I just got back from queeruption on the sunshine coast of B.C. and realized there are alot more queerdos in the woods than I thought. We will have some sorta internet contact thing starting up real soon, so just incase any of you other folks on here would like to be included in that, I could get you pluged in if you message me with yr email address.
Aww, I was just sad that this didn’t have any replies… I hope I’m already on that list, though!
(Finally getting around to reading this board by the way, Kestrel.)
I would assume that TrollSplinter’s replies probably came via PM so that folks could give him their email address.
Wow…only these three lonely messages from woodsy queerbos…and we already know eachother. Well, if there are any others out there…we occasionally have queer skill shares so if you are interested please let me know and I’ll keep you posted.
I’m always unsure what queer means.
Well, I’ll speak up and represent. (Not particularly interested in forming a club though, sorry!)
Bi f here, although lately only the XX types have been doing it for me. (As in chromosomes, kids…)
And in the already queer world of bis I’m doubly queer (or so they say…) because I’m really, extremely, adamantly monogamous and sentimental and a hopeless romantic, i.e. not promiscuous. (I know I’m using stereotypes here, but this is what I hear all the time about bis, even from those who identify as such.)
Yeah Plains, that’s a tuff one. It means so many different things for different people as I am sure you are aware. I claim it because I do not consider myself “homosexual”, “bisexual”, or “straight”. I feel like people that are marginalized due to the who they are attracted to, who they have sex with, and how they have sex, are queer. I include, “how they have sex” because I know a few folks that only sleep with members of the opposite sex that I would consider queer. Our american society at large finds it unacceptable for males to love being anally penetrated by females, or for people to whip each other even if it’s consensual. I consider this to be queer behavior. I guess subversive sexuality and/or gender abnormalicy are what I consider queer.
It seems like it would be better to relegate the word to either sexual deviancy or ‘gender deviancy’ as they’re not significantly related though.
Yeah, I agree with that.
I remember I’ve seen the term ‘gender-queer’ before. Is that a way around the problem? Queer is for sexuality and ‘gender-queer’ for the gender thing?
Wait then there’s still the problem of the types of attraction, because if you only explain it as sexual attraction, that leaves out the other still intimate sort most people experience, which some call romantic attraction. It also leaves out asexuals.
I think I’d be a bit queer by the way. As for gender, I dislike the idea (I’ve talked enough about that here though). As far as attraction, I tend to forget that I experience gay feelings because most guys disturb me or put me off to some degree, which prevents me from getting close to them as I generally can with girls. Intimate/romantic involvement with guys can be something I desire unheeded. The sexual part tends to interest me a bit less on that side however.
Oh I also dislike the idea of monogamous dating and marriage type relationships. I’m not fond of such restrictions.
yeah it does leave out the asexuals, but it wasn’t intentional. It is such a complicated word to put into a single working definition. Actually I doubt it’s even possible. Plus, I can’t type so I tend to try and keep even complicated things short, doesn’t always work out for me. Anyway, I’ll go out on a limb and say that we probably would agree on alot when it comes to queerness, open type relationships, and gender (and the desire to live free of it).
Yeah so I’m sure there are a number of things I failed to cover that easily fall under my definition of queer. Thanks for pointing some out.
Wait, I don’t think I would consider asexuality alone queerness actually. Not unless you were truely marginalized due to it. I do think that being attracted to the same sex, or gender-queer folks romantically, but with no sexual urge is totally queer, sex is not needed to “establish queerness” (sarcasm), it just can. The reason I put the and/or between subversive sexuality and gender abnormalicy is because I agree they are not tied to each other. I fit into both of those categories personally, but I know many that are one or the other.
The term gender-queer in my opinion is a great way to express queerness of gender, but not necsesarily sexual practice. However I also feel that a relationship in wich one or more people openly identifies as gender-queer, is a queer relationship. God damn it, I’m a talker, not a typer, and I just can’t articulate myself right now. I’m not gonna erase this post though because I’m sick of being a newbie, jr. member status, here I come.
Oh, I’d call an entire social structure dedicated to telling you that sex is the most important thing in your life “marginalizing” to asexuals.
I just call queer anything “not strait.” Which at first seem circular until you realize that strait does have a definition other than “not queer.” Strait is the culturally mandated norm of sexual relationship, which in this society is a monogamous heterosexual couple where the male is dominant, which either is or may potentially become a married family unit, either with or potentially producing children. Anything else is queer.
Of course, that describes me fairly well, but since I’m open to other types of relationships (and potentially being part of them) I consider myself “slightly queer”
I’d readily accept that definition, Andrew. I think it hits a mark.
Anything else is queer, in your opinion. I disagree, but at the same time wouldn’t say you were wrong I guess.
Well, it’s hard to define queer in positive terms, what it is, instead of what it isn’t (heterosexual procreators). Anything else tends to be marginalized in our society - something is “wrong” with other ways. This struggle with a definition reflects that marginalization. “Queer” is a word in our society’s language to mean something (be it homosexual, bisexual, etc.) that “isn’t” the sexual norm. All of these other sexualities could fall under the heading “queer.” So there is a dualism between “straight” and “not-straight” that strips any of the queer sexualities of its own unique dimensionality.
It’s similar to “white” and “colored.” The white people get to set the standard for what is white but if you are colored, whether you’re brown, black, yellow, red, or green, you’re still just “colored”: that is, not “white”. Ridiculous, no?
Ridiculous yes, very well put. I guess that is obviously why I posted this,[quote=“TrollSplinter, post:15, topic:324”]Anything else is queer, in your opinion. I disagree, but at the same time wouldn’t say you were wrong I guess.[/quote]
I would not identify with this;[quote=“Andrew Jensen, post:13, topic:324”]Oh, I’d call an entire social structure dedicated to telling you that sex is the most important thing in your life “marginalizing” to asexuals.
I just call queer anything “not strait.” Which at first seem circular until you realize that strait does have a definition other than “not queer.” Strait is the culturally mandated norm of sexual relationship, which in this society is a monogamous heterosexual couple where the male is dominant, which either is or may potentially become a married family unit, either with or potentially producing children. Anything else is queer.
Of course, that describes me fairly well, but since I’m open to other types of relationships (and potentially being part of them) I consider myself “slightly queer”[/quote]
This isn’t wrong, it’s just nothing like the definition of queer is in my personal type of queer community. Just a different type of queer.
just checking in on this thread…I’m queer identified and wannabe-woodsy 
For me, queer is an identity with a world view that encompasses sexuality and gender beyond the hetero-normative. I do think that the asexual ID is queer, I think that bisexuals can be queer or straight identified depending on their allegiances, gender-queer folk tend to intertwine gender expression with queer sexuality (and femme is one of those identities, btw), transfolk are queer (even when hetero) and bdsm sexuality can be queer if there is at least one queer identified person involved ;D
but, you know, ymmv!
Well put feral femme. That is a short and thorough definition that I personally completely agree with. It’s nice to know there’s another wannabe-woodsy queer around the area. Portland and Seattle seem to have a quickly growing dirt queer scene coming up.
so can I be queer to? It’s sounds like fun, and I’d love to join the frontlines in pissing of fundies.
What I’m really asking, is it enough to be queer just by being okay with people who do it more than missionary style (I do it all kinds of styles, but anyway)…
Also, related, kind of, I hear some tribes had six sexualities. Does anyone know these?