I won’t beg someone to love me. I learned long ago that there is no use in hopeless pleas of trying to make someone stay. I am too good to chase someone who does not know my worth and I am too wild to keep waiting for someone who doesn’t acknowledge my value. I want to be loved unconditionally. I shouldn’t have to fight so hard for it. I do not have the time to prove to someone that I am worth it. I shouldn’t have to prove any of that; I am worth more than that.

Anonymous asked:

I would say the label fits well. You can be bisexual and have preferences (women + nobinary preference). I'm not trying to harass you or make you choose the term. I just want to help you if you need it. But yeah, you have plenty of time to explore yourself.

just so people know my issue isn’t with whether or not bisexuality can include people with preferences (it does) or people who aren’t attracted to one or both binary genders (it does). The problem is that for me personally, the label I’ve used for over 4 years doesn’t fit right any more. It feels baggy and loose because I’ve grown and changed and it hasn’t, you know? But there’s this other label that feels welcoming too, and over the past decade it’s started fitting better and better and I like how it looks on me, but it’s a little bit too tight. Essentially, bisexual implies attraction I don’t have, and lesbian doesnt include attraction I do have. Now I’m sitting here trying to work out if I can patch these two labels together and make the perfect sweater, or if maybe over time I’ll grow into the lesbian one a bit more. 

I want a label that makes it clear that i want nothing to do with men and still love non-binary and agender cuties. I don’t want to mislead people by identifying as one or the other, and I know for a fact I’ll offend people if I identify as both, but neither on their own feel right or succinctly describe my orientation any more. Both are comforting and important to me and feel welcoming.

Lesromantic bisexual feels closest at the minute but even it’s still flawed.

Sorry if i’m coming off snappy and rude, but I think people are fundamentally misunderstanding my feelings at the minute, which is frustrating.

Anonymous asked:

Hi dear! You can be bisexual and not be into men. It's totally normal. I like women, nonbinary people, and agender people, and more. Not men. At all. It is up to you though, ultimately.

oh I know - i’ve been trying to explain that to people for years!

Thing is I am attracted to men, but compared to the number of women, nonbinary, and agender people I’m attracted to it sort of feels statistically insignificant. And now that I’ve been thinking about it I’m wondering if it’s just heteronormativity, in that I feel like I should be attracted to men, and it’s just taken me years to realise that maybe I’m not? Not in the way I’m expected to be, at least. The idea of having sex with a man isn’t very attractive to me, and the idea of dating one isn’t either. Both scenarios make me nervous, actually.

In contrast, if I imagine sex it’s with a woman. If I imagine myself in a happy and serious relationship it’s with a woman. If I imagine myself old and grey I’m with a woman. And in terms of who I’m attracted to, it’s overwhelmingly women and non-binary/agender people. If I’m attracted to dudes it’s usually in a more abstract way in that I can appreciate how he looks but I probably don’t want him near me.

Bisexual still applies to me. I’m just trying to work out if lesian is a label I should work into that (lesromantic bisexual? lesbian? bi-les? les-bi? idk!!) because it feels welcoming in a similar way to bisexual. It fits and I’ve known that since I was 8 but I’ve been rejecting it for a very long time. Part of the issue now is that I want to make it clear I have no interest in men, but I do ave an interest in non-binary and agender people. Neither bisexual nor lesbian on their own address that properly, you know?

I just have to do a lot of thinking, I guess.

thatvegancosplayer replied to your post “I’m identifying more and more with the word ‘lesbian’ lately because…”

Dude do what you want!

agh but the thing is i’m not a lesbian, and I’ve almost grown up in the bi community considering I’ve identified as bi in some capacity since I was 15. It’s super important to me, and it’s more literal because I do have sexual attraction to people of all genders.

But at the same time lesbian is a comforting word to me (whilst the community is not, unfortunately), and it sums up my romantic orientation a bit better. But I’m still into romance with non-binary people, and I probably could date a man but I just feel like the probability of that happening is incredibly slim, so idk.

Can I be a Bi-Lesbian or something? A lesbian? Does anyone else feel like this?

garlicblogger:

Ok pals so I got nominated by joe scaredofthepolice to do this 6 selfies thingy so this is lookin over the past year but not in order are ya ready~
1. This is just a recent one from the pub the other week idk me bein like ‘hey this is what I look like atm’ ya feel
2. I feel like I look cute here look at my top!!
3. This was just before the ball, I was tryna look fre$h but then Ciara is looking mardy in the back so this one just makes me laugh oh god
4. This isn’t even my final form
5. This is from the day I got me snoz pierced
6. Idk this is from last summer with bad hair but that dress was only a tenner success

Alright I guess I’m gonna say now it’s your turn to emiello butwhatdidy0uexpect nationofcheckout-girls duhrealmistavuhsachee singulvrity and the two Beth’s b33ff xaxetofallx

He may love you. He probably does. He probably thinks about you all the time. But that isn’t what matters. What matters is what he’s doing about it, and what he’s doing about it is nothing. And if he’s doing nothing, you most certainly shouldn’t do anything. You need someone who goes out of their way to make it obvious that they want you in their life.

this is really important (via dirtyberd)

(via lumpenspaceproletariat)

Anonymous asked:

This is NOT a hate message, I'm just a kind observer who wants to make a note. I'm on anon because I feel more comfortable like this. Also, I am not a vegan. Your comment on that vegan post makes it seem like you're saying if you can't be perfect, then don't even try. As if you're saying "You can't stop all suffering, so don't stop any." Care to elaborate?

the-vegan-in-blue:

unforgedsignature:

Guess what

I’m a vegan

I think veganism is a good thing, for those who have the means to do it—but many people do NOT. 

I do not like vegans thinking they are higher than other people because they “cause less suffering”. yes, vegans cause less suffering to meat animals—but they are still blindly (or not so blindly..) supporting industries that literally torture children and if they were asked why they do that, do you know what their (and my!) responses would be?

-it is financially/logically impossible to eat all locally grown food year round

-it is EXTREMELY hard to eat all true organic food all year round

-“but it says it’s organic so it can’t be bad”

-“those people aren’t being slaughtered”

-it would be too time consuming

which are some of the basic arguments of those who are unable to go vegan or don’t want to. veganism can be GREAT, but it’s absolute bullshit when all it does it put someone on a pedestal from which they can look down and insult others who can’t be vegans.

ideally, yes, people would mostly eat vegetarian/vegan, but also ideally, people would have enough money to sustain themselves, racism, sexism, classism, homophobia, etc, would not exist, and ideally vegetables would not be grown through what is basically slave labor.

I would argue that every person with the ability to aquire information on veganism/animal rights can be vegan.
Now, hear me out, because I know you’re probably planning to explain why some people can’t eat a plant based diet. I say that because I think veganism is best described as anti-speciesism. It is a moral stance against a prevalent logic of domination against non-human animals. From that, the logical step is to avoid, as far as possible, benefitting from and contributing to speciesism. Aka: lifestyle changes, including dietary ones. The important part is “as far as possible”. If someone has very real difficulties with the lifestyle changes associated with veganism, you could hardly say they’re less of an anti-speciesist because capitalism has forced them into a position where they can’t completely boycott the products of non-human exploitation. Veganism shouldn’t be seen as a purist consumer action against industrialised cruelty, but as a protest against speciesism itself. In that way, whether or not a boycott would reform capitalism to be a little nicer is practically irrelevant, for it’s a refusal to take part in an industry which is inherently exploitative.

With regards to human exploitation under capitalism, it’s slightly more complex in that it isn’t inherently tied to any particular industry, and people interact with capitalism more complexly. You cannot say, for example, that chocolate should not exist in an ideal world because it cannot exist without exploitation. However that is the case with all industries based around non-human animal exploitation - they cannot exist in a form that is non-exploitative, so in a sense we are living the kind of world we want to see.
In order to challenge human exploitation, or other more insidious forms of non-human exploitation (eg. killing “pests”), you must challenge capitalism itself, for it’s to capitalism that these things are inherent, not any one industry. But you cannot boycott capitalism unless you are privaliged enough under it that you can be self-sustainable. Of course, though, lack of inherent exploitation doesn’t mean lack of exploitation, which is where discussing speciesism is important.

I do what I can to minimise my impact on humans though, I buy second hand where available, grow my own food where I can, will not use chocolate/cocoa from unethical sources (I don’t use coffee), and try to make the most ethical choices reasonable to me. But it is not the same as refusing to accept an inherently exploitative, and ideally non-existant, industry, just as boycotting non-organic produce is not the same although that hurts non-human animals too. In those areas I try to do what I can, but as the harm is not inherent it is more difficult.

Bolded for emphasis because hell yes everything.

hubbrad:

commiekinkshamer:

i mean, buy not buying a burger i can maybe drive the demand down 0.000000000000000007% and save, like, a single cow in my entire life at best, but literally just…. existing in capitalism inherently requires exploitation of others and it does not matter what i eat, what trade or bargain i make with capitalism, the end result is the same or worse so uh

i wouldn’t deny that within capitalism there will always be exploitation of others and that a lot of the claimed benefits of veganism are meaningless within capitalism

that having been said, 

1) true, capitalism will always have exploitation, but that doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t make choices based on the fact that one is clearly worse under the given conditions (links are non-graphic and revolve around human/environmental suffering, non-human suffering is a given and can be pretty easily researched itself if one so chooses)

2) you can’t really narrow down impact based on “well me buying this one burger probably isn’t actually going to do anything,” especially in light of the actual changes in demand enacted by vegans as a movement

veganism isn’t all we need, not even close, but its a step made in the right direction for its refusal to see living beings as objects (which hopefully extends to human beings and a refusal to see them as machines) and an awareness of the forces of capitalism + production

"[Veganism] is part of a revolutionary perspective – how can we not only discover more compassionate relations with human beings but how can we develop compassionate relations with the other creatures with whom we share this planet and that would mean challenging the whole capitalist industrial form of food production." -Angela Davis