critical inclusionism: clarifications
what critical inclusionism IS-
- supportive of mspec lesbians, lesbian men, mspec gays, vincian/gay women, all non-binary people, all trans people, all xenogender people, all a-spec people, and all m-spec people
- supportive of trans men and transmascs having the language they deserve to describe their oppression (i.e supportive of terms like transandrophobia and transmisandry)
- analyzing inclusionism through context and queer liberation, not just “this is valid just because”
- against stating that the language someone can use for themselves is harmless (ie- against saying ‘words are just words’ because that ignores the very real impact that language can have- for example, identifying as mspec lesbian isn’t harmful, but a white person identifying as two-spirit is. words are more than just words- context matters)
- against all gender-criticals, TERFS, radical feminism, transmedicalism, ‘transracial’ as used in the ‘i identify as a different race/i want to transition races’ way, ‘transabled’ as used in the ‘i am abled but identify as disabled’ way, and ‘transage’ as used in the ‘i am an adult but identify as a child so it’s okay for me to sexually and romantically engage with a child’
- against the concept of validity in a queer context (i.e- there is no such thing as validity when it comes to actual queer identity, because queerness is about liberation and celebration, not cherry-picking)
- applying critical thinking and context to why queer identities are beautiful, and why some non-queer identities aren’t
- a celebration of queer people of color and cultural identities; pro-BLM/ACAB/landback/abolition, anti-ALM/Blue lives matter/BTB
what critical inclusionism is NOT
- “you need to prove you have ‘enough’ history and context to be valid/you’re not valid if your term doesn’t have much history”
- “this is valid just because”
vaporwave
theartofmadeline
andulkaphoto
snowghoul
turnnoffyourmind
jbbartram-illu
baratheonpilled
origamiaround
