RiotLinguist @RiotLinguistics@kolektiva.social

baby sister gave me an ace flag for my birthday and i have FEELINGS 😭🖤

i think the reason i'm so mad about it is that it is genuinely insulting that so many queer people--who really should know better--just assumed they did not need to question any of their assumptions about sexuality or understand us on our own terms or unlearn allonormativity in any significant way. they assumed we changed nothing about the way they understand the world. just another colored flag.

seems like a lot of allo queers thought "ace inclusion" meant getting a letter in the acronym lol

Another spicy Lacan take, don’t cancel me

Anyway I have suddenly run out of steam to finish this thought but. Do better, historians

But it’s seemingly LESS common (tho certainly not at all “taboo”) to see claims like “‘sexuality is a social construct”—(true, correct)—“therefore marital coerced sexuality was not perceived *or experienced* as violence.” (Absurd, dehumanizing.) Because of feminists doggedly pushing back against the dominant assumptions of masculinist historians.

It is very likely that throughout all of history and IN THE PRESENT countless women would not either describe their own assault by husbands as “rape” nor even, in some ways, “perceive” it as such (eg the many rationalizations DV victims commonly use to avoid “perceiving” their own abuse as abuse) but that is a completely different question from whether it is EXPERIENCED with fear, pain, and an aftermath of trauma.

(Whether ‘X’ = labor or sexual exploitation, physical violence, etc). Such claims are rarely ever qualified by the kinds of complexity we KNOW to be inherent to social realities & their conflicts with the material and/or experiential. Until the 1990s, marital rape was not a crime, and literally billions of women have been immersed from birth in a patriarchal discourse in which marital rape is not socially constructed as violence.

And ime this is particularly egregious in trans history and history of children & childhood. Almost every history/anthro work on children/childhood I have found has either explicitly stated or implicitly taken for granted some variation on “‘childhood’ is a social construct and has a history”—which is true 👍—“therefore [X] wasn’t perceived OR EXPERIENCED as doing any harm” (emphasis mine)—which is an egregious conflation of discursive construction & the material experience of persons.

Imo one of the problems with a lot of social constructionist works in history/anthro is a general carelessness about conflating discursive, social, mental/conceptual, material, and experiential realities. (This is not an anti-social-construction post, just an observation about the way a lot of scholars approach it methodologically). Theoretically the opposite of what you’d expect SC scholars to do bc the whole point of SC theory is to deconstruct these very conflations, but still very common ime

I seem to have, for entirely unrelated reasons, two different obsessive stalkers on Twitter who follow me from (multiple?) alts so that’s neat

@precatlady do not feel obligated to look at the possibly triggering notes above or answer this question but after months of researching and stepping on horrifying landmines in anthro works, I am beginning to wonder if there is any remotely responsible and sober anthropology of childhood, anywhere in existence?

Marginal notes on dangerously self-indulgent anthropological studies on childhood: going well

Who the fuck gave cats permission to do something as outrageously cute as rumbling gently when they are happy? Wtf is that?

Follow-up thought: it is perhaps also not a coincidence that such frameworks often position the “smothering maternal” as the source of the “forced” subordination to the “symbolic order of language”

A thought: perhaps so many mostly white cis male European philosophers and writers are prone to imagining “language” as something imposed from outside that ultimately constrains and controls is because that view serves to disparage the role of language as an intersubjective, multivalent, cooperative social practice of of knowledge exchange & thus de-centers the authoritative “truth” of the unidirectional gaze to which they feel entitled?

Apparently, Elon Musk is responsible for anarchists telling CSA apologists to fuck off?

here’s the answer @ichundmeintofu

Anarqxista openly endorses adults having sex with adolescents, and claims it is consensual.

CW for abuse

It is important that you see this first part so I will add the sensitive content to replies.

Heads up to those who aren’t on Twitter: you may of Anarqxista, an abuse apologist “anarchist” writer: I’m hearing that Anarqxista is planning to shut down her Twitter account and move permanently to Mastodon after getting called out for endorsing abuse.