#also misandry does not exist. i do not need to explain that

[mahoutoons]

me when i remember i used to be one of those "if a woman chooses to wear makeup its a totally feminist choice also misandry is NOT okay" libfems

[cosmic-vanity]

What a lot of people don't get is that "transmisandry" is actually also the intersection of transphobia and misogyny but in the specific way that it affects trans men. Because it's not the same way that it affects trans women.

I don't think anyone actually believes systemic misandry in modern human society is a real thing. And if they do, I'm certainly not one of them.

A lot of trans women experience misogyny, usually but not always in the way that every other woman does, in the form of Gender Essentialism. Of course, there are way more intricate ways that transmisogyny exists within, but as a person who isn't a trans woman I am not qualified to even try to explain them. I recommend you look up posts by transfems on the topic :) AND, t-women also suffer from radical feminist's extreme Bio-Essentialism, because despite the fact that they are not cisgendered men, the victimising narrative of every RadFem on the planet tells them that "every person who was assigned male at birth is evil and out to get me and my sisters, then kill us or worse."

Trans men experience misogyny in that the patriarchy views us as women regardless no matter what we identify as or how much we alter our bodies to look just like them, and therefore, they view us as weak due to their Bio-Essentialism. Because we are not cisgendered men. They're the ones on the top. Again, our intersection of identifying as male and being transgender is really really complicated but I am sure there are more people out there who are better qualified to explain it than I am. AND, along with the aforementioned Gender Essentialism that RadFems also love to perpetuate (get this, most TERFs just use repackaged misogyny with a "trans" label slapped on it so they can pretend to be woke about their hatred) and their and self-victimisation, makes them view t-men as "evil gender-traitor monsters who hate us and are secretly out to get us".

Trans women and trans men both experience G.E and B.E on a regular basis.

Trans women usually get misogyny, USUALLY BUT NOT ALWAYS in the form of G.E, from patriarchy and B.E from TERFs; while trans men get misogyny, USUALLY BUT NOT ALWAYS in the form of B.E, from the patriarchy and G.E from TERFs. Both suck ass. Both forms of essentialism and both forms of oppression are equally bad, and both need to go.

But we will never get to that point if transfems and transmascs on Tumblr keep targeting eachother with transmascs going "Wellllll ermmmmmm I experience more oppression than you because society views you as male" or transfems going "Ermmmm ackshually your label for your experiences is invalid because-"

Quit the infighting. We have to stand together if we ever want this to end.

[l0veraven]

why the fuck would you reclaim the violently transphobic webcomic instead of writing your own thing. awful. are you tme? don’t think i’ve ever met a tma leasebound enjoyer. funny.

I'm trans-masc (this is the first time I've seen the term TME so that was pretty cool to see), but there's more to it than just reclaiming the story.

I 100% disavow the author, Rusty, and her beliefs that she shoehorns into her story. Many of her characters are bland and one-note, and (even though the original story is wildly transphobic), it's turning the transphobia on its head and taking a critical look at transphobia while also focusing on the actual lesbian love story.

I'm not sure if I mentioned it in the Author's Notes from the top of my head, but the love story is heavily overshadowed by the story being a soapbox and shouting, "trans women are evil and ugly and [insert more insults here]." In my fic, I'm still bringing topics of gender into it, but in a way that, again, takes a deeper look and is an integral part of how the characters interact with each other.

We also need to talk about how allergic Rusty is to depicting men. That's actually another major issue I have. The flavor of terf/radfem beliefs that Rusty upholds is genuine misandry (prejudice/discrimination against men). I don't use misandry lightly and don't mention it much in conversation.

Chapter 12 actually highlights this point.

(Spoilers for people that haven't read the chapter)

Shez's backstory is explored and details how her trauma with her mother being in abusive relationships with men had negatively impacted everyone involved (the mother, siblings, and herself). The character being averse to men and having trauma is completely valid and I would never critique someone having PTSD. I, myself, have PTSD from abusive relationships (familial and otherwise) throughout my entire life, so this isn't something foreign to me, but everyone does experience trauma differently.

I bring up Shez's backstory because even though it's a perfect way to explain why she hates men, it perpetuates the idea that men are inherently violent, predatory, and abusive. This isn't helped by how Meriam, the mother, is genuinely heterophobic and refuses to acknowledge that therapy would be beneficial for her.

(Here are the heterophobic panels in question)

I understand where Meriam is coming from, even though I don't have the same trauma as her. It's understandable that she wouldn't want a man in her house. I see why she's avoidant of meeting Rissa's boyfriend. It's normal to avoid triggers.

What isn't normal is actively avoiding seeking help to work through trauma. This isn't to say she should invite men to her house and "get over it". It's that she needs to learn that not every man is out to hurt every woman they encounter. I had to get therapy myself in the past and had to learn that not every romantic partner will manipulate me, but need to establish boundaries to ideally avoid being in a situation like that again.

To point out the heterophobic lines (which is wild because this is the first time I've seen actual heterophobia in any piece of media)"

Rissa: "[...] SHANEZY doesn't NEED to date women. [... Your ex-husband] was ONE man, mum. ONE. [...] He treats me like a QUEEN. You'd know that if you just gave him a CHANCE!"

Meriam: "One chance is too many. Nice men are the best liars."

This is where Meriam is unable to see the nuances of human interaction. People with enough charisma, period, are the best liars. Could be Ted Bundy, could be your mother-in-law. Anyone and everyone is capable of lying and tearing a person down. Toxic lesbian relationships can and do exist. You don't avoid liars just by attracted to the same gender or only interacting with the same gender.

Rissa: "And WOMEN never lie?!? They're just perfect angels who can do no wrong?!"

Meriam: "Women cannot make you pregnant."

We'll look past the women being able to impregnate (trans women do exist, but that's besides the point). Rissa is making a very valid point. Anyone is capable of lying and you can't avoid toxicity by only avoiding one group of people. Liars exist in a variety of spaces and have a variety of identities. Men are not the only ones capable of bad behaviors.

Rissa: "[...] So my options are: be a fucking lesbian or die alone? Great!"

Meriam: "Rissa... I am not saying this."

But she is. To a degree. I'm assuming that Meriam would be fine if Rissa abstained from relationships entirely (but we can't forget that terfs tend to not acknowledge asexual and aromantic identities), as long as she wasn't with a man. In theory, assuming that Rissa is straight, she would unfortunately be pressured by her mother to remain single.

THE BIGGEST POINT HIGHLIGHTING THE HETEROPHOBIA HOWEVER:

Rissa: "What if we get married, hmm? You just won't come to the wedding? You won't meet his family? Nothing?!"

Meriam: "I cannot support this, but I cannot stop you either."

Rissa: "Well, I guess you'll just never see me after that then!"

Meriam: "You will always have a home here..."

THIS is the problem. Instead of trusting her daughter to ensure her own safety and establish hard boundaries in her relationship with someone she hasn't even met yet, she just doesn't trust men. Period. This dialogue is something that comes straight out of a conflict with a homophobic parent. Remember the lines, "I cannot support this, but I cannot stop you either," and, "You will always have a home here." This reeks of "I don't support your lifestyle, but I still love you and you're always welcome here. Just not your partner."

Why go on about heterophobia?

For one, it demonstrates how hating men is acceptable in the comic, because with how the conversation is treated within the comic, Rissa is the irrational one for not siding with her mother. The other aspect is that it perpetuates "man violent," which isn't really beneficial to anyone. It fails to understand the nuances of people as a whole.

We also can't forget the gay couple with a gender nonconforming son that only appeared for a split second and never returned. Again, Rusty is allergic to men. I actually hate how her friend rags on her "inability to draw men". I think it's untrue, and frankly, I like some aspects of Rusty's art style. However, Rusty herself has mentioned that she refuses to depict men in her comic (unless they're characters like Trinity AKA "Madame President" as shown in Chapter 13).

THE POINT IS:

Why not take a shitty piece of media and re-write it to make it better? It's kinda like being mad at all the anime abridged series out there because the original media is shitty in one way or another. Besides, the story itself has SO MUCH POTENTIAL, but it's completely ruined by the transphobia and focusing on that aspect rather than developing the relationship between Jaden and Riley.

This comic has been going on for 5 7 years and we got the backstory of a side character before getting a look at Riley's backstory. Focus on the main characters please. We haven't even gotten to the inevitable break-up between Riley and Blaire yet.

Who knows, maybe one day I can publish this fic as its own book like with 50 Shades of Grey 🙈

[transmascpetewentz]

The reason that transandrophobia is a real, systemic oppression is because both transphobia and misogyny are forces of systemic oppression that greatly affect the lives of transmascs. Misandry need not exist for transandrophobia to; what I call transandrophobia is the intersection of transphobia and misogyny that affects transmascs, as well as anyone perceived to be transmasc or transmasc-adjacent.

I would also argue that transandrophobia usually refers to the way that a combination of transphobia and misogyny are used to speak over transmascs, take away our autonomy, and treat us like objects who don't have opinions on everything that affects us. It's the way that some of us, usually those of us who primarily date cis women, try to be "one of the good ones." It's the way that everyone is immediately suspicious of us being incels, especially if we aren't attracted to women.

It's the way that we are constantly forced into the role of a woman: how we're expected to put up with forcefem "jokes," detransition "jokes," corrective rape "jokes," and other such "jokes." If we don't let people walk all over us, calling us feminine terms, reminding us of our place, that's toxic masculinity. We can't have any relationship to womanhood, either, or else we're creepy men invading women's spaces. But if we reject womanhood entirely, if we exist as men who only love other men; then we're basically the same as MGTOW guys! /s

The difference between us and MRAs is that MRAs are straight, white, and usually able bodied and neurotypical. Meanwhile, transmasc-centered feminists tend to be neurodivergent and/or disabled gay trans men, and there seems to be a good mix of different ethnicities and cultural backgrounds speaking up. The MRA comparison doesn't work because when MRAs don't want to take women seriously, it is from a place of misogyny and often straight privilege. Gay trans men that don't worship cis women in every way are just guys who are tired of being forced to be women. There is a big difference here.

A lot of this new discourse is very much "gay men are more likely than straight men to be misogynists because they don't even like women!" repackaged, except it's not even repackaged. You just added "trans" to the beginning of everything! I don't know why I have to explain to queer discourse Tumblr in the year 2023 that not being attracted to women when you're a man doesn't inherently contribute to misogyny and patriarchy.

Gay trans men aren't making a choice to leave the Good Pure Women's Team and join the Horrible Evil Incel Faggots. Kill the radfem in your brain that believes that queer male identity and sexuality is inherently oppressive. Kill the homophobe in your brain that believes gay men need a woman in their lives to prevent them from going off the deep end. Kill the biphobe in your brain that believes that the only moral thing for an m-spec man to do is to date a good pure woman.

Transitioning is not a calculated choice for the vast majority of transmascs. I do not owe any cis woman the rest of my life spent in emotional pain due to dysphoria in order to make her happy that I'm not one of Those People. No one owes anyone else suppression of their personal identity and desires for gender expression in order to serve someone else's political framework. If your social or political framework does not include someone's identity, that is a problem with your framework, not their identity.

Gay trans men are not predators. Putting "trans" in front of your homophobia doesn't make it less homophobic.

[aikoiya]

I actually agree with a large number of this. At the same time, I can't help but mention how the Gerudo themselves are also very problematic.

However, more so in the way that they interact with/view men.

While it's absolutely true that the Gerudo are mostly Middle Eastern-coded, there's also some Greek influence in their culture by way of the Amazons.

Yet, despite this, not a lot of fans really examine how being a female-only race that still reproduces as any other human does, would affect a culture.

Not many acknowledge the possibility that perhaps sexually segregating themselves from men might, in part, have contributed to Ganondorf's continual villainy.

I mean, imagine what it must've been like for him. For you & I, it would be like if we spent the first 18-20 years of our lives surrounded by nothing but men, having never seen another woman, yet being expected to act as pillars of perfect femininity.

No women to explain to us what it means to be women.

Now spin that around & put Ganon in our place.

It's no wonder he ended up so screwed up. (Not that that's an excuse for bad behavior, but it, at the very least, could help explain it.)

He had no one to help him when he had questions. No one to teach him what it meant to be a man. And most likely only male stereotypes to base his idea of masculinity upon.

It's no wonder he grew into the very image of corrupted machismo.

There's also most likely a substantial pressure put upon the Gerudo to go out, find men, & have as many children as possible. Because the continued existence of their race depends upon it. Which, in & of itself, would basically kill any possibility of them being in any way feminist.

The Gerudo don't have the benefit of being in close proximity to males the way that most other races do. They are forced to go out & find a man.

They are forever on the cusp of extinction & I don't think a lot of fans really understand how something like that would actually affect a culture. Because this means that they are forced to look at reproduction through a lense of "I have to do this or I am contributing to my people's eventual extinction." It's not fair, but that is just the reality of their situation.

So, this just brings into question why they continue to enforce the no men rule.

Why do they believe it necessary to extract young 5-6 year old Vai from their homes & forbid them from seeing even their own fathers?

It just seems remarkably cruel. Especially when it's proven to have no true benefit based upon modern studies saying that, for the best possible outcome, a child needs both amother & a father. In this way, the Gerudo are likely extremely stunted as people.

If anything, it largely seems based upon superstition & even partial misandry.

But yes, the abortion comment was not only gross, but also makes zero logical sense considering the Gerudo's situation as a female-only race that still reproduces the same as all other humans.

By all accounts, based on that fact alone, they're more likely to see abortion as one of the worst sort of crimes. Especially considering the fact that in order to perpetuate as a race, that would mean that every Gerudo would need to have at least 1 child & every Gerudo that doesn't, would basically be foisting off that responsibility onto another Gerudo. Meaning that some other Vai would need to have 2.

And that's just to keep the death rate even with the birth rate. To really keep the birth rate above the death rate, every Gerudo should have at least 2 if not 3 just in case of unforseen tragedy.

This isn't in any way based on racism, but facts based upon the reality of their existence.

If they allowed men to at the very least live in Kara Kara, they'd have an infinitely easier time of it.

As it stands, each & every Gerudo is forced to train extensively. Admittedly, it's likely in part just a part of their culture & there's nothing wrong with that.

However, it's also probably partly due to the fact that the no men law requires them to travel to foreign lands in order to reproduce.

Which, in a world where things like Gleeoks, Lynels, & other such monsters exist, is bound to result in many Gerudo dying on their journeys. Any every Gerudo that dies childless, is one fewer Vai who left someone behind to take her place.

They just... they really have it very rough... worse, it's partially so difficult for them due to their own misandristic traditions. I legitimately can't imagine the pressure placed upon young Vai. Especially upon Vai who might not have ever even met a single man in their entire lives.

In all likelihood, most probably see men as exotic, yet alien themselves. And their own tradition has likely resulted in a false belief that men are only necessary for the creation of children & that they have no business in the raising of.

Which, probably didn't do Ganondorf any favors growing up.

things that have stuck with me as a woc in (the zelda) fandom

Hey all. This post is mostly about the Gerudo and my own experiences in fandom as a Middle Eastern woman (will be using acronyms such as MENA and woc), because the longer I stay here the more insane I become. This post is mostly about a lot of horrible stereotyping, misogynistic, racist, etc. headcanons, and just downright horribly offensive comments I've witnessed that have stuck with me throughout my time here.

There are a lot of other problems in this fandom with a lot of other aspects of the games (the Zonai...) which I won't touch on, as the Gerudo resonate closest with me and I feel I have the authority to speak on these issues as I am MENA, and they are based on MENA stereotypes.

TW for racism, misogyny, xenophobia, abortion... it's just strange.

The most notable thing I've experienced during my time in this fandom is being spoken over, as a woc talking about woc issues, by white people. White people who were MY FRIENDS.

One instance that sticks out to me is when someone shared their art of Urbosa in a Zelda server. It was really sexualized, and her waist was EXTREMELY tiny. Below the art, the artist said, "her waist is snatched because she got an abortion." She didn't say this about the other characters she drew. Only the woc.

Do I need to elaborate on why that is a horrible, disgusting thing to say?

This really upset me. What upset me more, however, was that nobody spoke up. Nobody said hey, this is wrong, and what you said is gross. When I spoke about this with my friends, they continued to bash the art style or whatever and ignore the fact that what was said was disgustingly racist. Then, after repeating about 5 separate times the impact this had on me as a woc (because nobody was listening to me and the most action that was taken was hug emojis), I got asked: Are you MENA?

They chose to ignore the racism they were witnessing and then questioned my (already stated) credibility. To question my capacity to be upset, hurt, and angry. These were people I called friends.

This next instance was not me being spoken over, but it was... weird. In a Zelda server, someone shared their headcanons for their personal AU. One of these headcanons was:

The Gerudo stop aging until they meet their significant other.

The Gerudo stop aging until they meet their significant other.

This was to justify the person's pedophilic ship with Riju, which... yeah. Self explanatory. So not only that, but you are tying the life and worth of WOC to their partners which, in-game, are men. The Gerudo do not continue their lives until they met their partners. The woc do not continue their lives until they meet their partners.

Be real.

This person ended up getting called out (after MUCH convincing from me to do so...).

These are two specific instances that have stuck with me during my time in fandom, but now I'll touch on more general stuff.

The only way people speak about Urbosa or other Gerudo characters is sexually or violently. It seems we only have the capacity to say "yes mommy Urbosa step on me! Crush my bones!! Yes!!" which is actually extremely harmful. You can like the Gerudo. You can think they're sexy or hot. But you need to be more mindful about how you speak about them, because if the only way you can express your feelings about these woc is through acts of violence, that is a problem. Because you cannot see the Gerudo as characters beyond being man-hating lesbians to satisfy your own fetishes. By acting this way, you also contribute to the idea that Gerudo women cannot be feminine because they are brown-skinned. No other race in Zelda is spoken about this way.

The Gerudo are often attached to other characters, as mentioned previously. I think this is most commonly and easily seen with Urbosa. Whenever she is discussed, it is in relation to Zelda (mother-daughter relationship) or Zelda's mother (having an affair or whatever other headcanons there may be). It is rare that Urbosa is written on her own, outside of her relationships. Not like she has an entire society to run or anything.

Let's also not forget about the sexualization of Link in his Gerudo vai outfit. Yes, it's cute. Yes, it looks good on him. But so many of you borderline fetishize him wearing it. However, I don't think I know enough to speak on this specific issue, so I will stop there with that.

I will never forget the time I came across a post saying that the existence of Ashai, a pale Gerudo, is racist.

Here is Ashai. She teaches the dating lessons in Gerudo Town. As you can see, she is paler than a lot of the Gerudo.

However, contrary to the westernized belief that all Middle Eastern people are literally brown-skinned Muslims, the Middle East is extremely diverse. Middle Eastern people are pale, dark, brown, tall, short, Muslim, Christian, Jewish. We are not carbon copies of each other like this poster wanted the Gerudo to be. In fact, this same exact identical-ness is what made early versions of the Gerudo so racist. The one thing Nintendo did right was having a diverse range of skin tones for the Gerudo in BOTW, and by saying Ashai's existence as a pale Gerudo is racist, you erase all of that progress.

Race is not just in your skin tone. It's in your eyes, your nose, your mouth, your ears, your body. That is why, despite being pale, Ashai is Gerudo. Ashai is a WOC.

This post is not intended to stir up drama, because if you believe racism = drama, that is not on the poc calling it out.

If you are a white person who is friends with POC, this doesn't make you exempt from contributing to the harmful stereotypes or racism.

Sit down. Listen. And reflect.

[fictofaggot]

Hi! im assuming you're trying to learn as well, so here a trans man in your inbox re:transmisandry. it's Actually A Real Thing, people just hate the words we use and that's a big part of it. One of the biggest issue trans men face is our invisibility and non-trans people don't Get that, this also includes debating whether or not we Should use the words we use and if we even suffer from oppression at all. They don't want us to have words to define our struggles, just like when they didn't want ace or nonbinary people to not have theirs, because it's not real enough/we're privileged/etc.

People often forget that our "trans" comes before our "men" BUT that we suffer from transphobia SPECIFICALLY because we're men because if we weren't men we wouldn't be trans, duh! Also we aren't in the same space of power as cis men because no matter how well we pass, we're always one slip up alway from losing our "man" status so you REALLY can't say we're at the same level or privileged for Becoming Men. We aren't part of the oppressors and we don't benefit from the system as much as people think we do. The moment we decide to transition we Lose whatever "privileges" we had from our agab and we never quite gain full access to the perks of the other binary one.

Surprisingly enough, we also suffer from misogyny (although people ignore that we do) because society mostly thinks we're just Women Who Are Wrong, but we accept that we can't really use the term transmisogyny for ourselves. So we can't use that one. So what can we use to talk about our own specific struggles then? We need our words, even if people don't like them. There's too many people speaking for us. Listen to US (trans men) when we say we suffer, not to Other people with Opinions.

I don't mean any ill intent with this btw, just that you seen like a nice person who reblogged some misinformation. That's all.

just putting it out there that i am a trans man. so. i don't really need to be treated as what you say is "Other people with Opinions", cause this comes from like, my own experience

i don't claim to think that trans men don't experience specific types of transphobia at all. clearly they do, and it would be more than a little stupid to claim otherwise.

most of the issue i have is just... the word itself. again, transmisogyny as a term describes an intersection between two types of oppression, misogyny and transphobia. transmisandry, on the other hand, says that there's an intersection between transphobia and... misandry. which is widely agreed to be something that does not exist? as far as i'm aware?

and so if something does not exist, how can there be an intersection with it? i struggle to understand the reasoning.

the fact that i dislike the term as it is does not mean i think trans men are "privileged for Becoming Men". i don't think that at all. you do not suddenly become an oppressor once you transition into manhood... that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. trans men are still oppressed on the basis of being trans. trans men still face specific forms of oppression. just... maybe it's not best described as transphobia interacting with something that isn't real, once again.

i really think you should've just read the post you claim is misinformation.. it explains basically the same thoughts i have? like, even down to the example of the term misogynoir not having a white woman counterpart. it's the same concept in my mind.

but, all in all, i don't really care. love and light and peace on earth. i love trans people

[pronounpinbadge]

fyi i am not a transandrophobia/transmisandry truther and im gonna explain why. preliminary note im not transfem/transmasc and dont experience transmisogyny, all of the info i have is directly from my transfem friends or from trans women talking about this stuff. take with a grain of salt and listen to trans women on this first and foremost!

21/10/2022 edit: if another one of you weirdos assumes that im cis because im not transmasc or transfem im going to assume that you are actually faking your acceptance of complex identities, or actually any identity that doesnt fit your trinary of man/woman/nonbinary (as a whole label, not an umbrella term) suck my transneutral duogenitals

transandrophobia is a term that doesn't need to exist, because it was made to mirror the term transmisogyny but for transmascs, but transandrophobia truthers (TAT's for short) misunderstand what transmisogyny actually means (which is pretty much the driving force behind this whole discourse, lack of research and understanding)

transmisogyny is the intersection of transphobia (based on the birth sex) and misogyny (based on the desired sex) -- an example of this in cissexist standard would be "failed to be a man, trying to get pity by being a woman" which leads to degendered dehumanisation. trans men are hugely more impacted by cissexist misogyny, since we all live in a massively misogynistic society still, so theres no need for a term that intersects transphobia and a societal nonproblem, cissexist misandry. even if transandrophobia WAS just a term for 'transphobia against tmascs' (which is dumb, you can just say transphobia) transfems dont have a term like that, why do you! thats not what transmisogyny is at best and an intentional misinterpretation at worst.

misandry does happen to tmascs in ways, like "if you go on T youll become a digusting bald angry abuser", but thats about it, a misogynist society will always favour men, even if the 'stupid weak women' are trying to play pretend as us 🤪 that isnt comparable to transfeminine mass fetishisation in the sex work industry (which is the intersection of misogyny, since theyre supposedly ""not woman"" but still treated as sex objects since "they wanna be women!") (which trans men also suffer from vis a vis the whole cuntboy fetish!!!)

i understand the thoughtline of "they get a special word" -> "their discrimination is worse than mine" -> "we need a special word too" that TATs go along but you have to break out of the trauma-olympics mindset. trauma is trauma, doesnt matter how much you suffer

TLDR; transmascs suffer more from cissexism a la misogyny than they do misandry, so transandrophobia is an unneeded term and only divides tfems and tmascs more for the sake of 'our special boy-discrimination word'

this is an EXPLANATION post on why im not a transandrophobia truther, not a discourse post -- if you debate on this post/try to get a response just know ive already muted this post and am going to go play crazy golf. i genuinely do not care about this discourse, i care about real life transphobia, byyeeee

[thecommunityoftrustworthysinks]

“misandry doesn’t exist so transandrophobia/transmisandry doesn’t exist” okay but it’s not saying it does because it is a term explaining the unique way transphobia affects transmasc people, as transmisogyny explains the unique way transphobia affects transfem people (which includes and intersects with misogyny because they’re women and misogyny in a specific way cause they’re trans women)

like you do fucking realize that transandrophobia is also a function of misogyny and transphobia because transmasc people are fucking seen as women, but of COURSE we’re not gonna call it transmisogyny because that word is already in use and that would be WILDLY inappropriate, and trans*andro*phobia was selected because transmasc people aren’t women (+ to avoid transmisandry’s implication of misandry LMAO a decision i agree with)

like this is not this fucking hard, of course transphobia impacts trans people of different agabs differently, look at how cissexist society views gender and sex??? that’s WHY transmisogyny is a thing too, because of the way cissexist culture views gender, it’s absolutely insane to imply that that wouldn’t happen to afab people because ????????? we’re masc??? or something??? like fucking seriously the main argument is “you’re not uniquely oppressed because you’re men” as if cis society SEES US AS MEN? you’re literally fucking kidding me

“just use transphobia” no, because transphobia refers to oppression that exists for ALL trans people, there are specific fucking ways it manifests for transmasc people (being seen as if we can’t make our own decisions, as if we’re ruining our bodies, as if we’re betraying womanhood, etc etc the list goes ON if you just LOOK) and THAT is what transandrophobia is FOR, you CANNOT separate out the masc part of transmasc and what that means by just saying “well ur men so it doesn’t matter” the people oppressing us don’t see us as men that’s literally why we’re oppressed and that intricately has to do with what our assigned gender at birth is, of COURSE THAT COMES WITH SPECIFIC WAYS OF OPPRESSION, AND ONES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH MISOGYNY BECAUSE WE ARE SEEN AS WOMEN, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MISANDRY AS A SOCIAL FUNCTION AT ALL, THAT ETYMOLOGY ONLY HAS TO DO WITH US NOT BEING WOMEN

you can claim that’s “just transphobia” but there is a sore need for a word to refer to the particular manifestations it has for afab trans people (just like for amab trans people!! we’ve all seen the stupid ass discourse invalidating nonbinary people who are amab!! it fucking sucks but yes agab matters!! because we’re all trans!! it doesn’t just stop mattering when you’re afab and masc!!! honestly same for exorsexism!!! we need these words!!!) and that is what this word is trying to do

[proofthatihaveaheart]

Captain Marvel fic recs

i wrote this ages ago, during the summer, and then forgot to post it - but better late than never! it’s got a mix of gen, carol/jess, and carol/maria fics on it, including both comics and mcu fic. enjoy! 

Gen

Galactic Response Time by SassySnowperson (Carol & Fury, 5k): All the OTHER times Nick Fury texted Carol Danvers. // May 4th, 2012    Get your ASS over here there is an INVASION. Aliens are coming out of the SKY HELP US // May 10th, 2012 "Invasion, Fury, the word you used was invasion! I made it across three quarters of the galaxy in six days! Where are the aliens?" [I love this fic and the way it so perfectly captured Carol and Fury’s dynamic. THE DIALOGUE! IT’S JUST SO GOOD! Their banter is fun and there are some genuinely sweet moments.]

whatever it takes (and i couldn’t whisper when you needed it shouted) by pratz (5k):  In which Tony called Carol glowing space Jesus, and Carol did her best to understand the weight of 3.2 million lives lost. [An AU of Endgame focusing on Carol and her journey in processing what happened and what she can do about it. I love the characterization and her interactions with the other characters, particularly Tony.] 

Carol/Maria

All Around [Reminders of You] by sinandmisery (1k):  The first year is the worst. [Maria and Monica’s grief over Carol’s ‘death’, framed around Christmas. Some good and painful angst.] 

another place, another time by sorrybaby (1k):  In every lifetime but this one, Carol gets to love Maria. [Oof, this one hurts and it’s absolutely brilliant. It’s Carol/Maria and endgame Carol/Val and sometimes you can love someone but not be with them. Because sometimes life is like that and you miss one another. Lots of good pining and learning to let go. Bonus Nat + Carol friendship.]

a simpler place in time by Elisattack (3k): It starts like this: Carol blows up. // Actually, it starts like this: Carol falls down, then she gets right back up again. Her dad shakes his head at her bruised knees and cut face, and calls her unladylike. She says fuck him, and fuck any man that tells her what to do. [Tracks through Carol and Maria’s relationship from the early days to getting together to the events of CM + Endgame and afterwards. Lovely writing and character work. One of my favorite works of this kind]

brave face talk so lightly by lesbiyawn (1k): Carol is stubborn. Carol is hot-headed. Carol can’t help it if some people deserve a just beating. Maria knows this. It’s why she loves Carol calls Carol her best friend. [Pre-canon and pre-relationship fluff that is both sweet and very them]

do you have to let it linger by whyyesitscar (2k):  in the wake of carol's crash, maria has to explain everything to a lot of different officials. only one of them seems to get it. (Maria talks to Peggy. Beautiful fic about grief and the people who can understand it.)

jambalaya (please be my baby) by carol_danvers (6k): Loving Maria comes easier than anything else ever did. Carol won't say she wants to be more than friends, not when she has so much to lose, but she'll tell her in everything but name.AKA Carol tests out pet names, Maria gets pregnant, and they fall a bit more in love. [One of my favorite get-together fics, the writing is so good and I love the development of their relationship, the PINING and the obliviousness, it’s gold.]

kisses under my palm by neon_air (1k):  Carol Danvers has been kissed before but never by the one person she wanted it from most. [All the different kisses Carol has had, and love. A lovely one-shot.] 

Lightning Crash by Monochrome_girl (2k):  Carol is here to stay. Maria is still getting used to having her back. [Carol stays and they reconnect. It’s a lovely progression of the two relearning each other and building a life together that also involves collecting alien scraps and it’s sweet.] 

Love’s Labors Lost by lesbians_and_puns (3k):  After Carol finds a home planet for the Skrull, she returns to Louisiana to try to get her old life back, but when she finds an old photograph of herself and Maria on Maria's bedside table, they both realize how much they're still missing. [An angsty take on Carol’s return and the things people can say because life is stressful and complicated and sometimes you hurt the people you love without meaning to. It’s really good, it also hurts.] 

we were too close to the stars by inkwelled (1k): "God, what did they do to you," Maria whispers, wrapping another bandage around Carol's bicep. / For all it's worth, Carol doesn't even wince. [This hurts but in a delicious way. There’s a kind of soft aching quality to the angst, it’s premium, good stuff, you can feel the love.] 

Carol/Jessica

Always Falling by sariane (2k): “What do you want?”“I don’t want to be her sloppy seconds. I want all of it, all the corny relationship stuff. I want the dumb date nights, the stupid fights, the awkward breakfast-making elbow bumps. I want to take her up flying – someday. I don’t know,” Carol says suddenly, scuffing her foot on the street, “I want stability.”Carol wants a lot of things. She does not want to be Jessica's rebound girl. [Basically Jess and Clint break up, Carol is a great friend on the comfort front, and then Jess kisses her. And Carol assumes it’s because she’s a rebound. There’s some light angst over that, it’s very well-done. Characterization is very good.]

Fly, Fight, Win by singalellaby (1k):  It's not a sign of superhero lesbian bed death, whatever Peter says, it's just that Jess is an Adult. A Mature Adult. In a Mature Adult Partnership with a woman who happens to wear skin-tight suits as her work uniform and it was either become habituated to her girlfriend being the hottest anything with Kree DNA around or living in a state of permanent arousal in her own pretty damn tight costume. And since S.H.I.E.L.D doesn't spring for laundry expenses, that was so not an option. [Jess POV, admiring her really hot partner.]

He Picked the Wrong One by beckydawolf (Carol/Jess, 34k): When Captain Marvel and Spider-Woman are knocked unconscious on a mission, they wake up in a world a lot like their own. In fact, it’s almost identical. Except that the Civil War never happened, Jess doesn’t seem to exist and their Carol is dead. Oh and then there’s Natasha Stark.Turns out, slipping between universes might not even be the most complicated part of this mess. (Fantastic characterization, really love the perfect Carol and Jess banter, nested in this wonderful comic book-y plot that works as perfect background for the development of the characters and the relationships. Also the plot is entirely driven by characters and their relationships and their love - both unhealthy and healthy. It’s great)

In My Dreams by sariane (3k): Carol may not have her memories, but she has her dreams.(But, of course, she dreams of kissing Jessica. As if her life isn't already complicated enough.) [This fic takes this concept and does a phenomenal job with it. You really get Carol’s growing frustration with the dream as she tries to work out what it means by subtly asking everyone other than the person in her dream.] 

It’s A Slow Slide Into Misandry by bendingwind (800): Carol's all fixed up and Jessica's moved on, and things have... changed. [Short little fic post-Hawkeye break-up, dealing with feelings. It’s cute.]

once you live a good story by pummelwhack (Carol/Jess, 13k):  Carol and Jessica redefine what it means to be happy, in the context of coffee, philosophy, and each other. Or: the one where Carol and Steve own a used bookstore, Sam runs the coffee shop next door, and Jessica searches for more than what life is currently offering her. (Lovely, soft fic about falling in love and finding happiness in each other and your life. Some truly beautiful lines and musings about philosophy.)

Pin the Tail by Alsike (Carol/Jess, 7k):  Carol doesn't know who she is. But she knows Jess. She likes Jess. There's probably a good reason why she's not dating Jess, but, you know, amnesia. [Glorious, this fic has pining and angst and trying to deal with amnesia and it just gets Jess and Carol down. And the emotions, they’re just really good as they navigate their relationship and the baggage they bring]

Red by awesomocity (1k): If Carol had been a more self-conscious person she might have worn stale jeans for another day. But years of dealing with brothers and locker rooms and the general knowledge she was both hot AND powerful made standing in a laundromat in her underwear at three in the morning tolerable, if not comfortable.(or, the one where Carol and Jess get romcommed by laundry.) [Love the characterization in this, just a really good fic for cheering you up.]

Smell Like I Sound by Sineala (6k):  Carol likes Jess a lot. That's not the weird part. The weird part is that Carol likes Jess a lot more when Jess isn't in the room. [A pheromones fic taking place in the Marvel Adventures verse. It’s really cute and I really like the push-pull of Carol figuring out her feelings and wondering why she keeps having these moments of revulsion around Jess.]

Snow Day by Traincat (1k):  Jessica Drew goes missing. Carol and the Hulk team up to get her back (and maybe fight some ice monkeys along the way). [Absolutely delightful fic, I love the dynamic between Carol and the Hulk as well as Jessica and the Hulk, and Carol’s concern for Jess. I could easily see this being a real comic]

Such a Cunning Disguise by WhenasInSilks (2k): Carol is fracturing again.Carol and Jess started dating six months before Stamford. Eight months before Captain America died on the courthouse steps. Ten months before things like the measurement of time ceased to be part of Carol’s personal universe.Now she sits alone in the darkness of her cell and feels herself fall apart.A Secret Invasion AU. [This fic HURTS. It’s beautifully written too which makes the angst all the more delicious. Warning for heartbreak and self-loathing and mental instability]

the small rain down can rain by tigrrmilk (3k): When Jess was jumping between universes, trying not to get killed, she had wondered - was there a version of her and Carol who had... made it work? [Jess dealing with Carol having amnesia and going off to space. Really good character stuff, all the complicated feelings Jess has about what Carol did, and then Carol showing up, you can really see the connection between them, regardless of memory loss or distance.] 

Turn Around and Look Back by Sineala (Carol/Jess, 6k):  When Carol first lost her memories, to Rogue, Professor Xavier healed her and let Jess experience all of Carol's missing memories. When Carol loses all her memories -- again -- it's up to Jess to give them back to her, in exactly the same way: Jess has to link with Carol telepathically. But Jess' mind contains a lot of feelings about Carol that she doesn't exactly want Carol to know about. [I love this fic, just all the feelings, the pining, the concern, the character voices, it’s all really good.]

Unshackled by beckydawolf (27k): Carol's in space and Jess is alone again. But that's the pattern of her life. The hunt for a missing teenager leads Jess to some new friends, reminds her she still has some old ones and forces her to face a part of her past she'd rather ignore. [A darker take on the pheromones and the trauma + complications of Jessica’s powers. This fic is really good at how it handles it, and I really love how supportive Carol is. Also Anya and Kamala and America and Kate show up and they’re awesome!]

[heart-ruled-moved]

{ thinking about the wasted potential behind Tenko and how i feel about my own writing on her. Some canon bashing below the cut so - yeah. }

Out of all the muses I have here, I think Tenko suffers the most out of not being fully explored. While I think Kazuichi could have been a much more amazing character than he was in game if they focused more on the personality he showed in his FTEs, at least he has a very well completed backstory for the reason he’s so obnoxious, dresses like a punk he isnt and even explains why he’s so jumpy if you’re paying attention. Akane’s backstory is also pretty complete, and is probably my favorite character in game overall, and though I have some a LOT of issues with how the game choses to handle her clearly hinted at sexual abuse she suffered and her character design - she’s still pretty well understandable and rounded out.

Tenko though? she’s got some hints of personality, mostly with how childlike and over the top she is about all her emotions, and she even plays a pretty important part in the story with how her dying words reach Himiko.

But god. They...really don’t go anywhere with what they have. Her entire existence basically made up of “I’m obsessed with Himiko and I hate men”

Like god, she actually has no meaningful interactions with anyone outside of Himiko and Shuichi, even in UTDP. I get that she’s supposed to be more of a comedy character  but ...that’s kind of the problem. I dunno, maybe its just me, but I think there’s so much potential with her character they could have unlocked. I dunno, I get that in game they had to keep her man hating consistent to have the plot make sense, but I’m really disapointed they didnt do much aside from a few hints in UTDP that she could potentially overcome her prejudice that??? very obviously doesn’t suit her?? For being a character that the creator said was written as a symbol of self-improvment, she sure doesn’t show a lot of it

idk im just....really tired of Tenko’s only point to exist being that she likes himiko and hates men. because no matter what i do I still feel like im writing her out of character a lot of the time, because holy fuck there’s nothing more to go on than those two point in ANY OF HER DIALOUGE. Like?? Her thought patterns sure I think I can get it down okay, but she has no other accent or life to her dialouge other than those two points. For god’s sake, Kazuichi and Akane’s manner of speaking were incredibly individualistic, Makoto’s shone through his personality perfectly and even Yuta displayed more character depth than Tenko did in the 15 minutes of being in game that Tenko ever did.

It’s really hard to feel any confidence in how I play her when I’ve started to chip away at her misandry through character development, only to be frustrated that none of her dialouge sounds right because she’s not obsessing over Himiko or insulting males in everything she does. Maybe i just need to experiment finding her voice better. I dunno. I’m just. MMmem. 

[themyskira]

Wonder Woman #34

Previously on what’s looking increasingly like a bad practical joke: James Robinson spent three issues telling us about stuff that happened in another comic.

Also: Darkseid is a baby, and his sexy evil half-Amazon daughter is helping him age up by feeding him the demigod children of Zeus. (And, incongruously, the nymph-turned-bear Callisto, because James Robinson’s Wikipedia game is not up to scratch.)

So far Diana’s been kind of a bit player in the story, appearing in less than 50% of the first three issues. She only made five pages of the first issue; last issue she didn’t feature at all. But this week she’s back, and guys, I just have this feeling that things are looking up for--

ohwaitnevermind.

At last! JASON! The hero for all those comic fans who’ve ever been reading a Wonder Woman comic and suddenly found themselves wondering, but what about the mens? Who will be the champion for them??

Flashback. Philippus, who is far too cool for this comic, smuggles baby Jason out of Themyscira. She explains to her accomplice that she’s not hiding him from the other Amazons, but from the wrath of the gods.

On the surface of things this is an improvement, because at least we’ve gotten away from the old New-52-Amazons-sell-their-sons-for-weapons bullshit. Except— if Jason is in such danger from conniving gods and/or a jealous Hera that he has to be sent far away from his family to be raised in deepest secrecy, how come none of that applies to Diana?

And okay, maaaaybe Robinson is working on the assumption that Azzarello’s origin still stands — i.e. that Hippolyta had an affair with Zeus, then somehow hid her pregnancy from everybody and, to protect Diana from Hera’s wrath, pretended that her daughter had been made from clay and given life by the gods. Problem is, that origin story never held up to begin with (preeeeetty sure the gods are going to remember whether or not they made an entire human being for you, Hippolyta), and it certainly doesn’t hold up now.

And if it did, then why couldn’t Hippolyta use that excuse for both of them? If evil-Amazon-misandry isn’t a factor, why not just say you made two babies from clay, and raise them both on the island?

Who wants to bet it’s because Jason is some kind of super-special-dangerous-powerful-prophecy-child who needs to be double-protected?

A sailor with an irritating habit of swallowing his vowels meets Philippus at Themyscira’s border. His name is Glaucus, the once-mortal fisherman-god, who’s also too cool for this comic. He promises to raise Jason in secret.

In the present day, Diana and Jason exclaim melodramatically at each other.

“Jason! Brother! I can’t believe I’ve found you!”

“Wonder Woman. My sister!”

A fisherman in the background makes this face, which is a fair reaction, tbh.

The exclamations... escalate.

“Diana! My name’s Diana. Say it, please. I want to hear you say my name.”

“Diana. I had hoped this day would come. Every time I saw you on the news— the amazing feats you performed, and all the good you did. I prayed one day we’d be together.”

Is… is it me or do they sound more like love interests than long-lost siblings?

Jason explains that Glaucus made him swear never to contact Diana. He suggests they leave the boat for some alone time, and Diana is like, “buuuuuhhh I mean I guess I could carry you??” Forcing Jason to point out that he is her twin, for fuck’s sake, and therefore shares most of her powers, including flight.

One problem with this? According to Diana’s new Rebirth origin, she wasn’t born with powers. She was strong, sure, and a trained warrior, but it was only after she ventured into Man’s World that the gods gifted her with flight, supernatural strength, speed, the ability to talk to animals, and all the rest. Which means that, unless Jason’s undertaken any heroic quests or earned any divine favours, he ought to be just a fit, stronger-than-average dude.

Have I mentioned how much I hate this reboot-but-not-really-lol job DC’s done on Wondy?

I need to pause for a second because there is something fucked up going on with Jason’s musculature right here. He looks like he’s wearing a shirt made out of human skin.

Jason explains to Diana that it wasn’t just his oath to Glaucus that prevented him from making contact. He was scared of who he was and of what Hera might do to him. Again: if Hera’s such a threat, why did nobody make any effort to hide Diana from her?

Back at ARGUS HQ, James Robinson is persisting with this idea that Steve Trevor is both a former Air Force Colonel and a current top-ranked Naval NCO, which, by the way, means that Steve should be at least in his mid-forties.

Doctor Peril, the confusingly-named not-a-villain, tells Steve that the relics Diana recovered from Giganta during her blink-and-you’ll-miss-it appearance in the first issue contained metal from Apokalips, which makes Steve glower wonkily out of the page.

Diana and Jason’s reunion continues to read like a budding romance and it’s creeping me the hell out.

They exposition some more for good measure. Blah blah Themyscira is unreachable, blah blah Grail is killing Zeus-spawn, and

Oh, for fuck’s sake.

Diana asks what Jason’s other powers are. He says he has super-strength, but “maybe not as strong” as Diana, which reads like a token to appease critics of this story. ‘How can you possibly say this super-secret, super-special, super-powered, chosen-one brother plot is sexist?? We specifically said he’s not as powerful as her!!’

He adds that he has other powers unlike Diana’s, but he’s not going to tell her about them now because it would ruin whatever ham-handed dramatic reveal James Robinson has planned down the line.

Then they start talking about their love lives.

Jason is super keen to know about Steve. Who is he? Is he her boyfriend? Does Diana loooove him???

I CANNOT BE THE ONLY ONE SEEING THIS THEY ARE FLIRTING OUTRAGEOUSLY WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON

(Also, Diana says of Steve, “He has a lot of [military] ranks, wears a lot of hats”, which makes me snort. Steve has all the military ranks, guys. He collects them! He’s an Air Force Colonel, a Naval Master Chief Petty Officer — he’s even a Rear Admiral in the Coast Guard! This is absolutely how the military works! I watched NCIS this one time!)

More stilted exposition. Jason says he fights monsters occasionally, but only in secret. They ruminate on why Hippolyta chose to give Jason to Glaucus, before circling back to the demigod-murdering elephant in the room.

Then the sun starts to set and Jason intones that “the appointed time has arrived” and—

oh for shit’s sake.

Grail arrives and punches Diana through a wall. Jason goes full supervillain, attacking Diana while monologuing about how much he wants to kill her. “I’ve hated you — the very thought of your existence — I can’t bear to look at you.”

She punches him off a cliff and he reveal his secret superpower, which is even dumber than you might have guessed.

“YOU WANTED TO KNOW MY OTHER POWERS, SISTER? OUR FATHER WAS GOD OF THE SKY — THE AIR — AIR PRESSURE — WHICH CAN CREATE A TSUNAMI!”

While this is technically true — rapid changes in air pressure can displace water, which in turn causes a meteotsunami — it doesn’t explain why Jason has the power to sculpt the waves into a giant version of his head and torso.

Diana is beaten and impaled on Grail’s sword. Jason and Grail gloat about how easy this all was. “We’re not going to kill you yet, Diana,” Jason tells her. “You’re needed. But don’t worry, when the time comes… it’ll be me that does it!”

Oh, and as a parting blow?

Looks like we’re in for yet another Wondy-less issue next time. That’s fine, it’s not like her name’s on the front of the book or anythi--

oh. right.

[thenightling]

Hey, so I can appreciate that fandom discourse can get frustrating, but it does hurt me to see a friend I treasure being called certain things. May I ask that you try and keep it civil? If there's a problem, it's easy to clear it up over messenger. We all have different opinions but hopefully we can still respect each other. I'm sorry to hear about the anons - nobody deserves that. There's Tumblr hit-tracking tools out there which can help you see where they're coming from in future =).

I appreciate your civility and you have the right to know that I strongly suspect your friend was sending me very hateful anonymous messages for days all because I dislike The Dreaming spin-off comics and outside of those anonymous messages her most recent open reply to me was accusing me of being Transphobic, misogynistic, superficial and other hateful terms, among other things.

The evidence is there in her “points.”   The wording used is virtually identical to the hateful anonymous messages attacking me and telling me that I was calling the author “as bad as her oppressors.”   

What your friend and certain others on Tumblr need to grasp is that being Trans doesn’t automatically make someone non-Transphobic.  There are plenty of ways Trans people deal with Transphobia within the Trans specific community.  

There are gate keepers who insist you need to get the surgery to be a true Trans.  You even see Passive-Aggressive behaviors about this when they’re being critical of the character Wanda from Sandman simply because she was afraid of the surgery and therefor (according to these specific hateful elements) “not really Trans.”

You even see it on the DC Wikia page for Echo (the character your friend was defending) by the repeated statements in the wikia page saying “She was really a man before she became a nightmare!” (No, if she was always a woman deep down inside she was always a woman.  That’s the truth of it). 

And the one bit of potential Transphobia in The Dreaming that your friend can’t seem to get her mind around and accept the probability of, while ironically calling me Transphobic, is the fact that The Dreaming, despite being pro-Trans Woman -more or less- (See what I said there about Echo) you will find content that at least one Trans male has been uncomfortable with, and that is Nuala happily going back under a glamour.

The simple fact is someone can be pro Trans Woman while being anti Trans Man.  As weird as that may sound, that mindset does exist.  And I am afraid that may exist in The Dreaming comics.  I could be misreading it but that is how it appears to me.  

There’s actually a lot of apparent misandry in The Dreaming, including how the Corinthian is written, coming off anti-Woman when there was no indication he was like that in the original comics, he just preferred men, as lovers and victims.   And Cain (in the Book of Dreams) using words like “Bitch” in jarring places, where he sounds more like Freddy Krueger than his usual Vincent Price-esque self.  Can you really imagine someone whose vocal patterns and mannerisms were modeled after Vincent Price shouting “Get on, Bitch!” to Nuala?    

I have explained the symbolic significance of Nuala and her glamour, and how I and some others have seen it, as best I can, but your friend not only refused to accept my opinion but harassed me over it.   I compared it to someone willingly going back into the closet and even used non-sexual comparisons- anyone defying their cultural expectations but then conforming to them later “But this time it’s their choice so it’s empowering!”    

I’ll use a religious comparison.  A dissatisfied Catholic finds her true beliefs in Wicca but later the browbeating and the fact that everyone else around her is Catholic gets the better of her, so she goes back to “the fold” and treats the religion that she actually felt at peace with is now “evil.”

But your friend keeps claiming “Nuala is more than her appearance!” making it clear that she refuses to even consider the metaphorical implications.   And it’s rather rude.   Not only that but in her latest bullet points she decided that to dislike Nuala hiding herself under a glamour is “misogynistic”  

And honestly, this was the last straw.   

I had to shut off the Anonymous feature because of messages received,  that use her exact same wording, her exact same attempted defenses of the author, Echo, and Nuala.   And I’ll be perfectly blunt, even if that was a coincidence and somehow those anonymous messages were not her, there aren’t that many people who liked or even heard of The Dreaming comics.  That’s why DC doesn’t sell them in trade paperback form and ignores most of the events of those comics and also why characters like Echo have never appeared outside The Dreaming.  So the probability of it not being your friend greatly diminishes in my mind.  I acknowledge that there is a chance it was not her, but the chance that it was her is too great for me to to be willing to take the chance.  

Rest assured I will not unleash my anger on your friend again for her bullying replies to my opinion but she also needs to learn to be respectful of the opinion of others without turning it into self-righteous social accusations (and this has nothing to do with my suspecting the anonymous person is her.  This has to do with her final open reply to me).   For this reason I have blocked her.  

[eichy815]

I Don’t ‘Consent’ to This Narrative

Almost one month ago, I authored a Morpheus magazine op-ed entitled “#MeToo: Oh, But Not You.”  In this piece, I argued how male survivors of sexual abuse, harassment, assault, and rape shouldn’t be excluded from the #MeToo discussion.  Although, statistically and numerically speaking, there will be a higher number of women sharing their stories, as survivors – if we aren’t so hesitant to allow male survivors to speak out within the context of #MeToo, it will only enhance the discussion on how to dissolve the patriarchy and rid our society of toxic masculinity.  

ON-EDIT (two days after the original publication of this 12/27/17 blog piece) – Relationship coach Harris O’Malley just authored an op-ed for The Good Men Project entitled “Be Proud of Being a Man.”  In it, he makes the argument that part of redefining masculinity is to reassess how we view maleness (at the social level) in relation to one's purpose, community, and service.

However, fashion blogger Andrew Spena had previously epitomized a distinct strand of misandry that has reared its ugly head – and been perpetuated by a shrill minority of the population – as everyone tries to make sense of public discourse due to the fallout of the #MeToo dialogue.  As I discussed in my “#MeToo: Oh, But Not You” editorial, this invective is being inflicted upon males “as a group”...including those of us males who are members of the LGBT community.

Proving my point, in his mid-October editorial entitled “Men, Please Hold Your ‘Well, actuallys’ in the Wake of #MeToo,” Spena squawks:

I’m certainly not the first person to call out cis queer men on the Internet for this, and sadly, I won’t need to be the last.  Queer cis men, before you see a chance to jump on a trending hashtag, take a second to think about who’s steering this narrative and what they’re trying to say.  Ask yourself if this is your story to tell or your moment to sit back and thank the people who are sharing their stories.  (Hint: If you have to ask, it’s almost always time for you to sit back and listen.)

That’s what #MeToo is all about: hearing and believing women.  It’s about amplifying voices who’ve been ignored.  If you haven’t done a great job so far, now’s a great day to start.

I could go hog-wild on a diatribe breaking down Spena’s numerous fallacies while eviscerating his warped worldview.  But I feel that I have already done so, at great length, refuting other voices amongst Spena’s like-minded ilk in my “#MeToo: Oh, But Not You” manifesto from November.

Instead, I want to take a different approach.  During the week of December 18, ABC’s Good Morning America did a journalistic series entitled “Raising Good Men.”  This three-day series of news segments took a look at the process of redefining masculinity.  While it explored some healthy concepts in terms of raising future generations of boys with better values than many of their predecessors, it also (unfortunately) harbored traces of a neofeminist, neoliberal, misandrist, heterosexist framework – albeit a fairly subtle one.  My social commentary today will discuss why and how that is harmful.

The first segment of “Raising Good Men” focused on young boys ranging from the ages of seven through ten.  These boys were residents of the Houston area, having participated in the local Boys & Girls Club’s “Passport to Manhood” program.

To start off the segment, the Houston-era boys were asked their opinions about girls...including how girls should be treated.  Some of the boys’ answers were mature (e.g. one respondent citing fair treatment based on gender/race) – valuing the concepts of respect, manners, personal space, listening, behaving, and asking for consent.  Some of the role models who these boys named from their own daily lives included teachers, coaches, or barbers (in addition to fathers or other male family members).

But, to my chagrin, many of the boys’ answers were steeped in an outdated worldview of “chivalry” based on traditional gender roles.  They gave examples such as “buying flowers” (for females in their lives) or “opening doors” for women.  One kid named Cooper mentioned how he had specifically been taught to open the door for his mother and sister.  When asked by moderator T.J. Holmes what the terms “Be a man!” or “Man up!” meant to them, these boys indicated that it conveyed how they were expected to act strong and tough.  Holmes may have been operating the interview from a place of subconscious heterosexism and gynocentrism, as he neglected to ask the Houston boys any real questions about how they relate to (or show affection for) their male peers.

Dr. Dave Anderson of The Child Mind Institute had been observing their interview from behind-the-scenes.  Anderson emphasized how the concepts of respect, empathy, and consent need to be GENDER-INCLUSIVE...not just applying to boys, but applying to anybody.  He also said that positive modeling behavior needs to remain gender-neutral; we have to stop conditioning our boys to believe that girls are “frail,” which also means we need a more diverse social message.  Such messages should include the age-appropriate teaching of consent.

I will simply concur with Dr. Anderson’s statements, here – while also citing my editorial pieces entitled “Redefining Masculinity in the Modern Era” and “Chivalry: A One-Way Street?”, from December 2013 and May 2014, respectively.

The second segment profiled older teenaged boys ranging from the ages of twelve through sixteen.  This group of older boys was from the Denver area, and ABC News moderator Paula Faris asked them a number of questions as to how they interact with peers upon having entered puberty.

One striking difference I observed between the younger boys from Houston versus the older boys from Denver was how the Denver boys gave much more thoughtful responses.  For example, when Faris asked them how they show affection to girls (and notice how she never even entertained the possibility that any of them might be homosexual or bisexual), they mentioned holding hands while walking together to Panera (a popular neighborhood hangout near their school).  They also specified the need to create dialogue, such as asking, “Are you okay with it?” or “Does it feel good to you?”

Then, when Faris asked them what the phrase “Be a man!” means to them, this group of boys spoke (rather forlornly) about the social expectations of acting emotionless as a sign of “maturity.”  They universally expressed how they felt afraid to show their emotions publicly, but they often wished that they could.

Dr. Stephanie Dowd (observing from behind-the-scenes, the way Dr. Anderson had been, the previous day) says that it’s “rigid” and “dangerous” to use these traits as barometers of masculinity.  She cites concepts such as “mutual respect,” “compromise,” and “genuine caring” as new emphases that could transform “toxic masculinity” into “healthy masculinity.”

Perhaps the most compelling difference that I’d noticed, comparing the Houston boys vis-a-vis the Denver boys, was that most of the language used by these adolescents from Denver was gender-neutral (in the context of this discussion).  Some of their parents (who had also been secretly listening in, from the next room) even admitted that they had begun to realize how they’d been sometimes sending the wrong message to their teenaged sons.  After the fact, Faris told her ABC News peers (via their in-studio dialogue on that morning’s broadcast) how she was extremely impressed with this group of young dudes from Denver.

The final segment featured a group of young men, aged 18 through 22, who resided in various parts of New York City.  This segment was moderated by Deborah Roberts.

When prompted by Roberts to name some of the words they associate with “healthy masculinity,” they invoked concepts such as “Love,” “Humble,” “Respectful,” “Value,” and “Responsible.”  Building on that, these young men expressed that they want to take positive examples that they see in older men...and then become better versions of what they see.

Then, when pressed by Roberts as to whether they’re reluctant to speak up in an all-male environment where there is “locker room talk” objectifying females, one of the New York dudes admitted that, if someone tries to speak out against such “locker room talk” that he may find to be distasteful, the rest of the group can tend to gang up against that one moral naysayer.  In her post-production commentary, Roberts explained how this is the age when alcohol consumption can become a gateway to sexual assault.

These young men from NYC unanimously responded that it is important to step in when you see any type of assault happening...even if it’s your own buddies who are doing it.  One member of this NYC-based focus group, additionally, specified the importance of checking in with your own friends to make sure they’re okay, beforehand, as an approach of crisis prevention.

However, in her narration, Roberts phrased it as the need to “...step into situations with women when they feel something is abusive or unfair.”  This, unfortunately, is a narrative that inherently deemphasizes the necessity of males stepping in to come to the aid of their male peers who are being assaulted or harassed (regardless of whether such abuse is sexual, behavioral, or social in nature).

Also, according to one of the college-aged participants:

The onus and responsibility is on men to make a change and to address these issues even when it seems like it may be socially-uncomfortable to do it at that time.

This worldview is subliminally repressive and sexist.  It assumes that males are predisposed to violence and disrespect (vis-a-vis females).  It posits that boys and men are automatically heterosexual (and/or sexually-voracious) until proven otherwise.  It implies blanket culpability on the part of male survivors while not imposing any such social expectations on female survivors.  And it misappropriates the existence of male privilege as a pretext for minimizing any abusive actions that females may inflict upon males (or upon other females).

Another participant in this NYC-based focus group likened reverence for women to treating a girlfriend or wife the way one would treat his mother.  Some of the participants had started an NYU chapter of a social activism group entitled MARS (Men Against Rape and Sexual Assault).  One of them vocalized how males can’t just sit on the sidelines – we need to be a proactive part of the conversation.  #MeToo, he says, isn’t supposed to be just about women calling out men; it’s also about men joining in to change things.

Roberts also acknowledged that ABC’s news division intends to create news segments on “Raising Good Women”...as well as discussing these issues with coed focus groups.  When the NYC students’ parents (who had also been listening in, behind-the-scenes) joined their sons after the segment had concluded, the parents all reiterated to Roberts that they wanted their sons to learn from their own past mistakes.

But what kind of mistakes are we poised to make, in the future?  If males are going to be a proactive part of the #MeToo dialogue, it can’t be solely at the whims of those who bask in their anger to bring others down while pushing myopic personal agendas.  As actress Minnie Driver sneered, earlier this month, in response to actor Matt Damon’s contention that there is a spectrum of different types of abuse, harassment, and assault:

I honestly think that until we get on the same page, you can’t tell a woman about their abuse.  A man cannot do that.  No one can.  It is so individual and so personal, it’s galling when a powerful man steps up and starts dictating the terms, whether he intends it or not...How about: it’s all fucking wrong and it’s all bad, and until you start seeing it under one umbrella it’s not your job to compartmentalize or judge what is worse and what is not.  Let women do the speaking up right now.  The time right now is for men just to listen and not have an opinion about it for once...

There is not a woman I know, myself included, who has not experienced verbal abuse and sexual epithets their whole fucking life, right up to being manhandled and having my career threatened several times by men I wouldn’t sleep with...In the same stereotypical way that we see women being supportive of men in their endeavors, I feel that’s what women need of men in this moment.  They need men to lean on and not question.  Men can rally and they can support, but I don’t think its appropriate, per se, for men to have an opinion about how women should be metabolizing abuse.  Ever.

The poison in Driver's words and sentiments is self-evident.  While I agree with Driver that we shouldn't be "ranking" the oppression and abuse that people endure, she is ultimately doing exactly what she accuses powerful men of doing -- creating an exclusionary binary where her moral compass apparently gets to establish the terms under which everyone else can participate.  This is especially jarring in light of how Driver's own ABC family comedy, Speechless, is one whose writing team glorifies the outlandish terrorizing and shaming of "wimpy" males (most notably through the other characters' unapologetic abuse of the Ray DiMeo character, which is normally played off for laughs at the adolescent male character's expense).

Also, the three groups of male students (Houston, Denver, NYC) interviewed by ABC News were simply sample focus groups.  The differences in their perspectives could partially be attributed to geography – seeing how Texans would be likelier to teach traditionalism to their youth, Coloradoans would tend to be more balanced and moderate, and New Yorkers would be more prone to accepting a doctrine of “female exceptionalism.”

And, although I have survived many traumatic instances of sexual harassment, assault, abuse, and intimidation throughout my own life, #MeToo has also impelled me to reflect on how I could have taken more proactive steps, myself, to stand up for others who were being harassed or abused – even when I wasn’t the direct target.

While I personally have been privileged enough to have never found myself in a situation (as a bystander) where I had to intervene in a rape, a fight, or a sexual assault – I also know, firsthand, what it feels like when I have been targeted and no one in proximity will step in to back me up.  So, with this knowledge, I try to reflect on whether I can recall any examples of this occurring in the past.  I’m sure there may have been several of which I just haven’t retained the memories (or didn’t notice it happening, at the time).  It reminds me that I need to be consciously on the lookout for these instances, in the future.

But there is one very vivid incident that happened, where I was neither the aggressor nor the target, but #ILetItHappen nonetheless.  This might seem like an anecdotal example, but I keep it in mind as an example of my past inaction...so that I can hopefully find a way to intervene or diffuse any similar type of situation in the future.

One year, while I was in college, a bunch of us were waiting in line for the cafeteria to open for dinner.  I was there by myself, so everyone else who was in line around me was a complete stranger to me...but, nonetheless, what happened next was absolutely disgusting.

Two guys in front of me proceeded to spend at least five minutes making snide and derogatory comments about the cosmetic “ugliness” of the cafeteria employee (a middle-aged woman named Ruth) who was waiting to open the doors for us and who was tasked with swiping our cards.  Even after she’d opened the doors and was getting the register prepared, they still proceeded to make those comments – clearly WITHIN EARSHOT of Ruth.

I look back on that and wonder, “Why didn’t I say anything to them?”  Especially once the doors had opened?  Why didn’t I tell them off to their faces?  Why didn’t I tell Ruth not to pay them any mind?  Why didn’t I loudly say my piece...and then storm out of there to make a point (or, better yet, go get the manager)?  Probably a number of reasons:  worrying about my own physical safety (although in hindsight, I realize they probably wouldn’t have physically attacked me), worried about making a scene and getting in trouble myself, worried about subsequent repercussions against me, self-consciousness about my own looks that made me just want to “blend in,” etc.

But I do know this:   if it happened today, and I was a witness to it, I would definitely say something.  I would absolutely “make a scene” on Ruth’s behalf (assuming she was the same victim in a contemporary scenario)...because that’s the type of thing I would want someone to do for me, if I was the victim.  

One missing link that seems to be left out of this entire conversation is how we can cultivate healthier friendships and bonds-of-brotherhood between boys – that they bring with them into adulthood as they become men.  This was a question underlying Remaking Manhood co-author Marc Greene's fantastic February 2015 op-ed for The Good Men Project, entitled "Why Do We Murder the Beautiful Friendships of Boys?"

So rather, than go on another rant, I will pose these questions to everyone insofar as how the #MeToo dialogue continues from here:

*****************************************

What value is there in silencing male survivors who have endured rape, sexual assault, sexually-driven harassment, or bullying throughout our lives?

Should the #MeToo discussion extend to women beginning to self-examine how they themselves may have acted sexually-oppressive toward men throughout their lives?

Piggybacking off of the previous question:  should women be encouraged to stand up for other women if they observe female-on-female violence/harassment occurring?

Regardless of your sex or gender identity:  how many times in your life have YOU stood idly by and been an enabler of #ILetItHappen?  How many times didn’t you speak up for someone (or intervene, on their behalf) if you witnessed them being sexually assaulted, harassed, or degraded?

Are there ever occasions where – by speaking up and/or intervening – you might be putting YOUR OWN physical safety at risk, amid the crossfire between aggressor and victim?  Why should there necessarily be a greater onus on males to take this potential risk (to our physical well-being) as opposed to females doing so?

What role does perpetuating traditionalist gender roles play when creating environments that enable the types of assault and abuse that the #MeToo movement seeks to confront?  How does the targeting of transgender people stem from this dynamic?

If we do indeed subscribe to the nonsensical Minnie Driver doctrine of "Men should just listen and not have an opinion" – at what point are males going to be allowed to reenter the discussion?  And who, specifically, gets to decide those terms?

If our focus shouldn’t be to “rank” survivors’ traumatic experiences against one another (and, instead, recognize every woman’s past trauma as its own distinct truth), then shouldn’t we be showing equal respect and deference to the traumatic experiences of male survivors?

*****************************************

Although my sentiments toward redefining masculinity haven’t changed, I am grateful to the #MeToo movement for motivating my need to engage in personal introspection.  The value in this will be how I can use that knowledge to protect and defend others – female and male, alike – whenever I encounter them being exploited or preyed upon within the context of my daily life.

I will speak out on every facet of this epidemic.  We need to broaden the discussion to protect boys (who are minors, legally) and LGBT people.  We need to start taking it seriously when we encounter domestic violence cases where a victim happens to be male.  We need to crack down on same-sex abuse regardless of sexual orientations of any parties who are involved.  And we need to find ways to prevent CONSENSUAL forms of positive bodily-contact between friends (e.g. hugging, kissing, sports-based camaraderie, locker room horseplay, faux-flirting) from becoming stigmatized. 

Many of my critics might sneer that I’m laying out all of these terms in a very “Eichy-centric” way.  Yes, my life is “Eichy-centric”...because it’s MY LIFE.  But I’m the one who has to live my life – and I want to live in a world where friends, acquaintances, and strangers feel reasonably comfortably around me.  I will continue to fight for this type of world, for as long as I breathe.

If you object to that, you’re going to have to put a bullet in my head.