Drakedrawz

the queer community needs to hype up disability pride month (july btw) while queer pride month is happening. the queer community needs to amplify disabled queer experiences.

the queer community needs to recognize intersex people and how many of us have disabilities related to our intersex variation - and this Still Does Not Prove Eugenicists Right.

someone in a wheelchair stood up? not my business.

someone has a service dog but doesn't visibly need it? not my business.

someone is acting weird? not my business.

someone is participating in a culture i don't understand? not my business.

someone got an abortion? not my business.

someone identifies in a way that doesn't make sense to me? not my business.

someone has a medical issue i don't understand? not my business.

whatever we do, we can't win. we can't be seen as actually nonbinary. people binarize us and often mock us or get aggressive or dismiss and ignore our nonbinaryhood or something else.

if we don't medically transition, we are "just cis trenders."

if we do medically transition, we are "just [binary trans] eggs."

we are "technically transmasc or transfem anyways" if we don't use these terms.

we are lumped together with binary trans men and trans women if we do use these terms. our nonbinaryhood is ignored or seen as some kind of "gender-lite."

we are aggressively pressured to disclose if we're AFAB or AMAB, TMA or TME, transmasc or transfem, "boy nonbinary" or "girl nonbinary." and if we refuse to answer, people get double mad at us and pick something for us anyways.

if we show the slightest hint of something that could be interpreted as binary gendered, we are immediately binarised.

if we put a lot of effort into looking the most ambiguous or androgynous or neutral, people still try to find something. and they become aggressive. people often EXPLODE [PT: explode] when they can't gender someone by glance.

our ways of expression are constantly mocked and ignored (like neopronouns, nonbinary-centering labels for gender and orientation, basically all things that are associated with nonbinary people).

but if we choose more typical ways of expression (for example, use "he/him" or "she/her" pronouns), people use it to ignore and dismiss our nonbinaryhood.

EVERYBODY knows (or should) that you DO. NOT. STOP. in Vidor, Texas. 

It’s best to just run out of gas elsewhere. Whatever you do, black folks, DO NOT STOP IN VIDOR, TEXAS. 

There’s a good chance you’ll get lynched or just come up missing - and I’m not joking.

also do NOT stop in Harrison, Arkansas!!!! (relatively close to OK and MI) a nazi town with a BIG KKK organization.

https://sundown.tougaloo.edu/sundowntowns.php

This website has a clickable map where you can see suspected and confirmed sundown towns by state, as well as information about whether these attitudes are historical or current.

reblog for the link

Typically asexuals don’t have protection to begin with (we are recognised partially in two countries as of 2025, may have updated since then but doubt it) so we aren’t included.

This is the first case of “asexual acts” being criminalised.

It’s illegal not to have sex?

Is it illegal not to have sex for religious reasons now? Such as a nun or priest?

Not only that; but the laws (if there are any) around consent have just been demolished. A man could now accuse a woman who won’t sleep with him of “asexual acts”, resulting in prison time. They might have a strict “not before marriage” faith/law, but don’t tell me someone won’t do this.

The wording creates such logical absurdity when applied to asexuality because, what constitutes an "asexual act"? If asexuality is characterised by an absence of sexual attraction and activity, then the concept of "practicing asexuality" as a criminal act becomes incoherent. The only "act" associated with asexuality is often the lack of sexual engagement.

Criminalising non-action?? A literal interpretation of the law could imply that simply not having sex or not experiencing sexual attraction is a criminal offense. (And THERE ARE LAWYERS AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS WHO INTERPRET THE LAW QUITE LITERALLY, the theory is where people interpret legislation literally and is known as Textualism in the United States)

How will the law affect religious practices like celibacy? (Celibacy is the state of voluntarily being unmarried, sexually abstinent, or both, usually for religious reasons.) Well, Niger is approximately 99% Muslim, with a small Christian minority (around 0.3% to 0.5%), and the Catholic Church has a presence in Niger, with dioceses in Niamey and Maradi. Priests and religious sisters are highly visible symbols of celibacy. While the law's intent is to target LGBTQIA+ individuals, its letter provides a tool for those who might wish to harass or persecute religious minorities by labeling their celibacy as a "prohibited practice."

They've left their MAIN religion open to persecution. And it'd be LEGAL.

They also didn't define asexuality in the act, which means, legally, any interpretation of asexuality could be argued in a court there, and WIN (should it be argued well enough that is). That's why acts have definitions or "this word or act is defined as..." at the start of them.

People are shipping, and they keep using the terms yaoi and yuri.

I'm doing my best to remind people that we have enbian for a reason, but I hate that I have to.