@izzyizumi / izzyizumi.tumblr.com
If you want to discuss a trans or non-binary person's gender make sure that person actually wants to have the discussion with you. Not every one of us has the energy or patience to explain our gender to every single person who asks.
Also, make sure that if you find a trans or non-binary person who is willing to discuss their gender that that discussion doesn't become a debate on whether their gender is valid or not. Their gender is valid. End of discussion.
[Image description: A hand painted posterboard sign at what looks like a protest. Sign is in all caps and reads, "HRT is older than Viagra, Lasik, and heart transplants. Stop calling it "experimental" /end ID]
hey so some people are just happier & more functional not living with a partner. this isn’t necessarily even an aromantic thing. some people are just genuinely better-suited to living alone, no matter their relationship status.
not everyone needs to move in with their partner, and moving in together doesn’t have to be the ultimate goal of every serious relationship.
and some people would rather live with friends or roommates, even if they’re in a committed relationship with someone they’re not living with! there are more long-term options than “live alone” and “live with your partner”
this! is a very good addition!!!
Listen if your response to an aro talking about a non-romantic partner is “LOL DO YOU NOT KNOW THE TERM IS FRIENDS” you’re an annoying crappy piece of shit and your opinion on the relationships of others specifically aros is literally worthless
Can we please stop validating C-PTSD by invalidating those with PTSD?
This is something I have seen a lot more lately. People are talking about how C-PTSD is so much “worse” than PTSD and I do not think that is a good narrative because it can make people with PTSD feel their struggles are “less than.”
I have also even seen a post that mentioned that one of the differences between the two is that C-PTSD is a life long struggle while PTSD is gone within weeks and months at most. Which is false and promoting a timeline for healing which I think is a big no.
There is no timeline for healing from either. Both are valid and mean that someone experienced something they should have never had to deal with.
This goes for all disorders: Please, can we validate our disorders without invalidating others?
Thinking about fashion and working on your appearance as a nonbinary person is not vanity.
It’s one of the most harmless, yet effective, methods of undermining a system that constantly works to erase us.
It is our way of breaking free, revealing truth, and finally being seen.
You may not be neutral to or uninvolved in “the discourse” re: asexual and aromantic acceptance in LGBT+ spaces if:
You either support asexual and aromantic people, or you don’t.
Having an opinion at all about the belonging of asexual and aromantic people is not neutrality. Refusing to learn anything about asexual and aromantic people is not neutrality. Ignoring and blocking asexual and aromantic people is not neutrality. Neutrality is not really neutrality.
Stop asking people to “leave myself out of ‘the discourse’” when we all know you mean really “allow me to ignore my impact on asexual and aromantic people, even though they have no choice but to be impacted by my own actions and opinions in a way that attacks and erases their identity and experiences”
What They Say: Most of the people I know who call themselves “queer” are straight.
What They Mean: Most of the people I know who call themselves “queer” are members of gender and sexual minorities I don’t think are real.
“I don’t think are real and/or do not like”.
Alternatively- “Most of the people I know who call themselves queer are people who disagree with me and my shit opinions, and because of that I have decided to say that they are straight so that I can throw that out as an excuse for why they have no right to pitch in on intracommunity discussions, despite the fact that they are indeed queer/LGBQT+. I just cannot handle the fact that anyone disagrees with me and I think labeling them as straight takes away their credibility”
Another alternative: “I have met multiple people who will go so far as to tell me they’re queer, but for mysterious reasons surely unconnected from my elitist contempt, none of them felt comfortable entrusting me with any further knowledge about their private lives.”
i learned that if you are highly allergic to peanuts it is possible to die from being given oral sex by someone who has eaten peanut butter within the last few hours (x)
I heard a story somewhere that a boy ate a peanut butter cookie, brushed his teeth and thoroughly washed his mouth out with mouthwash to remove all traces of it, and he didn’t eat any more peanut butter for two days because he knew his girlfriend was deathly allergic to peanuts.
He kissed his girlfriend when he saw her again. Her throat swelled shut and she died despite all efforts to revive her. She’d reacted to a trace amount of peanut butter cookie too small to see, smell or taste.
And that’s why if someone says they have a food allergy, I take it deadly serious.
And that's that on that.
Apparently I wasn't done 🤔
These are FABULOUS, OP, but can I suggest one to the riff of "QUEERNESS IS NOT DEFINED BY THE AMOUNT PEOPLE HAVE SUFFERED"?
Thanks! Here you go 🥰
Some other additions:
Inspired by @unicorn-in-the-library:
And because @surfs-up-roxy wanted an ace one:
I didn't want to make the message ace-specific because I wanted to make a point of how all of the above include aspec people, but I tried to use an ace colour palette for the background :) I also think the message applies especially (even if not exclusively) to the ace community!
Hope you like these 🥰
@rockmarina possibly “all labels were made up at one point, stop being an ass”?
I played around with the concept a bit, I hope you like it anyway!
I feel like this also needs to be said:
(Image description: a pink background with white and blue text that says “respect my fucking pronouns”. End image description.)
why is it so hard for non-queer people (by which i mean people who do not ID as queer) to understand that queer positivity posts are not about them and that posts that use the word queer are not automatically including them against their will?
a post that says “happy pride month to queer people” is not about you if you’re not queer. queer people are allowed to make posts about our queerness, for ourselves and other queer people. the term is not being “forced” on you when we do this. if you’re not queer then it’s literally is not about you at all.
‘Uwu wlnb/mlnb is fetishising bc I PERSONALLY id more as a man/woman and i wanna be treated that way instead’
Okay: have you considered these terms are aimed at non-binaries who don’t use binary alignment terminology (male aligned/female aligned) and see no positivity of themselves, no posts getting cute women and men supporting them, supporting relationships with them, talking about their attraction & crushes on someone who is nb, or their partners, who deserve to feel gushed over, and have positivity too?
Have you considered never seeing any content aimed at us makes us feel unattractive and unlovable? Have you considered few want to misgender themselves into a binary category just to receive this? Have you considered binary trans men and women can also be attracted to us when you go on about fetishizing trans people?
Have you considered calling yourself attracted to a nb person doesn’t mean you’re saying you’d be interested in Literally Every NB Person or that nb is one gender? Have you considered most if not all wlnb/mlnb posts i’ve seen so far were made by nbs themselves, OR their partners directed at their nb partner.
Have you considered if it doesn’t apply to you don’t use it? Have you considered, maybe, this wasn’t really intended for you? Have you considered letting nonbinary people who don’t align to the binary have this One Thing for once?
Hi! So I wasn’t on the internet as much when aphobia was super popular, so I only kind of remember it. I’ve seen you & other people say it’s similar to panphobia so can I ask what the similarities are?
hey! some similarities are:
i’m sure there are more tactics and arguments i’m missing, so feel free to add on y'all!
(also worth noting that a lot of this was/is argued against bi people and trans people, too. all exclusionism is the same stuff recycled.)
don’t throw nonbinary people with “stranger” gender identities than yours under the bus
don’t throw nonbinary people who use pronouns you think are “weird” under the bus
don’t throw nonbinary people who use “too many” labels or not the “right” labels under the bus
being nonbinary yourself does not in any way mean that you can’t be nbphobic or hold gross views about other nonbinary people and being nonbinary yourself does not mean that your nbphobia is somehow more acceptable than if had come from a cis person.
stop trying to play at respectability politics and being harmful to nonbinary people you think aren’t the ‘right kind’ of nonbinary. stop throwing your fellow nonbinary people under the bus in some BS effort to distance yourself from them and make people who aren’t nonbinary take your own nonbinary identity more seriously.
gatekeeping who can/can’t be nonbinary or what nonbinary identities are ‘valid enough’ isn’t okay even when you’re nonbinary yourself. your prejudice isn’t justified just because it’s aimed at your own people.
