Jump to content
Stray Fawn Community

Ask Angel About LGBTQ+


wikipedia [he/him]

Recommended Posts

I made another similar to the thread above, as I realised I'm probably going to end up being asked about LGBTQ+ too. :)

---

What are 'transtrenders'?

Transtrender is a slur against trans people. It is often used by meddies to say that trans people who do not complete surgery are not 'really trans'. Trendercore is the opposite of transtrender, as trendercore says that any person who identifies as another gender than your assigned sex is trans

'You do not need dysphoria to be trans. it has been proven that you do not need dysphoria to be trans, and the definition of transgender says nothing about dysphoria, only identifying as a gender the than the one you were assigned.' -Trendercore, by 'theadventurelinetm'.

 

What do the suffixes mean?

sexual = desiring sexual interaction

romantic = desiring romantic interaction

alterous = desiring interaction that is neither 100% platonic or 100% romantic, but is rather somewhere in between (affectionate speech, physical affection, doing things together exclusively, valuing the relationship more than others)

sensual = desiring sensual interaction (kissing, cuddling, handholding, physical affection, sharing space, being physically close)

queer = desiring interaction that is not 100% platonic, but is actually more, while not being 100% romantic either (kissing, cuddling, handholding, nonsexual touch, being physically close, affectionate speech, doing things together exclusively, valuing the relationship more than others)

platonic = desiring platonic interaction (nonsexual touch, doing things together exclusively, valuing the relationship more than others (possibly), friendship, making lifelong decisions together, relying on each other emotionally)

aesthetic = experiencing aesthetic attraction (admiration, valuing their existence more than others (non-obsessively), adoration, interest in their persona, distant emotional reliance)

flexible = Identifying as a certain orientation, but flexible in that identity, i.e. occasionally deviating from that orientation. Mostly used as homoflexible or heteroflexible

  fluid = your orientation or preferences changes over time. It could change rapidly, multiple times a day or very slowly over a course of months or years. It could have a pattern or be random, it could be influenced by external or internal things or nothing at all. It could change back to something you were before or not. 

  flux = An identity that changes in intensity. This label can be applied to both orientations and gender identities to indicate that they feel their identity more strongly some times than others. 

  forced = A feeling that one only feels a type of attraction due to trauma/abuse, and would not feel that type of attraction if they had not experienced that trauma/abuse.

  slide = Sliding along the scale from repulsed to favorable; not necessarily the whole scale though.

  spike = Usually not feeling attraction to (prefixmeaning) but occasionally having it rapidly skyrocket into intense attraction, then plummeting down to no attraction again.

vague = An orientation that is influenced, in whole or in part, by the person’s neurodivergence. Most commonly used as acevague/arovague. Only use if you are neurodivergent (have a M-I/D/D).

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are some people so insistent on either/or labels? Those calling "transtrender", while being transgender themselves, might want to eradicate a part that others project onto them. I can kind of get that. It's traumatic and actually threatening by some logic. But why are some average "everyday people" so violent in their denial? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, spacecat at random said:

Why are some people so insistent on either/or labels? Those calling "transtrender", while being transgender themselves, might want to eradicate a part that others project onto them. I can kind of get that. It's traumatic and actually threatening by some logic. But why are some average "everyday people" so violent in their denial? 

I, personally, do not understand it. Some of it is due to internalised -phobia, or due to trauma; others may simply be due to society or their family. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, wikipedia (angel) said:

I, personally, do not understand it. Some of it is due to internalised -phobia, or due to trauma; others may simply be due to society or their family. 

So social peacocking? "This is my group and we're nothing alike, at all, because my reaction to fear is disgust."? I don't understand power dynamics, but they end up being really, really rude. I'll never know what eradicates the need for politeness in people. Do they want to drown one need by excessively polarizing on the other? 

My uncle kind of divides the world into "stupid" vs. "reasonable" people. So he puts all religious ones into the former. All of them. Is this some need to eradicate by domination?? 

I'm sorry if this is just too much rambling, but I really don't understand some things on an existential level. I mean, I can just avoid them, but having to actually put up with that sounds hellish. How should you even react when people just blow up like that?

Edited by spacecat at random
bad Grammar and typing too fast
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, spacecat at random said:

So social peacocking? "This is my group and we're nothing alike, at all, because my reaction to fear is disgust."? I don't understand power dynamics, but they end up being really, really rude. I'll never know what eradicates the need of politeness in people. Do they want to drown the other need by excessively polarizing on the other? 

My uncle kind of divides the world into "stupid" people vs. "reasonable" people. So he puts all religious people into the former. All of them. Is this some need to eradicate by domination?? 

I'm sorry if this is just too much rambling, but I really don't understand some things on an existential level. I mean, I can just avoid them, but having to actually put up with that sounds hellish. How should you even react when people just blow up like that? 

Essentially- I don't understand why people cannot just... accept it. Accept, even if you don't understand. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, heyitsgeorgie said:

im just gonna say based off twitter:

- he/him or they/them lesbians (which are valid lol, if that's who you wanna be be my guest)

- "bi=pan=poly=omni" (IT DOESNT THIS ONE ANNOYS ME)

- "nonbinary people need to look androgynous otherwise theyre not nonbinary!!111!11!!"

- the fact that lgbt+ people can be black really annoys some people for some reason

- pedophiles aren't a part of the lgbt community (wow, big shocker!)

- straight pride marches/flags/ect.

theres a lot more but that's just off the top of my head. like c'mon twitter, I followed like 5 people and was yeeted head-first into this madness

^^^

Also the fact that 'xenogenders' (simply terms to better describe how people feel their genders) and 'neurogenders' (genders that are effected by M-I/D/Ds aka the fact that people have disabilities) even exist... Additionally, neopronouns (which are older than everybody; they started in shakespearean times) 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Goggles-kun said:

As a demi-bisexual, I’m confused on this one. Why do some people absolutely refuse to believe bisexuals exist? And heavily stereotype bisexuals as opposed to some other sexualities?

See above: social peacocking 

Also, because history tends to erase bisexuality compared to homosexuality; it seems to be a more 'people are not exposed to it' ordeal. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, heyitsgeorgie said:

he/him or they/them lesbians (which are valid lol, if that's who you wanna be be my guest)

I remember scrolling through Twitter and seeing a he/they lesbian, and at first I was confused (I was new to the LGBT community). After doing a little more googling I just accepted them for who they were. If you’re a guy/non-binary friend and you identify as a lesbian, you’re valid! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Goggles-kun said:

I remember scrolling through Twitter and seeing a he/they lesbian, and at first I was confused (I was new to the LGBT community). After doing a little more googling I just accepted them for who they were. If you’re a guy/non-binary friend and you identify as a lesbian, you’re valid! 

Fun fact!: Pronouns aren't gendered, and she/her was counted as a neopronoun til the 1700's! 

  • Eek! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Question: If you don't want to have a relationship with an asexual/aromantic person is this discrimination? I'm not sure about it, but I personally would need those things in a relationship, and therefore we would probably not work out (just speculation, haven't had this situation in real life). But on the other hand, if people refuse to go out with bisexuals, this is discrimination to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mhiahia said:

Question: If you don't want to have a relationship with an asexual/aromantic person is this discrimination? I'm not sure about it, but I personally would need those things in a relationship, and therefore we would probably not work out (just speculation, haven't had this situation in real life). But on the other hand, if people refuse to go out with bisexuals, this is discrimination to me.

well, there's a question there: why would you need both those things in a relationship? Why do you feel that you would need to have sex (keep in mind that some asexuals can still have sex), or have romance (keep in mind that aromantics just have a different term for romance)? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, glitched wikipedia (angel) said:

well, there's a question there: why would you need both those things in a relationship? Why do you feel that you would need to have sex (keep in mind that some asexuals can still have sex), or have romance (keep in mind that aromantics just have a different term for romance)? 

I think that it could work out, depending on where they are on the spectrum, but I'm generally a human that likes physical affection very much, and it would be important for me that my partner enjoys this too and doesn't just do it because I like it. On the other hand, I haven't had a relationship yet, and my priorities may change over time. Right now though, I'd want a partner that has a romantic and physical relationship with me.

Also, just in general, is it okay for someone to have this wish or not? Because in my opinion everyone should choose the type of relationship that they want, which would mean that someone can decide that they don't want to have sex, while other say that they need to have sex (this sounds kind of weird, but I feel like this is the right way to say it). So, is this discriminatory or just everyone's personal right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you put up some stop-end when already involved, that could get very ugly. But if you actually discuss things before hand, why shouldn't it be equal to things like: Doesn't/does ...

-- want to get married

-- have kids

-- put a time limit on the relationship

-- consider long distance

? I mean, it just seems like messing up badly with any of these comes from communication problems, not the issues themselves. Things get problematic when "give me X, or Y happens" turns up. But that's different from "we can't be equal and both get what we want", hence the breakup, or both saying no to a relationship from the start.

If you mix in "but why don't just give me X?" at said start, or "why do you even need... so badly", one party is trying to push their needs above the other... by, I guess, emotional extortion and devaluing them, which might or might not be something to call discrimination. But it's going to suck every time, no matter the name.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, glitched wikipedia (angel) said:

or have romance (keep in mind that aromantics just have a different term for romance)? 

I guess some people would feel like their partner doesn't love them

(I have no experimence in romance or anything but I think that could bother people)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, spacecat at random said:

If you put up some stop-end when already involved, that could get very ugly. But if you actually discuss things before hand, why shouldn't it be equal to things like: Doesn't/does ...

-- want to get married

-- have kids

-- put a time limit on the relationship

-- consider long distance

? I mean, it just seems like messing up badly with any of these comes from communication problems, not the issues themselves. Things get problematic when "give me X, or Y happens" turns up. But that's different from "we can't be equal and both get what we want", hence the breakup, or both saying no to a relationship from the start.

If you mix in "but why don't just give me X?" at said start, or "why do you even need... so badly", one party is trying to push their needs above the other... by, I guess, emotional extortion and devaluing them, which might or might not be something to call discrimination. But it's going to suck every time, no matter the name.

I agree, that's what I think too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest SilverTheNicheling
23 minutes ago, Spooky Goggles-Kun said:

Got a quick question. I identify as she/her/they/them, but I feel as though people will say my identity is invalid because it’s not “one or the other”. Any advice?

I gotta agree with you that I don’t like people either.. some of them do suck :( and it’s awful...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...