[snip quotes for length]
As much as I love most of Dykosaur’s stuff, the constant “you’re not really a queer, go away” is really starting to piss me off.
First up, if you don’t think that a straight, cis person having the shit kicked out of them because people think they’re a “fag” isn’t a victim of homophobia, then I don’t want you on my team. Gays who think that are incredibly damaging to the movement, and, to be honest, with that degree of empathy they’re probably not people.
damn I didn’t even know people paid attention to my tumblr. Pretty sure no one ever said that wasn’t homophobia, but a straight cis person being the target of that behavior is NOT the same as a queer and/or trans person having the same experience. I can’t tell you how many arguments I’ve gotten into with “allies” about how they ~know what it’s like to be queer~ because they get shit for being allies/people mistake them for being gay. I don’t think anyone will pretend it’s not a shitty experience regardless of actual sexual orientation, but to act as if it is the exact same as an actual queer person’s experience of it is privilege-denying. Here’s why:
- a straight cis person who is the target of anti-queer sentiment is more likely to get help from authority/justice figures (god that’s awkwardly phrased)
- a straight cis person’s actual identity is not under attack; a queer person’s is. If a straight cis person is the target of anti-LGBT violence or harassment, they have the comfort of knowing that they are actually straight and cisgender. At the end of the day, they know they are not queer/trans, and that makes it much easier to deal with. If you’re actually queer and/or trans, your identity is being attacked. Your very being is being attacked. And you can’t escape it. tl; dr: Straight cis people have straight and cis privilege.
I completely agree that there is a difference between an LGBT person getting attacked for that, and a straight person getting attacked for perceived LGBT-ness. But attacking straight people for complaining about homophobic attacks against them, as you did, isn’t simply noting that difference: it’s trying to diminish their experiences. Personally, I think those kind of attacks are wrong no matter who’s targetted.
Secondly, the continual “if you’re asexual you’re not queer” repeat is ridiculous. If you’re going to be conservative in your use of language, then a queer is strange, gay is happy, and lesbian is a native of Lesbos.
we (as in those people who agree with me on this issue) are operating with the historical use of the word queer, which is a slur. Simply by comparing “queer” to words like “lesbian” and “gay,” you have proven that you have no idea what you’re talking about. “Queer” is NOTHING like “lesbian” and “gay.” “Queer” is like dyke and fag and tranny. There are older LGBT people who refuse to reclaim “queer” because for them it is still a slur. Referring to myself as queer is the same as referring to myself as a dyke. It’s my attempt to reclaim a hateful word that is used to oppress people like me, and that I will probably hear several times in my lifetime. It is NOT the same as referring to myself as a lesbian.
It’s your attempt to reclaim a hateful word. That’s wonderful, and you keep on doing it, if that’s what you want. But it’s my attempt to escape from the monosexist abuse that gays & lesbians dish out to bisexuals, from the mainstreaming of non-heterosexuality, from the ridiculous historical-based rules of LGBT culture. How dare you tell me that you’re allowed to use that word in a way that supports you, but I’m not allowed to use it in a way that supports me.
And I can’t take the “older LGBT people think this” argument seriously. Plenty of older LGBT people disagree with you, and plenty of LGBT people think that bisexuals are just gays in the closet.
Language changes over time. Any idiot knows that. And queer has, over time, come to act as an umbrella term for any sexuality which is not “the norm”, particularly in the context of breaking down essentialist constructs of identity.
no, that is NOT what “queer” means. even if the meaning of the word itself has changed (which I don’t think it actually has, I think there are a lot of ignorant people trying to change its meaning so that they can be included under it), that doesn’t mean we should simply accept that new meaning. “words change” is the argument countless people use to justify “that’s so gay,” because hey, language evolves, right? So now “gay” also means “stupid,” and “queer” means “not normal.” Awesome!
So language doesn’t change over time? We never come up with new meanings for old words? Never reclaim old words?
and if you had been reading my reblogs you would have seen, over and over, responses to all of these arguments that you’re making. I see no reason to put it into my own words when other people have been so much more eloquent about it (emphasis mine):
I understand why asexuals may fall into the trap of thinking that [asexuality] should fall in with queer, especially when homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, are all accepted queer identities, so why not asexual? It is in fact not heterosexuality, and I will not argue it is. However, these words don’t fall into groupings by virtue of being commonly unlike something, but rather the commonality they do have. There are differences in what it is to be “homo-“, “bi-“, “pan-“… but they all have one unifying characteristic and that is attraction to the same gender. That is at the heart of this issue, because queer unequivocally refers to people with same sex attraction, while straight refers to those with opposite sex attraction.being queer refers to same-sex attraction. not “abnormal attraction” or “lack of attraction.”
Just wrong. For a start, fetishists have been called “queers” forever. And secondly, you can tell the article above is written by a monosexist: as I’m bi, does that make me straight and queer at the same time? The best argument you could make would be that straight refers to exclusive opposite-sex attraction, and queer refers to everything but exclusive opposite-sex attraction.
And no-one’s saying that everyone who gets to use the word is equally oppressed. Yes, lesbians do have it worse than asexuals (but, of course, not as bad as the bisexuals, and probably not as bad as gays): but that doesn’t mean asexuals don’t have it hard at all. Obviously.
lol, did you just say there’s a hierarchy of oppression in the LGB community and it’s lesbians » bisexuals » gay men? I sincerely hope you are joking or else this lesbian who suffers from SEXISM and HOMOPHOBIA will tell you that gay men do NOT have it worse than lesbians, because they have this thing called MALE PRIVILEGE. that isn’t me playing along with your Oppression Olympics (god I hate using that phrase now), that’s a FACT.
stop erasing lesbians’ experiences of misogyny and sexism, in and out of the LGBT community, which make up a HUGE part of our lives (in some cases, more than homophobia and heterosexism).
I find it difficult to see how someone so prepared to use an intersectional approach to her own oppression is so against using an intersectional approach to someone else’s.
So, in short, either language changes over time, and queer’s a fine word to describe our how little band of non-“normal” sexuality (and, hopefully, in time, even the “normals” will come to recognise their sexuality is but one point on the multi-dimensional phase space of queer sexuality), or language doesn’t change over time, in which case you’re not a lesbian (unless you were born in Lesbos).
queer =/= “not normal” and saying so is incredibly homophobic. Queer means “I’m going to beat you up, fag.” Queer means “I’m going to rape you, dyke.” Queer means “I’m going to murder you, t****y.” So when an LGBT person uses the word “queer” to talk about themselves, queer means “fuck you,” not “my sexuality is ~special~ and ~unique~”.
not everyone has “queer sexuality” and I find attempting to include straight cis people under the “queer umbrella” because they aren’t vanilla supersexual str8ies absolutely abhorrent and a great sign of ignorance. You realize that these straight cis people harbor homophobia and transphobia, right? And that they’re going to bring it in to our spaces and make ACTUAL queer people feel unsafe and uncomfortable in the few spaces where they should feel at home. Why the fuck should we let them into OUR spaces (which WE get to determine because there are no other spaces that we have any control over) just because they feel like they can co-opt a word whose only relevance to them is that it perpetuates the power structure from which they benefit?
Statements of fact are not homophobic. Attempting to shut down a bisexual’s discourse by labelling it homophobic is biphobic.
And saying that “these straight cis people harbor homophobia and transphobia” is heterophobic. What gives you the right to determine who gains access to our spaces? As I mention above, plenty of gays & lesbians who ban me from “their” spaces. Is that acceptable? A large number of “feminist” organisations ban trans-women from their space. Is that ok?
in short (emphasis mine):
queer as a pejorative term has historically been used against people who experience romantic or sexual attraction to the same gender. it still is today. it is the verbal essence of the hate, disgust, and derision that straight people and homophobic society feels about us. in recent history, those it has been used against have begun the hard work of reclaiming that word. reclamation of “queer” is the empowering process through which we take control of a word that has been used to hurt us and to turn us into queers rather than human beings. this process is not complete. people still use these words against us. in the mildest cases, angry men scream QUEERS out their car doors as we walk from parking to the gay club that is celebrating pride that very night, all because two women were holding hands. in the most severe cases, the psychological violence of that word is backed up by physical violence. there are still many people who wince when they hear “queer” and would rather not make it part of their identity. and even those of us who do use that word to describe ourselves do it gingerly, conscious of the ways in which that single syllable can suddenly turn poisonous in the mouths of even the most “progressive” straights. and then suddenly, a group of people who does not share this history and this present with us come clamoring in, demanding that they count as queer because a few academics who were horribly disconnected from the “real world” decided to change the definition to “not normal.” these people - hetero- or aromantic asexuals, in this case - have never and will never experience the oppression that is inextricably linked to this word. in fact, they carry with them the privilege of being able to choose ”queer” - to want ”queer,” even - while those of us who actually are queer had it shoved on us by a society that refuses to see us as anything more than queers and hates us for it. the logic isn’t circular. it’s simple. “queer” has always been a slur aimed at us, people who are somehow attracted to the same gender. and so it is our word and no one else’s, just as it is our pain and no one else’s.and that’s all I’m going to say about it, because tbh I don’t really have anything to add to these arguments, I’m just parroting what other people have already said (well, except the lesbian erasure thing).
p.s.: before you argue that hetero aces aren’t heteroSEXUAL and therefore aren’t straight, please do some reading.
The quoted piece is wrong from the first sentence. Queer has been a perjorative historically used against anyone who didn’t fit society’s expectations of sexuality. It is the right of anyone who isn’t allowed to feel normal in that context to reclaim it.
lol “heterophobic” are you serious?
that’s all I need to know. you don’t know what you’re talking about, I don’t have the time or energy to reply to your b.s., and you need to seriously re-examine how privilege and power work. also, go do some reading up on queer history. preferably by and for actual queers.
ETA: No one ever said “queer” meant exclusively same-sex attraction. It means some amount of same-sex attraction. learn to read.
![graftversushost:
blarharharth:
ayries:
heartinakiln:
queersecrets refused to post this so i’m sharing it for a friend
[TW for bigotry? IDK is there a word for anti-asexual stuff?]
Oh, shut the fuck up.
Let me guess- this is about heteroromantic asexuals using the word queer, yes? You know what, I am sick and tired of this. STOP POLICING PEOPLE’S IDENTITIES.
A heteroromantic asexual person may be subjected to the following things by a heterosexual society:
Told that they have sexual dysfunction- in essence, be told that their orientation is an illness. This can also be linked to people feeling it was trauma. Many assume asexual people are asexual because they were assaulted, or in an abusive relationship, for example. Imagine being told that about your identity day in day out.
I have definitely heard of people being medicated for it, too. Medication for your sexuality. Think about that for a bit.
Be coerced or pressured into sex- i.e. rape by coercion- by partners who insist they are entitled to it. Since asexuality, even for people who are heteroromantic, is seen as abnormal when it prevents someone from wanting to have sex this is often not seen as odd or wrong.
A lack of representation, let alone positive representation. Not having any representation makes it much more difficult to come to terms with one’s self, and may alienate people (lord knows that the lack of bi/polysexual role models I had made things hard for me, I know that much).
Be evicted and/or shamed by families. Yep, really. You’re a woman who isn’t gonna have kids? Fuck off, a conservative family has been known to say. You’re a man who doesn’t experience sexual attraction? Screw your romantic attraction to women, clearly you’re gay and we don’t want you anymore. I have seen stories of people being hounded and abused by their families over it, and no, being heteroromantic didn’t help because society doesn’t just want romance.
Women in general are shamed for not wanting to have sex with men, in many cases. Women are generally expected to be willing to give sex to men- a woman who refuses is seen as a ‘frigid bitch’.
In general virgin shaming is a problem. How many jokes do you know where the punchline is about how a guy is, shock, a virgin? Look at stereotypes of virgins over about 18- pathetic, losers, geeks, ugly, fat, all sorts.
Do you see what I’m getting at here? Society is not just hetero. It is heterosexual. Heteroromantic asexual IS NOT HETEROSEXUAL. That is why they are different words. Asexual people are seen as abnormal by society even when they are romantically attracted to people of the opposite gender to them (or, well, “opposite”, lol gender binary). If they weren’t, don’t you think it would come up in casual conversation more? Would be represented on TV and in books and in the cinema?
This is fucking absurd. I have never in my entire life, as someone who is polysexual/bisexual felt ‘silenced’ by other people talking about these things. An ace who is romantically inclined towards the hetero side of things talking about the ways that it is hard to deal with being pressured into sex they don’t want does not prevent me talking, nor does it make my experiences seem less important. A straight ace, as it were, discussing the fact that their doctor told them they were ill does not stop me from discussing the ways I myself am oppressed. How the fuck are they supposed to be silencing us?
And while I don’t know that much about the asexual community as I actually tend to avoid all queer/GSM communities a lot of the time, and also because tbh while I am sort of maybe hyposexual/grey-A it doesn’t really feature as much in my life, there is slut-shaming everywhere because society slut-shames, and is misogynistic. It is also present in… every queer space I have ever been. Can I claim all bisexual people are slut-shamers because in the bi community I eventually abandoned, loads of people were? No, that’s fucking ridiculous. Asexuality in and of itself is not inherently slut-shaming. Whaaat.
tl;dr IF AN ACE HETEROROMANTIC SAYS THEY ARE QUEER, THEY ARE FUCKING QUEER. They are not silencing us. They are not appropriating us. They are people who are told by society “sexual attraction is normal” when they do not experience sexual attraction. I’d say that’s pretty oppressive, what with them therefore not being seen as “normal”.
Like, ffs, how many heterosexual guys have you met who would be A-OK with an asexual heteroromantic dude who loved his girlfriend very dearly but never wanted to have sex with her, and who had no idea what this whole “she’s hot” deal was about? Yeah. Not many. Thought so.
People do not have the right to claim any identity they want to. Words still mean things. Sometimes, and I know this is pretty wild and crazy, but SOMETIMES lack of sexual drive IS indicitive of a health problem/mental illness. Bizarre, right? People are medicated for illnesses, and like I said, those illnesses can sometimes go hand-in-hand with low to no sexual libido. Though please, provide citation for all those times medications have been forced on someone with literally no problem other than low or no sexual libido. Please. I’d love to see your references.
And oh wow, it must be really tough for people to assume asexuals have been assaulted. As a rape victim, and especially as a rape victim whom NO ONE would listen to, I REALLY empathize with that. Rape is disgusting. Lack of consent is bad. But why is this considered an oppression of asexuals when this is, in fact, an issue of lack of respect of the word ‘no’? Everyone is in danger of sexual assault and rape. It is not a problem unique to asexuals.
Women being shamed for not wanting to have sex with men? THAT IS SEXISM. That is oppression for being a woman who is viewed as nothing more than a sex object, that is NOT about being asexual, no matter how much any asexual wants to twist it. Virgin shaming? So does that excuse the RAMPANT slut shaming in the ace community? And anyways, this is, again, sexism at work. Men are expected to be big tough virile heroes, while women are expected to be meek and virginal. Sexism. Not ~asexual oppression~.
Don’t fucking scream at me about asexual oppression, MOST ESPECIALLY AND SPECIFICALLY not when it’s an asexual in a HETERO relationship. See, I can’t go to certain countries without being in danger of being killed. I can’t go places in my OWN country for fear of being harmed. I am called dyke. I am called queer. I am told I am worthless, that I’m going to burn in hell, that I don’t deserve to live. I can’t get married in most places in my country. I can’t hold my girlfriend’s hand in public without being afraid. THAT. That is oppression. Not any kind of minor inconvenience. It’s REAL oppression.
And bully for you, that you’ve never felt silenced. That’s fantastic, aren’t you a great asexual ally, blar dee blar. Guess what? I’ve felt silenced. I know PLENTY of people, both on and off tumblr, who have a HUGE problem with heteroromantic asexuals calling themselves queer when it is a slur that will NEVER be used against them. You cannot reclaim a slur that does not belong to you! What is so fucking difficult to comprehend? You cannot SAY YOU ARE QUEER THEREFORE YOU ARE QUEER. That is so fucking fucked up that I’m almost ashamed to QUOTE it.
reblogging for blarharharth’s commentary.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lpmbdymFju1qdl044o1_500.jpg)
