[ SECRET POST #6548 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6548 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Dungeons and Daddies]



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 24 secrets from Secret Submission Post #936.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - 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: Is this problematic?

[(Anonymous)]

as long as it doesn't imply that allosexual gay people are somehow more privileged

They can be, though, depending on the context. Maybe privileged isn't the right word, but definitely more accepted and not as criticized/made fun of, if a friend group consists of all gay or bi people who tend to make comments saying awful things about asexuals.

Re: Is this problematic?

[(Anonymous)]

Agree to disagree. Being accepted within a peer group that's bigoted isn't the same as privileged on a societal scale, but I'm not here to argue about that, just answering the question of if it's problematic to write (it isn't).

Re: Is this problematic?

[(Anonymous)]

You're ignoring that societal privilege still is in action in societal subgroups. And inside queer communities, there definitely tends to be a "privilege pecking order" as well - it's just a matter of the group in question which ones are the more privileged and which ones aren't.

Re: Is this problematic?

[(Anonymous)]

No, not quite. I've dealt with the intracommunity pecking order before, but the moment I leave queer communities I still have less rights than cishets.

Re: Is this problematic?

[(Anonymous)]

Sure, but even there, some very liberal communities are more open to the "traditional" iterations of queerness on account of not understanding how asexuality works.

Re: Is this problematic?

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT

Totally agree. In my super liberal, ~sex positive~ community gay people are absolutely more privileged than ace people. The person you're replying to can dislike that I'm saying that for their own reasons, but that doesn't change the fact that it's true.

I'm not making a blanket statement or talking about anywhere else (in very conservative, religious communities I'm sure the opposite is true) but where I'm at, people don't care what gender/how many people you're having sex with/what kinks you're into, etc., as long as you're having sex with someone. If you're not, you're "sick", you're "just a prude", there's something wrong with you, you're mentally ill, there's something wrong with your hormones, you were clearly molested as a child, you need help, etc. etc.

In some places it's definitely easier to be gay than asexual, it just is.

Re: Is this problematic?

[(Anonymous)]

Dang, mind naming some of these places? Would love to know.

Re: Is this problematic?

[(Anonymous)]

You're actually asking ayrt to basically doxx themself just because you don't believe them huh.

Re: Is this problematic?

[(Anonymous)]

I have been that ace in a group of queers where they all bash asexuality and make "jokes" about how some day I'll come out for real. Among other gross things.

I have better friends now so it doesn't matter, but yeah. I wish past me had just settled on "queer" with that group instead of admitting I was asexual.