problematic gays anonymous

Ceph | he/him | 24 | i've been here too long and i'm opinionated | TERFs fuck off | my about

[transcephalopod]

btw it is incredibly cruel and vicious to call LGBT people assimilationists because they don't like being called the q slur. people on this site will think a literal cis straight person who only wants to fuck people they're dating is more revolutionary and oppressed than a gay person who's uncomfortable with a slur. idk i just think you're a bad person if you assume someone's discomfort with, again, a literal fucking slur is a sign that they're secretly politically opposed to you or conservative or whatever the fuck else.

[transcephalopod]

"we need more mean gays!" you guys can't handle, like, an exclusionist

[fakelawyerbug]

I've seen a bunch of "fandom etiquette" posts on my dash today and I'm going to say something that is maybe going to be unpopular but;

The absolutely pervasive mentality that unwanted criticism or critique shouldn't be given and should be ignored is why fans of color don't stay in fan spaces.

And I am not going to mince words here:

A lot of you are racist. A lot of your fan works are racist.

That might have been difficult to hear. And if it was, you should probably reflect on why that was.

"Fandom etiquette" has created a space where fans of color either bite our tongues and eventually leave or say something, get dogged on, and then eventually leave.

So much of "fandom etiquette" seems to be about insulating creatives from Feeling Bad and hostility to any kind of negative feedback is a pretty big contributor to why bigotry festers in these spaces.

[noblackwomannocry]

"well you're judging victims too victims have these fetishes too 🥺" one of the men who groomed me got off to the other little girls who groomed telling him about being sexually harrassed & abused. he was very open about his fictional little girl pornography addiction which is why, to normal people, there was not a surprised pikachu face in sight when it came out that he and his close friend were both grooming real actual children. the only people surprised were, Shockingly, his buddies he'd share ehentai and pixiv fictional little girl pornography with on Skype.

personally if I was someone with an abuse related fetish derived from a personal experience, I think I would be even more vigilant about the fact that those who seek to abuse others the way that I have been abused would flock to the same fetish spaces. I would not want to associate myself with them in any form whether or not I continued to indulge in my fetish for whatever personal reasons I had. I would especially not try to make it sound like victims are the majority of the people with these fetishes and sharing them publicly when we have things like online "rape academies" that men get into to learn how to drug and rape women, including their partners, because they started watching "amateur" sexual assault videos taken without women's consent as pornography because of their rape fetishes. but maybe that is just me.

basically

you're just doing this

[homobloquy]

so like when is everyone going to start applying the whole “what do you call 10 people sitting at a table with a nazi? 11 nazis” line of thought to child rape fetishists and pedophilia apologists?

i’m not saying you have some moral obligation to vet every single random person you reblog from. but why is your mutual posting little sister rape fantasies. why is your mutual’s mutual doing that. like, why are you comfortable socializing with people after you see that they clearly don’t think it’s a dealbreaker to fantasize about raping children or sexually abusing your siblings or whatever.

again my point is not that you have to be a detective about it. but if you rightly draw the line at following and being friends with a pedophilia apologist, why don’t you draw the line at keeping the company of people who do the same? how does it not make you sick to your stomach to turn a blind eye to someone in your social circle very publicly getting off to child rape?

[transcephalopod]

"if you inflict any social consequences on rapists, you're a danger to the community!" well i actually want them all to die so this is a nice compromise for you, no?

[transcephalopod]

i really can't overstate the lack of sympathy i have for rapists. "but they rely on mutual aid!" well maybe they should've thought of that before assaulting someone. "but they'll be without a community!" well thank god they don't have access to more victims. "but they're marginalized!" and? there is no sob story that can make me think these people deserve a scrap of my compassion. i do not care if you lose your community, i do not care if you can't make money anymore, i do not care if you end up on the streets. i don't care how many marginalized groups you're part of or how hard your life has been or how sad and lonely you are. if you make the decision to assault someone, i no longer care what happens to you. and if you think calling out a rapist for their behavior is worse than the rapist fucking raping people, you are absolutely not any kind of feminist lmfao

[transcephalopod]

"if you inflict any social consequences on rapists, you're a danger to the community!" well i actually want them all to die so this is a nice compromise for you, no?

[transcephalopod]

in light of the latest ISFF nonsense i'd like to make it clear that, without reservation or caveats, i think the world would be a better place if every rapist on the planet dropped dead tomorrow

[transcephalopod]

remember 10 years ago when everyone calling themself a feminist understood that "you don't want to ruin their life over a MISTAKE, do you?" is rape apologism and not leftist praxis

[transcephalopod]

in light of the latest ISFF nonsense i'd like to make it clear that, without reservation or caveats, i think the world would be a better place if every rapist on the planet dropped dead tomorrow

[anglaised]

like i don’t speak in That crowd often but im glad the people in that crowd consistently go mask off about what they are actually about like thankyouuuu for admitting u dgaf about trans girls or protecting them and ur only actual goal is protecting abusers and forming networks of people to celebrate predation …..cuz everytime me or anyone else said it before we were constantly met with “ur reading her wrong ur putting words in xyz bloggers mouth” no….them ppl are predators and predator enablers…thats what this has been from the start, that pro pedo essay she endorsed shoulda woke yall up but it didn’t, i truly wonder how That crowd is gonna spin “its ok for a trans woman to rape other trans women and if u dont like her ur a bigot” as a woke position…….genuinely disgusting ppl using transfeminism as a trojan horse to not only garner victims afraid of disagreeing bc they dont want to be labeled a bigot and to form networks (cults really) of dangerous ppl to head pat echo chamber each other into oblivion…..ridiculous

[plum-soup]

How is your takeaway from this "oh no! They are banning asexuality!" They are banning being LGBTQIA+. They are just using a modern woke version of the acronym to define who they persecute. De facto they will only go after asexual people that go to pride parades or start advocacy groups or something. They're not gonna arrest you for not filling your sex quota lol

[transcephalopod]

Something really wild that once happened to me is that I met this woman. She soon started talking about her "q***r identity" without being specific and then in my head I was like "ok, I'm not gonna ask" (because maybe it's private). Then later she said she's straight and asexual, and that she considers herself a part of the "LGBTQ+." Apparently she rarely feels attracted to any man and doesn't want to have sex. And soon after that, she called my friend "q***r" even though they never consented to that. And at that point, I was like, I'm not talking to you anymore.

It's wild how cishet aces think they're LGBT somehow these days, and so many people are like "omg of course you are! 🥺"

heterosexual audacity is something else

[transcephalopod]

also i genuinely think the lgbt community has been going downhill since it became normalized to conceptualize sexuality as not just what gender(s) you like but *how* you like them. it's opened the door to a million meaningless goddamn microidentities and ppl refusing to accept established definitions bc they'd prefer to go based off vibe and make everything inexplicably a "spectrum." like a spectrum from what to what? if there's an asexual spectrum, wouldn't everyone be on it? how sexual does someone have to be to NOT be on it? and can that even be quantified? not to mention how little sense "multisexual spectrum" makes. it's not even a spectrum, it's just a bunch of terms that either 1) mean the exact same thing - you're bi and you think that your specific ratio and how much it fluctuates or whatever else deserves its own label or 2) aren't even describing being attracted to multiple genders but rather just one's openness to dating nonbinary people or something. it would honestly be the EXACT same deal if all of a sudden a bunch men who are exclusively attracted to other men started creating microlabels for having preferences for masc vs fem guys or for all the personal hangups regarding sex and romance that are possible to have, and started saying "gay spectrum" instead of just "gay." anyway every single day i see things that make me think like jesus christ do yall even want to be a community or not

This is one of the main things that bothers me about sexuality microlabels and you put it into words very well. I've never gotten a single satisfactory answer as to how we quantify a "normal" amount of sexual attraction, much less tell when someone deviates from it to a sufficient degree to qualify as "on the asexual spectrum".

I think a lot of it comes from sheltered people who believe it's common for people to fall in love at first sight and that there's a "normal" experience of sexuality where it's straightforward and uncomplicated for most people and any complexity in someone's relationship with sex/romance means they're asexual. A lot of people who think this way never interact with people outside their echo chamber enough to realize that it's common to have a complicated relationship with one's sexuality, and universal to have preferences/turn ons and turn offs.

If they do ever realize this, they're usually so invested in the microlabel fandom that they double down instead of realizing how utterly unnecessary it is to have an entire sexuality for their preference for only fucking on Wednesdays and not feeling like having sex when they're stressed out. I also think a lot of this comes from loneliness and lack of community IRL, and treating sexuality as another fandom to be part of, but that's an entire rant I don't feel like typing out rn lmao.

Also frankly a lot of the microlabels are TMI. I don't need to know that you don't fuck on the first date unless I'm going out with you. It's unnecessary information that inherently discloses specifics of your sex life in ways that telling someone you're gay or bi or whatever else doesn't. Your coworkers don't need or want to know that you don't like hooking up.

[transcephalopod]

"Thanks for talking about how alienating the q word" anon again - I'm browsing through some of your older posts and nodding nodding. I don't exactly agree with everything here but I can at the very least see where you're coming from where we disagree. You're kind of opening my eyes to some stuff, lol. I'm a bit tempted to make a disk horse blog now, but I'm not sure if I have the spoons for it...

glad to hear i could give you some interesting things to think about! tbh i enjoy having a discourse blog despite the inevitable idiots i get arguing with me, it's just nice to be able to speak my mind freely.

[transcephalopod]

Hi Ceph! I just wanted to thank you for making that one post about the q word. While I haven't personally been called it in a derogatory manner (as it literally doesn't exist in my native language), I feel highly uncomfortable using it to describe myself because, y'know, can't reclaim it if I haven't been insulted using it. The prevalence of the word in English-speaking online LGBT communities is part of the reason why I don't bother with those anymore. I've struggled to pinpoint why I never really felt at home in those, but... yeah, isolating is a good descriptor.

Thank you for sharing, I appreciate getting to hear from other people who are uncomfortable with the q slur for various reasons. I'm glad my post helped!

It always struck me as odd that the q slur got exported into countries where it was never even used as a slur, like you said there's not even a reclamation argument to be made in those cases. It's just pointless slur usage.

[transcephalopod]

demanding that people provide hard evidence that they've recently been called the q slur or else you won't believe them because "no one uses queer as a slur anymore" is so fucking vile and cruel. unlike these people i actually go outside and i can't exactly ask the men screaming the q slur at me from their pickup trucks to circle back and drive by again so i can film it this time, now can i

[pitbolshevik]

isn't teaboot a rent-a-cop or something

[pitbolshevik]

paul blart would like to weigh in on lgbt discourse