IS THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND SERIOUSLY PROTESTING AGAINST THE REDEFINITION OF MARRIAGE
What, you mean the First National Church Of Yes Your Majesty Of Course You Can Get As Many Divorces As You Want?
It really annoys me when I see everybody and their grandma obsess over Dirk and Jake as a couple. Yeah, it’s cool because there’s so much happening with them and hints are being dropped etc. but the fact that almost every person in the Homestuck fandom is flipping the fuck out and just being absolutely obnoxious with it is a little too much for me since I honestly don’t like JakexDirk. People seem to forget about the two other girls who seem to be just as crazy about Jake as Dirk is, Jane and Roxy, and also the girl that Jake has his eyes on, Aranea. I usually don’t have a problem with people talking about yaoi, I’m okay with the fact that people like that stuff, and I’m okay with homosexuality in general, but oh my god this is just too much.
Being okay with something “in general”, but only being okay with it as long as there is not even a single example “in specific”, is really a form of “not being okay with it”.
Seriously. This is the one non-het couple. Uncomfortably close to the one non-het couple ever in media not specifically targeted at LGBT audiences. I can name most of the others off the top of my head; there’s the hilariously bad stereotyped gay guy in 9 Chickweed Lane who had an affair with a girl for badly-explained reasons, I think there’s one in Glee… I think maybe Buffy had one… Uhm. Raffles and Bunny? And that’s got us back to the late 1800s.
People are excited about this because they have become aware of the subtle difference between the real world and fiction, which is that in the real world 5-10% of people are gay, and in fiction 0.0-0.5% of people are gay.
Try your post with other examples. “I don’t see why people are making a big deal about Jackie Robinson. I’m fine with blacks in general, but why aren’t they as excited about all the white baseball players?” “I don’t see why people are making a big deal about Barack Obama. I’m fine with blacks in general, but why aren’t they as excited about all the white presidential candidates?” “I don’t see why people made such a big deal about Sigourney Weaver’s character in Alien. I’m fine with women in general, but why aren’t they as excited about all the credible male leads?”
See the problem?
This is what they call “queer erasure” — trying to make it so it’s fine if the gays exist, as long as they don’t take up any valuable screen or story time that could have been devoted to het relationships. And that’s not fine.
The queer relationship gets a disproportionate amount of attention because it is the queer relationship. If queer relationships were as common in media as they are in the real world, they would not attract so much attention, positive or negative.
Someone reblogged that “no girl believes she’s beautiful, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is”. Nevermind the heteronormativity, the creepy social structure, and so on. What this thought needs is to have its words repeated until they lose all meaning.
Obviously, the best way to do this is to replace the word “beautiful” with some other adjective, or adjective clause, or noun, which makes the sentence better.
- No girl believes she’s being poked and kicked in the shins every few minutes, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s completely insane and probably hallucinating, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s made entirely of marshmallows, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s an F5 tornado, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s in reruns, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s completely invisible, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s on fire, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s in the trunk of a car and maybe it’s on a freeway, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s a decorative object with no other purpose or worth, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s finally beating the shit out of one of these assholes, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s being harassed, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
- No girl believes she’s in the dictionary under “gullible”, until a guy comes along and makes her feel like she is.
So here is how the homestuck video game works. You have a pool of things you can do, such as “make silly jokes”, “self-insert”, “reveal interactions between characters”, “reveal things about plot device”. Each update must contain at least one thing. You also have the option of passing (not posting an update). When you post an update, users become happier or unhappier depending on how it affects them. Happy users tend to recruit new readers who are likely to agree with them. You can kill characters more than once (because one of the things is “resurrect character”), but characters can only die a certain number of times (more if they’re a main character). Shippers tend to get happier over time if nothing contradicts their ship, and most users tend to get happier when you update. So for instance, if you have a bunch of happy jonkat shippers, and you kill off John or Karkat, or show them having spades, you make those readers unhappy.
Each turn, you score points based on the current total readership.
The game ends when you have no living characters, or only one living character and no one you can resurrect, or when at least half of the fans are happy.
ATTN: everyone who reblogs that series of Humon drawings of anthropomorphised animals with accompanying commentary about nature being “fluid in representations of gender and sex”
Howdy! I see you have requested my attention. Granted!
ASIDE FROM Human being an enormous racist, sexist piece of shit,
Well, things had better be aside from that, because defining your response to a statement or work of art by your opinions of the artist would be the argumentum ad hominem. I give no fucks. I don’t care whether this person is a racist, sexist, piece of shit, or a serial killer, or a bodhisattva. I care whether I like the piece of writing.
WHO GIVES A SHIT if animals change sex characteristics or have matriarchal societies,
I do! I think science is fucking awesome. I love nature. I love watching a world in which different things are different and not always the same.
because nobody should have to justify being gay or trans by pointing at a fucking fish that is gay or whatever.
Well, that’d be nice. Sadly, I am trapped in a world where I encounter people to whom “but that’s not found in nature” seems like an argument. And what I’ve found is that if I lead them around with stuff like “hmm, well, if it were found in nature, would that matter?” I can often get them to realize that they were being stupid.
And see. I just want to win the game. I want to make people stop being jerks. I want to educate them. And when it comes to whether I “should” need a given tactic or not, the Kama Sutra is but a partial list of the things I do not give. Seriously. I will totally argue about what I should need to use at a time when I don’t have friends who could show up in multiple dumpsters and have to argue with the police as to whether or not this might be evidence of a crime.
also the descriptions themselves are chock full of bullshit (essentialism, kawaii rape, in the artist comments she apologizes for talking about “lady penis” and “man breasts”)
God forbid that cutesy descriptions of animals which try to anthropomorphize their traits so human readers can better comprehend them be in some way imperfect.
so could we all please stop propagating this shitty meme drawn by a shitty person and then saying that it totally justifies trans peoples’ existence, because
I never said it justified trans peoples’ existence. I did, however, think it was pretty awesome the way in which it helped provide a way to communicate that reality to a very large set of people who are, in the absence of such communications, a direct and possibly lethal threat to people I love.
See, I am all for cleaning up relatively minor stuff like “you know, strictly speaking this argument shouldn’t be necessary”. I just figure I’ll work on that when I am not afraid that the trans people I know will someday just stop logging on, and I’ll never find out why.
- that shit dont need to be justified
Need to be justified for a thing which exists is of necessity always relative to an audience. You may be comfortable disregarding bigots as an audience. Me, I think about that audience a lot, because that’s the audience I have to convert for my friends to be safe. And maybe I shouldn’t have to do that, but you know, there’s a lot of things we shouldn’t have to do.
- humon is terrible
Irrelevant. I’m not reblogging the art because of my opinions of the person, of whom I know nothing.
- the descriptions are shitty and essentialist anyway
An interesting claim. Woulda been neat if you’d justified it.
- analogizing human behavior to that of other animals as a form of justifying human behavior is pretty much useless anyway, especially considering you’re saying “lol it’s ttly ok to be trans cuz animals do weird sex stuff in nature” WHILE USING A COMPUTER TO ACCESS THE INTERNET…
Your failure to understand an argument does not make the argument stupid. Heck, even if it’s stupid, so what? People who have based a position on a stupid argument can sometimes be argued out of that position by working within that framework.
Eyes on the prize. The goal is to win the game. We win when everyone is able to accept that not everyone has to fit unambiguously into a particular gender binary. If there are people whose argument is “but nature is like this”, then being able to say conveniently “no, nature is not really like that” is incredibly useful. It allows us to come closer to winning the game sooner.
So I’ll take a thing which allows me to approach my goals over randomly bashing people for not having done absolutely everything perfectly, especially when there’s no improved alternative on the table.
When you have a better argument for actually persuading the silly people who think that “it’s not natural” is a compelling argument, go ahead and present it. If it’s a good argument, I’ll reblog it and like it and use it. In the mean time, I’ll use the tools I’ve got.
> And when it comes to whether I “should” need a given tactic or not, the Kama Sutra is but a partial list of the things I do not give.