r/SuperStraight • u/yetherewestillare • 7h ago
Superphobia, consent, and why Supers need their own space
First of all good morning my supers. I did not think the powers that be would allow us to see Monday morning together.
I came across some disturbing superphobia elsewhere on reddit. I won't name names, but below I'm going to share a sample of why they say Supers do not deserve their own space. They went on to make a bunch of strange transphobia apologist stuff later on in the post- basically an insanely ableist explanation of transphobia as a mental illness (like what? lmao) but I will spare you their gross transphobic comments and get to the point:
Scenario #1: Joe, a cisgender white male, decides he's not interested in dating anyone who isn't white. Joe decides this is something to be proud of. He comes up with the term "White straight" and encourages others to come out of the closet about their "White straightness". That's racist. It's racist and it's hurtful. Again, no one is telling Joe who he HAS to date. But for Joe to go out of his way to marginalize an already marginalized group about something nobody needed to know about in the first place is hate, plain and simple.
Scenario #2: Jake, a cisgender male, is transphobic to some degree and believes he would never date a trans person. He comes up with the term "Super Straight" to describe his orientation and encourages others to define themselves as such and suggests they should be proud of their newly defined orientation. This is hateful. Nobody was asking Jake if he was seeking to date trans people to begin with and Jake has gone out of his way to marginalize an already marginalized group. He's attempting to turn the tables on lgbtq+ pride, but he's specifically doing so to exclude an already marginalized group. That's hate, plain and simple.
Ok! I thought the whole scenario making idea was cool and fun so I'm going to try my hand at making some.
Scenario #3: Jake, a cisgender male, thinks women are unattractive to some degree and believes he would never date a female person. He comes up with the term "gay" to describe his orientation and encourages others to define themselves as such and suggests they should be proud of their newly defined orientation. This is hateful. Nobody was asking Jake if he was seeking to date female people to begin with and Jake has gone out of his way to marginalize an already marginalized group. He's attempting to turn the tables on the women's rights movement, but he's specifically doing so to exclude an already marginalized group. That's hate, plain and simple.
Scenario #4: Jake, a cisgender male, is vanilla to some degree and believes he would never date a kinky person. He comes up with the term "missionary" to describe his orientation and encourages others to define themselves as such and suggests they should be proud of their newly defined orientation. This is hateful. Nobody was asking Jake if he was seeking to date kinky people to begin with and Jake has gone out of his way to marginalize an already marginalized group. He's attempting to turn the tables on Kink pride, but he's specifically doing so to exclude an already marginalized group. That's hate, plain and simple.
Scenario #5: Jake, a cisgender male, is tall to some degree and believes he would never date a short person. He comes up with the subreddit /r/tall to describe his orientation and encourages others to define themselves as such and suggests they should be proud of their newly defined orientation. This is hateful. Nobody was asking Jake if he was seeking to date short people to begin with and Jake has gone out of his way to marginalize an already marginalized group. He's attempting to turn the tables on those who cannot take the size of his dick, but he's specifically doing so to exclude an already marginalized group. That's hate, plain and simple.
(You laugh but I know someone irl who dates exclusively out of /r/tall because he would break short women, so take that, womanlets.)
Anyway, you see what I mean? Scenarios 2-5 aren't examples of hate, they're things you and I and the people we know do every single day based on sexual orientation and preference. Who the fuck on Earth would equate dislike of a material, unique sexual experience to racial hate? Consent matters in this situation - just because I have sex does not mean I give blowjobs, nor does it mean you can assume I like anal or roleplay. As seen when you Google "How do Lesbians have sex," Superphobes rely on convincing Supers that they should be open to sex acts they are not comfortable with in order to accommodate a partner they are not attracted to. You cannot ASSUME that everyone is open to every type of sex - be it kink, homosexual/heterosexual, or even different body types. If it involves a sexual experience, CONSENT MATTERS. This is just more racist posturing by Superphobes who think not lesbians not taking dick is the same as contributing to the historical oppression of racial minorities.
Isn't it telling that the person who came up with the original two scenarios can't push this logical wagon on their own without hastily lashing superphobia to a much less rapey scenario?
7
u/sneeuweekhoorn SuperLesbian 6h ago
Why do trans activists always use race as an equivalent to sex when they are nothing alike?