respect identities

Mentally ill trans people with stigmatized disorders are not less valid than other trans people.

Mentally ill trans people shouldn’t have their identities dismissed as just a symptom of mental illness.

Trans people deserve access to mental health treatment with competent providers who will respect their identities.

Trans people deserve access to hormone replacement therapy and gender confirmation surgery even if they are mentally ill.

Do you feel like someone is using the “wrong” bathroom?

Please don’t:
-Stare at them
-Challenge them
-Insult them
-Do not purposefully make them uncomfortable.

Instead, please:
-Respect their privacy
-Respect their identity
-Carry on with your day
-Protect them from harm

They are using the facilities they feel safe in. Please do not take this right away from them.

Trans* & gender questioning students… You have every right to be here:
-In this facility
-In this university
-In this world

Your gender identity and expression are valid.

lesbian is:

• a positive word
• a wonderful identity
• a beautiful thing to be

pansexual is:

• a positive word
• a wonderful identity
• a beautiful thing to be

bisexual is:

• a positive word
• a wonderful identity
• a beautiful thing to be

transgender is:

• a positive word
• a wonderful identity
• a beautiful thing to be

gay is:

• a positive word
• a wonderful identity
• a beautiful thing to be

nonbinary is:

• a positive word
• a wonderful identity
• a beautiful thing to be

intersex is:

• a positive word
• a wonderful identity
• a beautiful thing to be

asexual is:

• a positive word
• a wonderful identity
• a beautiful thing to be

aromantic is:

• a positive word
• a wonderful identity
• a beautiful thing to be

queer is:

• a positive word
• a wonderful identity
• a beautiful thing to be

Respect other people’s identities, even if you don’t agree with their vocabulary
And feel free to reblog and add your identity! You deserve positivity, too! 

💛💚💙💜

#renewsense8 because...?

[cracks knuckles] hold onto ur hats - i’m bout take a lil’ moment to sing this show’s praises

  • 8 main cast members, only 2 of whom are white Americans; beautifully characterised, constantly developing, flawed, realistic people you root for, laugh with, feel in ur heart!!
  • every culture, language, sexuality and gender identity is respected. nobody demeans their own country for laughs and they’re so honest about the unique issues each character (called a Sensate!) faces specifically because of their race, their gender, etc ACCORDING to where they live
  • god, the cinematography. the colours, the acting, the shots, landscapes, the way it shows you parts of the world from almost every corner and makes you feel as if you’ve known them your entire life!!
  • it doesn’t go down the “colour-blind, we’re all human”, route. it actively accepts, celebrates and encourages ppl in the show (and watching!!) to celebrate our differences, large and small. they’re what makes us, us; not something to overcome, to connect in spite of, but because of
  • all of the 8 main characters are basically non-het, non-monogamous, and one of them is trans & if i was gonna define them, i’d have to say pansexual!! polyamorous!! go ahead & count how many non-white pansexual poly characters of multiple genders YOU know of in books, tv, movies, ANYTHING
  • it gives me hope for our future. that as one diverse race, accepting of our differences, understanding the enemy, we can fight what tries to divide, kill and disconnect us
  • it connects the people watching it to each other in a way that’s never happened to me with anything else. i can’t describe it, but it’s almost as if the empathic link between the Sensates pulls you and everyone else watching into some kind of massive network and you just feel real and vital and human and so, so alive
  • THE SOUNDTRACK IS POPPIN and what’s up by the four non-blondes is about to become your anthem. i swear it
  • every ship is 100% possible. they’re literally a big polyamorous pile of love (no spoilers … but wait for THOSE scenes). p much every ship is canon @ this point. what’s a ship war again
  • sense8 preaches loving openly, unapologetically. it’s an advocate of diversity in every form imaginable. it’s about acceptance; it’s funny, it moves you, it opens you up, and it shows you what the world could be, for a moment, if we could push ourselves to be more connected
  • so, if you read this far, and you’re totally into it - sense8 is available on netflix (and go.movies, if ur living That Life) rn, in danger of being cancelled so use #renewsense8 on twitter, tumblr and facebook to save it!!!!!!!! 

it’s so hurtful when people, especially people who are also members of my community, claim that being gay is regressive.  it is not more progressive to be multi gender attracted, gay people are not being discriminatory by only being attracted to one gender, and we do not have privilege for not being multi gender attracted.

gay men are not misogynistic for not being attracted to women. support and respect their identity.
lesbians do not owe men anything and being a lesbian is not predatory. support and respect our identity.

please defend us against those who claim that “monosexual privilege” exists, the idea circulating that being gay makes you oppressive is harmful to us - especially people struggling with internalised homophobia.

[NOTE: trying to derail this post will get you instantly blocked.]

Pro tip: If you’re looking into signing on with a pagan group, the phrases “male and female energies” and “Great Rite initiation” are both secret codes.  The former means, “We will refuse to respect your identity,” and the latter means, “Yeah, we’re a cult, but we’re a sexy cult,” and they can both be taken as shorthand for, “Run, bro.  Run away,  Run fast.  Run far.”

The ‘q slur’ tag

Every time I see someone reblog my posts and tag them ‘q slur’ I feel pain. 

I get it: you wanna make your followers comfortable. But did you think about me? How do you think I feel about my identity being called a slur every single day? As if I am something dangerous, traumatic or nsfw just by existing as queer?

I know you don’t think you’re doing harm, but I can feel the hurt, they’re little needles in my queer heart every single day. I’m tired of it. 

I am QUEER. That is non-negotiable. That is where my strength comes from and my rage and my joy. No other term is ever going to describe who I am like ‘queer’. No other term is ever going to be my home like ‘queer’. 

And I refuse to let my home get called a slur every single day when I know the strongest voices behind the ‘queer is a slur’ campaign don’t give a shit about triggers. they’re transphobes and aphobes and biphobes trying to crush to spaces where people can exist without clear labels. They’re the people that want to make my queerness disappear. 

I am Queer. That is my soul. That is my rebellion. That is my solidarity. No ‘gay’ or ‘bi’ or ‘transgender’ label could set my heart aflame like that, could set me free like that, could give me the courage to walk through walls like that. Queer is why I am still here, alive.  Queer is my every breath.

If you don’t respect my identity, why reblog my posts? If you won’t let me be queer without putting ‘slur’ on who I am, just stop reblogging my posts, okay? 

“culture is meant to be shared how else r we going to accept eachother?” this is ur daily reminder that the point of culture has never been abt sharing, it was about identity. this is also an extremely harmful perspective as it shows white ppl r unwilling to accept cultures that are not theirs “if u cant share ur culture how will we all get along?” as if respecting someone for their identity requires your invasion of their community. we get it u lov imperialism and colonialism

Submission: As a queer, nonbinary person and an animal educator, I’ve thought a lot about the issues recently being discussed on this blog and I wanted to share some of that here. I’ve tried to be as calm and clear as possible, but this is an emotional issue for me so it might be a bit emphatic.

Serveral people in this discussion have mentioned already the problems with questioning the existence of bi/pan/trans/ace/aro animals, but not questioning the existance of straight, cis animals. You’ve made passing mentions to this, but I think it’s actually really important to step back and reframe the entire discussion in this context, if you want to be fair and accurate both to the animals and to the people emotionally affected by this issue.

In particular, this passage: “However, the animal science world uses gendered pronouns to denote physical sex in an animal, because that is how efficient and accurate communication about the animal is ensured” raises some massive red flags for me. Yes, it’s important to clearly communicate with your vet about the body parts an animal does and doesn’t have, for ease of treatment. However, pronouns are far from the only way to do this, and definitely not the most efficient. The pronoun “she” doesn’t tell you if a dog is unaltered, spayed, in heat, pregnant, or menopausal - information your vet definitely needs to know.
It’s the work of half a moment to state “my dog is a spayed female” at the start of an appointment, regardless of what pronouns you use after that. In fact, many trans* people have already learned to talk with their doctors in specific terms about their hormone levels and organs they do or don’t have, and cis people need to catch up. Part of the reason this is such an emotional issue for trans people is that the argument, “your doctor needs to know the gender you were assigned at birth! Therefore everyone you meet needs to know, and it should be on your ID, in case you get in an accident and we have to tell the doctor!” is often invoked. (I wish that was an exaggeration. It’s not. This is in spite of the fact that, as a trans* person, knowing the gender you were assigned at birth is more likely to lead to false assumptions about your health and biology than true ones.) So yes, your doctor needs to know about your biology and your vet needs to know about your pet’s, but gender pronouns really aren’t the way to do it.

Outside the vet’s office, insisting on cisgender-equivalent pronouns for your pet leads to a world of problems. I volunteer at an animal shelter, and I see people misinterpret animal’s actions through their percieved, anthropomorphic gender roles constantly. They’re more eager to read aggression from a male animal and affection from a female, which has the potential to lead to massive problems, since both of those behaviors can be dangerous to misinterpret. I would personally argue for the stance that people would be more able to accurately interpret the behavior of animals if we refered to all non-human animals with gender-neutral pronouns, to more accurately reflect the fact that animals do not have gender. Even in social animals that do have sex-differentied social roles, those are completely different from human gender roles and should not be confused with them by the use of human gendered pronouns. If the biological sex of an animal matters in a particular context, you can mention it in that context, rather than applying it all the time as though it was part of their identity.

I do understand that some people find it reassuring to observe that the social roles of biologically male or female animals are different from those of humans, and that they too can be as nurturing as a male penguin or as fierce as a female hyena. So I understand that sometimes people will want to refer to those animals as male or female, in the same way that I want to refer to a cuttlefish as genderfluid because it makes me feel happy and validated. I just want cis people to understand that those interpretations are exactly equivalent.

As for how this perspective affects the emotions of humans impacted by this issue: claiming that gendered pronouns are a form of scientific terminology that accurately reflects the biological sex of an animal is, intentionally or not, supporting the idea that there are biologically and scientifically two genders. It gives fuel to people who try to force that mindset onto humans, and believe me, they use it. I’ve met many people who become enraged if I use the wrong pronouns for their dog, but refuse to respect my identity and pronouns. The attatchment of gendered pronouns to biological sex in non-humans is absolutely reflected back into humans by most of the public, whether that is your intention as an educator or not.

Using gender pronouns as scientific terminology also muddies issues significantly as soon as you leave the field of mammals, where it quickly becomes clear that a male/female dichotomy is far from absolute. Do I use female pronouns for the hermaphroditic flatworm who lost the penis-fencing match and is now carrying eggs? Will those pronouns still apply after the eggs have hatched? What if they win the penis-fencing match next time and contribute sperm instead?
How about a worker bee, who is genetically female but has not developed reproductive organs and plays no reproductive role?
Do I use male pronouns for a fish who was born genetically male, but isn’t able to engage in sexual behavior and fulfill the male sexual role until mating is initiated by the supermale? How about for the supermale, who is genetically female and used to be reproductively female but has since morphed to be reproductively male due to being the largest fish in the school? Is it even accurate to say “genetically female” of a species where both major reproductive roles are carried out by the same genetic category of animals, and those born “biologically” male only reproduce at all by swimming into the middle of the mating dance, ejaculating, and hoping for the best?

A similar issue exists with the assumption that animals are straight. I’ve seen some cringe-worthy anthropomorphization of male/female pairs of animals, including calling them “married,” referring to them as being “in love,” and a lot of analogies to human married-couple behavior, but I’ve never seen this criticized or significantly discussed as an issue of anthropomorphization. But every time I see a post about lesbian birds or trans fish, this issue comes up. I don’t think that animal educators are doing this on purpose, but I do think it is an indicator that many animal educators have not sufficiently deeply challenged the cultural narrative that straight and cis are “normal” but queer and trans* are “debatable” and should be challenged and argued about. 

Science is an ever-changing field, and scientific terminology becomes outdated and is changed as we realize that it reflects our social assumptions more accurately than in reflects reality. The terms we use to discuss sex, gender, pair-bonding, and mating behavior are all deeply intertwined with human social assumptions of cisgender, heterosexual, monogamous life-time bonds that are simultaneously romantic/affectionate and sexual in nature. Scientific communication would be improved by dropping those assumptions and the terminology that comes with them.

I don’t think I have much to add to this - it’s really well thought out and well said - so I’m going to boost it as is as part of the continued discussion. 

Scientific communication would absolutely be improved by changing the terminology to something more accurate. I don’t know if it’s something that would currently be feasible - because of a myriad of things that make attempting that type of change across so many cultures and languages and historical/social contexts difficult - but I definitely support the idea. 

Sugilite: What was Sapphire’s deal?

For a long time since the reveal of Ruby and Sapphire, I’ve been seeing posts that (jokingly or not) suggest that Sugilite’s behavior, as a Fusion of Ruby, Sapphire, and Amethyst, was the result of the rambunctious Ruby and Amethyst dragging Sapphire along for the ride.

I kinda get why people say that, because obviously both Amethyst and Ruby are prone to anger and sometimes lack filters and coping mechanisms. Meanwhile, Sapphire seems so calm and in control. Surely Sugilite was mostly Amethyst and Ruby getting carried away.

But y’all have seen “Keystone Motel.”

“This will pass. She’ll eventually just burn herself out.”

Sapphire, when she’s upset, pretends to be above it all, ignores others’ emotions while denying the effects of her own, and even resorts to shaming those she loves when she’s not happy with their behavior. 

She can be callous. Cold. 

Sapphire is just as responsible for everything that went on with Sugilite as Ruby and Amethyst were. 

Now here’s the thing. Fusions can feel like they’re one being–especially when they get used to being fused–and though they’re “a conversation” and “a relationship,” they’re also capable of functioning like a single consciousness despite that they technically can never quite be “individuals.” So I do hesitate to pick apart “what comes from which Gem” when examining Fusions’ behavior. However, much like you can analyze the traits of a child and surmise which parent they “get it from,” you can sort of do that with Fusions. But there’s another element you have to keep in mind when you do this.

A manifestation of the fusers’ influence on each other.

Guide to the Crystal Gems is the source of this tidbit–a canon source authored by Rebecca Sugar. You don’t really see the “influence” aspect discussed explicitly in the show, but this implies that Fusions aren’t just what their components are, but what they inspire in each other. What they think of each other, what they expect from each other, what they want to be together. What they bring out in each other, regardless of whether that element is usually part of the individuals.

Look at Smoky Quartz. Before they appeared, Steven and Amethyst had just had an arc with a competitive and self-deprecating tone which led directly to forming Smoky for the first time. They literally fought each other over who was the worst, had a discussion of not living up to what they were supposed to be, and aired their grievances over the proper path to improvement.

“Us worst Gems stick together, right?” “That’s why we’re the best.”

Amethyst and Steven literally formed their collective identity based on their low self-esteem and feelings of inadequacy. They play it like a big joke, of course, cracking puns and offering distractions, but when Sardonyx presses them during their second appearance in “Know Your Fusion,” Smoky heaps on the self-abuse.

“I guess zero plus zero equals zero. They say two wrongs don’t make a right–I guess I’m living proof that that’s true! I’m just one big super-wrong good-for-nothing dud with a yo-yo!”

Delivered with a smile. 

Supposedly it’s a common trait of youngest children to be the comedian of the family–if you’ve spent your whole life feeling like those who came before you have won all the awards, done it all before you, and met stratospheric goals before you even found your feet, you might feel like there’s no point in performing well, so you joke about it and poke fun at everything, including yourself. Amethyst and Steven have both spent a lot of their lives feeling like the youngest child who’s a bit of a screw-up with whom everyone must be patient. Smoky doubles that feeling, and when they start to feel inadequate, out come the self-deprecating jokes.

Sugilite is more complicated because she’s a three-Gem Fusion, but I’d like to first refer to my “How Fusion Relationships Work” post and assert that Sugilite is far more a relationship of Amethyst and Garnet than she is a relationship of Amethyst, Ruby, and Sapphire. If Sugilite were to internally argue with herself the way Alexandrite did in “Fusion Cuisine,” you’d probably hear Amethyst’s and Garnet’s voices, not Ruby’s or Sapphire’s. I could be wrong, but I think Sugilite is better understood as Garnet and Amethyst’s Fusion. Therefore, to find out what comes from Sapphire and what comes from Ruby in Sugilite, it makes more sense to pick apart where their traits feed into Garnet first.

Sardonyx and Sugilite are both Garnet Fusions. And Sardonyx and Sugilite have both shown an incredible capacity for showing off for Steven. We know Pearl loves to perform, but Sardonyx seeks to impress through grace and precision, while Sugilite is about power. That is likely a strong Amethyst trait–she REALLY wants to be strong, and she thinks Garnet is this incredible pillar of strength. Amethyst’s beliefs about Garnet and desire to be strong would feed into making Sugilite the powerhouse she is.

And Amethyst also has abandonment issues.

“What about ME, huh? I had someone who was always there for ME until she started hanging out with YOU!”

What was Sugilite’s apparent main complaint?

“You left me behind!”

She was left alone with no one to perform for, no one to encourage her or make her feel cool for being strong enough to take out all those pillars.

This seems like an awful lot of Amethyst, but what about Garnet?

“We don’t need to be careful. We just need to be huge.”

Get the job done, Garnet. Who cares about Pearl’s feelings? Who cares if there might be some speed bumps? It’ll turn out with the result we need, and that’s all that really matters.

Well, that’s some Sapphire there.

That’s probably exacerbated further when all the frustration and feeling of being left out was amplified by Amethyst’s perspective, and it’s all directed at Pearl. What might Sugilite be thinking about Pearl? “She’s to blame! She took Steven away and abandoned me! She called me ‘too much’ because she’s just too little! And now she wants me to unfuse just when I’m enjoying myself! She’s probably just jealous Garnet didn’t pick her instead!”

There’s a ton of feeling in there and not a whole lot of thinking. And feeling is something Ruby does extremely well. Meaning she does a lot of it, and she doesn’t think about the past or the future. Now is all she can think about, and her incredibly important, long history with Pearl and any future consequences are beside the point in the face of all that emotion. Sugilite feels hurt and angry and vengeful now. And she has a ton of power that this little Gem Pearl wants to take from her. She won’t let it happen.

But here’s something complicated. Ruby is emotional, but she isn’t selfish. She’s almost entirely selfless. I mean that literally, too–at the beginning of her life with Sapphire, she expressed that it didn’t matter if she was broken because there are tons of her. Even more recently in her life, in “Jailbreak,” she cared about what happened to Sapphire but had no thoughts for herself.

“Did they hurt you?” “WHO CARES??”

And if you listen to her rant about Blue Diamond in “Gem Heist,” Ruby still offers an onslaught of anger that has almost nothing to do with slights against her.

“She’s a shatterer! She yelled at Sapphire, she hates fusion and love!”

Hear that? Blue Diamond had specifically threatened to shatter Ruby, but she doesn’t say “she threatened to shatter me.” She just uses general terms about her being “a shatterer” before launching right into how Blue Diamond mistreated Sapphire and hates their union. And, going back to “Keystone Motel,” it’s more of the same from Ruby: she’s angry not because Pearl personally hurt her, but because Pearl disrespected fusion. Disrespected Garnet.

“It’s FUSION, Sapphire! What’s more personal to us than fusion?”

She’s so, so angry, but it’s on behalf of their relationship, not on her own behalf. She’s not mad at Sapphire for wronging her. She’s mad at Sapphire because this is about fusion. Without fusion, Ruby doesn’t even think of herself as worth something to be mad about. But the fusion she’s contributing to? Wow, nobody better EVER say anything against THAT, or insult it for ANY reason!

So, no doubt this is magnified in Sugilite.

“I AM myself, and I’m SICK of being split up!”

Amethyst’s respect for power, Ruby’s respect for fusion partnerships, and Sapphire’s respect for outcome over process all contribute to Sugilite’s motives. But Amethyst’s sullenness over abandonment, Ruby’s single-minded emotion, and Sapphire’s callousness make those motives manifest in a destructive way.

When Garnet is just Garnet, she has effective coping mechanisms most of the time, at least when it comes to losing control. But Ruby’s EXPLOSIVE emotion is very present in Garnet–we repeatedly see her punch first and ask questions later, or break things just because she’s pissed off. Sapphire’s soft-spokenness and withdrawal from full engagement are also very present in Garnet, and we see her withholding emotion or letting her overconfidence make her stubborn. But she’s balanced, and she carries leadership without cracking, and she rarely makes her problems into other people’s problems.

But when Garnet is part of Sugilite, emotion is streaming in from Amethyst AND Ruby, and neither of those Gems likes to think outside the present. If you said Sapphire’s future vision and composure is “drowned out” by such passionate energy, you wouldn’t be far off, but I think it’s more nuanced than that: Sapphire’s traits manifest differently. Amethyst respects the heck out of Garnet, and Ruby feels like Sapphire matters far more than she does. Sapphire holds a good deal of the self-respect in Sugilite–the part of her that thinks she deserves attention, dignity, and honor. There’s still some aristocrat in her. In Sugilite, that respect is up against an overwhelming amount of self-directed belittling and inadequacy. So you get someone who knows she should be respected but feels that she doesn’t deserve it.

Ruby and Amethyst may be the source of Sugilite’s fury and pain, but without Sapphire’s cold indifference, she wouldn’t have ever posed such a threat. Some of the most brutal aspects of Sugilite may have their roots in Sapphire.

10

gender respect masterpost