Eclectic Creative

When I was a kid, I liked to be a girly tomboy. I think this was the best you could describe my gender. I wasn’t afraid of bugs. I liked picking up worms, and I wanted to be outside digging in dirt, etc. I also liked sports well enough, though my dad, subconsciously sexist, spent more time with my brother playing sports and ignored me completely. I wanted to wear lace because I liked it, not because it was girly. My gender wasn’t exactly a question. It’s more like... people called me a girl, and I accepted it, but I never completely subscribed to everything feminine, but I wanted to do both. Every gender test says that I’m 50/50. There are things “feminine” I don’t subscribe to. And there are things masculine I don’t subscribe to. I never quite saw gender as this perfect binary in the first place because I always fit somewhere in the middle. I didn’t like the violence of the subscribed male characteristics, but I didn’t quite love the “Have to go shopping” mentality and materialism of what women were supposed to be. I suppose, too, that since I jumped countries, my ideas of feminine and masculine aren’t fixed either. And I wonder if there are days that some cis women just don’t feel like performing as women like I do, but go with whatever is on hand anyway. Or sometimes have fantasies about dressing up in historical men’s clothes for fun. Or just love the idea of people challenging gender norms because the roots of gender norms are not fixed. Skirts are only coded feminine because of pants, but call them by a different name and then they can be manly, like the toga... Beautiful calves are something from Tudor Times for men... not women. High Heels were made for men, not women. Pants were made for horse riding, not men. Lace was for both sexes. Eyeliner was for men and women as sunglasses kind of thing. Knowing the history of gender, etc, I feel less enthused by gender roles, in general, and I can’t quite say I always feel like a super feminine woman. Most of the time I honestly don’t. Most of the time I feel like I’m foreign to a lot of the idealized feminine things especially in US consumerist culture. And I hate the European notions of men as violent creatures that can’t think or reason for themselves or FEEL anything. I want to ditch the whole thing. So what gender am I? I don’t give a fuck anymore. I wish that was a gender category. I’ll happily dress like a 19th century man. A Korean man, Super feminine woman, because I really don’t think it matters all that much. Why should I limit what I like by some arbritrary gender assignments given by culture in order to usually suppress women and LGBTQIA anyway? I’ll be 80 and dye my hair pink if I want to.

exist. But a lot of sex repulsed aces imagine sex positive aces to be more like sex neutral. “tolerate sex” is sex neutral or just below sex neutral. Open and receptive to the idea of sex. Just noting this.

I’m due to get my degree soon in Anthropology, though I mainly focused on systems. I also have officially a minor in Comp Lit. (Comparative Lit which does World Literature--Or compare everything to Europe which is the real title they don’t tell you). Systems, means things that are prejudiced and discriminatory in our societies, say, LGBTQIA, women, gender, socio-economic class, etc. I’ve wanted since High school to focus on media exchange (i.e. import and export of say books and movies) and how the diversity changes with that importation and exportation. I was also interested in the importation and exportation of food and the impacts to economy, etc. However, my university really doesn’t recognize this as a subsub field at all... so this is why I’m quitting at a BA. Also Psst. The university is sooo white. I only have one math class to go after this current one. And then I might get a certificate or AA in Graphic design. Which is to say, I know what the fuck I’m talking about when I talk these subjects, but personally, I think I knew a lot more going in than I gave myself credit for. Because I only found 3 of the classes really useful overall for the Anthropology degree. And none of the Comp Lit classes really useful, because I knew and could challenge more. (Maybe 1 out of all of them--Modern Middle Eastern Lit). And through this, I, too, am going to say that it feels more and more like Uni is for the piece of paper rather than education. And Education needs reform and accessibility. Not just getting in, but to undo the whiteness and privileged systems within the university system. To let students challenge the very fabric of the university and be on the cutting edge, rather than being light years behind where we need to be. Also we need to not tax students with unbelievable amounts of debt. My education wouldn’t have taken so long if it wasn’t so expensive. But there I go again, talking systems.

The majority of slurs are food or animal comparisons--this is true cross culturally. So if you want to invent a slur, then you just choose an animal or a food and compare that person to those things. Animals is easy to figure out... cross culturally, most humans think they are superior to animals. Food, is interesting to dissect cross culturally. What I’ve noticed is that imperialistic countries are more likely to use it towards imperialized countries. So in some way they are literally “eating” them. It’s also common with sex terms, but mostly towards women. And why do women have to be the ones who get “consumed” in that scenario anyway? BTW, I’m one of those women who is like, can’t we stay away from comparing women from food and men to knives and other sharp instruments? What is this? Fruit Ninja?

So, you scared anon, side with people who do rape threats, doxing, stalking, and death threats like in Gamergate who flung the term at a woman asking people to change like it was the worst thing in the world. You know illegal activity such that Anita Sarkeesian had to involve the FBI. Good to know! Thumbs up on supporting rape culture and the patriarchy. I’m sure women are right behind you when you call them hysterical too, because their message is hard to hear. You know, blame their uterus, because balls (testes) are just the best ever.

When is adoption OK?When the surrender is 100% voluntary and not under coercion from a well off woman/family who understands 100% of the implications of surrender and possible trauma to follow and implications for the child involved. This may be the case in a slim number of adoptions where a woman may have a child she feels too old to raise by herself and decides to give birth to the child with full knowledge of all consenting adults in the family of what she is doing and then gives the child up for adoption, knowing the effects it may have on the child. In such cases, often the woman asks for open adoption or semi-open adoption.The other extremely rare case is that both parents are literally dead and a family member because of those circumstances comes to be guardian for the child until they come of age AND they’ve been carefully screened by the government. In this case, the child’s name is not erased.These are the only narrow scenarios where you are 100% sure the adoption is clean–you have contact with the birth mother to know it’s clean. But, unfortunately, this is NOT the majority of adoptions. The majority come from preying on the poor, people of color, disabled (mentally or physically), and mostly women or being asses about the Foster care system. And International adoption is one of the worst for this. The more faceless the birth family, the less you can communicate with them, the more you can dehumanize them so you can overwrite their stories, especially when you come from a position of power socially, economically, etc. Insert a rescue and grateful narrative. Neglect==poverty. Drug addiction?==poverty. The top reasons for separating kids from parents most often? Poverty. We failed them as a society, so we punish them by taking their children away, by scamming them, scarring those children with higher rates of suicide, mood disorders, and learning disabilities.In any case there is nothing in this world that gives someone the absolute right to someone else’s child. Nothing supports this. Not the Bible or any other Holy book supports this.

And each of those things I listed women have fought for. We’ve fought against the idea that women belong only in the kitchen. That women can’t go into the workforce. We’ve fought for the right for women not to be victim blamed. To be able to wear what they want. We’ve fought against the idea that boobs and large hips are the only way to express womanhood and that this should determine our characters and who we are. The exact fall of women’s rights have often fallen with the rights of those listed groups. In another words, when you spew forth hate to other groups, you are re-enforcing hate upon yourself. This is why you need to quit being a white feminist.

I’m setting it up this way: The adoptees that come to visit Korea, the adoptees that choose to stay there, and the adoptees who are deported and have to start from scratch, often separated from their families. We need a documentary like this. I want a documentary like this. How are we going to make this deportation end if we don’t make people aware and angry enough to act on it? I’m thinking of the title “A Place Where We Belong” as a title.

My exact problem with them, besides their inherent academic masturbation in a circle jerk reaction, is their idea that all aces must be alike and fit the majority when Aces often contradict them, but then the aces that contradict them aren’t considered “reliable sources” only they are, quoting themselves. The idea of a biological imperative for all of sexuality, in of itself is problematic. If there is a biological element, it’s not locked into ideas of things like religion or height. Neither of which are particularly 100% genetic to begin with, because environment plays a big role. Also, the way they talk about sexuality, has this strict Eurocentricism, which I loathe. And has the added shiny on top of because it’s ace, it’s a “special” discovery, when they don’t look at if zedsexual people also have this “special” feature, which inevitably, they do 99.99% of the time. Look, Ace people, most of the time can see color~~ let’s write a paper on it, and use material from old populations of ace, to justify why this is a “new” discovery. And then self congratulate themselves for what David Jay already said, who, BTW, is trained in sexology to begin with, but his word is somehow invalid without Bogaert, a non-ace to “discover” what David Jay already said without giving credit to David Jay, BTW, which kinda super ticks me off, though I suppose David Jay forgave Bogaert since Jay gave the book a positive review, but still ticks me off. And no, not a teenager. Long past that. So the loathing is genuine. I’m not for the biological imperative mode of defining asexuality. I’m for listening to voices and paying attention to how the movement changes over time so that one can capture different kinds of asexuality on an individual basis. Asexuality is not a monolith.

Doing an anthro paper on asexuality. So depressing. I want to know from aces, why oh why do you even BOTHER talking to Lori Fucking-us-up Brotto. Why do you even let Anthony Bogaert into your spaces when they will not and do not honor asexuality in its full definition and seem to have this deliberate stubbornness not to get it right. I mean, seriously, fuck them. They spent sometimes over 7 fucking long years getting it wrong, then retconning, and then topping it off with still getting it super wrong and then crunching us down to single digit numbers. WTF? Why are you, as aces, even letting them talk? Shut them down. Seriously. I had to read their shit, including them throwing fits over Julie Decker a legit ace and someone who is also an academic. If people deliberately take your hospitality and spit all over it, then shut them out. I say this as a double gray-a. I say this because I hope to god, they don’t get to write another paper about us because they can’t even get their heads out of their asses long enough to get the basics of sexuality, let alone asexuality right. I say this because we, as a community deserve better researchers and ones in our corner who will help undo the damage they’ve clearly done to us. We are not all white, cis. We clearly have range in all major definitions we use as aces. From sexual attraction, libido, romantic attraction, aesthetic attraction, sexual desire, to physical attraction. Conflating that into single numbers is what Brotto and Bogaert continue to do. Calling us a “sexual dysfunction” and not owning it... Brotto and Bogaert need to be taken down. Shut them out. Support Ace researchers and researchers who do care. Say like Julie Decker and Emily Lund. We don’t need a physiological or psychological reason we are ace. We just are and people should just take it or leave it as it is. We don’t need that level or justification.

Such a white word. And often used for white women’s violence. “Why can’t you be nice?” Also used often in off-handed manner. “Isn’t that nice?”

I take this to mean, when you can embrace the chaos inherent in the universe, there is also a beauty in the diversity. When you can embrace the beauty in the diversity, there is far more order than you initially thought, but it’s not the order that you first came up with.