posh.wiki

I'm gay.

Well, sort of. Not really. Let's talk about that.

Labels are weird and reductive, but TL;DR I'm panromantic androsexual t4t theoretically-ambiamorous practically-monogamous transfem/non-binary. This post is true as of the day I made it. I may well change over time.

Why even say?

For one thing, it's pride month. If you're attending any kind of parade, remember that pride is a protest. Know your rights, don't talk to cops more than you have to, and don't talk to the media at all. You're not a lawyer, you don't have media training, anything you say will be used against both you and the wider LGBTQ+ community.

Beyond that, it's a compelling argument that my sexuality and my gender are my own business, and that if I like someone and they like me, that's between the two of us. I thought this way for quite a long time.

But, you know what? Gay and trans rights are going backwards in most places, including my home country. Our queer elders didn't pry our precious rights out of the cold, callous hands of the social "elite" by being quiet about who they were. They were queer and they were loud.

And even when we do reach true equality (because I insist upon believing that one day we will), I hope the future generations are vocal about who they are too. I hope they use a million different microlabels and write blog posts nobody asked for to honour the struggles and sacrifices of their ancestors.

Gender

I suppose we have to start with gender, since sexuality and romantic orientation are contextualised from that.

We're just going to accept the idea that gender is a construct invented to stereotype and oppress people based on their anatomy and that it's not at all tied to biological sex. Also, they/them has been used as a gender-neutral third person singular pronoun in English for centuries, and even if it wasn't, a language is the property of its speakers, not its scholars.

I believe the accepted term is that I am "assigned male at birth", which isn't exactly a secret. I have XY chromosomes, I grow facial hair, et cetera.

That said, I don't really engage with the ideals of "being a man". If I imagine a stereotypical man (as far as what "man" means to me), perhaps even a caricature, I don't look or act like that at all. I'm ever so slightly closer to my idea of a "woman" in terms of my appearance and how I act, and I'm a lot more comfortable being seen as "very much not a man, but not quite a woman".

I don't really have any intention of "medically transitioning". The effects of estrogen and bottom surgery just aren't things I'm interested in. Makeup, clothes, and a bit of hair styling are all I really need to mitigate the discomfort of being seen as a man.

For pronouns, I prefer they/them these days, but he/him and she/her are alright too. Neo-pronouns aren't exactly my thing.

In short, I describe my gender as trans-feminine and non-binary.

Sexuality and Romance

I think the best term for my sexuality is "androsexual", the attraction to masculinity. Men, women, and everyone else more enlightened, I don't mind so long as they're somewhat masc-presenting.

As for romantic attraction, I guess I'm panromantic? I don't really see gender identity or presentation as a factor in forming romantic relationships.

The caveat there being that in a relationship with a woman, I don't imagine myself being so secure with a cis woman. It's not a feeling I fully understand yet, but I imagine it's something to do with shared experiences and internalised fear of accidentally perpetrating some kind of wrong, especially with the advantages I'm perceived to have on top of the personal hurt. So, I'd also add the "trans-for-trans" (t4t) label.

Relationship Structure

This is where I'm going to speak on matters that are a bit iffy. Nothing I say should ever be taken as gospel and I should never be taken to represent any community I identify with in any significant way, but I want to make it absolutely clear that I'm not particularly involved with polyamorous communities, and I pre-emptively ask for understanding and education if anything I say here is factually wrong/misleading and if anything causes offense.

I'd describe myself as theoretically ambiamorous. Ambiamorous is a slightly niche term that just means one could be happy with one romantic partner, or more. I like this term, because it doesn't imply that I'd be unhappy or feel restricted in a monogamous relationship.

Within that, I think I'm more comfortable with the idea of polyfidelity. Polyamorous relationships aren't necessarily "open" - in a polyfidelity relationship, there's just a group of 3 or more people, and they all date within that group, without a particular openness to expanding it.

That said... I can't really be bothered. I know I have a lot of love to give and that under different circumstances I could thrive in a polyfidelity relationship, but multiple simultaneous romantic relationships is so much work, and especially on top of everything else I've got going on in my life, I don't have the energy to treat myself or anyone else fairly in such a dynamic. So I'm practically monogamous.

Other notes

I'm a big fan of the idea of "relationship anarchy", as No Boilerplate describes it (hey, that URI contains the substring "gay"!), specifically the ideas of treating all relationships as equally important, enjoying different aspects of companionship with different people, and not expecting any one person to fulfil every social need and desire. I feel like this really ties in with my experience of being neurodivergent (yes, I was officially diagnosed by medical professionals), and my inability to clearly define a romantic relationship and delimit it from close friendships.

But!

Really, I just feel like I identify with the wider queer community in general. I'm not married to any of these labels, but I'm quite sure I'm not a straight man. Plus, an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us.

I use the word "gay" for myself less to mean "homosexual" and more analagously with "queer", to say, in some way deviating from the historical socially accepted norm. And because it's a lot quicker to say than all of the above.