|
Timeless Appeal posted:If it's any consolation, I do think there really are big shifts happening in the upcoming queer generations. The more statistically obvious is that trans folks are much more prevalent along with bi or pan people being the vast majority of LGTBIA youth. Yes I was going to mention this, I am a big fan of the radical inclusivity that seems to be gaining a bit of traction in younger folks, and doubly so because it doesn't seem to be generated from any organiztion? It seems to be just a thing that lots of small groups and people have decided is important of their own volition and worked out ways to promote when they come together. Genuinely is very heartening to see this... impetus to understand I guess I would call it, being adopted.
|
#
?
May 23, 2022 19:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 14:10 |
|
|
LITERALLY A BIRD posted:Due to having no sexual preference for men or for women I thought I was bi for my entire life up until Jan. 2020 when I learned that actually, I am functionally the opposite, I am ace (and I am also forever grateful to Julias and to you, Liquid Communism! for telling me that this is an orientation that is real and exists). Unfortunately this means I am twice-over excluded from the greater LGBTQ community Glad to have been helpful, LaB! It's a shame that there are LGBT+ people out there who struggle to understand ace folks and make them feel welcome. I can kind of see how, for some, it'd be hard to get their head around someone lacking attraction when attraction is such a strong part of one's self identification, but that's still no reason to be a gatekeeper over it. I honestly think there is more to be found in common than not when it comes to folks whose orientation lies outside of the assumed social norm of heterosexuality. On another note, anyone bracing themselves for the incoming wave of pinkwashing? I already saw a new low in Walmart house-brand Pride themed ice cream... Liquid Communism fucked around with this message at 22:20 on May 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2022 22:18
|
|
|
I tend to view the commercialization of pride month fairly favourably to be honest. Like, obviously it's gross, but at the same time I view it as a sort of insurance. It wasn't so long ago that being LGBT+ was a joke, or something to be hidden away, so it being important enough for capital to try and co-opt it I think is an important part of entrenching it in the culture. It is a sign that we are doing well, basically. And I'm not sure it does a lot of harm to the movement as a whole either? I'm sure there are actual ultra-assimilationists who are totally onboard with pride flavoured missiles being made at raytheon by a diverse team of engineers to be sold to regimes who murder LGBT people if they get their hands on them, but I do feel like there is a fairly common sentiment that companies really don't "get it" and seeing it for what it is, rainbow washing as you say. I don't know how long it can last or how accurate the perception is but every company on the planet competing in the "how do you do, fellow gays" olympics for a month, to a significant amount of blank stares and mockery from actual LGBT+ people, is 1. very funny to me and 2. kind of exactly how I would want it to be, honestly? It is good that they feel it necessary to do that, but it is also good for people to be cynical about it. I think it is evidence of us leading the culture, to a degree. Which is how it should be.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2022 22:47
|
|
|
Pink-washing and commercialization of Pride is kinda gross but I'd agree with OwlFancier is largely a good thing. Especially if it involves statements of support for trans rights and trans pride flags since trans people are the main target in the culture wars right now. Even if it's just virtue-signaling it's still signaling which side of the culture wars a company wants to align with. edit: like yeah, most companies are doing Pride stuff because they want to sell you products and services. That's a hell of a lot better than, I dunno, a company advertising Straight Pride. Which is telling me they want the money of bigots and don't want my money, also that they can eat three lukewarm bowls of poo poo. Fritz the Horse fucked around with this message at 22:54 on May 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2022 22:52
|
|
|
i don't really care how many rainbows companies slap on their products in june when they spend the other eleven months of the year giving all their money to republicans they're not supporting poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 00:51
|
|
|
It mostly bugs me because it's often a cynical marketing grab companies use while treating their LGBT+ (especially trans) employees like second class citizens year round.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 02:43
|
|
|
Agreed on both counts, but I think it is better for them to be making the overtures while doing that, as that weakens their rhetorical position if and when it becomes possible to extract material changes from them, than the prevailing alternative in prior decades, which was that they give lots of money to republicans and treat their LGBT+ employees like poo poo and also say that's cool and good. I would like to think it is an indication of those attitudes becoming unstable, they feel it necessary to do the propaganda stunts to cover for those practices, rather than just doing them in the open because it's just accepted and good pretty universally. But that does also mean that I still think contempt is the best response.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 02:53
|
|
|
I do think that one thing that the LGBTQIA+ movement struggles with is how closely our experiences are connected with cosmopolitanism. A tool of queerphobes has been to not attack us directly on moral grounds, but to invoke imagery that ties our experience to rich, out of touch people. The issue is not gay people, it's yuppies who everyone hates. The issue is not trans people per se, but whiny people lecturing you about their pronouns you see. And I think the utopian imagery of corporate pride that abstracts sexual and gender equity into just feeling good about yourself divorces the movement's reality of fighting for very material needs and issues of class, potentially perpetuating the idea that queerness is inherently cosmopolitan or upper-class. I've seen in Leftist circles, for example, queer issues being seen as a sort of detour and distraction despite the fact that a lot of queer people struggle with basic housing, job security, and are interacting with an economy that is fundamentally hostile to their participation. In short, queer people are sometimes rejected as a potential under-class within capitalism despite that being the lived experiences of many of us. And even myself who is financially fine lives in fear of losing my job in our current climate. I don't despise the corporate pride imagery. As dystopian as it is, Macy's having Pride signs might actually make someone who feels alone feel good even if it is grotesque that an uncaring corporation is the thing that has to do that for that person. But I think when we see how someone like MLK gets flattened by capitoa and media, we should always be wary of the longterm effects. My fear being that the real material needs of queer people often get sidelined, and some of the folks who should be our allies fall for that. And I'm not sure if seeing corporations as insurance is the right frame. I don't have confidence for them to have anyone's back when the chips are down. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 03:40 on May 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 03:35
|
|
|
And the fact that it is the same forces of capital that drive corporations to do LGBT+ branding are also the cause of many of our problems (not specifically related to queerness but often intersectional with) I think is why a lot of people think it's dumb and fake when they try it. Because yes it does not resonate with the actual lives of normal people in many of the same ways that advertising in general do not. And I am sure there are people who you could describe as left wing (though who I might not) who want to draw a distinction between queer issues and other social problems but I think it is quite easy to create a comprehensive worldview that incorporates both, and sees how they both intertwine. Which would rightly see the corporate crap as just propaganda (but interesting for the fact they feel it necessary to make) and also which would form the basis for a continued advancement of queer rights. For a revolutionary political movement to be co-opted I think the material issues which cause i to spring into being in the first place, need to be addressed sufficiently. And I have not really seen much slowdown from queer activism in that respect? Gay marriage got made more legal but I don't think very many people stopped after that. I think also, that our fight has an advantage in that the opposition depend on hegemonic control of social spaces to keep it down. And to an extent I believe that a big part of the changes you are seeing especially with younger people, are a result of the changes to how we socialize brought on by technological changes in recent decades. It is much easier nowadays for someone to find a community of people who will accept them and talk to them and with whom they can generate ideas about how the world is, and how it should be, even if it's only on the internet. I believe, ultimately, that the push for radical inclusivity we're seeing now is an outgrowth of people having had the chance to live part of their lives in inclusive spaces, and deciding that they much prefer living like that. And so they feel it necessary to make the whole world like that. And I think that the reason a surprising number of people are signing up to that (again I think especailly among younger people) is because that is a better way to live. I also think that this is a great way for anticapitalism to spread too, for a lot of liberatory ideas, actually. And I think it's reasonable to expect a lot of people to start joining the dots between all of those different-but-linked fights and to view them all as aspects of the same fight. They are all, ultimately, trying to break the shackles on your life, the things that stop you from being the healthy, happy, self actualized person you want to be. They are all fighting things that do not need to exist, that serve no good purpose by existing, but which exist out of historical inertia. The idea of the intentional community, building a little model society outside of wider society so you can live the way you want to live, is something that a lot of different poltiical movements have tried over the centuries, and usually they are crushed by force or collapse under internal problems brought on by isolation. But I think our position is somewhat unique in that the society we want can be built in miniature, I'm posting on an example of that at the moment. And it doesn't isolate people either, the internet allows the formation of self-curating groups of people from all over the world and you can be a part of those without physically being anywhere different, it integrates into your life far better than was possible at any previous time in history. Critically also, I think, from a trans rights perspective, the internet is one of the few things that kids might have access to without their parents knowledge. And that is obviously very important for kids who are experiencing doubts about their gender and also, I think, important in that they can have access to a countercultural view of the world at a formative age. Their parents might be assholes and they might live in a very oppressive environment IRL but they probably can have access to people who are trying to create a better one, before all the normative indoctrination gets fully into their brains. I really think that's powerful, that that gives people the opportunity to see how the world could be different, to live, on some level, how they want to, and having done that I think it's very hard for them to not want to see that reflected everywhere else. And because of the nature of the internet I think it's very hard for big powers like states and corporations to fully co-opt these communities because they exist in no small part because of the laissez faire approach to moderation of the internet as a whole. The internet runs on user generated content, and I think in the western world at least, trying to change that is going to run up against the entire spirit of the prevailing political ideology. I don't think content hosts are especially interested in moderating out LGBT+ content entirely, and that, I think, is why corporate pride month is insurance. It is emblematic of the attitude that I think is most helpful to us in terms of our continued advancement. They';re happy to have us around as long as they can make money off us, and I think a lot of queer spaces which form the big impetus for people to develop radically inclusive ideologies, exist within corporate controlled spaces. i.e the internet. As long as they continue to be fairly hands off, I think that works to our advantage, and while I don't expect them to stick up for us, I do expect them to be generally resistant at being drafted to fight a holy war of moderation on the behalf of old insane religious fundamentalists. I do not think it is consistent with the general trend of things in the corporate world, where they seem very keen to trade on LGBT+ goodwill, and as long as that includes harboring inclusive spaces, I think that's good for us. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 04:19 on May 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 04:14
|
|
|
The pinkwashing crap is obviously unbelievably cynical and not to be rude or anything but if you think for a second the corporate world wouldn't scrap it all and start celebrating Bash That loving Queer Month if there was a single dollar more in it for them you're being taken for a ride. It's acceptable because the LGBTQ community is largely harmless to the greater cause of capital, people talk a big game but the second we evolve beyond naming a Twitter account Trans Flags for Killing Cops and saying stupid crap like "our existence is an act of resistance" and start doing anything that might actually threaten capital all the rainbow flags at the Raytheon HQ will vanish like mist in the midday sun and it'll be back to HR-mandated DADT I'll be honest, seeing corporations as "insurance" has just the most unbelievable "How do you do, fellow leftists" vibe to it. That's just a baffling and entirely ahistorical stance to take, and if anyone who wasn't a cis white guy was to say it I would suggest they need their head examined?? some plague rats fucked around with this message at 05:04 on May 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 05:00
|
|
|
Would and likely will over the next decade or so depending on how the ongoing attempts of the religious right to install Christian dominionist beliefs as law go. The megacorps will support whatever makes them money, and that'll waver based on public perception.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 09:09
|
|
|
Corporate fashion is a signal, not a source so I can’t bring myself to care about it one way or another. The fact that many people do think it’s worth caring about is a testament to the successful spread of the notion that our main political/ethical agency exist in individual buying decisions. CHUDS burning Nikes didn’t help or harm the BLM movement. Same deal when I see a cute pair of rainbow converse.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 10:42
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:The pinkwashing crap is obviously unbelievably cynical and not to be rude or anything but if you think for a second the corporate world wouldn't scrap it all and start celebrating Bash That loving Queer Month if there was a single dollar more in it for them you're being taken for a ride. It's acceptable because the LGBTQ community is largely harmless to the greater cause of capital, people talk a big game but the second we evolve beyond naming a Twitter account Trans Flags for Killing Cops and saying stupid crap like "our existence is an act of resistance" and start doing anything that might actually threaten capital all the rainbow flags at the Raytheon HQ will vanish like mist in the midday sun and it'll be back to HR-mandated DADT But I also just disagree fundamentally in how you're positioning us in broader society. The US movement was literally started in its modern sense by beating the poo poo out of cops, something many are trying to reclaim and remember. We experience a disproportionate amount of workplace discrimination and harassment. We're twice as likely to be homeless, and even those of us who have access to owning a home face discrimination there. Our medical needs are often ignored to the point that the Government allowed a devastating virus wipe out a good amount of our population. When our activists' corpses are thrown in Lake Michigan, their deaths are a buried also ran story. The poverty rates of trans people is literally 30% higher than the general population, and in general LGTBQIA+ experience 25% higher rates of poverty. If capital is the main driving force in our society, and in that society queer people are faced with an adversarial economy, then how is our fight for equity not a challenge for capital? Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 14:09 on May 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 12:59
|
|
|
There is nothing inherently anti-capitalist about being queer. Like every other form of resistance, rebellion, and non-conformity, capitalism is perfectly capable of carving up queerness like an artisanal butcher. It takes the choice cuts to suit its uses and throws away the rest. Take one of the great queer victories of our time: same-sex marriage. quote:Marriage is a legal instrument that establishes legitimate entitlement to assets and their inheritance. As such, access to it is necessary for ascent into the ruling class. For example, as a 2017 Pew report shows, marriage is becoming something disproportionately for rich people. As the economy shifts from one built on presumably legitimate theft and extraction to one focused on presumably legitimate inheritance (e.g., the booming market in music copyright), limiting access to marriage on the basis of sexuality alone is no longer in the best interest of the ruling class. Obergefell, the Supreme Court case that guaranteed gays couples the right to marriage, maximized rich white families’ capacities for the intergenerational hoarding of both wealth and life chances.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 13:50
|
|
|
I'm not arguing that just being queer is a challenge to capital in of itself just like being Black or being a woman isn't, I'm arguing that many LGTBQIA+ people are still cast as an underclass and to meaningfully advocate for queer people is to advocate for very material things like housing, equitable access to work, and healthcare which means challenging capital. I think the corporate flattening of queer activism that ignores material needs like housing and healthcare that disproportionately impacts queer people is dangerous because it's ignoring the more material suffering of queer people in favor of an utopian narrative where we just dance with each other in gap clothes or whatever. But I am also fearful of the internalization of that flattening of queer activism
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 14:25
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:If capital is the main driving force in our society, and in that society queer people are faced with an adversarial economy, then how is our fight for equity not a challenge for capital? I think the answer to this is pretty simple: because we're losing. Badly. Queer people provide no meaningful challenge to capital because those of us with any actual tendancy towards radicalism are struggling to survive. We're not out there throwing bricks at cops, we're keeping our heads down to try and avoid losing our jobs while, for example, the US takes away what little healthcare protection was offered and increasingly makes being trans illegal. Queer people today are a challenge to capital in the same way that me getting in the ring with Mike Tyson would technically be a challenge to him. (I know he's retired but I use Tyson for my example because he clearly has no qualms about hitting a woman)
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 19:52
|
|
|
Crosspost form USPOL but right wingers/bigots have used the Texas school shooting to further target transgender women and specifically are using someone from reddit. CW: Right wing transphobia/lies https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1529244568805416960
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2022 18:54
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Crosspost form USPOL but right wingers/bigots have used the Texas school shooting to further target transgender women and specifically are using someone from reddit. Okay cool thanks for letting us know
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2022 22:36
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Okay cool thanks for letting us know
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 03:02
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:To clarify, the rumor spread pretty thoroughly and was repeated by a US Congressman. And we should be absolutely afraid in our community of this sort of stuff. The same thing happened with the Wi Spa fiasco last year that an unrelated trans-woman was being targeted and dragged into it. Yeah that shits insane but it was covered in USCE, which seems like a good place to just drop a link and dip out like that. this thread was having some interesting longer-form discussions and at least personally I could do with an an LGBTQ thread somewhere on the forum that isn't just an RSS feed of lovely things that happened to a trans person today
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Yeah that shits insane but it was covered in USCE, which seems like a good place to just drop a link and dip out like that. this thread was having some interesting longer-form discussions and at least personally I could do with an an LGBTQ thread somewhere on the forum that isn't just an RSS feed of lovely things that happened to a trans person today https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3906197
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 04:54
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Yeah that shits insane but it was covered in USCE, which seems like a good place to just drop a link and dip out like that. this thread was having some interesting longer-form discussions and at least personally I could do with an an LGBTQ thread somewhere on the forum that isn't just an RSS feed of lovely things that happened to a trans person today Fair enough, I won't do that here any further.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 05:11
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Fair enough, I won't do that here any further. I didn't mean don't post stuff, just like it would be better if there's some discussion to be had or something worth going over that isn't just "wow, right wing politicians and 4chan incels are terrible" which everyone here is 100% aware of and probably doesn't need reminding about. I'm not Thread Boss though, this is just my personal take, other people might chime in that they like the "thing happen" posts
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 06:58
|
|
|
The context of "people are lying about people being trans to make trans people look bad" is worth posting just so people know the truth of it, imo. I was getting DMs from people yesterday afternoon after the shooting specifically because people were falling for the trans shooter thing and wanted to... give me a heads up, or because I'm the only trans person they know, or something. (I just assumed it was true and passed it along elsewhere as I was busy before anyone could fact check it for me. it's a good thing to be aware of.)
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 07:29
|
|
|
if distressing news has to be anywhere id rather have it here in d&d than any of the other lgbt threads on the forum. sad as it is with the state of politics im always ready for the worst in d&d
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 10:44
|
|
|
No. The trans chat thread where trans people share personal stories and support and commiseration and tips is not the place for debates about the place of queerness in capitalism, LGTBQIA+ political discussion in general etc.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 11:38
|
|
|
Yeah. Please do not turn the CCCC chat threads into pits of endless despair. We've got Twitter if we need a running list of all the terrible bullshit going on.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 11:43
|
|
|
doingitwrong posted:No. yeah i misread the context of some plague rat's post, apologies. post felt aggro and i meant it more to come across as a "relax, there's still happy threads out there"
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 11:54
|
|
|
I think Plague Rats has a really good point that there is a danger of just doom posting. Like if this thread turned into daily dunking on Matt Walsh videos or JK Rowling posts then it would be a pretty unpleasant thread. But more importantly that poo poo isn't unique or significant because it happens almost everyday. But I do feel like it was worth balancing that with facing the bad stuff when it seems significant. The story yesterday spread like crazy, endangered people in the community, and was parroted by a congressman so I think that makes it worth discussion. And in general, I think it's an evolution of historical trends. We've seen previously queer people being lassoed in as an excuse for social ills and natural disasters, but the evolution of social media means specific people can be targeted. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 13:12 on May 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 12:59
|
|
|
The propoganda works and I'm not sure exactly what can be done about it, except putting even more effort into positive propoganda to fight back. Genuinely, for the longest time I bought into the idea I wasn't trans and I didn't want to be trans, either, because so many places on the internet are flooded with the worst caricatures and depictions of trans people. I didn't even know HRT was a thing until quite literally weeks before I started it, because the way it's portrayed by transphobes is that the only aspects of trans is wearing a dress (because trans men don't exist) and getting surgery on your nethers. I guess my question is, what historically has the greater queer movement done to push back on propoganda like that? Is there really anything better than just being out there and being visible?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 13:51
|
|
|
Minera posted:I guess my question is, what historically has the greater queer movement done to push back on propoganda like that? Is there really anything better than just being out there and being visible? This is something that's been bothering me for a long time, even written articles about it for independent media (not about being trans but the commercial aspect of living.) With the gay marriage and abortion referendums here (Ireland) the reality was that they succeeded not because of political lobbying but simply from the fact almost everyone knew someone, or knew someone who knew someone who was gay, and people who'd had an abortion. So the "being visible" thing is absolutely key to a lot of stuff. When you run into people who aren't too bothered by much (so they're not already politicised) they're generally happy to co-exist as long as the other person is as well. "Who's bothering anyone?" would be the question. For the gay marriage thing, "They just want to marry the person who they love, what's wrong with that?" and that comes from knowing and seeing people who are just getting on with life. What I've written about is the idea that "getting on with life" is becoming increasingly commercialised, and with commercial realities it involves paying money, often substantial amounts to take part in "getting on with life." Where's a place where you can simply exist in your town without paying money for food, or drink, or a show, and even then the "existing" isn't to the fore. If you bring it back to simple realities of what being trans is, being recognised as the woman or man you are/wish to be is difficult when there are fewer and fewer places "to be." When everywhere demands that you're not in that space to be realised as a person(and I don't mean support groups or things like that here, with the like-minded) then it means that the simple act of being a person is taken from more and more people. The other day I had a big bout of dysphoria. I had to be seen to exist as the person I am (the whole philosophical thing of being caught looking through the keyhole makes you aware of your existence/makes you feel.) What were my options at 8 in the morning? In the end I went and bought makeup and the woman in Boots smiled at me, great stuff. Then I wanted to just sit in a comfortable space, reading a book and drinking a coffee. Both of those things cost money, and are already low on the interaction it takes to make you feel seen. When society is doing everything to commericialise itself, to almost make you pay for recognition as a living, valuable entity it's difficult for people who are not already valued as members on the pure human level to pay the extra human cost as well as the pure financial. So for me it's two part, allow yourself to be seen as part of the world, but also change the world where you don't have to hand over cash to be seen as a member. Where your existence isn't contingent on resources or capital (social or financial) and the basic functions of wanting to be, wanting friendship and love, wanting conversation, and being allowed to contribute, etc. are instead actually valued. I think that changes people's minds.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 15:04
|
|
|
I think the fight for trans rights is unfortunately different than gay rights. A lot of the arguments against gay marriage or sodomy laws were so easily disprovable. For example, nobody actually believes that sex is only for reproduction regardless of what they say because most people have masturbated or had sex strictly for pleasure and intimacy. It was also easy to disprove stuff like gay people being pedophiles or bad parents or whatever. With the fight for trans rights, we're really arguing a lot of things and I'm not sure even as a community we're all on the same page. We're basically arguing: --Gender and sex are not synonymous which isn't always easy for people to get their heads around, but I think also we don't come from the same page with things. I think there is a difference between "gender is not rooted in sex" and "someone's gender is not rooted in sex." Gender obviously has a relationship with sex that is tricky and problematic, but when we talk about gender as a social construct, it is by and large a social construct that is interpreting sexual characteristics. --Transgender people are real. This one has a bunch of layers you have to deal with: 1) Being transgender is not a mental illness although it can lead to gender dysphoria 2) People not identifying as their gender they were assigned to or experiencing gender dysphoria clearly exists throughout our history and across cultures, but because gender as a concept varies across place and time, there are people we might call trans or non-binary in modern parlance, but had very different existences. It's easier to look at a gay historical figure and just say, 'Well the guy banged a guy so...." 3) You have to get people to buy into the first bullet of gender and sex not being synonymous for any of these other arguments to make sense. --Transgender people by and large are happier just being transgender and it is dangerous to try to push us not to be, now let me give you a bunch of research while explaining while some other research is problematic and had flawed methodology. --Connected to that last bullet, trans equity does require a discussion of social norms (Respecting pronouns, affirming people's stated gender, letting people use facilities that match their gender). And each of these norms garners its own attack that you need to explain "Why should I have to call someone I think is a man a woman?" (Because it's possible to mistake a CIS woman for a man and a CIS man for a woman, and it would be hosed up to continue to refer to them as the gender you think they are and asking them to confirm their genitals for you is bizarre) "Aren't we putting women in danger by letting trans women use the bathroom?) (Statistically no, but you are endangering trans women by forcing them to use male facilities) I think the movement for gay rights was able to function with a more centralized thesis and also didn't require as much explanation. And I think we also run into a lot of issues as a community trying to get these arguments across: --It really is tiring to have to constantly give a TED Talk to explain who you are as a person, and we as a community I think can feel burnout on having to explain us. That becomes compounded by the fact that so many of us are also on the spectrum. --I think the social media landscape is really stacked against us because while we are right that trans people and non-binary people exist and are deserving of respect, the basis of affirming our identities requires nuanced and complex understanding of society and sex. And I would argue twitter is a much more well-suited platform for people whose arguments are "If you have a penis, you're a man; If you have a vulva, you're a woman." I know that when someone says gender is an immutable aspect of being that's insane because we literally have different names for people's genders depending on how old they are. Even if you want to say gender is tied exclusively to someone's sexual characteristics, a seven year old girl, a twenty-two year old woman, a forty year old mother of three, and a seventy year old woman all have incredibly different relationships to their bodies and their sexual characteristics. But I also don't know how to frame that idea in a pithy tweet. I think it's very clear to me that transracial identities cannot be compared to gender identity because gender is both a cultural and personal constant while the social construct of race is not, so the comparison is moot. But once again, that's an idea that requires a bunch of context to make sense. --I think Q and the whole pedo and grooming conspiracies have poised a right that is very ready to believe insane things about children being corrupted. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 23:20 on May 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 16:13
|
|
|
Mrenda posted:When society is doing everything to commericialise itself, to almost make you pay for recognition as a living, valuable entity it's difficult for people who are not already valued as members on the pure human level to pay the extra human cost as well as the pure financial. Thank you for the whole post, but particularly this section. I'm about to move and have been thinking hard about how I might plug in to my new area, particularly as an ally. I think I can be in a position to help cover both of those costs.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 18:08
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I know that when someone says gender is an immutable aspect of being that's insane because we literally have different names for people's genders depending on how old they are. Even if you want to say gender is tied exclusively to someone's sexual characteristics, a seven year old girl, a twenty-two year old woman, a forty year old mother of three, and a seventy year old woman all have incredibly different relationships to their bodies and their sexual characteristics. But I also don't know how to frame that idea in a pithy tweet. Good point. And if someone's name for me was Uruk Hai, but it respected me and included me in social values I would respect that. The problem is it doesn't and they don't. Am I a woman? I dunno. I wanna a P in my V. Is that enough? Maybe. It's a physical reality. Also I want to do girly things like drink wine. quote:I think it's very clear to me that transracial identities cannot be compared to gender identity because gender is both a cultural and personal constant while the social construct of race is not, so the comparison is moot. But once again, that's an idea that requires a bunch of context to make sense.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 18:25
|
|
|
Thank you very much, Mrenda and Timeless Appeal. These are very thoughtful replies I will think on for a while. E: One point Timeless mentions that I've felt a lot recently is about how much more thought gender requires than sexual identity. I used to be pretty open about a lot of stuff on my mind in one of my friend groups, and recently I decided to dial it down a bit when a friend said something jokingly like "I just love thinking about Gender" when I was posting something making fun of Blizzard's weird diversity charts. I don't really know if she meant anything in particular by it, but it's been floating around in my head a ton because.... actually, yeah, I do like thinking about gender now way, way more than I did when I thought I was cis, and now I can't help but overanalyze and wonder if I'm being overbearing to cis friends when I talk about it. Minera fucked around with this message at 22:57 on May 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:51
|
|
|
Minera posted:Thank you very much, Mrenda and Timeless Appeal. These are very thoughtful replies I will think on for a while. So, when we come at them with our well-developed sense of these concepts, a lot of them just reject us out of hand, because many cis people seem existentially uncomfortable with scrutinizing the nuts-and-bolts of our internal experiences of gender and how society mucks that all up. That's not to say that cis people are incapable to understand, it's that we have to reject accepted gender roles and norms and redefine our own roles and norms just to survive, so it comes naturally for most of us. Cis people have to get really introspective and think in unfamiliar ways just because to cover that ground and a lot of people just aren't willing to do that no matter the subject.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2022 05:33
|
|
|
Minera posted:Thank you very much, Mrenda and Timeless Appeal. These are very thoughtful replies I will think on for a while.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 00:35
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:Literally I was talking to an ex boyfriend about my current and they both play Overwatch and he was like "let me guess he mains Mercy" and I was confused how he knew it but I guess Mercy is like the most gay dude played character? I don't know if it's exclusively a gay dude or even a queer thing, Mercy started being picked by people as a submissive fantasy kink years ago, since the character's kit encourages being a selfless follower of someone with better stats than you. This was a really small amount of players, largely revolving around a subreddit that predates that game called 'healsluts'; but then Kotaku published an article about both the activity and the reddit board, and that exposure mainstreamed the idea to the majority of players. It's the same old Lowtax rule-of-internet-fetish thing, where something that wasn't intended to be erotic gets an erotic community because the internet allows you to signal to kindred spirits with minimal consequence to your personal reputation.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2022 16:10
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I don't know if it's exclusively a gay dude or even a queer thing, Mercy started being picked by people as a submissive fantasy kink years ago, since the character's kit encourages being a selfless follower of someone with better stats than you. This was a really small amount of players, largely revolving around a subreddit that predates that game called 'healsluts'; but then Kotaku published an article about both the activity and the reddit board, and that exposure mainstreamed the idea to the majority of players. I hate every single word of this. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2022 05:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 14:10 |
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I don't know if it's exclusively a gay dude or even a queer thing, Mercy started being picked by people as a submissive fantasy kink years ago, since the character's kit encourages being a selfless follower of someone with better stats than you. This was a really small amount of players, largely revolving around a subreddit that predates that game called 'healsluts'; but then Kotaku published an article about both the activity and the reddit board, and that exposure mainstreamed the idea to the majority of players. Healslut has been a thing for awhile and it's exactly as  as it soundsIn other news https://twitter.com/sigridellis/status/1532339071007313920?t=4QJICFB3XYWNVBH9JsaM1Q&s=19 https://twitter.com/sigridellis/status/1532340701026983937?t=nJMbZfRQ3hZ10AAgN_Mirg&s=19 I want to thrash this person over how profoundly stupid they are. Even if we pretend these companies aren't brutalizing our queer comrades in the global south this very instant, they will throw us into a woodchipper the femtosecond it becomes profitable to do so
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2022 21:09
|
|