#intracommunity discussion

[viragoposting]

What are your thoughts on what 'counts' as gnc? Are there ways to be gnc outside of appearance in your opinion? Specifically with more feminine men as male gender roles are currently somewhat stricter than women's (it is normalised for women to wear pants but not for men to wear skirts or dresses). Is it ok to call a man feminine even if he conforms to outside appearance-based expectations of gender, on the basis that he has more traditionally 'feminine' mannerisms/traits? Or is that just reinforcing the "weak, dainty, submissive" = feminine and "tough, strong, dominant" = masculine dichotomy? Sorry if this is confusing

First off, hate to break it to you, women not wearing pants all throught history isn't as accurate as you might think.

I love Nicole Rudolph, she's a great fashion historian who talks about it a little here. She makes great content (shameless, unsponsored plug)

So you're wondering what 'counts' as GNC, huh? If you don't feel like reading, GNC is both an internal identity and external representation of an identity. I will tell you that arbitrarily 'assigning' GNC 'traits' to someone otherwise not GNC by any context, isn't the way to go about things as it can easily slip back into Cuphobic/Misogynistic sentiment.

"Is it ok to call a man feminine even if he conforms to outside appearance-based expectations of gender, on the basis that he has more traditionally 'feminine' mannerisms/traits?"

Not the wisest idea, no.... While there are gendered actions, linguistics, speech patterns, and mannerisms that are feminine in regular and queer context, most of the time, it's misplaced to talk about...not feminine people. Cuphobia (The fear, polarization, and bigotry of feminine men) informs the very low threshold for femininity in men. Because if men absolutely aren't able to become feminine, touching it even slightly "counts". This can easily go wrong with our logic where men who do not identify with femininity can be maliciously labeled as 'masculine' for simply doing a certain action that doesn't fit the hypermasculine (and patriarchally informed) presentation politics of manhood. This isn't to say mannerisms cannot reflect an internal identity, just be careful calling them as such.

"Now then, what would you count as GNC?"

Again, this is highly dependent on cultural context and using discernment. Although I'm certain different subsets of HetGNC queers exist all around the world, Chances are if you're reading this, you live in a euro-colonial/western influenced society. So we'll be talking from that perspective. From this point on, I'll use the term 'gender quality' to communicate a person's gender and it's Alinity. (ex: masculine woman/intramasc woman). See Allinity model:

When identifying a GNC person, it's best to get a little bit of everything. Presentation, Internal Identification, and maybe relational identity. At the end of the day, all roads lead back to identity, everything else is conduits for expression, which feeds back to strengthen an identity. From an outside perspective the most confident evidence to gain is both presentation and expression. If you don't know someone, visual language is the another way strangers communicate an identity.

The Presentation Problem

Let's talk about it!

I've noticed that a significant number of members within our community experience shame, confusion, and frustration regarding body types, clothing presentation, and accurate representation. This tension created a subtle divide. On one side, our presenting community members feel it's unfair for 'closeted' individuals to claim or insert themselves into characters, archetypes, and tropes that do not reflect their lived, material realities. Conversely, the other half of the community feels insecure about stepping into their authentic selves within a society that actively dislikes them; consequently, they rely on finding small, subtle ways to latch onto representation. There, of course, are others who take note of the scarcity of true representation, then take it upon themselves to headcanon.

I feel we all agree o what prsentation for GNC people generally look like for Mollis & Virago. The issue arises when a straight gender-conforming character or gender-conforming body types are labeled a Virago/Mollis, causing...community-wide dysphoria. A direct solution to this issue isn't to avoid the conversations, but to have them...even if it can get a little ugly. Gender Non-conformity doesn't just look one way! but... we have to be aknowledge there is still always lies a consensus on what is Gender Conforming and these people get visibility and priority over us.

In the long run, even if it gets hetic, it'd be healthy we have uncomfortable conversations now, rather than later!

[hollycantkeeptrackofthedaze]

how we talk about "egg" sherlocking and the line vis a vis transphobia

people should rightfully call out egg sherlocking and how it reinforces gender conformity - but also it's a fundamentally rude and invasive thing to do even if sherlock mcjackass ends up being right. if you focus on the harm of the action and its bad assumptions i think you're fine.

once you start talking about there being a big trend of gnc people being "pressured" or "tricked" into transitioning because they've been mislead about their gender, by trans people (especially if you generalize it to trans people as a demographic rather than individuals) you have bought into a transphobic myth.

the biggest pressure against gender nonconformity is and has always been from gc perisex cis society and those who uphold it. it has never been a system for gnc or trans people. there's more in common with the two communities' struggles than differences, and there used to be a time where there wasn't even the privilege of distinction.

[monsterqueers]

the origins of the sunset flag is why we still don't use it despite being a lesbian. not to mention how difficult that discourse made it for us to realize that we are in fact lesbian, ironically enough.

Yeah we have 2 lesbians in our system too and they dont use the flag either because of how mired it was in the acecourse. The sapphic flag or bust.

We just cant forget how aggressively the flag was pushed on everyone, how EVERY time for a solid two years if you checked on a blog with that flag in the pfp the blog was very blatantly an exclusionist... Just Horrendous.

The flag isnt like. Irredeemable. Its grown beyond a discourse bludgeon. Its just... We were there seeing it all go down and it damn well left its mark.

It wasnt just a cute little embarrassing ~whoopsie~ vague association we can forget about. It was THE exclusionary flag. It was created and spread SPECIFICALLY so that people could bully people making pride stuff over the ace flag when the flag they were doing that with got made too ~problamatique~ for them to associate with. They wont claim it was, but it was.

Like if people want to reclaim it, cool. But its got History.

[frannyglassfan]

okay jews i need your thoughts:

have you noticed that jewish poetry tends to follow a specific style?

like i’ve noticed jewish poetry tends to tap into collective memory a lot. and often there is a dreamlike quality to it. most recently i read “Night Feeding” by Muriel Rukeyser and it felt very ancestral, reminiscent of like The Red Tent by Anita Diamant

[hachama]

If someone were to ask me if I keep Shabbat, I would say yes.  If someone were to ask me if I’m shomer shabbat, I would say no.  I abstain from work, but not to the same degree as hareidim.  

If there’s something I do not want to do, I will not do it during Shabbat (unless it’s like... feeding the cat.  He is dependent on me for his well-being, I will not cause him to suffer for no good reason).  I do not do homework, or wash dishes, etc.

But I’ll turn on lights, and I’m typing this during Shabbat.  

So here’s my dilemma.

If I define work as “things I don’t want to do” then writing my novel is not work.

If I define work as “things I get paid to do” then writing my novels is work, because once it’s completed I’m going to publish it to Kindle Direct and I’ll receive at least some royalties from it.  (If nothing else, my mommy will buy my book)

So which definition do I go with?  

[trans-axolotl]

hey, intersex people. this post by @rosetower really got me thinking about gender markers when it comes to intersex people and whether or not fighting for an “X” identitfication. Personally, I hate that we have gender markers at all-I’d much rather remove gender markers and sex markers from everything, including birth certificates. And for me, I’d much rather focus my energy there. But I can also understand why some intersex people would want to fight for the X, as I know healthcare and insurance can be really tricky and deny us treatments based on our assigned sex at birth, and that having an X would be helpful there. 

I’d love to hear some more intersex people’s perspectives on this, and sort of see what some people consider the pros and cons to be. 

[antiblackness-archive]

butch/femme origins and usage: a thread

[nydescynt]

It scares me when ppl say attraction to nb genders must not *really* exist, that it's fetishizing or must be based on something random or isn't "real" attraction.

Because what I hear from that is "it is impossible for people, particularly cis ppl, to be attracted to you as you are; and the more they try to make room for who you are in their attraction, the more evil and fetishizing they are." And I really can't abide that.

And what it ends up meaning is that all identity must relate to binary genders, which is... hm.

Of course it makes sense to be wary if a cis person says they're only attracted to nb ppl, I'm aware chasers exist, run into a few; but I don't think it's an impossible identity to have. And yeah obviously there are lots of nonbinary genders, but it seems in bad faith to assume that the shorthand attracted-to-nb labels imply that they're equally attracted to all nonbinary genders + presentations and therefore see us as one conglomerate third gender.

Saying that my gender doesn't have a coherent appearance (as if any gender does, so happy we can apparently only judge attraction based on our assumptions about another person's gender) and therefore claiming people can't be attracted to that gender just sounds like my gender isn't real or binary enough.

Idk, just wanted to throw my 2 cents in bc I've seen this website descend rapidly into this argument that attraction to nb people cannot exist, or that it MUST be paired with a binary gender attraction (I call that the "nb genders don't count, are you straight or gay tho" requirement). And that argument is deeply deeply uncomfortable and dysphoria-inducing and just.. doesn't seem right.