Great observations and explanations, thank you very much. If I could just fine tune a particular point, queer people like me feel particularly under siege right now over "sexualization."

When a really good, very non-political, insightful novel like "Lawn Boy" by Jonathan Evison is condemned as "too sexual" by pretty much everyone on the right, LGBTQ folks have a very special problem.

Evison's novel is not highly sexual. It's barely sexual at all. He didn't write a novel about sex; he wrote a novel about an economically marginalized young man living without hope who pulls himself up by his bootstraps and stays positive and loving the entire time. (You'd think Republicans would be in favor of that kind of message.)

Then, in the final pages, the young man realizes he's gay and understands the emotion he's feeling for his best friend is love. That's a minor side point, but it was enough to get the book banned in about 5,000 US schools, according to Pen America.

That said, on Tumblr and plenty of other social media platforms, LGBTQ people face an especially strict (and usually inaccurate) definition of what crosses sexual lines and what doesn't.

Twitter is fine. Facebook mostly is not fine. I've had friends banned or restricted on Facebook for sharing LGBTQ-themed short stories I've written that contain sexual elements, but that are much less sexual than typical Harlequin romances that Facebook has no trouble promoting.

I don't even try to promote those stories on Facebook. I know better. I know Facebook uses a stricter standard when deciding if LGBTQ related material is permissible on their platform.

I know they aren't alone.

I know when lots of LGBTQ people hear about social media platforms debating permissibility of sexual content, they roll their eyes along with me.

Because we know we are not going to get a fair shake.