Morning Chorus

The are no Oppression Olympics, just the difference between prejudice and oppression.

galesofnovember:

morningchorus:

It occurs to me why asexuals on tumblr annoy the fuck out of me. It’s because they remind me so much of the atheist community I used to be involved in. It was mostly middle class white guys and I was convinced atheism was the worst oppression to face, but then reality smacked me in the face, well mostly their own misogyny towards me and other women.

I know the atheist arguments so well because I used to make them. They argue from a place without experience so as they shout out against sexism in the bible, they actually fail to realize that biggest reason why sexism exists is men. Of course the typical atheist, especially the internet one, is ignorant of what sexism, homophobia, racism, and other oppressions are really about.

So while yes, people can be prejudiced against atheists, they’re not oppressed, there is no institutionalized oppression against atheists, no murders happening today on the streets because they’re atheist. Yet, they won’t hesitate to appropriate struggles of other people, and if you dare say they’re not oppressed they whip up the worst, yet rare and far between incidents of against atheists as if it happens to them on a daily basis. They even appropriate the “coming out” of gay people, bc telling your parents you’re an atheist is the same thing as gay, riiiight.

And that’s not to say people aren’t ignorant about atheists, and it’s really fucking sad when parents won’t allow their children to believe as they want, but they’re not oppressed.

Ring a bell asexuals? because this is exactly what you do too.

And invariably I’ll get the but I’m “insert actual oppressed identity” then i’m not talking about you, but if you’re going to defend straight asexuals appropriating my identity and pulling this shit, then you’re not helping the LGBTQ cause. Demisexuality and Asexuality is not an oppression. I’ve never claimed they don’t get shit, but it’s not the same. Learn the difference.

I think an important unifying factor is that both groups are heavily made up of nerds.  And I really hate nerds.  Scratch the surface of any nerdy dude and you will find oozing piles of resentment against women and queer people and especially against queer women. 

Very true.

The are no Oppression Olympics, just the difference between prejudice and oppression.

It occurs to me why asexuals on tumblr annoy the fuck out of me. It’s because they remind me so much of the atheist community I used to be involved in. It was mostly middle class white guys and I was convinced atheism was the worst oppression to face, but then reality smacked me in the face, well mostly their own misogyny towards me and other women.

I know the atheist arguments so well because I used to make them. They argue from a place without experience so as they shout out against sexism in the bible, they actually fail to realize that biggest reason why sexism exists is men. Of course the typical atheist, especially the internet one, is ignorant of what sexism, homophobia, racism, and other oppressions are really about.

So while yes, people can be prejudiced against atheists, they’re not oppressed, there is no institutionalized oppression against atheists, no murders happening today on the streets because they’re atheist. Yet, they won’t hesitate to appropriate struggles of other people, and if you dare say they’re not oppressed they whip up the worst, yet rare and far between incidents of against atheists as if it happens to them on a daily basis. They even appropriate the “coming out” of gay people, bc telling your parents you’re an atheist is the same thing as gay, riiiight.

And that’s not to say people aren’t ignorant about atheists, and it’s really fucking sad when parents won’t allow their children to believe as they want, but they’re not oppressed.

Ring a bell asexuals? because this is exactly what you do too.

And invariably I’ll get the but I’m “insert actual oppressed identity” then i’m not talking about you, but if you’re going to defend straight asexuals appropriating my identity and pulling this shit, then you’re not helping the LGBTQ cause. Demisexuality and Asexuality is not an oppression. I’ve never claimed they don’t get shit, but it’s not the same. Learn the difference.

desliz:

Men’s Acts, not Women’s Choices: “Quantum Consent”

galesofnovember:

radtransfem:

And while I’m linking articles from evebitfirst, here’s a great one* on “quantum” consent (do you remember Schrodinger’s Rapist? like that)

(* eve makes some claims about prostitution that I don’t know enough about to endorse or not, I’m linking it for the consent discussion)

I’m not sure I agree with every point,  but I think the last paragraph is particularily insightful:

“The issue isn’t just whether an individual woman (or women as a class) are expressing “intrinsic” “individual” desires (as opposed to culturally-imposed ones), but why men are willing to go along with it. There’s something particularly disturbing about men who are big supporters of third-wave, “post-modern,” “sex-positive” feminism. And this is it: they may echo all the right words about consent and agency, but they’re using the focus on females’ gatekeeper “responsibility” to continue their objectification and exploitation of women.”

As much as I rag on the asexuality movement, I must admit that it appears to be more or less in reaction to this; the focus on consent (complete with phrases like “consent is sexy!”, which makes an obvious, if unintentional, implication about what not consenting is) complete fails to equip women with the ability to talk about what they don’t want, sexually. Of course, asexuality has approached this by going to the other extreme, portraying “sexual attraction” as this zombifying menace that makes one incapable of folding laundry without being paralyzed by sexual fantasies, but mainstream feminism as it stands has done a piss-poor job of addressing the needs of women who don’t want to prioritize their attractiveness, or who don’t actually like penetration that much, or who resent the implication that they must be sexually available to anyone at any time (which includes, in a roundabout way, giving your stamp of approval to anything the patriarchy presents as desirable). Instead, they turn to ridiculous Tumblr microcategorization of sexuality because sex-positive feminists are too busy talking about which waterproof mascara holds up best when radically deepthroating your man. There is no recognition of the grey area that contains the situations and emotions that come between “rape” and “enthusiatic consent”. I don’t question why people want to be excused from that game. We fail to give them the tools they need to defend themselves and then demand they do it anyway.

Hinging your sexual identity on being better than another sexual identity is pretty terrible

radfemme:

I identify as bisexual. Sometimes I’ll use pansexual if I’m around people that I know are lgtbq savvy and would understand the word, because I feel that that fits as well. However, I honestly think that the term bisexual, given its history, accurately fits and explains that I am attracted to people across the entire gender spectrum/with a variety of gender presentations. And it’s far more accessible and well-known than pansexual is at the moment.

So when people say, “I’m pansexual, it’s a more inclusive term than bisexual,” and grin at me like they’ve shat out a rainbow, I’m unimpressed. 

When someone says, “I would NEVER identify as bisexual, I’m queer, that’s a political stance,” I’m a bit miffed.

Is my identity not a political stance? Because I’m pretty sure it is. Identifying as bisexual and being a woman flies in the face of slut-shamers and assholes who would try to dictate my identity one way or the other. It’s non-monosexual and confuses the shit out of everyone.

My identity is just as valid as yours. I more than appreciate that identifying as queer or pansexual is a healing and awesome act. However, please don’t take a giant dump on my identity while you do so!

Elementary.

cheatthis:

morningchorus:

lord-of-the-night:

Let’s make it clear. I don’t hate the actors who play in the show, because I kinda like Lucy Liu and Jonny Lee Miller. What I hate is that the americans have turned John Watson into a damn girl. I mean… why?! The only reason is that they wanted Holmes and Watson to flirt, and if Watson had been a man it would have been wrong ‘cause they’re both men.
And also, I watched the Trailer and that’s not Sherlock Holmes. That’s CSI.

So, yes, I hate the show because it’s clearly copied from BBC’s Sherlock and it’s completely different from the books.
 
Deal with it. 

Lucy Lui is woman, not a “damn girl”. Sorry, but your sexism is showing. 

Claiming homophobia as a reason, when there is no relationship between between Holmes and Watson to begin with, is pretty fucking offensive to gay people. Don’t use us to cover up your blatant sexism.

There are many adaptations of Sherlock, and BBC doesn’t own it.

Deal with it.  

Seriously where the fuck were all these people when Irene fell in love with a man? No one seemed to give a fuck about queer people then. But ofc, it’s less offensive for a canon lesbian to be turned straight than it is for a canon straight dude to be turned… straight.

Wait, what?

seriously sherlock fans, where were you?

Quoting the dictionary

my-slightly-awkward:

Invariably in the ”queer doesn’t mean anything, how dare you uppity LGBT people be exclusive of asexuality*” discussions someone will quote the dictionary (specifically the merriam-webster, oddly). In the merriam webster queer is defined as something along the lines of ‘differing from normal’ (though it is also noted that it is a derogatory slur**). Kay cool.

Now lets take a look at how the merriam webster defines asexual: ”1) lacking functional sex organs 2)A) Involving or reproducing by reproductive processes (as cell division, spore formation, fission or budding) that do not involve the union of individuals or gametes 2)B) Produced by asexual reproduction C) Devoid of sexuality

Oh wow look, maybe the dictionary isn’t the best place to go for definitions of societal groups?!?

*please note the use of asexuality, as in the identity, rather than asexuals because I am well aware that there are LGBTQ aces.

**pop quiz: which of these definitions do you think is the one that (parts) of the LGBT community are trying to reclaim, a.k.a. which definition is actually relevant in this context?

lol, i love this

Morning Chorus: Sexuality and why asexuals are not oppressed or queer

galesofnovember:

Morning Chorus: Sexuality and why asexuals are not oppressed or queer

morningchorus:

So feeling the need to vent some thoughts, the whole GSM thing pissed me off. And this has been brewing for some time anyway. So here goes for a wall of text and TW for mentions of rape, homophobia, and sexism.

I’m 27 years old. I realized I was a lesbian less than a year ago. Before then I…

I’m riffing off of this awesome post, which can totally stand on it’s own, but has inspired, of course, a fuckton of ridiculous defensive shit. 

One of the things I see the angry rebloggers latching onto is the theory that morningchorus is describing a “conservative” upbringing,  when I didn’t really get that impression.  But regardless, I think that “that’s what conservative people think” is kind of a popular, unexplored, homophobic trope from the ridiculous tumblr asexual world.

Socially Liberal Homophobia is totally a thing.  And tumblr asexuals are big time proponents of it.  Socially liberal homophobes, like there conservatives counterparts, believe that all gay people are libertines out to destroy hallowed social institutions like marriage and family and child-rearing. They believe that gay people are uniquely degenerate and that gay communities are basically 24 hour pride parades of silly costumes.   The difference is that socially liberal homophobes think this is awesome! They think of themselves as great allies or as practically queer themselves, and don’t acknowledge that a “positive”stereotype is still dehumanizing. 

The mass media loves the de-sexed, limp-wristed Gay BFF stereotype and sexy girl on girl action. Hipsters and bohemians adore exotic, transgressive “queers”.   Liberals or white boy atheists love to use gay people as a “gotcha” against social conservatives.  Tumblr asexuals and otherkin and whatever ridiculous identity concept is popular today, are mostly teenagers or people still hung up on adolescent ideas of belonging, and they love to imagine GLBT communities as the utopia of personal acceptance they never had in high school. 

This is homophobia.  This is treating gay people like objects instead of human beings.  Gay people do not exist to perform for straight people, or to be “inspiring” symbols against your dull bourgeois upbringing. We’re not political tools and the spaces that GLBT have created over the years do not exist so that anyone who feels alienated can be wrapped in our loving arms. 

You can tell how homophobic this is by how angry people get when a GLBT person doesn’t obediently fulfill these stereotypes.  My personal real-world favorite is the straight boy atheists who get so, so pissed off at me for having the gall to be religious (use the word “sin” with a straight dude atheist some time. It’s hilarious.) Otherkin and asexuals who shriek about how “you’re just as bad as the homophobes!” are all pretty funny.  Married straight people who will opine about how they don’t support gay marriage because marriage is, like, an outmoded patriarchal institution, man, are just depressing.  Let’s not start with poly people. 

For me, socially liberal homophobia was as much a factor in my life as the more conventional conservative type, since I was lucky to have a liberal, not overtly homophobic upbringing.  The weight of feeling like I had to fulfill those stereotypes was daunting.  I feel like I spent a good chunk of my early 20s feeling like I wasn’t pretty enough to be a lesbian, which sounds totally batshit.  But I had so strongly internalized the idea that the right kind of lesbian had to be hot. 

The root of this silly internet nonsense is the idea that gay people don’t exist as autonomous human beings, that instead we exist to do the job of livening up straight people’s lives.  And this includes having the responsibility to change ourselves and our spaces to accommodate the needs of socially awkward teens who don’t feel like dating. 

Thank you and well said. When I saw people saying I had a conservative upbringing I could only laugh. I have my family to thank for a lot of my liberal thinking and political inclinations, but just because I was surrounded by liberal thinking people did not mean I wasn’t subjected to constant homophobia. 

Sexuality and why asexuals are not oppressed or queer

bananapeppers:

morningchorus:

So feeling the need to vent some thoughts, the whole GSM thing* pissed me off. And this has been brewing for some time anyway. So here goes for a wall of text and TW for mentions of rape, homophobia, and sexism.

Read More →

*Gender and/or Sexuality Minority. morningchorus is referring to the usage of GSM by some as a replacement for LGBTQ or similar.

two points. I am directing them to anyone who responded to the post with

• celibacy ≠ asexuality; or

• the blame for morningchorus’s experiences of homophobia falls on her Catholic environment only

1. celibacy is deliberate abstinence from sexual activity despite desiring sexual activity. when nonasexual LGB people talk about the pressures from family, friends, religious bodies, or greater society to be asexual, “celibacy” does not tell a complete story. for the individuals and groups who are pressuring us, it is not enough that we abstain from gay-male or lesbian sex. we must also, somehow, lose our sexual thoughts. consider what the intended results of genital electroshocking were/are. the whole point of “therapies” such as genital electroshocking is to render us asexual, not celibate. we are encouraged to dismiss or counter our sexual thoughts until they stop coming.

2. I won’t deny Christianities’ roles in spreading, enforcing, and reinforcing homophobia. my point then is that an LGB person does not need to grow up in a Catholic environment to receive those same homophobic messages. lots of LGB people do not grow up in Catholic environments and receive those same messages. I grew up removed from Christianity, with a Jewish/atheist upbringing, and I have received the same messages—by having (Christian) friends, by having classmates, by going to mental healthcare providers and psych-hospital staff, by socializing with acquaintances, by reading. there are sources I cannot pinpoint because the idea that I should not even have sexual thoughts about other women seems like it’s everywhere.

Thank you <3