xenoqueer:

lines-and-edges:

icestarstorm:

xenoqueer:

argentconflagration:

beachdeath:

it terrifies me that so many young people are being told that violence & hierarchy are necessary for passion & intimacy, and that “aftercare” will fulfil their need for comfort & security.  sex can do that!!  sex doesn’t have to terrorize you so that aftercare can comfort you.  sexual intimacy can (should) be an enjoyable experience, not The Gauntlet you have to run before cuddling

it’s monstrous to try to convince young girls that

1. sex is something you have to endure in order to be rewarded with comfort & support
2. replicating abuse during sex makes sex better, ““deeper”“, & more romantic

uhhhh this is a thinly-veiled anti-BDSM screed and I’m very surprised to see it on my dash?

the author (the person who wrote this post, who is a terf) puts “aftercare” in scare quotes, and I’m willing to bet that “so many young people are being told that violence & hierarchy are necessary for passion & intimacy” is their code for “some people openly enjoy BDSM”.

take a look at that last sentence. the author isn’t talking about any actual abusive behavior (or they’d just say “abuse” instead of “replicating abuse”), they’re talking about acting out in fiction/roleplay things that would be abuse in reality. which 1) is perfectly fine 2) for a lot of people, does make sex better and more romantic and more meaningful. it’s not hard to be aware of the existence of such people! the author isn’t being honest with you.

there is a core to this post which is right and important – lots of people, especially those who are young and/or female, are made to believe that they have to endure sex they don’t enjoy if they want a hope of getting the things they do want out of a relationship. but there’s a reason a terf bundled that message with this “people are being told they have to do BDSM” stuff and posted it in tumblr.

there is a common theme to all the gross stuff terfs believe (transphobia, being anti-sex-workers, being anti-BDSM, “all heterosexual sex is rape”, etc). the best way I’ve been able to articulate it is that when faced with the choice between not having to adjust their worldview or believing people about their own lived experiences, they always choose to keep their worldview. they can’t bring themselves to believe that a woman would choose to do BDSM, or do sex work, or transition, no matter how much those people speak for themselves. as a result, they have to believe that there are enormous forces in society preventing people from making they choice they would. never mind the fact that people risk losing their jobs when outed as kinksters, the fact that women get arrested for sex work and then mistreated by the police, or the existence of transphobia. if marginalized people aren’t making choices like a terf would, it has to be coercion. that’s why terfs talk in dishonest, concern-trolling posts like this one.

there’s a reason this post was found on a terf blog. it is a terf post.

believe people about their lived experiences.

This sort of thing is exactly why “terfs don’t interact” is such an upsettingly useless thing to hear, anymore.

People don’t understand what makes radical feminist rhetoric, and so it gets spread around without the warning label of “terf” on it.

But just because you don’t know something contains lead, that doesn’t stop lead poisoning.

Imo as a sex worker, a trans person, and a kinky person, the above explanation is very solid.

However, op, if you have any questions after reading it, please feel free to reach out for more information and I’ll do my best to answer.

This makes me wonder if we’ll see something that says “op was terf :))) i’m stealing this post now :)))))” on a fucking post about “MALES ARE LAUNCHING AN ASSAULT ON FEMALE SAFE SPACES!!!”

@icestarstorm I’m pretty sure I have seen something like that, but I don’t have a link handy.

I hope this is the one you were looking for, because if there’s more of them, I don’t want to know about it.

A collection of other posts where well intended reporters didn’t recognize the TERF ness of the original: Gender binarism. Anti-sexualism. Anti-femininity. Anti-polyamory. Cotton ceiling garbage. Historical revisionism. Gender binarism again. Bi/ace/transphobia in fandom. Anti-shipping. Historical revisionism. Calling fiction the same as rape. Transphobic dogwhistling. Gender binarism. Bi erasure. Queer is a bad word. Transphobic dogwhistling.

Bonus round: an actual radfem agrees that this “stolen because OP was a terf” crap just serves to spread radical feminism further, faster.

wetwareproblem:

biandlesbianliterature:

gaysaey:

gaysaey:

gaysaey:

I’m reading this queer anthology and the first story is a fairytale about a queer Latina girl whose anger was so fierce it literally poisoned the rich white men who unfairly captured the transgender soldier she was in love with and my heart is literally bursting I’m going to cry

the second story is about two queer girls who leave their husbands-to-be at the altar and flee together on a boat to become pirates IM FUCKING SCREAMING THIS IS EXACTLY THE KIND OF GAY CONTENT I SIGNED UP FOR

okay this is the anthology and it’s entirely written by queer authors and inspired by the stories of real queer teens in history and it’s the most wholesome and epic thing I’ve read in a long while

[image description: The cover of All Out: The No-Longer Secret Stories of Queer Teens Throughout the Ages edited by Saundra Mitchell]

Worth mentioning: The Latina girl mentioned above is specifically Indigenous, and this is a major part of the context of the story.

vivi-vii:

raedmagdon:

nick-ii:

thestonedsoldier:

devenka:

reallytinylaura:

starlightblood:

thestonedsoldier:

Reasons straight girls need to stop calling their female friends “girlfriends”:

– The word “friend” already exists and is gender neutral you don’t need another word for friends of the same gender

– I’m gay and confused

– That’s it

“I m gay and confused” is probably my new life motto

Once a co-worker of mine confused the crap out of me by asking how my girlfriend was and I’m like “….fine?” and then she’s like “oh so is she home from the hospital?” I realized she was taking about my friend who was in a car accident a week earlier.

Stop confusing the gays. We’re sad enough already.

Language policing at its finest

28,000+ gay women: This is annoying and confusing

Y’all: 

Okay, so here’s the thing for me

Whenever a female talks about her girlfriend, I assume it’s romantic. Just like if a boy were to talk about his girlfriend. I assume it’s romantic/sexual. There is no reason for it not to be. 

So what does this mean? It means this female is LGBTQ+. This means I can be safely out to her. I can trust her. 

However, with this whole “girlfriend but in a platonic, only-friend” thing? No, I can’t trust that. I can’t. I should be able to assume that if someone is using the term for a same-sex lover, then they are LGBTQ+. 

Like- if a girl talks about her boyfriend, you’ll assume that’s romantic/sexual, right? 

If a boy talks about his girlfriend, you’ll assume that’s romantic/sexual, right? 

If a boy talks about his boyfriend, you’ll assume that’s romantic/sexual, right? 

So why is it different when a girl talks about her girlfriend? 

It’s not that hard to say “friend”. It’s not. 

It’s not just about being confused and annoyed (although I really, really relate).

LGBTQ folks are always looking for small signs that the acquaintance they’re talking to is a safe person to come out to, or might be queer themselves. We come out over and over in our lives, not just once. Every time, it’s a judgment call. Should I? Is it worth it? Will I be safe?

If a straight girl says “girlfriend”, we will likely assume A) she’s not straight and B) she’s safe to come out to. Sometimes, that grievous error will put you in an unpleasant, or even unsafe, situation. It’s happened to me, unfortunately. =/

petition to burn national girlfriend day or what ever that hot mess was like last week and make it national GIRLFRIEND day for wlw

philosophy-and-coffee:

apparentlyeverything:

boxingcleverrr:

aztechnology:

kelssiel:

systlin:

shitrichcollegekidssay:

them: SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST MEANS HUMANS MUST BE INDIVIDUALLY SELF-SUFFICIENT AND COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT

biologist:

Like literally the only reason we didn’t go extinct is because we are aggressively social creatures who community organized and helped each other when faced with disasters that drove other species over the brink. 

 (Like we’re so aggressively social that we looked at APEX PREDATORS and went ‘they look soft! Friend????’)

(The answer was yes because wolves are also aggressively social and they adopted the strange tall not-wolves just as eagerly.)

humans @ wolves: holy shit these things are so cute i wonder if they’ll let us pet them?

wolves @ humans: holy shit these things are so cute i wonder if they’ll pet us?

Just in case people want source, here you go: humans are compelled to help each other in disaster situation, humans feel an innate urge to help others. We will help strangers too, not just family, and it has been tested. 

Also we’ve always taken care of our elderly and disabled. When life was literally “hunt and gather every day to live”, we saw value in taking care of those with disabilities. 

reblog to make a libertarian mad

Humans: Collecting grain in any one area causes pests to follow soon after, and we’re not good enough at hunting them to save our grain. There’s no way this agriculture is sustainable!

Cats: We can take care of that.

Humans: At what price?

Cats: …pet us.