I Don't Want A Romantic Partner I Want Friends Who Will Go Dumpster Diving With Me, I Want Neighbors

I don't want a romantic partner I want friends who will go dumpster diving with me, I want neighbors who will knock on my door and ask for butter because they forgot to buy some and it's sunday. I want book shelves in public spaces, food banks and shared tool sheds and community gardens. I want to trade home grown tomatoes for a couple of eggs with my neighbor and I want to bring food over to my friends house when I've cooked too much. I want bicycle only streets and I want people to go on spontaneous walks with. I want people to ask me for help when they need it and I want to be able to ask for help in return. I want community as a safety net. I want people to stop focusing on the vague concept of the one, who will Cure All Isolation and Loneliness. I want every single person to be able to find support and comfort around them, regardless of their relationship status.

Ooh thanks for making this post! I was so absolutely confused about this but your explanation makes a lot of sense!

why do you identify with "lesbian" if you say you're a man. A man can't be a lesbian, i don't understand it.

The whole lesbian concept excludes men bc it has nothing to do with men. Lesbian is women loving women, and if you identify as a man, i don't understand how you can identify w the lesbian community as well.

like this isba genuine question, I'd like to listen to your explanation bc im genuinely confused!

trans men, and any trans person really, cannot exist on the same binary cisgender people exist on. the binary was not made with trans people in mind, to be trans and to change your sex (which isnt limited to bottom surgery btw), would be inherently nonbinary, simply because the binary does not accommodate for trans people

beyond that, trans men dont have the same rights privileges and power that a cis man would have. meaning that while a trans man IS a man, he is not a cis man, and thus cannot experience male privilege, or the systemic power that comes with being a cis man

so we can conclude from that two things. one, trans people are inherently nonbinary. while not every trans person identified as nonbinary, the act of transitioning, socially and medically, is an inherently nonbinary act. i personally choose to identify as nonbinary to deal with the distress of people forcing me into the cis man category when i am fundementally different from them. now that we have concluded that the act of transitioning is nonbinary, let me address that: trans men have always been included in lesbianism. the communities are not seperate. the historical definition of lesbian has included gender diverse people as well as women, and trans men are still gender diverse

beyond that; a trans man identifying as a lesbian is not the same as a cis man identifying as a lesbian. the ideas that trans men are men and that trans men are NOT cis men can both be true. trans men who are attracted to women have more societally in common with lesbians (especially genderqueer lesbians) than cishet men. yes, trans men identify as straight all the time. however, if a trans man wants to identify as a lesbian, who are we to deny him? he isnt a cis man, hes not a threat to lesbianism or to the queer community.

faq:

"wouldnt identifying as a lesbian and a trans man be invalidating?"

a: different trans men have different opinions for themselves and their gender. some trans men choose to identify as straight/heterosexual, some trans men choose to identify as lesbians. it just depends on the person, however, if a trans man truly felt invalidated by the lesbian label, he just wouldn't use it. you dont get to assign rules on how a trans man chooses to identify, and you don't know him better than he knows himself

"what IS a lesbian then?"

a: the historical defintion of a lesbian is any gender diverse individual who likes women and/or gender diverse people. however, every lesbian can tell you something different. i know lesbians who only date binary women. i know lesbians who are exclusively t4t. i know lesbians who are femme4butch and date trans men who are butches. someones personal definition of their own lesbianism doesnt invalidate yours, and vice versa

"whats next, a CIS man identifying as a lesbian to cause trouble?"

a: and what if the world was made of pudding? trans men are not cis men, and to believe such is wishful thinking at best, and ultimately distressing to trans people. beyond that, i raise a counterargument of, what if we let trans people use the bathroom of their preferred gender? what would happen if a cis person used the opposite genders bathroom to cause trouble? the fact of the matter is, punishing trans people who are trying to live for the hypothetical cis person doing something wrong is transphobic and also stupid

"evan, i dont WANT to date a male lesbian/lesbian on t! what does this mean for my lesbianism?"

a: absolutely nothing! date who you want! you actually dont have to be attracted to every single person who is a lesbian! i know im not! youre allowed your preferences. i do know for a fact that some lesbians, especially under the trans/genderqueer umbrella are really into trans male lesbians and lesbians on t, but that does NOT mean that you have to be! once again, nobody elses personal definition of lesbianism can invalidate YOUR personal definition of lesbianism. im ALL ABOUT doing what you want!

Unwanted sex bots trying to follow me in here should be considered acephobic bc why

I think I have found a new hyper fixation for my autism which is solarpunk.

The history of Solarpunk

Okay, I guess this has to be said, because the people will always claim the same wrong thing: No, Solarpunk did not "start out as an aesthetic". Jesus, where the hell does this claim even come from? Like, honestly, I am asking.

Solarpunk started out as a genre, that yes, did also include design elements, but also literary elements. A vaguely defined literary genre, but a genre never the less.

And I am not even talking about those early books that we today also claim under the Solarpunk umbrella. So, no, I am not talking about Ursula K. LeGuin, even though she definitely was a big influence on the genre.

The actual history of Solarpunk goes something like that: In the late 1990s and early 2000s the term "Ecopunk" was coined, which was used to refer to books that kinda fit into the Cyberpunk genre umbrella, but were more focused on ecological themes. This was less focused on the "high tech, high life" mantra that Solarpunk ended up with, but it was SciFi stories, that were focused on people interacting with the environment. Often set to a backdrop of environmental apocalypse. Now, other than Solarpunk just a bit later, this genre never got that well defined (especially with Solarpunk kinda taking over the role). As such there is only a handful of things that ever officially called themselves Ecopunk.

At the same time, though, the same sort of thought was picked up in the Brazilian science fiction scene, where the idea was further developed. Both artistically, where it got a lot of influence from the Amazofuturism movement, but also as an ideology. In this there were the ideas from Ecopunk as the "scifi in the ecological collaps" in there, but also the idea of "scifi with technology that allows us to live within the changing world/allows us to live more in harmony with nature".

Now, we do not really know who came up with the idea of naming this "Solarpunk". From all I can find the earliest mention of the term "Solarpunk" that is still online today is in this article from the Blog Republic of Bees. But given the way the blogger talks about it, it is clear there was some vague definition of the genre before it.

These days it is kinda argued about whether that title originally arose in Brazil or in the Anglosphere. But it seems very likely that the term was coined between 2006 and 2008, coming either out of the Brazilian movement around Ecopunk or out of the English Steampunk movement (specifically the literary branch of the Steampunk genre).

In the following years it was thrown around for a bit (there is an archived Wired article from 2009, that mentions the term once, as well as one other article), but for the moment there was not a lot happening in this regard.

Until 2012, when the Brazilian Solarpunk movement really started to bloom and at the same time in Italy Commando Jugendstil made their appearance. In 2012 in Brazil the anthology "Solarpunk: Histórias ecológicas e fantásticas em um mundo sustentável" was released (that did get an English translation not too long ago) establishing some groundwork for the genre. And Commando Jugendstil, who describe themselves as both a "Communication Project" and an "Art Movement", started to work on Solarpunk in Italy. Now, Commando Jugendstil is a bit more complicated than just one or the other. As they very much were a big influence on some of the aesthetic concepts, but also were releasing short stories and did some actual punky political action within Italy.

And all of that was happening in 2012, where the term really started to take off.

And only after this, in 2014, Solarpunk became this aesthetic we know today, when a (now defuct) tumblr blog started posting photos, artworks and other aesthetical things under the caption of Solarpunk. Especially as it was the first time the term was widely used within the Anglosphere.

Undoubtedly: This was probably how most people first learned of Solarpunk... But it was not how Solarpunk started. So, please stop spreading that myth.

The reason this bothers me so much is, that it so widely ignores how this movement definitely has its roots within Latin America and specifically Brazil. Instead this myth basically tries to claim Solarpunk as a thing that fully and completely originated within the anglosphere. Which is just is not.

And yes, there was artistic aspects to that early Solarpunk movement, too. But also a literary and political aspectt. That is not something that was put onto a term that was originally an aesthetic - but rather it was something that was there from the very beginning.

Again: There has been an artistic and aesthetic aspect in Solarpunk from the very beginning, yes. But there has been a literary and political aspect in it the entire time, too. And trying to divorce Solarpunk from those things is just wrong and also... kinda misses the point.

So, please. Just stop claiming that entire "it has been an aesthetic first" thing. Solarpunk is a genre of fiction, it is a political movement, just as much as it is an artistic movement. Always has been. And there has always been punk in it. So, please, stop acting as if Solarpunk is just "pretty artistic vibes". It is not.

Thanks for coming to my TED Talk, I guess.