Dreamsexual or dreamgender is a made up sexuality, usually what people who are in love with the YouTuber, “Dream” call themselves. It can mean something else but I'm focusing on the YouTube one. The term was made by someone homophobic, and many people use the term to try to push into LGBT+. There have been many homophobic attacks on other websites about this term, usually Dreamsexuals trying to force people to accept them as LGBT+ and changing LGBT+ so it is for Dream “stans”
Is it OK to say you disagree with this term?

1Oaktree2 wrote:

Dreamsexual or dreamgender is a made up sexuality, usually what people who are in love with the YouTuber, “Dream” call themselves. It can mean something else but I'm focusing on the YouTube one. The term was made by someone homophobic, and many people use the term to try to push into LGBT+. There have been many homophobic attacks on other websites about this term, usually Dreamsexuals trying to force people to accept them as LGBT+ and changing LGBT+ so it is for Dream “stans”
Is it OK to say you disagree with this term?

I find it pretty weird that these people would base something off of a person? I'm not sure though, just don't use the term to be safe.

1Oaktree2 wrote:

The term was made by someone homophobic

Yeah, I'd say this term isn't allowed.

considering this term was meant as an offense, i would not support it on scratch.

it appears i have to wait 120 seconds per post in order to post again… how unfortunate. i did not see that coming.

Although at first it may seem like this is allowed, it is not. If the term was made by someone homophobic, then it's probably not allowed.

Not to mention dreamsexuals are often homophobic and transphobic.

If it was made to be offensive, the don't use it and report it.

“Dreamsexual” people are almost certainly trolls and aren't trying to get recognized as a legitimate sexual identity. They're yanking your chain. Report them when you see them. If a person actually bases their sexuality on a Minecraft youtuber then they need professional help.

A bit off topic but….



Im glad dream stans haven't taken over scratch yet. Theyve destroyed the entirety of twitter and therrs nothing we can do

OhOkSir12345 wrote:

A bit off topic but….



Im glad dream stans haven't taken over scratch yet. Theyve destroyed the entirety of twitter and therrs nothing we can do

I believe the Scratch Team would be able to control a full-website takeover to be honest. The first signs of one would probably be a red flag to them.

NanoRook wrote:

“Dreamsexual” people are almost certainly trolls and aren't trying to get recognized as a legitimate sexual identity. They're yanking your chain. Report them when you see them. If a person actually bases their sexuality on a Minecraft youtuber then they need professional help.

I was more concerned that some people may be serious and get offended and bark at me,

bluedragon8633 wrote:

If it was made to be offensive, the don't use it and report it.

I wouldn't…

Yellowsheep43 wrote:

Although at first it may seem like this is allowed, it is not. If the term was made by someone homophobic, then it's probably not allowed.

Not to mention dreamsexuals are often homophobic and transphobic.

Yeah, linking back to NanoRook's post, they could be trolls trying to get attention by being offensive. You won't believe how many people do that.

-r2 wrote:

considering this term was meant as an offense, i would not support it on scratch.

it appears i have to wait 120 seconds per post in order to post again… how unfortunate. i did not see that coming.

(offtopic - nice! I see you have a 3-letter username)
Yeah. Definitely.

dhuls wrote:

1Oaktree2 wrote:

The term was made by someone homophobic

Yeah, I'd say this term isn't allowed.

I don't have much to say here.

rayli1123 wrote:

1Oaktree2 wrote:

-snip- don't quote the entire OP

I find it pretty weird that these people would base something off of a person? I'm not sure though, just don't use the term to be safe.

most of them are trolls. I find it odd that people stan that much over a person whose true identity is unknown.

If it's made to be insulting, don't use it.

If the term is the vein of being used for discrimination against LGBTQIA+ people, such as attack helicopter and super straight, then it's not allowed here.

Because it was created by a homophobic person, this term is most definitely not allowed. And it isn't even a real sexual identification. Don't come at me but if you identify as this, get major help.

1Oaktree2 wrote:

-snip-
Is it OK to say you disagree with this term?

yes, that’s 100% ok to say you disagree. i’m offended by it as an lgbtq+ person because it invalidates our identities if people can become part of our community just because they are a fan of a youtuber.

there are genuine identities that are called dreamsexual and dreamgender, unrelated to the youtuber, and they are 100% valid and it’s horrible how people turned it into a harmful term.

yeah, as it's a very harmful term. having attraction to a single person isn't a sexuality. it's blatantly homophobic, report uses of it, unless it's the nonharmful version which is different.

It definitely would not be okay, but in consideration that it is not a problem here, I don't this would be an appropriate topic to bring up on Scratch (because, yikes, that word definition could very much lead to an unintended discussion about unhealthy fanaticism). Closing thread.