Post ARXbFyyuwLU8sMDnCS by GDPHCommunity@nnia.space
(DIR) More posts by GDPHCommunity@nnia.space
(DIR) Post #ARWxiMCSDCykpOWols by comrade_lecter@nnia.space
2023-01-11T10:29:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
I don't think "queer" is some all encompassing, all inclusive label. It's an umbrella term, sure, like "gay" or "trans". It includes a lot of diverse experiences. People who feel like their identities are queer have the full right to use it. But I'm opposed to inflating queerness beyond this, I'm opposed to turning it into a supercategory all other non normative identities should be included in by default. Paraphilias aren't queer. For two main reasons: 1) "Paraphilia" used to be the umbrella term that includes queerness. I understand that it isn't like that for many people nowadays, but that doesn't mean we should pretend paraphilias are lesser and can just be forcedly shoved inside queerness.2) Queer spaces are unsafe for paraphiliacs, and paraphiliac political goals and personal support cannot happen within queer spaces without a huge change. I've just had a conversation about this on Twitter, and I'm upset people still think queerness is some inherent virtue instead of just a contemporary identity label popular among paramisiacs.
(DIR) Post #ARXY5NR7NSxTfnfBlA by comrade_lecter@nnia.space
2023-01-11T17:16:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
I started ranting about it out loud, and I think it helped me figure out the principal difference.I see "queer" as a social identity that unites people who fight for rights of those with non normative gender preferences and presentation. These people are more or less at the same page with what they want (freedom to express same gender attractions between peers/adults or lack of any attraction, freedom to modify your gender presentation as you wish), and with an exception for several bigoted outlier groups, stand together. They do not stand with us, because the majority of them thinks we should be exterminated for the sake of their progress. Therefore, for me, calling paraphilias queer is assimilating into a hostile community and potentially becoming more vulnerable to abuse. Why would I want that?But people who want to call paraphilias queer see queerness as an abstract philosophical category. They think "queer" is a convenient term for any non normative identity because it means "weird" and was traditionally used to denote an oppressed minority that successfully fights for its rights. For them, queerness is a universal symbol of being abnormal and rebelling. So they think paraphilias fit in.
(DIR) Post #ARXbFyyuwLU8sMDnCS by GDPHCommunity@nnia.space
2023-01-11T17:52:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@comrade_lecter it's either 2 sides:fight for queer rights or make paraphilias fit inside queers. can't understand shit but i have to figure this out
(DIR) Post #ARXbMRCYvo4a8VgL0C by boygirlalien@nnia.space
2023-01-11T17:53:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@comrade_lecter Do you think that there should be an umbrella term similar to queer, for paraphilias? Something to unite under? Paraphilia is, or propara, in a way, but it's not an ID label. I think I remember you being against being called a paraphile, which was was my first thought. I just like labels and find them helpful, so I'm not sure if this is important to you, or others. If queer is uniting under non normative relations to gender, then what are we uniting under? I'm not sure how I would describe it, other than maybe 'degenerate'. Uniting under having feelings and desires that society has decided is dangerous.
(DIR) Post #ARXoBVKmWcHPAidwXI by comrade_lecter@nnia.space
2023-01-11T20:17:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@boygirlalien I identify as a paraphiliac. I don't like "paraphile" for personal reasons. But I've seen people use it with no problem.
(DIR) Post #ARZCxTngzR8FHAa7aC by comrade_lecter@nnia.space
2023-01-12T12:29:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Some more thoughts: being included into queerness would be good if it had tangible benefits. Like access to support resources. But that won't work in our case, because, again, an average normophiliac queer is hostile, queer support groups aren't designed to accommodate us, but will gladly abuse us. Without anything helpful attached to it, "queer" is just a word. Yes, it's a fitting label for some people to describe their identity. Yes, some are emotionally attached to it. And these people should not be discouraged to explore it. But claiming a whole class of orientations to be inherently queer is not about feelings of particular people, it will have social consequences for everyone involved.
(DIR) Post #ARZnO1NqLdpZJLRjKS by irratizomb@nnia.space
2023-01-12T19:17:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@comrade_lecter I would like to preface what I am about to say with a couple things, which is typically not the strongest way to argue a point, in the academic sense, but is I am not after a strong argument but after one that clarifies something as this may be a distinction without difference that I am arriving at from approaching the position more colloquially or a position that has consequences I have not foreseen for it being not yet academically as rigorous as someone who has spent a lot of time parsing though queerness as a philosophical concept in an academic space.My position is that "queerness", as such, is a sociological super-catagory exactly because it has been used by normative society to denigrate not just other orientations but also paraphilias as other, lesser and and non-normative. Since society sees it as super-encompassing, everyone who fits within that, regardless of what our actual positions are, are compressed into that form, it is imperative that we either take that form and dismantle it, or recreate it into something positive. To use a more concrete analogy, my understanding of the situation is that society has used "queer" and "queerness" in the way that American society has used the term "Indian" historically. As such, it is entirely proper to take that forced term and turn it into something we can embody and make a point of pride.
(DIR) Post #ARZtQiFaXZgIZ3FfEX by comrade_lecter@nnia.space
2023-01-12T20:25:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@irratizomb queerness wasn't used by the society to denigrate paraphilias. I've never heard of someone being called queer by normophiliac haters for being attracted animals or inanimate objects."Queer" as a supercategory is a product of online discourse INSIDE the queer community.
(DIR) Post #ARZtaSmQugq9TpGQHg by comrade_lecter@nnia.space
2023-01-12T20:27:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@alyssawitchcraft @irratizomb people as individuals, regardless of orientation, have a claim to whatever term they think describes their experiences. But that doesn't mean queerness is suitable objectively.
(DIR) Post #ARZx3819UFaZLXVbTk by irratizomb@nnia.space
2023-01-12T21:05:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@comrade_lecter Hmm.... Perhaps, I have not had that particular experience, but that might be a consequence of my peculiar history, society and political geography and not a general trend. I will need to do more research, but I have largely found that term used pejoratively by people who were outside the queer community. Then again, I have lived primarily in rural United States.
(DIR) Post #ARZzhOoYeiGOvswrNg by comrade_lecter@nnia.space
2023-01-12T21:35:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@irratizomb well, yes, it IS used pejoratively - but against gnc and gay, bi, ace, pan, etc people.
(DIR) Post #ARa2KYJpS6Qvc0N9w8 by irratizomb@nnia.space
2023-01-12T22:05:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@comrade_lecter Right but what I am saying is that I, personally, have heard it used against paraphiles in particular as paraphiles.
(DIR) Post #ARaAcJw8SkZPquH1Rw by comrade_lecter@nnia.space
2023-01-12T23:38:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@irratizomb where?
(DIR) Post #ARaNe79yEj4yD0vkmG by irratizomb@nnia.space
2023-01-13T02:04:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@comrade_lecter In Rural Oregon in abouts Oregon City and in rural South Carolina both. Rural Americans do not see a difference, in general, between gays and foot fetishists. They are all "queer" that is to say, not straight, cis and typically, male and Christian.
(DIR) Post #ARaO4tBSJ6bsgKONYe by comrade_lecter@nnia.space
2023-01-13T02:08:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@irratizomb huh.Then again, in my language "queer" exists only as a rare loan word than means "LGBT" and is used exclusively by LGBT members. The closest to that is probably our version of "deviant".
(DIR) Post #ARaOHe0U2updNMLHm4 by irratizomb@nnia.space
2023-01-13T02:11:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@comrade_lecter Almost certainly, and that is why I offered my previous assessment. Because culture is gonna play a lot in this. American Christians do not see "attraction" as different from a "paraphilia" if you pressed them on a difference. They are both "deviant" from "normal" or "vanilla" as such both are queer. So queer discourse in America must include paraphiles, in order to be relevant to our lives as it is imposed.
(DIR) Post #ARaOPDGJMlAEkGM33g by comrade_lecter@nnia.space
2023-01-13T02:12:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@irratizomb the problem is, normie queer people treat us the exact same way homophobes treat them, and they aren't gonna stop unless the whole society changes.
(DIR) Post #ARaOkRBAokzxzQ4Wky by irratizomb@nnia.space
2023-01-13T02:16:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@comrade_lecter Well, then we have a whole society to change, at least, in America, in other countries the discourse can and should be different because the issues, while similar are not the same. The tactics and tools used in Europe will not necessarily work in America because of cultural differences. And vice versa. Where you are, your analysis actually looks spot on and easier to do, but I am saying, in general spaces where Americans and non-Americans intersect, like here, there is gonna be cross contamination. In America, however, there is precedent for changing a culture in precisely this way. The Amerindians have had a label thrust upon their varied selves, and have done quite well for themselves even if there is much work still to do. What matters is forming unity under the label. In America that means paraphile and LGBT unity.