How do you document real life?


Hi, I'm Lauren!
(or rdm, if you prefer the shorter name with the longer story)

I'm 23, a university student and a self-confessed music nerd.

Here you'll find Glee, Disney, Sherlock, fic, musicals, pretty people, pretty things and my ramblings.
Oh and I have a tendency to overshare. Don't say I didn't warn you.


Anonymous whispered:
so its ace awareness week which is 200% necessary and delightful but ive seen a lot of people saying "ace people often will have sex and still fall in love and like none of us never have relationships" and as an aro ace person this makes me really uncomfortable? like on one hand i get that there are lots of misconceptions about aces but i was watching a video that said that the percentage of aces completely disinterested in sex was like 0 and it made me really anxious? am i the problem? thanks!

dyemelikeasunset:

ace-muslim:

dyemelikeasunset:

I understand why it would make you uncomfortable; a lot of ace-politics spend so much time trying to debunk myths that they end up sweeping some identities under the rug.

This happened with the gay/lesbian community too, with people saying “not all gay men are girly” or “not all lesbians are bulldykes” etc. It’s to combat stereotypes, yeah, but in the end it shits on a lot of other identities that are only negative because of cishet culture.

While it’s completely true that asexuality is a huge umbrella (that ranges from those that have sex to those that don’t), social politics often try to “soften the blow” with attempts to “normalize” aces because we live in a “sex-is-normal” society. They succeed in one thing but completely ignore another.
Aces can have sex and some don’t want it whatsoever. By boxing everyone into “aces have sex and relationships too!!” it defeats the purpose of awareness by not being all-inclusive.
Ultimately, it’s a lack of intersectionality, and it’s pandering to sex-normal society. 

Please know that you aren’t the problem, it’s how other people are going about spreading “awareness.”

I hope nobody minds if I add some general commentary to this. The point brought up by the anon OP and by dyemelikeasunset is very important.

Sex positivity can all too easily become sex normativity, which can be outright harmful for many asexuals, especially those of us who turned to the asexual community because we felt alienated by the sex normativity in mainstream culture. According to a community survey, 70% of those on the asexual spectrum have never had sex before (77% of asexuals, 61% of gray-As, and 59% of demisexuals) and an additional 11% have had sex before but are currently sexually inactive (9% of asexuals, 16% of gray-As, and 14% of demisexuals). Thus 81% of those on the asexual spectrum (86% of asexuals, 77% of gray-As, and 73% of demisexuals) are not sexually active. Yet, too often our outreach efforts say, “Some asexuals are sexually inactive, but others have sex,” as if these two were equivalent groups.

Moreover, the community survey also showed that 55% of those on the asexual spectrum are sex-averse or repulsed by the idea of having sex (65% of asexuals, 51% of gray-As, and 37% of demisexuals). Only 4% say they enjoy having sex (1% of asexuals, 4% of gray-As, and 11% of demisexuals). Again, saying “Some asexuals don’t like sex, and others do,” or talking a lot about, “being asexual doesn’t mean you can’t have and enjoy sex,” while true statements, may misrepresent the experiences of the majority of those on the asexual spectrum, especially of “core” asexuals (i.e., not gray-A or demisexual).

Other times, important concepts are presented in a very simplified form that ends up erasing the experiences and identities of many aces. For example, gray-asexuality is often presented as just experiencing sexual attraction rarely. In fact, there are many ways to be between.

Or take romantic orientation. This is often presented in a way that makes it seem like watered-down versions of sexual orientation categories. (This graphic, for example, just reproduces the Kinsey scale - right down to sticking aromantics off to the side as though we’re not related to all the other orientations. Kinsey’s study did the same thing to asexuals, calling us “Category X” and thus most people don’t realize that Kinsey knew about asexuality.)

This way of thinking about romantic orientation can result in dividing asexuals up and putting us with the related sexual orientations - something that erases asexuality. Moreover, heteroromantic asexuals are often treated as though they’re straight. They’re NOT. They’re asexual. People typically only identify as asexual after coming to realize that other identities don’t work for them, and that includes heterosexuality. Heteroromantic asexuals often face significant alienation in heterosexual relationships because of their asexuality, including coerced sex and rape (in fact, heteroromantic asexual women may be particularly at risk of domestic violence or sexual abuse, similar to bisexual women with male partners).

Another part of this is when non-asexuals decide that some asexuals get to be “queer” and others are excluded. Curiously, it’s not just heteroromantic asexuals who are excluded, but also aromantic asexuals. People who make these arguments often have a binary view of queerness, that is, that anyone who is not queer must therefore be straight. This leads to the nonsensical result that an aromantic asexual who is not attracted in any way to people of a different sex or gender, and who most likely has not had a relationship with them and does not want to, is called “straight” and told they don’t belong in LGBTQ spaces and need to go away. Isn’t it about time that we recognized that same-sex attraction is not the only way to be non-heteronormative?

But that’s not all! According to the same community survey quoted above, 29% of aces do not fit into the “Kinsey scale” type model of romantic orientation. That’s the largest single category in the survey! Some aces have developed the concept of wtfromantic to convey that this model leaves them out. Stop and think about this next time you say something like, “All aces have a romantic orientation, and the romantic orientations are just like the sexual orientations.” Whichever group you belong to (biromantic, heteroromantic, etc) there are more wtfromantic aces than there are of your group, and nearly third of all aces overall are wtfromantic.

If the way we present asexuality and the asexual spectrum to others does not resemble what the community actually looks like, and erases the experiences of many aces, we are doing a grave disservice to our own community and we need to stop and think about why it’s more important to be “accepted” by the mainstream than to do what’s best for our fellow aces.

I really need people to see this again


posted 1 day ago with 883 notes - via miggylol © dyemelikeasunset

grumpypedant:

I think a lot of people have trouble understanding transgender issues because they try to see themselves as trans, but come at it from the wrong direction. i.e. a cis woman tries to understand transness by going, “what if I felt like/wanted to be a man” when she should be approaching it as “what if I, a woman, was so easily mistaken for a man that I had to pretend to be one”,

And I think this is something to keep in mind and to explain away when trying to get these matters across to people who’re new to the idea.


posted 1 day ago with 8,829 notes - via thetimesinbetween © grumpypedant

janetmock:

AM Tonight host Alicia Menendez and I did something fun, awkward and enlightening. Alicia suggested that I “flip the script”on her during our interview about my book Redefining Realness and ask her all the invasive questions I’m asked to prove my validity during interviews.

The following is a series of screengrabs where I ask her to prove her identity as a woman to me by asking about puberty, her transition from girl to woman, her genitalia and whether she used tampons. This was beyond uncomfortable but I hope our demonstration illuminates the problem in our media culture and it serves as a teaching moment for us all about self-determination and the fact that we are all valid, real and don’t need anyone’s interrogation into our lives, bodies and identities.

You can watch the full interview about my book Redefining Realness at Fusion, where I discuss my childhood, sex work and the power of telling our own stories.


posted 2 days ago with 9,283 notes - via sansaofhousestark © janetmock

gaywrites:

gaywrites:

New video, finally! My beautiful girlfriend Kaitlyn and I talk about femme invisibility, or being overlooked in the queer community because of how you look. Bonus topics include catcalling, “looking gay,” gender performance, superpowers, and so much more. Let me know what you think, and don’t forget to subscribe on YouTube

ICYMI: Talking feminism, queer gender expectations and more! Subscribe on YouTube, like on Facebook, follow on Twitter


posted 3 days ago with 354 notes - via gaywrites

Anonymous whispered:
Hi! I was wondering if you knew if any YA novels with queer girls as the main character? I'm queer myself and am really intrigued by these books! :) thank you in advance!

queerbookclub:

Thanks for your question - I’m happy to say that there are many YA books featuring lesbian/bi/queer girls out there!

A few of my favorites are Adaptation and Ash by Malinda Lo, Ask the Passengers by A.S. King, Annie On My Mind by Nancy Garden and Skim by Mariko Tamaki and Jillian Tamaki. A few I haven’t read yet but have heard good things about are The Miseducation of Cameron Post by emily m. danforth, The Dark Wife by Sarah Diemer, If You Could Be Mine by Sara Farizan, The Second Mango by Shira Glassman, Everything Leads to You by Nina Lacour, and Fat Angie by e.E. Charlton-Trujillo. Julie Anne Peters has also written a lot of well-loved YA books about queer girls.

For even more, here’s Malinda Lo’s list of queer women in fiction recommendations and a huge lesbian YA fiction list from Good Lesbian Books.

Readers, you are welcome to reblog and add your favorites!


posted 4 days ago with 285 notes - via thetimesinbetween © queerbookclub

"

We have this myth of identity — that who we are is the summation of a lot of choices we made in the past. That we’ve got a map for the life we’re supposed to lead, and we’ve got to stick to it. But that’s assuming that we’re all static beings, and that’s not how people work at all.


In every moment, we’re changing and evolving and growing. In every moment, we’re reconstructing our identity. We’re not defined by our decisions from two years ago. We’re not even defined by our decisions from two minutes ago. We’re defined by who we choose to be in this very moment.

"

-  I’m An Otherwise Straight Man (Who Fell In Love With His Best Friend)

This is a really moving account of one man’s relationship to sexual orientation and identity, and I found it fascinating. And while I’m totally on board with the impermanence and fundamental malleability of identity, and the ways that identity can become an unhelpful or arbitrary trap, I also understand that identity can be an incredibly useful tool for affecting change, political and otherwise.

There are lots of reasons why people may get pissed off at this man’s refusal to identify as gay or bisexual, some of which are knee-jerk ignorance and some of which are rooted in their own experiences and their own politics and ideology. And there are lots of mirror images of this guy: people who may continue to identify as “gay” or “bisexual” or “male” or “female” regardless of the present-day reality of their sexual attractions or gender performances, for equally valid political reasons. We all get to say who we are. 

Which doesn’t contradict anything he says, and in fact in many ways supports it. But I’ve seen some commentary on this article that suggests that identity itself is the enemy and if we could somehow just do away with all these pesky labels we’d finally be free. And that’s not really how I see it. My perspective is coming from my own identity as an openly bisexual person in an opposite-gender marriage. Identity matters to me. It matters that my congregation knows that their minister is bisexual. That identity makes a real difference in my public witness, and I just don’t think that hearing that their minister “doesn’t believe in labels” would be anywhere near as powerful.

(via wintry-mix)


posted 6 days ago with 298 notes - via thetimesinbetween © neutrois

"

Queerness, to me, is about far more than homosexual attraction. It’s about a willingness to see all other taboos broken down. Sure, many of us start on this path when we first feel “same sex” or “same gender” attraction (though what is sex? And what is gender? And does anyone really have the same sex or gender as anyone else?). But queerness doesn’t stop there.

This is a somewhat controversial stance, but to me queer means something completely different than “gay” or “lesbian” or “bisexual.” A queer person is usually someone who has come to a non-binary view of gender, who recognizes the validity of all trans identities, and who, given this understanding of infinite gender possibilities, finds it hard to define their sexuality any longer in a gender-based way. Queer people understand and support non-monogamy even if they do not engage in it themselves. They can grok being asexual or aromantic. (What does sex have to do with love, or love with sex, necessarily?) A queer can view promiscuous (protected) public bathhouse sex with strangers and complete abstinence as equally healthy.

Queers understand that people have different relationships to their bodies. We get what it means to be stone. We know what body dysphoria is about. We understand that not everyone likes to get touched the same way or to get touched at all. We realize that people with disabilities may have different sexual needs, and that people with survivor histories often have sexual triggers. We can negotiate safe and creative ways to be intimate with people with HIV/AIDs and other STIs.

Queers understand the range of power and sensation and the diversity of sexual dynamics. We are tops and bottoms, doms and subs, sadists and masochists and sadomasochists, versatiles and switches. We know what we like and don’t like in bed.

We embrace a wide range of relationship types. We can be partners, lovers, friends with benefits, platonic sweethearts, chosen family. We can have very different dynamics with different people, often all at once. We don’t expect one person to be able to fulfill all our diverse needs, fantasies and ideals indefinitely.

Because our views on relationships, sex, gender, love, bodies, and family are so unconventional, we are of necessity anti-assimilationist. Because under the kyriarchy we suffer, and watch the people we love suffering, we are political. Because we want to survive, we fight. We only want the freedom to be ourselves, love ourselves, love each other, and live together. Because we are routinely denied that, we are pissed.

Queer doesn’t mean “don’t label me,” it means “I am naming myself.” It means “ask me more questions if you curious” and in the same breath means “fuck off.”

At least, that is what it means to me.

"


posted 6 days ago with 8,532 notes - via thetimesinbetween © mossflowers

Anonymous whispered:
As a lesbian, I do not care at all about bisexual girls feeling left out or judged in the LGBTQ community. I know that's horrible, especially since my girlfriend is bi, but I find it very revolting when I think about making love with someone that loves taking dick. I fell for my girlfriend without knowing she likes guys and girls. I don't purposefully date bisexual girls and I don't think it's wrong to say that.

sc0uttt:

fatpinkmyrishswamp:

sc0uttt:

the-unfeminine-aesthetic:

.

I really hope your girlfriend realizes she’s dating a pathetic waste of a human being and finds someone infinitely better. 

A lot of lesbians are turned off by the idea of their gf having sex with men. Why is that such a bad thing? Why is it so wrong to only like women who like other women? I think the anon who asked this should be honest with her gf and break up with her though if it’s that much of a turn off. 

At first I wasn’t going to reply to comments like these but now that I’ve had a couple of beers the idea of repeatedly hitting my head against a brick wall seems more enjoyable so here we go.

I have a problem with lesbians who claim that they have a “preference” towards dating other lesbians over bisexuals. I understand having a preference, I personally have a preference for girls who are my height or taller than me.  However, does this preference make me view my own voice, safety, and representation in my community as superior and of more importance than those I do not have a preference for? Nope. That’s why this anon (and unfortunately other like minded individuals)  don’t have a “preference” they are biphobic and overall prejudicial assholes.

If you’re not comfortable dating bisexual people because you feel they will ultimately leave you for the opposite sex or (insert other stereotypical view of bisexuals) you don’t have a preference, you are biphobic, and have some huge insecurities that you should probably deal with before you enter a relationship.

If you’re a lesbian and do not feel comfortable dating a woman who is also attracted to individuals with dicks because you find it “icky” or “gross”, it must blow your mind when you find out your partner likes watermelon and you don’t. How do you even move forward from there? Is the relationship just doomed? And yes it is the same thing. Those individuals are judging someone based on something they cannot control.

Prejudice and phobia inside the queer community is something I will never understand and is absolutely infuriating. 


posted 6 days ago with 23,196 notes - via edenwolfie © the-unfeminine-aesthetic

Ways to be an Ally to Non-Monosexual/Bisexual People 

candiedbinicorn:

The ideas in this pamphlet were generated during a discussion at a UC Davis Bi Visibility Project group meeting and were compiled Winter quarter, 2009.

Nonmonosexual / bisexual individuals self-identify in a variety of different ways – please keep in mind that though this pamphlet gives suggestions about how to be a good ally, one of the most important aspects of being an ally is respecting individual’s decisions about self-identification. There are hundreds of ways to be a good ally – Please use these suggestions as a starting point, and seek additional resources!

In this pamphlet the terms “bisexual” and “nonmonosexual” will be used interchangeably to describe individuals who identify with nonmonosexual orientations (attracted to more than one gender), encompassing pan-, omni-, ambi-, bi-, and nonmonosexual identities. Respect personal choices about self-identification and use specific terms on an individual basis.

Monosexism: A belief that monosexuality (either exclusive heterosexuality and/or being lesbian or gay) is superior to a bisexual or pansexual orientation.

Try...

  • Acknowledging that a person who is bisexual is always bisexual regardless of their current or past partner(s) or sexual experience(s).
  • Using the terms “monosexual” and “monosexism.” Educating yourself through articles, books, websites or other resources if you have questions.
  • Questioning the negativity associated with bisexual stereotypes. Example: The stereotype that “all bi people are oversexed.” This reinforces societal assumptions about the nature of “good” or “appropriate” sexual practice or identity. Acknowledge the different ways women, people of color, disabled people, queer people and all intersections thereof, are eroticized or criticized for being sexual.
  • Checking in with someone about what term(s) they prefer – different people prefer different terms for different reasons, respect each term.
  • Being inclusive of bi people of color (BiPOC). This means not assuming that all bi people are white and acknowledging that racism exists within the bi community. BiPOC are often further invisibilized by the assumption that they do not exist.
  • Recognizing that coming out can be different for people who are nonmonosexual than it is for lesbian/gay people. Because nonmonosexuality is invisibilized/ delegitimized, nonmonosexual people usually have to come out over and over. Often, after we come out, we also have to convince someone that we are nonmonosexual, and not “confused.”
  • Recognizing that sometimes it’s appropriate to group people who are nonmonosexual with people who are lesbian and gay, and sometimes it’s not. Example: Healthcare & economic studies on LGB people that separated bisexual from lesbian/gay have found that there are significant disparities.
  • Remembering that no one person represents a community; no two people are the same.
  • Recognizing that privilege is complicated. Bisexuals don’t have straight privilege because we are not straight. Some will never have a “heterosexual looking” relationship. However, many have “passing” privilege in different forms. This might be gender conforming privilege, which people of any sexuality can have. This might also mean being assumed to be straight when with a partner of a different gender. (Note: This often does not feel like privilege but rather an erasure of bi identity). Acknowledgement of one’s own privilege (whichever forms it takes) is always important.

  • Taking a minute before asking questions and looking into the assumptions behind them

  • Recognizing the way that specific relationships function is entirely independent of sexual orientation. Be positive about all relationships –monogamous, polyamorous, or anything else.
  • Remembering that when a person who is bi says something biphobic it takes on a different meaning than when said by someone who does not identify as bi. Witnessing biphobia in any form does not give permission to be further biphobic. Biphobia is harmful to bi people in any form.
  • Remembering that no one individual is more or less nonmonosexual; no one is “truly” or “untruly” nonmonosexual; someone is nonmonosexual if they say they are.
  • Remembering that just because a person who is nonmonosexual reinforces a nonmonosexual stereotype does not mean the stereotype is true.
  • Accepting you might never fully understand someone else’s sexuality, and that it’s okay not to.

Don’t assume…

… You can only be a bi ally I you know people who are bi - Going to events, talking in gender-neutral terms, or being inclusive of bi sexualities speaks volumes to people of any sexual orientation.

… All people who are nonmonosexual are sexual or have had “all” kinds of sex. Not all have had experiences with different genders; no one person will necessarily have had experiences of any specific kind.

… All people who are nonmonosexual are gender conforming. Gender and sexuality are separate and do not depend on each other.

…Someone’s sexual orientation is based on the gender of their partner(s).

… All people who are bi are heteronormative or homonormative.

… How a person who is nonmonosexual defines “virginity.”

… All people who are nonmonosexual do/do not prefer one gender over others. Neither of these is more or less nonmonosexual.

… That people who are bisexual are attracted to everyone. Everyone has different criteria by which they judge whether or not someone is compatible.

… What kinds of sex people are having or how they relate to different kinds of sex. These assumptions might be based on perceptions of gender roles, or assumptions of what someone’s genitalia looks like and how it functions.

Be Careful Not To…

… Attempt to quantify “how bisexual” someone “really” is. This is related to the stereotype that people who are bi are lying or confused and sometimes satisfies a craving to categorize bi people as either “more gay” or “more straight”. People often try to do this by asking someone about their romantic or sexual behaviors. People deserve to have their privacy while having their identities respected.

… Use “Gay” as an umbrella term. Doing so invisibilizes nonmonosexuality. Example: Saying things like, “gay rights”, “gay marriage”, or “gay sex”, implies that bi people are only included when “acting gay”, i.e. when they are engaged in same- sex relationships/sexual activity. Instead, use the terms “same-gender relationship”/“other-gender relationship” instead of “gay relationship”/“straight relationship”. Relationships don’t have sexual orientations.

… Seem infatuated, fascinated or exoticizing of nonmonosexuality.

… Invisibilize bisexuality. Example: “All people are bisexual.” This dismisses people’s identities as if they are a negligible part of “human nature”.

… Ask invasive questions, or interrogate people about their sexuality. This may make the person feel like a scientific study and contribute to a sense of invalidation or isolation.

… Suggest that people who identify as bisexual inherently uphold a gender binary of woman/man. Different people think differently about their identities. Many people identify as bisexual as an act of reclaiming the word from its negative contexts. Many describe being bisexual to mean “attraction regardless of gender”, or “attraction to any gender”. Identifying with the word bisexual can also serve to connect with history and literature.

<3 Feisty Bis


posted 6 days ago with 473 notes - via bemusedlybespectacled

sansaofhousestark:

like, i understand why ladies who are attracted to other ladies cling steadfast to the very few canon f/f ships out there. i get it. they’re all we have.

but.

i am very tired of this trend whereby we idolise unhealthy relationships between women.

i ship a fair few questionable ships, i’m not saying you can’t. shipping can be cathartic, it can be an indulgence for things which are not acceptable in real life relationships, it can help you better analyse healthy and unhealthy relationships dynamics.

the problem at large with the femslash fandom is that there is no admittance that these ships are problematic. for example, i’m a sansa/sandor shipper, and a good percentage of meta i read about them discusses the problem of power dynamics between the two, sandor’s bad treatment of her, sansa’s naivety and youth, etc. sansan shippers (in general) tend towards full and open admittance of the sizeable problems with the ship, and work to avoid the pitfalls of bad fic tropes, unhealthy depictions of the two, etc etc.

i have never encountered this with any of my interactions with femslash fandom. i have to work very hard to seek out critical analysis of, for example, cosima and delphine from orphan black. this ship is not a healthy ship. delphine repeatedly betrays cosima’s trust and even denies her full control over her body at some points. delphine is in a relationship with someone under her medical care and that is not a healthy balance of power.

now, that’s not to say you can’t ship them. like i said above, i myself have ships which are unhealthy or have other issues to contend with, such as age differences or trust issues. but you need to be aware of these issues. you need to discuss them and bring them to light to ensure that younger members of your fandom do not mistakenly idolise these unhealthy relationships. you need to make it clear that these relationships should be confined to the realm of fiction.

another example. alex and piper in orange is the new black are a compelling couple and have great onscreen chemistry, i can’t lie. but alex emotionally manipulates and abuses piper, in some cases explicitly because piper is multisexual. for example, the line “never fall in love with a straight girl” places the blame on piper for leaving despite the fact that alex was putting her in danger and ignoring her, erases piper’s multisexuality, and this theme continues throughout the series with alex’s behaviour. if this had happened between two male characters or a male/female pairing, you bet your arse there would be tons of discussion about multi erasure, abuse cycles, and so on. i’ve found maybe three posts on this website which discuss this in any detail.

i get it, guys. we have limited options. there aren’t many canon femslash pairings. but for the love of god, this is not an excuse to ignore or heaven forbid condone abuse simply because it’s two women. these discussions need to be had and i’m not seeing it.


posted 1 week ago with 21 notes - via sansaofhousestark