#but can we get some gender non-conformity?

[whitestopper]

Also, do ALL of our girls need to be femmes? Kitty did NOT wear a suit to her parents' wedding for this!

[enfinizatics]

dear americans,

as a polish queer woman and human rights activist, i know exactly how you're feeling right now and what to expect from these elections. i lived through the 2015-2023 regime of pis, a right-wing populist party that divided families in the same way trump did. i’ve experienced the rise of fascism in poland, the influence of far-right parties like konfederacja, and their “santa’s little helpers”—ordo iuris, an ultra-conservative catholic organization (banned in many countries, mind you) that helped enforce a near-total abortion ban and runs anti-queer campaigns in public spaces. i supported the black protests in 2016 as a middle schooler when they first tried to ban abortion. as an adult, i actively participated in the 2020 women’s strike, running from police tear gas daily after they finally passed the ban. i supported friends who faced charges.

i’ve lived through intense homophobia in poland as a queer teen and adult. i survived the first pride march in my hometown, where far-right extremists threw stones and glass at us. i endured the anti-queer propaganda spread by the ruling party in state-owned media. i survived the “rainbow night,” poland’s own stonewall moment in summer 2020, when police arrested around 50 queer activists following the arrest of margo, a nonbinary activist. i survived the "lgbt-free zones," the targeted violence, the slurs from strangers on the street, and the protests i held against queerphobia. it was hard as fuck, but i survived.

but just because i survived, it doesn’t mean others did. many women died because of the abortion ban—marta, justyna, izabela, dorota, joanna, maria, and many others who didn’t survive pis’s draconian anti-abortion laws. milo, kacper, michał, zuzia (she was 12), wiktor, and other queer and trans kids and young adults took their own lives because of the relentless queerphobia.

despite all of this, our experience in poland can serve as a guide now. here are some tips for staying safe and how we, polish queers and women, organized under the regime:

safety first, always. if you know someone who’s had an abortion, no you don’t. if you know someone is trans, no you don’t. if you know people who help with safe abortions, no you don’t—at least not until you know it’s 100% safe to share. if you are queer or have had an abortion, only share this with people you trust fully. most importantly, not everyone has to be an activist just because they’re part of a minority. if it feels unsafe to share that you're queer, trans, etc., then don’t. it doesn’t make you any less queer.

use secure, encrypted messaging like signal for conversations on potentially risky topics, such as queerness, abortion, organizing counter-actions, protests—anything that might be used against you.

stay anonymous online. if you want to research or report something without surveillance, do not use regular internet. get a vpn (mullvad is affordable and reliable), download the tor browser (for both onion and standard links), and if you plan to whistleblow, consider using a riseup email account.

organize and build networks. community is everything now. support each other, foster independence, because your government won’t have your back. set up collectives, grassroots movements. create lists of trusted professionals—lawyers, doctors, etc.—who can offer support.

to lawyers and doctors: please consider pro-bono work. this is what got us through poland’s hardest times. your work will be needed now more than ever.

for protests or risky actions: always write a pro-bono lawyer’s number on your arm with a permanent marker.

get to know the anarchist black cross federation and other resources on safety culture: "Starting an anarchist black cross group: A guide"; Still We Rise - A resource pack for transgender and non-gender conforming people in prison; Safe OUTside the system by the Audre Lorde Project;

for safe abortion info or involvement: get familiar with womenhelpwomen.

stay radical, stay strong, stay informed: The Anarchist Library

if i forgot to (or didn't) include something, don't hesitate to reblog this post with other resources.

[velvetvexations]

watching this "passing" conversation on my dash has me thinking about hannah gadsby, a butch lesbian, who tells a story in her memoir-y standup special nanette about being mistaken for a man (specifically, "a faggot") by a guy threatening her on on the street, and when he realized she wasn't, he changed tack to calling her a "lady faggot", and attacked her anyway.

trans men don't revert back to being cis women in the eyes of transphobes when we don't pass. we become lady-faggots.

i know asking for compassion from TRFs is a waste of time, but at this point i'd take the simple acknowledgement of reality that to transphobes, we're all faggots and lady-faggots. the othering of anyone who doesn't conform to gender standards isn't fucking exclusive to trans women.

this whole conversation is so baffling, because it involves arguing that passing as a women is profoundly, exorbitantly difficult, and simultaneously that anyone afab can effortlessly do so at any time regardless of gender or presentation.

like, fuck's sake, these are the same people who constantly describe us by our height, our voices, our hair, our genitals, whatever feature of gender non-conformity they find most cringe or demonstrative of our moral failing at the time. they fucking know what we (at least, some of us) look like!

and yet. and yet. apparently we're all hypermasculine passing men, or indistinguishable from cis women. the transphobia is fucking galling, particularly coming from people who should by all rights understand the fucking struggle.

It's wild because people will insist trans women are not seen as men because they aren't treated like men, but then turn around and say trans men are treated exactly like cis women. Like, they'll say "I'm not saying trans people AFAB aren't oppressed at all" but they certainly don't believe transphobia against them exists beyond like, being a bit mean by misgendering them, which these radfems are perfectly happy to do themselves like with Thicced-Witch or in more subtle ways like screaming like a toddler to get to use a slur that refers to AGAB.

[genderqueerdykes]

if you are a trans man or masc, masculine nonbinary, genderqueer, genderfluid or other gender non conforming identity, masc gay, a bear, a butch, stud, or boi, or other masculine queer person and don't feel welcome in any queer spaces, you're not alone.

the communities both irl and online have become EXTREMELY hostile toward mascs and men to the point of straight up excluding us and changing their wording to justify their violent exclusion. from renaming nonbinary spaces to "femme & them" and "she+" spaces, to telling men & mascs that they would "Scare" the women and "nonbinary" folks just by being there, as if masculinity and manhood are inherently traumatizing to be around.

masculine and male nonbinary folks have it so hard- most nonbinary spaces are almost definitely women's spaces who also conflate womanhood with nonbinaryhood, and often times just view nonbinary people as confused women. we are not inherently traumatizing to be around: masc enbies need places to go. we are still nonbinary and still trans and still queer for fucks' sake

nonbinary has never and will never mean femme or woman-adjacent inherently. nonbinary means what it means: people who don't or refuse to adhere to the gender binary, regardless of what side it is. masculinity is included in this, femininity is not the only way to be nonbinary.

masc queers do not have to bend over backwards to try to be more feminine and thus "less threatening" in order to have places to go. that's dysphoric and just inaccurate to a lot of queer folks' identity and presentation. it blows my mind because it makes no sense, anyway, even within the gay community, hypermasculinity has been present and even sought after by some people who find it very attractive, twunks, hunks, bears... but between the periods in queer history people started viewing masc gay leathermen and kinksters as the ones who were responsible for spreading AIDS and thus removing them from pride parades,

AND the lesbian separatism moment picking up to remove butches & male & masc lesbians from lesbian spaces identity, paving the way for modern rdical femniism, we've only entered a downhill landslide of hating men and mascs and ultimately trying to erase us from the queer community entirely.

the queer community is not the "women & femmes community". the queer experience is broad and vast, it includes a wide variety of masculine and male experiences, as well as genderfluid, multigender, completely ungendered and other gendered experiences. the lesbian, trans, bisexual, nonbinary, gay and general queer communities aren't the "safe place to hide from men & mascs community" like estranged rdfems and terfpilled trans folk like to tell you they are.

this is the QUEER community and it includes ALL forms of queerness, masc, femme, butch, male, neutral, bigender, neutral, and all. he/shes and he/hims and he/theys and he/its and so on are just as much of a part of this communities as she/hers and they/thems. you can't cast a blanket of "inherently abusive" over all men and mascs and one of "inherently abused/incapable of being abusive" over all women and femmes because that just traps you in a fantasy land that doesn't exist AND it prevents mascs and men from getting the help, resources and community they NEED.

men & mascs are hurt and abused by women & femmes every day and we refuse to speak about them because we live under a white cisheteronormal patriarchy and have complaints about how that functions. the complaints are legitimate but assuming that all men and mascs are oppressing all women and femmes and that women can never be oppressive is a false as hell narrative that actively damages people.

enough is enough. this mindset is hurting people. it's leaving masc and male queers to be estranged, harmed and even dead. i care about you if you're being affected by this mentality and these behaviors. you deserve community, safety, and a sense of belonging, you do belong, even if we struggle to form our own spaces due to unjust hatred. we will do our best to band together and keep each other safe. we must

[skys-archive]

I think in honor of pride month and also in general forever we should stop trying fit queer people into the identities we think they should call themselves.

And I know no one is going to see this because no one ever does but I'm going to talk about it anyway because this is important.

Bisexual doesn't mean you don't date trans people, it doesn't mean you like men and women, it doesn't mean you can't have a preference. Someone can identify as polysexual or bisexual or omnisexual and have no preference and you don't get to say that that means they're pansexual. Because no, if they don't identify as pansexual then they're not pansexual.

Transmasc doesn't mean you use he/him pronouns. It doesn't mean you identify as a man. Transfem doesn't mean you use she/her pronouns. It doesn't mean you identify as a woman. You can be nonbinary or genderqueer or agender or any gender that isn't binary and not use they/them pronouns. You can use any of those labels and still identify as a man or a woman. You can use different pronouns than is typically used for your birth sex and not consider yourself transgender. People can be gender non conforming and not he trans. People can be trans and not gender non conforming.

A trans man can be fem. A trans woman can be masc. Nonbinary people don't owe you androgyny. Intersex people don't owe you androgyny. Intersex people are people, they deserve way more attention than a way to one up transphobes. Intersex people face discrimination and body altering surgeries without their consent and then are only ever talked about to say "some cis women have penises" or "some people have an extra x chromosome" and then we never talk about the struggle they face as part of the queer community.

Asexuality and aromanticism is a spectrum. Some aces like sex, some aces are repulsed, some aces only experience sexual attraction to one person or once in their life, some aces need a deep emotional bond, some aces their attraction changes. Some aros change identities. Some aros are repulsed by romance unless it's a fictional character. Some aros have romantic feelings until they get to know someone. Some aros crave a romantic relationship but never have romantic feelings. You don't get to say someone isn't asexual or aromantic enough.

Asexuality and aromanticism is having a unique relationship with romance or sexual feelings and impulses. Someone who is transgender has a unique experience with gender. You don't get to decide that they don't have a unique experience. But guess what? You don't get to decide if they do either. Someone can have a unique experience and still not identify as asexual aromantic or transgender. You can cross dress and still fully feel like a man. You can use he/him pronouns as a cis women. You can have trauma around sex and not identify as asexual. You can never have a romantic relationship and not identify as aromantic.

You can have "contradicting" labels. I don't know as many of these because I don't personally identify as any but please fell welcome to add in reblogs. There are trans men lesbians and gay women. There are sex loving asexuals. I know there are others I just genuinely am not educated enough.

YOU DONT GET TO CHOOSE SOMEONES LABELS

ANYONE CAN EITHER IDENTIFY OR NOT IDENTIFY AS QUEER

Please feel welcome to add anything in reblogs. I'm sure there's things I've missed. I haven't talked about neopronouns I haven't talked enough about "contradicting" labels. I haven't talked about queer platonic relationships or kink or polyamory or enough about intersex people or pronouns vs gender. There's so much important things but at the end of the day it's just so important to not choose other people's labels.

[andy-wm]

How to speak without words

a simple guide, by Jikook

This post is all about context, so for context 31 March is Trans Day of Visibility.

Its a day be your authetic and true self and to show the world that trans people exist.

I'm also going to use it as an opportunity to talk about something that comes up over and over, especially with Jimin & JK.

How do we share our story if we can't speak directly?

In the spaces around Jimin & Junkgook, there's a lot of discussion about the messages they are or aren't sending.

For some people these messages aren't significant enough to validate or even to make them wonder. They don't see the broader context or the cumulative effect of the many small moments. Its easy to dismiss it all as isolated incidents.

But for those of us who are seeing the whole picture, nothing is lost or ignored or dismissed.

We understand how these small moments fit together to create a complex story because we see the wider context. They are individual threads in the tapestry of their lives.

When JK goes live on Weverse on White Day wearing a white shirt and not much else and has a drink with ARMY, and we know Jimin is not around, we get what's happening. When Jimin posts a photo of the two of them wearing white on White Day, he doesnt need to say anything else.

When JK sends a thirst trap birthday message for Jimin and ends it with a clunky 'happy birthday bro', we know why.

When he uses the sign language for love on a stage in front of the whole world and directs it at Jimin, we see what hes doing.

When Jungkook presents himself as the vampiric stereotype - lusting for the forbidden - in his photo folio and Jimin parallels this with his own mythic themes and darkly sensual imagery in the same project, we can't misunderstand the symbolism.

When Jimin says "hurry up and be me soon", when he presents feminine for one concept and masculine for the next, when he stands on the Miss Dior red carpet in a cape and full face of make-up but with his bloodied knuckles on full display, we can't pretend we don't see it.

When Jimin & Jungkook wear matching outfits, even even when they're not together...

When they publicly conform to couple stereotypes - off stage and outside of BTS...

We know. We see it all as a single woven story and we know.

And like any truly committed couple, they're there for each other in good times and bad. They celebrate their successes, comfort each other, and stick together when times get tough.

And no, they've never verbally confirmed or denied. The context of their lives makes any such declaration incredibly difficult, if not impossible. Regardless, they owe no explanation. But being so visible would be confirmation enough for almost any other couple to be acknowledged.

They tell us over and over who they are.

Showing so undeniably that they are always there for each other is more than enough, honestly. If you can accept all the things you cannot see, how can you look at these two and not see love?

💜💛

That's essentially what the Trans Day of Visibility is about.

Showing that you exist.

Being seen and believed.

You don't needs to make a speech or an announcement. You can if you want to of course. You can go to a rally if you want to be with the trans community, and in the current political climate that might be safer if you want to be seen.

Maybe you just want to drop a hint ... iykyk

But you don't have to be seen at all if you choose not to...

Shout out to all the trans, gender diverse, gender questioning, and gender non-conforming humans in the world and all our allies and supporters too.

On this year's Trans Day of Visibility, I understand more than ever why people might prefer to remain invisible. It's dangerous out there.

Nevertheless, celebrate yourself today and every day. Being authentic and living your life as your genuine self in a way that makes you happy is your right.

If you aren't there yet, take your time, be brave where you can but be safe, and know that you are amazing.

Trans right are human rights.

And in case it's needed, here's a message for the haters: You will never win. We've always been here and we will always be here. Just like every other human, we belong here too 🏳️‍⚧️

[alyakthedorklord]

Back on my genderfuck batcryptid shit (this doesn’t make ANY sense whatsoever)

Some reporter, after a Justice League fight with a villain that happened to be gender non-conforming, being rude about trans ppl, trying to get a comment from the justice league, steamrolling past any and all niceties and no comments, Superman about to pop into a rant that Batman just KNOWS will be twisted out of context and turn into a PR nightmare.

So Batman chooses not to anger, but confuse.

Batman, in his deep gravelly voice: “So I’m a woman then?”

Reporter: “…what?”

Batman, either trans or lying: “you just defined a woman as being capable of carrying a child. I have the biological capability to bear young. Does that make me a woman?”

Some other reporter: “But your name is BatMAN.”

Batman, going all in on the cryptid thing: “Gotham named me. I am partially of the species ‘man.’ Gender is irrelevant to the name. I suppose my womb makes me a woman then.”

Reporter: “I… yes? Yes. Women have wombs. Men have dicks.”

Batman: “Oh. I also have a Dick.”

(Robin falls over cackling)

Reporter: “You what?”

Batman: “What does that make me?”

Wonder Woman, rolling with the punches while the rest of the JL are either confused or trying not to laugh: “Whatever you feel you are, my fellow warrior. Tell me, would you rather I refer to you with She/her? As a shield sister? Or they/them?”

Transphobic reporter, squawking in horror:

Green Lantern, supporting the bit: “We can call you Batwoman!”

Batman: “I would be honored to be referred to as your sister. I do not care what you refer to me as, but I have become used to he/him. And I am keeping Batman. It is the name Gotham gave me. I will not change it for my genitals.”

Transphobic Reporter, pissed now: “But you’re a woman!”

Batman, nodding: “So you have explained. Tell me- when I grow too old to bear young, will I become a man? Is that why it’s called menopause?”

(Robin sits up and cheers)

[triaelf9]

Just a lil post about Taash and how I'm feeling about how ppl are reacting to them as someone who relates to them very strongly not only on the gender journey front, but also on the mom-issues front.

Cut for length b/c of course this won't actually be a "little" post lol

So I hear a lot of "Taash is too young" "Taash acts like a child" "Taash is too brash" "Taash has wildly binary views of the world" "Taash is thinks their reality is the world's reality" etc etc etc

And I'm here to say that as someone who realized that non-binary was a thing later in life, grew up trying to be them, but society was not only unwelcoming to that, but openly hostile at points, with a mom who had totally different interests, who very much wanted to protect them from the outside world to a point where it left them unprepared to deal with nuances of the world, etc, a mom who thought they were "just doing their best" but was never meant to be a mom, and never wanted to be a mom, didn't have the tools for mom-hood, who wanted to protect their child, but had no real idea how, and how every comment turned into the mom trying to steer her kid the right way, but just came out as a dig or a "you're not good enough" remark, AND looking after your mom in a world that is wholly unsuited to her, that she can't really adapt to and fit into, and kinda becoming her mom to a point so that your life completely revolves around her until you leave home?

Yeah. I get Taash. It's actually kinda freaky how, fantasy elements aside, I get Taash on a frightening level. (aside from the dragon stuff, we're both the same with that HELL YEAH DRAGONS)

Taash doesn't read young to me because I've always read young because of how I was raised. I didn't get the chance to figure myself out until I left home. I also had the benefit of being able to leave for college at a younger age, and got a chance to experience things away from my mom earlier. But seeing things in such a binary way, that's how it is when you're protected like that.

You don't want to admit how similar you are to how your mom sees the world, b/c she sees it in one way, and as you go through life, you get to learn differently. You come out of this situation INCREDIBLY judgmental at first. Why aren't THESE things conforming to MY reality. You come across as brash and childish. And when you get treated as such, it's triggering b/c that's how your mom treats you.

You hate how you look, you think you look like a freak b/c your mom is constantly commenting on your appearance. She does it out of love (she wants you to be healthy & not mocked by your peers) but she doesn't consider that constantly telling you not to look a certain way does damage. My self confidence only recovered in my thirties. I'm 4 days from my 38th birthday, and it took getting pregnant to finally be like "you know what, I don't hate myself & my body" which is MASSIVE for me.

So where do we get our self confidence? In things we enjoy, in hyperfocuses that we're good at. For me that's comics, naginata, fantasy & DA lore lol XD For Taash it's dragons, fighting, and working out. And when we falter there, it's devastating b/c it's the only way we can feel good about ourselves b/c our SELVES are disconnected and tucked away b/c they make us feel bad.

So I totally get how Taash reads to people. The autism aspects are more like my wife (who is autistic & has issues with social cues, while I'm HYPER AWARE of social stuff which fuels my anxiety b/c of the type of person my mom was and how I had to look after her), but I get it.

But it makes me sad when I hear people dunk on Taash as "bad writing" and "unrealistic" and "annoying" and it's like...is that how you see people like that? Is that how you see me and people like my wife? I feel like people aren't willing to look deeper so often (an issue with all the companions tbh & some day I'll have to get into my Davrin feels b/c BOY do I have them. Neve too, WHOOF) but I feel like if you do that in a game, I hope you don't do that irl.

anyway TLDR this is a Taash defense post b/c while they have a lot of issues, stuff they need to work out & have wrong opinions on stuff, they're growing, they're learning & they have to do it later than most. They're an incredibly complicated character with tons of nuance, and I can't wait to get deeper into their story and banter with companions in round 2 of my playthroughs, and then again in round 3

Sorry this is too long, and I'm sure not all of this was intended when they were written, but this is how it all clicked with me as someone who has lived a large portion of that stuff. Like, again, I'm nearly fucking FOURTY and I don't feel like I should be there yet b/c I started so far back. It ALSO doesn't help that ADHD wild child I was, I was held back in preschool b/c neurodivergence also makes a kid read younger, AND the choice to have me be the youngest in the class would have been a very bad one. So I'm older than most of my peers BUT I've always read younger, felt younger, and have had a sore spot when it comes to all that.

Thank you for coming to my Taash Talk, I'll be here all week to think about more stuff, including how their body makes them read as lady, and they're not sure how to feel about that, but they don't want to CHANGE it, but is it right?

ANYWHO this is why Taash is a fascinating character & deserves better than to be regulated to "annoying kid"

[rrcraft-and-lore]

In addition to my Monkey Man post from earlier, the always kind & sweet Aparna Verma (author of The Phoenix King, check it out) asked that I do a thread on Hijras, & more of the history around them, South Asia, mythology (because that's my thing), & the positive inclusion of them in Monkey Man which I brought up in my gushing review.

Hijra: They are the transgender, eunuch, or intersex people in India who are officially recognized as the third sex throughout most countries in the Indian subcontinent. The trans community and history in India goes back a long way as being documented and officially recognized - far back as 12th century under the Delhi Sultanate in government records, and further back in our stories in Hinduism. The word itself is a Hindi word that's been roughly translated into English as "eunuch" commonly but it's not exactly accurate.

Hijras have been considered the third sex back in our ancient stories, and by 2014 got official recognition to identify as the third gender (neither male or female) legally. Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, and India have accepted: eunuch, trans, intersex people & granted them the proper identification options on passports and other government official documents.

But let's get into some of the history surrounding the Hijra community (which for the longest time has been nomadic, and a part of India's long, rich, and sometimes, sadly, troubled history of nomadic tribes/people who have suffered a lot over the ages. Hijras and intersex people are mentioned as far back as in the Kama Sutra, as well as in the early writings of Manu Smriti in the 1st century CE (Common Era), specifically said that a third sex can exist if possessing equal male and female seed.

This concept of balancing male/female energies, seed, and halves is seen in two places in South Asian mythos/culture and connected to the Hijra history.

First, we have Aravan/Iravan (romanized) - who is also the patron deity of the transgender community. He is most commonly seen as a minor/village deity and is depicted in the Indian epic Mahabharata. Aravan is portrayed as having a heroic in the story and his self-sacrifice to the goddess Kali earns him a boon.

He requests to be married before his death. But because he is doomed to die so shortly after marriage, no one wants to marry him.

No one except Krishna, who adopts his female form Mohini (one of the legendary temptresses in mythology I've written about before) and marries him. It is through this union of male, and male presenting as female in the female form of Mohini that the seed of the Hijras is said to begun, and why the transgender community often worships Aravan and, another name for the community is Aravani - of/from Aravan.

But that's not the only place where a gender non conforming divine representation can be seen. Ardhanarishvara is the half female form of lord Shiva, the destroyer god.

Shiva combines with his consort Parvarti and creates a form that represents the balancing/union between male/female energies and physically as a perfectly split down the middle half-male half-female being. This duality in nature has long been part of South Asian culture, spiritual and philosophical beliefs, and it must be noted the sexuality/gender has often been displayed as fluid in South Asian epics and the stories. It's nothing new.

Many celestial or cosmic level beings have expressed this, and defied modern western limiting beliefs on the ideas of these themes/possibilities/forms of existence.

Ardhanarishvara signifies "totality that lies beyond duality", "bi-unity of male and female in God" and "the bisexuality and therefore the non-duality" of the Supreme Being.

Back to the Hijra community.

They have a complex and long history. Throughout time, and as commented on in the movie, Monkey Man, the Hijra community has faced ostracization, but also been incorporated into mainstream society there. During the time of the Dehli Sultanate and then later the Mughal Empire, Hijras actually served in the military and as military commanders in some records, they were also servants for wealthy households, manual laborers, political guardians, and it was seen as wise to put women under the protection of Hijras -- they often specifically served as the bodyguards and overseers of harems. A princess might be appointed a Hijra warrior to guard her.

But by the time of British colonialism, anti-Hijra laws began to come in place folded into laws against the many nomadic tribes of India (also shown in part in Monkey Man with Kid (portrayed by Dev Patel) and his family, who are possibly

one of those nomadic tribes that participated in early theater - sadly by caste often treated horribly and relegated to only the performing arts to make money (this is a guess based on the village play they were performing as no other details were given about his family).

Hijras were criminalized in 1861 by the Indian Penal Code enforced by the British and were labeled specifically as "The Hijra Problem" -- leading to an anti-Hijra campaign across the subcontinent with following laws being enacted: punishing the practices of the Hijra community, and outlawing castration (something many Hijra did to themselves). Though, it should be noted many of the laws were rarely enforced by local Indian officials/officers. But, the British made a point to further the laws against them by later adding the Criminal Tribes Act in 1871, which targeted the Hijra community along with the other nomadic Indian tribes - it subjected them to registration, tracking/monitoring, stripping them of children, and their ability to sequester themselves in their nomadic lifestyle away from the British Colonial Rule.

Today, things have changed and Hijras are being seen once again in a more positive light (though not always and this is something Monkey Man balances by what's happened to the community in a few scenes, and the heroic return/scene with Dev and his warriors). All-hijra communities exist and sort of mirror the western concept of "found families" where they are safe haven/welcoming place trans folks and those identifying as intersex.

These communities also have their own secret language known as Hijra Farsi, which is loosely based on Hindi, but consists of a unique vocabulary of at least 1,000 words.

As noted above, in 2014, the trans community received more legal rights.

Specifically: In April 2014, Justice K. S. Radhakrishnan declared transgender to be the third gender in Indian law in National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India.

Hijras, Eunuchs, apart from binary gender, be treated as "third gender" for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of our Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament and the State Legislature. Transgender persons' right to decide their self-identified gender is also upheld and the Centre and State Governments are directed to grant legal recognition of their gender identity such as male, female or as third gender.

I've included some screenshots of (some, not all, and certainly not the only/definitive reads) books people can check out about SOME of the history. Not all again. This goes back ages and even our celestial beings/creatures have/do display gender non conforming ways.

There are also films that touch on Hijra history and life. But in regards to Monkey Man, which is what started this thread particularly and being asked to comment - it is a film that positively portrayed India's third sex and normalized it in its depiction. Kid the protagonist encounters a found family of Hijras at one point in the story (no spoilers for plot) and his interactions/acceptance, living with them is just normal. There's no explaining, justifying, anything to/for the audience. It simply is. And, it's a beautiful arc of the story of Kid finding himself in their care/company.

[crossdreamers]

Norwegian Conservatives defend the use of the Pride flag against proposed ban in schools

The Norwegian Christian People's Party wants to ban the Pride flag in public schools. The Conservative Party wants to protect the rainbow flag.

For an American trying to get to grips with the Norwegian party landscape the Norwegian right wing may be more than a little confusing.

At the moment there are no less than four parties that might be designated as "conservative": The Conservative Party (Høyre), the Christian People's Party (KrF) and The Progress Party (Fremskrittspartiet) are all considered right wing. There is also the Center Party (Senterpartiet), which pretends to be centrist, but is in fact a right wing, rural, populist party.

Supporters of the centrist Conservative Party would normally fit well within the Democratic Party in the US. The Progress Party is a populist anti-immigrant party, but unlike the MAGA movement it is in support of public social welfare (i.e. a strong state).

As far as LGBTQ issues go, they have all claimed that they are pro-LGBTQ, to the point of leaders taking part in Pride parades.

The Christian People's Party moves to the right

The Christian People's Party have, however, for the last few years been gradually moving from the center to the more extreme right and has now adapted what can only be seen as an explicit anti-LGBTQ standpoint.

The party is now in support of banning the use of the Pride flag in public schools. Note that nearly all Norwegian schools are publicly owned.

David Hansen, KrF's first candidate for parliament in Østfold, protested, calling this a "Viktor Orban"-policy. He is right. KrF is clearly trying to gain support by appealing to traditionalist conformity and fear of those outside the cis/het norm, just like Orban.

Dag-Inge Ulstein is moving the Christian People's Party to the right. (Photo: Frilansering CC)

In the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten KrF's leader, Dag-Inge Ulstein, make use of an old right wing populist trick, presenting the Norwegian flag as a symbol uniting all the people of Norway. In other words: There is no need for a Pride flag, which only causes confusion and uncertainty.

He tries to connect the Pride flag to the main Norwegian LGBTQ-organization Fri, which is supporting "surrogacy, liberalization of gender reassignment and abolition of the sex purchase law." Since Fri is political, the flag becomes political, as Ulstein sees it.

In other words: The Norwegian flag is not political, because it apparently represents values KrF, a political party, can stand behind, while the Pride flag should be banned in schools, because it is political.

Politics are political, and fighting for social inclusion of marginalized groups has been the explicit goal of all Norwegian governments for decades.

The last time a party tried to appeal to some kind of national unity "outside politics" in Norway, was Vidkun Quisling's National Unity Party (Nasjonal samling) in the 1930s. Quisling is not a good role model for any democratic party.

Politicians support the use of the rainbow flag

As far as we can see, representatives for most of the other Norwegian parties have criticized KrF for this move.

Alexander Papas of the Socialist Left Party says:

"Removing the pride flag from schoolyards is not creating peace. It is giving in to the forces that want to make queer people invisible – and who would rather see them as non-existent."

Julianne Ferskaug of the Liberals says:

"In many countries we are now seeing how human rights are being undermined, and queer people are being used as scapegoats in a larger political game. Making the safety of queer youth a political issue is harmful and protects no one."

Frøya Skjold of the Green Party (Miljøpartiet De Grønne) also supports the use of the flag in schools.

Anti-LGBTQ tendencies

We have not found a response to the proposal from the populist Progress Party yet, but last year local representatives united with the Marxist Red Party (Rødt) in order to ban the use of the Pride flag in Oslo. The Progress Party has supported a ban of the public use of the Pride flag in several municipalities.

The Center Party's MP Jenny Klinge, a Norwegian TERF, has promoted policies similar to the one of KrF. However, the party officially supports "initiatives and plans aimed at increasing acceptance of LGBT+ people in all communities and strengthening efforts against hate crime."

Conservative support of the Pride flag

For Americans it might be interesting to see how Tina Bru, deputy leader of the Conservative Party, addresses the KrF proposal.

Tina Bru (Photo: Hans Kristian Thorbjørnsen CC)

Bru argues that children do not need protection from love and tolerance but rather from intolerance, hatred, and rhetoric that fuels discriminatory attitudes.

She brings up the 2022 homophobic and transphobic terrorist attack in Oslo, as well as other incidents of hate crimes against LGBTQ+ individuals, including attacks, bullying, and exclusion faced by queer children and teenagers in Norway.

She emphasizes the importance of schools being safe spaces for all students, especially those who may already feel marginalized.

Bru argues that banning the Pride flag sends a harmful message to children who have same-sex parents or are struggling with their identity.

She refutes claims that exposure to LGBTQ+ themes would influence children’s sexual orientation, stressing that inclusion fosters respect rather than changes identity:

"No one becomes queer because they see a rainbow flag waving. No one becomes queer from learning that we should treat everyone with respect. No one becomes queer from including queer love in the community."

She expresses frustration that the same debate surfaces every year, with opponents spreading conspiracy theories about the Pride movement. She maintains that the flag represents freedom, safety, and the right to love without fear.:

"It is not an option for my children to grow up in a society where we were unable to stand against the forces that want to hide all colors."

Americans conservatives could learn a lot from the real conservatives of Norway.

[polysucks]

Arya "I'm not a boy!!!!" Stark vs Brienne "doesn't correct a stranger who misgenders her" of Tarth. One of these characters is trans and gee whizz I wonder which it could be.

(Additionally jaime is a gay bottom who just wants to be tenderly pegged by Brienne)

Cw for a cis-woman talking about gender lol

I want to touch on the idea that Brienne might be an egg, but I have to disagree. I want to preface by saying don’t inherently oppose anyone who thinks otherwise. Art can be interpreted subjectively, especially in ASOIAF. Everyone can have their views, and I love that.

That being said, I'm approaching this discussion about Brienne and Arya and their gender identities from the perspective of a cis-woman, so trans and gender non-conforming people, feel free to weigh in! I just have one perspective, and how else do we learn about others' experiences if we don't make time and space for others to share theirs?

Also, this might sound a bit TERF-y on a surface level, so let me say upfront: TERFs, get lost. We can discuss femininity and gender without TERF opinions, because TERF opinions don’t matter. Trans women are real women. Trans men are real men.

It’s easy to understand why some might believe that their struggles are rooted in gender identity—but that doesn’t necessarily mean the argument holds water.

I personally feel like it's dismissive of exploring gender identity as a deeply personal experience and reductive to assume that anyone who doesn’t fit neatly into gender norms must actually be trans. gender-non-comforming cis people exist because gender is a social construct.

It makes total and complete sense why someone might perceive Brienne and Arya as struggling with their gender identity, and I am not here to deny that! They do not fit into traditional femininity, they are often mistaken for boys, and they are both deeply frustrated by the roles imposed on them.

But assigning transness or gender dysphoria to them without deeper critical thinking feels like a reach that flattens their very real struggles as cis-women in such a strict society. Their battle is not one of personal identity—it’s one of a rigid community refusing to acknowledge them as women on their own terms.

That being said, there is beauty in seeing oneself in them. If a trans or gender-nonconforming person finds kinship in their struggles, that is valid and meaningful. The power of storytelling is that we see ourselves in narratives, even when the struggles and experiences depicted do not perfectly align with our own.

I feel the same way about the Northmen and the Starks being NDN/Indigenous-coded—it is not explicit canon, but the cultural parallels are undeniable. Westerosi gender roles are stricter in the South, while Northern culture—like many Indigenous cultures—allows for a broader understanding of strength, womanhood, and survival.

Brienne and Arya’s journeys are universal in that way. They do not have to be trans or gender-nonconforming to be relatable to those who are. But at their core, their stories are about expanding the definition of womanhood, not escaping it.

That being said, let's fuckin YAP!!

Brienne and Arya: Women on Their Own Terms

They Are Women Rejected by Society—Not by Themselves

Brienne and Arya defy Westerosi femininity, but their conflict is not with their own gender—it’s with a world that refuses to accept women who do not conform.

They do not reject being women. They reject the restrictions placed on them as women.

Their struggles are external, not internal—it is society that refuses to acknowledge their strength, not themselves.

Brienne's silence on misgendering is not gender dysphoria—it is indifference to the opinions of those who diminish her. She does not waste energy correcting people who already dismiss her. As for Podrick, he is not questioning her gender, only how to respectfully refer to her.

Arya, similarly, never expresses a desire to be a boy—only frustration that being a girl limits her. She says it herself in ACOK

“I don’t want to be a lady,” Arya flared. “I want to learn to fight.”

Wanting to fight does not mean she is not a girl—it means she resents that Westeros restricts girls. When she disguises herself as “Arry,” it is not because she feels like a boy but because it keeps her alive.

Being Mistaken for a Man Does Not Mean They Identify as One

Neither Brienne nor Arya (i mean, she does generally, but not whole-heartedly) corrects misgendering because it serves a purpose in their survival—but it does not define them.

Brienne is called "Ser" because she is a knight. She does not correct it because she knows Westeros will never see her as a proper lady anyway. But she never expresses a desire to be a man—only to be respected.

Arya disguises herself as a boy out of necessity. The moment she no longer needs the disguise, she drops it. She never claims she feels like a boy—only that Westeros treats girls as weak.

At no point do either of them wish to stop being women. Their struggle is not about escaping womanhood—it’s about expanding what womanhood can be.

Brienne, in particular, wants to be both a knight and a woman. Her inner conflict is not about identity, but about a world that refuses to allow her to be both.

They Do Not Seek to Escape Womanhood—They Seek to Redefine It

Brienne and Arya challenge Westerosi femininity without discarding it. They prove that womanhood is not fragile—it can be strong, honorable, and defiant.

Brienne does not wish to be a man—she wishes knighthood wasn’t exclusive to them. She embodies the ideals of knighthood more than most men, proving that a woman can live by the same code.

Arya does not wish to be a boy—she wishes being a girl didn’t mean powerlessness. She does not reject her gender; she rejects society’s expectations of it.

Their fight is not against being women—it is against a world that refuses to acknowledge that women can be more than one thing.

The Stark and Northern Perspective: Strength and Womanhood Can Coexist

Westerosi gender roles are stricter in the South, where women like Sansa are expected to conform to delicate, ornamental femininity. The North, however, values survival, strength, and practicality—traits Arya naturally embodies.

Among Indigenous-coded Northern families like House Mormont, warrior women are not questioned:

Maege Mormont and her daughters fight without forfeiting their womanhood. They are warriors, leaders, and mothers, all at once.

Arya fits into this tradition. She does not need to abandon her gender to be a warrior—she simply needs a culture that recognizes warrior women exist.

In many Indigenous cultures, gender roles exist but are flexible—some women are suited for battle, others for domestic life, and both are necessary. This aligns with Arya's arc: she does not need to be a boy to fight. She only needs a world where warrior women are possible.

Survival Shapes How They Are Perceived—Not How They See Themselves

Both Arya and Brienne are mistaken for boys, but their responses are pragmatic, not existential.

Brienne does not correct people who call her “Ser” because she knows it won’t change how they see her. She is resigned to being seen as "unnatural," so she leans into her strength rather than fighting a losing battle over perception. She wants respect, not pity.

Arya actively disguises herself as a boy because it keeps her alive. She knows that if people recognize her as a highborn girl, she will be kidnapped, sold, or killed. The disguise is a survival tactic, not a reflection of her identity.

Neither of them struggles with who they are—they struggle with how the world treats them.

They Are Women Who Break Barriers, Not Women Who Break Away from Womanhood

Brienne and Arya are not trans, nor are they struggling with gender identity. They are women who refuse to conform to narrow standards.

Brienne does not wish to be a man—she wishes men would accept that women are more than single-minded expectations

Arya does not wish to be a boy—she wishes Westeros would stop treating girls as helpless and with only one lot in life

Their battle is not with their own gender but with a world that refuses to see them as full people based on their identified gender. That is what makes them powerful.

And if trans or GNC individuals see themselves in them? That is a testament to their strength and their pride in their existence as it is.

Representation in fiction can be deeply personal, even when it isn’t literal.

That is the beauty of storytelling—there is room for all of us in it.

[spiderfreedom]

I honestly owe detrans people, and especially detrans women, so much, because reading about their experiences has taught me a lot about... well, everything? About myself and my own trauma re: femaleness, autism. About the factors that lead people to transition. About resilience and moving forward and making a life for yourself in a world where there's no space for you.

Some of my favorite writings from detrans people:

somenuancepls (Michelle Alava, active on substack) has multiple great posts, especially on resilience and growth for detrans people. I recommend "Actually I was just crazy the whole time" (on the mindset that leads medical transition to be viewed as a panacea), "We Shouldn't Have to Be Here" (on how detrans people are expected to act as martyrs) and "Let's Talk About How We Talk About Detransition" (on how to ethically and compassionately talk about transition and detransition without harming (de)/transitioners).

destroyyourbinder (no longer active) has so many amazing posts that I really can't list them all, but "Unriddling the Sphinx: Autism and the Magnetism of Gender Transition" was genuinely revelatory for me as a gender non-conforming autistic woman. (It also kinda sent me spiraling for a few days so if you are also an autistic gnc, read with caution)

funkypsyche has been writing a lot about 'woke' culture in a way I don't agree with, but "The Archetypal FTM Sensitive, Quirky, Artistic Weird Girls" (on the type of people attracted to transmasc identification and the ways society fails them - do you see also see yourself in this list?) is a good read. As a supplement, there is "The History of Tumblr: Gender and Woke Indoctrination, Video Essay", and if you can get through the parts about, well, 'woke indoctrination', it provides a perspective on tumblr and its relationship to mental illness and gender. You do not realize how much mental illness is normalized and glorified on tumblr until you see someone explaining it from the outside and you go "huh, I did not realize that happens and that I do that, too..."

Max Robinson wrote "Detransition: Beyond, Before, and After", the only academic text on detransition to my knowledge. An in depth view on factors influencing transition such as lesbophobia, and the relationship between gender dysphoria and body dysmorphia and how the latter is treated as frivolous and vain while the former is treated as profound and serious.

And there are a lot of tweets I've collected I can't really link here, there are many detransitioners on Twitter. I really do recommend reading a broad variety of detransitioned people, detrans women and men. Even read people who retrans like CrashChaosChats, who once wrote on detransition but then retransitioned after finding that she was unable to deal with dysphoria. If you actually care about dysphoric people, trans people, and detrans people, you need to read broadly to understand the full range of reasons people transition or detransition or retransition.

Feel free to reblog with your additions of writings by detrans people, or people you follow on Twitter or other social media if they don't have long-form content.

[gay-otlc]

Recently, it seems like there's been a pushback in the trans community against the "typical" trans narrative- someone who always knew they were a [binary gender] trapped in a [other binary gender] body and has always experienced dysphoria and plans to or has transitioned fully and is gender conforming. And there should be pushback against this narrative, because this is far from the only way to be trans! Trans people who don't fit into this way of being trans absolutely deserve recognition and celebration.

However, some members of the trans community sometimes go too far in their attempt to defend and celebrate non-typical trans people, and end up being hostile to trans people who do fit that "typical" narrative.

"Trans people don't have to medically transition!" and "trans people can still present as their assigned gender!" are both true statements, but it's inappropriate and offensive to say this to a trans person to try to change their mind about transitioning, or the way they present. When a trans person says they plan on going on hormones or getting surgery and someone says "Oh, you don't need to do that to be trans :)", it sounds like you are trying to convince them not to transition, which is the exact same thing transphobes do. And while some trans people are comfortable wearing clothes that are traditionally for their assigned gender, many of people have faced a lot of dysphoria and trauma from people forcing them or pressuring them to wear those clothes. "Pronouns don't equal gender!" is a good way to support pronoun non conforming folks, but it should never be used as an excuse to misgender someone, or tell them that they have to think about their pronouns differently. The "born in the wrong body" description of transness is outdated for many, but it resonates with some people, and that doesn't mean they're making the trans community look bad.

All this is to say, there are so so many diverse trans experiences, and we should absolutely make an effort to support trans experiences that differ from the "norm." However, trans people with experiences that do fit the "norm" are often treated as though they are responsible for transmedicalism, or for cis people's misconceptions about transness. This is untrue and an unfair way to treat them. In supporting the diversity of trans experiences, we shouldn't throw any under the bus.

[genderqueerdykes]

hello, i have a question concerning one of your recent posts talking about trans men, ftm and other male or mspec people being lesbians. i mean this in the most respectful way possible, but how could a trans man be a lesbian? isnt the whole point non men loving non men? im sorry if youve got this question before and thanks for answering in advance if you do

i get this question all the time lol but i don't mind answering. thanks for taking the time to ask!

that is radfem rhetoric that you've picked up from other people inadvertently- lesbian does not mean "non man loving non man," as gay does not mean "non woman loving non woman". "gay" is a form of queer attraction, so is lesbian. if we don't define "gay" by who we leave out, why are we doing so with lesbianism? we do not define who we are attracted to by who we leave out, that makes no sense. lesbian is a form of queer attraction that can include as many people as an individual feels is right for them. if we say "non men" to include nonbinary people why are we excluding nonbinary and other trans people who also happen to be men as well? some people are "non men" and men at the same time, so do we exclude them, too, or do we include them?

the logic falls apart instantly the second we remind ourselves that multigender, genderfluid, gender non conforming, genderqueer, (masc) nonbinary, genderfuck and other people who completely break the gender binary. and a lot of them are men and mascs. lesbians should not have to be shoved inside of a cis butch woman - cis femme woman dichotomy and nothing else. we've been tricked into thinking like radfems by viewing "proper" lesbian relationships as relationships between cis lesbians and feminine afab nonbinary lesbians (who are being viewed as cis women in this scenario) and nobody else. we need to allow lesbianism to be diverse, otherwise, we will continue this radfem echo chamber that has been going on for decades!

we must also consider that lesbian is a form of queer attraction, so it can include lots of experiences, just like gay can. nonbinary people, genderqueer people, trans people of all genders can use "gay" how they see fit, whether it means they're attracted to men, women, nonbinary people, intersex people, genderfluid people, and so on. people of all genders are allowed to do the same thing with dyke, sapphic and lesbian as well! the most common useage of the word lesbian is to mean wlw, but that doesn't mean every single lesbian, dyke and sapphic explains it that way. some lesbians, dykes and sapphics experience multiple modes of attraction! some are bi, pan, poly, omni and so on

lesbianism and men are not polar opposites. lesbians can be multigender or genderfluid. lesbians can be transmascs and trans men and guys and boys and men. lesbians can be boydykes and guydykes. many trans men and mascs start out in the lesbian community and find their home there. some find they never stop feeling like lesbians or butches or dykes. there are two-spirit lesbians who are also men. this is totally okay. this sort of thing can hurt intersex lesbians. this kind of thinking can hurt transfem lesbians and lesbian trans women as well if transphobic people consider them "men". we need to stop trying to exclude as many people as we can from lesbianism, and focusing on including people instead. lesbian is not and well not ever be an exclusive term that only applies to women and women only. let's be real, "non men" just means very feminine nonbinary people and ""women-lite"" enbies. this doesn't apply to masc enbies and trans people, because where does the line between "non man" and "man" begin? it doesn't exist

hope that helps! thanks for taking the time to ask! have a wonderful day you can also search the tags on this post on my blog as i talk about this a lot! :) this works best in desktop or in a browser on mobile.

[hadesoftheladies]

Opinion: We Need to Start Talking About Violent Feminist Activism Seriously

while i do not think that females are as violent or would be as violent as males without patriarchal obstruction, i think it's mostly the emasculation of women (female socialization) that leads to this demureness that perpetuates female subjugation. we often frame femininity as something that inhibits consciousness-raising, but it is actually far more frightening and deeper than that. femininity and its practices inhibit female self-worth which in turn causes women to devalue themselves. this is why women are not accustomed to fighting for themselves, like every other animal (male and female) on this earth. women are so used to "lying down and taking it" because it is something they are primed to do. the danger of femininity isn't just that it deforms our bodies or divides us from each other, it is that it physically and mentally disables our ability to fight back.

i have often neglected to mention alternative methods in my separatist posts, but separatism is not the only way we can enact large-scale societal transformation. it is the only nonviolent way.

the truth of the matter is, as much as we make jokes and fantasize about killing men, the reason most women and girls "behave" when it comes to men and men do not "behave" when it comes to women is because women simply aren't feared, despite the fact that we have the power to become a threat. even in feminist circles such as this, talk of women physically harming men is seen as taboo, as something that can be easily used against us. so we have to constantly disclose that we aren't serious. i think this is part of the problem.

the other word for fear is respect. men cannot respect or revere men they do not fear on some level. in a twisted way, in order for women to become human to men, we have to get scary. we have to hold real power over them and become intolerant to them.

this doesn't necessarily have to be done strictly in violent ways. resisting femininity can range from allowing ourselves to frown and even scowl in public, not being hospitable toward men, not complimenting, affirming, validating or cleaning up after them. but the point of combatting female socialization is resisting the role of women in patriarchal society: sexual object, or in other words, victim. it is the victimization of women that men find especially erotic. that's why consensual sex isn't enough for them. they are fuelled by female terror.

in short, gyns, i'm saying the time has come when we should aim to put the fear of god in these bastards. the only way they will view rape as badly as they view cannibalism is if there is a constant looming threat of brutal social castration. they need to fear social punishment, which is difficult because half of society is made up of men that approve. so how can the other half, women, make it so that the other half are afraid to do so?

which brings us, ironically, back to separatism and also gender non-conformity. in order for women to reach a place where we can defend ourselves using violence and not get taken ten steps back for killing/maiming a rapist, pedo, abuser we need women to have access to ironclad female solidarity.

male solidarity is what keeps the status quo intact, and female solidarity is its only worthy counterpoint. the reason patriarchy is so strong is because of female solidarity with males rather than intra-community solidarity. this is the weak point of patriarchy, it's over-dependence on women on a cellular level. society as we know it, patriarchal or not, will fall to shit if women refused to participate in its core structures. literally the only reason children are still being born, raised and schooled in the face of men's destructiveness is because of women. men can destroy as much as they like and a society will still function for the most part because of the resilience of women. literally the biggest economic problems societies face come from male criminality whether from upper or lower class men. the only reason any of it still functions is because of women. women are the glue of the home themselves, the basic unit of society. take women away, and i promise there's nothing fucking left.

for this reason, the biggest de-radicalization tools patriarchy employs against female liberation are marriage/co-habitation with men, femininity and religion and i will get into the details why briefly:

-marriage/co-habitation often results in the woman's isolation from female community or larger society because the man strategically makes himself the central focus/recipient of her resources (health, attention, energy)

-femininity keeps women focused on male approval as a source of power, further encouraging female-female competition and destroying solidairty

-religion and romance are explicitly androcentric, focusing on framing men as the only possible givers of life, purpose, fulfillment and meaning to women while simultaneously demeaning, obscuring and devaluing the fact that women are oftentimes the primary sources of human life and love

now see that all three do three very important things for de-radicalization: they frame men as sources of life, meaning and vitality as opposed to a threat or disadvantage, isolates women from their true selves (devaluing their friendships, erasing their history and contributions, distorting their nature), and pits women against each other. to sum up, centering men and then erasing and isolating women from each other and themselves.

but we won't scare men by psyching ourselves out of what's going to be necessary to defend ourselves. in order for women to be mobilized to take power men have no authority to deny them, we have to cultivate strong, nearly unbreakable self-esteem. we need to esteem ourselves so highly that we never question whether or not we should feel entitled to a better life.

that's why refusing to emasculate yourself is the first step. decolonizing your mind of its male-centeredness and no longer seeing yourself as subordinate, inferior or less worthy to a life of freedom than him.

the second step after de-centering men within yourself is to quickly center women. that's where separatism comes in. not only does this also aid you in decolonizing the rest of your mind, but it gives you the courage to go for better rather than settle for what men say you deserve. seeing that actually, men aren't vital at all to a wonderful life. throwing yourself into female centricity and replacing male hegemony with female history, philosophy, culture, literature, all of it. but not just on a mental level, on an interpersonal and financial level as well. this boosts you economically and empowers you buy giving you that independence necessary to make demands.

then when it comes to the dire, when men retaliate as they are prone to do, you don't hesitate to punish them for it. you don't hesitate to make it cost them. whether that's in organized feminist cyber attacks (doxxing, phishing, DDos attacks, etc). you make them see themselves as potential victims. where what they do to others can also be done to them. where they fear being poisoned, disappearing, outed, isolated, killed.

this kind of organized self-defense will not happen without female solidarity. we already have examples of women coming together to beat abusive men up and get rid of the threats themselves when victims of male violence fear state retaliation too much to defend themselves. female solidarity can substitute for state neglect. it is the only thing that can. the king of the pride doesn't stand a chance against a pack of lionesses. and the state cannot punish all its women lest it destroy itself entirely. governments know that restricting women restricts their economy, so killing masses of women is just not feasible.

female solidarity is the missing piece, and that's what the status quo continually tries to dismantle. also, non-violence in the face of our oppression has never been a virtue. it is something the patriarchy has counted on.

the lie of femininity is that men will respect or care for us once they see how we suffer and how beautiful we are. we think they will set us apart as sacred if they are in love with us. but the truth is they will only respect us if they fear us.

anyways, i'm just thinking out loud here, and these are all generalizations. i'll need to make a whole other article where i break this down on an infrastructural level.

[doubleca5t]

What do you think gay men are attracted to in men that they can’t be attracted to in women?

It can’t be anything about femininity or masculinity obviously. That’s both sexist, and cultural so can’t be what drives men-only attraction.

It can’t be anything about stated identity because someone could lie just as easily as they could tell the truth in such a statement, and it makes no sense because homosexuality and heterosexuality exists in other species with no stated identities. It’s not like other animals without gender are all pan.

Saying idk it’s the vibes or some indescribable trait men have that women can’t but “I can’t explain” is a nonanswer.

Soooooooo what is it? Or do you think any sexuality but bi/pan is just cultural performance or an identity rather than an inborn orientation?

- [ ]

see I can tell that this is a bad faith ask because I've been getting an influx of terfs on TikTok lately but I'll take the bait and answer this legitimately. I think the *actual* answer here is that sexuality is complex and even though we put a lot of labels on it, those labels are ultimately never going to account for every possible corner case and so rather than constantly redefining the terms of our sexuality I think it's better if we just embrace the messiness of it all as part of the game.

Like I consider myself a lesbian (and you would probably consider me a straight man) which *should* mean I'm only attracted to women. But I've also found myself attracted to drag queens and femboys and some non-binary folks who identify more on the masculine side of the spectrum. Does that mean I'm actually bisexual? I don't think so, because I don't feel any attraction to dudes (cis or trans) who aren't actively playing with gender in a way that's either flirting with femininity or wholeheartedly embracing it.

I imagine plenty of gay men have a similar experience seeing women who present very masculine or a non-binary person who's more on the femme side. And before you accuse me of insisting that lesbians can be attracted to men, there is a HUGE difference between saying that gender non-conforming people throw a wrench into people's sexual identities and saying that "lesbianism includes men".

In short, the reason why I don't have a definitive clear cut answer to your question is because I think human sexuality defies such an answer. I just so happen to be ok with that because I think it's a better, easier way to live