Jump to content
Stray Fawn Community

Ask Angel About LGBTQ+


wikipedia [he/him]
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Bad fawn said:

I personally am fine with LGBTQ+ people. I don't even try to understand, because it's way too coplicated for my small brain. I just don't mind them. They're just people. Different, but still should be treated the exact same as other people.

What does annoy me is when people list their sexuality and stuff like that on their bio. Yeah it's good to know someone's gender, but sexuality is just pointless unless it's a dating site. No one needs to know that.

Also what's with the black/brown in the pride flag these days? Those aren't colors of the rainbow and the flag doesn't have white in it either. Isn't this just sorting people by color? Skin color really shouldn't have to matter when it comes to this stuff.

A lot of pride flags can be used by racist communities, so the black and brown shows that the group that uses it isn't racist 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Strayed Away Fawn said:

From a scientific standpoint, there aren’t as many genders really only Female, Male, Both (I forgot what it was but you have both of the traits.) and non-binary. (Of course there could be more that I don’t know.)

I- No, that's sex. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Bad fawn said:

What does annoy me is when people list their sexuality and stuff like that on their bio. Yeah it's good to know someone's gender, but sexuality is just pointless unless it's a dating site. No one needs to know that.

then who would you think I am if I didn't tell you I was lesbian? It explains a lot of my personality, I think, and if you forgot I will remind you once more. And telling people that lets them know that "frick off if you don't like it"
or like whatever
I guess everyone just assumes white girls are "normal"

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Bad fawn said:

What does annoy me is when people list their sexuality and stuff like that on their bio. Yeah it's good to know someone's gender, but sexuality is just pointless unless it's a dating site. No one needs to know that.

I think it's nice to have people know your sexuality, and taking pride in it and not having to hide it is important. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FAWN QUEEN !!! said:

I think it's nice to have people know your sexuality, and taking pride in it and not having to hide it is important. 

I'm not saying it should be hidden, I just don't see the point of having it in a bio. You don't introduce yourself to people like "Hi, I'm Lea and I'm bisexual".

But I guess some people would find that an important part of them or something

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Renio2490 said:

then who would you think I am if I didn't tell you I was lesbian? It explains a lot of my personality, I think, and if you forgot I will remind you once more. And telling people that lets them know that "frick off if you don't like it"
or like whatever
I guess everyone just assumes white girls are "normal"

I don't think it defines you as a person. You're you, no matter your sexuality. I wouldn't view you any differently if I didn't know that. When I see your comments I don't think "oh that's the lesbian person", I think "oh, that's the 10 year old who does a lot of rp and draws cute nichelings and gets mad at people sometimes but is nice when not mad". I don't even remember people's sexualities and stuff most of the time. Those things don't matter to me. It's the things that people say and do that matters.

But I can see it keeping haters away

Also normal people don't exist. Just less interesting ones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
On 1/14/2020 at 10:23 PM, heyitsgeorgie said:

henlo u dont have to answer but what is. ur hot take on bi/pan lesbians

im literally just trying to ignore their existence and all the tweets about them rn because idk what to think '

Seconded, even though I have no idea what those are...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, the internet described someone with no preference towards anatomy, but a preference for "feminine features". Not sure if that's an ideal combination of labels... can't they just say they prefer "feminine traits"? I think there was a word for that. Or words. So many labels... 

(Gynephilia would be literal but I don't know the full context. Too busy to stay and search rn.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spacestar TheThundersuncat said:

Seconded, even though I have no idea what those are...

They're basically bi/pan people who also label themselves as lesbians, usually because they have a strong preference to women. I think the main issue people have is that now men who want to date lesbians can say "oh maybe they're a bi lesbian!" but I think people are a bit too hard on them and should just explain the harm they're causing and help them! 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, heyitsgeorgie said:

They're basically bi/pan people who also label themselves as lesbians, usually because they have a strong preference to women. I think the main issue people have is that now men who want to date lesbians can say "oh maybe they're a bi lesbian!" but I think people are a bit too hard on them and should just explain the harm they're causing and help them! 

I mean, I don't know what the discourse looks like, but I also think that they cause harm by using those labels (I mean at that point a bisexual man could try and say that he is heterosexual gay). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2019 at 5:52 PM, Just normal Lilytuft said:

I don't think it defines you as a person. You're you, no matter your sexuality. I wouldn't view you any differently if I didn't know that. When I see your comments I don't think "oh that's the lesbian person", I think "oh, that's the 10 year old who does a lot of rp and draws cute nichelings and gets mad at people sometimes but is nice when not mad". I don't even remember people's sexualities and stuff most of the time. Those things don't matter to me. It's the things that people say and do that matters.

But I can see it keeping haters away

Also normal people don't exist. Just less interesting ones

oh no

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2020 at 9:23 PM, heyitsgeorgie said:

henlo u dont have to answer but what is. ur hot take on bi/pan lesbians

im literally just trying to ignore their existence and all the tweets about them rn because idk what to think '

 

12 hours ago, heyitsgeorgie said:

They're basically bi/pan people who also label themselves as lesbians, usually because they have a strong preference to women. I think the main issue people have is that now men who want to date lesbians can say "oh maybe they're a bi lesbian!" but I think people are a bit too hard on them and should just explain the harm they're causing and help them! 

See, now, are they calling themselves literally a lesbian or are they calling themselves NBLW/WLW? 

NBLW/WLW is a term that goes for anybody who is NonBinary and Loves Women/Woman who Loves Women, regardless of sexuality. This term does not care how much you are attracted to women as long as you are (and are a woman/are nonbinary). 

Additionally, it's possible they're calling themselves lesbians to protect themselves, like closeting but from other LGBTQ+ people. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, mhiahia said:

I mean, I don't know what the discourse looks like, but I also think that they cause harm by using those labels (I mean at that point a bisexual man could try and say that he is heterosexual gay). 

I- Heterosexual Gays exist. It simply means that you're romantically attracted to the same gender and sexually attracted to a different one. That's a different thing to bisexuality. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think people get that label 1, label 2 means (romantically: 1, sexually 2) or the other way around. I'd be easy if that's your ingrained impression when reading it, but...

Aren't they a really small niche? Why would that catch on?? People already have an impression of:

1  "respectable" LGBTQ+ people

2. The Crazy

I think. That's how it's here, anyhow... but my point is, they just see a raging dumpster fire in those labels and wouldn't want to weaponize an "empty" term, unless it is to mock the people using it specifically. They don't want to seem affiliated with The Crazy. That's automatic public embarrassment to their in-group of equally ignorant people. Severely

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Spacestar TheThundersuncat said:

I don't think people get that label 1, label 2 means (romantically: 1, sexually 2) or the other way around. I'd be easy if that's your ingrained impression when reading it, but...

Aren't they a really small niche? Why would that catch on?? People already have an impression of:

1  "respectable" LGBTQ+ people

2. The Crazy

I think. That's how it's here, anyhow... but my point is, they just see a raging dumpster fire in those labels and wouldn't want to weaponize an "empty" term, unless it is to mock the people using it specifically. They don't want to seem affiliated with The Crazy. That's automatic public embarrassment to their in-group of equally ignorant people. Severely

if you're talking about the Homoromantic Heterosexual thing, the 2+ label thing is super common and why we have so many suffixes? i'm mostly in a LGBTQ+ community though, so it's possible that i don't understand simply because im 'incapable' of understanding ''straight culture''?? 

(heavy quotation marks)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, wikipedia (angel) said:

if you're talking about the Homoromantic Heterosexual thing, the 2+ label thing is super common and why we have so many suffixes? i'm mostly in a LGBTQ+ community though, so it's possible that i don't understand simply because im 'incapable' of understanding ''straight culture''?? 

(heavy quotation marks)

Straight culture is the only culture here, so I guaruantee that that's not their usual pick when it's once again the time of the year to express public hatred. It might be a thing when hunting the witches of group 2, but there's just too much material as for that not to be seen as just "another outgrowth" from the (more) "acceptable" group 1.

If you behead that movement*, you just "get" another one as the spotlights shifts. When value runs into "that sounds weird", wanting to find "the weird" in things they already dislike is the way to go. That step can be repeated eternally... but of course, you can make "weird" things up too, courtesy of propaganda. 

It's a grave error to make things about ignorance and not factor in human stupidity. Every argument is replaceable if there's want for one, and you'd have to harm "group" 1 directly to make these things about "group" 1 effectively. They just latch onto and attack the "bad" members, having infected group 1. It's a great way to hate and not hate "The Gays" at the same time if you're centrist-ish. If not, there's already too much nonsense in people's heads. They don't care. It's mostly an in-fight here, quoting "The Straights" as specifically aggressive is just not really working out...

(*as seen in general "straight culture", not the actual one)

  • Like 1
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...