Love. Pride. Positivity.
Check out my side tags for my art, my hedgehog, and quick links to common tags I use.
My main fandoms are Overwatch, Marvel, LotR, Pokemon/Legend of Zelda/Nintendo.
My Battletag is HanzosNipple; message me if you want to play, or say hi if you run into me!
“You want to talk about kink at work and not get fired” no I want to be able to talk about my kinks outside of work in appropriate settings without giving people a weapon to get me fired from work if they are pissed at me
“You want to talk about kink at work and not get fired” no I want to be able to go to a policeman and tell them I’ve been raped without having them tell me that since I’m into bdsm I can’t be raped because I probably enjoyed it
“You want to talk about kink at work and not get fired” no I want to be able to go to a therapist to talk about my sexuality without having them refusing me service or trying to convert me to “normal” sex or claiming that all my problems are due to my sexuality
“You want to talk about kink at work and not get fired” no I want to be able to go to a doctor while having bruises from bdsm play and feel safe telling them what those bruises are caused by without risking them flipping out at me, refusing to cure me or denouncing my partner for abuse
These are all things that happened and keep happening. But, sure, let’s frame it as “you want to talk about kink at work and not get fired” so we can keep claiming there is not a problem.
Dear Fandom Mum, I come to you with A Question. I've been thinking about my romantic orientation a lot lately. I'm in my mid 20s and I know that I'm heterosexual, I don't feel any sexual attraction to women. But I do appreciate beauty in women, and I almost feel like I have a "type" in them. But more like aesthetically speaking, if you know what I mean? Thing is, ever since I started speaking about love and sexuality with my friends in college I've always said that I can't imagine having (1/2)
… sex with a woman, but I have no problem kissing them or having them touch me. I have also said for years that I could imagine loving a woman, “regardless” of their gender. The question is, do you think I could be biromantic? Or am I just being needy/selfish when I imagine I could love and be loved by someone of my own gender but I couldn’t be able to pleasure them because sexually I don’t swing that way at all? (2/2)
///
There are several different types of attraction. Sexual, sensual, romantic, platonic, and aesthetic. You don’t have to have one to have another, if that makes sense. You can be sexually attracted to someone, but not romantically attracted to them. You can be aesthetically attracted to someone, but not sensually attracted to them. I mean, there are SO MANY combinations you can have for each person! Like, I’m aesthetically and sensually attracted to this person over here, which means I like hugging on them and cuddling with them and I think they’re really great to look at, but I have no interest in romance or sex. Just imagine the combinations! And each person you know has their own specific combo, if you get what I mean.
Only you can decide what you are. Sometimes labels work and sometimes they don’t. And sometimes we meet exceptions to the rule. Sometimes we don’t. You’re not being anything but yourself. If your body says it’s a no go, it’s a no go. There’s no lack of trying involved, here. That’s like trying to make my eyes see better if I squint just the right way. =)
Don’t stress, lovely. If you’re not sure of a label, don’t worry about it overmuch. Just keep your mind and heart open if a special someone should come along. Otherwise, listen to what your body tells you.
Fun fact: Though being gay in the 40s sucked, being gay in the military was easier, and pretty common. There were apparently, at one point in time time so many lesbians in the military that when they tried to crack down on it, the girls wrote back and said “Look I can give you the names, but you’ll lose some of your best officers, and half your nurses and secretaries.” And they pretty much shut up about it unless you were especially bad at subtlety. (Source: Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers. A good source for gay history from 1900s onwards.)
wait but also lesbians in the WAC were so common and often had hierarchies of popular lesbians; more traditionally butch women were considered super hot and often formed cliques where they’d wear men’s suits and cut their hair to look like sideburns and smoke cigars in the mess (there was also a lot of terrible profiling done to butch women during gay/lesbian witch hunts later in the military but at least this part is fun)
also when they finally tried to crack down on lesbian relationships in the WAC it proved to be incredibly difficult because of male officers’ inability to distinguish friendly female behavior from like.. couples’ PDAs (“gal pals????” they all thought. “lesbians????” they couldn’t tell. “these women are all holding hands with each other and kissing each others’ cheeks what is going on,” they thought. “men don’t do this?”) and this wasn’t at all helped by the fact that the women would often intentionally mess with the people questioning them; they’d pull the gal pal card and they’d pull it hard. “do you two sleep in the same bed?” “well of course, we’re best friends!”
and when the military tried to profile more butch-presenting women, who often (but not exclusively!) filled more industrial jobs such as mechanics and technicians etc. they found that they were losing some of their best people who were replacing “”“male”“” homefront and reserve jobs and therefore couldn’t discharge them
another great book to read is Coming Out Under Fire by Allan Berube; it specifically addresses lesbian and gay climates in WWII, with a heavy focus on the WAC and on drag culture in the men’s army/navy
If you dont reblog this, REVALUATE your fucking life.
I WILL FOREVER REBLOG OK
Signal boost. All love should be valued. VALUED.
Ok I have to share a thing. Someone on my facebook posted THIS picture which has been floating around
Cyberteeth basically sums up my entire feelings about this topic.
‘Straight Pride’ is not as innocent as it seems.
It is a way for people try to push maintaining the ‘status quo’ and taking back the civil rights movement.
People who are straight do not face the same level of constant persecution that those who do not fit in the binary, cis, and straight package do. It is the same issue with ‘white pride’ vs ‘black pride’. It is devaluation of the struggles of the minority group and emphasizing current standards of those whom already hold privileged position in society.
“Umm, how can you be ‘semiaquatic’, you either are aquatic or you’re not. Don’t be greedy.”
“So, I get that you’re a monotreme and everything, but do you identify more as a rodent or a bird?”
“Ugh, why do you have to be such a special snowflake. Do you and like three other species need an entire order to describe yourselves that separates you from mammals that birth live young?”
“You needlessly complicate an artificially constructed system of classification. Why don’t you just lose the webbed feet and beak and egg laying ways and become a proper mammal.”
“Ha! You may look like you belong to class Aves, but I know for a fact that birds don’t have fur. You’re such a phony.”
“Why do you insist on appropriating beaks and webbed feet. Like, you admitted you weren’t a bird, stop incorporating them into your anatomy. All you’re doing is making birds look less legitimate as an order.”
Yea it’s clearly our “generation that’s making homosexuality a trend.” Seriously, pisses me off when people say that. look at this! It’s always been around, it’s not a trend, it’s real. It’s beautiful.
These are really beautiful images.
History Lesson: In America from about 1700-1920 there was a social rule that said that women did not have a sex drive. According to men, all women ever were asexual and only ever had sex because their husbands wanted it and as a good doting wife they would open up for him. That said, lesbians flourished in this time! Because it was believed that women did not have sex, when two women would share a house and finances together (called a Boston Marriage, look it up!) nobody thought anything of it. Because clearly they werent homosexuals since clearly women were incapable of being independently sexual. The more you know!
Fact: all pansexuals and panromantics glow in the dark. Pansexuals glow a pretty light blue while panromantics have a green hue. Pans who are both have a bright combination of the two and transform into the ultimate ethereal being of grace
