fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2977 ]

[ SECRET POST #2977 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2977 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

[Paul Darrow]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Dragon Age: Inquisition]

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

(Bee and Puppycat)

__________________________________________________

09.

[Joan Watson, Elementary]

__________________________________________________

10.

(Marvel's Agents of Shield)

__________________________________________________

11.

[One Piece]

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

[Noah Emmerich, The Americans]

__________________________________________________

14.

[Teen Wolf]

__________________________________________________

15. [ WARNING for rape ]

__________________________________________________

16. [ WARNING for dubcon? ]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #425.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

As someone who is queer (bisexual), I hate the way so many "veteran" members of the queer community are so eager to prove that anyone who uses one of the newer labels they don't believe in the legitimacy of is really straight and just wanting to be a special snowflake. I'm starting to think they're the ones who want to be special snowflakes by keeping too many people from claiming a label of queerness.

I definitely get this vibe sometimes. It feels like they keep themselves purposefully ignorant of what the newer labels really entail just so they can feel more secure in their own queerness.

As what I guess you could consider a "veteran" queer, I'm exhausted to death of people desperately trying to wiggle under the queer umbrella like it's a fun exclusive club. I'm sorry, but if you're heterosexual/heteroromantic/cisgender, using flowery terms like "demisexual"/etc. to try to gain Queer Points is just going to make me get pissed off.

Okay, but nobody who is demisexual but only towards the opposite gender says they're queer. You can, however, be demisexual and only sexually attracted to people of the same gender if you're close to them; but if someone says they're demisexual people just assume they're heterosexually so, which is awfully heteronormative. Demisexual isn't a queer label by itself, but if someone finds it a useful modifier, I don't mind.

TBH, I wouldn't mind it if it didn't have the suffix -sexual to it. It makes it too easy to put it on the level of homosexuality.

+1

I mean, I'm sure there are some demisexual people who do that, but there are tons of straight people who try to claim that they're queer for being kinky or that they're "queering" marriage if the wife doesn't take the husband's last name, and I don't hear even a quarter of the hysteria over that that I hear over nonbinary and ace spectrum people.

DA
Demisexuality seems like bullshit to me, since all descriptions of it sounds like most people. And you'd be surprised how many straight people on tumnblr try to say they're queer because they identify as demisexual, as well as the kinsters.

Eh, I mostly agree with you. However I have seen people say that demisexually is a part of asexuality, and therefore demisexual heteroromantics/sexuals = queer.

Not the majority I don't think, but enough.

How in the world is demisexuality like asexuality? That is so dumb. If you want sex, even if it's only under certain conditions, you're not asexual. I mean shit.

They're similar/identical to grey-aces (depending on who you talk to), and because grey-aces are a part of asexuality, some demisexuals consider themselves to be too.

It's kind of important to keep in mind that almost everyone talking about this stuff has a different definition of things. So sometimes arguments fall completely on deaf ears and sometimes they're valid, and sometimes people claim that no one in their group claims those kinds of things while others say acknowledging the existence of the first group is equivalent to saying "well I have a black/gay/[insert minority] friend..."

so

the words are meaningless

I'd say "too many meanings" vs "meaningless." The end result is pretty much the same, but there is a difference.

So you're assuming they're really straight and just making it all up? Just like the OP was saying?

Ehhhhh, DA, but there are straight people who use the newer 'special' sexualities and claim to be 'queer'. I'm Asexual and I've distanced myself from the ace community because I couldn't agree with all the het-mantic people claiming they were queer because they didn't have sexual attraction.

The way I see it, yeah, it's not normal, but no one is going to deny you rights/attack you/murder you because you aren't having sex and or don't have sexual attraction.

Maybe this runs more fundamental than I realized.

What value do you think the queer label serves, if any? That is to say, how do you think the world is better for having the "queer" label than if the term had never been invented?

The way I'd answer is that the queer label shows that you don't fit the straight label--it's a way of taking all the assumptions wrapped up in being straight and saying "This isn't me." I don't think it's very common to be truly 100% straight, so I'm all for more folks calling themselves queer. The more people reject the assumption, the less legitimacy it retains.

DA

For me, it's a community term for those of us that have suffered genuine oppression (lost jobs, refused housing/medical care, threatened with violence, etc.) at the hands of the current and yes, still very much legitimate straight/cis societal institutions. Which is why people literally pulling random terms out of thin air to "queerify" their orientations, who have never experienced an ounce of hardship for it outside a side-eye or two, sort of feels like a slap in the face.

Genuine oppression, as opposed to non-genuine oppression? To try to draw an analogy, I would never, ever tell someone that they're not genuinely ill because my illness is so much worse than theirs.

Yes, as in non-genuine oppression. As in "someone thinks my made-up orientation doesn't exist, I'm so oppressed :(((((", the sort of thing that takes away from the lived experiences of queer people that have had real-life, terrible consequences for being queer. I'm sorry, but I completely refuse to put hurt feelings on the same caliber as being thrown out of your home, or physically attacked, or denied housing and medical care.

You know how "queer" is a reclaimed word? We took a term used in violence against us and made it out own. It's ours because we earned it. And maybe not everyone that feels like it gets to use it too.

Re: confessions

feotakahari - 2015-02-28 03:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: confessions

(Anonymous) - 2015-02-28 03:57 (UTC) - Expand

Re: confessions

feotakahari - 2015-02-28 04:34 (UTC) - Expand

Queer is a term used by people who are oppressed/in danger in society. If you're still enjoying all the perks of being a Heterosexual, sanz the sex part, then no, you're not queer. If you're straight, but only get attracted to opposite gendered people when you know them/love them, you're not queer.

You may be different, but you're not persecuted.

I'm not even going to pretend to be polite about this. I would sooner stick a chainsaw up my ass than allow anyone--ANYONE--to ever tell me that I'm not queer.

(And seriously, "the perks of a heterosexual"? Not having rocks thrown at you is a perk? Or are you talking about marriage, in which case Erika Moen might have a bigger bone to pick with you than I do?)

Right, sorry, but if you're Cis gendered and only feel attracted to people of the opposite sex, then you're not queer. You will never be queer, and it's insulting that you want to pretend to be.

"I'm Demisexual you guys! Don't you understand that only having sex with people of the opposite sex who you love is exactly the same as being chained to a truck and dragged to death?! It's totally the same! Having a guy murder you because you were born the wrong gender and presented otherwise is totally the same thing as having to get to know someone before I bang them!"

You disgust me.

Re: confessions

(Anonymous) - 2015-02-28 20:47 (UTC) - Expand

Re: confessions

(Anonymous) - 2015-02-28 23:40 (UTC) - Expand

Thanks for proving that "demisexuals" are special snowflakes who want to co-opt a label to make themselves feel important.

I'm a little bothered by this, because it means that bi people aren't queer, since they're able to pass as straight.

Re: confessions

(Anonymous) - 2015-02-28 13:12 (UTC) - Expand

I sort of agree but I also agree with people who worry about the term being diluted. My basic feeling is that if you are affected by homophobia (I include biphobia and other more specific things as subsets of this umbrella term since they wouldn't be an issue if the same sex attraction wasn't there, even if other things are attacked too) then you're queer, even if "being affected" is "only" dealing with the negative attitudes toward queer people and knowing they're talking about you, since requiring any more than that tends to imply that closeted people don't deal with homophobia.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only