General Discussion

[quote name="Casandraelf" date="2013-07-09 18:19:33" url="main.php?p=mb&board=gend&page=4&id=390306#401990"]Moving on, I have a little pet theory about homosexuality, although it could probably be applied to any alternate sexuality. The theory is this: homosexuality is a failsafe population control put in place by nature. Humans are hit with it the most because we don't have any natural enemies. Infighting and disease just aren't keeping us under control, so homosexuality occurs much more often in humans. Homosexual behavior has been recorded in the animal kingdom, but it's significantly less common than it is in humans.[/quote] That's an extremely common theory actually. And I believe it 100%. It's not working out for nature so well that there is now surrogacy but as long as a percentage of the population chooses not to breed then we should be fine. I already have two kids and am planning on fostering, adopting, and maybe having one more biological child. But my sister and her husband hate kids and just have a mess of dogs instead.

I possess little to no maternal instinct, and never plan on having kids- thankfully, my girlfriend is the same- and the one word that always slips into the conversation is 'adoption'.

(I think people tend to misunderstand- I am both not biologically able to have children with my partner/unwilling to carry and birth a child and simply do not want children.)

I really don't understand the stigma surrounding homosexual couples who look to adopt children- I mean, the child will obviously be better off in a stable home environment rather than an orphanage/a succession of foster homes..

@Meulin This is a safe place. If you don't like RuPaul, that's okay. I would like to know why.

@ Lyre
"I do have one question, though. I'm absolutely guessing, but isn't the idea behind this movement to make sure gender/sexuality etc no longer matter? And to make people aware that everyone is completely different in these regards? So why all the labels?"

I have a few things to say here!

1) It's really difficult to pin down what "this movement" wants, since it's a giant pool of people of vastly different backgrounds, all with slightly (or drastically) different beliefs and definitions. So it's important to remember that everyone might have a different thought of what they're trying to achieve here.

2) I like to think of LGBTQA (and all other encompassing queer folk there) and the label discussion similarly to how we view racial identity. There was a long time where a lot of people strove for "colourblindness", for "I don't see race" as an ideal. Now I'd like to think a lot more people are coming around to the idea/ideal that people can be different but equal. Saying "we are all human and that's all that matters, why divide things any further?" can be erasing to people whose culture and race are an integral part of their identity; conversely, there's always some people who shrug and don't care where their parents were born and don't want you to identify them by it.

I prize my identity as a part of me, integral and earned through years of frustrated searching. I am proud of it. Additionally, having a term I can reference when people ask me why I want to be called by non-gendered pronouns is helpful; unfortunately, lots of people don't view "because I would like it if you would" as a good enough reason. I am fiercely proud to call myself genderqueer and I want others to call me it too, in the same way that someone might hold up their femininity or their race as a mark of pride.

Not to mention it makes finding other people like me easier. You can always define yourself the troll way*, but other people's attention might not last for it, and there's no guarantee the long explanation will be easier to understand than the short one.

= = =

*Homestuck joke, troll titles and nouns are often long and extremely detailed, defining every aspect of an object or concept, where human terms are boring, quick, and less easy to understand at first glance HERP DERP

@ Meulin
"the fact that so many people look down on using multiple labels to describe oneself as 'looking for attention' or being a 'special snowflake' (a term i hate, because it discourages individuality and deviance from social norms) more inhibits the progression of civil and
social rights afforded to lgbtqia people than anything."

I completely agree about "special snowflake" as an insult. There's really nothing wrong with needing something as an individual that not everyone needs. Really it only makes sense, given every single person out there is an individual and all.

@Path I'm know I'm not the only straight asexual cisgender woman out there. Believing that's just plain silly.

@Casandraelf
Obviously it is easier to find individuals with the same orientation or gender identity the more common that identity is, since the accepted label is more mainstream. The further off the white/cis/male/straight beaten path you get, the more you have to invent terms to qualify your experience, leading to "gray ace" and so on. (Not trying to imply those are less in any way.)
But for those of us who can't find representation or role models, it's easy to believe we are alone, freaks and weirdos, until we do find a term that matches our internal vision. Then sometimes we can find others like us, to reassure us that we're not alone. That's one of the reasons I value labels.

I realize I didn't touch on the harmful aspect of them, the reason many of us dislike even using the term "labelling". I don't think it's too much to say that most of us are okay with labelling ourselves and not okay with others labelling us. So basically as long as nobody's judgemental or presumptuous there's really nothing inherently wrong with labels. Just use what people ask for and don't use anything they don't ask for. Haha, how hard is that, world?