It’s also fair to criticize someone who makes a statement like, “I’d never date a feminine man” or “feminine men are ugly/repulsive/disgusting.” But OP sounds like they are making a strawman argument. And there has been (justified) criticism from some queer theorists about making masculine men and feminine women standards of beauty in the gay community. Sure, if you think masculine men or feminine women are more valuable human beings or if you discriminate against those who don’t fit those standards (which I think is more common than people “discriminating” against people for liking more gender normative people) THAT is a problem. long term, monogamous, romantic ones) over others, despite the damage it does to those whose relationships do not and/or never will fit that frame.Īnd I have yet to meet anyone who claims someone’s sexual preference for masculine or feminine people is problematic. It means that you’re for the promotion of an institution that awards privileges for certain types of relationships (i.e.
I have no idea what possessed you to send me this ask, but I would strongly recommend that you get off the internet and go think about your fucking life choices.Īlso: gay marriage IS assimilating, to a degree. Men are not monsters, women are not innocent angels, and sex is not inherently degrading no matter who you have it with, how many times you have it, what kind of sex you have, or how many people you have it with as long as consent is given by all parties.ħ) As a final note, this kind of rhetoric is really, really damaging to lesbians who have been the victims of sexual assault perpetrated by men, because by your stated definition, a lesbian assault survivor is “tainted” and no longer a “gold star”, and that is a whole lot of salt in a very deep wound that absolutely no one in that situation deserves. Everyone’s journey is different, and pretending that there’s some “gold star” tier of any sexuality is not only weird and obsessive, it also unnecessarily shames people for needing time to discover themselves.Ĥ) A corollary to #3: the very concept of a “gold star lesbian” is also inherently sexist, because you’re not only demeaning women who are romantically and sexually attracted to men, you’re also implying a really gross dichotomy wherein women are “pure”–or “golden”, if you will–until they have been touched by a man, which taints them, because men are somehow dirty?ĥ) This logic leads to the idea that having sex with a man inherently devalues women–which smacks of not only Conservative Christian ideology and abstinence-only deceit-based sex ed, but also of emotionally-stunted Puritanical values, and establishes men as an inherent threat to women, which is:Ħ) A putrescent pile of TERF horseshit. Because it implies that if a woman realizes she’s a lesbian later in life, after having boyfriends–or even a marriage, which may or may not include kids–that she is somehow “lesser” for it. Like, your-grandma-would-slap-you-for-this levels of rude.Ģ) I know I already said it, but it bears repeating: my sexual orientation, partners, and behaviour is none of your fucking business, and never will be.ģ) The term “gold star lesbian” is pretty offensive. Period.īut, since you’ve presented your whole ass to me for target practise and I am a woman who doesn’t believe in turning down opportunities for a good time, here’s an itemized list of everything wrong with your ask:ġ) It’s rude. My sexual orientation, behaviour and partners are none of your fucking business. But you’ve caught me on a bad day nonny, so to you I say: What in the unbridled, everliving FUCK made you think it was okay to send this?īecause, NEWSFLASH! This? Was not okay! You don’t get to go up to random strangers on the street and start asking them questions about their sex lives, and you sure as hell don’t get to pull that shit on the internet because you’re a coward hiding behind the anon option. Usually I’d delete or ignore it, for a lot of reasons. Usually, I wouldn’t answer an ask like this.