Visit Citebite Deep link provided by Citebite
Close this shade

Beyond the Valley of the Femdoms

This isn't what it started as. I'm not sure where it's going.

On Rolequeerness

I’m actually pretty excited about all of the discussion about rolequeerness going on lately. I think, conceptually, it is absolutely wonderful, and one that I have been exploring privately for some time.

I think the primary limit to wider discussion of rolequeerness was that Maymay is a piece of shit. They have a tendency to attack anyone and everyone who even mentioned their ideas or tools in a way that didn’t involve kissing their ass and acknowledging their absolute moral and intellectual superiority. They have been absolutely vicious to people who have dared to mention the possibility that they have ever done anything wrong. They refuse to acknowledge that they might carry any sort of privilege. I could write a lot of very long essays about this, but I don’t think it would accomplish anything of value.

I think a lot of great ideas have piece of shit originators. I consider Gayle Rubin’s charmed circle formative to how I think about a lot of the world, but her opinions about pedophilia are garbage. Margaret Sanger was racist and supported eugenics, but Planned Parenthood and reproductive choice are so, so good and important. Good ideas can come from shit people. I don’t think the measuring an idea based on the moral fiber and kindness (or lack thereof) of its originator is a good standard for determining its value. Take what is good from an idea and use it to develop your own. This might be the ex-academic in me talking, but you can take an idea and run any way you want with it. The approval of an idea’s originator (or popularizer, more about that later) is meaningless.

Rolequeerness is valuable because questioning the purpose or even necessity of binary power roles in kink is valuable. I don’t think identifying with rolequeerness is threatening to binary kink roles any more than queerness is threatening to binary sexuality or genderqueerness is threatening to binary gender. All of these types of queerness interrogate the institutions that insist that the world must be a certain way. Some people find that threatening. I find it liberating. Participation is not mandatory.

Maymay didn’t even invent rolequeerness. The term was invented by Relsqui regarding dance roles, and was popularized by Maymay. Hell, they aren’t even the primary theorist. Everyone keeps glossing over R. Foxtail’s contributions, which I think are pretty great, even if I am pretty sure she really doesn’t like me (to be fair, I really don’t like her partner). Glomming together the accomplishments of a woman with her (male or often read as male in the case of Maymay) partner is pretty misogynist and I am not a fan.

Rolequeerness is bigger than Maymay. I am excited to see it expand and evolve.

Also I am super into notfuckingcishet's new blog, rolequeer. I think the questions it raises are really interesting and thought provoking.

*Battens down hatches for oncoming shitstorm*

  1. underhuntressmoon said: Yesssss thank you for explaining it better than I could
  2. safeword reblogged this from rolequeer and added:
    reblogging to add: i really need to get to work on that post with the political/activist history of the word “queer”,...
  3. antarcticanarchic reblogged this from beyondthevalleyofthefemdoms
  4. foxtrotthegirl reblogged this from safeword
  5. emotionalexhib reblogged this from beyondthevalleyofthefemdoms
  6. neverrwhere said: interesting! Will definitely follow that new blog :)
  7. unrepentantfatty reblogged this from beyondthevalleyofthefemdoms
  8. literalbookworm reblogged this from beyondthevalleyofthefemdoms
  9. literalbookworm said: this is literally exactly what I was thinking about this.