[ SECRET POST #3177 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3177 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.



__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12. http://i57.tinypic.com/35chf9c.jpg
[penis]


__________________________________________________



13. http://i.imgur.com/OB1EeH5.jpg
[porn - furry/illustrated]









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 042 secrets from Secret Submission Post #454.
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.

Comments

Re: You mean they are ridiculous and you die laughing?

[(Anonymous)]

Obviously you can use the word yourself if you like, but I don't think there's anything "clean" or appropriate about encouraging straight people to use it.

Re: You mean they are ridiculous and you die laughing?

[(Anonymous)]

You choose what you get offended by, and I'll choose what I get offended by, thank you.

Re: You mean they are ridiculous and you die laughing?

[(Anonymous)]

If I identify as queer (which I do) then why shouldn't straight people respect and refer to that identity? Not to mention, it's used more often in academia, as in "queer studies" or "queer readings" of a text, and in this case, the word is infinitely more useful than something like "LGBT reading" because that assumes active identities whereas queer doesn't demand categorization (for example, you can do a queer reading of Dracula, but it's more presumptuous to argue that Dracula "identifies" as bisexual or something). Since, unlike many other slurs, queer is actually used as an identity (unlike, say, faggot), it does not have to be offensive.

Re: You mean they are ridiculous and you die laughing?

[(Anonymous)]

I meant to say that encouraging straight people to use it as a catch-all is inappropriate. Of course you can tell straight people to call you personally whatever you want them to call you. But it's not okay to refer to an entire community with a word that many in that community still view as a slur.

Re: You mean they are ridiculous and you die laughing?

[(Anonymous)]

I refer to them that way. And I am perfectly fine with straight people doing so as well, provided they use the term respectfully. There is a difference between using it as a slur (as a noun) and using it as a correct description.

Re: You mean they are ridiculous and you die laughing?

[(Anonymous)]

You're being willfully dense if you don't see why there's a problem with referring to people by a slur that they find offensive and have no desire to reclaim. If you call yourself queer, then of course you don't have a problem with it being used as "a correct description." But someone who does not think of themselves that way and has experience with the word being used as a violent slur against them by homophobes may not be comfortable with their community or lifestyle or relationships being called queer. You can't just tell those people "too bad, queer is so much cleaner as a catch-all so you'll have to get over yourself and accept that it's been reclaimed!"