"queer" and "poc" are starting to become less descriptors of people (who are always fluid and naturally incapable of rigid conduct) and more descriptions of certain spheres of human social interactions where you can do all your "risky business" and not threaten your status

to some ppl it might seem weird that now social quantifiers like that are becoming so rigidly defined (lines in the sand) but its a natural consequence in a world where theres less and less privacy and less physical boundaries cuz of compooper. speech acts are now of prime import

u have to ask "what exactly are people fighting about?" to make the speech act "i am 'x' identity" doesnt appear to do anything materially. but cuz of internet youre deterritorialized and dehistoricized (w0w). so with it, yr asking for a social relation to give you context again.

this is best seen with the "Great Slur Debate" (lmao). a slur only works cuz of social context. the slur itself is an arbitrary set of sounds. so who can say, not say, who the slur addresses is utterly a social relation BUT the sum of social relations is only us

so, now we gotta constantly manage these social relations through either conflict or a temporary social truce. theres no top-down authority (académie française but for gays?), so each person in the network (millions!) has to participate in this relation. consensus is v unlikely.

this is why almost all "conservative" discourse is really cringe here cuz it suggests theres some kind of cool trick where we magically make an institution appear or reappear from the past. thats not how it works. churches take 100s of years to become institutions. no ez game sry

imo current cognitive science (which has very very conservative assumptions about humanity) overvalues consensus, coming up with a rigid binary between nonproductive disorder and productive mutual order. i actually think conflict and disorder is beneficial. root of creativity.