There are plenty of letters in the LGBTQIA+ acronym, and the community seems to keep growing. So why is "queer" still one of the best descriptors we have?
Some people say they have a hard time believing queer or BIPOC characters could get to the HEA required in historical romance. That's silly.
Despite what some people want you to believe, queerness is not new. Let's look at queer history around the world.
Laws banning discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity are front-page news. But they seem to be overreaching on a lot of fronts.
When it comes to Western media, romantic love takes precedence. But what of platonic love? Can we even separate the two of them?
Some parts of the queer community reject asexuality as "queer enough." Yet asexuality is actually more of a threat to the heteronormative order than most would care to admit.
Why are bi and pansexual people so misunderstood or told to "pick a side"? It has a lot to do with the balance of power in our society.
Which characters are queer? What does it take for us to accept them as true representation? What counts as "queer enough"? Whenever we ask these questions, we're debating how queerness should be performed.