everyone outside of the ace community automatically reads your bi identity as ‘bisexual’ and everyone within the ace community automatically reads your bi identity as ‘biromantic’ because everyone assumes forgets that a person can just simply be bi or that there’s more to a person’s sexuality than just -sexual / -romantic.
anonymous said: okay. so. why are pan and bi both terms if they can mean the same thing? (i have googled this, trust me) …gonna take a stab in the dark and guess that this is in response to this post where no one ever said that they mean the same thing. well fear not, confused anon! unlike Google, i have an entire tag (or four) dedicated to your very question! may i direct you, dear anon, to my #bi vs pan tag in particular, as well as to these two posts in that tag: “what’s the difference between bi and pan?” (hint: there is a difference) “why does it matter if the definitions of bisexuality overlap with the definitions of…?” (hint: it doesn’t matter) and no, lovely anon, my sarcasm is not meant as condescension! i just found the tone of your ask mildly annoying, so i thought i might as well jump onto…
…so this has been going around on Japanese Twitter. about to pass out, but wanted to put a link to this here with a little blurb reasonably-contained-imho rant for my own future reference because this is personally relevant to me.
quoted from a Tumblr post: Okay so I’m not against #GiveElsaAGirlfriend or anything, but I identify myself as an asexual person and honestly I would be really happy if there could be a princess who doesn’t need a prince or a princess or anyone. It would be really cool if there can be just one Disney character that does not need that kind of love, because being asexual is not easy to explain and much less to understand for others and yeah I think that #LeaveElsaAlone is much more accurate. please note: the following isn’t directed specifically at the OP so much as it’s directed at anyone & everyone who thinks that #LeaveElsaAlone is a good idea. could aces please, please, please not do that really shitty thing where you piggyback off of another community’s hashtag advocacy?? actually, this isn’t even piggybacking, really. i consider #AllLivesMatters to be piggybacking off…
…oh, how i wish Nintendo would make it easier to add people on Miitomo. Miitomo has proven itself to be a great resource for wasting time and unwinding when i’m too stressed out / busy / whatever to deal with stuff. it’d be great if i could casually interact with you all there, but no. Nintendo has to be illogical.
anonymous said: Thanks for your most recent post re: saying no/transphobia/people’s need to express “no” being prioritized over the well-being of trans people. I think you cut to the heart of it – it’s not reasonable to ask trans ppl (like me) to deprioritize discussing transness and transphobia once sexual consent gets brought up. That also assumes, IMO, that trans people are never in the group of ppl who need to say no and don’t have the tools?? Which, like, trans people (and trans women especially!) are targets for sexual violence and are often *especially* lacking access to “no”. Also I think it ties really grossly into “trans women as rapists” tropes (I’m AFAB so I hope I’m getting it right) – the fact that (presumably cis) people’s consent immediately becomes the ONLY IMPORTANT THING once trans people start talking about desirability and transness speaks to how cis people honestly…
…so now i’m being accused of “attacking the [alterous] community as a whole” because i pointed out the overlapping usage of two concepts/terms and expressed concern over how things are being worded/conceived by some people while being “non aro” and “non alterous”. great. i love how the responsibility is being put on me to go to their askboxes and explain my feelings / view and that i’m being faulted for expressing my feelings on my own blog without coming to them personally instead. as if i have the time or responsibility to go to the askboxes of blogs every time i feel some kinda way about something. and then when one of them does reach out to me privately, there’s more ‘you’re not aro so stop talking.’ all of that aside, i do not understand how they are unable to see how off-putting they’re being. if i was at all leaning towards using alterous for…
all too often i see people making appeals to science— more specifically biology — to try and legitimize their argument that race, gender or whatever else doesn’t really exist. in fact, i come across such arguments so often that such arguments have become a pet peeve of mine. so yeah, you can bet i got really angry when someone recently tried to justify doing blackface to me with “but race is a social construct and doesn’t exist anyway. we’re all the same race— the human race!” and was praised by thousands for her “bravery.” *drops the “angry black person” mic*
this post was triggered by three posts (tw: violence) posted recently by @nonbinary-support arguing against the use of aporagender, which has in turn triggered even more posts about race and gender.
anonymous said: On the aporagender topic. Aporagender is an appropriative term used/coined by white people who were sad they couldn’t use the term third gender. I’d advise you to use maverique, which is basically the same, but coined by a PoC and thus not appropriative. dear anon, care to explain what, exactly, is being appropriated by aporagender? the word itself isn’t appropriative, so what is it that’s being appropriated? do you seriously think that people of color are the only people who have the right to coin words for their own gender if it happens to be completely outside of the male-female binary?? also, you do realize that “third gender” is a word coined and used by white colonialist and anthropologists to indiscriminately and non-consensually label the genders of non-white people that they deemed “deviant” from “the norm”? that “third gender” itself is a white colonialist term, not a ‘POC term’?? yes, it’s a…
