LGBTQA and Ally Safe Space

[ColoQ]

...almost never interact with LGBTQA spaces because I find them wicked frustrating. There are a lot of assumptions about people who are any one for these groups of people, so having them together is kind of a cocktail for stupidity.

Uhhm... What ?

[Vella]

Thanks, folks. You're right - I need to start reinforcing some boundaries. I've been kind of avoiding her on Internet, so I think I've got enough distance now to go back and do the thing again.

[Reluctant Amazon]

I am really overwhelmed by the proliferation of labels..

Sent from my LG-D321 using Tapatalk

[sisustrong]

Hey all, new recruit here.

I, too, am struggling with labels. I'd rather not label myself at all, but at the same time, it's hard to explain things to others without them... Plus my brain likes to keep everything organized.

But a little about me... I tend to identify as agender, and I'm cool with my sec being female. I don't really see myself as a man or a woman though, except in anatomy, I'm just a person... I like to dress androgynously, usually in men's clothing (because pockets!!).

I really have no clue what my sexuality is. I grew up thinking I was straight, then bi, then a lesbian, and now I'm not sure. Am I demisexual? Asexual? No idea!

At this point I'm not putting a label on it. I just say I like people! I figure if I meet the right person, it won't matter anyway.

Great to see a safe space here at NF!

[Vella]

Welcome, sisustrong! Fellow afab agender person agreeing entirely about pockets

Quite frankly, sexuality is strange, and I've decided I'm better off just saying "queer" and leaving it at that. I tried to tell a friend of mine that, with the joke "Once I got to four prefixes on my 'sexual', I figured it's time to think about picking an umbrella term", and their response was "Yeah, but what were the prefixes? Like, what section of 'queer' are you?" -.-
If they were accurate, I wouldn't be using 'queer' ...

Aaanyway, rant over. Welcome, hope you enjoy your stay.

[Artinum]

I am really overwhelmed by the proliferation of labels..

 

You're not alone. I think the problem is that no simple set of labels always works, so we keep getting new ones, but people still use the old ones as well. Rather like this:

 

http://www.xkcd.com/927/

 

There was none of this "cis" stuff when I first came out, for instance. First time I saw someone talking about cis-gender on here, I had to google it. In ten years or so there'll be a whole new batch of terminology and you young'uns will be getting shocked looks from the latest newcomers for calling them "xer" instead of "xim", or whatever pronouns will be cool then.

 

Now where did I put me pipe and slippers?

[Jett]

I'd rather not label myself at all, but at the same time, it's hard to explain things to others without them... Plus my brain likes to keep everything organized.

 

EXACTLY THIS. I try to look at whatever labels might apply as useful shorthand to help describe myself to others, but it doesn't have to be 100% accurate. I've noticed that the labels don't always mean exactly the same thing from one person to another, anyway. (Like sometimes, when people say "bisexual" they actually mean "pansexual"? Whatever.)

 

I've decided I'm better off just saying "queer" and leaving it at that.

Yeah. I feel you on that, Vella. :3 Sometimes it's just not anyone else's business.

 

In the end, I think gender expression and sexuality is probably pretty much unique for everyone. If people are straight enough and "cis" enough, they might not notice the difference, but once you start examining it in close detail, everyone's a little "queer" somehow.

 

Hey, this reminds me of something I was thinking about the other day...

 

Why do we have specific words for "females that like other females" and "males that like other males"? Shouldn't who you're attracted to be a separate distinction from your gender? I propose:

 

"Androphilic" for people who are attracted to males

"Gynephilic" for people who are attracted to females

"Panphilic" for people attracted to other people, without a gender distinction

 

I'm probably no the first to suggest this, but it seems to make a lot of sense to me. So, like, "I'm a panphilic androgyne." That reduces the explanation to two words that anyone with an understanding of greek roots can figure out from context.

 

(Lol, I know this is just making the problem worse. I'm sorry!)

[sisustrong]

Why do we have specific words for "females that like other females" and "males that like other males"? Shouldn't who you're attracted to be a separate distinction from your gender? I propose:

 

"Androphilic" for people who are attracted to males

"Gynephilic" for people who are attracted to females

"Panphilic" for people attracted to other people, without a gender distinction

 

I'm probably no the first to suggest this, but it seems to make a lot of sense to me. So, like, "I'm a panphilic androgyne." That reduces the explanation to two words that anyone with an understanding of greek roots can figure out from context.

 

(Lol, I know this is just making the problem worse. I'm sorry!)

 

No worries! As a former English major and a linguistics nerd, the way we come up with new words fascinates me. Incredibly complicated, sure, but fascinating!

 

I also find the use of labels awkward sometimes... for example, if someone felt that they identified as a gay man, but had yet to been with another man, they might feel dishonest calling themselves 'gay' without the 'experience', I guess, to back it up. Another random example, if someone says they're bisexual but they have only been with a woman, and was asked, "so you've been with men and women, then?" it might feel awkward to then say, "well, no... I've only been with men." That leaves an opportunity for the other person to say something like, "oh so you're not really sure" or "then you're not really *identity* since you don't do *these prescribed actions placed on that group*"

Which could make that person feel incredibly crappy about themselves.

 

I don't know if that makes sense, but... anyway, labels can be difficult.

[ColoQ]

No worries! As a former English major and a linguistics nerd, the way we come up with new words fascinates me. Incredibly complicated, sure, but fascinating!

 

I also find the use of labels awkward sometimes... for example, if someone felt that they identified as a gay man, but had yet to been with another man, they might feel dishonest calling themselves 'gay' without the 'experience', I guess, to back it up. Another random example, if someone says they're bisexual but they have only been with a woman, and was asked, "so you've been with men and women, then?" it might feel awkward to then say, "well, no... I've only been with men." That leaves an opportunity for the other person to say something like, "oh so you're not really sure" or "then you're not really *identity* since you don't do *these prescribed actions placed on that group*"

Which could make that person feel incredibly crappy about themselves.

 

I don't know if that makes sense, but... anyway, labels can be difficult.

 

 

What makes me uncomfortable is when I get a giant infodump right when someone meets me.  when Someone introduces themselves as a trans person, or pansexual.. that is one thing.  But I get an awkard feel of "you have told me too much /this is confusing" when I encounter things like  "Trans person, homoromantic, pansexual: homo primary, who is polyamorous with aromantic tendencies"   I struggle with  1.) What gender you are/identify with 2.) what gender you want to bang. 3.) What Gender you want to settle down with. 4.) If you want to settle down with anyone 5.) How you can be both polyamorous and aromantic. and 6.) Why I needed to know / interpret all this in one whack.

That being said, words have power. You want a label to describe you, thats great. I know I was confused for the longest time because I wanted naughty times with girls and with guys, and had never heard the word "bisexual" (this was long before "pansexual" was more common, even). So when I heard the word "bisexual" my life made way more sense. So it is important to have the tools (words) necessary to describe yourself.

What I'm finding is that labels are most useful given a necessary context for use of them. I reference my cis-maleness, my pansexual tendencies, my polyamory relationship types, my race, my religion etc.. only when they are salient to the conversation: balancing against a desire to overshare.

[sisustrong]

Also I thought I'd share this gold:

 

http://con-amore.tumblr.com/post/118686968737

[Polaris]

I think I may have ranted talked about my gender issues before in this thread. And next to some other people's issues, they seem like a non-issue, but sometimes they're driving me crazy. I mean, I'm AFAB and I've always been treated as a cis girl/woman and mostly I'm okay with that... mostly. But I once stumbled upon the definition of demigirl/woman, and it hit way too close to home.

 

It's just that... ever since I was a kid, every time I've been told I should be tidier/more personable/like pink/whatever because I'm female, I get upset, not just because of the gender roles (that I'm fundamentally against) but because I feel like those expectations shouldn't be applied to me. And I have near-dysphoric attitude towards pregnancy and such; I would ever reproduce biologically because the image seems so wrong to me. I've never wanted to be a guy, but I envy their testosterone production and relative ease of building muscle, and their social privilege.

 

On the other hand, in some ways I like being a woman. And I'll never find out if I still hated it had I been born to a non-sexist society. But I strongly feel that gender is biologically and socially imposed upon me, rather than something that comes from within and is inherently tied to my personhood. And I dislike it, but I can't escape it. Because no matter how I feel on the inside, I'm 5'4", have long hair and curvy figure and the unfortunate ability to get pregnant... Nobody would treat me as non-binary despite how I might identify. And my biology won't change no matter how much I wish it would. so often I think, what would be the point? [/rant]

[Reluctant Amazon]

I wonder sometimes, do people whose gender identity matches their assigned gender actually feel it?

Sent from my LG-D321 using Tapatalk

[fleaball]

I wonder sometimes, do people whose gender identity matches their assigned gender actually feel it?

Sent from my LG-D321 using Tapatalk

Based on the way I've seen the dysphoria and feelings before/during/after transition described, I don't think I ever have. The only time it occurs to me is when I see trans/agender/genderqueer people describing their feelings and struggles and I know I've never felt that way. 

[Artinum]

I wonder sometimes, do people whose gender identity matches their assigned gender actually feel it?

 

No, I very much doubt it. The feeling comes not from the gender itself (either of them) but the dissonance of having two different ones; rather like dizziness is caused by your eyes saying you're still and your ears saying you're moving. When eyes and ears are in accord, you don't feel dizzy - regardless of whether you are still or moving.

 

I dislike the term "assigned gender" as it suggests someone decided I was going to be male from the outset, rather than just how things happened.

[Deidara]

Why do we have specific words for "females that like other females" and "males that like other males"? Shouldn't who you're attracted to be a separate distinction from your gender? I propose:

 

"Androphilic" for people who are attracted to males

"Gynephilic" for people who are attracted to females

"Panphilic" for people attracted to other people, without a gender distinction

 

I'm probably no the first to suggest this, but it seems to make a lot of sense to me. So, like, "I'm a panphilic androgyne." That reduces the explanation to two words that anyone with an understanding of greek roots can figure out from context.

 

(Lol, I know this is just making the problem worse. I'm sorry!)

 

You are by far not the first person to suggest this and I can explain why it doesn't really work!

 

Sexuality labels and identities came into being because same-sex attraction was pathologized. There were no sexuality labels, no words for queerness or anything, until the APA created a diagnosis of "homosexuality" to refer to men who were attracted to men. These labels and identities continue to exist because they are marginalized, because people they apply to are discriminated against and face violence for it. That is how identity politics work - identities are based on traits that result in discrimination.

 

JUST attraction to women, or to men, or even to both/others, is not what's being faced with this. What's specifically being targeted and met with violence is same-gender attraction, is WOMEN liking women, MEN liking men, etc. And the converse - heterosexuality - exists because ONLY having a label for the oppressed group helps to distinguish and "other" it from "normal" people. Having a label for the dominant group makes it so that you don't have a nebulous, unmarked "normal" concept to fight against.

 

Also hi I should have introduced myself before doing that but I'm very trans and very pansexual. I'm nonbinary but still medically transitioning which is fun (not).

[Jett]

JUST attraction to women, or to men, or even to both/others, is not what's being faced with this. What's specifically being targeted and met with violence is same-gender attraction, is WOMEN liking women, MEN liking men, etc. And the converse - heterosexuality - exists because ONLY having a label for the oppressed group helps to distinguish and "other" it from "normal" people. Having a label for the dominant group makes it so that you don't have a nebulous, unmarked "normal" concept to fight against.

 

Hi, Deidara! Thanks for weighing in. I figured it was probably something like that - there's a specific word for women-who-like-women or men-who-like-men because the alternatives are considered "normal". Which is why I would love to see the terms changed; language subtely reinforces worldviews, and you can change how people feel about things if you can change how they talk about them.

[SolitaryOrchid]

I dislike the term "assigned gender" as it suggests someone decided I was going to be male from the outset, rather than just how things happened.

 

That's essentially how it works. A doctor sees a penis and decides this is a male regardless of whether that individual is actually a male. Personally I prefer the term designated sex rather than assigned since it makes more sense to me.

What would be a term you'd find more appealing?

[Reluctant Amazon]

Words. Words. Sex and gender were the same concept and meaning until relatively recently, with gender being the more universal term, applicable to words and objects.

Sent from my LG-D321 using Tapatalk

[Artinum]

That's essentially how it works. A doctor sees a penis and decides this is a male regardless of whether that individual is actually a male. Personally I prefer the term designated sex rather than assigned since it makes more sense to me.

What would be a term you'd find more appealing?

 

Designated works better. Assigned implies deliberate intent.

[Reluctant Amazon]

Assigned is the more accepted term. And designate is a term bearing more deliberation

Sent from my LG-D321 using Tapatalk

[Hratheceane]

Hi there, I'm Hratheceane. Thought I'd stop in and say hi! I'm pansexual and genderfluid, but I'm fairly comfortable in my female body. 

 

I do find the label business to be very strange and a bit of a way for us to further segregate ourselves from others. It would help if the world did anything to help us feel like existing on a spectrum is normal. I just decided to do that for myself, because I never felt like any one thing. I feel like I have the possibility of being attracted to anybody and I feel like I'm a different gender depending on whatever activity I'm doing or, hell, if my forearms are exposed or not.

 

I just exist on a spectrum and it's a fun ride. I never had to question it much; I've managed to be with the same person for over 7 years of my almost 21 year-long life, and for that I'm definitely grateful. She's a great girl, really. She's a huge motivation for me to properly lose the weight.

[Jett]

Hi there, I'm Hratheceane. Thought I'd stop in and say hi! I'm pansexual and genderfluid, but I'm fairly comfortable in my female body. 

Hello! Welcome to NF and to our little corner of it. :3

 

I'm always pleased to meet other pansexual, genderfluid "girls". I grew up thinking I was the biggest oddity, but there's actually quite a lot of us!

[ColoQ]

Hi there, I'm Hratheceane. Thought I'd stop in and say hi! I'm pansexual and genderfluid, but I'm fairly comfortable in my female body. 

 

I do find the label business to be very strange and a bit of a way for us to further segregate ourselves from others. It would help if the world did anything to help us feel like existing on a spectrum is normal. I just decided to do that for myself, because I never felt like any one thing. I feel like I have the possibility of being attracted to anybody and I feel like I'm a different gender depending on whatever activity I'm doing or, hell, if my forearms are exposed or not.

 

I just exist on a spectrum and it's a fun ride. I never had to question it much; I've managed to be with the same person for over 7 years of my almost 21 year-long life, and for that I'm definitely grateful. She's a great girl, really. She's a huge motivation for me to properly lose the weight.

Hi! Welcome.  thanks for saying Hi!

 

[sisustrong]

Hello! Welcome to NF and to our little corner of it. :3

 

I'm always pleased to meet other pansexual, genderfluid "girls". I grew up thinking I was the biggest oddity, but there's actually quite a lot of us!

Another genderfluid, something-sexual "girl" here!

[Ahyar Dreamspark]

I started testosterone injections just a little over a month ago.

 

Last month: 1 to 2 pistol squats in a row.

 

Now: 6 to 7 pistol squats in a row.

 

This feels like cheating and it is wonderful. Onwards, to get ripped!