#bad penis synonyms

[morokollisyo]

Prompt: World Gone Mad

Words: 1,913 Description: Sam and Dean want to leave Random Town, but it's not as easy as they think.

Read here: AO3

Oh boys, fate is throwing you again in directions you don't want to go!

[hiiragi7]

Reminder that y'all should just say what you mean instead of "AFAB" or "AMAB".

If you are referring to penises, say penis.

If you are referring to having a period, say the word period.

If you are referring to being raised female or male, say that.

If you are referring to the ability to get pregnant, say that.

And so on, and so on, and so on.

The terms "AFAB" and "AMAB" do not tell you anything about a person's reproductive, hormonal, or chromosomal profiles. It does not tell you what body parts they have. It does not tell you anything about their life experiences or what gender they were raised as.

Using "AFAB" and "AMAB" as if they are synonymous with [perisex] "female" and "male" excludes intersex and trans people. Using the terms "AFAB" and "AMAB" in this way is only recreating the sex binary of female and male but masking it as more progressive when it really isn't. Just say what you really mean.

There are trans people who have the same equipment as a cis person of the "opposite" assigned sex. There are intersex people who were assigned a sex at birth while having completely different internal reproductive organs or hormones, or who were raised as a different gender than the sex they were assigned at birth.

There is no such thing as "AFAB" or "AMAB" experiences. AGAB language only describes what you were assigned at birth. It says nothing about your body or your life experiences.

I know that people tend to shy away from using direct language when talking about anything related to sex (even as it relates to biology and not anything actually sexual) but using the actual terms for these things isn't bad. It's extremely counterproductive to movements to view sex as a fluid and broad category when you use AFAB and AMAB as if they are anything more than a sex designation given at birth.

[genderqueerdykes]

being intersex and transfem is a fucking Experience let me just say. shoutout to all the transfems out there who feel like they cant fit in with other transfems for whatever reason. shoutout transfems who always feel like if others find out about what makes them different, theyll be othered and ostracized. shoutout transfems who dont fit neatly into the popular discourse on transmisogyny. shoutout transfems who were afab

i get you 100%- this is the exact issue I have as an intersex transfem. the assumption that transfem is synonymous with AMAB is actively damaging our community. i'm actually in the process of writing a zine about intersex transfemininity and how we are failing our own community by assuming that all transfems are AMAB. the obsession our community has developed with transfem being synonymous with "penis haver" has rapidly become dangerous. it ostracizes intersex transfems and post-op transfems alike.

this also leaves out all of the nuance that comes with transgenderism and transsexuality, because nobody can fit into a perfect, mentally curated box. people are individuals with unique attributes and many transfems fall outside of the extremely strict box we've put around it. i saw someone in a sever i'm in complain recently about how folks are trying to disseminate transfem from meaning "someone with a penis," as if that's a bad thing. they claimed that being raised male as a child is integral to the experience and that you can't separate the two, but i argue that there are many people who go through similar experiences that are not AMAB and were not raised as boys.

this also leaves out people with unconventional transition paths, multitransitional people, and so on. there's so much nuance to terms like transmasc and transfem and people refuse to accept that. transfem does not mean amab. transmasc does not mean afab. we have to stop focusing on the genitals of our siblings, it's uncomfortable and just as disgusting as when cis folk do it

i get called and referred to as a trans woman by most strangers i meet. i've had to fight and claw tooth and nail to be seen as a girl and woman due to my masculine body and face, even before puberty and HRT. i was forced to take estrogen HRT as a teen and young adult to "fix" my masculine features. i was born AMAB but then it switched to AFAB. i have to transition into womanhood because i've always been denied it. but that doesn't mean that i have a penis- in fact, i have dysphoria about not having one.

thank you for this ask, i really get where you're coming from. stay safe out there

[velvetvexations]

@trans-androgyne made this lovely post that spurred me to have thoughts about how their second point also applied to transfems but I didn't wanna derail theirs so I decided to make my own post.

Transitioning being a pro-feminist move applies to trans women as well. Gender abolitionists want to get rid of gender but in practice mostly seem to want to just go back to not considering it separate from sex and otherwise keeping such clear lines between one or the other* that gender would be the only possible result. Like, the feminist future is one where anyone can undress in front of anyone, not where we recognize that women are weak prey animals that need to be kept separate from their natural predators.

So like, it's said that trans women further the patriarchy because they associate things like the color pink with womanhood. This is an understandable perspective that appears logical on the face of it, but dig deeper. When you say pink is a woman's color, and liking the color pink - to vastly simplify the many things that goes into recognizing a desire to transition - means you must be a girl, the implication is that there is an inherent link between womanhood and the color pink. But you're missing the forest for the trees, because the actual idea at play here is that whether or not you're associated with the color pink is no longer decided for you at birth!

Naturally the counterargument is that plenty of women throughout the world and history is that plenty of women have gotten by without liking the color pink, yet not categorizing themselves as a man. GNC cis women have a long, storied history, and in this modern age are especially prominent. They are not men, or non-binary, simply because they dislike pink.

However, cis women that are gender conforming exist literally everywhere you look. Performing femininity is not at all a trans thing, and radical feminism has had a ton of conflict with cis women who shave their legs, enjoy makeup, and things like that.

But cis women, you might say, have expectations of femininity thrust upon them. Isn't it uniquely bad of trans women to choose to define their womanhood that way?

That might be the case except that a lot of trans women are also GNC as well. Literally if you saw me you'd be like "that's a gender conforming man."** It's not only about separating gender from sex, but rendering it a totally meaningless form of personal expression. That doesn't mean erasing, trivializing, or appropriating anything about cis women, but I think it feels that way to many because they have a hard time getting away from terms like "woman" meaning what it traditionally has in the past. TIRFs*** take a stab at the linguistic evolution, at least, but otherwise still see everything the same way, and will often use words like "male" and "female" to directly refer to sex specifically despite the synonymous associations they have that make trans people still reject that kinna labeling**** even before you get into the actual ideological stuff that most trans people of either assigned sex reject.

But I think you need to have both. I think a gender conforming woman who has a penis goes to show that that gender role is not defined by having a vagina, nor is having a vagina defined by that gender role. Then, on top of that, you have GNC trans and cis women alike doing whatever the fuck, breaking down the idea that a woman is one thing in particular not only regarding sex but also in how they exist in society.

*ignoring for now that even sex isn't a binary; I would love if an intersex person could please add on addressing that if they felt they had anything to add

**until I get my breasts, anyway, after which I'll look like an otherwise gender conforming man with breasts

***distinct from TRFs, TIRFs are the ones who reskin TERF frameworks with trans validating language

****I consider myself male and specifically because of my body, but this is personal to me because my identity is based heavily in a lot of archetypical stuff that doesn't play a factor in the identity of others; one way to view it is that I like to use a certain shade of purple because it was used in a lot of paintings that inspired me, but other people use other shades of purple because they were inspired by different things that come at their self-portrait from a different angle

[normaljenny]

To be half serious for a second, it does annoy me how penises are treated as synonymous with tools for penetrations. If you're into that sort of thing then good for you, but there's so many other things you can do with dicks (and so many other ways to achieve penetration).

It gets especially bad when you combine this with the inability of some people to distinguish between dom and top. Like I have a dick that I'm pretty happy with and usually take a more dominant role, but have no interest in penetrative sex at all. So you can see how this sort of attitude gets on my nerves. Stop acting like every penis haver with an ounce of assertiveness wants to stick that thing in you. It's more than just a fleshy dildo!

[thedreadvampy]

this is my new gripe forget talking about "die" vs "unalive" if I have to see one more person talking about "sexual assault" or "SA" when they specifically and exclusively mean "rape" I'm gonna fucking lose it.

apart from anything else idk about other legislatures but while in general/casual use I do personally think rape is a subcategory of sexual assault, in both Scottish and English law I'm pretty sure that rape and sexual assault are two distinct things. attempted rape falls under sexual assault but rape is its own crime?

and I'm not wanting to lean on that tbh because the legal definition of rape is Bad Actually - extremely heterocisnormative (UK law is particularly bad on this bc rape legally can only happen with a penis, any other penetration is Assault By Penetration), extremely restrictive, and, due to being a discrete legal construct, draws extremely arbitrary boundaries between which things which in my experience are pretty much on the same level are and are not rape.

and I also don't. think that legal constructs of sexual assault from within a carceral system are the most useful even if they were broader and more reflective of the human experiences of rape and sexual assault.

hooooooowever. they don't need to be separate things for my point to stand. let's ignore the law (because it is. deeply flawed.) and just talk about what sexual assault entails.

Sexual assault includes (depending on your definition):

Unwanted sexual touching (with hands or objects)

Unwanted kissing

Attempted rape

Cumming, pissing or spitting on someone sexually without consent

Violating someone's bodily autonomy for sexual purposes (eg secretly feeding them things, looking up their skirt)

Groping/feeling up without consent

If we're going to get technical, generally speaking in a legal/professional context, sexual assault means specifically unwanted sexual touching. however I don't think it's unreasonable in an online context to bundle in other forms of sexual violence including:

Masturbating in front of someone

Trying to coerce/threaten/trick someone into any sexual act (whether with yourself, with another person or by themselves)

Flashing someone or sending sexual images without consent

Pressuring people into sexual conversations/situations

Watching/recording people in sexual situations without consent

Creating or obtaining nudes of someone without consent

and loads of other stuff that's traumatic and miserable as well - I don't want to get too granular

rape is an aspect of sexual violence, but not all sexual assault or sexual violence is rape.

rape includes:

someone having sex with you against your will or without you being able to give full consent

that's it that's specifically what it is

the only flex in this definition is what you count as sex and how you define the bounds of consent for the purposes of the conversation

but like

do you see the problem?

do you see how. wherever we place rape in relation to sexual assault. attempted rape is also a form of sexual assault.

do you see how it's important that "rape" isn't synonymous with a term that also includes "attempted rape"?

in some - many! - circumstances it's useful to group together all these experiences of sexual violence. the edges are not clearcut and they all deserve to be understood as significant and traumatic.

but if we're taking about rape we're taking about rape. We're talking about a specific thing and it requires specific language. If we unilaterally consider rape and sexual assault to be 1:1 synonyms, there's absolutely no room to acknowledge the difference between "attempted rape" and "rape" (other than by removing anything that isn't a full on successful rape from the definition of sexual assault, in which case we're just removing the language to talk about that type of traumatic experience)

they're not the same thing and the use of SA as a euphemistic way to talk about specifically rape is convincing a lot of people that they are the same thing. and that does immediate measurable harm to our ability to actually talk about our experiences.

[koschei-the-ginger]

Screw it, brief reviews of Jason Bateman's filmography pre-Arrested Development

(there are only 4 pics but the post is long)

1981 Little House on the prairie - He was there for 1 season and already became so popular they made the grand finale all about him being a proof that God exists lol

1983 Just a little more love - can't find this one

1982 Silver spoons - they had to fire him because the second he appeared on screen nobody gave a crap about the other kid, iconic, I've only had Derek Taylor for 21 episodes but if anything happened to him yk yk..

1984 Knight Rider - Derek Taylor steals a car

1985 Robert Kennedy and his Times - I'm sure he's in it somewhere but it's like SIX hours long and incredibly boring

1984 The Fantastic World of DC Cooper - Derek Taylor strikes again

1984 It's your Move - Arrested Development for 6th graders, this show is SO fucking funny the parents insisted on killing it together with his Derek-sona for good.

1985 Right to kill - blink and you'll miss him, this is his sister's movie

1986 Mr Belvedere - MILF CHASER

1986 Can you feel me dancing - a commissioned tv movie to show off Justine Bateman's range

1986 St Elsewhere - see, Dave Hogan can do drama too (no)

1986 Valerie/ The Hogan family - his most famous role pre-AD and I genuinely don't understand why, stale bread even for a family sitcom™. Cancelled for being the only show that was normal about aids thanks to Jason. They also dyed his hair to a different shade of auburn each season for some reason lol

1987 Bates Motel - this was supposed to be a sequel to Psycho 🤨

1987 Teen Wold too - words cannot describe how much I hate this movie and everything about it

1987 Matlock - he's playing "Jason Bateman, the star of Valerie" only 1 year after they fired Valerie from Valerie hmm...

1987 Moving target - this was fine

1988 Our House - if your kids think giving 10k to a teenager will get them a record label at 13 it's on them, he did nothing wrong

1988 Crossing the mob - you can watch this but god at what cost, it's so grainy you can barely see their faces (okay movie tho)

1989 Breaking the rules - commissioned to show that he can do some "serious" acting, a tragic mistake on everyone's part

1991 Necessary roughness - Scott Bakula simps, I understand, no I seriously get it

1992 A Taste for killing - for every good movie (prev) you get 2 bad ones

1994 Confessions: two faces of evil - COPAGANDA

1994 This can't be love - *looks up synonyms for CUTE*

1994 Black sheep - can't find this one either

1995 Hart to Hart - he was so annoying they made him believe he's related to Donald Trump I can't even rgsthsrth

1995 An affectionate look at fatherhood - can't find this one either²

1995 Burke's law - this show is so camp you need to WATCH THE DUEL

1995 Simon - the writing is atrocious, he's trying SO hard to make it work while Harland Williams recites every line as if he had just learnt to read. Tragically, a must watch, I wish it existed in HD

1996 Ned and Stacey - a sitcom star playing a sitcom star in a sitcom making fun of Friends, 10/10

1997 Chicago sons - 3 polish brothers live together, Jared Paladecki isn't in this eventhough there are at least 4 people that look like him

1998 George and Leo - if this came out today AO3 would be full of this elderly gay couple

1999 Love stinks - not mine but yk

2000 Rude awakening - the absence of a laugh track caught me off guard, he's doing his best Bud Bundy impression down to the tragic goatee

2001 Some of my best friends - after this many cancelled sitcoms you stop seeing AD as a show that's simply good but as a miracle

2002 The Jake effect - if Scrubs was about hs teachers

2002 The sweetest thing - nobody cares about the men this is the penis song movie

2002 No way out - this is like Cary Elwes-kind of bad

2003 Sol Goode - blink and you'll miss him (idk what's even happening)

2003 Twillight Zone -someone get him an Emmy for trying to bribe a ghost of a kid he unintentionally murdered

[rowarn]

sorry i wasn't specific with my ask! if you could just give me some ideas on how you get your inspo and word usage, that's mostly what i'm looking for! anything is appreciated though, thank youu. :))

RIGHT ON! its okay, i would have given random tips but i wasnt sure if there was something specific you were looking for!

my inspo largely comes from other media. tv shows, movies, edits, fucking character ai bots, other fics; literally anything that i enjoy i typically wind up using in my fics. its not for me personally but plenty of people get inspired by music! songs and music videos

other fics are excellent inspo bc u can see how readers respond to tropes that they've done. age gap, dilf, aus, and stuff like that. its also rlly great to see characterization. as long as you're not plagiarizing then emulating and learning from other writers who are doing the same thing you do or want to do is excellent. i love reading fics hehe

ik that sounds like super basic and boring but having a repertoire of existing tropes and stuff is super great!

as for word usage, it's all super subjective bc my tastes and stuff will not match up for everyone. but if u like how i write and want to emulate it then there are a few things i can say! i focus mostly on smut and dialogue.

first, it's important to have a good vocabulary. knowing synonyms to words you want to say is important. u don't want to have a paragraph that uses the same word over and over again, you want to break it up and make it mentally appealing to read. it won't be interesting to readers if you don't expand your vocab!

i am primarily a smut writer so that's where most of my focus is on intentional word usage. all my narration and plot is pretty basic i'd say. nothing incredibly special except for my dialogue which i put a lot of thought into.

i don't use metaphors that much. so, say, for smut u won't catch me using "globes" in reference to tits. i much prefer to just come out and say breasts, tits, chest.

i also don't use like Correct anatomy language. so i don't use penis, testicles, vagina or clitoris. i use.......porn language bc that's what im writing; cock, pussy, cunt, clit. just to keep it......erotic bc i personally (again, subjective) find correct anatomy language to be more off-putting than erotic.

smut is where it becomes difficult to use broad language. there's only so many words you can use for a dick. so don't be afraid to bust out some wattpad words u know? length, member, etc. ik they can sometimes be cringey and u don't like them but use them at the right time and using it sparingly and most ppl won't rlly notice. it breaks up reading the word cock and dick over and over and over again for 2k words.

for some examples,

for dicks u can use; dick, cock, member, shaft, length

for the puth u can do; pussy, cunt, folds, core, sex isn't bad

clit i use clit, bud, and nub mostly...but ppl use pearl or button, i don't but it doesn't bother me when i see it

i also don't use flowery language. i know in creative writing or whatever it's common to use poetic word usage but i find it to be more confusing than anything. i can't read rlly flowery fics bc the meaning of what im reading just genuinely gets lost. it's all lost on me. i'd say im a much more direct writer with my words and scenes? i utilize a fair bit of narration and exposition in my writing.

i find dialogue style to be quite important. if you read my stuff (like the fics, we dont look at my word vomit LMAOOO) you'll usually see i make the characters talk in specific ways.

simon cuts off his words "goin'" instead of "going", "somethin'" instead of "something", like that. i dont use a ton of language to depict his accent other than that, i leave the leg work mostly up to the readers bc they know what he sounds like. but some writers do like british slang, "wanker", "mate", "innit" LMAO i just don't and thats my choice. i choose to just cut his words off and call it a day. he has a more casual way of speaking in Taking What You Need as compared to konig in Experience.

konig, in Experience, has a specific way of talking as well that is opposite to simon. he doesn't use contractions. i did that intentionally bc i wanted him to have a more intimidating, professional, cold kind of way of talking. "do not do it" comes across different than "don't do it"!

i personally would say that a large part of my characterization comes across in dialogue and the style of dialogue i choose. i think that makes it more enjoyable for readers!

all in all, i basically just emulate what i personally like to see in writing. that's how i keep finding it enjoyable. i love giving fics for ppl to read but if i didn't write straight up what I wanted to see then the actual physical task of writing would be a lot worse.

idk how helpful this was since i basically just told u.....what i like to do LMAOOOO but i hope it gives u some kind of idea of what i focus on and how i get my writing to be the way it is?

EDIT: important that i also use inclusive language to the best of my abilities!

instead of saying like "your cheeks turned red" i use "you feel your cheeks heat up" or something along those lines since people with darker skin tones won't have their cheeks turn red when they blush!! but feeling your cheeks BURN is smthn we've all experienced.

i also try not to use any "running your hands through your hair" bc not everyone can do that! i can't even do that i have curly hair hehe. an alternative would be pushing a stray strand out of your face or tucking some behind your ear or something like that.

also, i don't mention nipple color or vagina color or anything !

[i-can-even-burn-salad]

Happy STS, Elli!

As you close in on the end of Till Death (*vibrates*), I'd like you to think back on the story. Are you still happy with the beginning? What have been your favorite and least favorite scenes to write? (if it isn't too spoilery to say lol) How many graves are you anticipating digging? *cough*

The endings of some other stories have left you with some complex feelings; how are you feeling about finishing this one?

do i need to say how freaking excited i am? :D

🥺

Are you still happy with the beginning?

In general, yes. I am curious to see if my experiments in the early chapters are still are to my liking on my first re-read, and as always, there's a few details that need adjusting because something became clearer later on, but for a project that had no outline, I am very happy.

What have been your favorite and least favorite scenes to write? (if it isn't too spoilery to say lol)

Least favorite, funny enough, all the goddamn torture scenes, that's it, I'm done 🙄 There's this post going around with synonyms for penis, but holy shit, how many synonyms can I get for "pain" or "shatter" or "burn" 😆

As always, my favorite ones turned out to be the low stakes, low outline filler scenes. Characters can be so fun when they do more than sobbing on the ground, bleeding and dying, who would have thought.

How many graves are you anticipating digging? *cough*

In the story? I wanted it to be standalone, so every bad guy gets one. Wait is that a spoiler? Here on my blog happy end central? Don't think so.

In real life? Gonna dig myself a grave, because y'all are gonna kill me, whoever buries you then is not my fucking problem 😂😅

The endings of some other stories have left you with some complex feelings; how are you feeling about finishing this one?

I do think I'll feel pretty good. Without the anxiety of posting it, it's just a book to be finished, a project done — and that 2 weeks ahead of schedule!

Another thing that left me floating after Glass Shards was the worry that I could never again pull it off. Here I am, 4 months later, and I did, in fact, pull it off. I will probably take a break after this, to catch up with editing, formatting, and some very abandoned other hobbies, but I do trust myself a bit more that I can start another project when the time is right.

[andtheny]

A Vanilla Prick wants me because I don't want him

He's lonely, desperate, and on the lamb

His ex-wife is chasin' his bank account

He thinks he can hide under my mattress

Squeeze in my closet

And nestle against my bosom like a baby lion

But I'm not your fucking mother, Vanilla Prick

A Vanilla Prick isn't always white

In fact, nine times out of ten, he's black as Africa

But skin don't matter, I can see his insides

He tastes like VANILLA

Like a virgin, he's only had sex with his ex-girlfriend

He never learned how to please a woman

That's why she left you, asshole!

She didn't give a rat's ass that you gained ten pounds, you stupid fuck

Just wanted a good time, and you failed to deliver

A Vanilla Prick loves the rat race

He's gettin' his steps in

Makin' those gains

Those muscles fail to impress me, Vanilla Prick

Not only do I find them asthetically displeasing

But, as a bonus, I've learned that a muscular men taste Vanilla

I want to fuck a cyborg, thanks

Tall or short, happy or sad

As long as he knows what the fuck he's doing

Actually, you know what?

I'm an excellent teacher

Give me a virgin, sure

I'll show them what I like

But stay the fuck away from me, Vanilla Pricks

Your ex-boyfriend tainted you

This Vanilla Prick was bisexual when I met her at the LGBT club

But her ex-boyfriend, Prince Eric, lowered her self esteem

Now she thinks she can take that out on me?

I'm sorry, did my C cups resemble his man tits?

Did I forget to shave my fucking mustache again?

My bad, this is so all on me

Listen up, Butch, you're a Hello Kitty Batman Vanilla Prick

You're obsessed with sex, erotica, monster fucking, etcetera

But you can't even be arsed to give me a fucking hug?

What a frigid Vanilla Prick

Oh, I'm sorry, how politically incorrect of me

You aren't frigid, you're asexual

My bad, my bad, let's Just Be Friends

In fact, I was looking for a roommate that doesn't secretly want to fuck me

How convenient!

Do you promise not to secretly wish you could fuck me?

If so, let's get married

Pardon, let's be roommates, I should say

Queer - Platonically, of course

Ah, I'm not allowed to flirt with my female coworkers?

I'm only allowed to have one night stands with stupid straight men?

Why, if we're just roommates?

Ooooooh, and now I'm not allowed to marry my girlfriend Robin? That's funny, my Daddy said the same thing. He ALSO told me to stay away from women and only have sex with straight men

Well, technically he told me he wanted me to find a husband, but it's synonymous, honey

Why are you fucking crying?

We're just roommates!

That's what you told your family, isn't it?

IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE EVEN HAVING SEX, YOU POSSESSIVE DYKE

What do you mean, you secretly wanted to be more than roommates since we met at the LGBT club in 2015?

You

SAID

You

Did

Not

Want

To

Have

Sex

With

Me

You psychotic cunt!

Listen, I understand

Bitches be crazy

However, I'm damn tired of Vanilla Pricks treating me like fucking trash

Do you want to fuck or not?

Don't tease me, baby

What, did he think I wanted to look at a photograph of his penis?

Was it supposed to impress me?

I looked at it, shrugged, and said, "Look, are you DTF or not?"

He said, "I'm married!"

What a Vanilla Prick

[polychaeteworm]

Hilarious Kung Pow Penis related story I feel like I need to put on Tumblr:

My two black cats Hamb and Zelda drink out of a large plastic water basin in the kitchen. They've done this for a long time, they like it... I think.

Hamb has unfortunately started doing this thing where he slaps the water basin really hard and like... diggs at the bottom of it, aggressively pushing it and splashing literal puddles of water onto the kitchen floor. We don't know why he does this. I'm sure it's because it's fun. We will eventually find a solution, but it sucks and we have towels on hand in the kitchen because of it. He seems to only do it right after I refill the basin, and just once. He knows it's bad, and he's started doing it when nobody is looking. Until I can afford something he can't splash with, we just gotta use the towels.

So the funny part. For some silly reason, I can't remember why, it's just one of those stupid things but basically my partner and I started referring to this behavior as Hamb "doing Kung Pow Penis" to the water basin. Because he's being aggressively silly to the water basin and making it explode... I guess.

This has resulted in either I or my partner walking into the kitchen and yelling across the house:

"HE DID KUNG POW PENIS AGAIN!"

And in response,

"HAMB WHY YOU KUNG POW PENIS! STOP DOING KUNG POW PENIS!"

Now "Kung Pow Penis" is synonymous with "naughty behavior" and if he's doing something he shouldn't, you need only yell "Kung Pow Penis!" and he will stop.

It's better to be chuckling when my feet are fucking wet and I have to bend over on my bad joints because my cat went Silly Mode on the water dish. Also don't worry about this dumb idiot hes spoiled.

[fozmeadows]

This is a really important thing to talk about, and I'm going to add that this is a significant way in which TERFism and its attendant dogwhistles dovetail with Evangelical purity culture, ie: the idea that evil bad predatory behaviour is stored in the penis. TERFy fearmongering about trans women being fundamentally dangerous derives from exactly the same toxic, fucked-up view of male sexuality - and of male existence - espoused by Evangelism: that all men are biologically predisposed to predation, violence and other sexual evils, such that they can't ever really be trusted.

It's a difficult thing to talk about, because demonstrably, gender-based violence directed against women by men is a widespread problem! But it doesn't follow that a majority of men are bad by default; rather, it's that many have been trained to entitlement and bad behaviour by patriarchal systems and misogynist ways of thinking, which are both things we have the power to change.

Attemping to affect this change and bring about equality is the core conceit of feminism, and we can see, very demonstrably, that it works. So if you fall into the gender-essentialist trap of believing that men are bad fundamentally, whether because of Evil Biology or Original Sin, then you're not only saying that the long-term goal of feminism is impossible; you're functionally agreeing with every disgusting, sexist rape-apologist who brushes off assault and misogyny as "boys will be boys" and "men are just like that." You cannot hope to hold bad men accountable for their actions without acknowledging the existence of good men; that their misdeeds aren't synonymous with their masculinity, but are rather choices they specifically have made.

So while it's crucial to call out the ways in which women suffer from sexism and gender-based systems of violence and to name the misogyny inherent in their perpetuation, it's also important to show how these systems are unnatural: that, rather than representing some default state of cruelty to which all men naturally revert, misogyny is instead taught - and that the teaching itself, while offering contextual authority to men, can also be harmful to them.

I cannot express how jarring it was after being raised by a "Porn Addiction Coach" to get into a relationship with a woman and come face to face with the fact that she did actually want me to sexually desire her.

Like, in Evangelical Purity Culture, male desire was basically poison. It was a threat. It was this constant temptation that would destroy everything. And even after leaving, in the sort of queer, feminist spaces i spend most of my time in that wasn't something that pretty much anyone was spending time actively dissuading me from feeling.

But my desire is good. It's not something that I'm being accepted in spite of. It's a positive thing. It's a bonus. Not even just vanilla stuff, all the stuff I'd convinced myself were these weird terrible desires that were shameful to have.

It honestly took me over a decade to fully accept that. To stop dissociating during sex and confront that I was, in fact, being a massive perv and that was fantastic and preferable and that I could accept that into my self-image without shame or self hatred.

But it's important to do. It's important to leave relationships that don't welcome that part of you. To know that your sexuality is valuable and valid and worth owning and celebrating. Because the alternative is just...not being. Either existing as yourself and repressing the part of your identity that is sexual or allowing that sexuality to exist but turning off your self while it does.

[the-hem]

"Speak of the Devil." From the Chandogya Upanishad, the Exploration of the Mysteries of the Priesthood.

Chapter II − Meditation on Om as the Prana

Prana is the Vital Breath. It is synonymous with the Great Soul, the Life Giving Essence, Intelligence, the Spark of Creation. OM, the gift of speech and writing is how we explain it, incorporate it, and use its power to become fully enlivened beings.

Persons studying the Priesthood have to become intimately familiar with the transubstantiation of our intelligent awareness into language and use all of its gifts for the Glory of God.

As we will see we are here to live and understand using Prana and OM as our means and medium. It is a Great Sin, the worst, to use and language to bring harm, shame, powerlessness, or pain to another person or life form.

As Priests of OM, it is our duty to combat the misuse of OM in all of our fields of experience. We always start within. This has necessary impact to the outside.

1 When the gods and the demons, both offspring of Prajapati, fought with each other, the gods took hold of the Udgitha, thinking that with this they would vanquish the demons.

2 They (i.e. the gods) meditated on the Udgitha (Om) as the prana which functions through the nose. But the demons pierced it (i.e. the prana) with evil. Therefore with it (i.e. the breath) one smells both what is pleasant−smelling and what is foul−smelling. For the breath is pierced by evil.

Prajapati is the Mother of Creatures. She is analogous to the Mesopotamian Goddess, Inanna also called Ishtar and Isis. She was born of Udgitha, which is the Bright Essence of Creation; a cause for celebration.

She created all that moves, slithers, breathes, consumes, excretes, fucks, reproduces, and produces. Her work- Udgitha- is always pure, pristine, and is the very essence of the cause for Celebration.

The gods – in this case, the instincts for bright shiny things in the human mind, felt this Bright Light of Udgitha was best kept in their care. Gods in Vedic Studies are not Hercules and Apollo and Thor. They are cosmic principals. They perform certain duties so that life and creation can interact.

Your eyes, nose, mouth, asshole, penis, vagina, skin, ears, all of these gods work together with the gods of gravity, light, sound, the gases, elements, and laws of physics to make One Contiguous Reality possible for embodied beings.

The gods love life! They love to acquire it and analyze it and make fabulous things from it. They often do it to excess, but their abode is joy and luxury and for these things, they have no loss of appetite.

Demons…they are the same, but they always want joys and pleasures that do not belong to them are or unlikely to come their way through anything but cheating, stealing, lying, and colluding with others like them. They do not cooperate or apply effort to their schemes unless it can hurt someone in the process and that makes getting the spoils all the more delicious to them.

The gods spoke of life with great zeal  and enthusiasm, the demons denounced it, claiming life was bad and sinful, and everyone would be better off it they handled things. War arose in Heaven.

3 Then they meditated on the Udgitha as speech. But the demons pierced it with evil. Therefore one speaks both truth and falsehood. For speech is pierced by evil.

It is just as Lord Krishna said, "Over and over I try, tirelessly to create the Worlds according to My Nature, and steadfastly, the House clings to notoriousness in all quarters."

How we communicate with ourselves about life on earth is called meditation. The scriptures tell us what this will be like when we find the right words. What we say afterwards about it determines whether or not our use of language produces a powerful sense of Udgitha or that which is foul and infernal.

The quality and temperament of OM, of Speech, affects how the presiding faculties over the rest of our perceptions behave.

Speak ye evil of others, it is evil you will preside over. But one who tells the truth, tells the world we are presiders over Grace disguising ourselves in unfortunate lies we are destined to supersede.

[baeddel]

Please. Please can you tell me what a baeddel is and why people (terfs?) used it in a derogatory manner on this website for a hot minute but now no one ever uses it at all

you asked for it, fucker

[2k words; philology and drama]

baeddel is an Old English word. i have no idea where it actually occurs in the Old English written corpus, but it occurs in a few placenames. its diminuitive form, baedling, is much better documented. it appears in the (untranslated) Canons of Theodore, a penitential handbook, a sort of guidebook for priests offering advice on what penances should be recommended for which sins. in a passage devoted to sexual transgressions it gives the penances suggested for a man who sleeps with a woman, a man who sleeps with another man, and then a man who sleeps with a baedling. so you have this construction of a baedling as something other than a man or a woman. and then it gives the penance for a baedling who sleeps with another baedling (a ludicrous one-year fast). then, by way of an explaination, Theodore delivers us one of the most enigmatic phrases in the Old English corpus: "for she is soft, like an adulturess."

the -ling suffix in baedling is masculine. but Theodore uses feminine pronouns and suffixes to describe baedlings. as we said, it's also used separately from male and female. but it's also used separately from their words for intersex and it never appears in this context. all of this means that you have this word that denotes a subject who is, as Christopher Monk put it, "of problematic gender." interested historians have typically interpreted it as referring to some category of homosexual male, such as Wayne R. Dines in his two-volume Encyclopedia of Homosexuality who discusses it in the context of an Old English glossary which works a bit like an Old English-Latin dictionary, giving Old English words and their Latin counterparts. the Latin words the Anglo-Saxon lexicographer chose to correspond with baedling were effeminatus and mollis, and Lang concludes that it refers to an "effeminate homosexual" (pg 60, Anglo Saxon). this same glossary gives as an Old English synonym the word waepenwifstere which literally means "woman with a penis," and which Dines gives the approximate translation (hold on tight) male wife.

R. D. Fulk, a philologist and medievalist, made a separate analysis of the term in his study on the Canons of Theodore 'Male Homoeroticism in the Old English Canons of Theodore', collected in Sex and Sexuality in Medieval England, 2004. he analysed it as a 'sexual category' (sexual as in sexuality), owing to the context of sexual transgressions in the Canons. he decides that it refers to a man who bottoms in sexual relationships with another man. i don't have the article on hand so i'm not sure what his reasoning was, but this seems obviously inadequate given what we know from the glossary described by Dines. Latin has a word for bottom, pathica, and the lexicographer did not use this in their translation, preferring words that emphasized the baedling's femininity like effeminatus, and doesn't address the sexual context at all. Dines, however, only reading this glossary, seems to decide that it refers to a type of male homosexual too hastily, considering the Canons explicitly treat them separately. both Dines and Fulk immediately reduce the baedling to a subcategory of homosexual when neither of the sources to hand actually do so themselves.

by now it should be obvious why, seven or so years ago, we interpreted it as an equivalent to trans woman. I mean come on - a woman with a penis! these days I tend to add a bit of a caution to this understanding, which is that trans woman is the translation of baedling which seems most adequate to us, just as baedling was the translation of effeminatus that seemed most adequate to our lexicographer. but the term cannot translate perfectly; its sense was derived from some minimal context; a legal context, a doctrinal context, and so forth... the way Anglo-Saxons understood sex/gender is complicated but it has been argued that they had a 'one sex model' and didn't regard men and women as biologically separate types, which is obviously quite different from the sexual model accepted today; in any case they didn't have access to the karyotype and so on. the basic categories they used to understand gender and sexuality were different from ours. in particular, Hirschfield et al. should be understood as a particularly revolutionary moment in the genealogy of transsexuality; the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft essentially invented the concept of the 'sex change', the 'transition', conceived as a biological passage from one sex to the other. even in other contexts where (forgive me) #girlslikeus changed their bodies in some way, like the castration of the priestesses of Cybele, or those belonging to the various historical societies which we believe used premarin for feminization [disputed; see this post], there is no record that they were ever considered men at any stage or had some kind of male biology that preceded their 'gender identity.' the concept of the trans woman requires the minimal context of the coercive assignment at birth and its subsequent (civil and bio-technological) rejection. i have never encountered evidence that this has ever been true in any previous society. nonetheless, these societies still had gendered relations, and essentially wherever we find these gendered relations we also find some subject which is omitted or for whom it has been necessary to note exceptions. what is of chief interest to us is not so much that there was such a subject here or there in history (and whatever propagandistic uses this fact might have), but understanding why these regularities exist.

a very parsimonious explanation is that gender is a biological reality, and there is some particular biological subject which a whole host of words have been conjured to denote. if this were the case then we would expect that, no matter what gender/sexual system we encounter in a given society, it will inevitably find some linguistic expression. if, like me, you find this idea revolting, then you should busy yourself trying to come up with an alternative explanation which is not just plausible, but more plausible. my best guesses are outside the scope of this answer...

anyway, all of this must be very interesting to the five or six people invested in the confluence of philology and gender studies. but why on earth did it become so widely used, in so many strange and unusual contexts, in the 2010s? we're very sorry, but yes, it's our fault. you see apart from all of this, there is also a little piece of information which goes along with the word baeddel, which is that it's the root of the Modern English word bad. by way of, no less, the word baedan, 'to defile'. how this defiled historical subject came to bear responsibility for everything bad to English-speakers doesn't seem to be known from linguistic evidence. however, it makes for a very pithy little remark on transmisogyny. my dear friend [REDACTED] made a playful little post making this point and, good Lord, had we only known...

it went like this. its such a funny little idea that we all start changing our urls to include the word baeddel. in those days it was common to make puns with your url (we always did halloween and christmas ones); i was baeddelaire, a play on the French poet Baudelaire. while we all still had these urls a series of events which everyone would like to forget happened, and we became Enemies of Everyone in the Whole World. because of the url thing people started to call us "the baeddels." then there was "a cult" called "the baeddels" and so forth. this cult had various infamies attatched to it and a constellation of indefensible political positions. ultimately we faced a metric fucking shit ton of harassment, including, for some of my friends, really serious and bad irl harassment that had long-term bad awful consequences relating to stable housing and physical safety and i basically never want to talk about that part of my life ever again. and i never have to, because i've come to realize that for most people, when they use the word baeddel, they don't know about that stuff. it doesn't mean that anymore.

so what does it mean? you'll see it in a few contexts. TERFs do use it, as you guessed. i am not quite sure what they really mean by it and how it differs from other TERF barbs. i think being a baeddel invovles being politically active or at least having a political consciousness, but in a way thats distinct from just any 'TRA' or trans activist. so perhaps 'militant' trans women, but perhaps also just any trans woman with any opinions at all. how this was transmitted from tumblr/west coast tranny drama to TERF vocabulary i have no idea. but you will also find - or, could have found a few years ago - i would say 'copycat' groups who didn't know us or what we believed but heard the rumours, and established their own (generously) organizations (usually facebook groups) dedicated to putting those principles into practice. they considered themselves trans lesbian separatists and did things like doxx and harass trans women who dated cafabs. if you don't know about this, yes, there really were such groups. they mostly collapsed and disappeared because they were evildoers who based their ideology on a caricature. i knew a black trans woman who was treated very badly by one of these groups, for predictable reasons. so long-time readers: if you see people talking about their bad experiences with 'baeddels', you can't necessarily relate it to the 2014 context and assume they're carrying around old baggage. there are other dreams in the nightmare.

the most common way you'll see it today, in my experience, is in this form: people will say that it was a "slur" for trans women. they might bring up that it's the root of the word bad, and they might even think that you shouldn't use the word bad because of it, or that you shouldn't use the word baeddel because it's a slur. all of this is a silly game of internet telephone and not worth addressing. except to say that it's by no means clear that baeddel, or baedling, were slurs, or even insulting at all. while Theodore doesn't provide us with a description of how we can have sex with a baedling without sinning, and it may be the case that any sexual relations with a baedling was considered sinful, sexuality-based transgressions were not taken all that seriously in those days. there was a period where homosexuality within the Church was almost sanctioned, and it wasn't until much later that homosexuality became so harshly proscribed, to the extent that it was thought to represent a threat to society, etc. and as i mentioned, there are places in England named after baedlings. there is a little parish near Kent which is called Badlesmere, Baeddel's Lake, which was recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Domesday Book (as having a lord, a handful of villagers and a few slaves; perhaps only one or two households). it's not unheard of, but i just don't know very many places called Faggot Town or some such. it's possible that baedlings had some role in Anglo-Saxon society which we are not aware of; it could even have been a prestigious one, as it was in other societies. there is just no evidence other than a couple of passing references in the literature and we'll probably never have a complete picture.

[alarajrogers]

The attitude that being attracted to some unusual trait in humans is a "fetish" and that "fetishes" are automatically disgusting because they automatically deny the humanity of the person with the trait... it really needs to die.

It is ok to be strongly attracted to a specific trait that does not appear in all humans. (It is also ok to be strongly attracted to a body part that most people don't find attractive, such as feet.) Human attraction is kind of weird and complicated, but the truth is, none of us choose who we're attracted to. Attraction just happens.

Objectifying the person you're attracted to means to deny them their humanity. To treat them as if their reason for existing is to satisfy your desire. To confuse your desire for them with their supposed desire to make you desire them. It doesn't mean "find attractive."

"Fetish" in a psychological context is supposed to mean "an unusual trait or body part or other aspect of sexuality that is non-standard, which the person with the fetish requires to feel attraction or to achieve orgasm." It was considered to be a psychological disorder because it prevented people (usually men) from having "normal" sex (as defined as, missionary position with a woman after being attracted to her butt and boobs). It is frankly ableist, homophobic, transphobic, and probably every other kind of negative -ism out there, because being attracted to feet or requiring your partner to have a certain body type that is unusual is not harmful, even if you can't feel attraction otherwise. I mean, by the original definition, being gay could be defined as a fetish for men. And I suspect it was, often.

The term "fetishization", when referring to sexuality, should be considered as offensive and outdated as "penis envy" or "Oedipal complex". There is nothing wrong with being attracted to people with unusual bodies (or usual bodies that society has said "those are unattractive!", such as fat people), or specific traits, or body parts that not everyone finds attractive. There's nothing wrong with needing specific costuming or activities to get in the mood. As long as it's all between consenting adults, none of this is bad. (Including playing child/adult, as long as the partners in question are both adults.) Nothing two adults do together that both consent to and that doesn't result in anyone suffering permanent harm is bad. (I do draw the line at things like consensual murder or maiming.)

"Sexualizing" means taking a person who does not feel sexual desire and pushing them into having a sexy appearance, to gratify your desire. This is bad, but has much more limited application than most people think. You can't sexualize a grown woman who decided to put on a miniskirt and fuck-me heels because she wanted to be sexy. Sexualizing means putting a perception of sexuality on a person who doesn't feel that. And it has to be a person. If you sexualize a cartoon character, no you didn't, you just decided to draw them sexy. They're an inanimate object; they cannot suffer from a disconnect between how they feel and how they are perceived. Sexualization is harmful precisely because of that disconnect between how a person feels and how they are seen. Desexualization is the same thing.

You can cause harm by sexualizing or desexualizing a fictional character, but only through the means of implicitly doing the same thing to those who identify with the character. If you make every autistic black male character asexual, you are doing harm to the autistic black men who look to them as representation. If you make every fictional woman with big breasts a sexpot who uses sex as a weapon, you're doing harm to the women with big breasts who will now be perceived that way by everyone who experienced nothing but that kind of fiction. But this is harm that is done by media in aggregate, not an act that can be specifically committed by any one specific person.

"Objectifying" is genuinely bad, but is not synonymous with "being attracted to." You can find someone's breasts or butt or shoulders (or feet) sexy, and still treat that person as a person. Experiencing attraction to someone does not objectify them! What objectifies them is treating them like your desire for them is the only important quality that exists about them. Treating them like their subjective experience does not matter, or does not exist.

I have seen this concept that having a "fetish" for fat people, or trans people, or Asian people, or whatever, is disgusting, and what they seem to mean is, being attracted to that kind of person is disgusting, or being attracted to that kind of person automatically objectifies the person. And then this results in the kind of horrifying situation that the OP describes, where if you're attracted to fat people, and thus it upsets you that fat people are heavily desexualized and treated as if they're disgusting, you will be described as "fetishizing" fat people and thus your opinions discredited. This is not okay. Being attracted to bodies that society in general says "this is unattractive" is fine, there's nothing wrong with it. Even being attracted to only those bodies, which is what fetishization means, is fine and there's nothing wrong with it. Finding people attractive isn't sexualizing them; perceiving them as trying to attract you or existing to attract you when they are not is sexualizing them. Finding people attractive isn't objectifying them; treating them like that's the only reason they exist is objectifying them.

It is okay to be attracted to fat people. It is okay to only be attracted to fat people. The term "fetishization" is slur-like, having come from the context of "this is a mental illness and therefore bad and must be fixed", and probably should not be used unless you're reclaiming it or using it in a positive context. Accusing people of having a "fetish" because they are attracted to someone for a trait society says is unattractive is... well, it could be any kind of -ism depending on what the trait is, but it is definitely socially unjust. Using the term "fetish" to try to discredit people's opinions (or basic humanity) is also unjust.

romanticize gaining weight this is not a joke.

[rayshippouuchiha]

Was reading a fic and all of a sudden it veered from two friends studying into smut

And that wouldn’t have been so bad, maybe, except for the fact that the author used EVERY POSSIBLE SYNONYM AND METAPHOR FOR “PENIS” *EXCEPT FOR* PENIS

As it turns out, when a fictional character goes on and on about “warm rod”s and “dingaling”s, I can no longer take the fic seriously and have to X out

oh trust me I know those feels well