While Rain, Emily, and Ky were talking last week, Holly and Debbie were going to talk to Chanel (established the week before). Today, we're catching up with that.
Not a whole lot happens here, but I like this one. It's a rare instance where we see Chanel on her own. Holly misses the point again in an amusing way (albeit, in a little bit of a frustratingly real way). And while I know a lot of you are worried about Debbie, she's quiet the whole time here (and even seems impressed, hearing about Maria's handiwork).
Awww, poor Channel, having to mis-identify her orientation. I'm aro ace with a "same"-gender (I'm femmme AFAB enby, she's cis) pan ace partner. Sometimes it's so much easier just to say "I'm gay" (as shorthand for not-straight) when dealing with LGBT-unaware folks, but it aways makes me feel like I'm betraying myself.
A good one is to say, "No. I could explain it to you, if you were intelligent enough to comprehend. Then again I don't owe you and explanation and it's not my job to give you the education you are so clearly lacking. Simpler for you to just mind your own damned business." With some people it just never works out being nice to them.
(Replying to LTL) Wow, I guess I graduate from Queer University … I actually understand all the terms you’re using without having to google anything :)
Oh, it sounds wrong to me. But for different reasons.
Before I started HRT I was lesbian. Back then I never called myself gay. It didn't sound right. That euphemism always sounded like it was for male homosexuals. Not girls. So for myself I said lesbian.
The other reason? You said "aint." That's just shit for English. You're just wrong. 8^P°°°°•••••.....
That seems to depend on where you're from. I live in France, and yeah, I was pretty surprised to see "gay" used for lesbians when I started to get into the (mostly) American web. Before that, it was exclusively used for males, in my mind.
It has been perceived that way because the American education system has failed. As the numbers of the poorly educated have increased so egregiously so has such misuse of the language become prevalent. As more people fail to differentiate it in no way makes it proper.
I like holly. I know people will interpret her as being an ignorant jerk on purpose. But she just has a limited knowledge. You gotta understand it's the case with a lot of these people. You can't judge them based on what they do now, it's if they are willing to learn and start being educated is the real point. Like Drew, fans hated him a lot, and some still hate him. But he's at least willing to learn so he can understand more about Ky and about himself. So you really shouldn't get mad at people like Holly, Devon, or that kid with grey hair. They just act with what knowledge they do have. No one has actually went up to them and tried to communicate how they feel when the people use simplistic terms like using gay for everyone not straight.
You think I haven't tried??? I know how people can be because I've tried. Start to give basic info and they try to shut you up. Yet they think they can tell me who I am when they know nothing about me.
The few who are actually willing to listen without arguing, they didn't suddenly change because they're listening. No, they're listening because they were already prone to listen. They didn't change but just continued on with how they already were.
People have a way in the manner of how they approach you which rather quickly gives it away if they are prejudiced and pigheaded. Those are who I started talking about at first. They are the ones best not to waste effort on
Drake, I can see both sides on this one. Even questions asked in innocuous curiosity can end up as crap we can't ask people to deal with.
For example, leafing through Jocelyn's Magical stuff on DeviantArt gave me questions about dysphoria & different ways of being trans. Questions that'd have to be phrased really carefully or they'd come across not as seeking information, but as "Are you REALLY trans?" or "Can't you be like that without being trans?", which would be impolite.
Then there's the repetition. There's this trans person at a chat channel where I hang out, whom I drove out of the channel for a few minutes by asking too many probing personal questions about what it's like to be colorblind. (I'm a klutz, yes.) I imagine that doesn't hold a candle to how old questions about being trans get.
OTOH, I don't want to get on anyone's case for asking questions or encouraging answers. I can't oppose seeking to know. Assigned Male seems to hold that cis people asking trans people about transness is in and of itself inappropriate, possibly injurious, as the action calls into question their legitimacy or validity, but I find this stance more confusing or anything.
It's not confusing at all when you're the target of such questions. Rarely does such do anything other than to put us on the spot and question our validity. Such experience quickly shows us.
Know what's weird? I can't wrap my mind around asexual hetero-, homo- or other romanticity. I know there are people like that, but I can't understand how.
To me, it's specifically the element of sexual physical intimacy that distinguishes romantic live from e.g. love between friends or family members. Sexual relationships without the romantic element aren't my cup of tea, but I can undetstand them. Imagine them. The opposite just does not compute. I wonder if this is me working with different concepts & borders, or if I'm straight up wired differently.
Fortunately, it's not something I need to understand in order to properly respect. Or is it?
Well, I can't wrap my mind around the importance or even want of sexual intimacy myself, there's at least some kind of balance there. :p
I don't believe one needs to understand or empathize with a relationship to respect it. If that was the case, how could we even respect any relationship (and one's own lover(s)'s feelings), since we can't even know how they feel beyond a pretty vague word like "love"?
The same way we can trust someone else when they say they "love" us romantically, I think we can trust people that they love each other romantically when they say so, even if we can't understand it.
So all is needed I think, is not telling asexual couples they're just special friends and not really in love...
Or if one's ace like I am, not thinking some other couples are emotionally shallow and not really in love because sex is a (potentially defining) part of, or critical to, their healthy love lives. And not shaming people who do have emotionally shallow sexual relationships, of course.
I think not getting things is fine, the problem lies when one thinks there is nothing legitimate to "get".
That just irks me to no end. >.<
The question is frustrating but Holly seems to be trying so it's hard to hold it against her too much.
Before I started HRT I was lesbian. Back then I never called myself gay. It didn't sound right. That euphemism always sounded like it was for male homosexuals. Not girls. So for myself I said lesbian.
The other reason? You said "aint." That's just shit for English. You're just wrong. 8^P°°°°•••••.....
People have a way in the manner of how they approach you which rather quickly gives it away if they are prejudiced and pigheaded. Those are who I started talking about at first. They are the ones best not to waste effort on
For example, leafing through Jocelyn's Magical stuff on DeviantArt gave me questions about dysphoria & different ways of being trans. Questions that'd have to be phrased really carefully or they'd come across not as seeking information, but as "Are you REALLY trans?" or "Can't you be like that without being trans?", which would be impolite.
Then there's the repetition. There's this trans person at a chat channel where I hang out, whom I drove out of the channel for a few minutes by asking too many probing personal questions about what it's like to be colorblind. (I'm a klutz, yes.) I imagine that doesn't hold a candle to how old questions about being trans get.
OTOH, I don't want to get on anyone's case for asking questions or encouraging answers. I can't oppose seeking to know. Assigned Male seems to hold that cis people asking trans people about transness is in and of itself inappropriate, possibly injurious, as the action calls into question their legitimacy or validity, but I find this stance more confusing or anything.
To me, it's specifically the element of sexual physical intimacy that distinguishes romantic live from e.g. love between friends or family members. Sexual relationships without the romantic element aren't my cup of tea, but I can undetstand them. Imagine them. The opposite just does not compute. I wonder if this is me working with different concepts & borders, or if I'm straight up wired differently.
Fortunately, it's not something I need to understand in order to properly respect. Or is it?
I don't believe one needs to understand or empathize with a relationship to respect it. If that was the case, how could we even respect any relationship (and one's own lover(s)'s feelings), since we can't even know how they feel beyond a pretty vague word like "love"?
The same way we can trust someone else when they say they "love" us romantically, I think we can trust people that they love each other romantically when they say so, even if we can't understand it.
So all is needed I think, is not telling asexual couples they're just special friends and not really in love...
Or if one's ace like I am, not thinking some other couples are emotionally shallow and not really in love because sex is a (potentially defining) part of, or critical to, their healthy love lives. And not shaming people who do have emotionally shallow sexual relationships, of course.
I think not getting things is fine, the problem lies when one thinks there is nothing legitimate to "get".