Repeat after me, kids: your significant other liking multiple genders does nothing to invalidate the fact that they like you best.
It simply means that they could have chosen literally anyone on earth, regardless of gender, and yet they still picked you.
This is really important.
Tag: relationships
listen
i know a lot of us are “arg no more m/f couples!”
but listen
we do need more m/f couples
just not the twig white cis emo boy with basic girl couples
what we NEED:
- ones that aren’t toxic
- the ones that ARE toxic be taken as toxic and not romanized and actually dealt with maturely and shows that those relationships are not healthy
- overweight girl of color with most popular boy in school
- trans girl with the football player
- trans boy of color with girl football player
- just break the basic white stick cis girl and the basic white stick cis boy normative!!!
^THIS!!! Like, cool. I’ll take some more m/f couples, but they need to be diverse!!!!!!! I want trans guys and gals, I want people of color, I want healthy relationships!! People need to see themselves represented, and that includes all of those people who are in m/f relationships, but aren’t the “white cis guy and white cis girl” that are the current mold. Please and thank you.
Agreed on everything.
Also more m+f and m+m and f+f friends that don’t end up in romance and have a healthy friendship, please.
Healthy friendship is all the reason I got back into Elementary (I’m mid s04 right now and please, don’t spoil me for anything).
It’s about the only show I can think off the top of my head where you have a m/f friendship between two adults who do their best to be good friends as well as trying to do their best to be as emotionally healthy as they can be, and help each other along the way.
It’s honestly amazing and I am all over that. I wish we could see more healthy relationships in media in general.
There’s that word again. Need. I need you. I need you to need me. How nauseating, to need another human being, as if their heart is in your throat. Love isn’t about need. Don’t romanticize the notion of desperation. Let me let you in on a secret: you don’t need me and I don’t need you. We can get through life just fine without each other. Love is not wanting to. We want each other, we want skin and hands and all our daily scars. We want intoxication and art museums and intertwined limbs. We want ferocity in our lips and tracing slow, small circles on our stomachs. I don’t need you in my life, but goddamn I want you in it.
date a girl who treats you the same way she treats books
I’ll critique you continuously and won’t be too bothered if I break your spine
And then I’ll review your performance on several social media sites and ask for feedback.
I’ll also insert rectangular metal and paper objects into your body whenever I need a break from you, and store you on a shelf in my house
I’ll be done with you in less than a week and move on immediately.
I’ll switch between you and others several times whenever it pleases me
I’m not going to spend any money on you unless you can tell me something I don’t already know about the Cold War.
I’m going to drop you and never look at you again if all you give me is stories about a straight white dude.
I will keep promising myself I’ll spend more time with you and then spend all that time reading fic on the internet instead.
I’m going to leave you, dog-eared, on the bedside table when I’m done with you for the night.
I’ll take you into the bathtub, accidentally fall asleep and drown you.
Hillary who? Cher for next President
Straight men who infantilize women’s friendships have no fucking survival instinct. Like my uncle is always making fun of and rolling his eyes at my aunt’s friend lunches and telephone dates with her lady friends, teasing her like she’s a gossipy teenage girl in high school drama. And my aunt just laughs about it but I know for a fact that if it wasn’t for her best friend K, she would have probably set him on fire by now.
Like straight men are capable of maybe a quarter of the indepth emotional labor and support women do for each other. Like men can literally have one friend named Bob that they go fishing with once a year and still be content for life. Then they think it’s cute and girlish that their wives have these long term, integrated, emotionally intense relationships with women but like…LOL, it’s not because men don’t need those kinds of relationships, it’s just that they get it all from their wives while offering peanuts in return. PEANUTS.
Like if your woman is on the phone for 2 hours with her friend and you think that’s childish of her, just know that she spent half of that time getting the support that you should be giving her (but are incapable of) and the rest lamenting what a giant fucking baby manchild you are.
@sprinklecunttt lol
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
Men need to understand that women are capable of different friendships and they shouldn’t pass judgement whether a women are too ‘girlish’ or ‘antisocial’ or anything.
I always worry about these men. Like… Are they honestly incapable of understanding friendship? Are they honestly so messed up that they don’t understand what it’s like to be able to trust people to support you emotionally unless they’re sleeping with you?
This is the unspoken implications of the “friendzone” concept; it implies that friendship has no value. In fact, friendship has negative value, because it’s an obstacle in a man’s path to getting his dick wet, which is apparently the only valid reason for interacting with a woman.
OP is so right though.
Men don’t have differing needs for social support. They just are encouraged by the toxic expectations placed on men to neglect themselves emotionally, and those same expectations also tell them women should take up the slack.
A lot of the time, the only reason men can get away with having one friend they see once a year is because there is a woman or several women in his life doing all the rest of that work for him. Sometimes one woman doing the work of what really should be three other people.
Men aren’t taught to do emotional self-maintenance – hardly anyone is, but it seems especially neglected in men. This is not only deeply harmful to these men, which is awful on its own, it is a completely unreasonable burden to put on women, it stunts their emotional development. Those are emotional resources she could spend growing herself, actually reaching her potential, and they are being spent bringing someone else up to speed when that is a thing that they should mostly be doing for themselves.
This should not be an expectation we have of women, and yet it is. We expect them to help make a man better. And not just in the sense that a romantic relationship should encourage you both to be better, but in the sense that we expect women to do this at their expense, and any expectation that this should be a two-way deal is considered evidence of selfishness on her part, for some reason. Women are expected to drop everything to tend to their boyfriends’ or husbands’ needs.
Men need to establish and nurture healthy friendships with other men. Men need to take care of themselves emotionally, and contribute to the upkeep of other men in the way that women contribute to the upkeep of other women.
I’m not saying relationships between women are void of unhealthy dynamics, far, far from it. I’m just saying that this plays out in hetero relationships in predictable and really disturbing ways on such a pervasive scale that it actually upsets me to contemplate it. Most of the women I have known who are in relationships with women have been very happy. Most of the ones in relationships with men have not been. And ALL of the ones who have been with men have complained about the exact same set of behaviors.
Men aren’t natively awful. Not at all. We all start out as little babies, equally helpless and in need of support and attention. But they get force-fed some truly horrible shit and as a result will utterly neglect themselves to the point of being barely capable of functioning without a woman as a caretaker, all while denigrating relationships between women as frivolous. And they don’t see the problem with that, and then women are seen as selfish and awful for wanting to opt out of the whole deal.
Gross.
it seems so strange to me that the only people it is socially acceptable to live with (once you reach a certain stage in life) are sexual partners? like why can’t i live with my best friend? why can’t i raise a child with them? why do i need to have sex with someone in order to live with them? why do we put certain relationships on a pedestal? why don’t we value non-sexual relationships enough? why do life partners always have to be sexual partners?
My grandmother and grandfather more or less adopted my grandmother’s best friend back in the 50s. After my grandfather died (before I was born, back in 1968 or so) they continued to keep house together, platonic best friends, and they hung together until they died, a few months apart, in 2007.
It’s quite recently, as far as I can tell, that living arrangements like that have stopped being regarded as normal.
It’s absolutely a new thing to find this stuff weird, and it has a lot to do with media pretending that the nuclear family and marriage are the only reasons to live with other people.
I’ve lived in a 3 adult household my whole life. My parents and their best friend. This was never weird to me, even though everyone my age thought it was because the media never portrayed these kinds of housing arrangements. As far as i was concerned, I just had an extra non-blood parent.
According to my parents, it was very common in the 70′s-80′s to buy houses with your friends, because it was financially smart to do so (so long as you were certain they were close friends who wouldn’t fall out with you and fuck everything up). Houses and house payments are much more manageable when you split the bills 3-4 ways instead of just two.
Millenials aren’t the first to think it’s a great idea to just shack up with friends. That’s housemating without the hastle of living with strangers. It’s still a good idea to shack up with people you’ve known a long time so you know how you’ll get on living together, but still. In the current economy, it’s pretty much now our only option for affording anything.
I think, and I’m not researched on this, but I think conservatives probably tried to suppress images of non-nuclear families because they likely thought it would encourage ideas of polygamy, polyamory, open sexual relationships with or without marriage, as well as other relationship types they thought of as un-christian or unsavoury. I could be wrong, but that shit wouldn’t surprise me.
(And i want to make a note that there’s also a disturbing amount of asexual denial around that makes people go ‘if they’re living together they HAVE to be banging because why wouldn’t they?’ and that shit both creeps me out and annoys me no end. People can be in relationships without sex. People can live together without sex. Sex is not the be-all and end-all and people being taught to think it is really need to stop).
Don’t let the media fool you into believing you can only live with a sexual partner or blood family. Someone somewhere has an agenda for making these seem abnormal, when really it’s just practical.
A lot of people acted like it was super weird when two of my brothers decided to move states with me when I started my postdoc. I got really used to giving a little canned speech about it because it seemed to bewilder people so much. (Their leases happened to be up! We could share rent! They wanted to try somewhere new!)
The notable exception was my grandma, who was just like, “oh, yes, when we were young my sister and I decided to move cross-country together and it was lovely.”
More of this kind of thing for everyone, pls.
The implication that close sibling relationships must also be a warning sign for incest also peeves me off; what kind of society are we living in anyway
#my mom’s a historian#does a lot of research#one of the main takeaways from the census data of literally every US census since the beginning#is that the nuclear family has never been the actual norm#nobody really ever lived like that#and a lot don’t now#and it’s clearly artificial and not ideal for most people#every household in the census had at least a grandma#usually a cousin#some rando#someone living in the house who wasn’t mom or dad or kid#always someone#usually several someones#some uncles etc.#unmarried aunties#that sort of person#but often unrelated friends#we’ve never really lived alone#that’s not how families work#that’s not how humans work
tags by @bomberqueen17
Imagine your OTP getting really confused while trying to build IKEA furniture.
