)

Does the term “genderbend” reinforce the idea that gender is binary?

This argument surprised me, because in larger usage the term “genderbend” or the practice of “genderbending” is often used specifically when someone wants to be actively inclusive of people whose gender exists along a spectrum of presentations or whose gender presentation does not align with the norms for the sex they were assigned at birth. If you google “genderbending” you get a picture of Conchita Wurst (someone who has actively and vocally resisted gender binaries) and wikipedia’s definiton: “a form of social activism undertaken to destroy rigid gender roles and defy sex-role stereotypes, notably in cases where the gender-nonconforming person finds these roles oppressive. It can be a reaction to, and protest of, homophobia, transphobia or misogyny.”

In the last year I’ve heard discussion of genderbending in the press following the deaths of David Bowie and Prince - people who were cis, but who actively defied conventional gender norms and rejected the gender binary. In earlier parts of my life, I’ve heard it applied to other public figures, and to private people who made choices that pushed at gender roles. Until seeing an ask about this in the last day or two, I had never - as a person engaged with pop culture, as a queer person, and as a person who actively engages with glbtq+ culture and history professionally and personally - heard any equation of genderbending with binaries.

The term “genderbend” as anon is asking about it here is not identical; I recognize that context matters and that it has a more particular meaning in fan culture. But part of the reason I like it and have used it is because, from the broader usage, it suggests a broad range of identities and presentations. In my own tagging (xx, xx, xx) I’ve used it that way, to be inclusive of a range of presentations and to reject the idea of a binary.

Does genderbent art or fic reinforce a binary?

In a lot of the pieces I read, the authors wrote things like “In both art or fic featuring the “genderbend” or “genderswap” trope, the characters are always still depicted as cis.” (xx) Which, again, surprised me. Maybe that’s because of who I follow and what I see, but I have seen genderbent art where the characters’ cis status was not obvious. I have seen genderbent art and fic where gender was intentionally ambiguous or explicitly non-binary. I don’t agree that the characters are always still depicted as cis.

Which also leads to a whole line of questioning that makes me kind of nervous because, to be entirely honest, I’m not sure whether I’m veering too far out of my lane here. But I’m trying for honest and open discussion and it’s part of my thought process, so I’m going to put it out there. And I want to preface this by recognizing that of course there’s heavy, well-established precedent for assuming that a character is cis until proven otherwise, and I’m not trying to deny that. Still, these questions are sticking, so.

When people argue that the characters in in all the genderbent art they see are cis…what does a cis person look like? What does a trans person look like? To what extent does this argument carry some vestige of essentialism or transphobia or trans panic, with the assumption that trans people are/must/should always be visibly trans to really count as trans people? That passing somehow disqualifies or lessens one’s trans-ness or gender fluidity? Or that being genderfluid or agender must look a certain way? (Recommended reading: Hari Ziyad’s “3 Reasons Why Folks Who Don’t ‘Look’ Non-Binary Can Still be Non-Binary”)

And I would argue - tentatively, with aforementioned awareness about lane lines - that fan art, and particularly genderbent fan art, can be read as playing by different rules than mainstream media. When an artist or author actively sets out to challenge canonical depictions of gender, I think we’re playing in something of a different sandbox.

Maybe I’m underestimating the problem because in my own viewing of genderbent art, I’m not necessarily assuming that they’re cis. But that’s also something I like about the term genderbend - it speaks only to the characters’ gender, and not to their sex.

Is it harmful to explore gender in a way that’s predicated on a binary system?

Not in my opinion. For two main reasons.

First, not every story has to tell every story. Re-imagining a canonically cis male character as a cis female character does not preclude a different re-imagination of that canonically cis male character as trans, genderqueer, genderfluid, agender, etc. Not every artist or every writer has to tell every story every time. It would be impossible to do so. Not every choice is an erasure. When we talk about representation, it’s about a collectivity more than about any one specific piece. Individuals are responsible for their contribution to that collectivity and their awareness of norms and stereotypes, imo, but not every author or artist is responsible for covering every type of representation every time.

Second, it can be useful and effective (vis a vis identity, a particular ‘verse, a character, a story - in lots of ways) to consider what would happen if a character who was cismale and amab had grown up cisfemale and afab. Among other things, those stories (including the stories told through visual media) can reveal the arbitrariness of gender binaries, and the artificial and often painful/harmful restrictions they create. Basically? Binary gender roles are really real for a lot of people, and that makes them something worth exploring, even when its on their own terms. (And remember, sometimes that’s because the people doing the exploring don’t yet have other terms.) They can help us re-imagine gender roles and get used to thinking of them as more flexible and expansive. That doesn’t contribute to binarism. That contributes to the bigger project of interrogating gender binaries.

Are other terms, like presentation play or genderswap, better?

Not in my opinion. I dislike the term genderswap specifically because a swap is “an act of exchanging one thing for another“ and that sounds much more binary to me than the idea of a bend, “a curved or angled part or form of something.” Swapping one thing for another suggests the replacement of one clearly defined thing for another. The idea of a bend leaves more room for ambiguity. I dislike the term presentation play as a blanket term for describing this type of work because the idea of play feels, to me, too lighthearted for the things that are sometimes at stake. Re-imagining a character’s gender requires really re-imagining their place in the world, how they would be treated, the options that would be available to them, their safety. A lot of serious things. I do think that gender can be explored playfully, and that it’s good and important - vital and critical, even - for their to be space for joyful gender exploration. But I don’t personally embrace a label that makes it sound only lighthearted, the kind of thing you can put on and take off easily, when the real stakes are so much higher. I’m sure there are other terms and could talk about them, but these were the ones I saw most frequently. And the larger point I’m trying to make here is that there are, imo, reasons to actively like and embrace the term genderbend - among them that it specifies gender as opposed to sex, that implies flexibility as opposed to stringent exchange, that it doesn’t disaggregate the appearance of gender from the experience of gendered identity, and that its seriousness can be read and used in multiple ways.

What is the role of epistemic privilege in this debate?

Another argument I’ve seen is that trans people are saying that the use of genderbend is transphobic, and that cis people have to defer to them. Generally, I agree that those who are not part of an oppressed community cannot tell that community how to define itself, or what it finds hurtful. I also agree that there is an ethical obligation for people who are not marginalized to listen to marginalized people’s experiences and to adjust accordingly. But even though I agree with all of that, there’s one big, messy problem with it: not all members of a marginalized group see things the same way, or feel the same way about the same terms.

When a member of a marginalized community says something about their experience, my feeling is that that means that it’s time to put that issue or idea on my radar and be attentive to similar ideas and stories elsewhere, and to be prepared to take them seriously and engage accordingly. That’s what I’m trying to do right now - to read, to engage, to make myself aware, to make my followers aware. But in my reading and looking around, I haven’t yet found that this is a widely held and well-considered position reflecting the views of a community, as opposed to the views of a few individuals within a subset of that community. And, to be entirely honest some more, even if it makes me cringe a little, I’m not yet really convinced by the arguments that I’ve read. Most of them haven’t seemed rooted in or aware of the history of related terminology, or to have been very considered as to the options, and I’ve seen a lot more assertion than explanation. It’s not necessarily that I need to be blown away by precise, perfect logic, and please believe me when I say that I understand how hard it can be to be logical about something that’s deeply personal and emotional and feels like an assault on your identity and/or your place in the world. But I do sort of need either that or a critical mass - either someone who can really explain why it’s hurtful, or a fair number of people from different communities or parts of a community who agree that it’s hurtful. I am still open to being convinced. I still intend to keep an eye out. But I‘m not yet ready to abandon a term that I do see as positive and useful in ways I’ve discussed throughout.

What does one do when there are competing interests?

In this case, the biggest competing interest I see is one of clarity and organization. How do we tag things so that people can find what they’re looking for? That’s a concern on multiple levels, some of which are more important than others. There’s the convenience one, wherein it would be a pain in the butt to go back and change my tags, but I don’t think inconvenience is an adequately compelling reason not to make that kind of change if it would be more just or affirming. But the reason I do find compelling is that genderbend is still the more popular term, and by a lot. I had to go digging to find alternatives, and you didn’t offer any in your ask, all of which leads me to believe that there isn’t an equivalent term that will help people find the content that they want. And I really do want people to be able to find this content. I want people to imagine what their beloved fictional worlds could have been (could be) like with differently gendered characters. I want people who are questioning their own gender, or who are feeling excluded from fiction because of their gender, to be able to find depictions that feel closer to their own experience or help them imagine themselves in worlds that are important to them. Right now, that term is genderbend, probably especially for people who are newest to it as an idea as a thing.

ffs dicta, what are you going to do?

Based on the reading I’ve done and a lot of consideration (which I hope is obvious) I’m not going to stop using the term “genderbend” or its variations at this point. Like I’ve said above, that could still change. It’s on my radar. I’m not in a position where I feel either justified in being or inclined to be stubborn. I welcome responses and conversation. But for now, I think there are good things about the term “genderbend” and its variations, and will continue to use it for the time being.

[dyketonks]

teddy lupin is a woman aligned nonbinary person and victoire weasley is her sports lesbian girlfriend

[bisexualharrypotter]

Andromeda and Ted knew each other, of course. They went to the same school in the same grade. They shared some classes over the years. But they didn't really know each other in a friendly sense. Not until 6th year when a 7th year started a Queer Wix Association and bi Dromeda and demia trans Ted both stopped by to check it out. Their meeting was short and they were awkward with each other, yet drawn to getting to know each other more. It didn't take long for them to become inseparable.

The 7th year is a Ravenclaw so of course they ask people to do short presentations on any queer topic they like at the beginning of their bi-weekly meetings. Ted does one on theories about all the founders being trans (his favorite supporting evidence being that all of their names alliterate like his). The next week Andromeda does one on three centuries of wixen who challenged queerphobia in pureblood society (because continuing one’s pureblood line generally lends itself to upholding amotonormativity, heteronormativity, and cisnormativity). Of course they approach one another after each one’s presentation and tell them how great it was. They have so many questions for one another that both times they miss curfew. (However, only one of them is caught, and just the one time. Ted never lets her live it down.)

- Mod Snafu