#anyway. i know some trans men do still have ties to lesbian as a label that is cool of them carry on

[saxifactumterritum]

Here's a recent artical about them changing it (content warning: transphobia, TERF rhetoric):

[ID: a photo of Kemi Badenoch standing smiling, arms crossed, in front of a painting and a union jack flag. End ID].

I'm not sure how these links with pictures are for acessibility so I put an ID. The artical seems to be giving a pretty much blow-by-blow account. It doesn't counter the absolutely whacky shit being said, it's not an arguement against the changes. I don't know what it'll persuade people of but to me it is scary and sad.

Here’s a petition to try and stop the amendment of the Equality Act that would discriminate and transgender people.

You need to be a British citizen to sign this, and you have to use a confirmation email to have your signature be valid.

[wickmitz]

lo and behold, here’s my sexuality list for some of the lackadaisy characters! i am well aware most of these aren’t canon and that i’m being a little ‘too fruity’ with it, though that’s alright! these are just my opinions and, frankly, i don’t want nor need them to be canon in any way -- they are just aspects added to the characters mostly for my enjoyment. some of these are subjected to change ( due to a variety of reasons ) and some of these i may consider ‘canon’ in the sense that i read the characters with these headcanons in mind. i could also write an essay on some of the hcs listed here, but for the sake of simplicity i kept them as brief as i could … but without further ado, lets get on with it! :

rocky : he’s rather confusing, sexuality wise. tentatively would say he’s bisexual to some degree given how little someone’s gender matters to him, and that he also falls under the asexual umbrella ; being either demisexual or greysexual perhaps! he mostly just yearns to be loved and to serve as an invaluable object in someone’s life, taking his devotion to the extremes even if it’s unasked of him to do so. i don’t think he actually thinks about romance and any of his romantic feelings for people are more so vague and metaphorical … while he wouldn’t turn down a relationship, especially with someone he ‘desires’, i don’t necessarily think that’s his goal either. rocky is too easily caught up in outside factors to function normally in a traditional romantic sense, and any such activities that come with dating is the furthest thing from his mind. he likes being someone’s number one, their one and only, the most important force in their life … but if he can achieve that without romance, then he’ll be fine with that too. rocky will die for his crush ten times over but is rather okay with never getting to kiss even their hand. he’s an enigma!

freckle : transgirl and she’s too nervous to figure out the rest of her identity as it stands, though would probably be best described as demisexual. might have a phase where she adopts the lesbian label due to a preference for women only to find out she’s still attracted to men … swears off labels after this due to embarrassment! overall, freckle’s whole thing is about exploring her gender identity more than anything else ; finding a skin that’s actually comfortable for her to wear and easing some of that inner turmoil and anger inside of her. wiggling into something that feels freeing rather than being eternally tied down by her mother’s intense catholic views. ivy helps freckle out a ton too, making for a great mentor when it comes to embracing femininity and enjoying the girlish birthright of crushing on stupid boys, and speaking of ivy …

ivy : heteroflexible plain and simple! is primarily interested in men while showing little to no attraction towards girls, and wouldn’t have ever dated one had it not been for freckle transitioning. she staunchly refused to break up with freckle after, and decided ( rather brazenly ) that she’s got a girlfriend now and that’s really cool actually!! plus she now has a loophole to present to viktor so he doesn’t try to kill her paramor. love wins <3

viktor : straight. he is not sexually nor romantically into men, sadly. has mostly sworn off love in general though, so he doesn’t think about this stuff as it stands ; and he’s kinda behind on all these terms anyway. but despite this, he wouldn’t be opposed to being life partners ( or being in a qpr ) with a man if things fell that way. see my mini essay on vikdecai for additional info on that!

mordecai : transman, homoromantic(?), and asexual … mordecai keeps all of this under lock and key, with the only people knowing about his trans identity being atlas, mitzi, and viktor ( who all found out through various means ) -- though serafine and nico also heavily suspect it themselves. he’s more oblivious to his homoromantic inclinations though, as well as his asexuality to an extent. will typically dismiss his repulsion towards touch as something else he’s just being ‘neurotic’ about, rather than holding any real significance. the reason for the question mark near homoromantic is simply due to the fact i could see mordecai still being interested in women! so i sort of flip between homosexual labels and demiromantic labels for him. but he definitely, and without a doubt, has a heavy male preference regardless!

mitzi : straight and polyamorous … kind of. she’s experimented with women before ( on the road, most notably ) and has no qualms about being with them sexually or doing minor romantic acts with them either. she’s just never been particularly attached to them the way she is with men, hence her more serious relationships being exclusively with the opposite gender. still, she’s more casual and loose with her sexuality than most are, and is more than willing to be with a girl if it suits her needs or makes her happy. might become bisexual down the line after meeting women that fit her type, or she might always be straight with a few ‘exceptions’ … being kind of heteroflexible in that regard! and as for her polyamory, while she enjoys that lifestyle and could commit to it again, she much prefers monogamy now, usually. see my mitzi’s type post for more info on all of that!

zib : oh boy. i don’t think zib cares for labels and prefers being an unlabeled mess of a thing ( calling himself and resonating with ‘queer’ is as far as he’ll probably ever go ) but to make this simple, he’s sort of a … bisexual, genderqueer, demiromantic, and polyamorous cocktail. and even those labels are almost too restricting for zib, who’s rather unashamed and free where it concerns existing as his disastrous self. he likes men, he likes women, he likes people who aren’t men or women, he likes people who are both … he’s a man, and sometimes a woman, or at the very least enjoys dressing like a woman … he likes casual and multiple partners … he struggles with more traditional romantic commitment but wants it nonetheless … etc, etc. he’s sort of everywhere! views life through a simplistic lense of ‘if i like it, then i like it’ and doesn’t bother with it further.

wick : a man who is straight by design and default, since his type is as standard as it can get … aka being primarily interested in curvy women who are extremely feminine. he still likes all manner of women though! but he’s not really into men really, even if he’s extremely open minded about lgbtq+ overall and almost wishes he could have a queer experience of some kind. if only because everyone around him thinks he’s gay or has assumed it at some point in time. though there is some wiggle room despite this! wick could become romantically attracted to a man, i think, if certain things aligned -- but will never be attracted to them in a standard sexual manner. it’s too complicated for me to thoroughly explain here ( and @churchwick is more qualified to talk about this than me anyway, as the wick expert ) yet i do think wick could fancy himself an exception or two. he’d be rather awkward about the whole thing though </3

serafine : lesbian who barely ever bothers with men and isn’t shy about showing off her lady-type preference. she also has some gender stuff going on, occasionally embracing he/him pronouns alongside her feminine ones whenever she so pleases. operates on very hedonistic grounds too, constantly adorning herself with pretty girls until her arms are full and keeping her furniture warm, since she sleeps better that way if nico is unavailable. enjoys taking in girls who are ‘blind’ and need to be shown the truth … likes offering them a better life within her cult and by her side. although it’s worth noting that serafine is rather casual with her conquests and hardly ever takes on a permanent and more personal ‘lover’, but she’s semi open to the idea of it regardless. she is merely going through life and enjoying wherever it leads her, after all.

nico : i’ll be honest, i have no clue! i do not think about nico enough to have an opinion on his orientation, but it felt wrong to seperate the savoy siblings, so here he is anyway. he’s certainly cisgender and is extremely comfortable with being a man. and, like his sister, he’s more prone to casual arrangements rather than actual dating. i could see him being pansexual perhaps! i don’t think he cares for gender much, and will go for anyone who is ‘hot’ enough or ‘interesting’ enough if that makes sense. he’s a little shallow about it! but again, those are just my rather quick thoughts on the matter. i seriously need to think more about nico sometime, whoops.

lacy : extremely repressed bisexual! she is rather inexperienced with dating in general, having been strictly study focused in school and now that she finds herself as wick’s secretary, she still has little room left for a love life. her entire schedule is mostly just wick, wick, wick, and wick … keeping sable stone & quarry afloat business wise while also tending to her employer’s personal health and safety as well. such a busy life ( on top of tennis and the occasional lunch with friends ) has her rather closed off to meeting men or being courted by them, with her crush on wick being no help in this regard either! she is rather content with his company and has made little effort to seek out new men to converse with, or engage with women in a flirtatious manner. but eventually she’ll have a rather violent bisexual awakening that sends her reeling and leaves her confused, a little caught up in the almost teenage throes of envy, admiration, and hate towards the women she’s attracted to. over time she’ll get over herself and her perpetually reserved demeanor enough to explore this side of her -- though it will come with many bumps along the road and won’t be as seamless of a transition for her as it would be for some people.

church : homosexual through and through. he’s unmarried and is taking great advantage of the pansy craze happening underground. engages in more casual relationships with the same rotation of men due to a.) not caring for romance and b.) also being keenly aware of the fact that there are plenty of people out there who would use this to ruin him, blackmail him, or worse. so to say he’s extremely careful and secretive about it all is almost an understatement. hasn’t ever required a beard due to his disdainfully bored personality … but not having a wife to feign care towards leaves him with ample room to explore and carry himself as he pleases behind closed doors. if anyone knows the ins and outs of some queer scenes in st. louis, it’s him, surprisingly. and he’s rather tight lipped about the whole thing.

atlas : like the man himself, nobody knows, not even me! he definitely loved mitzi, though whether or not he was equally into men is a mystery.

so tada! those were my very brief and incoherent notes on the lackadaisy crew and what’s going on with them, sexuality and gender wise! i originally planned to discuss other characters here as well, like asa, the arbogasts, ruby, virgil, etc … basically anyone else i could think of, or whoever else that was listed on the lackadaisy characters page that i hadn’t covered yet. although to be frank, i don’t have many thoughts on those characters where it concerns their orientations! so i left them alone for now. maybe one day i’ll update this or make a part two -- who knows! though i’m more than content with this being my list for now haha

[shinra-makonoid]

1. I know you meant it in a sarcastic way but do you think TRAs are the reason so many ftms feel more welcome in radfem spaces? Because many of them if they 'came out' as a radfem usually had the experience of being repressed homosexuals that clearly have no connection to GD by the way the tell from their perspective. (such as being obviously urged by the environment to transition, whereas most transsexuals (in my experience) try to convince themselves of the opposite/ find excuses).

2. In many bios I notice the description 'former-dysphoric female' or 'victim of the gender cult' like they realize they were obviously only exposed to the 'tucute' side and never met real transsexuals (which to be fair is kinda rare but still). I'm just wondering what makes someone switch to radical feminism when they had so opposite views. Because I did hold radfem beliefs as a teen but had no opportunity to share them. I kinda grew out of it.

3.But why? I know you don't know me but I always wondered how someone came up with these beliefs like Dworking, Simone de Beauvoir. Cause I reached the same conclusion as them despite never reading anything from them. And that's scary. You said you were a tucute. How did you came to this? And how did you get away? Do you think some people will always stay in these cult-like groups and why do some have the ability to get out and some don't? Is it biological or social that some can('t) do that?

There’s many thoughts with this so it’ll be long and potentially messy.

I know you meant it in a sarcastic way but do you think TRAs are the reason so many ftms feel more welcome in radfem spaces?

I’m not sure TRA are the reason so many FtM feel more welcomed by radfem spaces. But I’m pretty sure that mainstream feminism in itself has a hand in this. GNC females (trans or not) usually feel out of place regarding their own place in society, and feminism is right there to pick them up. From there, they have a community in which they can rely on, with a specific set of beliefs to follow. You have basically two major communities of feminism, the libfem and the radfem.

Radfems are like the special club of the “enlightened ones”, while libfem are the lazy ones who just follow the trend of feminism. So, I suppose, depending on how implicated you are in feminism and gender, you get to be close to one or the other. There is also the fact that homosexuality/bisexuality in itself will come with a set of experience as a young woman who will surely push you more on the more radical side.

I long time ago now, when I was still a TRA, I’ve known someone who didn’t know if they identified as a lesbian or a FtM, and was heavily in the radfem discourse. We discoursed a lot together, and despite our very different views, we managed to bond. They brought me to nuance my views and reach that kind of “peak” where you actually realize that biological sex DOES exist in fact (crazy right). And I helped them realizing that the radfem discourse wasn’t always godspell. Idk what happened to them since, it’s been a long time. But anyway, it really made me tend to the other side of the balance, even though I’ve never subscribed to it, because I couldn’t, with my own existence, you know? At least there’s something in me that wouldn’t.

I think a lot of FtM comes through that path at some point, and violently shift to the other side as a reaction from when they were a TRA. Finally they are “enlightened to the truth of the world”, and therefore become radical feminists, because they HAVE to be a type of feminism (because otherwise they say that it means you don’t support women’s equality, and you are not appreciated). I personally stayed a long time with a feminist label, before understanding how crappy it was, by wondering about the male side.

__

Which brings me to the other point. As girls of our generation, we all were raised with feminism in mind. It’s an ideology that was thrown at our throat. Every time that we did something that wasn’t “typically feminine”, it was feminism. Playing with the boys was feminism. Playing video games was feminism. Going to STEM was feminism. Not wearing dresses was feminism. Our normal behavior (GNC behavior) became feminist. We became, despite ourselves, some kind of representant of the powerful female that we “needed” to be, to bring back some balance in the world. It’s very dehumanizing when you think about it. We are warriors for the feminist belief, and our simple behavior is suddenly perceived as something courageous when it is simply how we exist. So, even if you don’t read the feminist books and all that shit, you are still bound to feel like a flavor of feminism, by the simple fact that you exist. Add to that, that it’s very socially good to be seen as a feminist. I think that’s how most of us get trapped in that.

We are social creatures. Finding our peers is a necessary step for us to stay alive. And if it comes with a set of beliefs that need to adopt, then so be it. That’s how we get in.

__

I know you don't know me but I always wondered how someone came up with these beliefs like Dworking, Simone de Beauvoir. Cause I reached the same conclusion as them despite never reading anything from them.

Why did you come to the same conclusion as people who supposedly did sociological thesis and were eminent respected people in my country? Because it’s what felt right, it’s your intuition, your set of beliefs based on your biased experience that showed you that. It’s the same reason as to why all culture have a religion. We love to believe, we need to believe, and we love wishing for things to be the way we think they are. It’s the reason why those people were fake. They based all of their observation on their personal life and wishful thinking. They created a world that they had in their head, and projected it on reality.

It was very easy for me to think that males were abusers on the basis of my experience. I was already mindful of men, because that’s what I was taught from my family, but my bad experiences reinforced it, and feminism magnified it to a phobia. It’s this endless circle of people validating your biases, an echo chamber but on a life-scale. People who believe or behave a certain way will stick with the other people who believe and behave a certain way, as we’re a tribal creature.

__

TRA/Radfem, any cult-like thing, will have that. They will discourage you from considering the opinion and the view of the other side, because it will be deemed as being false/wrong/sin, and will also continue to validate the things that you already believe over and over again. They ARE the enlightened ones. They are the ones who discovered the truth among the falsehood. They are sure, persuaded of what they think, that it is the Truth. 

They also spew a very anxiety-driving feeling. Radfems are persuaded that all females who transition are brainwashed by the cult. Do you want your fellow females to end up in a cult and hurting themselves? Obviously not! So you help them, you try to convert them, because you feel the urgency of the situation. “She needs to be saved”. It’s a bit like the Christian persuaded they need to save you from hell.

__

Do you think some people will always stay in these cult-like groups and why do some have the ability to get out and some don't? Is it biological or social that some can('t) do that?

With time, and seeing all of these groups, I became sure of one thing. Certainty is poison, in my opinion. The world is made of nuances, and a lot of them we can’t yet grasp accurately. I am certain of nothing. I try to doubt at every step, and for everything, because in the end, even if it’s very uncomfortable, it is also the best way I found to be able to navigate without getting too stuck somewhere. I have beliefs that are still tied to my values, I will probably always have those, because we aren’t machines. But I am aware of that, and it allows me to take a step back, and think “Why is that so important for me to believe in?” “Why do I believe what I believe?”

Those two questions are the fundamental ones that need to be asked, in order for someone to rationally think. Along with that, you have to understand what constitute a fact, and how to differenciate it from an opinion. The people who get stuck in cult-like mentality are the ones who do that. But it’s not something that you just do. It’s really something to live by. Skepticism. I am lucky because in France, there are a lot of content for people to understand better science and skepticism in general. It really helped me.

Some people won’t ask themselves those questions because they never thought about it. Some people won’t ask themselves those questions because the feeling coming from it is very bad. When I shifted away from the TRA belief, it was a nightmare. When I looked into the HSTS part and how they didn’t believe in any “gender identity” the way we conceive it, I was also crushed. It’s a bad feeling, to feel the way you view the world getting destroyed by other views. It leaves us with uncertainty, fear, vulnerability, that we have to handle. We are left with more questions, less answers. It’s not easy. I would go as far as saying it’s physically painful.

It is easier to just repeat the same mantra, and get stuck with that feeling of certainty that is comforting. It is safe, and you have people thinking the same way you do, you are never alone anymore, you don’t doubt anymore. You know the truth, after all! It’s a very pleasant feeling, to know the truth. But is it an accurate depiction of reality? We are all guilty in that. You, me, the most rational person in this world is guilty of it.

__

What matters to you? Having the most accurate reality you can grasp, or your comfort and sensation of having the truth in your hand? The answer to that might be obvious, but it is actually a very difficult one, that one has to ask themselve often.

[b0x]

😔 some Thoughts on the Trans Experience under the cut that i wanna vent out bc of some posts ive seen around that just kinda didnt sit right with me i guess

every time someone on here is like “trans men cannot experience eldest/only daughter trauma bc they are men and are therefore experiencing transphobic trauma” it’s like... man, gender is way too complex to be so cut & dry about a topic like this. many trans men grew up experiencing the traumas of being a daughter And being a trans man daughter, both pre-transition and post. saying that isn’t saying “trans men are actually women because they experienced this women’s trauma” it’s just recognising that many traumas overlap, regardless of gender. i know it comes from a supportive place, validating us as real men, but that should include validating our unique experiences too. 

i hope this makes sense, but a trans-man-daughter is still 100% a man, still 100% a son, but is very different to and does not have the same experience as a trans-man-son. and a trans-man-daughter doesn’t mean “a trans man raised as a daughter because they didn’t know they were trans at the time”, or “a trans man raised as a daughter by a homophobic parent even after coming out and already knowing they are trans”. no, a trans-man-daughter can still also be a trans man raised as a son with 100% support, because a parent’s trauma can still pass on regardless of the circumstance, because a trans person’s relationship with themselves and their own gender and body and mind is so unique and one-of-a-kind that we were practically designed to overlap the many gendered concepts that so many gatekeep as a sense of empowerment. 

and it sucks making our own posts/experience sometimes, because they never feel like “our own”? because they all come from traumas and bigotry that have already been boxed and labelled and sorted into sections, and to be someone who has bits and pieces from all those different boxes/sections? a trans person can, for example, experience misogyny one year and then transmisogyny the next and that doesnt make the misogyny the prior year “actually transmisogyny”, it was still misogyny that was experienced, even if it’s later relabeled as “transmisogyny”. if anything that just makes it TWO kinds of misogyny experienced instead of just one. it’s terribly confusing. and trust me, for every cis person confused by a trans concept, i can almost guarantee you it’s just as confusing for the trans person themselves. and this isn’t also me saying that ohh trans people have it worse because we experience Double the bigotry and trauma - no absolutely not. i just think it’s important for people to realise that there are people who will experience both misogyny And transmisogyny and that in itself creates its own new kind of bigotry/trauma experienced, if that makes sense?

of course, i don’t speak for every single trans man, but it’s a very specific kind of transphobia a lot of us experience that ties in directly with eldest/only daughter trauma, and why we relate to and connect with posts like that, even when they’re aimed specifically at those who identify primarily as women.

and on top of all that, i see quite a few of the same trans man “supporters” who say “trans men can’t experience daughter’s traumas because they’re men” do complete 180s and say that trans women can’t experience eldest/only daughter trauma bc their transphobia doesn’t correlate with “womanhood” at the source, because trauma that sons/men/male at birth experience is different to the trauma that daughters/women/female at birth experience, which is.. horrifically and bewilderingly transmisogynistic, transphobic, alienating, and just..  Shocking. shocking that these two points can be somehow made in the same breath together without any of them realising what they’re saying.

it’s like.. this weird group of people who are somehow both the opposite of and exactly the same as terfs? theyre more like... tirfs - trans Inclusionary radical feminists - the people who treat trans men like a substitute for the “effeminate cis gay best friend”, the one’s who will validate your masculinity but not entirely consider you a 100% guy, latching onto that “biological fact” of trans men being “female at birth” and therefore considering you more of a “sister” than a “brother”, regardless of them knowing and understanding that you are a man. i guess its kind of very similar to the transphobes who make awful comments that nonbinary people are just closeted lesbians/gays?

anyway, yes, many traumas are gendered due to binaries designated by society and a misogynistic and men-restricting patriarchy (and many other factors that all play parts in this whole big system such as religion and the upper class), but traumas are traumas, and honestly shouldn’t be gendered, because they all overlap regardless, and can be experienced by anyone if the exact circumstances are met. that and every single trans experience is so unique and so so complex because gender in itself is an extremely unique and complex concept that it just cannot in any way be monitored or labelled into strict rules and laws and binaries.

every time i see a post on here about womanhood and daughter traumas and cis women’s misogynistic experiences and hell even a lot of lesbian traumas/experiences, i find myself completely and entirely relating to many of them every single time even though i am 100% a trans guy, and half grew up as a son. and i guess it’s just kind of weird but not so weird because sure while some days it just feels like im not calling myself a true trans guy, most days its just me validating and relating to an experience that i had that was unique to me and doesnt necessarily mean that im a woman because of it

because womanhood and manhood are temperaments, traits we are either born with or without, traits that are ever-changing and developing as we evolve generation by generation. anyone can pick up or be born with parts of womanhood and/or manhood. like that’s what makes all of us so unique, not a single one of us are alike in any way shape or form because of that. the combinations are always unlimited. so it’s just dumb seeing stuff like that gatekeeped. you cant Own an Experience like thats... what the hell is going on. every time its always the same thing, everyone’s always tryna play god in some way, be it mastering themselves, their own emotions and life, or controlling others, dictating what they think how certain things should be etc

it’s like that one post that’s like everything would be so much simpler if everyone was bi and nothing was gendered ghadjgdkgj

idk.. just.. to gender conceptual things like gender and traits and personalities and traumas is just so... unhelpful and unopen to change and not fluid whatsoever as theyre supposed to be. i dont wanna be all “nothing is real” abt it all but labels and binaries and decided systems and set laws are literally the reason, since the beginning of time, for wars and bigotry and oppression and poverty and the whole shebang. bc Someone decided one day that being a woman means this this and that, and being trans means that and this and that, and those meanings will be the basis we will rewrite occasionally and maybe add to, instead of completely scrapping our whole outdated initial ideas about it bla bla bla. 

im just tired gender is weird and stupid why are we arguing why are we so protective like just have a convo man rule with curiosity not adamancy and you’ll be sooo much happier trust me

[ambident]

Is ambident something you are or something you are interested in? Like, "experiencing gender and sexuality as one identity", if it's something you are doing, then if you're going as the gender you were born with, then it's cis, or if you're going with the gender you're not born with, it's trans. If it's something you're interested in, then it's bi/pansexual mattering on definition. You can do what you want, i'm just giving you my view here.

its neither. its not a sexuality or gender. in fact, you can be bi/gay/pan/straight/asexual, trans/cis/nonbinary/agender, any combo except pericishet, and use this identity. it can take the place of both if its more comfortable, or simply be an add on as an explanation. its a statement of unity, explaining that your concept of who you are is tied to who you like.

let me give you an example: there have been quite a few studies on gay people that show many claim that if they were born as the opposite binary gender, they would still exclusively like their own gender, because they so strongly identify as being gay, over simply liking who they like. in that context, its saying “who I like is determined by my gender, and my gender is determined by who I like.”

its not something you can reduce down to some labels. some people will find themselves trans because they are gay, or gay because they are women/men, or nonbinary because they are bisexual, and its intrinsically linked and would find both things to change if one did, not just by definition.

another example is butch lesbians. many butch lesbians I know use butch as their gender identity. a lot of assholes claim butch women are too masc to be women, or that they’re secretly trans men or nonbinary, but many butch women define their own gender around being a woman who loves women. that is a gender identity intrinsically linked to who you like, especially because the ONLY people who can use that gender MUST be a woman who likes women.

for me, I’m very fluid. my gender shifts, as does my attraction to some extent. even if it didn’t, there would be no static label. if I felt fem one day, masc the next, then neutral, but only liked women? what label is there for that identity? none really, because “lesbian” determines that you are linked to womanhood and only like women, so that doesn’t include me in the definition, because those things aren’t static for me.

perhaps its something more common to sapphic people because lesbian is truly the only label to actually tie gender and sexuality by definition (because “gay” is an umbrella term,) but the fact that my experience is often revolving around liking women (even if its not exclusively all the time,) and feeling attachment to womanhood (even if I’m not always a woman,) means everything to my identity.

my gender is intrinsically linked to my attraction. if one were to change, the other would change too. they have before. sometimes its easier to emphasize that part rather than keep switching labels arbitrarily for other people’s comfort, or exist in an in between state because there ARE no labels for my experience.

if I were to simply try switching labels all the time, I would find myself at a loss, because there IS no label that explains how my gender is always shifting from masc to fem to both to neutral, and my attraction to men is ENTIRELY dependent on how masc I feel and also is unclear and maybe even nonexistent but I can’t figure it out because I don’t care about men anyway, but my attraction to women is constant and is the link to womanhood I hold even when I feel more masc? give me a goddamn label for that. because what feels important for me is that who I like holds a link to how I view my gender and vice versa, and I should be able to say so, even if other people get confused. because its about my comfort and self understanding, not their benefit.

[lunarssong]

quick little summary/title: this started out as a rant but if you scroll down to the large bold, there’s a metaphor that should hopefully help explain why terfs are so god damn awful and dangerous

me? sending an ask off-anon to a terf because im both pissed and a fucking dumbass? its more likely than youd think

in fact! im not even gonna censor the word terf! if i dont feel like dealing with their bullshit replies and rbs then i literally just fucking wont!! yeah they might send in death threats but guess the fuck what?? im leaving my anon on fuckers, because honestly that shits gonna be funny to me! and if they try to doxx me (very unlikely, but i am trans and its not riskier to mention that because its already obvious, and ive never directly made a post about terfs before, so i really dont know whats gonna happen) or something then like! im a minor! we can sue those shitheads and hopefully bring more media awareness to how god damn shitty terfs are! literally dont even start, lmao.

have the damn ask because i wanna elaborate on it

“hi there! i wish you’d delete your tumblr, because you are dangerous. you are a violent misogynist, and make me ashamed to be a feminist.

you’re gonna attack me because i’m off anon, but you’d probably call me a coward if i was on it, lmao.

anyway! stop disguising your misogyny and transphobia with shitty ass ‘feminism’. i was raised by a feminist with a feminist mom who literally can’t believe y’all exist because your ideas are SO far from actual feminism.

just say you hate trans people and go.”

tbh? its so fucking wild to me how they literally spit out misogyny, transphobia, and lesbophobia but then get all pissy when someone calls them out on it,, but then have the nerve to accuse that person of being misogynistic and lesbophobic? like,, honey. honey, what? the fuck? how much of a dumbass are you?

because like. im a pretty big dumbass! like ive walked into a mirror before because i thought it was a door! im a dumbass!

but even i know that trans women literally cannot discriminate against cis women by saying that theyre (plural, but trans women can 100% use they and thats totally valid) women! because guess the FUCK what?? theyre fucking women! if yall shitheads (terfs) wanna call that misogyny then yall cant call yourselves women either!

if yall assholes wanna call a specific group of lesbians/wlw pointing out, “hey! we experience discrimination because of an entirely irrelevant physical feature we all happen to share that has literally no actual affect on whether or not we are women/wlw” lesbophobia or speaking over minorities then wow.

wow.

wow, are yall gonna be shocked when (if) you realize what the hell yall doing that qualifies as.

oppressors literally depicting and/or committing fucking hate crimes, sometimes even as serious as murder, rape, etc. (this is referring to terfs, i should never have to point that out) is NOT comparable to an oppressed as hell minority saying that people who literally want them dead should not be in safe spaces intended for people of a community they both happen to belong to.

to put this into perspective for yall out there literally worse than garbage (terfs)! imagine this scenario.

youre in a community of women. trans women may or may not be a part of this particular community, shut the fuck up, thats irrelevant. a group of straight women pop up, and start saying that being wlw is misogynistic and harmful to women. this is bullshit. you know that immediately. why wouldn’t it be? you explain to them the obvious reasons why it is not. they ignore you.

they begin to spew utter bullshit, claiming things like “women should never marry other women. you’re ignoring the fact that a man’s place is as a woman’s wife, and basically trying to be men, which is like admitting that men are superior.” or, “as straight women, you flaunting your homosexuality,” the woman gestures to a lesbian couple who aren’t even holding hands and haven’t been touching the whole time theyve been there. one has a small rainbow heart sticker on her purse. “makes me feel threatened in my femininity. (insert plural of 4 letter slur against lesbians that i dont feel comfortable typing a single letter of) arent really women, their existence is heterophobia and misogyny. they shouldn’t be allowed in female-only spaces because they normalize masculinity.”

over time, this group of straight women grows. they call themselves feminists, claim theyre fighting for the rights of all women! unless those women happen to love other women and dont perfectly fit their (cisnormative too but terfs are awful so they like that) heteronormative idea of a woman. they protest at the very idea of saying “significant others”, “partners”, or even “wives and/or husbands” because it doesnt fit their idea of being a woman. because they think having a wife and loving women is only for men.

eventually, they start getting braver and braver. they start going to feminist rallies, and if they spot gay women, or even women they think look gay, theyll get up in their faces, threaten them, call them slurs. theyll try to record them, try to get them fired from their jobs or outed to unsupportive families. or even just expose them to the potential of assault in their day-to-day life. because theyre gay. and that doesnt affect the straight women at all, but they hate diversity and are homophobes. so they need an excuse.

sometimes theyll get their other gay-exclusive feminist friends to record them committing violent acts against wlw feminists, just to take stills from those videos out of context when the gay women defend themselves, and then go crying to the media, twisting the roles of victim and aggressor to paint a violent picture of wlw. they say that feminist rallies should be an event only for real women or allies to their cause—meaning, to them, no wlw, and certainly no mlm. they probably even try to turn all homophobia towards gay men into a sexism issue (they are sometimes tied, but not mostly). but they lose their shit when anyone tries to tell them to get out of these safe spaces for women, because by attacking wlw for literally nothing beyond existing, they are ruining the safe part.

people start to become ashamed to call themselves feminists, and are often lumped in with these homophobes. even if they themselves are gay. straight feminists who love, support, and fight for wlw begin to feel guilty for being straight. new labels for feminist ideology begin popping up, the gay-exclusive feminists strike them down and turn them into jokes.

their end goal is to reverse victories like gay marriage, remove gay representation both in the media and in history books (sometimes even arguing that famous wlw were ‘just close friends’ with their wives or girlfriends), and to send wlw right back to hiding and marrying men for fear of their lives.

all in the name of thinly veiled homophobia feminism!

but wait, you cry, that sounds nothing like feminism! it actually sounds like misogyny and homophobia!

exactly!

think about who yall are the real-life equivalent of in that scenario.

need a hint because youre so brainwashed? try changing ‘gay/wlw’ to ‘trans’, ‘straight’ to ‘cis’, and ‘gay-exclusive’ to ‘terf’.

i doubt any of them will actually read through this, let alone realize their flawed perspective due to it, but hey. maybe ill sway some people who’re on the fence about how horrible terfs are.

[collectivedreamscapes-moved]

oh bloody hell fine. clearly saying it last night wasn’t enough. someone is still just fighting pissy mad about it so. here we are.

when we were with our ex-gf, who was also multiple, and lesbian, was when we first started looking shit up abt transitioning. we spent two years looking stuff up about it. talking to people who were doing it (online but still). weighed the pros and cons. ultimately we decided for the system it wouldn’t matter in the long run. the body has never felt like ours and it will never match who we are on the inside and it wouldn’t help everyone feel like they fit it better. we ultimately decided, if in some way we could manage it, the only thing that mattered would be having our breasts removed. everyone, even those who identify as girls, was FINE with that.

our ex-gf is a lesbian. i think the term used to be bull dyke? she preferred men’s clothing and men’s haircuts. she taught us more about ties than we’d ever known. we were still more ‘butch’ than her and everyone knew it, even them.

our ex-gf was also multiple. whose system was 80% males. who had multiple cross entanglements with ours (we had a fucking chart to keep it straight i’m not kidding).

we thought... if anyone would understand they would.

they... did not.

they were against the whole idea of it. they struggled with it more than we did. they told us if we went through with it they didn’t think they could stay with us. they told us that removing our breasts would affect our sensitivity and impact sex (they’d had a reduction so they knew a little bit abt that but that they used sex in this argument pissed us off). they kept wheedling that we settle for reduction not removal.

ultimately the decision we made was for us and not them. but the whole time all of us could only think ‘but if you love US why does it matter what our BODY looks like none of us match it ANYWAY?’ we could not understand. it made no sense to us. and trying to explain it just seemed to compound the confusion.

since then we have learned: 

for some people, their sexuality really is that immutable.

our sexuality has little to do with a person’s body or gender identification (and explains so much abt our various frustrations over the years)

about the fucking aromantic scale and why every fucking romantic relationship we have attempted was doomed from the start. (we’re not broken and trying to keep ‘fixing’ it won’t work and what we were taught is a societal perspective and not the whole truth)

gender is fucking complicated and trying to sort out ours is hella difficult.

when we first started making quilts? and doing domestic things? when our kids were babies? do you know how much shame we felt for enjoying those things? bc they were traditionally ‘girly’ things? we fought with ourselves and our guilt and shame for liking doing those things for months. and nvm that the world looked at us and saw a girl. and nvm that we had no words to explain why liking things a girl is supposed to like made us feel guilt and shame. it happened. it was a thing we had to deal with.

when we had our hysterectomy? and our mother and aunt were all like ‘you’re still a woman even if you don’t have a uterus’? it took everything in us not laugh in their faces. bc they would never understand the depth of our relief to have it gone. or the depth of our disappointment that they left our fucking ovaries. (we were 27, apparently that’s standard unless cancer is involved). how do you explain that? when you have no fucking framework to put it in?

we were told, repeatedly and constantly from day one ‘you’re a girl’. and everything we did to define who we were was to defy that label.

our ex-husband has said, we were more a guy when we met than he was. (which we still think says more about him than us but whatever)

our spawn tells people she was raised by two dudes. (that makes some of us entirely too fucking proud)

we did everything to fight our kids being shoved in any kind of gender mold. our spawn wanted short hair? we cut it. she went through a pink girly phase. we cringed, but it was what she liked and she wasn’t US. our youngest son (who we’re pretty sure now is trans but he’s still working through it so we will call him son until he figures it out) wanted long hair and liked rainbow butterflies. so we let him wear long hair and made his quilt with rainbow butterflies. and fuck our family when they said anything about it. this had nothing to do with them. it was about OUR kids figuring out who and what they were and what they did or didn’t like and that was all I cared about.

we think of ourselves as Moms bc that was the role we took. even the guys in the system. we weren’t Dads, not as we understand Dads to be. so we keep the Mom title bc we earned and owned it. it didn’t have a damn thing to do with our gender.

so yeah this continues to be a recurring issue. and someone is apparently just pissed enough about it they felt the need to have it laid out.

[whereimfeminine]

Hey, in light of this conversation I'm thinking a bit about my own sexuality and like.. I'd sort of settled on not using a label cause honestly... I feel like I'm still figuring shit out and it changes a lot and I find myself contracting myself and like... idk man, "no labels for me" feels right? But also? I don't want to "overstep"? Ik people struggle a lot to come to terms with a given label and have to deal with blatant homo/trans phobia when they come out and since I'm straight passing /1

it feels a bit like a cop out? It's easy for me to parade as "label-less" and never have to suffer for it?? Does that make any sense at all? I'm not comfortable with straight because I feel it's way too restrictive for what I feel but.. yeah. Idk. Sorry, you didn't ask for this ramble in your inbox but you've answered similar things in a way that made me feel comfortable before so I thought I'd give it a go? Maybe? *runs away*

hi nonnie! Never apologize for rambly messages, all I do on my blog is ramble about feelings after all, and this was so sweet! 💕 I actually super get what you mean too! The whole idea of “straight passing” is kinda homophobic in itself and has lotsa issues, but at the same time like, I totally get it. Like, especially for me as someone who sorta presents in the way my gender is “expected” to or whatever, it makes it much more easier to avoid everyday homophobia, in a way that, for example, a butch woman wouldn’t. And I’m totally with you too in that I’ve also sorta felt like a cop-out or just, I dunno, like somehow I just should have a label and be ~out and proud with it ya know? And like there’s some sort of comfort and like Officially A LGBT Person-ness that comes out of it. Which is silly, I know! But feelings are weird and hard to change.

Anyways, I’m digressing so much from your ask!!!! I think the best two cents I can give you is: how you identify and how you present yourself is personal to you. Coming out, not coming out, and figuring out sexuality is a deeply personal experience. Whether you identify as gay or pan or bi or anything else also won’t change the reality of how society reads social cues for LGBT people, unless I suppose, you were one of those people who wears “nobody knows I’m a lesbian” shirts, in which case I guess being firm in your label could help with whatever the experience of “straight passing” is, but that just seems a lil silly. So, I don’t think it at all means you’re copping out if a label doesn’t feel right for you, and I don’t think it means you’re hurting the LGBT community in any way, especially if you’re there for and supporting the community too. A label will never change who you love or what you do.

I also have some not fully formed thoughts on connections between the gender people were raised from birth (that’s probably not a good way to phrase it, like assigned sex at birth is maybe a better term? but I know a lot of ppl don’t like that either I’m sorry!!!) and comfort with labels (like tied to heteronormativity, and I dunno, I feel like women are super taught that they have to like men, so some women are maybe more uncomf w identifying as lesbian/gay that because of social norms, and men are kinda taught they’re straight or gay, like that it’s not ~normal for men to be bi, so there’s different types of discomfort w labels ppl experience skldfjklsd none of this is coherent I’m not expressing it well, I just have some vague thoughts on how heteronrmativity plays into the experiences of labeling for lgbt people based on how they were raised as kiddos, i hope this isn’t all terribly put) 

[mxadrian779]

I know you've seen me around a lot lately, with pretty much the same old stuff and some reiterations. If you're getting sick of me, I apologise.

A lot has been going on lately, both internally and externally, and I sometimes wonder if the two are related. I've been sick on-and-off since the summer. There's been some extreme red tide in my area that has just been knocking me and my family out. I fell back in class, but luckily managed to get a late withdrawal. I've been at basically a mental standstill, the best I can describe it, and I've had a lot of downtime, which means a lot of Sims, Neopets, and introspection. I've been evaluating my identity yet again. Nothing's changing, per se—I still identify as nonbinary demifemme/genderfluid/transmasculine. What's changing is that my transmasculinity is growing seriously stronger, which both excites and scares me.

I've always been pretty feminine, but with an internal tomboy edge. I enjoyed feminine expression while also enjoying crude humour and other “dude stuff.” I liked the idea of being ascribed “dudely” traits—crude, strong, tough. I liked the idea of being muscular (I've been doing the wheelchair since I was a kid). I remember when I was a kid being like obsessively convinced that my voice sounded like a boy's. A treasured moment was when my boyfriend, his buddies, and I would gather in our cafeteria on mornings and play a card game called “B.S.” I had a ballsy moment and used the actual curse (I was 15). I'm not sure whether I liked impressing my boyfriend or liked being “one of the guys”; maybe both. I collected die-cast cars as much as I collected dolls. I was never a baby-doll person—maybe my mother never bought that stuff for me, I don't remember—and I liked some sporty kids' shows like “Rocket Power.” I was so drawn to the concept of skateboarding and surfing. Later on, I would also become drawn to BMXing. I'm definitely not into sports, but I was attracted to the...what, the speed and adrenaline aspects or something? What would you call it?

Like many trans people, I sometimes feel fraudulent because there were no gender-defining moments in my childhood...and that is something I only realise as I type it now. I don't recall explicitly feeling like a girl or identifying with other girls (autonomously, anyway), although I certainly never identified with boys. I don't identify with the men I know; I don't feel like I'm in their camp, nor do I have any desire to be in their camp. The girls almost looked like me, so they were in my league, and we had some common interests until later on. I was never into specifically (maybe stereotypically) “girly” things like shopping, fashion, or, that I remember, boys. I've had crushes of all genders and all intensities, but I don't recall having the need to gush over them (save for the occasional writing of their names in my notebooks). I hated magazines aimed at teen girls and women; they struck me as so shallow and just one big marketing ploy. I felt like 'what, do you think all girls can do is gush over boys and makeup?' This is likely more a feminist and gay-female notion than a gender-identity notion, but it might have had some tints of identity.

Despite some tomboyishness, I never explicitly felt myself identified as masculine, but maybe I just didn't know I could. It was only this autumn that suddenly something changed—it was like the word “transmasculinity” just came up and slapped me in the face. Something seemed to have suddenly shifted, yet I still can't explain what. I just felt like a masculine identity was unlocked. It seemed like it would just be a phase, a fleeting feeling, but even so, I knew I had to explore it. I immersed myself in transmasculine/FTM culture, and found myself somehow more comfortable than ever. I loved the crowd. The people I saw, the stories I read, somehow resonated with me, and since then, my masculine streak has only been getting stronger. The best I could describe my gender blend is to break it down into percentages. Early on, I was about 50% female (or demifemme), 40% neutral, and 10% male (or transmasculine). These days, I would say that 50/40/10 has changed to about 25/40/35—a big and jarring shift for someone who's been feminine most of their life.

It's been almost two years since I first came to my nonbinary gender identity. My internal feelings hadn't changed; what changed was the realisation that I didn't have to be tied down to my assigned gender, but I still did largely identify with it, as much as I had before. I didn't really have a masculine side then. Now I do. I find myself completely puzzled by it, perplexed yet entranced yet scared...and also kind of doubtful.

I've always been quite severely disabled. Basically a lifelong wheelchair user. I grew up socialised differently. I was held apart from mainstream society. I still am. This is where doubt and confusion sometimes come in. A lot of trans narratives involve never feeling like you fit in, never feeling like you could fit the mold, never feeling like your body fits you. But I've had these all my life, and they revolve around disability, not gender. Here, I don't know where my disability ends and my gender begins—I don't know what feelings of unease, discomfort, and dysphoria I can ascribe to my disability and what I can ascribe to my gender. I always knew I could never fit the mold, no matter what gender it held. I never felt comfortable with my body—I get depressed and nauseous sometimes looking in the mirror. I can't reach back into my childhood, point to a man or a woman and say “I aspired to be them” because I knew I could never do so. I can't say I identified with anyone of any type or gender, as if I knew I was going to grow up like them, because I always knew my world was completely different than theirs. There are so many parts of society, so many physical, emotional, and social things that I don't have access to—I mean, how can I tell you what I've felt or aspired when I've never had access to a normal frame of reference, you know? How can I identify certain discrepancies in my identity when my whole existence is a discrepancy?

I also wonder how much of this sudden introspection isn't real and is just some strange byproduct of being sick. Maybe I've got too much time on my hands and I'm digging in too deeply; maybe the red tide neurotoxins are messing with my head again; maybe this masculine identity crisis is just a way to reboot my system since this semester went so terribly.

I've been checking out some trans books from my library. The first, “Gender: Your Guide” by nonbinary author Lee Airton, is a great book for both cisgender people and trans newbies. I personally didn't get much new out of it, but it was a good read. I'm currently on “Unbound: Transgender Men and the Remaking of Identity” by transwoman Arlene Stein, about transmasculinity. I almost returned it because I didn't like its tone regarding religion and politics, but when I picked it up again and started reading, it got more interesting. Although I never identified, and likely still won't, specifically as a transman, the transmale accounts resonate with me. One transman mentioned, among other things, the fact that he hated the word and ascription of “lesbian” (before he came out and transitioned). He said it was because he didn't like how it assigned him as female. I've had my own problems with the word, and wonder if that subconsciously might have been one of them. The word held me back considerably when I was coming to terms with my sexuality because I didn't like its oversexed association, its sound, or the fact that it felt like another way to hold women as separate—why are gay men “gay” but gay women have to be “lesbian”? But was there another reason for my trouble with the word? Was I resistant to it because of its gender implications? Possibly; as my transmasculinity strengthens, my conflict with the word lessens, as if because it's less applicable to me. What would my sexual identity become, then, with such a strong transmasculine gender identity? I'm still attracted to women, but also transmen—basically, anyone who isn't a cisman.

I've been pondering how to move forward with this. As strong as my transmasculine identity is, I want to hold onto my feminine identity, too (hence why one of my labels is “genderfluid”). I want to create a masc identity—find a name, figure out a look (both of which will probably just stay in my fantasy). How would I go about constructing a transmasculine identity that's slightly feminine? Or take a male name but keep my female pronouns? I really, really do not like “he/him” pronouns for myself. “They/them” are also not quite right for me, but I often use them online anyway, if only to signify my trans status. Neopronouns are not my thing, unless they're a derivative or blend of the traditional pronouns, like ey/em (“they” pronouns without “th”), shey/shem (blend of “she” and “they” pronouns), or, one I was thinking about before, hey/hem/heirs (blend of “he” and “they” pronouns), then maybe I can wrap my head around them. I've been reading about transitions and options, and I find myself conflicted. As someone severely disabled, I've had a lot of exposure to the medical field, surgeries and a lot of procedures, and I swore to myself that I would never submit to procedures that weren't 100% medically necessary. I read about top surgeries, and I have no plans to put myself through that. Hormones, however..I was opposed to them at first, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't incredibly curious about them, although I don't know how they would play with my system) and I've had more than enough needles, thank you).

This has become an incredibly long post, and I apologise. I've written essays shorter than this. This gender identity thing is just throwing me for a loop. I've been fine the last year, year-and-a-half, until summer came and shook things up, and left me God-knows-where now. A part of me loves this, loves self-exploration and finding new things, but what throws me off and makes me slightly uncomfortable is the fact that this transmasculine thing struck me so suddenly and so hard. I've never been masculine, never considered being masculine, nor could I even describe what I'm defining as masculine. It feels like it can't be real, and I'm almost afraid to think that it is. It just comes as a shock to me, and once again, I don't know what to do with it all.

I also feel a little uneasy because I would like to be able to share this with friends, but most won't understand, some might be phobic, but more than anything, it seems too personal to post on my page.

[words-that-form-a-rainbow]

Pantomime, and the problem with (Hollywood) diversity

Title of book: Pantomime (Micah Grey, #1)

Author: Lam, Laura

Would I recommend: Yes

Synopsis (From goodreads.com): Gene's life resembles a debutante's dream. Yet she hides a secret that would see her shunned by the nobility. Gene is both male and female. Then she displays unwanted magical abilities - last seen in mysterious beings from an almost-forgotten age. Matters escalate further when her parents plan a devastating betrayal, so she flees home, dressed as a boy. The city beyond contains glowing glass relics from a lost civilization. They call to her, but she wants freedom not mysteries. So, reinvented as 'Micah Grey', Gene joins the circus. As an aerialist, she discovers the joy of flight - but the circus has a dark side. She's also plagued by visions foretelling danger. A storm is howling in from the past, but will she heed its roar? 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As if it wasn’t clear from the first two book reviews I’ve written on this site (Which you should totally go read and share, by the way), I tend to read books that include a lot of representation of all sorts, both LGBT+ and otherwise. And though I like to be optimistic the majority of the time, I am, as everyone should be, critical of them, because if the mainstream catches on to all this, would you rather them see some beautifully crafted, incredibly written prose about our struggles and lives, or that one gay sonic fanfiction you wrote when you were twelve? Yeah, me too.

But even if you are a lot more casual in your enjoyment of media (Which I wish I could be, at this point), it isn’t hard to notice to different levels of diversity certain minorities get over others. Now, I’m not trying to start any kind of war, because even the most represented groups are horribly outweighed by the straight whites of the West, but come on. There’s nothing wrong with effeminate gay men, or (Usually dead) lesbians, or sassy black women who say “Aw hell naw” like it’s the only thing keeping society as we know it afloat (Which isn’t wholly from the truth, actually), it can get a little tiring after a while, especially when you see another series or book written by someone who either a) has never actually met a gay person in their life, and/or b), is horribly fetishistic to a certain group and completely excludes literally anyone else, like those women who think gay men are their taboo sinners, yet find Sapphic women and trans folk predatory (They’re so gross).

And to be honest, I’m tired of it. And I know a lot of other people are, too.

And that is why I was (Very happily) surprised when I read Pantomime, the first of the Micah Grey trilogy, by Laura Lam. And do you know what it has? A queer main character who is neither gay nor perfectly attractive, and whose identity isn’t the only facet of their character! Oh boy, I felt like a kid in a sweet shop. And then I felt a kind of sadness, that we, as a community, were celebrating the fact that a character was, y’know, an actual character and not just a walking stereotype. This is the bar we’re setting for ourselves. This is the bar the mainstream has made us set.

And hell, I’ll shout from the rooftops with praise for any kind of media that raises it. Even if it’s by just a little.

So a big part of what I liked about Pantomime was the main character, Micah Grey (Also called Gene in some parts of the book, but as they almost exclusively choose to use Micah to refer to themselves, I’ll use that), who is, one of if not the first intersex character in a novel, or at least is certainly the only one I know about. Now a lot of you may be going, “Oh, gee, Scotty, I know all about them Ells and Gees and Bees, but what the hell is an intersex?” And that, is precisely the problem.

If I were to answer the question scientifically, an intersex person is one who is not born entirely male or female, biologically. They make up around one percent of the population, (Which is around 80 million people, and about twenty percent more people than the entire population of the UK, so don’t even dare try to tell me that it’s too small of a number to care about), are not the same as trans people (Which is all about gender identity), and yes, exist, either as having both sets of genitalia (Like Micah does), or any other mix, for example being born with XYX chromosomes, wrong amounts of hormones, etc…

But you don’t care about that, right? You wanted a book review, not a biology lesson. Fair enough. But my point is, this is the representation we need. An actual character, with unique identities and struggles and strengths that many people go through and can relate to. Because fuck political correctness, diversity within media just straight up makes it more interesting, as well as eliminates the feeling of many, many people feeling excluded from the little penthouse party Hollywood have got going on for any kind of shithead, as long as you’re cishet and white and can make a lot of money. Just fuck the rest of them, right?

Sorry, I just… the Harvery Weinstein thing happened this week, and though I’m not a huge film guy generally, I knew this guy was at the top of the food chain. And the fact that it happened for years… let’s just throw the whole Hollywood out, to be honest.

Anyway, I’m getting off topic. Back to Micah.

What I liked about the way Lam portrayed them is that she struck a nice balance between the aforementioned, “Let’s make their identity the only part of their personality/development,” and the even less accurate idea of them having no struggles with other people and, just as importantly, themselves. Throughout the book, they find themselves torn between their given identity of wholly female, and the identity they chose as male at the circus, which is where most of the story takes place. And although the main reason for them running away from the circus is to avoid corrective genital surgery (Which, yes, is a real thing, and also yes, is done on a lot of people without their consent, usually when they’re much younger than Micah), and even after their intersex identity is found out by some of the other characters, they still use the same name, they never directly state if they strictly identify as one or the other, (Bearing in mind this is only the first book of three, I’ve only just started reading the second), which is also why I choose to use they/them pronouns throughout this review.

It’s done well, really. Generally speaking, the more conflict and challenges the character faces at the beginning, the more satisfying the overcoming is at the end, and their feelings never felt out of place, or rushed. Good job, Lam.

The bisexuality of Micah is also an interesting talking point, particularly how it develops not only their sexuality but also their gender identity. Their first real love interest, Aenea, not only makes them realise their bisexuality, but also questions the masculinity within them, highlighting an interesting talking point about a subconscious idea in society that, even within the LGBT community and/or people who completely negate labels of gender altogether, we still conform to the traditional, heteronormative ideals we try to break away from. There’s always the question asked of who’s the man and woman in the relationship. There’s always the assumption that trans people are straight. One of the girls always has to wear a suit and a dress at the wedding. It’s stale, you know?

And while some people might criticise this arc for perpetuating that idea, I would argue more that it shows the way a lot of LGBT people do still think, subconsciously, including me, even though I, like many others, know the whole idea is stupid and archaic. It shows how ingrained heterosexuality and heteronormativity is in us, no matter who we are.

It also shows change in Micah - that their identity in every sense is constantly changing and evolving to fit new people and situations, that gender is a fluid sort of concept to them that isn’t really one hundred percent labelled by them, which can be and is what many people choose to be. And to be honest, that’s just plain nice to see in a queer character, since most stories begin at the point when the character has finished that kind of emotional journey, or play it off like they’ve known precisely who they were all along (Which is another ridiculous stereotype, by the way. Stop expecting kids to be able to figure that out by themselves, or even care about it. There are more important things to them, like getting hyper off of ridiculously sugary drinks and making sure they catch that Pikachu.)

I like it a lot, can you tell?

One criticism I have (Which isn’t really one, but more of a concerned prediction), is that it’s a particularly concise story, meaning, generally, it doesn’t leave a lot open. Yes, Micah is on the run from the police with a character called Drystan, (Who is a gay man who conveniently explains what being gay means, but he’s somehow made clowns seem a lot less scary to me so I’ll allow it), which is an intriguing enough continuation, but apart from that, there’s not a whole lot to go on. We haven’t had much development of any of the other places, every character we got to know is either dead, (Sorry Aenea, I did like you), vaguely left at some point in the novel, or is too minor to really give any kind of mention. I’m scared that Lam will either waste her time for a few hundred pages by treading water in the shallow end of the pool, or try to set up a whole new roster of characters while completely abandoning the old ones, essentially destroying the relationships and need for a lot of the interactions in the first book, (Which, if we’re going with the swimming pool analogy, would be like getting out of the water and jumping out of the nearest window into the Mariana’s Trench with bricks tied to her legs).

But we’ll just have to wait until I read it, won’t we. Hopefully not long, eh? (No, not long, is the correct answer. You can at least try to humour me, you know. You’ve read the whole review so you must like me a tiny bit. Tiny tiny bit? Maybe?

Hm… I hope she does do the second one, to be honest… or surprises me with some kind of magical third option, but I’ve learnt that you get brownie points on the internet if you’re constantly cynical. Not that it matters. The inevitable passage of time will consume and leave us all behind, eventually, letting us to fester wondering, was it all worth it? Were my shitty book reviews a valuable contribution to human society, in comparison? And what even was the point of this system in the first place? Why do we even bother to try to be more than savages, or even calculate that yes, we are living, when it will do nothing but further realise the emptiness and complete loneliness of the vacuum of space? Or what if-

Sorry. It’s been a rough week. See you next time.)