#but don't hate men this isn't inherent to being male

[velvetvexations]

It's frustrating when any radical feminism is called out in trans circles, the whole thing is "well since I'm trans I can't be a TERF"!!! Like, transmisogyny is not the only thing TERFS and radical feminists preach?? Like if you're anti sex work, anti kink, anti bodily autonomy for any kind of transition or sex, think men (whoever the individual bigot defines as such) are genetically predisposed to evil, think women (whoever the individual bigot defines as such) are predisposed to good, and anti-ace/aro people, like one or two differences in opinion will not preclude you from radical feminism. Idk, out of the "trans inclusionary" radical feminists, I feel as though you either fall hard into transmisogyny or transandrophobia.

But a lot of the people who believe in all the same things as the normal strain of radical feminism but support trans women just,, only seem to think that transmisogyny is what TERFs preach?

Also like lowkey I never understood the Shinigami eyes extension because TERF dogwhistles are kinda easy to spot and easy to check. Like, overly judgmental of a random woman? Overly judgmental of a random man? Seems to think x kink is evil? Implying porn is disgusting and evil (without any actual criticisms of the industry, just talking about it inherently)? Weird about ace/aro people and their attraction or lack thereof? Wow! Probably a terf.

I think there is some issue with "OP is a TERF" that made shinigami eyes appealing for a lot of people. I once saw someone make a really good point about how a theater production that sexualizes nuns is not progressive for sexualizing women who don't want to be sexualized, but whoops, OP was a TERF. Often moral rationality is not an issue of logical reasoning as it is motivation. For instance, I also saw a tankie shitheel give a pretty good rundown of Chiquita's bullshit in Central and Southern America. In both cases, Bad Group A was opposed to Bad Group B, whether that be imperialism or the patriarchy, so they can call out legitimate issues when they want to before going right back to complete bullshit and supporting their own evil shit.

But absolutely no one actually knows what TERFs are anymore because they do think it's literally all just hating trans women and are incapable of connecting the dots between TERFs and second-wave feminism, and realizing that they have a whole suite of beliefs that goes beyond that. It's partly obscured nowadays for exactly the reason that they'll often be aimed at cis men, which TRFs simply don't count as evidence of them hating men because of course you should be against like, Cis Male Celebrity Getting #MeToo'd, as though the issue with TERFs isn't that they see that and trans people as being products of the same patriarchal system because their view of the entire world is warped.

Especially funny is the claim that you can't call TRFs TRFs because they don't self-identify as TRFs. I mean, even putting aside Talia Bhatt's book, we have a very famous meme of Sonic the Hedgehog telling TERFs to fuck off for using that exact same "that's just a slur to silence me" argument. Like, no! You may not recognize what you're saying is nearly identical to everything TERFs say just because you add "trans" behind "women," but that's a you problem!

[thenighttimeparadise]

The fact for most people, having acrylic nails, wearing make up, doing your hair, doing skin care, wearing skirts/dresses, wearing heels, ect. is considered feminine and things women biologically want/need to do or should do because it's "feminine" is crazy to me.

Let's unpack this.

So... acrylic nails. Putting shit on your nails to make them longer/ more colourful. Why might this be seen as "feminine"? Females usually have longer, thinner fingers, which longer nail help make the appearance of, women usually biologically have longer nails like they have longer hair, and they're expected to care more about their appearance. Why don't these things actually explain this phenomenon? Long fingers could be considered attractive for both men and women, they are attractive for women mainly because they look dainty and bc subconsciously society want women to spend more time on their looks so when you see a women with longer, painted nails it looks right bc she spent time and money to be feminine and to look "right" (society wants women to suffer, whether you admit it or not, the idea of femininity is to hate yourself quietly, I can expand on that if you'd like). Also, while females have longer nails and hair biologically (on average and on a pretty small amount) men also biologically grow hair and nails. Like, men used to have shoulder length hair and women had hair to their waist. The fact men have shorter hair now is bc of the army. Fight me on this. If this was according to biology it would masculine to have hair to your shoulders or lower back and somewhat longer nails, but it's not. My point here isn't to say that it's untrue that female biologically have longer hair and nails, but that these standards can change according to socialization, and we did change them for men, so much so that we won't consider some biologically masculine stuff masculine. Bc it's mostly socialization. The idea that women are the prettier sex, even as an empowering thing, is simply incorrect, and I do want y'all to understand that if we wanted to decide males are the beautiful sex we could change that in our minds in like one generation.

The wearing heels/dresses/skirts is just pure bullshit, forgive me for the way I'm wording this but these are pieces of a fabric, and while one can argue dresses and skirts could feminine to accentuate the "female silhouette" as in making the body look more curvy, I want to remind you that you're very subjective and what you're attracted to and what you find beauty in is about 76% due to socialization. I promise you if you were born 100 years ago you'd have different opinions about what is and isn't attractive. Sure some stuff will remain, like being hygienic, having clear skin and straight teeth and not being overly obese or thin, since these things are just signs of being unhealthy (even though some people don't care about these things I just mean generally speaking in the way our body and brain processes things), so many other things you might think are attractive for you bc of biology, such as facial features, height, body type (you can be as fertile without having small waist as someone with tiny waist, it's about having breasts and body hair [signs of fertility and sexual maturity] And while both of those aren't sexual [while breasts are a sign of fertility that doesn't mean they're inherently sexual just like beards are a sign of sexual maturity but they aren't inherently sexual] Yk what that raises the question of what is inherently sexual and I have an answer, tell me/write an ask about it if you wanna know but ANYWAY beauty changes over the years so being an hourglass figure isn't necessarily the 'objectively' most attractive a women can look.

[unforth]

I stumbled upon the post of you talking about how you're trying to raise a son that won't hate himself for being male. From a young man to the mother of a young man, thank you. Honestly thank you so much. That will mean so so much for your kiddo, both now and for the rest of his life. I hope your mother's day is a joyous one :)

oh anon, many many hugs. and thank you. I hope you don't hate yourself either, you seem like a really kind and caring person. <3

[olderthannetfic]

I just got the weirdest hate comment. Basically, this woman who has loved all my stories and commented on them for months found out I'm a cis man. And now she hates my F/F stories. She's now decided they're "fetish fuel" for "your lesbian kink" and "you probably write with one hand down your pants".

None of these stories have steamy scenes. One, I suck at writing those. A lot. A lot a lot. Two, the women are busy saving the world. That's stressful and stress makes some people's horniness go way down, so I always assumed they wouldn't be in the mood until the villain is defeated, you know? Three, some of these stories have middle school aged characters and I find people older than me hot, so I have literally, truly not thought once against their sex lives. I assumed they were going on dates like I was at 13 - movies, hang out at the mall, playing video games, that stuff. Nobody I knew was getting laid at 13. (I didn't get laid until I was 20, personally, but idk what the statistics on that are.)

So it's really weird that she's suddenly angry at me. I know most of the fans of the show are women. I get why she assumed I was one. Totally valid. Statistically that makes sense. It's the jump from "you are male" to "you're getting off to this" that I don't get. Don't get me wrong, I know some guys like F/F and some women like M/M. But liking writing/reading something doesn't mean you get off to it.

(Also utter side tangent but I don't like her using lesbian to refer to bi characters. That's... not how that works. Bi people don't become straight or lesbian or gay depending on who they date.)

Can someone explain to me? I think my neurodivergent ass is missing a lot here and I'm lost.

--

Radfem nonsense.

Look up lesbian separatism as a political thing to find the sorts of women who think all men are inherently suspect, dangerous, predatory, etc. Some of them are also TERFs and think trans women are men and predators, but this general attitude on gender happens even without the transphobia.

Basically, she thinks you snuck into her exclusive clubhouse and got your cooties on it.

Some femslash fans do view this type of fandom as an expression of their identity, not just a thing they enjoy, and being confronted with the reality that it can also just be a fiction taste and the space isn't all people like them making a space for people like them can be upsetting. She's being a jerk and not responding to your actual work or your actual self, but if you want to know why, that's why.

[selfship-confession-void]

MALE SELFSHIPPERS ILYILYILYILY

TRANS MEN, TRANSMASC, CIS, STRAIGHT, LGBTQ+, MULTIGENDER, ANYTHING

I LOVE YOU GUYS SO MUUUCHHH AS A GAY TRANS MAN SELFSHIPPER MYSELF I SPREAD ALL MY LOVE AND CARE

REMINDER THAT SELFSHIPPING ISN'T GENDERED, DON'T FEEL BAD ABOUT SELFSHIPPING BEING "GIRLY" OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT!! YOU'RE ALL AWESOME AND MANLY RAAAHHHH (no hate to fem/girl/enby selfshippers!! I love you all so much too, but I hate the stigma that selfshipping is inherently "girly" or seeing male/masc selfshippers getting heavily overlooked and underrepresented)

-

[doctordragon]

That one post that's like "I'm no better than a man" for being attracted to Falin's bouncing boobies is 100% proof of how normalized terf rhetoric is on this awful website

1. The idea that literally just being horny somehow makes you "worse" is such an anti sex sentiment. Being horny isn't a moral failing, it's just a part of having a sexuality. Being horny is good because sex and sexual attraction can be extremely fun and pleasurable for some people.

2. The obvious "women are inherently better than men" sentiment, but not just that. Women are better because they're chaste and wholesome, unlike those gross dirty horny men. Not only is this hateful towards men in a classically terfy way, it's also pinning women's "goodness" on their sexual purity and chastity. This is of course where terf and conservative Christian rhetoric overlap and it's very blatant in this post imo.

3. The intent likely comes from the oversexualization and objectification of women in media. I don't think this is applicable to dungeon meshi specifically because the way the female characters are treated with genuine respect when they are sexualized, in addition to the equal if not greater amount of sexualization given to the male characters. But, even if the media is Problematique in the way it portrays its female characters, there's still nothing wrong with being horny for those women. Again, being horny is a good thing.

4. Specifically speaking as a transgender gay man, I fucking hate the way these people talk about men. I love men. It's kind of my whole thing. I love men so much that I choose to be one every day. Is being a man sexually attracted to other men suddenly making me worse? This post clearly dictates that women are better because of mens' sexualities, so what does that say about their view of gay and transgender men? It's impossible to express hatred for male sexuality without being transphobic or homophobic.

Please stop putting shit like that on my dash. Just say "I love Falin's big bouncy boobies and they make me horny" and stop trying to shit on men's sexualities every time you can.

[shsl-analyzer-guy]

So recently I made a post about why I think Chihiro makes the most sense within the context of her own story as a transfem. It was a post made right after an all nighter, so I'm honestly surprised how coherent I was able to make it lol, but anyways, I wanted to keep talking about it. I think I covered pretty well about why Chihiro being trans is more impactful for her, but not so much why transfem specifically, and not transmasc. Basically, the goal of this post is to explain why I think a lot of people are weirded out by the transmasc headcanon in a way that hopefully doesn't feel like an attack

I'm well aware that a lot of people that enjoy transmasc Chihiro are transmasc themselves, and see themselves in said interpretation. This is generally true of a lot of trans interpretations of characters, but especially here, as the canon explanation of Chihiro's character is "he feels immensely uncomfortable pretending to be a girl so people won't make fun of him." I myself used to adore the transmasc headcanon. I hc'd Chihiro as wearing a packer, that Kyoko could tell it was an artificial dick, and everything that followed was the class being Super Cool about trans people because it just seemed like the easiest out for all the transphobia within her story. Besides, I quite liked Chihiro, and 'boy who feels like he must dress like a girl for people to assume his identity' was something I related to a lot.

The thing is, the more I looked into that interpretation, the less sense it starts to make. Again, as a GNC trans man, I like to wear skirts and things like that. Clothes don't have gender, after all, and they can be way more comfortable than pants, especially when you don't shave. But Chihiro isn't GNC. Her story as it's meant to be interpreted expressly says feminine clothing makes her feel lesser than. She's described (by Monokuma ofc) as hating said femininity. It makes her feel weaker, like those skirts and female identity is an inherent weakness. And that's what I think the main problem is; even when under the guide of being a trans man, Chihiro's story still falls as one rooted in misogyny as most logically presented.

The story presented in chapter 2 is inherently male-centric, to the point where its title is "Boys' Life of Despair". It's a story about men, questioning the identity of men, and focused wholly on men. The one (canonically) fem character that's important to the chapter's plot is Toko, and only to perpetuate an ableist trope as a red herring. Even then, when Syo reveals herself, all her dialogue is explaining why men are so important to her. I don't think having a subplot that focuses on male characters or the concept of masculinity is a bad idea on paper, especially not when within the confines of an overarching plot that very much does utilize women as leading characters, but in practice, the plotline about toxic masculinity is used *at the expense of* women, rather than existing in tandem with them.

Throughout the entire chapter, it's established that women are weaker via Chihiro. When Mondo says that women are naturally weaker, Chihiro starts crying, and Mondo is made to apologize. HOWEVER, the reason he apologizes is not because of the blatant misogyny of the statement, but rather, because he yelled too loud. Even when Hina and Sakura are involved in the conversation, neither of them seem to care about the sexism. Even in the stage play, when Sakura DOES take offense to it, it's shrugged off as a gag, with Mondo saying she's 'special.' Sakura is held as an exception to the rule. AT NO POINT IN THIS CHAPTER IS THE ASSERTION THAT WOMEN ARE INHERENTLY WEAKER THAN MEN EVER CONTESTED. Later in the same chapter, Makoto (the player character whom we're supposed to be projecting onto) says that Mondo was right, and that girls aren't strong.

Chihiro's backstory and the way she views herself *as presented by others* only reinforces this idea. The parallels between Chihiro and Mondo are a story about strength and weakness. Chihiro is physically weak but mentally strong, and Mondo is physically strong but mentally weak. This is the point of them being paired together, and the foundation upon which everything else found in the chapter is built on. So when you have Chihiro, a canonical man who wears skirts, and give her an inferiority complex about her weakness that's inherently tied to how similar she is to women, you end up with an inherently misogynistic narrative. According to Danganronpa, Chihiro is weak BECAUSE of her similarities to women, as is enforced by the language used and the presentation of Chihiro's identity. Similarly, the assertion that Chihiro makes to Mondo defining her 'mental strength' is the assertion to no longer be fem-presenting, to destroy everything feminine about her and to become a 'real man' like how she perceives Mondo. This part by itself could be interpreted as transmasc, but when paired with the rest of the chapter's insistence of the weakness of women? It's not transphobic anymore, sure, but it still has that inherent core of misogyny, without any real acknowledgement or deconstruction of it in the way that the transfem headcanon does.

Ultimately, fiction is meant to be interpreted by those who consume it, and you can fanonize as much as you want. Just don't be too surprised when women, especially trans women, don't like the way you're interpreting it. It is always worth deconstructing your own biases and the way you consume media

[n3felibata]

I made a post on Reddit titled "Hot take but I feel like many if not most Stolitz antis are either homophobic or just hypocrites" and I even had to clarify at the end that not all Stolitz antis are like that. Cue the replies harassing me, taking it as a personal attack on them and making baseless accusations about me. One of them even sarcastically said "Anyone who disagrees with me is wrong and bigoted" as a way to make fun of me. I never said anything remotely similar to that. I don't think they bothered to actually read past the title where I explained that Stolas and Blitzø meeting as children is compared to a bad fanfic when that never gets said about straight couples in media who met as children and that people who hate Stolitz for what it is now only tolerated it when it was just a running gag, as if they can't stand it when gay relationships are being taken seriously. I also mentioned that even non-homophobic Stolitz antis complain about how toxic it is and then turn around to ship Blitzker. (Blitzø x Striker)

I had a similar experience. It's so stupid because like, some of them aren't even subtle about it. Same for chaggie antis. I remember seeing a post talking about how much Charlie doesn't get enough dick, so she's unsatisfied and needs Alastor. Like... I'm sorry, what?

A lot of the arguments stolitz antis are literally inherently bigoted. Like how they want Stolas to be paired with Stella instead even though he's gay. And STILL hating him for "cheating" after The Circus even though he's a gay man being forced to marry an abusive woman? Idk, that's... a red flag 💀 The same people saying stolitz is one sided were the same ones saying that Stolas and Stella were in love not to long ago... sounds like heteronormativity...

And a lot of them are Stella defenders? Sorry that I came to the conclusion that the people doing mental gymnastics defending the cishet abuser calling the gay male abuse victim the abuser may be homophobic ���

Like, it's not that different from female characters who get hate while the same people shitting on her praise fictional men who are worse or do the same shit. There are clear double standards here. These people turn around and praise cishet media with very similar writing, characters and tropes as Helluva Boss. And not only that, but it's not even just about their relationship specifically. Like, I have a theory that the whole controversy about Stolas being an "abusive" father is because of the stereotype that queer people can't be good parents. And the whole "child and parent have conflict but make up in the end" trope happens in fiction all time (example: Danny Tanner, Jeff Morales, Doofenshmirtz, ect.) Weird how it only became abuse and neglect with Stolas and Via.

Some people are blantly saying they wanted stolitz to "stay a joke", and it feels obvious to me that a lot of them just like queer characters who are queer in a goofy "dark humor" way and not an actual character with queer struggles and/or queer relationships.

People who say "but I disagree and I'm not homophobic!" Be expecting you to give them a pat on the back or something, I swear 💀 Like... good for you? Thanks for not being a bigot? Do you want a reward?

What I don't think people understand is that if they're not homophobic, then the post isn't about them. The fact that they're getting so defensive about posts directed at no one in particular is just weird because it looks worse than it would be if they just kept scrolling. Now it just kind of seems like Freudian Slip.

No one was looking at you until you said something

Of course they're not all the same, but I've seen people straight up call them the f slur

Sorry that happened to you. Just remember that Reddit is INFAMOUS for being toxic, so don't take what people on that app have to say to heart. Like, it's up there with Twitter and Tumblr...

And wouldn't you know it? Those are the 3 sites I see the most Stolas and Blitz hate.

Interesting

[tirfpikachu]

trans activists often forget that it isn't just trans-identified and nonbinary-identified people who can suffer from what they call cissexism or gncphobia. some people who aren't identifying as trans or nonbinary actually may face worse anti-gnc oppression than some people who claim the label, and get talked over by people who have no fucking clue what it's like. they just refuse to stay in their lane.

this is why any label that is nebulous enough for ppl to remain unchanged while identifying as such, and have no specific experience or behavior needed to belong to the group and be able to claim the label, will never be an accurate enough way to decide if someone has been more or less oppressed under the gncphobic/sexist (and of course heavily misogynistic) patriarchy. this is why often non-trans gnc people can be super frustrated by how they're treated by tras as some super privileged group shielded from horrific treatment by gender roles lovers, especially rightwing men. tras can be very out of touch, which doesn't go well with genuine lgbt/feminist activism spaces where we're genuinely trying to make positive change and actually talk through complex issues to find solutions to all the fucked up things the patriarchy has done to marginalized people. especially female/ofab people and people who are actually perceived as female in their day-to-day lives, or people who are visibly very gnc to a degree that pisses off patriarchs. trans/cis are often useless labels outside of denoting people who use different pronouns than their usual sex-assigned pronouns, or people who have dysphoria. otherwise, it gets incredibly vague and often includes people who for all intent and purposes live very gender conforming lives and truly are shielded from gncphobia, misogyny and transphobia/cissexism, as much as they hate to admit it.

the trans activist community claims to be against sexism and against rigid gender roles and all for embracing gnc people, yet gnc people who don't fit neatly in their usual cis/trans dichotomy get told they're either repressed and need the trans label, or they're bigots for saying they do face gncphobia and cissexism, at times more than some trans-identified folks. fighting patriarchal gender roles is more complex than simply identifying out of it. protecting gnc people, whether they identify as trans or not, is more complex than only protecting those who enjoy the label. protecting dysphoric people also means protecting those with reverse dysphoria and advocating for better healthcare in regards to transition, and more support in detransition-related surgeries, laser treatments etc from society. fighting against sexism also includes fighting sexism within your own spaces, and not assuming anyone gnc must hate being in their sex category and aren't female/male coded enough to still align with their sex. it also means discussing how not all trans people actually face cissexism, transphobia, sexism or misogyny irl and they need to learn to be good allies to those who do, whether they identify as trans or not. ofab/female people and transmisogyny-affected people also need to be good allies to one another, and not position one side as inherently less oppressed than the other in every aspect.

y'all also need to learn to respect ALL sexualities, including sexualities that involve the person's sex/"agab" without guilt-tripping or saying conversion therapy rhetoric. trans activists need to be more self-aware and grounded in reality. things are getting really ridiculous and it's why so many tras are peaking and flocking to radblr. it has its glaring issues, ones i am very critical of as are many radfems, but we at least have more tolerance for free speech and nuanced discussions and we absolutely refuse to ignore normalized homophobia against homosexuals (as in the og definition of the term) and blatant anti-female/ofab oppression in tq+ spaces. it can't stay this way forever!!

[dolls-self-ships]

related to my last post (on Ford's sexuality/romantic orientation)

ok, this is going to sound really stupid so please, bare in mind that I am aware that this is a fictional character and he isn't real and even alex hirsch himself said that anyway a fan might resonate with a character can be true to them. With that being said, I personally don't love the headcanon that Ford is gay. I myself am aroace, and a lot of what he seems to experience in terms of romantic relationships and his feelings on them seem to align more with my own and lots of other aroace people that I know. And idk why but fandoms and esp just the lgbtq community in general seem to be really dismissive of aroace people (some don't even consider us queer but thats another post), and idk why but it just bothers me that anytime a character in canon expresses little to no intrest in romance it becomes almost automatically fanon that said character must be gay and not know it, as if being aroace just isn't an option. Because, I feel like those are two different experiences, not completely but, different enough since one can still feel romantic attraction and one feels little to none of it. I also think it's over looked/never discussed how much of Ford's struggles with romance can also come from trauma (being ostrochized, bullied, dont even get me STARTED on it post Bill, etc.) which I also relate to, as someone who for mental health related reasons hasn't dated in years. And I've met lots of people, including men, who have struggled with the same thing. I've had my best friend suggest to me multiple times that I might be a lesbian since men seem to scare me (I've tried, I am not one) and idk I just wish there was more space in fandom to discuss how trauma and being nd or even just being on the aroace spectrum (or all 3) might affect someone's dating life instead of just coming to the conclusion of "oh he struggles with women so poor guy must not know he's gay". Not saying if you headcanon Ford as gay that you're wrong, he can literally be whatever, he's not real. I just wish I had more people that shared this point of veiw on his character with me because I resonate with those parts of his character just in different ways.

I also want to preface that it gives me the personal ick that whenever a male character is more effeminate/eccentric people think that it's an automatic precursor to them not liking women. Like, idk I really hate that it's 2024 and people still base their hcs off of that. There are (very few but they exist) straight drag queens. Femininity is not inherently connected to being attracted to men.

[separatist-apologist]

I just read an article in that guy who murdered two women. Absolutely horrifying. All the booktok crazies fawning over him reminds me of the women that would write letters to Ted Bundy while he was in prison.

I wasn't gonna answer this because I felt like I said what I needed to say and like, I was just preaching to preach but THEN while I was asleep, an anon came into my askbox to accuse me of not being a girls girl while intentionally missing my point. I blocked them before I thought of a good comeback (tragic) but like fellas is it anti-feminist not to stan a man who killed two women because (and this is so important to me) he hates women?

I'm gonna put the rest of this under a cut with a heavy trigger warning for domestic violence, I just want to say it and then I think I'm done talking about it because it's genuinely so disheartening.

Anyway, I think sometimes I get nervous to answer these kinds of asks because as a therapist I should know better than to speculate on people and what they're going through and whatever else, but as a person, its like...do you want to be picked that badly?

I think we all know by now that I work in DV and all the people fascinated with men like this fuck me up because like..."oooh what makes him tick, I want to talk to him, why did he do it-" and for me, I sit on the opposite end talking to survivors of violence asking the same questions with hollow eyes, with shaking hands, with safety plans meant to buy them just enough time to get out of their house so they aren't killed. I still think about some of the people I spoke with who didn't survive it.

When I was in grad school, I took a summer internship at the local DV court helping survivors with orders of protection. The system was set up better than a lot of other courts, but its still the legal system, you know? With all its flaws. My job was to flag for lethality based on what I was reading in the OPs and then reach out directly to survivors to help them navigate the process, connect them with resources, and sit with them in court. And I still remember this one particular woman who's situation was so desperately dangerous. We did a safety plan- and at that level, a safety plan isn't like, "remember to take your keys and wallet with you when you go", its "don't go into the basement or bathroom if he's in the house with you because there are too many hard surfaces, exposed pipes, and basins of water that making killing you easier. Go to a bedroom or closet because strangling a person is really hard and takes time," like THAT kind of safety plan. Anyway she thanked me, I remember this so well, she said thank you and I told her I'd call her the next week with an update and over the weekend he bludgeoned her to death.

And I guess I just don't think there is anything fascinating, interesting, or otherwise unique to men like this (obligatory yes I know women kill/abuse too). They're everywhere. I saw another post about how some podcaster is trying to get him on to talk to that guy and its like, why don't you just call up one of your friends' exes. Like. If you've got more than one female friend, you've probably got a friend who has experienced violence at the hand of a male partner, call him. Talk to him. Ask him why he did it, let him give you his made up story about trauma and sadness and oh life is hard because whatever whatever.

That's my thing. Books, movies, tv- they're not making people like this, and I'm not condemning people for what they enjoy in fantasy spaces. I am condemning it when you bring it out of those spaces and side against the women who were violently murdered because, and this is so important to me (did I say this already??), he HATES women. You are not special. You cannot fix him. He's not smart, or interesting, or fascinating and the having an attractive face is literally just chance and not something inherently moral.

And like, lastly, when you prop these men up and give them a platform, you signal to EVERY man just like him that there is something special and tragic about him. You let him play the victim, you let him rewrite the narrative, you shift the blame of his actions off of him and onto the people he hurt. Like with this particular man, you also side with a white supremacist so what are you saying to all your BIPOC/Jewish friends/mutuals, you know?

Anyway. That's my self-righteous rant, I guess.

[bored-trans-orchidsexual]

A Starstruck Odyssey, and Masculinity

I have thoughts and am just gonna unload them on Tumblr. That's what we do here, right? I recently have been re-listening to Starstruck and have had some thoughts on it's depictions of masculinity. This isn't a serious post per se, just some thoughts and observations. Starstruck has a wide spectrum of masculine characters on display, though a lot of it is hostile/toxic. Most men or male-coded characters are either outright villains, or more neutral parties with some toxic and selfish tendencies. Don't get me wrong it's a wild violent galaxy and that's the point, the entire party participates in scamming, kidnapping, exploitations, and unnecessary murder and we love to see it, it's not like it explicitly makes all men out to be inherently more monstrous and evil than others. But I do think the depictions of masculinity can be interesting to observe. Amercadia is a pretty cut and dry critism of the patriarchy and American nationalist culture, which is fantastic worldbuilding to include. Many of the masculine-coded androids are actually pretty nice, friendly and helpful or serious about their jobs, aside from a bitchy one in the beginning who injects our main 'droid with an anxiety spike about being one of a kind. Pretty much all of the Slugs we meet occupy masculine bodies, and they seem to have an abstract gender that picks up pronouns from the body they occupy, though the monarch is objectively a king and uses masculine pronouns even before getting a body, and he's pretty selfish and stupid.

But the main pair I'm thinking of, is Barry and Gunnie. Looking at the two of them, there's a lot you can assume. Big Barry Syx is this massive, bulky dude in power armor and shades with a mullet, while Gunnie is a 4' 11" techie cyborg with a big ol' smile. Listen to them in action and many of your assumptions are reinforced; Barry is a total dude-bro associated with nuts, steroids, working out, and acting much like gym bros in our modern life, while Gunnie is a hyperactive technician just doing his best, despite being mired in sympathetic tragedy. Barry's trauma is fairly fantastical or common to stories, having his family gunned down by one of his own, while Gunnie is mostly weighted down by medical debt after he got in an accident after trusting the wrong person. Based on these apperent details one would assume Barry is this toxicly masculine jackass who's insecure about his flaws, while Gunnie is the smartest man on board and is trying to keep everyone in line, doing the right thing, ect. And of course, you'd be dead wrong. Gunnie, while a sympathetic and likable character, is *mired* in toxic masculine traits. While it was an accident that put him in his situation, it was brash foolishness and ignoring obvious red flags that got him in that position in the first place, not to mention a rebellion against his family driving him to it. Furthermore, as Lou himself admits in Adventuring party, Gunnie's *pride* is the reason his problems are so vast; He comes from a lot of money, his initial debt might have never happened or mostly gone away to begin with if he went back to his dads for help. His toxicity doesn't make him an unlikable character but he does have these traits. He's brash, prideful, and ignores common sense a lot. He is also very nice and friendly with others, listens to people, ect. He doesn't have *every* toxic trait in the book, but has them which I tend to not even notice because he's just a funny little guy. Barry, meanwhile, is just about the most wholesome and giving person in the entire 'verse. Syx *And* Nyne, when not under a slug's control, are these total sweetheart bros. Sure, they shit talk each other with friendly ribbing, and yes they are very good at violence, but this violence is always motivated by helping those in need or fighting for those who can't fight for themselves, the Barry Battalion way. Barrys hate it when people are rude, or hurt the innocent. Barrys fight for their friends, provide endless support and praise, and will throw their very bodies into danger to protect or help, as seen on Rec 97 and in the big finale of the battle of the brands. And while the thing the love most is other Barrys, that does not mean that what they respect is also being heavily macho dudes. Barry one (or was is spelled differently? Barry Won? who knows) was the professor who created the other Barrys, a nerdy and fragile professor type, that the Barrys loved and treated as a fellow Barry *literally* the moment they were created. Even Syd is a Barry now, and that's accepted both by Barry Syx who's known her a long time and bonded with her, as well as Barry Nyne who literally, to his perception, *Just* met her, despite her appearance as like a waitress with an arm canon. Being a Barry, in other words, isn't about being just like them, having the name Barry, or anything like that. It's a vibe, it's a way to be, and the 'verse is better off with these super wholesome boys who, despite embodying many stereotypes of the gym bro, posses *none* of the commonly toxic traits also associated with that. They aren't insecure around smarter people or those with different skillsets, they hold no gendered assumptions, and they never wanna use their might to opress others for their own satisfaction.

Just, some thoughts.

[missfreija]

You have to love the hypocrisy of the show acting as though being a pimp is so much better than being a slave owner; like it isn't still human trafficking, and as though in that time and place, black women wouldn't have suffered the most from it. It's a seriously disgusting thing to pretend that it's this cutesy, morally fine thing to do: if they're fine with Louis being a sex trader, than they should have been fine with portraying the actual story of the books - he's meant to be a passively bad person. The story is about evil deserving empathy. It would be different if they used the fact that he's a pimp to explore the fact that he's always profited off of human lives and was passively evil in life, that would have been different (though that's exactly what the books do, so it still would have worked with the original story and then the show might have been good), but it was used as a way to make Louis a morally fine uwu baby. I fucking hate it. It's disgusting for the show runners to pretend sex trading is okay and doesn't harm people, it's dishonest to pretend the show is a discussion about the legacy of race in America without actually discussing the way in which black women suffered as a result of misogynoir and how they were sexualised and their sexual exploitation was ignored (but we all know how the show feels about black women given what they did to Claudia), and it's ridiculous to pretend that it's a gothic story when it veers away from the moral complexities inherent to the gothic genre. It's a poorly written, malicious, badly developed show with subpar actors, and I hate how popular it's become. It feel as though it's defiling the legacy of the books. And apparently Marius is a pimp now too. I hate even engaging with it, but I had to vent. I hope it gets cancelled as soon as possible and the fan base dies down, in the meantime, I'll try to enjoy the books and the circle of book fabs that remain here. Of which your blog is a wonderful example. Love to you, hate to AMC.

I absolutely agree with every single word lol. As a woman and as a iwtv fan i am disgusted by the treatment of women in this show, but apparently the show writers and the majority of audience don't care about women representation, neither black nor white. Also the fact that they portrayed the sex workers (in the few scenes where they appear) as 'relaxed' women that seem to have a friendly attitude towards Louis (who in this show possesses a strong ambition for business) is weird and gives to the viewer a distorted view of reality. The narrative focused a lot on the issue of racism, so why not showing briefly the suffering of black prostitutes? Because the male gaze doesn't want to recognize it? I don't know. And don't get me started on the other female characters.

What happened to Claudia was completely avoidable and unnecessary and still rj opted for this version and said that the r4pe was 'a horrible thing that happened to her, but it has toughened her up'. I guess it is a self-explanatory sentence. I can't even imagine how SA victims felt while hearing him say it. It completely downplays the trauma of SA and implies that women get something positive out of it. I felt that episode and the scene in one of the first episodes where Louis burns the tapes of the '70 interview (the book….) were disgustingly disrespectful towards Anne Rice and her fans.

Last year I got into a heated argument with some show fans on twitter because they kept reiterating that 'at least prostitution gives more freedom to women/people than slavery', 'louis is a good pimp, he treats his girls with respect', 'he defends the prostitutes from cruel men' , 'at least he didn't enslave my ancestors unlike book louis', it was annoying and i was astonished of reading all their statements, very misogynistic.

Regarding pimp Louis: not only this is a way to avoid probing into the character's psyche/moral (and not include one of the most important themes of the novel), but it is a way of de responsabilize (and deny) the past. Louis is a man of his time and, with an accurate work of writing, it would have made sense to contestualize his privileged position and explain what it meant for him to be in charge of a plantation, it would have been interesting to show what it meant to be a landowner and slave owner at the time and the consequences of his actions reflected on his slaves, maybe introducing some of them into the narrative in a more concrete way (or do the same with the pimp/brothel storyline in the show, because it's equally evil), since it is a topic basically not explored in the book. But the showrunner decided that nowadays one should not represent these issues on tv and you have to disregard the past. It is extremely hypocritical.

And it's awful that for this reason they chose another historical setting, changing century and not addressing the fact that there were just as many issues in 1910/20 as well; apparently for the writers the XX century was a historical period with minor social problems where no difficulties existed (aside from racism, it was pretty much the most prominent theme in s1). And I doubt that the reconstruction of the New Orleans society of the time is faithful lol (and where is the voodoo?). All this imo denotes great laziness in the writing.

And clearly this series does not belong to the gothic genre, it's more a teen drama. Beyond the surface level thrills, the gothic literature holds a profound mirror to the complexities of human psychology that here are totally absent. I also doubt that the show writers did extensive research on the figure of the vampire in literature.

We were all eagerly waiting for the cancellation of this garbage that is NOT iwtv/tvc and the immediate disappearance of the show fandom ahahah but unfortunately it has been renewed for s3 😔

Thank you for the compliments mwah! hugs!

[rjalker]

Edit: to clarify, (since I wrote this while overheating from lack of AC during a heatwave):

If you require access to gynecological care or abortions, you by definition do not have access to male privilege, because having male privilege means you are not subject to systemic misogyny, including medical misogyny.

Radical feminists love to pretend that trans men magically gain male privilege the instant they begin identifying as men, because radical feminists don't give a single flying shit about how the world actually works. Misogyny exists. Transmisia exists. No one is going to give you a free pass to get an abortion just because you don't identify as a woman. No one's gonna give you free and accessible gynecological care just because you don't identify as a woman.

The people who are standing outside the abortion clinic threatening to shoot anyone who goes in aren't gonna apologize and wave you in because you tell them you're not actually a woman.

The fact is that being a trans man makes it even more difficult to access reproductive and gynecological care, especially if you don't "look" like a woman anymore.

Trans men and any other trans people who need access to abortions and gynecological care do not benefit from male privilege because male privilege inherently precludes the necessity for accessing """"women's healthcare"""""". People who actually have male privilege are never going to need to get an abortion. They're never going to need to go to the gynecologist. They're never going to be told that they're a horrible child murderer for having a miscarriage or an abortion.

If you could ever need to get an abortion, something that is literally illegal in many parts of the US, you by definition literally do not have male privilege. Because if your bodily autonomy is controlled and made illegal by the patriarchy you by definition don't have male privilege.

If your ""feminism"" can't even grasp the most basic realities of how systemic misogyny works in the real world outside the fantasy version in your head where gender identities work like Pokemon types and simply identifying as a man gives you access to all aspects of male privilege and removes all barriers put in place by misogyny that's been going on for hundreds of years, you're not a feminist, you're just a misogynist who's putting a progressive spin on it.

Trans people who are subject to systemic misogyny inherently, by definition, do not have male privilege.

If you literally refuse to acknowledge the systemic medical misogyny that exists in the real world in your campaign to demonize and shit on trans men, you just need to admit you're not actually a feminist. The right to an abortion is one of the most blatant issues that feminists have been fighting for for decades. And you people want to pretend it's magically not a form of oppression as soon as the victims are trans people who don't identify as women.

Stop ignoring the reality of systemic misogyny in your quest to hate trans men. You are literally not helping anyone except the misogynists who are taking away our rights in the first place.

If you're literally willing to argue that needing access to abortions, which can get you arrested or murdered or both, isn't an issue for feminism, you're just a fucking hateful misogynists like any other conservative.

original post which I thought was clearer than it actually is but is actually extremely unclear and confusing:

people who have male privilege don't need access to abortions or gynecological care. you'd think this would be obvious, and yet….

[transmascpetewentz]

Moving The Goalposts: Infighting, Exorsexism, and Transandrophobia

I want to start this off not by getting directly into the meat of my theory, but instead by showing all of you a post that I came across today that illustrates exactly what I am talking about when I say that transandrophobes, and specifically TEHMs in this case, move the goalposts in a way that causes infighting within the trans(masc) community. This is a post by a pretty well-known TEHM whose blog I've been watching for a while.

What Jackson is doing here seems pretty obvious on the surface. He's making fun of nonbinary people who were AFAB because he perceives them as fakers and/or trenders. However, when you take a look at some of the other things that he believes, you realize that it just isn't that simple.

This is a post by one of Jackson's mutuals on here. If you don't know what some of these phrases mean, "trans heterosexual" refers to gay trans people (in this case, it's likely focusing on transmascs, but this rhetoric harms transfem lesbians too), and "trans homosexual" refers to straight trans people. What lavenderlad is trying to do is infantilize non-straight trans people, acting like we are complaining about nothing (maybe hysterical, even) for pointing out the oppression that we face from cishets and cis queers alike.

But it goes even deeper.

This right here is a very interesting post, specifically because lavenderlad seems to have changed his tune completely. As opposed to infantilizing us like in the previous post, he has now switched to transandrophobic conspiracy theories about how we are apparently some sort of dominant societal force despite being less than 2% of the population. My antisemitism radar is going off right now, too, because this sounds suspiciously like your average antisemite talking about Jews. He went very quickly from treating us like we're little girls who can't do anything to treating us like evil, scary men who are trying to invade his space.

He moved the goalposts because it was convenient for him at this moment to contribute to the oppression of gay trans men.

To elaborate, there's a specific type of transandrophobia seen in these circles that Jackson and lavenderlad are using. They are applying both maleness and femaleness to us. They infantilize us like we are women, and use our perceived femininity to justify gatekeeping us out of their spaces, while also using very common anti-gay male and generally anti-marginalized male stereotypes such as us being inherently aggressive, invaders, our bodies disgusting, etc. It's exorsexism, plain and simple.

And I feel like these posts show us how transandrophobes and transphobes in general can cause infighting within the trans community. A feminine nonbinary person might look at Jackson's first post and go "see! trans men have so much better than me!" but in fact, trans men, both binary and nonbinary, aren't actually treated any better. The grass is not greener. Trans men who try to conceal our birth sex and/or transness are considered liars, trying to invade spaces we don't belong, and more; but trans men and transmascs who do not try to pass, who don't try to conceal our transness, are accused of being "not really dysphoric."

Do not be fooled into thinking that transandrophobes would like you better if your gender expression was different. They don't want trans men to be displaying our transness, they don't want us to go stealth, and they don't want anything in between. They want us to be cis. Do not argue with your trans brothers about who society hates more; because society will see you as whatever will prove a transandrophobe's point. Address the root problems of patriarchy and transandrophobia instead of letting infighting eat us alive.

[floralovebot]

lrb i didn't want to add anything to the tags of that post cause i didn't want to take away from the very literal real life issues and talk about fandom instead so. doing it here!

the last sentences of the last reblog. "There is nothing inherently Predatory about being masc or Pure about being femme, that's just traditional gender roles repackaged."

in the whole "was helia meant to be a girl at first" discussion, i don't want it to come across like i Hate woman!helia or trans!helia. and i don't think it has, but i do want to be clear. there's nothing wrong with headcanons like that. the issue is why. why do you think he's more feminine than the others? why does that mean he can't be a cis man?

often people cite his personality. that his personality is more feminine. and they don't realize just how insane this sounds. being calm is not feminine. being mature is not feminine. being somewhat against violence is not feminine. just like being aggressive, angry, emotionally dense, or violent are not things that are inherently masculine. personality traits are not gendered.

it's okay to have a fun au with lesbian florelia or witch helia or trans helia dealing with red fountain issues. that's fine! that's good! i love those aus.

the issue isn't the headcanons - it's always been the why. why do you think he's more feminine. even if he is, why does that automatically mean he's a trans man. why do you think he can't be a cis man. do you think cis men can't be feminine? do you think all trans men are feminine? what's different between cis men and trans men to you? why do you think you can tell someone's "real" gender based on their visuals? why do you think it's okay to say that a male character with long hair Has to be a woman? whenever you're tackling issues with real life parallels/consequences, you need to ask yourself these kinds of questions.

just like: why do some fans think aisha would hate wearing dresses? is it based on anything from canon? or is it them being racist by thinking a black woman can't be feminine? why do some fans exclusively redesign musa's outfits to look like traditional asian clothing? is it them being inspired? or is it them being racist by participating in orientalism? why do some fans think lucy is trans? is it them seeing themselves in her or noticing the narrative possibility? or is it them being transphobic by thinking her canon appearance is "ugly" and "too masculine"? why do some fans think helia is super feminine and must be trans or a woman? is it them using their own experiences? or is it them upholding western gender roles by thinking a cis man could never be that feminine therefore he must be trans or a cis woman?

when i say that nothing about helia is feminine or more feminine than the other specialists,, when i say that if you can't see the other specialists as women or as trans men,, this is what i mean. you aren't being progressive for thinking helia is more feminine and redesigning him to be a cis woman or a trans man. you're upholding western gender roles. and often being misogynistic and/or transphobic in the process. "There is nothing inherently Predatory about being masc or Pure about being femme, that's just traditional gender roles repackaged."