PRESS CTRL OR COMMAND+ FOR BIGGER TEXT, CTRL OR COMMAND- FOR SMALLER TEXT
SKIP TO NAVIGATION & SEARCH | SKIP TO CONTENT

“…that what is currently recognized as queer studies is, for instance, unacceptably Euro-American in orientation, its purview effectively determined by the practically invisible—because putatively nonexistent—bounds of racial whiteness. It encompasses as well (to continue for the moment with the topic of whiteness) the abiding failure of most supposed queer critique to subject whiteness itself to sustained interrogation and thus to delineate its import in sexual terms, whether conceived in normative or nonnormative modes. In other words, to speak personally, it bothers me less that white practitioners of queer critique tend not to address the significance of racial nonwhiteness in the phenomena of sex and sexuality they explore (though one often wishes they would, and, indeed, some do) than that they tend not to address the effect of racial whiteness on the very manifestations of those phenomena and on their understanding of them; for the upshot of this failure—somewhat paradoxically, given the interest of queer criticism in definitional fluidity—is an implicit acquiescence to received notions of what constitutes sex and sexuality, however nonnormative, as though the current hegemony in this regard were not thoroughly imbricated with the ongoing maintenance of white supremacist culture.”

Phillip Brian Harper—The Evidence of Felt Intuition: Minority Experience, Everyday Life, and Critical Speculative Knowledge

This black critique on the cultivation of “queer knowledges” is really interesting.  Maybe I’ve been reading too much Foucault but it’s interesting to see how sexuality has been constructed through forms of (white) domination and power (the discourse of medicine, law, institutions of power).  This searing critique starts to make links between race and sexuality as mutually informing, but also unique in their positionalities.

(via queerinsurrection)

i’ve been struggling with this lately in my reading up on trans* issues, non-binarism, gender queerness and fluidity etc. it just seems like gender itself (as well as the means to escape/challenge binarism) is imagined and conceived of in very white terms. or at least, i don’t see any acknowledgment/engagement with the notion that gender can be and is constructed and lived in different ways, specifically in ways related to culture and race. for example that notions of racial authenticity and loyalty (and religion!) are tied up to gender within communities of color in ways that they’re not for white folks, and that there’s a risk of cultural alienation for not adhering to hetero/ciscentric gender norms that’s simply not there for white folks. a white post-op trans woman is not going to get accused of not being “really” white or of setting back/wanting to damage the race. or of being whitewashed, or an oreo, etc. and stuff like how uneven access to health care or greater economic instability affects how trans* and genderqueer identities are lived. if anyone knows of any resources that talks about this stuff, i’d appreciate a link.

(via so-treu)

(via hexgoddess)

{ LINK: Lesbian Sex With Men }

(Source: sapphoria, via lucypaw)

{ unpopular opinion: }

thejuthikakid:

aintitgrand:

hopesichord:

fattiesinlove:

aphoenixdisplaced:

I agree with slutshaming. I think that there should be more of it going on. Why would anyone want to encourage people to dress in a way that makes them appear as though they have no self respect. Dressing like a whore doesn’t mean that you are self confident… BUT as a thought, which is more important to you, your body or your mind? I think people should spotlight what they feel they have to offer… I’m sure there are some girls out there who dress like hoes despite being intelligent, kind, honest to goodness wonderful people, but I dont think that their clothes necessarily portray that. I dont think that its wrong for actresses/singers/women in general to be proud of the fact that they are succeeding without being skanky or without making a fool out of themselves. I dont think its right to consider that a negative thing.

Okay, Rant done.

Why are people so unfortunately obsessed with a naked human as a sexual object instead of just a physical body?

Wear whatever the fuck you want. Gaga’s walking around with no pants on half the time, it doesn’t mean I respect her any less.

Anyway “slutshaming” doesn’t entirely revolve around telling girls with little clothing on that they’re sluts, it has more to do with telling women that they can’t have as much sex as they want because it makes them, somehow, “dirty”.

[image: animated GIF (link): person with long straight blonde hair and light skin, wearing a white blouse and dark tie and making an annoyed, “are you serious?”-type facial expression.]

oh please please please let me show you to a door so you can get the fuck out

Why would anyone want to encourage people to dress in a way that makes them appear as though they have no self respect. 

Maybe they don’t look like they have self-respect to you, but to others they look fantastic. Self respect is knowing who you are and knowing what you stand for, it is not subjective to clothing choices. Self-respect is for yourself, for every person who wants to respect themselves, not for you to judge whether or not a person has self-respect.

Dressing like a whore doesn’t mean that you are self confident… BUT as a thought, which is more important to you, your body or your mind?

Again, none of your business. Self-confidence comes in many ways, and again, you are not the judge. Dressing like a whore is what I do. I love showing off my body. I like my mind as well, but I like my body as well. 

I think people should spotlight what they feel they have to offer… I’m sure there are some girls out there who dress like hoes despite being intelligent, kind, honest to goodness wonderful people, but I dont think that their clothes necessarily portray that.

Offering someone their body is not something bad. It’s actually healthy to have sex, you know, and if they want to have sex, if they want to look sexy, go right ahead! It doesn’t matter what other people think of them if they feel good about their own body. Having ‘class’ and ‘self-respect’ is really a definition that many people have for themselves to judge other people and feel good about themselves. Do you feel good about yourself that you’re slut-shaming? Because frankly, it looks that way. 

I dont think that its wrong for actresses/singers/women in general to be proud of the fact that they are succeeding without being skanky or without making a fool out of themselves. I dont think its right to consider that a negative thing.

Loving sex and loving your body is making a fool out of themselves? I think these people are gutsy and I love what they have to offer because they feel GOOD about their bodies, and they don’t give a fuck about others. I would love to wear a miniskirt and rock it to show others that I love my body and who I am, and I can’t because of people like you, people who make snap judgments about a random person and instantly attach their sexual experience like that. 

^ reblogging for awesome commentary.

(via juthikaforpresident-deactivated)

{ LINK: Savage Love by Dan Savage }

tiaramerchgirl:

Reblogging for EXCELLENT commentary.

psalmintheair:

[snip]

HOLD THE FUCKING PHONE.

On first read I didn’t realise that this was serious. Then I read the outraged comment underneath, did a double take, and clicked the link to view the source.

Wait a minute, this wasn’t satire? This wasn’t a tongue-in-cheek piece meant to poke fun at the way some sexual people view the idea of sexless romantic relationships? This was actual advice offered to a minimally sexual person in search of understanding and guidance? 

Dan Savage, I don’t know where to start. Firstly, you clearly don’t understand asexuality. It’s not about lack of confidence, for starters. I’m an ace and I am fucking proud of my body. I am not a virgin and you know what? While I was having sex, I was good at it. I stopped having sexual relationships solely because I don’t like sex. I know that, as a sexual person, this might be hard for you to fathom. It’s like when someone tells me they don’t like chocolate. That seems bizarre to me. I fucking love chocolate. I eat it all the time. Sometimes I crave it so badly that I go out of my way to get it. It’s delicious. It’s satisfying.

But chocolate isn’t for everyone. Some people just don’t like it. There is nothing wrong with those people’s taste buds or their attitude towards eating chocolate. They just don’t like it. Their personal tastes shouldn’t be questioned just because they are a minority and most people can’t imagine a life without chocolate. They shouldn’t be forced to try different types of chocolate, or made to feel weird because they don’t like it. Chocolate eaters need accept that different tastes exist, and move on. The fact that some people don’t like chocolate doesn’t threaten your right to eat and enjoy it yourself. If you feel like your enjoyment of chocolate and confidence in your chocolate eating ability is threatened just because someone else isn’t interested in chocolate, well, that’s your problem.

Moving on from the chocolate metaphor (because I think I’ve beaten that dead horse enough), since when did sex become an obligatory part of a romantic relationship? Yes, most people involved in a romantic relationship expect that sex will, eventually, be a part of it. Whether it be at the end of the first date, or after three, or after months, or after a wedding, sex usually comes in to the picture. But only because both partners want sex. Just like people who want to do a lot of talking in their relationship are going to be most compatible with someone else who enjoys frequent and open communication.

And yes. If an asexual knowingly entered into a relationship with someone they knew to be sexual and lead that person to believe that they also enjoyed sex and would want to engage in sexual activities in the future, that would be unfair. Dishonesty of any sort is unfair in a relationship. 

But asexuals should not be disqualified from the dating pool just because they want different things out of a relationship than fully sexual individuals. If they are open about their asexuality when the subject comes up, they aren’t doing any harm. They aren’t ‘inflicting’ themselves on poor hapless sexuals who are now going to find themselves trapped forever in a sexless relationship with a permanent case of blueballs. Asexuals are simply seeking out like-minded individuals to establish a romantic connection with.

Sex is not a necessary or obligatory part of dating or relationships, but a personal choice. No one is obligated to be in a sexual relationship if they do not wish to be, just as no one is obligated to enter into a sexless relationship if sex is something they need from their partner. 

For those who fall in between asexuality and full sexuality, things get a little more complicated. They need to find someone who is willing to have some sex, but either has a lower than average sex drive like themselves, or is willing to compromise and find a happy medium that both sides of the relationship are comfortable and happy with.

Compromise is an important part of any relationship. And while no one should compromise themselves, it is perfectly normal for people to make some compromises in order to improve compatibility with the person they love. While no one should ask a person do deny themselves sex, there are a lot of people who value other things before sex and would be perfectly happy to have less sex than they are used to in order to make a relationship work with someone who has a lower sex drive than themselves. And for those who aren’t? Fine. They are entitled to seek out as much sex as they like, with fully sexual partners.

Having asexuals and demi-sexuals in the dating pool isn’t going to limit anyone’s options - just broaden their horizons. 

Dan Savage: blargh.  psalmintheair: AWESOME.

(Source: fuckyeahaces, via so-treu)

{ LINK: My name escapes their minds: Violence Towards Women }

thepeacockangel:

Whenever I hear sex negative feminists proclaim that “porn is violence towards women” or “high heels are violence towards women” I can’t help but feel incredibly hurt.

First of all, I have experienced actual violence towards women. I’ve been a victim of sexual assault…

(via juthikaforpresident-deactivated)

{ Sex positivity and other lies on Tumblr }

it-takes-a-muscle:

madamethursday:

I remember my first encounters with the sex positivity/sex positive movement, especially through the internet. I remember loving the basic principle of the thing: “Sex is awesome! No one should be ashamed of their sexuality or wanting sex! Let’s bring it out into the open so we can all enjoy a healthy, happy relationship with sex!”

I can get with that, really. 

But there was this lie in the whole thing, and the lie was told by blog after blog, webpage after webpage that talked a great game about how we can be open about sex, but seemed to equate sex with the nude bodies of thin, conventionally attractive, blonde white women in male-gaze centric pornography, as though if I really pushed myself to enjoy such titles as Biker Bitches 5 and clinically lit photoshoots of a woman with her legs in improbably acrobatic positions, I’d be making the world a better place. Because that’s what the world needed, more people to applaud the open display of sculpted bodies as though somehow, that would liberate my fat, pansexual ass from the confines of sexual oppression. As though the ways in which society has pushed at me and pushed at me, telling me to keep my fat ass covered and my queer thoughts to myself is the same as what society tells a 5’8, 110 lbs,  straight, white woman with no disabilities. Because it isn’t. 

People have been celebrating the sexualities of attractive white people for centuries. In fact, I’d say if there were ever a time when people’s discomfort towards sex dissipates and they’re willing to accept, tolerate, and engage with sexual content is WHEN it comes in the form of these bodies, these pre-approved forms. 

We actually accept a lot of sex in our society. We accept Victoria’s Secret ads and commercials, we don’t mind Calvin Klein giving us artsy black and white shots of picturesque, perfectly chiseled men in their underwear. Hell, we’ll even let those kinds of things get away with some homoerotic subtext. If two underwear models should be embracing themselves in their latest Victoria’s bra-and-panty set, we’re sort of okay with this. We accept movie after movie that might as well be porn without the money shot because the White Ingenue and White Hero Du Jour are in it. 

To pretend that the level or type of repression of sex is the same across the board, or that conventionally attractive, thin, able, cis, straight white people need the same amount of liberation as others is a lie and a slap in the face to those who know differently. 

I mean, just look at the shit the Lane Bryant ad got for something that Victoria’s Secret would’ve gotten no comment for. And can you imagine if they’d dared to use a dark-skinned model for that commercial, a fat Black woman or a fat Southeast Asian woman, or a fat transgendered non-white model? They probably wouldn’t have aired it at all. 

When’s the last time you saw anyone advertising non-GLBT products with obviously, openly GLBT models and themes? When’s the last time you saw a butch lesbian selling you toothpaste or a transman hocking insurance or a disabled person shilling laundry detergent? 

So when I take these things into account, I think of my experience with going through these “sex positivity” sites. 

I looked and looked in those sex positivity blogs and sites, in their pictures and stories and I didn’t find a lot of fat people (male or female), people of color, queer people. I have yet to find a mainstream sex positivity site (yes, this movement has a mainstream) that features transgendered people in all their beauty. Forget seeing disabled people displaying their various modes of sexuality. Forget seeing their bodies displayed as revolutionary and world-changing and an example of how sex is really, really awesome. 

I learned soon enough that most sex positivity is actually White Straight Thin Able Cisgendered Cissexual Positivity. 

And the world is already positive enough on those traits, thank you very much. 

I see so many blogs that are about how great sex is, showing sex, getting the great nudes and erotica and porn out there to the masses, showing it openly. 

But outside of blogs dedicated specifically to certain subsets of people (for instance, the fabulous fuckyeahblackdykes Tumblr or fuckyeahcurvygirls feed), the mainstream sex blogs are doing what mainstream sex blogs have always done. Teaching us that beautiful sex = white, thin, straight people. 

Worse yet, so many queer oriented blogs are so white, able, and cis that it hurts. I’m a pansexual/cisgender/cissexual person, and when I see these blogs I see the white, Western version of queerdom splattered across the screen. Occasionally I’ll see a white person with a partner who is non-white, but it’s rare. The usual ratio seems to be one to every fifty or so posts. Shots and stories and displays of people of color together, with no white persons involved, are limited to specialty feeds. 

And I have yet to see these sorts of “Fuckyeah[insert thing]” feeds focusing on disabled, queer people of color. I wouldn’t begin to hope to see disabled, queer PoC held up on the mainstream blogs and sites or even thought of. 

Why do I go on about all this? As though those who are aware don’t already know it and those who aren’t aware don’t want to deny it?

Because I’m tired of people defending porn, acting as though somehow I’m a sex negative person and a traitor to sexual liberties if I disdain and actively hate the U.S. porn industry that holds up “feminist” porn, or porn directed by a few women who have been trained in the male gaze as though it will appease me. As though women haven’t been repeating the sexist, male-centered messages we’re fed all our lives, as though most of these feminist directors aren’t white, able, cisgendered women who come with loads of their own prejudices. Women can oppress other women. And indeed, much of misogyny and rape culture in the U.S. is transmitted from woman to woman, from mother to daughter, friend to friend, sister to sister. So don’t tell me that because the person behind the camera has a vagina and ID’s as female that I should be impressed by a product that looks and feels exactly like what men put out. 

Because, honestly, it’s like telling me I should feel liberated as a pansexual woman because so many men enjoy seeing two women kiss each other for their pleasure and “lesbian” (ie - female-on-female for male pleasure) porn is popular . No, thanks. That’s not liberation, that’s control by other means. 

I’m tired of the lies. 

If you’re sex positive and you’re not making an active effort to include and celebrate all kinds of sexuality from all kinds of people? You’re a fucking liar. There it is. You’re a liar. 

Because sex positivity and body positivity and anti-racism and fat acceptance and the disability movement and queer positivity and womanism are part of the same thing. 

Same with any movement. Fat acceptance? If you’re only showing fat white people or fat able people or fat straight people, then you’re not fat accepting, you’re just white supremacy enforcing and trying to bring chubby people under that umbrella of dominance. 

I’m tired of the people who put up some Tumblr blogs and showcase the same old, same old and act like they’re part of a revolution. They’re not. They’re part of making sure that lots of other people know exactly who’s sex is celebrated and who’s isn’t.

So I say FUCK sex positivity. I want sex inclusivity. 

I reblogged a quote from this text earlier, but here’s the whole thing. It is well worth reading and it’s something that I personally need to bear in mind.

awesome

[image: pie chart titled “The Men On Tumblr”.  the green part represents “Straight”, and the red part represents “Gay”.  chart is almost entirely red, with a tiny slice of green.  the logo for GraphJam is in the bottom-left corner.]
girlsayswhat:

lgbtlaughs:

(Submitted by jrdoesdiscodisco)

What about the bisexuals, asexuals, pansexuals, and polysexuals?

yeah this is bullshit.  dividing people into ONLY hetero or gay is pretty fucked up on many levels.

[image: pie chart titled “The Men On Tumblr”.  the green part represents “Straight”, and the red part represents “Gay”.  chart is almost entirely red, with a tiny slice of green.  the logo for GraphJam is in the bottom-left corner.]

girlsayswhat:

lgbtlaughs:

(Submitted by jrdoesdiscodisco)

What about the bisexuals, asexuals, pansexuals, and polysexuals?

yeah this is bullshit.  dividing people into ONLY hetero or gay is pretty fucked up on many levels.

(via girlsayswhat-deactivated2011082)

{ Despite popular discourse to the contrary, people who sleep with whomever they want and whenever they want are capable of and generally do respect themselves. }

(Source: sexuallytransmittedsadness, via bubonickitten)

“Wearing a revealing item of clothing is a legitimate and legal form of sexual expression. Rape is not.”

STFU Sexists

There are just some moments where you have to highlight things that are just perfectly said. 

(via newwavefeminism)

the shitfuck whose ridiculous crap prompted this response wasn’t just misogynist, either — their arguments were also full of racism, cissexism, binarism, and asexual erasure (and probably more shit that i missed).  real piece of work.

(via sdfwe4332-deactivated20120124)

splatterdick:

this ain’t livin’: Glee: Sexy

The show spent a lot of time making fun of people who choose celibacy, implying that they are ignorant and naive. Actually, it did more than implying by having Emma select ‘Afternoon Delight’ as the celibacy club’s anthem. Look at all the clueless frigid celibate people who are too stupid to know what that song is about! Naturally, no one chooses celibacy for informed reasons, no one who is celibate is educated about sexuality, and celibacy is rooted in ignorance and fear.

(Source: se-smith, via sdfwe4332-deactivated20120124)