anti_cishet_aktion
A space for LGBTQIA+ people to express themselves.
RULES
-
Familiarize yourself with the site-wide Code of Conduct
-
Be nice to each other, no bigotry of any kind
Bigotry includes transphobia, homophobia, aphobia, sexism, racism, ableism, etc. Hold each other accountable. If you see something, say something. -
Don't link to transphobia
Please don't link to transphobia (or other bigotry), even if your personal intent is to challenge the bigotry in some way. Provide a content warning label in the title of your post where applicable. -
Be dank; don't be not-dank
No liberalism, capitalist apologia, imperialism, etc. -
Harassment
Cyber-stalking, harassment, and all other forms of threatening another comrade will result in removal.
Threatening, inciting violence, and promoting harm to another comrade shall result in removal. -
No sexually explicit content
As badly as some of us want to get saucy here, do not post sexually-explicit content that could reveal your personal or confidential information. Until there is a way this could be safely executed, all sexually-explicit posts will be removed to keep our comrades safe. -
Do not post NSFL Content
It will be removed. -
We are not a crisis service
We can't guarantee an immediate response. This does not mean no one cares. If you need to talk to someone at once, you may want to take a look at this directory of Hotline Numbers.
If you need help but don’t feel comfortable making a post for any reason, please message the moderators. We will be glad to talk with you privately, or help in any other way that we can.
view the rest of the comments
I strongly agree with you that the white maleness matters there. After calming down I realize I clearly said a lot of ignorant things in my argument.
There's a reason we call them reactionaries.
It's an interesting issue and talking people round from that reaction is difficult. Ultimately nobody wants to take away the fact that you definitely do experience expression for being gay but that the white men are overly represented and have overly dominant voices within the lgbt community to the point of harming other causes because they don't think to shut the fuck up from time to time, in fact they're happy to talk about what they think of other causes, even directly harming them with shit.
This happens in smaller subsets too. For example the same fragile reaction occasionally occurs among trans women, who are overly dominant within trans circles and some (not all) have a fragile reaction to this being pointed out rather than working to reduce that dominance and elevate trans male voices.
But the white male reaction is a very similar one to the same fragile white male reaction that occurs among cis people when you raise women's issues. Which is why the whiteness is specifically highlighted. There's different issues with black men, but their experiences and issues are quite unique to their intersection and their skin colour doesn't usually enter into their issues patriarchally unlike white men for example when you get into white men and racial fetishisation.
It's very difficult to have these conversations because people often have these reactions when their power is questioned, especially when it's power they don't want to acknowledge.
They are called reactionary because they think the past is better than the present or future.
Not because they are reactive
This is not the marxist usage. The marxist usage of the word is as a descriptor of the monarchist opposition to revolution, referring to the opposition as the reaction to the revolutionaries of 18th century france purely in a materialist way as a literal reaction to the existence of revolutionaries being a change in the material conditions provoking a reaction.
This in turn informs all other marxist usage of the phrase, referring to various forms of reaction to conditions that the left creates.