Their attention is just another reminder that “compulsory heterosexuality” was never meant to describe the experiences of the rest of us. It was and remains a TERF/radfem/lesbian separatist dog whistle.

muggle-the-hat:

betterbemeta:

dykeastraea:

betterbemeta:

Reminder that “compulsory heterosexuality” as a term was coined by

Adrienne

Rich, a contributor to the infamous TERF book The Transsexual Empire.

Wait how is compulsory heterosexuality a terf thing. I’ve never heard that ? (I’ve barely heard anything about the term in general though so.)

The informal concept that we are all compelled by society to be heterosexual is real and important. But the phrase/language use of “compulsory heterosexuality” was coined or at least popularized by Adrienne Rich in her essay Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence, which was extremely sex-essentialist and included stuff like… a mother nursing her female child as a lesbian experience. Or a nurse caring for a female elder a lesbian experience. Even if not all lesbian experiences are sexual, that’s kind of getting into a sketchy area (is caring for a male child ‘straight?’ is a latina or black nanny caring for a white girl baby having a ‘lesbian’ experience?) that is questionable at best.

the experience that all people are conditioned by a heterosexual society to be straight and see straightness as success and a default, is real– this post is not intended to remove that concept from anybody or ‘take away’ the right to express that concept in language. Lesbians experience it in a unique way, and almost all over lgbqa+ women (and others!) experience it in different unique ways. Its important. we gotta talk about it.

it’s just that this language as it was solidified, was done so by someone who did not think bisexuality, pansexuality, asexuality, were valid. And it was done so by someone who did not think that trans women were women, or that nonbinary dfab people were anything but cis women, or that trans men were anything but women. That’s what anon means when they say “it was never meant for the rest of us.” Many posts that are about “identifying compulsory heterosexuality” are posts that contain a lot of bi, pan, ace, trans, nonbinary, and other experiences as brainwashing and not as nuanced stores told by diverse people.

(which is not to say that a lesbian can’t have experiences where a heterosexual society tried to use bisexual and other categories as weapons or tools to keep them open to including men. We’re furious about that too.)

incidentally, TERFs would really love it if being a terf was synonymous with ‘lesbian experience.’ They have been trying to make that a reality for years. One of the ways they do so is popularize their language and references to their literature as I-thought-it-meants and get newcomers to lgbtqa+ community to use them and accept them.  It can be really disappointing to find out that what seemed like useful language was coined in a context that is exterminatory of others but I’m sure that moving forward alternatives can be found that don’t include contributors to The Transsexual Empire.

last time i asked, someone told me that it’s been suggested (so idk how widespread the use is yet) that we use “coercive heterosexuality” for a non-terfy version of the concept

gryffinewt:

gryffinewt:

you know what i think cis people, and especially lgb cis people, rely too much on people validating their romantic revulsion to trans people. like i’ve never met an lgb trans person who wasn’t asked “what do you think of gay people who aren’t willing to date you because of your transition status/agab/etc” and it’s the emotional labor we’re forced to carry to just say “no i don’t think you’re an evil cis gay for not being attracted to me, it’s within your right to have boundaries” an whatnot lest we be The Evil Transes Who Will Rape You.

like is it not enough to just reject us and go? can you just be satisfied in the knowledge that, yes you are rejecting us because we’re trans, but you’re gonna leave us with enough dignity to not say that’s why. we already know our attractiveness is in a permanent state of “up for debate” can you at least do this the simple courtesy of shutting up about it?

thank you to all the cis lesbians reblogging this but i still see almost no cis men reblogging it

prokopetz:

prokopetz:

“It’s bad to have robots and dragonfolk and half-angels as standard playable races in your RPG, because they impose a bunch of specific assumptions on people’s homebrew settings. Unlike Tolkien-style elves, dwaves and hobbits, which are perfectly generic and encode no setting assumptions whatsoever.”

And it’s not just the Tolkien stuff, either. There are people who will argue with a straight face that allowing players even the option of being, like, psychic werewolves or whatever represents an attempt to dictate to GMs how to run their games, but they’re perfectly okay the very same rulebook assuming that every single setting it could possibly be played in must include a subterranean empire of spider-worshiping David Bowie expies with goofy darkness powers because that in particular is a standard player character background. Like, do you not get that the latter is just as weirdly specific as the former?

elliexer:

what does “nb people are almost always binary aligned” even mean? 

“oh they wear make up so they’re woman aligned” 

“oh they grow their facial hair so they’re man aligned”

like what type of cisnormative gender role bullshit……… in 2017????? bitch…

thechronicchillpill:

*abled bodied voice*: omg… honestly its so hard on ME watching disabled people be… disabled, it rly makes ME feel so bad… u know i saw a disabled person on the street yesrerday… and i… didnt even harrass them!!1 where is my medal????? do you know how hard I try….

thetransbutch:

war-lesbian:

you’re all like “i love trans women!” but how many of you have actually loved a trans woman. you all want to play at supporting us but how many of you actually want to understand us. do you have any close trans woman friends? like actually close. like important enough to you you’d be willing to lose cis friends defending them. do you hang out with trans women outside of activist spaces? outside of tumblr? in group discussions when you hear a trans woman speak, do you tense up? if a trans woman says something you have to think about for more than 5 seconds do you do that work? or do you immediately reject and ignore it. if a trans woman disagrees with every other person you know does it ever cross your mind that everyone else might be wrong? when a trans woman asks for financial assistance on tumblr and you know you have that money to spare, do you help her? if you’re broke, and she just asks you to reblog her post, do you reblog it? or do you just scroll past and pretend you didn’t see it.

“support trans women” is a lie meant to make you feel good. you cannot support trans women. you can only support A trans woman, and then do that over and over again with every trans woman you meet.

Yeah this tbh

queeranarchism:

theunitofcaring:

saying “you are a burden on society” is just such a weird framing of priorities

It’s like saying “wow, think how much better gas mileage your car would get if you weren’t sitting in it” or “think how dry that umbrella would be if you weren’t holding it in between you and the rainstorm”.

the things we create? they’re for us. they are meant to carry us. they are meant to protect us. we are meant to hold them up to keep us dry. 

why do we even have a society if not to take care of each other?

lesbill:

gaybillpotts:

bill nd heather holding hands in the tardis and holding hands forever and brushing knees when they sit and hugging as often as they can and touching in any way as often as they can to reassure bill she’s not entrapped in cyberman casing, that she can feel skin against hers, that she’s alive,,

why must u hurt me..,..,..,,, i luv them..,.,,.,