|
Angepain posted:And it's not like there's ever going to be a precise border of who's queer and who's not anyway, so unless they're significantly affecting the direction of the community in a significantly negative way I don't see much worth in spending time bothering about the occasional tiny settlement on the borderlands. Sexuality is a spectrum, so are the only people who are definitively *not* queer the folks who sit at 99.9+% hetero on that spectrum?
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2022 19:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 16:51 |
|
|
I've got a question: do people qualify as part of the movement simply if they're not straight, or do they need to want to be in some way? I'm cis and I've lived my life 99% as a straight guy, but I'm definitely not just a straight guy. I'm comfortable in private, very private as in with my partner, talking about the ways I'm attracted to men as well as women, but I've never acted on it even though I'd kind of like to some day. I don't, and never have, identified as a pansexual or queer person. Maybe as bi? It's not how I present myself, and not really how I think of myself, yet it is an indelible part of me. "Queer culture" kind of makes me uncomfortable, which I can pretty safely blame on being raised in the blood-gargling beating heart of White American Evangelical Christianity right up until I went to college. I've never felt the need or desire to identify as anything but straight, which is definitely my privilege, yet I am not just straight. I don't have anything riding on the answer. I am just kind of wondering how, if at all, people like me are fit into rich and varied tapestry that is identity in modern 21st century America.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2022 02:09
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I think when we say the movement we mean different things. This is kind of how I was thinking about it. I have definitely not lived an at risk or marginalized life w/r/t sexuality. So yeah, that makes complete sense to me. Timeless Appeal posted:I would say though that one of the most informative things I've heard was a Black educator explain her view that white people don't get to call themselves allies. They can just try their best to be one, and I think that's a position I'd expect of cis and straight people as well. Fritz the Horse posted:edit: that's a great point about allies. Being a good ally is not an identity you claim for yourself but something members of the community might regard you as. This I very much understand. I don't claim it, I just try to treat people with the respect they deserve and actively think about my actions and prejudices. Yeah this is interesting. I was reading some of the posts in this thread about the sapiosexuals and gatekeeping, and the thought "huh even I could probably fall into that category [lgbtq] technically" went through my head. Immediately followed by "Nah that's not me" and then "well wait a second why isn't that you?" and now I'm doing some unpacking of identity. I'll say this. Evangelical teachings and culture and prejudices and just the loving shame around sexuality are extremely hosed up, and I maybe never even realized the full extent to how growing up in all that hosed with me to this day.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2022 03:52
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:The author in that Clinton quote starts off by positing their own opinion to the reader, and then verbatim quotes some aggreeable noises from Clinton. Whatever she was agreeing to is not printed verbatim. Like did the author tell Clinton that leftists are calling Rowling a fascist? (Most people I know only pull up to call Rowling stupid, but anyway...) It's like if I wrote you a huge anti-war screed and then quoted George W Bush saying something out of context about how there's too many families broken by war to make him seem like an anti-war person. Yep, it's just misleading, attention-grabbing headlines designed to maximize Twitter engagement / outrage. I'd say it's for "clicks", but I don't think most people even click on the article itself because Hillary doesn't say anything at all like what the lovely headline tries to put in her mouth. I don't give a gently caress about Hillary Clinton, but people should try to hold to a higher standard than straight-up lying clickbait.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2022 21:10
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:Hillary being a TERF is just one of the absolutely least surprising things ever. It doesn't seem like she is a TERF. It's a purposefully misleading headline that's not based on anything she said, don't fall for it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2022 04:14
|
|
|
I get the reasoning, but I think it's probably painting with too broad a brush for useful conversation. Israel cries "antisemitism!" whenever there's even talk of a policy change that would negatively impact their ability to crush Palestinians beneath their boots, for example. If we boycott, divest, and sanction Israeli products then some Jewish people will indeed be affected negatively, yet to call that antisemitism throws all detail and nuance out the window. It's just not a useful way to talk about things.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2022 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 16:51 |
|
|
cat botherer posted:I see where you are coming from, but capitalism, imperialism, economic inequality, and social intolerance are so tightly linked, that while it is necessary to sometimes focus on one aspect, its still necessary to keep the entangled nature of these factors at the forefront - it does a disservice to people in every marginalized group not to. I agree that everything is tightly linked. But to bring it around to the original spark of this discussion: "Hillary Clinton is a TERF / is anti-trans!" "Wow, what did she say about trans people or do to harm them?" "She's a political elite who presided over and fostered capitalist systems that immiserated trans people in the global south." That just....doesn't seem useful. Like, ok, then every leader of every capitalist country on Earth (which is all of them) is also anti-trans and a TERF, by that reasoning.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2022 00:42
|
|