saw a post abt Chapell Roan saying that “men don’t create good art” and idk if thats true but thats besides the point
the post had reblogs turned pff so I cant repost it but the op went on abt intersectionality and how queer men have made great art
but the post never mentioned cis men. And even as a trans guy that made me kinda mad because like… if all people who identify as men are men (and vice versa for women) then cis men should be included in conversations (obviously when privilege and things such as that are being discussed the conversation changes)
but i do think there is something to be said about how cis men are not included in discussions of artistic things, especially in discussion within queer community.
and I find this strange because some of the most talented, kind, and passionate artists I know are cis men. They have made great art.
all this to say, the post upset me because it devalued the passions and experiences that people have, all in the name of being “inclusive” to male artists. Yes, trans, gay, queer, and likewise men can and have created great art, but so have cis men.
so when the ip got mad at the quote because it devalued male art, that is valid. However, the op forgot to include a large group of men, who, at least in my opionion, make and will continue to make great art.
this take sounds strange on this website, especially because I see so much tip-toeing around cis-straight identities. ALL identities are valid, and in conversations about art and its creation, everyone’s identity should be taken into consideration.
idk, I just had feelings on this i guess
