Quidditism - Blog Posts
The flag situation
It's been brought to our attention that the original versions of the quidditism flags hel a lot of resemblance to the flag from a queer facsist group rising to "fame" lately.
At first, we elected to ignore it, but alas, nobody wants to be conflated with these people.
The flag has therefore been changed.
The old designs will stay up on this post and can of course still be used, but the main flag is now the one on the pinned/coining post.
Old flag designs:
New flag design:
just found this while scrolling and it seems remarkably similar to consistent progressivism but with contrasting values; wanted to ask what are the core fundamentals of quidditism and how does it compare to consistent progressivism; what would be some key differences between the two stances /neu
We could be considered similar for 2 aspects.
First one is, we're radqueer adjacent, and so are they. That means being pro-para, pro-bodily autonomy, pro-transid, and profiction for example.
The second similarity is that contrary to the radqueer community, that is closer to the MOGAI community on this point, we are not just a community for people to be themselves. We would like to do some activism as well, a trait we share with consistent progressivism.
However, the similarities stop there, and thank goodness.
I am working on an article about this, but they are basically fascists that covered themselves in rainbows. For a quick explanation, I reblogged this post (link) that explains the basics pretty well.
But let me give you the three main differences.
First: science denial. They redefine words and consider using Google and dictionaries as being conservative. Here is a screenshot of their Discord server.
In the thread linked to this, they list words that are conservative to use in their opinions. These words include parent, family, adult, anarchy, biology and age, amongst others.
Second: they believe everyone can consent to everything. Here is their resources about this. We quidditists have much needed nuance on this subject.
Third: to preface this, I'll start by sharing a screenshot of their definition of conservatism.
In short, they define anyone who holds discriminatory views as a conservative.
In practise, anyone that does not fully agrees with them is labelled a conservative. I won't get into it here, but it is one of the few cult tactics they use: the "Us vs Them" mentality.
Now, the bigger problem with this, is that they wish to violently genocide and torture everyone they see as conservative. They talk about this quite often in their Discord server, and even asks new members to describe how they would torture and violate a conservative in order to get verified.
Here is proof of them wanting to unforce this violence on everyone they label a conservative.
(other than their graphic & Discord sticker, the black & white images are quote pics made with a bot from messages on their servers, that they keep in a special channel)
Quidditism advocates for violence to only be used if you need to, as a last resort, and strictly as much as necessary and humane. Aka no torture, rape, slavery,...
I hope this clears things up! And thank you for your good faith question! /g
If anyone has any more questions, please send them my way! I'd be happy to answer them! /g
You can judge things in multiple ways at once. Things are rarely just good or just bad.
"wait but how can that work ?" instead of asking how their queer identity works, and how can it be valid, maybe ask them their experiences. ask how it feels to themself being a mspec mono, or lesboy, or turigirl, or whatever. instead of getting angry at queer identities which dont fit your standard, just perhaps let it go and ask them as a person what their identity means to them. stop policing identities and open up your mind a little.
Stop just asking "is it normal?" and start asking "is it harming anyone?" Lots of harmful things are normalized in this society and lots of things considered weird or rare are completely harmless. Whether something is considered normal or common shouldn't be the deciding factor in whether it's okay
Some women are conditioned to be fragile and weak, and to believe that it's a sin to outperform a man. Her feminism would involve allowing women to be strong.
Some women are expected to be strong at times when they can't. Her feminism would involve reassuring her that it's okay to not be strong.
Some neurodivergent people are raised to believe that they're too stupid to ever amount to anything. Their disability activism would involve reassuring them that they're capable.
Some neurodivergent people are raised to believe that they're smart and gifted, and are expected to live up to impossible standards. Their disability activism would involve allowing them to fail, make mistakes, be stupid, etc.
Some children are constantly reminded "you're the child, I'm the adult" in order to deny their autonomy. Their youth rights activism would involve treating them like an adult at times when they feel ready for it.
Some children are treated like adults in order to justify increased expectations or to downplay abuse against them. Their youth rights activism would involve allowing them to be a child.
There is no one-size-fits-all solution to oppression. Each individual person's experience is different. Whatever trauma is caused by their oppression, the activism should focus on undoing it.
Quidditism
Quidditism is an ideology and a movement that seeks to take peaceful action to push the world towards an accepting, tolerant and fully free future, where everyone can thrive without fear.
Why quidditism?
The word 'quiddity' has 2 major definitions. The first one being "whatever makes something what is is, the essence". The movement seeks to establish a world where everyone is allowed to fully embrace themselves and who they truly are. In other words we wish for people to embrace their essence. The second definition of the world 'quiddity' is "deviation from an established pattern or norm, eccentricity". The quidditism movement focuses on marginalised identities such as LGBTQIA+ identities or paraphilias as these people are not allowed, in today's society, to flourish as themselves without fear. In other words, the liberation and normalisation of people considered eccentric, whether it be by their gender presentation, attraction or neurodiversity, is central to our goal.
Emoji Code -🪷💫
Quidditism's core values
Now, let's go over quidditism`s beliefs and summarize them.
Radical Inclusion
Radical inclusion is the first of the values we'll go over. Being a radical inclusionist means accepting all 'good-faith' identities. But what even is a 'good-faith' identity?
There are 2 main criteria for an identity to be of 'good-faith'. The first one being that the identity is genuine, and not taken up to prove a point, to grift, or to be generally disingenuous. In other words, if you genuinely identify with it, this box is checked. The second criteria is the one where controversy arises, It is generally defined as being harmless. However, what is considered harmless may vary from individual to individual. Quidditists generally consider that as long as it doesn't do any real world harm (like taking up limited resources, although it is rare a simple identity can achieve this) and tries it's best to be non-offensive and non-bigoted, the identity is good faith. In other words, identifying as a transvestite because it feels right to you, and while having read up on the terms history is completely good faith, however identifying as the same thing to try and mock trans people isn't.
So, quidditists are radically inclusive: they support any genuine identity that does its best to be harmless.
Paraphilias & Contact
Now, we talked about paraphilias above. A paraphilia is defined as an unconventional sexual attraction. In our day & age, homosexuality isn't considered one, however back when the fight for the LGBTQIA+ community was far less advanced, it was considered a paraphilic disorder.
Wait a second, what even is the difference between a paraphilia and a paraphilic disorder? Nothing except the "disorder' part, aka the factor of "is it causing harm or distress to you or people around you".
However, paraphilias are never inherently considered disorders in quidditism.
Having said that, we consider them the same way as we do kinks and fetishes. They are cousins after all: kink regroups all use of unconventional sexual practises or fantasies while fetishes are a form of sexual desire strongly linked to a particular thing or activity. They overlap a whole lot, don't you think?
In general, we will use these terms interchangeably.
You could summarise quidditism's contact beliefs by "if it is consensual, it's fine", but you would need to define consent for this. So what is consent?
Consent, as a noun, is defined as the permission for something to happen or the agreement to do something. As a verb, it is defined as giving permission for something to happen or to do something.
Additionally, anyone who consents must be able to back out and change their minds at any point before, during or after what they initially consented to without fear of repercussions. They should also feel free to give (or not) their consent in the first place, and not be forced to do so.
There are a few points that we will examine further here.
Firstly, consenting to sex in itself is a complex thing and not just the act of understanding and agreeing, so there must be both a technical understanding of sex along with an emotional understanding of sex for consent to truly be possible.
Secondly, anyone of age and not under the influence can consent before regression, use of substance, sleep or death.
Thirdly, only older teens (16& up) should consent to adults, with proper harm reduction of course.
The thoughts on younger people are still being worked on.
And lastly, animals cannot consent to sexual acts due to not having the cognitive ability and speech for it. Additionally, just because an animal's body enjoys an act does not mean they consented to it, as consent is a clear agreement and acknowledgement, not body language or what you perceive.
Total bodily autonomy
Bodily autonomy is defined as the right to make decisions about your own body, life and future, without coercion or violence. When we say total bodily autonomy, it isn't trivial. In today's world, abortion access and rights are threatened more and more, women are still subject to genitalia mutilation at a very young age in multiple countries, and trans people need to jump through hoops to get gender affirming care. But to us, it doesn't stop there. We want to fight so that everyone has the right to make informed choices on what they do with their body and life, whether that's extreme body modification, gender affirming care, abortion, or just a tattoo.
Anti-psychiatry
Anti-psychiatry is the view that psychiatric treatment can often be more damaging than helpful. Do not the often in the above sentence. So, what does that mean in practise? A few things.
Psychiatric care should be entirely optional. Whether you want to recover with psychiatric help, by yourself or even not al all, you should be given all the necessary information to make that choice for yourself. This ties back in with the last point, total bodily autonomy, and with the next one.
Chosen Recovery
We've spoken about informed total bodily autonomy and what that would mean in psychiatry: the option to seek recovery or not. Here, we are extending this beyond psychiatry. We believe that no matter what you might have that could be recovered from, you should get to choose whether you want to or not. First, we believe that that is your right, and second, we are horrifically aware of the fail rates of forcing someone into recovery: as a general rule of thumb, if someone doesn't want recovery, they won't recover, no matter what you try. That doesn't mean you can't bring the option to their attention, just that ultimately, it is their choice, and theirs alone.
Transhumanism
Following up on all the bodily autonomy related beliefs, we have transhumanism. It is a movement that advocates the enhancements of the human body and condition by developing and making widely available new and future technologies that can greatly enhance longevity, cognition, and well-being. That would include wing or animal ears implants for transspecies folks, to only cite one of many examples.
Realmism
Realmism is an ideology based around the belief in magic and the multiverse. It promotes all faiths and religions, as well as the practise of reality shifting and the right to outlandish, weird, and uncommon beliefs, with an emphasis on being pro-delusion. If you wish to learn more, the entry on transid.org goes into more details.
Existentialism
Existentialism is the philosophical belief we are each responsible for creating purpose or meaning in our own lives. It isn't given to us by an authority. Whether you choose to seek it in faith, the arts, social causes or just your own happiness, it is entirely yours to craft.
Pacifism
Pacifism is a commitment to peace and an oppositioin to violence, war in particular. The quidditism movement believes that unless strictly necessary, violence should never be used, defining it as a last resort. How do we achieve our goals then? Educating.
Punk
Quidditism follows a very punk-ish ethos. The punk ethos is primarily made up of beliefs such as non-conformity, anti-capitalism, anti-authoritarianism, anti-corporatism, a do-it-yourself ethic, anti-consumerist, anti-greed, direct action, and not selling out".
Resources
🪷 Discord Server
💫 Blog
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.
May I ask how is Daddy's Little Toy missunderstod? It's not like Genderqueer where people wanted it to be banned because of transphobia. It's not like that. Daddy's Little Toy is not missunderstod. It's just a book where you supposed to be happy when a girl get's together with her groomer.
It's not a another Lolita. Lolita is not a romanc, and the writer of it did everything ín his power to make shure people know that. He himself was a surviver of CSA. And was a psychologist who showed in the book how awfull people justafy themself, but it's still veary clear that the main character is in the wrong when you read between the lines. Main whaile Daddy's Little Toy is a romance book, that the writer dedicated to her 3 years old dauther. The writer is niether a surviver of CSA, or a psychologist (probably doasn't know anything about it), and you are supposed to like the guy.
Wow 😑
Where the actual fuck did you get your information? 🤨
Let's start with Lolita:
Lolita was written by the Vladimir Nabokov. His life has been extensively documented by biographers and in his own memoirs, and there has never once been any suggestion that he was a victim of CSA
Nabokov was not a psychologist. Indeed, he was known for his strong and complex opinions about psychology. Most notably he openly mocked and rejected Freudian psychoanalysis
Lolita was very specifically modeled after the romance genre
Lolita is indeed written from the perspective of the abuser, but one element you may be missing is that the narrator Humbert does such a good job endearing himself and excusing, minimizing, and justifying his actions, that readers constantly fall into the trap of sympathizing, and even agreeing with him. The very term "Lolita" nowadays is used to mean a sort of precocious seductress because of this.
Continuing on to Genderqueer:
Regardless of their real reasons behind it, critics of Genderqueer always point to one or two panels that depict sexual activity. Taken out of context, they appear shocking and inappropriate. This is exactly what the critics of Daddy's Little Toy are doing. The biggest difference is that the critics actually managed to succeed this time.
And finally, as for Daddy's Little Toy:
Most people would undoubtedly consider Lolita to be the better book, but so what? Are we only allowed to read books about shocking or offensive subject matter if they are well-written? Who decides this? Why does it matter?
You have not read this book. I know that for a fact. You personally have no idea what the book is like. No one does, because the book cannot be found anywhere. You are simply parroting the incendiary claims from TikToks.
I don't fucking care if the book is one long, graphic description of a kindergarten bukkake party. It is fiction. It is not real. No one is harmed by it. It is the easiest thing in the world to avoid reading it. In fact there is no way that you can read it! So why does anyone even care?
I hope that clears things up for you.