this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2024
109 points (94.3% liked)

Asklemmy

44160 readers
1362 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Please don't think I'm here to complain about rizz or skibidi toilet etc. Thats all fine by me.

The term I dislike strongly is 'eeeh' before you make a statement disagreeing with someone. (This is over text only). Now maybe I've been pavloved bc it's always used by someone disagreeing. But I'm happy with people disagreeing with me normally its just the 'eeeh' or 'erm' that annoys me.

So what's a random term that annoys you?

PS. Saying "eeeh actually 'eeh' is a perfectly fine term" would be a ridiculously easy joke and I will judge you for making it. And I know atleast one person will. Especially bow that I've said all this.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I've always thought queer had 2 connotations. The first being the slur. The second is a catch all for someone not lgbt or someone who doesn't know what they are yet.

[โ€“] terminally_offline@infosec.pub 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Agreed!

But there's also a certain expectation of "flamboyance" from the gay community, or you're "not gay enough" and I think a lot of self-identifying queer peeps are to blame.

On top of the poor history of the word, I just don't want to be associated with colourfulness and energy because that's simply not who I am. People from outside looking into LGBTQ+ assume that that's who gay men need to be because of media representation... It makes me tired.

[โ€“] frauddogg@hexbear.net 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

But there's also a certain expectation of "flamboyance" from the gay community, or you're "not gay enough" and I think a lot of self-identifying queer peeps are to blame.

I feel this is due to a noticeably high level of what I've come to call "the ladder-puller generation" among gay folk. Y'know, the white faux-upper-class guys or girls who got the white collar job, do everything in their power to maintain a pristine aura of political 'good-one-ness' even when it means throwing their disadvantaged supposed-kin under the nearest bus. The ones who pulled up the ladders behind them as soon as they got to 'routine brunch-goer' level. I put it on them, and the compatibles that just welcome cops and corporations into Pride when it was supposed to be a riot against those forces.

If someone isn't loudly and proudly out around me, if someone goes to bat for rainbow-washers that shuck and jive for thirty days just to pump extra profit, then I automatically assume they're a ladder-puller that would sell me out to whoever for whatever if it meant they could get a little bit further in the cosplay-cishettry that is their life; because sometimes, it's the ladder-puller gays that are more dangerous to us than the cishet settlers.

tl;dr, they might fuck like us, but they not like us; and it'd take a near-government level background check for me to trust someone like that. From where I sit, the ladder-pullers, the pristine-optics gays? They let all of our artists, our creators, and the gays actually worth knowing die to AIDS, 'cause it'd have been icky to cede them help. That's why I don't trust the optics-bothers. Because the optics-bothers and ladder-pullers were the only ones to make it out.