Here’s a little exchange from Reddit that I found on ShitRedditSays that basically sums up everything that’s less-than-charming about the site. We start off with a blanket statement of male superiority, followed by an enthusiastically upvoted rape joke, and then we get massive downvoting and a “fuck you” to someone who’s challenging the blanket statement. (If you follow the link you’ll see that Butch_Magnus isn’t the only one jumping on piv0t.)
The context: This is from the Pics subreddit; they’re discussing a “sexist treadmill” with a control panel that looks like this:
Whew, finally caught up with the thread. Lauralot, as a non-queer-identifying asexual man, I strongly appreciate the stance you’ve taken here. Good job!
Thanks, 2-D Man. A number of posts in this thread have made me feel unwelcome, so I’m glad that you appreciate them.
Them being my posts, if that wasn’t clear.
I think I have gone to great lengths to answer that question, I suspect you aren’t listening.
I disagree extremely strongly with this proposition, and do not know of anyone who truly agrees with it either. Cis hetero adultry, historical stigma, so queer. Pretty much any woman’s sexuality, even if she is cis, hetero, vanilla, monogamous, married, is queer. No, that’s not the definition and I think we all know it.
The fact that you don’t care what sources I have, or how I argue indicates that the number of grounds I have been bringing up are being noted, you are just dismissing them out of hand.
You and to an even larger extent bagelsan, have argued that these experiences that lead to the formulation of queer identity and history are similar enough and the same enough that you feel you can use an identity label that involves reclaiming painful parts of that history. You are claiming a right over these types of histories and experiences when you claim queer identity.
Something that can get queer people literally killed in a number of situations, and massively discriminated against in others, but haha, why not fucking dismiss things like that in a discussion of queer identity.
No. I don’t have to sit back and take appropriation and will not be silenced and told to shut up and take it based on the fact that others disagree when the other side is not being hit with the expectation of ending the argument immediately as well. I have argued my point and said things that others did not like, and they have done the same to me, however, what I have not fucking done is just announce that others have an obligation to shut up and drop it because I say so, a courtesy that is damned well not being granted to me here. I don’t appreciate the concern trolling towards me here either that has been going on in this thread.
@DSC:
“I disagree extremely strongly with this proposition, and do not know of anyone who truly agrees with it either.”
Both you and I know that any sort of stigma at all is not what I meant. Your long post is essentially a list of 7 different ways that queer folk have been stigmatized, by one rationale or another. In essence, you are defining queer entirely by stigma, albeit a certain kind of stigma. This is working from the definition you have given (or at least the only one I can glean). Which, by the way, never actually answers the question of why, only the question of what.
So the real question, my original question, is why only those particular types of stigma can be accepted as queer. And also why Baglesan’s reply showing that many of them apply to asexuals as well doesn’t show that asexuals should be able to identify as queer.
Queer is a reclaimed slur, a slur targeted at specific communities and specific experiences. It is a term that carries with it a history of pain, a history of stigma, a history of these experiences.
Oh, you want to know why I think appropriation is an issue, okay, let me repeat myself
Even if you disagree that it is what is happening here, I don’t really get this inability to conceive why someone who believes their identities are being appropriated, that they are being asked to allow their spaces to be appropriated, and that people from the out group are using a fucking reclaimed slur for the oppressed group could be worrisome, painful, annoying, upsetting, etc. etc. Even if you think I am wrong about what is happening here, you should be able to get that someone who views it the way I do would see it as creating these issues and would feel this way. Oppressed people have a right to call out and to refuse to allow appropriation of their identities and histories, and have a right to see such appropriation is harmful, right? I know that not everyone here agrees with me that appropriation is happening, that is clear, but there is a dismissal of issues around appropriation and use of reclaimed slurs going on when you ask why a person who feels like appropriation is happening does not like it.
@DSC:
No, I want to ask why your particular definition of the word “queer” is the correct one. Is it that the only communities that are allowed to use the “queer” label are the ones that were called “queer” in the past?
From what I have seen in LGBT spaces, queer used in a lot of different ways by a lot of different people. DSC’s insistence on keeping the term “queer” exclusive is the first I’ve seen of it, and it really bothers me.
As far as I can tell, the facts are these;
1. Lots of people, including LGBT people, define queer differently
2. DSC has a very solid definition of “queer” that may differ from what others in the LGBT community define it as
3. DSC uses this definition as validation to tell people what they are allowed to identify as.
Darksidecat, I don’t really know what makes you the arbiter of queer identification, but you are erasing people, and that is so not okay. Really, really, not okay. Please stop
Hmm… “Gazork” is actually looking pretty nice right about now… Shame that my sex has not been very funny thus far. May I be Gazork-curious, until such a date that I may try out some more hilarious sex? That’d be nice…
Just to clarify, I believe that people are entitled to self-identify however they choose, so my point was never “you, specific asexual person, should not identify as queer”. My question was whether or not the term queer is or should be considered to automatically encompass asexual people in the same way it’s automatically assumed to encompass LGBT people. Also, in a general sense, what people think “queer” means. In my personal circles everyone who actively calls themselves queer is LGBT or genderqueer, so I had assumed that was what most people thought queer meant.
If people are actually using it to mean anyone non-normative in a sexual or orientation sense, then cool. I’m not particularly attached to the term, I was just confused to see it being used in a way I wasn’t familiar with. It would never have occurred to me that anyone would describe me as queer because I like BSDM, for example.
The bisexuality sub-conversation was weird, especially the bit about oppression. I think it’s easy to forget how much this stuff depends on where you live, what your social circle is like, etc. I can only think of a handful of occasions on which I’ve faced any prejudice as a result of being bi, and most of those cases have involved other LGBT people (mostly the L part). Bi-phobia is real, no doubt about that, but honestly hasn’t had a huge impact on my life. I think that’s because I’m conventionally feminine enough that I’m usually read as straight, so the kind of drive-by gay bashing and verbal abuse that a lot of other LGBT people get never happens to me. In terms of anything I’d actually call oppression…eh, not really. And I think that’s the case for a lot of women who are both bi and conventionally feminine – we pretty much have straight privilege unless we go out of our way to out ourselves, or we’re in the company of female partners. The men who I’ve known who’ve been openly bi have faced a lot more overt discrimination and generally shitty behavior than I do, and in terms of shitty behavior directed at LGBT people in general I think the worst of it tends to be directed at people who are gender nonconforming in most cases.
The only people allowed to use an oppressed identity are those whose identity falls within that oppression, the only people allowed to use reclaimed slurs are those who are part of groups the slurs are against. This is not a hard concept. Formulation of oppressed identities, which queerness is, involve those pains, those historical experiences, those stigmas, etc. The building an identity for resistence by the oppressed agaisnt an oppression is not the work or property of those outside of that oppression. Yes, oppressed people totally fucking do get to dictate the use of their identities built from their experience of that oppression. Yes, members of the oppressed group can and do have differing opinions about identity and meanings, but those are in community debates, discussions, rights of ownership, not ones that people not subject to the oppression have a right to step into.
Queerness is an oppressed identity. It is an identity naming, dealing with, and arising from histories and experiences of these oppressions and these oppressed communities. To claim a queer identity is to claiming such. It’s not a cheap rhetorical exercise for those whose identities have not fallen under these oppressions to use whenever they feel the need for a cumbaya rainbow umbrella so broad virtually all of the world can stand under it.
@shora, it is totally fucking inappropriate for a cis hetero to try and dictate what queerness means to queer people. You are actually a privileged person telling an oppressed person how our identity should be defined here. Don’t fucking do that. In what bizarre version of the universe do you think that is acceptable fucking behavior? In what fucking headspace do you live where you think that cis heteros get to demand genderqueer queer people have debates or not about queer fucking identity as you dictate? No, I will not let a cis hetero dictate my fucking identity or when and how I can discuss it. In fact, don’t ever, ever fucking speak to me that way again. You are engaging in flat out oppression right now. A fucking cis hetero trying to ‘splain queer and trans spaces and identities to a fucking genderqueer queer person, fuck, do you not pay any damned attention to your actions?
The last paragraph above applies to shora, certainly not to the trans and/or queer people on this thread disagreeing with me, who have a total right to participate in those discussions, and, shit, not even to the cis non-queer asexuals who have been debating here, because they are non-maliciously (if wrongfully and in ways that can cause harm) trying to figure out their identities and they have a genuine interest in boundary lines of queer identity in this matter, even though I disagree that they have a right to it. That line that I think cis non-queer asexuals have crossed here in regards to queer identity co-option and appropriation, shora just sailed so far past those sort of lines they can’t even be viewed anymore.
@DSC:
Alright, this is the last I’ll post on this subject, since I’m pretty much guaranteed a paragraph full of “fucks” thrown my way as well. It is not “dictating to a queer person what queer means” to side with asexuals in questioning the use of the word “queer.” It almost sounds like you are implying that cis hetero sorts are not even allowed to have an opinion on the matter, lest we be forcing you to… something or other.
The worst Shora could be accused of is relating to you how other self-identified queer people identify themselves, and how your rigid definition is at odds with theirs. In fact, I don’t think Shora is even trying to “appropriate” the term for herself, and then dictate to you what it means as per your example. So what it boils down to is that people disagree with you, people who want to self-identify as queer and people who don’t. The ones don’t are disagreeing by virtue of agreeing with the ones who do, and for some reason this is an offense to you of the highest sort.
This may start to sound like tone-trolling, but here goes. This debate will go in one of two directions, since you seem to be very set in your views. On the one hand, you agree to disagree, but realize that you were marginalizing the asexuals here on the forum. On the other, you continue making this last stand for what you feel is an attack on your existence, alienating you further from those who would be your allies. Your choice.
Yes, that’s pretty much right, or at least, insofar as you have an opinion, you have no right to inflict it on us.
I consider this discussion to have two debates involved in it, an in-community debate between queer people, and a between community debate of queer people with cis non-homo/non-bi/etc. romantic asexuals. So asexuals have a right to debate here, because their identities are at issue, and queer people do, because queer identity is at issue. However, the fact that these debates are going on does not make is suddenly okay for cis heteros to start thinking they have any right whatsoever to start telling queer people their business.
I’m sorry if that was unclear. I don’t think Shora is appropriating, I think she is engaging in outright oppression. A privileged person telling an oppressed person the oppressed person’s identities and how the oppressed person may debate and discuss them and must view them is oppressive.
Mere disagreement isn’t the issue. The disagreement is over queer identity. Cis hetero people don’t get a say in that topic. A privileged person trying to dictate the identities and their meanings and boundaries of an oppressed person to an oppressed person is oppression.
And, you are right, you are tone trolling, after I specifically said I wasn’t interesting in more concern trolling. But thanks for splaining how I should debate queer issues to me, because that’s totally appropriate.
Well, since you asked in such a cluelessly privileged way, how could I say no?
Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck
How come this identity discussion hasn’t had any input at all from NWO, Meller or Brandon. Why won’t they enlighten peopl?. What is the MRAposition regarding queer identities?
It doesn’t affect Brandon, so it doesn’t matter.
Mind you, you’d have thought he’d have popped in to make sure that we all knew.
talacaris:
Feminists disagreeing with each other? This is likely to be too unsettling and baffling for the MRA minds. Surely we all just sit around the bra-burning fires and talk about how much we hate men whilst braiding each other’s underarm hair?
Oh, and the MRA position regarding “queer identities” is probably something along the lines of “what’s that?” / “queer identities don’t exist” / “all men are either straight or gay whilst all women are bisexual”.
DSC, in your opinion do “pansexual” and “agender” count as queer identities, and why specifically does asexual not count,? And is it primarily or all about “shared oppression” rather than “non-het or-cis sexuality” I’m not trying to be defensive, but trying to sort out the reasoning.
Not to agree fully with darksidecat but I fully appreciate the anger where ze is coming from, because I also take strong exception to the idea of cis hetero people having a say in what is or isn’t queer from their admittedly outside vantage point. I refused to agree with someone else’s definition of queer, so perhaps I should give my personal view.
Queer is a lived identity and it means you are “out” in a significant part of your life. When I came out as bisexual at the age of 20, homosexual acts were still criminal offences punishable by jail. I was ostracised by some of my previous friends, who told me to my face that I was an evil person whom they never wanted to see or hear from again. I was lucky that none of my immediate family took this attitude, unlike one gay uncle who was ostracised by his father (my grandfather) and banished from home. This is a common reaction faced by anyone who comes out homosexually or trans*gendered, because it is sex and gender — being seen to have engaged in the “wrong” sexual behaviour or exhibit the “wrong” socially approved gender — where the repression has been the most virulent.
The discrimination is real, systematic, and pervasive, and the law has been gradually catching up (but not fast enough, and in some places it remains barbaric). I hid being in a homosexual relationship in one (frequently misogynistic) workplace with good reason, since misogyny and homophobia go hand in hand; but some homosexual and trans* people don’t have the luxury of quarantine some parts of their life off from unwanted hate and stress. Basically, not having to worry about homophobic and/or transphobic oppression is a privilege that to my mind, forms the nebulous boundary where someone is not queer.
With respect, I cannot see all asexuals as being automatically “queered”, though there is clear and obvious overlap: strongly so for trans* asexuals; likewise pan/homoromantic asexuals. For an example of the disjunction between queer and asexuality, I totally fail to see how a cis heteroromantic or a romantic asexual would be prone to the profoundly negative effects of homophobia or transphobia except by virtue of their strong association with homosexuals or trans* people. So I can see that some people have wider definitions from the aspects of other socially-frowned-upon practices (polyamory, BDSM, kink and some paraphilias that don’t involve harm), and I don’t want to invoke a round of Oppression Olympics, but from my perspective queer is strongly tied to openly LGT people and bisexuals (more or less so; my personal experience of this is complicated!), and then, varying degrees of overlap with the loose QUILTBAG++ alliance.
One last word: when I came out as bi in my youth, I didn’t also come out as transgendered, though I am — and I’m currently shyly peeking out of that closet (my partner and a few friends are in the know), fearful of the absolute sh*t and hate I feel I am likely to receive simply by going about what I want to do and who I want to be — and coming out as bisexual and dealing with people’s homophobia was traumatic and depressing enough.
Damn auto-incorrect on the iPhone mangled some words; some I managed to fuck up myself. Quarantining is the word I meant to type instead of quarantine in the third paragraph. In the next, I plead that the iPhone tried to erase “aromantic” as a legitimate form of asexual identity. (They obviously need to update the dictionary as well as fix Siri.)
Xanthe – While I certainly agree with anger that het cis people should not dictate terms to us, are you implying that closeted people are not queers? There is a significant part of my life in which I am not “out,” – does this unqueer me? It IS the lived experience of being queer in my particular circumstances.
Yup, that joke was definitely about oppressing you and not just about me being silly at Holly. Well spotted. 9_9
Yup, that joke was definitely about oppressing you and not just about me being silly at Holly. Well spotted. 9_9″
-Seconded. I really don’t think there was any dismissing going on.
Zhinxy, please note I didn’t say you have to be out in every aspect of your life. But I do not consider entirely closeted people queer, because that is a denial of identity, and when I say queer that is fundamentally about identity. There’s a well-known connection between being homophobic and being a repressed homosexual: I can think of a number of preachers in the United States who have been “outed” for being obvious hypocrites in vilifying homosexuals while being homosexual themselves. Should we regard them as “queer”?
“Queer” is not just used as a reclaimed slur anymore, DSC, its definition and appropriate use have expanded from that in many circles. No one has to be called a “queer” to their face in a specifically derogatory manner in order to use it, now; it’s also a political and/or academic blanket term that can be used purposefully vaguely to cover a multitude of identities, as well as a purposefully vague term used on a personal level by many people due to its inclusive and non-specific nature, allowing them both to include the diversity of other people as well as encompass the diversity of their own complex oppressions and identities.