Every once in a while, I stumble upon a term that names hundreds of experiences in my life that have previously gone unnamed. That happened for me this week when I read a post that contained the phrases “tenderqueer” and “white tenderqueer”. As I searched for more information, I found this article by writer Dolly Rose, this Instagram reel from PinkNews, and this article on its history from Them. Urban Dictionary defines a tenderqueer as:
“Typically a queer white hipster who uses identity politics to avoid accountability. Competitive oppression & self victimization. Centralizes themselves and their feelings in social / political movements…”
In this position statement, I wanted to share my thoughts on the term “tenderqueer” and use the term as a jumping off point to offer a broader perspective on unhealthy social dynamics I have observed within (white-centering) queer and trans communities. I will then describe what I think needs to change in terms of community social norms to stop centering, enabling, and catering to people who choose to behave like tenderqueers.
Thoughts on the Term Tenderqueer
First of all, I don’t think tenderqueer is an identity term. It is rather a way of behaving that people are socialized into and consciously or unconsciously choose (and can therefore unlearn). As noted in the above referenced articles, it is associated with queer and left-leaning political spaces, and someone does not have to be queer to adopt this way of being.
Second, tenderqueers are often white and often hold other more privileged social positions (class, dis/ability); the term is also associated with whiteness / white-centering communities. However, since it is a socialization, it can be adopted to varying degrees by anyone.
Third, my use of the term is not intended to label or demean people, most especially people who are working on themselves and trying to be accountable. It is rather intended to name behavior that I believe creates unhealthy communities, with the goal of transforming it. I also personally do not want to see this term used to squash people’s vulnerability but to rather expand their capacity for vulnerability, authenticity, tolerance, and accountability.
Characteristics of Tenderqueers
I am now going to describe characteristics of tenderqueers, as I have experienced them. This is just my personal experience, and it may differ from how others use or have used the term. My focus here is less on the term and on the patterns of behavior described. I also want to acknowledge that (as a white trans and queer disabled person who spends time in queer spaces) I am not immune to this socialization and pattern of behavior and have partaken in them to varying degrees over the years.
The defining characteristic of a tenderqueer is that they center their feelings (in political spaces, in communities, and in interpersonal relationships) over other people’s lived experiences and other forms of knowledge if they conflict with their feelings. If a tenderqueer has their feelings challenged, the whole room knows it, and the whole room (including people who also deserve to have their feelings considered) has to work and navigate and accommodate the feelings of the tenderqueer, regardless if their feelings align with other forms of knowledge or whether doing so is just or appropriate. Whereas others might take a moment to step aside or back until their feelings subside or apologize for over-stepping, tenderqueers demand space, time, attention, emotional validation, and apologies.
A second key characteristic of the tenderqueer is that they weaponize language from social justice movements and the mental health industrial complex to justify their behavior. Tenderqueers take ideas from therapy and demand that other people in communities and relationships coddle and treat them as if they were their therapist. Whereas others might ask for emotional support during difficult times and check whether another community member has capacity to offer it, tenderqueers demand it, including from more marginalized people. When challenged, tenderqueers tend to double down on it, alleging harm and violence, even if what is simply being challenged is the centering of their feelings. They also often co-opt language related to disability, mental health, and neurodivergence (that was intended for institutional/structural analysis, self-acceptance, and growth) and weaponize it to justify their feelings and behaviors.
A third defining characteristic of tenderqueers (and part of the reason I am writing about them here) is tenderqueers almost always adopt carceral relational dynamics. Whole people are often made-out to be problematic, toxic, oppressive, predators, and violent for perceived or actual offenses, without any opportunity or framework for repair and transformation. Tenderqueers take critical discourse that is intended to interrogate institutions, structures, and power and project it onto their relationships and onto communities in non-productive ways that make individual people out to be the problem rather than systems of power and add to rather than help resolve conflicts (which are inevitable in any relationship and community).
A final defining characteristic of the tenderqueer that I want to acknowledge is that because the guiding light of a tenderqueer is their feelings, centering their feelings typically does not advance justice or improve the health of communities. It is self-serving, not community-serving. This is part of why I think we have a responsibility to confront this socialization and pattern of behavior when we see it, rather than accommodate and coddle it, because doing so may keep the tenderqueer happy (in the short-term) but it does so at a cost. That cost is often born by the community and by more marginalized people.
Characterizing the Tenderqueer “Shepherd”
In addition to characterizing the tenderqueer, I also wanted to take a moment to describe a related phenomenon that I will refer to here as the tendequeer “shepherd”. There may be a better term for this that someone else has come up with. When I use this term, I am referring to a more marginalized person (often a person of color but not always) who engages in symbiotic relationships with tenderqueers, who conditionally uplift the “shepherd” in exchange for defending tenderqueer behavior interpersonally or at a community level. This person may embody tenderqueer behaviors themself, sincerely believe they are supporting tenderqueers, or be deliberately leveraging this relationship for particular social or political objectives. Importantly, I view the tenderqueer “shepherd” as a secondary phenomenon to the tenderqueer, that may also at times be its own trauma response. I, nonetheless, think it is an important phenomenon to name, as tenderqueers often use this/these relationship(s) as a tactic when confronted with their behavior to avoid accountability.
How Psychiatrization Enables Tenderqueers
Many, possibly most, tenderqueers are in therapy or have benefited from therapy. Ideally, therapy is a resource that helps you heal, grow, and build healthier relationships. For tenderqueers (and the therapists and mental health practitioners who enable them [who are sometimes tenderqueers themselves]), therapy becomes a key source of validation for centering feelings interpersonally and communally and provides them language they can co-opt and justify their behaviors. This is important to name, because this dynamic is thoroughly connected to capitalism. Many therapists struggle to keep a full client list, and having patients stay stuck in their own feelings for years is one of the most reliable ways for them to generate income under capitalism, regardless of the social and community effects of doing this. Therapy should help people move through challenges, traumas, and difficult experiences to become better and more accountable versions of themselves. People may stay in therapy for years, but they should be growing. Therapy should not enable people to behave however they feel, regardless of the impacts on others in relationships or the community. It should also not impose psychiatrized language and frameworks onto human relational and community experiences, when the liberatory and justice-oriented potential of these frameworks is often very limited.
