fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2807 ]

[ SECRET POST #2807 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2807 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 033 secrets from Secret Submission Post #401.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - random photo of a pizza place ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

02. http://i.imgur.com/M0kdllh.png

I also dislike this arc, if only because it's way too preachy, but I don't see how it's OOC for Tedd. It's been pretty clear for years that there's more than just a sexual thrill involved in all his experimentation with gender-bending. Having him acknowledge that he's not 100% "male" is a natural next step for him.

Pretty much this. If it were Elliot or Justin acting this way, then the OP might have had a point, but with Tedd. Yeah that is Just Tedd being Tedd, albeit a more mature version of hir. I'm kinda glad we've seen the back of the creeper Tedd, you read the older strips and they are painful not just because of the art, but Tedd was a creep in them.

I need someone to explain to me what it means "to be male" or "to be female" because that's the only way I can understand how you can be varying percentages of either.

The way you frame that question just makes it far too obvious you are trying to start some sexuality or gender-identification wank. 3/10: be more subtle.

If that's the way you see it, OK, but it's an honest question.

That's exactly why "genderqueer" stuff is such bullshit: there IS no one singular way to be male or female. Most people are an amalgam of qualities typically associated with both AND THAT'S NORMAL.

The idea that there are certain qualities or behaviors that "belong" to a particular gender is incredibly sexist.

Yep. And the irony is that so many who lavish love and praise over the genderqueer label are soooo quick to demonize demisexual as a label. And then they proceed to make virtually the same argument you just made.

I kinda agree tbh. I don't know if I'd say it's sexist specifically, but it definitely feels retroactive.

Edited 2014-09-10 04:55 (UTC)

So people are just not allowed to identify as a different gender than their bits tell you they are, or have any need to question it in any way, or understand themselves in a way you disapprove of?

Okay, then. Didn't get the memo where you get to decide for other people and tell them their feelings are bullshit. Must make a note. Asshole.

what exactly is the purpose of it beyond wanting to be a special snowflake who isn't like the other girls/boys?

you can be female and present or behave in a masculine manner. you can be male and present or behave in a feminine manner. that doesn't make you not female or not male. there is no such thing as traits/behavior/presentation/likes/etc. that is inherently male or female. there are things that are coded as traditionally masculine or traditionally feminine, but that does not make them inherently either. a guy baking cookies is masculine because he is a guy doing it. he does not suddenly become female just because he happens to enjoy a thing that is traditionally coded as feminine.

the people above have it right, it's sexist and regressive to act as if there are certain qualities that make one male or female and if you exhibit qualities from the other category then you're no longer allowed to identify as one or the other.

Okay, so if a guy wears a dress, it automatically becomes masculine, even though the vast majority of society associates that particular article of clothing as very strongly feminine? Pretty sure most would consider him effeminate. I'm also quite certain that many butch lesbians, while identifying as female, wouldn't appreciate the insinuation that wearing men's clothing is magically feminine because of the body beneath it. In this case, it's meant to convey masculinity. Sure, it's nice to think everything is equal and people can do/wear whatever they want (which they can!), but, you know, some people actually do want to convey a certain gender presentation that disappears if things automatically become masculine/feminine when based solely on physicality. Erasing this form of gender expression for "all-inclusivity" isn't cool.

tl;dr: some of this is actually conditional -- please don't paint it with a broad brush in the name of all-inclusiviness and progressism.

You're conflating gender presentation with gender identity, which I think is exactly what that anon was saying is a bad thing. Taking their example, a man who likes baking cookies is not somehow less of a man for engaging in an activity that is typically associated with women. Those butch lesbians are not less female because they like to present and express themselves in a masculine fashion.

It's the idea that certain behaviors have arbitrarily been designated as "masculine" or "feminine" and that engaging in those behaviors somehow diminishes how a person actually identifies.

Of course people can be a different gender than their bits. That was transgendered is. But outside of intersex (or whatever the appropriate term is these days), if you're wandering around going "I'm only the gender that matches/doesn't match my sex *part of the time* you're a snowflake moron.

(reply from suspended user)

AYRT The phrase "genderqueer bullshit" was a bit of clue. Your surprise in turn surprises me - there was nothing offensive or prescriptive in that to you? Huh. Likewise the constant reference to special snowflakes. It's condescending, demeaning and disrespectful.

Not about me, I'm cis (and not particularly gendercomforming). Someone who loves someone I love is genderqueer and I have enough respect for them not to tell them their feelings and experiences are invalid.

(reply from suspended user)

Exactly. It's the idea of needing a special label to say "I have traits and interests that are both masculine and feminine" when in fact that is the case for the vast majority of people out there. There are very, very few people who conform to their gender stereotype 100%.

Trying to separate yourself with said special label just further reinforces the sexist notion that there is a right way to be a girl/boy and that if you don't fit neatly into that little box, you aren't normal. But what's actually normal is NOT fitting completely into one box or the other.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-09-10 21:03 (UTC) - Expand

(reply from suspended user)

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-09-10 22:32 (UTC) - Expand

(reply from suspended user)

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-09-10 23:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-09-11 00:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-09-11 05:52 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-09-11 07:20 (UTC) - Expand

(reply from suspended user)

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-09-11 19:07 (UTC) - Expand

But... people being an amalgam of different qualities, rather than simply "male" or "female", is what makes genderqueer the only identity that makes sense.

If there are no differences between men and woman other than physical, there's no point in identifying asone as ospposed to another. There are also differences between peoeple's heights, but nobody makes it a point to identify as tall, or short.

I like that Tedd has grown and I'm curious to see more, of course with this story arc I prefer seeing more of Sarah beating those dudebros at the various games and I would enjoy seeing more of Luke and Justin and started to ship them until Grace got her squee face.

I figured Tedd for a self-insert the second he got the cute squirrel chick superhero to instantly fall in love with him.

I don't mind him, but his part in this story arc is the more boring aspect.

I just don't get why Grace of all people seems to know more about this than Tedd does. It doesn't really seem like something she'd be an expert in, at least to me.

This, really.

Word of God said that she looked it up because she goes to school with kids who talk about things. You know, like in real life?

Sorry, disagree entirely.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only