“You have to be SGA to be LGBT” is just ‘You’re either gay or straight, pick one" but low carb.
Now presenting: biphobic rhetoric repacaged with more artificial sweeteners! Buy 2 and you get an extra non binary erasure
what
Bitch it’s in clear language , read it a few more times if you need to. 😂
@patrexes unsurprisingly the argument was that she distrusted nonbinary people as a group for not “understanding transmisogyny”. and then tried the whole Monopoly of Suffering thing where an imagined trans person never suffering for being trans is an insult to the fibre of her being. they read like a villain backstory tbh. “dysphoria is my ultimate curse and so i swear vengeance on other trans people! they shall kneel before my deeply pointless wrath”
a girl on my facebook felt the need to come out as a tr/uscu/m and in the shitshow that followed told multiple people to check their passing privilege
ace person: hey you’re being kind of aphobic rn, could you maybe not
aphobe: i’ll have you know i was born with glass bones and paper skin. every morning i break my legs, and every afternoon i break my arms. at night, i lie awake in agony until my heart attacks put me to slee
at least give me credit for the post idea goddamn
what????
i KNEW i had seen this post somewhere before! it’s almost identical to this post by @sapphics down to the fact that you cut short at “slee” like damn how many posts are you going to steal?
Can you imagine being so far up your own ass you try to claim credit to a meme that existed long before your pathetic ass post?
only exclusionists can make spongebob jokes now apparently
anybody else thinking about that time somebody made a joke about how you can only have four aces in a deck of cards, and slimecourse said that op was saying all people who arent ace cheat on their significant others?
You know what’s wild to me about ace discourse? It feels like it completely undid years worth of social activism and the principles a lot of it is based on.
Like some of y’all actually decided you prefer the definitions and opinions of non a-spec people about it than those of actual a-spec people, and agreed with outsiders on the treatment of a-specs over the testimonies of actual a-specs, completely undermining one of the most basic understandings we have of advocating for marginalized identities.
Y’all backtracked on years worth of basic feminism wrt rape culture. Y’all started hailing anti-sex worker rhetoric because it could be applied to aces.
Y’all literally and actually went along with “well making fun of this one group isn’t bad this time because they actually deserve it.” While you condoned abuse, violence, threats, doxxing, suicide baits, harassment, and pathologization of a-spec people and pretended it was justified.
Every single one of y’all exclusionists have undermined at least ONE of the very basic, most humane rules of social activism. Your “movement” undid years of work on the new kids being exposed to it, to the point that the 13 and 14 y/o exclusionists I came across were nasty, transphobic, biphobic, ableist turds. And that’s on you.
Really tho, the most arophobic posts i find tend to be from actual literal terfs, and they’re going after aro het men specifically.
Arophobia from run of the mill ace exclusionists is bad, I won’t deny it. But with them, 90% of the time we’re an afterthought. They reduce our aromanticism to screwing and not calling the next day, and they often forget aro aces exist.
When radfems do it, they frame us as all being straight men who use women for sex at best, abusive men at worst. The think the idea of being a man attracted to women sexually but not interested in dating her means he’s preying on her. They don’t even mention aro women or aros who are not exclusively attracted to a different gender. “Aromantic” gets processed through their minds as “straight misogynistic men”.
But you know what ace exclusionists do when they see those posts? Some probably check the source, but others trust it cause it’s going after a-specs, and they reblog it cause they either don’t know thats a radfem or they don’t care. And if you criticize it? They’ll defend the radfem. Supposedly anti-terf ace exclusionists will defend a terf if said terf is talking negatively about aromantic people.
This is how radfem/TERF ideas spread. It’s insidious. Be aware of who you’re supporting.
I know I talked about this on my blog once but it was a while ago, so I’m gonna say it again. I have seen so many radfems blatantly state that aromantic allosexual people should undergo conversion therapy. Not like implying it, just outright saying that feeling sexual attraction without romantic attraction could only be proof of mental illness and that also aros need help.
“Autistic and a-spec coding often go hand in hand because NTs use both of these identities to Other a character and make them seem ‘not quite human’” is a good breakdown of the problem, not “making autistic aspec characters is automatically ableist/aphobic” and CERTIANLY not “lack of sexual attraction dehumanizes characters” and otherwise throwing irl autistic aspecs under the bus
This.
A-spec and autism are both often used to dehumanize. Autistic characters are portrayed as lacking sexual (and usually romantic) urges, attractions, feelings because they “can’t comprehend those emotions.” A-spec characters are often stripped of any emotional “intelligence” and uncaring/ignorant of societal boundaries.
Specifically because autistic coding is usually lacking emotional intelligence and completely ignorant of how to act in public/manners in general and specifically because a-spec coding is usually lacking any sexual/romantic urges and feelings (which is different than lacking sexual/romantic attraction) and often as if the character feels “above” such base urges…
Because the stereotypes that don’t automatically go with being either autistic or a-spec essentially uses the same ridiculous coding as each other, it’s virtually impossible to tell if many writers meant to code autism, a-spectrum, or both. Perhaps no coding was intended at all.
These issues aren’t the fault of a-specs or autistics or a-spec autistics. And they aren’t the fault of a-spec autistic headcanons. These issues are society’s, these issues are with allosexuals and allistics that don’t even try to understand what either of these identities mean or how they intersect.
I’ll continue to headcanon autistic a-specs, because I’m an autistic a-spec, because I know this identity isn’t ableist or aphobic.
If sex is so important to you that you don’t think you could be in a relationship with someone without it, that’s… something to bring up before even getting involved with someone. Y’know, so the other person knows what they’re getting into. If you assume that sex is important to everyone’s relationships and end up dating someone who doesn’t want to have sex ever, that’s not your partner’s fault. They have every right to say no. You’re the one who walked into this with expectations and didn’t tell them what those were.
And before someone tells me people who don’t want sex should mention that too, that’s true! But typically, they do. They don’t make that a surprise. Unless they just didn’t know sex wasn’t for them and thought they’d like it if they just tried it, which they tend to hear from others. In which case, you can’t tell people something you don’t know. That’s not their fault. Likewise, if you think you can be in a relationship without sex and find that you can’t after you try it, that’s also not your fault nor is it theirs.
Basically, people with different needs shouldn’t hide said needs from each other if they plan to be in a relationship.
Straight culture normalises this idea that sex is just what everyone wants and needs, but also sex is icky and ew, why would you ever want to talk about your sexual needs or consent, you weirdo! You should just instinctively know what your partner wants and when they want it!
This isn’t just harmful to people with sex repulsion, it’s harmful to everyone. Sex is one of those things that’s kind of important to bring up. Just like whether or not you want children, for instance. I don’t understand why this is contraversial statement in any way.
🍓🧀 (archive) 