I Think That The Limited Contact Stance Of “to Consent To Sex You Must Understand Sex” Is Like. A
i think that the limited contact stance of “to consent to sex you must understand sex” is like. a little bit ableist? there are a lot of people like me, who are disabled, and want, like, or consent to sex, for whatever reason. but some of us dont have the mental capability TO understand sex, even when we are adults. that doesnt mean we arent able to not understand the possible effects of sex, it doesnt mean we cant say no or yes, it just means we dont understand it to the same level an able bodied person would.
As you said, understanding sex doesn't mean the same for everyone. Disabled people can understand sex, even if it is slightly different to the understanding of an abled bodied person.
More Posts from Quidditism and Others
It's so telling that the 3 main arguments against consanguinamory are birth defects, assault, and personal disgust.
"What if the babies are born disabled?!"
What if they don't want kids? Hm? What then? Also, even if they did want kids, that's also fine because it's take generations for a debilitating disability to form, and the chances of that only increase by 3% and since I'm gonna wager most people aren't consanguinamorous, I don't see why that matters. Non-relatives give birth to disabled kids all the time. Being disabled isn't a bad thing. Being inbred doesn't mean you're automatically going to be born disabled. They use the whole think of the children bullshit to shut down the conversation.
"But my relative assaulted me/there are relatives out there who assualt their family, therefore consanguinamory is bad!"
If it isn't consensual, it's not consanguinamory, it's abuse. This is like if someone said, "Gay men are bad because some gay men have assaulted other men." Oh, wait, they do say this, don't they? And y'all keep reinforcing it with this kind of thinking.
"I just think it's icky."
That's fine, but your personal disgust shouldn't dictate how others should or can live their lives. No one is forcing you to date your relative(s). Not everything is for or about you. If people are happy and aren't harming anyone, then it's fine. It's fine, y'all.
radical queerness is everywhere. there are people who have confusing feelings about their race, age, abilities, WHATEVER else, and don't have a word for it. They will find it. there are paraphiles who are familiar with their attractions but don't know where to go, or what to do about it. They will know. they probably feel like freaks right now, though. as more and more people discover what radqueer is and what it means, the antis will fade out. you cannot stifle the expressions, the realness and the happiness of so many people. 🌈🍓
Very valid concerns! We do have an alternate flag that differs a lot from theirs if that's of any interest! /info
so i was browsing for a bit and found these
two radqueer ideologies that seem similar at face value due to their aesthetics but are actually starkly contrasted, quidditsm and consistent progressivism i think both of these provide an interesting and cohesive look at how radqueer liberation might be achieved so i made this chart to compare and contrast them
just to clarify i'm not taking a side on either of them, i just wanted to analyze them alongside each other
what are your thoughts on these?
You CAN be eco friendly with tech!!
Use energy saver mode
Dont keep your pc and chargers plugged in when not in use. Better yet, get outlets that can switch off.
Buy energy efficient products
Replace parts instead of scrapping the whole product, and when it is beyond repair, recycle or sell for parts
Replace your phone battery instead of buying a new phone
Buy used/refurbished. They’re just as good as new, but youre not contributing to more demand
Try to buy local
Buy sustainably sourced accessories or ones that can be easily composted or properly disposed of
Use Ecosia to plant trees while you search
Use wildhero to plant trees with your email
Limit AI usage
EUROPEAN CITIZEN INITIATIVE (ECI) : Ban of conversion practices in the European union. Just 762.726 more signatures
for this campaign to reach its goal before May 17th !!!!
Normalize not liking things for no reason or for stupid reasons.
Normalize disliking things others like and still treating them (the person and the thing in question) with respect.
Normalize not having an opinion on things.
Normalize not knowing things and asking others about them.
Normalize doing research.
Normalize disagreeing with your friends' tastes.
Normalize having mixed feelings about things.
Normalize being proud and loud about things you're into.
Normalize trying to emphasize with those you have opposing views with.
If something doesn't HURT anyone
It's okay.
We're only human!
We are not perfect and nobody should expect us to be.
Allow yourself to be you and let others be themselves.
if you feel like you're always getting talked over, or if you feel like you're always accidentally interrupting people, you should consider looking into some of the linguistics research about conversation style and turn-taking. lingthusiasm podcast has a great episode called "how to rebalance a lopsided conversation" that goes over some of this research in a really accessible way; Deborah Tannen's book You just don't understand is an early book¹ that's aimed at general audiences on the same topic.
the thing is, when there's conflict in how a conversation flows, often what's going on is a mismatch in norms or expectations -- not that one person is necessarily acting "wrong" and the other person is "right." the mismatches in norms/expectations can and do align with existing power structures in society, but being more aware of them can really help you as an individual trying to navigate them.
you can train your brain for more linguistic awareness! start listening for pauses, intakes of breath, or back-channeling that's meant to support, not interrupt. try it out!
¹ I am linking to the wikipedia page for the book rather than a link to buy the book because it's kind of outdated and the criticism section on the wiki page is pretty reasonable. If you do read this book, be prepared for uhhhh period-typical gender essentialism that, to my knowledge, Tannen has not particularly updated her views on in the intervening time. But it is an influential and important book, just read it skeptically imo
I am trying to choose to hope.
I am choosing to imagine public transportation.
Grocery stores with attached soup kitchens to decrease food waste.
Neighborhood meal- and garden-sharing programs.
Green spaces connecting to other green spaces.
The rainforest ADVANCING, churning up dry soil and turning it dark and healthy.
The sky filled with birds and the sea with fish, their populations increasing.
The air and water clean.
Emissions-free vehicles on roadways, with speeds governed, and safe streets for tricycles, bicycles, dogs, deer, and stray soccer balls.
Solar panels on every public building, over every parking lot.
Beehives and wildflowers on the open berms between roadways.
The total lack of gunshots around the world, and instead the sound of shovels, digging holes to plant fruit trees by public sidewalks.
-
decadence-and-karma liked this · 3 weeks ago -
permasleepymoth liked this · 3 weeks ago -
quidditism reblogged this · 3 weeks ago
