#but no we really needed more cishet white women on the show instead

[haven-of-dusk]

I don't watch that much Grey's Anatomy, but it is still upsetting that the show introduced a trans doctor (without introducing him that way, I think it took a whole season before they actually revealed it, aka did not make it his primary character trait), gave him interests and backstory and unique skills, set up potential arcs, and then dropped him unceremoniously in the middle of a season with no explanation outside of vague allusions to veteran's therapy.

Great representation there, guys...

[magentagalaxies]

making my own post bc i have thoughts and i don't want to keep having to go back and forth with tags and replies on someone else's post:

anyway original post i started this conversation on: @charlotterenaissance

my tag essay:

@liliana-von-k's reply:

(all this context is bc i have even more thoughts so i thought i should make my own post)

anyway to respond to that i 100% agree!! it also reminds me of something from my very first conversation with bruce (when we did a zoom interview before we knew each other) which idk if i've posted this aspect of before: i forget what my exact question was but i essentially brought up this kind of paradigm the KITH's female characters are often discussed in and how it's kind of strange comparing it to the actual representation of female characters in the show. like, sure dave "passes" the most as a conventionally-attractive female character, but also i'd honestly say any of the kids in the hall can pass as female, not even just from a genderqueer perspective but from a not all women are "conventionally attractive" perspective. like i know cis women who have a jawline like bruce's or a nose like scott's or any other feature that isn't seen as "feminine" from (often white-eurocentric) beauty standards and many of them are gorgeous.

and the fact that KITH's female characters are often discussed through a lens of "who plays the best woman" (meaning the one who "passes" according to beauty standards) is as frustrating as it is fascinating bc i really do think it points to the way the media tries to comprehend this gender nonconformity and shove it into a box they can understand. because the kids in the hall have already destroyed the most obvious box their female characters could be put in - yes, they are male comedians, but even though the most often way society rationalizes men dressing femininely is as a comedic act (whether as a man purposefully trying to elicit comedy via feminine actions and dress or via a man who genuinely enjoys feminine expression being made an object of ridicule via comedy), the kids in the hall break this framework (this "binary", if you will) by being comedians who are in control of the audience's laughter, but playing their femininity as genuine. you don't laugh with them at their femininity because they do not laugh at femininity, but you also can't make their femininity the subject of ridicule because their position as comedians means they are at once in on the joke and steering the joke in another direction. this technique is more subtextual (and likely subconscious) in the portrayal of female characters, but it's a tactic scott knowingly (and expertly) employs when playing buddy cole

so since the "men in dresses equals comedy" box is eliminated, cishet society feels the need to create another box for them to rationalize this gender nonconformity in, by attributing it to a spectacle other than humor. so they decide to instead view these gender transgressions through the lens of beauty and sexual attractiveness. this also helps rationalize any confusing attraction a cishet person has to one of the kids in the hall dressed as a woman - they pass too well, or at least whichever one you're attracted to (most often dave) does. making a spectacle of the kids in the hall playing women eliminates any confusion or implications that maybe gender and sexuality isn't as rigid as we think, by othering these performers as a special case and convincing yourself that there is no real woman who looks like dave foley in drag, and if there was she would be cis.

it's a slightly better box to be in than having the femininity be the target of ridicule, but it still misses the point that the femininity explored in kids in the hall is not meant to be othered. it leaves out so many of the show's most iconic female characters - fran is not glamorous, but she is a realistic woman. chicken lady is more chicken than lady, but she is still a well-written female character - and reduces others to their attractiveness when the sketch itself is not about that at all. and when i brought this up to bruce he sounded as though he had been waiting for someone to make this analysis, because even though the guys joke about it themselves it is at times uncomfortable to be in an interview that focuses so much on how the interviewer finds dave in drag sexy, or picking apart which physical aspect of the guys passes best. i think i remember bruce saying something to the effect of "no one's asking which one of us is the most hot playing a business man, but that's just as different of a person from us as playing a woman"

and it's interesting to think about this in the context of how the media in general treats people who identify as women in this framework of focusing on physical attractiveness all the time. in recent years, this behavior is more widely known to be sexist af so the overtness has declined (tho is it absolutely still present to some degree), but since the kids in the hall are all male it's fair game to make these sorts of comments about their female characters to their face, because it's spectacle and separate from them. even the exact same people who would call out a comment being made about a cis female comedian are often oblivious of how it could potentially apply to these male comedians, or have other bizarre lines within their ability to rationalize this gender nonconformity for themselves.

take the "wedding dresses" sketch that was censored from the amazon revival for example (this sketch was showcased at sketchfest's "scenes they wouldn't let us do" and has appeared in kith live shows since 2015). this sketch was censored because even though amazon would let the guys play women (and even then it was often an uphill battle), they would not let the wedding dresses sketch air because it featured men wearing wedding dresses in a comedic setting. the rule of thumb seemingly is: men wearing dresses is always comedic (and therefore transphobic), unless he (typically dave foley) passes too well, in which case trans people have nothing to do with the conversation. but the fact that they were men dressed femininely was never the point of the joke, it was the idea of a wedding dress, a significant garment symbolizing an event meant to be only worn for one day, being these guys' everyday wear and all the conflicts and community that came from that. it was an ode to the outsiders, a celebration of those who live and present unconventionally. and the fact that it's never about gender is in itself the most upliftingly genderqueer thing of all.

[kdinjenzen]

Do you also get a fuzzy feeling when people include LGBTQIA+? I feel like it and the I are the most frequently dropped and ignored...

Overall in major media I feel like pretty much all queer stories are sanitized in a way that will make it appeal to cishet folks more than the actual queer people who both want and need to see themselves represented in it.

I could make a huge reply here how gay men are still infantilized and written as two-dimensional “fashion forward, skinny, white, cis-woman’s best friend” type characters.

Or how lesbians are mostly written as hyper sexualized skinny white women for the sake of cis her male gaze or very (and here comes heavy quotation marks) “masculine” white butch women because that’s all people seem to think lesbians are.

Or that to be seen as bisexual in media you HAVE to be dating someone of the same gender, because dating someone of a different gender isn’t “bisexual enough” for people. Which is… stupid and annoying and wrong.

And on and on and on…

I’m a non-binary trans intersex pan/demi polyamorous woman and… yeah legitimately I’ll never see a character like me in mainstream media. More so, I will very likely never see a character that even touches one of those properly (and if so they will likely be portrayed by someone who is NOT those things) and there’s just… so much wrong with a lot of that.

Not to MENTION the fact that most of those stories (if you’ve been reading along I’ve hinted at it the whole post) focus on WHITE people and don’t even really show queer POC at all and if they DO it’s even more of a “let’s stereotype this up” writing that makes me want to scream and punch a wall in frustration.

This is why, above all else, I tell everyone to look to the indie space or specifically look towards queer creators who don’t have their IP tied to a major publisher or brand… because THOSE FOLKS are actually telling the stories you wanna see and will feel represented by.

Instead of the white washed and “for cishet people’s eyes” type of stories we get from literally every mainstream media.

[kimyoonmiauthor]

Literary theorists being AHs to women and PoCs

‘cause if I have to suffer, then you should also know how much of an AH these people are, so you can examine if their theories are even worth believing or if you SHOULD pay attention to their blind spots instead of saying it’s irrelevant to literary discussion. Personally, I think the fact they are unwilling to mention PoCs, particularly Black people and willing to actively dump on women is very relevant to current academic discourse. You can’t ignore Kant’s views on women, and see that the majority of the people who won in the end were people who showed hatred towards women.

Robert Scholes being an AH, Page 26-page 28 (Hilarious, but also homophobic and misogynistic) For context, EM Forster is gay, which makes this really homophobic.

Picture credit: https://www.brownalumnimagazine.com/articles/2017-03-03/memories-of-bob-scholes

‘Cause you see folks, the only decent writers in the world are men, cishet men. (notice the sharp sarcasm here).

E.M. Forster on Gertrude Stein (From Aspects of a Novel, a series of lectures he gave)

Credit: Getty Images https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/licensed-image?q=tbn:ANd9GcSjNW-FA-n5bkXFk2MFmMGMcBy1SJtQj185hrMceQN_8rK2L-6f2cu7Ct-PooBt8M6Mt7ffTDt5SPHpj00

https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/70492/pg70492-images.html

Granted, a Modernist (and gay himself, openly so at the time he gave this lecture), but still, the dumping on Gertrude Stein seems to be a tradition that extends to other people afterwards (Rowe did it sideways, Lajos Egri, directly). Seriously? Dump on the lesbian Jew trying to encourage ways to describe TRAUMA. OMG, we shouldn’t talk about trauma.

But I disagree heartily--we have entire story structures devoted to dreams that play with sense of time and reality *because* of Gertrude Stein. I mean, how could you conceivably get Inception without Gertrude Stein’s theories of how to move language and time? Besides that, you have Dream Diaries (Japanese), Dream Record (First Chinese then Korean--not imported into Japan because there was a war), and then the whole of Dream Time from Aboriginals which predate her. Non-linear storytelling has and can work--but you need thematic plotting to be stronger and tone plotting to really be tight (pacing helps, but isn’t as critical as the other two). Thank the Modernists for the European white version. I mean, Magic realism, anyone???

If you want to find ways to break linear time and describe trauma itself, and the feeling of missing time--Modernists are your best bet to find techniques to get you there. (Kinda Post Modernists, though I resent the focus on readers a lot--I heartily disagree, BTW, that Structuralists and Post Modernists are the same thing... as argued in this paper here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B0080430767039516. 

Post Modernists tried to find further ways to break the rules and structure by bending to the reader. 

Structuralists tried to impose a bunch of rules and binary. Like say, the panopticon and prison system/School system. There’s rigidity everywhere with Structuralists and Eurocentricism.) Or as the Raw and Cooked put it, a binary of acceptable and unacceptable, when some cultures don’t work off the Bible. So I think this paper here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B0080430767039516

is more likely.

John Gardner, The Art of Fiction for Young Writers, published 1983

Picture credit: https://blog.bookstellyouwhy.com/john-gardner-and-the-art-of-fiction

No one is surprised that its all men mentioned, right? 

But what makes ignoramuses bad writers is not just their inexperience in fair argument. All great writing is in a sense imitation of great writing. Writing a novel, however innovative that novel may be, the writer struggles to achieve one specific large effect, what can only be called the effect we are used to getting from good novels. However weird the technique, whatever the novel’s mode, we say when we have finished it, “Now that is a novel!” We say it of Anna Karenina and of Under the Volcano, also of the mysteriously constructed Moby-Dick. If we say it of Samuel Beckett’s Watt or Malone Dies, of Italo Calvino’s The Baron in the Trees, or Kobo Abe’s The Ruined Map, we say it because, for all their surface oddity, those novels produce the familiar effect. It rarely happens, if it happens at all, that a writer can achieve effects much larger than the effects achieved in books he has read and admired. Human beings, like chimpanzees, can do very little without models. One may learn to love Shakespeare by reading him on one’s own—the ignoramus is unlikely to have done even this—but there is no substitute for being taken by the hand and guided line by line through Othello, Hamlet, or King Lear. This is the work of the university Shakespeare course, and even if the teacher is a person of limited intelligence and sensitivity, one can find in universities the critical books and articles most likely to be helpful, the books that have held up, and the best of the new books. Outside the university’s selective process, one hardly knows which way to turn. One ends up with some crank book on how Shakespeare was really an atheist, or a Communist, or a pen-name used by Francis Bacon. Outside the university it seems practically impossible to come to an understanding of Homer or Vergil, Chaucer or Dante, any of the great masters who, properly understood, provide the highest models yet achieved by our civilization. Whatever his genius, the writer unfamiliar with the highest effects possible is virtually doomed to search out lesser effects.

Gardner, John (2010-05-20T23:58:59.000). The Art of Fiction . Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

OMG, give this guy a prize, he managed to mention a Japanese man Kobo Abe. /s https://literariness.org/2019/04/15/analysis-of-kobo-abes-novels/ But then fails to mention the names of the authors of some of the novels he’s talking about (I’m literally begging Writer’s Digest, Knopf, etc to force these people to give better citations)

The closest he gets to noting a Black person is noting American Jazz on the page where Chapter 2 starts, and then fails to mention Jazz musicians. No, I’m serious. What makes a person an AH? The inability to mention a single work in 1983 by a female author?

Though the fact is not always obvious at a glance when we look at works of art very close to us in time, the artist’s primary unit of thought—his primary conscious or unconscious basis for selecting and organizing the details of his work—is genre. This is perhaps most obvious in the case of music. A composer writes an opera, a symphony, a concerto, a tone poem, a suite of country dances, a song cycle, a set of variations, or a stream-of-consciousness piece (a modern psychological adaptation of the tone poem). Whatever genre he chooses, and to some extent depending on which genre he chooses, he writes within, or slightly varies, traditional structures—sonata form, fugal structure, ABCBA melodic structure, and so forth; or he may create, on what he believes to be some firm basis, a new structure. He may cross genres, introducing country dances into a symphony or, say, constructing a string quartet on the principle of theme and variations. If he’s looking for novelty (seldom for any more noble reason), he may try to borrow structure from some other art, using film, theatrical movement, or something else. When new forms arise, as they do from time to time, they rise out of one of two processes, genre-crossing or the elevation of popular culture. Thus Ravel, Gershwin, Stravinsky, and many others blend classical tradition and American jazz—in this case simultaneously crossing genres and elevating the popular. Occasionally in music as in the other arts, elevating popular culture must be extended to mean recycling trash. Electronic music began in the observation that the beeps and boings that come out of radios, computers, and the like might sound a little like music if structure were imposed—rhythm and something like melody. Anything, in fact—as the Dadaists, Spike Jones, and John Cage pointed out—might be turned into something like music: the scream of a truck-tire, the noise of a windowshade, the bleating of a sheep.

Gardner, John (2010-05-20T23:58:59.000). The Art of Fiction . Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Iunno, is it glaring to you? It’s glaring to me. Avoid talking about Black people challenge. I can name at least a few off the top of my head. Dizzy Gillespie? Billie Holiday? Ella Fitzgerald? And then he mentions white people before then? I’m groaning.

And that’s the thing, particularly about Black authors/Black people, they are either not mentioned by name, but their work is--WTF, or totally skipped, probably because the whole of Black literature goes against these white men’s structuralism, and postulations. On one hand, I’m glad they left them alone, but on the other, the saying this is the only way, while glaringly missing the obvious really is sickening.

As for dumping on women--well... should we go back to Aristotle being an ass and starting the whole anti-choice campaigns because somehow Aristotle is Jesus, even though Jesus didn’t say anything about Ensoulment at conception? And then indoctrinated white women trying to rescue Aristotle from taking the axe because all of his scientific ideas were wrong? (Just axe him--he was popular with the Victorians for a reason--he was a misogynistic asshole and that reinforced their worldview very well.) (And if you think I don’t have references for the anti-choice statement... oh wait for it... I so have it)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ensoulment Wikipedia, but I found scholarly articles too--not sure you want to be buried with that. Aristotle is not Jesus. !@#$ And Aristotle thought women got their soul later than men, because, as I said, royal asshole, to the point I want to do a whole long rant about how much of an irrelevant ah he was.

[chequerootlurks]

Let’s talk about reboots for a moment. Let’s not look at background for the reboots, or their creators. I’m going to point out a good, and a bad.

This show deserves more recognition:

There were a variety of ethnicities, body types, sexual orientations (including asexual!), neurodivergence, and gender identities.

Those were all secondary to the plot! The biggest thing was the characters were PEOPLE!, not vessels for “wokeness.”

Meanwhile, this show (“Velma”) that I watched three episodes of tonight — “bad TV night” is a thing in our house — is as painful as everyone says.

[article and a 12ft ladder to get past the paywall]

“Velma” feels like “Family Guy,” only if “Family Guy” tried to be over-the-top woke instead of offensive.

It has the same, unrelenting brash humour that prefers to browbeat the audience, rather than understate. As such, it’s not funny, nor clever. The characters’ pointed political speeches would be funny if they were done on rare occasion. Instead, almost every other discussion is something overdone. Wayyy to try hard.

In terms of ‘wokeness’ “Sonic Boom” did it better.

“Velma” ironically pushes the division between gender, race, and sexual orientation.

In episode three, we see the women fight to be “The Least Weak,” or a phase summat like that. Physical brawling. The show -could!- have raised up and pointed out how women should support each other rather than fight each other… but I guess we’re not ready for “women fight -for!- other women” speech here.

I guess “wokeness” for this show is limited to meta humour, PSA type monologues, and eye-rolling diatribes. It limited its wokeness to convenience and already heavily discussed issues.

I might also add Velma is an unlikeable character. She’s mean spirited, really quite a bully in her own right. Proof that you don’t need to be “popular” to be a selfish jerk.

She reminds me of Rick Sanchez, or Bojack Horseman.

Granted, I love those shows, but the supporting cast was always ready to call Rick and Bojack out on their toxic and destructive behaviors.

The show seems to ignore the importance of having balancing support. People who call out Velma for being as much the villain as anyone else encountered this far.

Norville (Shaggy) is hopelessly in love with Velma, he lets her abuse his friendship.

At the end of Episode 3, Daphne calls Velma out on a few things, but I have a feeling that won’t cause an overall change in Velma’s behavior. At least not for a while. Maybe there’s a “growth” arc planned.

If not? Ouch.

Also, I’m kinda tired of the “white male as the jerk” trope.

Yes, white males have a leg up in society, especially if they’re cishet… but there ARE! cishet white men who are decent people.

The only positive white male character this mud far is biracial Norville’s dad… and he’s not even a main character.

Making one skin-type/gender the bad guy doesn’t make a show “woke.”

All in all, “Velma” misses the mark.

I don’t know what it’s trying to do, but it’s bad at it.

I am curious about the mystery, but I’ll just read the end online. I don’t care enough to watch it.

[sparrowsabre7]

Best of 2022

Tagged by @summerhomeineskew

Will do my best to include at least one 2022 thing for each but if I don't have any it will just have to be "x I experienced for the first time this year".

Books:

Been awful with books this year, only read three and I don't even remember which three. One was a re-read as well. Therefore I'll cheat and add one I finished at the very end of last year, maybe finished on New Year's Day 2022 so sorta counts: Death's End by Cixin Liu, the final installment of the Remembrance of Earth's Past Trilogy (aka the Three Body Problem trilogy). It's hard sci-fi with some incredible storytelling and world building. It feels effortlessly real despite incredibly big ideas and a storyline that spans centuries. I don't wish to summarise, not necessarily for spoiler reasons, but because written in synopsis it doesn't sound all that interesting, but in reading it it is one of the most immersive and thrilling reading experiences I have had in a very long time.

Movies:

Ugh, I feel shamed that the only films I've seen in the cinema this year were superhero movies. And I love superhero movies don't get me wrong, but I really wish I could give my patronage to worthier fare, but having limited time and a small child means you need to be reasonably certain you're going to at least partially like the movie you watch.

I saw "Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness", "Thor Love and Thunder", and "Black Adam". All entertaining in their own way, Doctor Strange probably my favourite of the three, but the film I saw this year and enjoyed the most was probably "The Matrix Resurrections". I actually really liked a lot of things Lana Wachowski did with the storyline, even if it did feel like it was being wrung from her against her will with some pretty on the nose metatextual moments. Nonetheless, she refused to make "another Matrix" be what the studio and audience probably expected and wanted and instead went full George Lucas (and I mean that as a compliment) made the Matrix she wanted to make. I felt it was handled surprisingly deftly and although Weaving and Fishburne are SORELY missed, their replacements hold their own well.

Songs:

Ugh, I out myself very clearly as a basic cishet white man here and say, honestly? My favourite songs this year were from Taylor Swift and a Disney movie respectively. I really like "Anti-Hero" and "Surface Pressure" the latter especially for articulating the kind of struggle I think most people (women especially) deal with daily that is rarely acknowledged, let alone fully discussed in children's entertainment.

*Games:

A lot of old games this year bith new to me and recisted. The only 2022 game this year was "Lego Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga" and it is so much fun, if overwhelmingly large. There's like a thousand bricks to collect this time as opposed to the usual low hundred or so. The number of characters is impressive though andnthe updated mechanics makes it play unlike any other Lego game does.

Honourable mentions of games I played for the first time this year:

Lethal league - Really fun sports game meets fighting game, sort of dodgebaseball, frenetic fun

Exo One - A chill game with satisfying mechanics, pilot an unusual spacecraft through numerous planets

Halo 5 - I don't much like Halo as a series but I do like some of the individual games, as a result the "lore butchery" didn't bother me at all and I actually felt it was making some bold story choices that Inwould not have expected

Ghost of Tsushima - Beautiful looking and expertly crafted ninja/samurai game. Ubisoft wishes they could make AC this good again.

Shows:

Honestly here is where I lay out my unabashed love for "Obi-wan Kenobi". When it was announced I knew I was going to love it no matter what and whilst there are some flaws in the narrative that leave some gaping plot holes or confusing character choices, the overall experience was so much more than I ever dared dream, we got Obi-wan vs Vader twice. We got Hayden and Ewan back giving a much more layeed performance, we got some really heartfelt moments between Obi-wan and Leia and I actually liked Reva as a character, even if her decision in the final episode made little sense.

"House of the Dragon" also surpassed expectations, even as someone who was satisfied with GOTs ending. Special mention also to Ms. Marvel for giving a refreshing take on teen heroes and a standout turn from newcomer Iman Vellani, and pour one out for "Legends of Tomorrow", the show that dared to be stupid.

Memories:

So many new ones with a small child but best has to be first snow with him in an idyllic cottage in the countryside with my wife and in laws. Also built my first snowman at 32 and used one of my son's veggie straw crisps for its nose.

*added because I love video games more than music so a better metric for me

I tag @unseeliefaerie and @cryptobotanical should they wish to partake (no need to do so if you don't want to though =))

Edit: OMG I forgot "Glass Onion" was the best film of 2022. Got in just under the wire on NYE. Funny and entertaining, not quite as good as "Knives Out" and imo a less interesting supporting cast that wasted some of its talents (Leslie Odom Jr and Kathryn Hahn to name two) but Janelle Monae was terrific and Daniel Craig got more to chew on this time; still a very fun time.

[dogboysora]

I'll start by saying that I genuinely appreciate the civility of your response. It is not a courtesy I extended to you, since I'd rather rudely assumed it would be futile to engage in good faith. This was just another TME/TMA debate post crossing my dash to me before, but from this point on, I am taking the conversation seriously.

"You are, objectively, worse off than a binary transgender man for being nonbinary."

How so? By what objective measure? I have many experiences in common with binary trans men, though yes there are differences. In a certain respect, I am worse off because it is not possible in our current society to pass/go stealth as nonbinary. However, a binary trans man who presents more masculinely than I do has lesser access than I do (as a very androgynous person who's often assumed female) to support services for women or women & nonbinary people. A passing/stealth binary trans man also has to navigate the minefield of determining whether it's safe to reveal his transness to others, or he may be forcibly outed, leading to intense backlash. The same is true of stealth/passing binary trans women. And I certainly can't imagine ever thinking of a binary trans man of color as privileged over myself, a white person.

"And that [nonbinary TMA], on top of exorsexism, faces transmisogyny."

Yes. True. We agree that there are many axes upon which an individual may be oppressed.

"[Transmisogyny] is the additional stigma that you face for being specifically transfem, as opposed to anything else."

I have seen other definitions, but for the purpose of this discussion, I'll stick with the one you've given me. Transmisogyny is not just any instance of transphobia combined with misogyny then, it is specifically transphobia + misogyny targeting transfems. These are the people you call TMA. It makes sense, then, to call me TME since I am not transfem. I realize this may seem redundant, but my intent is simply to show that I am following your logic. So, now we've established a logical binary. A person is either transfem or not, and therefore either a target of transmisogyny or not.

All that established, I have followup questions:

When a passing, fully post-op trans man goes out in a dress and someone harasses him and calls him specifically transmisogynistic slurs like "shemale", what form of discrimination is he facing? Does it count as transmisogyny because the harasser believed the target was a trans woman? If so, is it still fair to call him TME? Or does the simple fact that it happened to a non-transfem mean it wasn't transmisogyny and instead something else, despite exactly the same mechanisms being at play as the mechanisms of transmisogyny?

How about a cis butch lesbian being assaulted for "invading" the women's restroom? How about a cis intersex woman with facial hair being accused by her cishet male date of trying to "trick" him into sleeping with her?

On to the next point. You have mentioned the existence of spaces that lump together cis women and enben who were AFAB. They do exist, but... do I really need to explain the problem with these spaces? Would *you* be comfortable going to a "men and nonbinary" space for support or necessary medical services, if that were a commonplace thing? It's very alienating to have nonbinary "inclusion" haphazardly tacked onto otherwise heavily and traditionally gendered spaces. Granted, this is anecdotal, but I have never known a single nonbinary person—even fem-presenting AFAB enben—to feel truly accepted, safe, or welcome in a space like that. Those who pass for female are misgendered, while those who don't are mistreated or just flat out turned away. Especially for those of us that have pursued masculinizing transition, even "inclusive" clinics don't always know what to do with us. I know people who have been told by "trans-inclusive" or even other trans/nonbinary doctors that x or y problem is because of their testosterone, without consideration for other possible reasons.

Next- Thank you for bringing up the example of neovagina-related gynecological treatment. This aspect of trans healthcare is often overlooked in these discussions, and I'm sure I'm guilty myself of overlooking it in past conversations. Assuming it's true that someone with a neovagina would have a harder time receiving adequate gynecological care than I would (which I doubt since anyone with a neovagina is either getting the relevant care from the same provider that did their surgery or can get references from their surgeon/generally is likely to be connected with certain medical networks already), that still doesn't really prove to me transfems altogether have lesser access to adequate healthcare than transmascs altogether. Transfems with neovaginas are a minority of transfems—that doesn't make their struggles any less important, but should we so choose to look at this issue in terms of scale... the vast majority of transmascs require at least some gynecological care in their lives. As you know, the state of gynecological care is abysmal to begin with, but throw in transmasculinity and several more circles of hell open up. There's also the fact that most transmascs also have (or at some point had) a uterus and ovaries. Medical misogyny affects us when it comes to those parts of the reproductive system as well, again coupled with medical transphobia and ignorance of how HRT affects our bodies. And remember when Apple dropped this emoji 🫃? It was fucking open season across the internet, everyone was mocking the idea of a man being able to get pregnant, mpreg jokes everywhere, etc. Most discussions of pregnancy healthcare, whether that healthcare is abortion or pre-natal care, use gendered language. This is more than just a discomfort problem though, because a law that says "Women have a right to abortion" would not protect any non-woman's right to abortion. A health insurance company that covers pregnancy ultrasounds for legally female patients would leave a transmasc patient paying out of pocket. And then on top of that, like I already mentioned, pregnant transmascs are objects of everything from ridicule to confusion to fear to disgust to fetishization, by everyone from fellow trans people (even transmascs) to TERFs to comedians to doctors to midwives. This may seem tangential, but I think it's worth discussing the topic of abortion & pregnancy because it is an area in which transphobia and misogyny act together to affect transmascs, and it is a particular combination of transphobia and misogyny that transfems (with the exception of potentially some intersex transfems) literally, physically cannot experience.

"You can always exempt yourself from transmisogyny specifically"

If transmisogyny truly is exclusively the unique kind of discrimination that transfems are targeted with, then again, sure, I'm TME by definition because I am not transfem. I find your wording here rather strange, as "you can exempt yourself" implies I have a choice in the matter. Which is a bit confusing because I thought whether a person is TME or TMA is, in your model, a matter of who/what they are and not a choice. I want to be charitable to you, though, so I will assume you didn't intend to imply I can somehow choose what oppression I do or don't experience.

Now, again, based on my understanding of your definition of TME/TMA: what makes this language more useful than just saying transfem/not transfem? If transfem and TMA are synonymous, then it seems to me that all the TMA/TME distinction accomplishes is grouping transmascs together with cis people. Which is a strange thing to do when cis people, generally speaking, hold systemic and institutional power over transmascs, and within that group, cis men hold systemic and institutional power over cis women. "TME" is a group that includes many different strata with an unfathomably vast disparity in levels of privilege. It is, quite frankly, disingenuous to make any generalization or claim about us (transmascs + cis people) as a demographic when that demographic is so broad and includes such a huge chunk of the human population.

"Transfems are murdered at a higher rate than transmascs."

I took the time to read the study you linked, and it was very informative, so thank you for that. It is interesting to see the numbers laid out for media-reported homicides of trans people. Note the "media-reported" part. When the author of this study analyzed their data, they had to make certain assumptions in order to account for underreporting. This is understandable and in fact good practice on their part. However... this assumption is still an assumption, based on little information since there simply isn't sufficient data out there, and the study assumes the rate of underreporting is the same for all trans demographics. We live under a patriarchal system though, in which womanhood is equated with victimhood, and it's generally well accepted that transmasc oppression tends to manifest in the form of erasure whereas transfems are hypervisible due to the ways in which they are demonized. So, I think it's fair game to argue that transmascs may be especially vulnerable to being reported as cis female victims. Another point of interest about this study is that it found trans homicide victim rates overall to be proportionally lower than those of cis people. If that finding is accurate (which I doubt), then it implies that there is more to the story of what motivates homicide than gender alone and thus that homicide is an unreliable indicator of how gendered oppression operates.

I would also like to point out that, in my admittedly subjective and biased opinion, the most famous murder of a trans person in the U.S. is Brandon Teena's murder. I genuinely do not think we have yet seen another case of a trans person being murdered with as much of a lasting cultural impact. And that cultural impact is one of ridicule. People still fondly remember the comedian I Shall Not Name who "joked" that Brandon Teena deserved to be raped and murdered in his own home. In fact, I have seen many people point to that particular "joke" as one of their favorite "jokes" ever told. All of the news and media and the mainstream discourse of the time referred to Teena as a crossdressing woman. If they sympathized, it was only pity for a mentally ill woman being murdered. This isn't some "gotcha", this isn't "See? This one case means transmascs have it worse". I wanna be clear about why I'm including this. This is something with significant cultural impact and I believe that cultural impact is worth consideration *alongside* consideration of broader hate crime and violence statistics.

All that aside, even in the event that it's 100% reliably and verifiably true that transfems are murdered at a statistically significantly higher rate, that is still just one metric. Same with the wage gap. I could talk about how other research has found that transmascs face higher rates of sexual assault, domestic violence, and stalking than transfems. We could, in fact, go back and forth all day debating the validity of various findings or which statistics are more important and so on. To get anything even close to a full picture understanding of transphobic oppression from a statistical perspective, we would need a fuckton more credible research than exists in the world. And even with a solid understanding of many different metrics (different forms of violence, poverty and homelessness rates, public opinion, mental illness rates, etc), we still wouldn't have the whole story because numbers can only tell us so much about what people's actual lived experiences are like.

"Transfeminism is not exorsexist..."

Never said it was.

" ...for putting nonbinary people where they logically belong in this system."

What does logic have to do with any of this? I'm serious. There is perhaps nothing in this world more illogical than systems of oppression. And yet you insist that a logical model of a clear-cut hierarchy (cis men > cis women > binary trans men > nonbinary AFABs > binary trans women > nonbinary AMABs) can accurately explain how oppression, which is innately illogical, operates. Where do masculine-presenting enben who were AMAB fall in this hierarchy? Where do intersex people of various stripes fall in this hierarchy? Where do GNC cis people fall in this hierarchy? Where do nonbinary people who identify as both fully male and fully female fall in this hierarchy? Where do intersex people forcibly operated on and forced onto HRT, only to later medically transition in the other direction, fall in this hierarchy?

This model is overly simplistic. It's too logical, too neat, too clean. Real human experiences are illogical, messy, nuanced, and altogether difficult to categorize.

You say you are not perpetuating the binarization of nonbinary people but you are. Countless nonbinary experiences are invisibilized in your rhetoric. The idea that nonbinary people can even all be sorted into "transfem" and "not transfem" is absurd in the face of infinite variety in our identities and experiences. Thus, I find the idea of placing people into a TME/TMA binary exorsexist, intersexist, and incredibly trivializing of "TME" people's experiences with gendered oppression.

i think in terms of gender liberation what i would like people to understand the most is that the obligatory nature of manhood or womanhood exists in tandem with the obligatory nature of conforming to whichever you were assigned. I'm going to use a close friend as an example, who is a TMA nonbinary person: in a summation of their many words - "you know what it's like on top of being hated by everyone for being TMA? going outside and never passing or being able to say my gender even when i can pretend to be cis, and then going inside a group of other TMA people and getting misgendered there too." the axis of power between the nonbinary and the binary person is similar to the axis of power in between the TMA and TME person. Just as TMEs have greater access to healthcare, social recognition and capital over TMA people, so too in a group of just TMA people will those who are women more easily access healthcare due to transmedicalism, more easily pass as their genders (it is impossible for a nonbinary person to ever pass as nonbinary in the vast majority of the world), and more easily have their gender respected than a nonbinary TMA. to the point where even the people most up to speed on gender liberation, will say "trans women" instead of "TMAs" when talking about transmisogyny. Because everyone is either a man or a woman, right? Even if you consciously say otherwise, that's how you discuss gender, and it is incorrect because society does in fact acknowledge nonbinarity for one purpose only. To erase, suppress and mock it.

[levitatingbiscuits]

people would be calling din a child abuser if they weren't thirsty for pedro pascal

for real, the parasocial thirsting for pedro really gave brain rot to a number of his stans. i will never forget the people who tried using his ethnicity to derail posts from poc calling out disney's abysmal mistreatment of temuera in his own show. someone was literally like "why are you pitting two leads of color against each other?" no, we're fucking mad because boba was an indigenous leading man and his last episodes were taken over by the white guy who was created as a blatant rip off of boba. and yet boba is the one whose series was handled so poorly by disney. i will never forgive the showrunners for that. people are constantly bending ass backwards to make excuses for din while shitting on legacy characters who have been iconic for years, calling boba an inferior version of din or luke a baby snatcher or whoever else they need to throw under the bus to prop up their favorite mandalorian. i'm TIRED.

also as a poc, it's so funny seeing several white women in the fandom act like they are woke for stanning din/pedro the white latino. lmao shut up.

Yeah it's incredibly transparent that a lot of star wars fans are racist. The shipping/fanfiction/tumblr side of fandom likes to think that we're so much less racist/sexist than the toxic cishet fanboys you find on reddit and YouTube, because many of us are queer and/or women, but we're REALLY NOT. I'd argue that the most egregious fandom racism against Finn (and John Boyega), Mace Windu, the clones, and Boba Fett has come from US, rather than the YouTube hot take guys. As white fans, it's our responsibility to actively work to make fandom inclusive, otherwise POC actors and fans get silenced or harassed over whichever white blorbo is the flavor of the month.

It's also very telling that Boba lost a lot of his popularity when Lucas revealed that he was a Maori man instead of a white guy. If you play internet fandom historian you can find a ton of racist meltdowns and people complaining that Temuera Morrison wasn't "cool enough" to be Boba Fett, that his voice ruined the character and the old voice was better (even though you could still find plenty of editions where there was no dubbing), etc.

Imagine if they created a replacement of a white character like Han or Anakin or Kylo instead of a brown character like Boba, and then had that expy take over their show halfway through. The fans would have LOST. THEIR. SHIT. Yet Boba, who was so beloved and hyped for so long, suddenly isn't cool anymore when we can see his skin and instead this irrelevant white guy they can more easily project themselves onto/fantasize about being with is just soooooo much more interesting. Never mind that he has his OWN SHOW, he's gotta take over the OG's too. And his job, because obviously Boba can't be a cool bounty hunter going on a lot of different episodic adventures anymore when DIN'S around to do that. Let's just shackle him to Tatooine and follow Din whenever we want to show bounty hunting badassery or Mandalorian culture (which was quite literally invented to be Boba's background).

Also how fucking cool would it be to see BOBA FETT with the DARKSABER. Fans have been fantasizing about Boba with a lightsaber since the fucking Christmas special. Get on it Disney!!!

Thank you for sharing your perspective, I appreciate it!

[mellometal]

Is it time to tear ANOTHER Dhar Mann video to shreds? YOU BET.

I've been sitting on this one for a bit because I wanted to make sure I talk about this tactfully. The subject of parents abandoning their disabled children is a very touchy one.

Parents abandoning their disabled children simply for being disabled is way too common. Like, I understand that not everyone has the resources to care for a disabled child (which is why you reach out for help, and why people like me, who work with disabled people, exist), but it doesn't mean you just walk out of their life. There are exceptions, like if you truly didn't want children or something like that, but just flat-out walking out of your kid's life BECAUSE they're disabled is fucked up.

I know someone personally whose biological mother abandoned her when she was born. Why? Because she's disabled. Physically, and mentally, to a point. I work with this woman on a daily basis. I don't really know WHY exactly her biological mother abandoned her, but I do know that her being disabled was part of it. It's sad. It doesn't affect her, thankfully. I'm happy that she's got her biological dad, her brother, and another maternal figure in her life, at least.

ANYWAYS. Before we get to the topic at hand, I need to put an obligatory trigger warning, like I do with EVERY Dhar Mann post:

This post will be talking about parents abandoning their disabled children simply for being disabled, treating disabilities like they're tragedies (in this case, we're talking about autism...again), divorce, and some SPICY ableist bullshit from an allistic (nonautistic) PIECE OF SHIT.

If any of this triggers you or makes you uncomfortable in any way, you don't have to read this post. This isn't worth putting yourself in a bad state mentally. I would never ask for any of you to put yourselves in that position all for a post. Put your mental health and well-being first. Consume media that sparks joy for you.

As far as my response goes, it's definitely more calm than normal. Funny....since this video is about autism spectrum disorder again. (Third time's the charm, huh, Dhar Mann? NOT.)

LET'S FUCKING GET IT.

The video starts off with these two parents (Gwen and Allen) in a psychologist's office. The psychologist tells the parents that their son (Chance) is autistic, and she tries to explain what autism is to the parents, but Allen cuts her off. Why? Because he teaches at a prestigious university, so he AUTOMATICALLY knows what autism is from that fact alone.

Um, excuse me? Just because you're a teacher at a prestigious university, it doesn't mean you're an expert in everything. It doesn't make you an expert in ASD or anything like that. Unless you SPECIALIZE in that area. Even then, shut the fuck up. The people who know about being autistic are AUTISTIC PEOPLE THEMSELVES! SHOCKER.

Hey, Dhar Mann! QUIT WITH THE VIDEOS ABOUT AUTISTIC LITTLE WHITE BOYS AND YOUNG WHITE AUTISTIC CISHET MEN! I'M SICK AND TIRED OF IT. It's annoying, ignorant, and it feels like you're doing this on purpose at this point to piss people off. If you're so uninformed about autism in women and girls, FUCKING ASK AUTISTIC WOMEN AND GIRLS! DO BETTER RESEARCH THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE AUTISM SPEAKS. The Autism Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) and the Autistic Women and Nonbinary People Network (AWN) are great organizations to go to for any kind of research on ASD in women and girls. STOP GOING OFF OF THE BRAINS OF AUTISTIC WHITE BOYS AND AUTISTIC WHITE MEN.

I don't feel I need to go too deep into the fact that autistic women, autistic girls, autistic nonbinary people, autistic BIPOC, autistic AAPI, autistic LGBT people, autistic teenagers, and autistic adults exist. Y'all already know.

Gwen asks the psychologist if that means Chance isn't healthy. (I understand not knowing about autism, but don't treat it like it's a terminal illness. Please.) The psychologist tells her that Chance is fine, but he just learns differently and might need more support compared to his peers.

Yeah, autism can affect how you learn about certain things (limited and repetitive patterns), but there are other disabilities that can affect learning as well. Like how dyslexia can affect your ability to read, dyspraxia can affect your ability to do math, and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) can affect your ability to focus or on impulse control. Autism affects how your brain is developed, it affects you socially, behaviorally, and how you communicate.

Allen is upset, says that he can't have a son "with a learning disability" (ASD is a neurological disability, not necessarily a learning disability), and treats Chance like he's stupid for being autistic. Gwen tells her husband that autism doesn't make you any less intelligent, WHICH IS SO FUCKING TRUE. ABSOLUTE FACTS. I was totally with her until she began that little monologue with "Just because a person HAS autism". SAY "JUST BECAUSE A PERSON'S AUTISTIC" INSTEAD! IT'S NOT HARD. PERSON FIRST LANGUAGE ISN'T WHAT EVERY DISABLED PERSON PREFERS. Allen says that "they could have another kid" and "put Chance up for adoption". Gwen obviously wasn't down with that. Allen gives his wife an ultimatum that it's either HIM or their son Chance. Gwen says that she can't choose between the two, but she will stand by her autistic son. Allen gets up and leaves the office, saying he wants a divorce.

Years pass by, Gwen is single and taking care of her autistic son Chance, and Allen has a new life with a ✨perfect son✨ (Samuel). He never mentions the son HE abandoned (Chance). He's completely forgotten about Gwen and Chance. (YOU OWE SO MUCH CHILD SUPPORT, ALLEN.)

Hey, Allen, how much do you wanna bet that your ✨perfect son✨ Samuel is autistic too?

There's the SATs, they're announcing a winner, and guess who it is? IT'S OBVIOUSLY CHANCE, OF COURSE. He's got the highest score in the country, with Samuel in second place. Allen is PISSED.

Chance gives a speech about how his mom really helped him, he struggled with autism, how Allen LITERALLY ABANDONED HIM, and THE CROWD GOES FUCKING WILD. Samuel, instead of being a sore loser, APPLAUDS FOR CHANCE. Stay humble, Sam.

My thoughts on the video? If you cannot tell by my tone throughout this post, IT WAS DOG SHIT. This video was insensitive to the true reality of parents abandoning their disabled children just because they're disabled. What do I expect from Dhar Mann at this point?

Here's my response to his video below. Don't worry, I will fully type out my response soon for anyone who cannot read the screenshots easily. It's a lot easier for me to do that on the desktop site than it is for me to do it on my phone.

For anyone who can’t read my response, I’m typing it out for you. Like I said, it’s easier for me to type it out on the desktop site than it is for me to type it out on my phone. It’s a real royal pain in the ass. But because I’m trying to make my posts easier to read for people, I’m doing this anyway. /lighthearted

First, second, and third screenshots (broken up into paragraphs):

Hey, listen, I appreciate the message you’re trying to go for, but can you please stop putting autistic people into a box? Can you stop treating being autistic like it’s a tragedy? Not every single autistic person is a little white boy in elementary school who’s considered “wild and unruly” or “super quiet and makes no friends”, nor are they a young white cishet man who’s a super genius or is how Chris Chan was before she came out as trans. (For anyone who doesn’t know about Chris Chan, there are many documentaries people have made on YouTube, and I highly recommend Geno Samuel’s docuseries, if you’re really interested in learning about Chris Chan.)

Autistic women, girls, nonbinary people, BIPOC, APPI, LGBT people, teenagers, and adults all exist too. 

It’s very apparent now that you get your resources from Autism $peaks, a hate group that spends the vast majority of their money on funding eugenics instead of helping autistic people like they claim, claims that only little white boys and young white cishet men are autistic and ignores all other autistic people who don’t fit that description, have no autistic people on their leader board or on any board for that matter, have members who have actually fantasized about k1lling their autistic children, treat autism like it’s a tragedy or a disease someone can catch (completely false), act like autism should be cured (there is no cure, and ABA therapy is a total shit show in itself), and treats autistic people like they’re broken and need to be fixed. Also, not every autistic person is a Super Genius(tm). That’s so demeaning to autistic people who aren’t seen as intelligent in any way. I’m autistic and seen as smart; however, there are subjects I’m stronger in than others.

If you can’t handle the possibility of having autistic children, or just disabled children in general, DON’T HAVE CHILDREN. If you can’t handle working with or alongside disabled people, including autistic people, maybe find a different profession. Even if you do that, you’ll never get away from disabled people. Disabled people aren’t a disease. We’re human beings just like neurotypical and able-bodied people.

Fourth and fifth screenshots (broken up into paragraphs): 

I would highly suggest getting resources from reputable organizations for ASD, such as the Autism Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) and the Autistic Women and Nonbinary People Network (AWN). Talk to any autistic person who isn’t a little white boy or a young white cishet man. 

Instead of using the puzzle piece, which is a symbol that many autistic people, myself included, are offended by (because of Autism $peaks and other organizations before them using it, plus it symbolizes that only autistic children exist and that we’re “missing a piece” like we’re broken), use the rainbow infinity sign (for all neurodivergent people) or the red and gold infinity sign (just for autistic people). Instead of “lighting it up blue”, light it up red or gold. Do both if you want. 

I’m actually really sick and tired of seeing just autistic little white boys and young autistic white cishet men being represented in the media, and y’all manage to fuck that up too. 

Before anyone mentions Sia’s movie “Music”, that’s also very poor representation of autistic girls. Besides, the actress who played the autistic girl isn’t even autistic. She MOCKED autistic people. I know she’s a kid, but that’s still super fucked up. I hope she’s able to turn that around. 

If anyone would like to discuss this topic with me or ask any questions, feel free to. I’ll answer as best as I can. Thank you and have a good night.

Before I get attacked for mentioning Chris Chan in my response, I bring up Chris Chan because allistic people think that every autistic person is like her (especially before she came out as trans). That person is part of why I wasn't open about being autistic or talking about my diagnosis until this year. I didn't want to be grouped up with Chris Chan because I do have very similar interests to her, I've been seen as cringey for having said interests, and just the way Chris treated autistic people who were formerly diagnosed with A$p3rg3r$ $yndr0m3 (like I was) really made me feel even more alienated.

Also, S1a supports A$ (Autism $p3aks). She's not a very good person to support. Some of her music is good, but her as a person....no. Her movie "Music" was gross, from what I've read about it and seen pictures of.

If you've read this far, thank you so much!

[andyinmiddleearth]

Not to be cisphobic but like... you know what screw it, I hate cis people. And by that I don’t mean that I hate every single individual cis person that exists, I actually have several cis friends and family members that I am close to and love. I mean that I hate cis people as my oppressors, that I hate cis people as a class that oppresses gender-non-conforming, intersex, trans, and non-binary people. Here’s some examples of the systems of oppression cis people as a class have placed that still hurt us to this day:

I hate gender-reveals parties. I hate the fact that a baby’s interests, decorations, hell even their entire personality, is determined just by simply looking at the fetus’ outward genitalia. Not to mention how inaccurate it can be cause sex is a spectrum (meaning it’s much more than just genitalia, it includes hormones, chromosomes, etc, and these can be super diverse and I myself, an AFAB person, don’t naturally produce estrogen) which is why some intersex people don’t even know they’re intersex until they get checked out by a specialist in their late teens or twenties.

I hate cis people assuming pronouns, ESPECIALLY when it comes to people like me that are visibly queer. I hate going to a doctor’s office and having to listen to nurses and even doctors call me sis, girl, ma’am, lady, she, her, when over here I’m standing with a ‘men’s’ haircut and wearing entirely ‘men’s’ clothes. But as a whole, I just hate assuming people’s pronouns in general because gender is so much more than gender expression. Men can be feminine, women can be masculine, non-binary people can be as femme or masc as they want. Our bodies and our clothes don’t determine our gender. We do.

I also hate cis people not respecting pronouns on purpose, like that time at Einstein Bagels where I was wearing my he/him pin and the cashier kept repeatedly calling me ‘ma’am’ despite me wearing this 2.25 inch long button WITH MY PRONOUNS ON IT. I hate how I have family members that purposefully misgender me every single fucking day despite me being out as trans to them for YEARS because they just think ‘being transgender is a choice, like being vegan.’ I hate how one of these said family members does everything they fucking can to trigger my dysphoria and constant remind me that they see me as a woman.

I hate cissexism. I hate words like ‘lady parts’ and ‘boy parts’ and ‘girl parts.’ Boys and girls (and all genders) can have whatever private parts they have and still be their gender AND IT’S NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, and frankly very creepy to want to know what’s in someone’s pants. I hate how instead of using terms like afab or amab it’s just ‘male parts’ and ‘female parts,’ ‘male body,’ ‘female body,’ which also blatantly erases intersex people that may have both, or something else entirely different.

I hate how cis people have made this concept about the ‘the perfect trans person’ that people in the trans community (yes, I’m talking about transmeds) will shit on our non-binary and non-dysphoric trans siblings because ‘they make us look like a joke.’ Spoiler alert, cis people as a class hate trans people because they’re transphobic, period, not because some random non-binary sixteen year old uses ze/hir pronouns and is non-dysphoric. I hate how I was harassed on this platform FOR YEARS and sent hate on and off anon by transmeds simply because I, a dysphoric trans guy, think you don’t need dysphoria to be trans. Because I think being trans is so much more about being uncomfortable in your body, because I think you can have gender euphoria and not gender dysphoria. And I hate how the transmeds that bullied me also called me all kinds of slurs (both referring to my ethnicity as a Latino and also just homophobic ones like the f-slur) and perpetuated exactly the behavior they see white cishet men perform because they think that way maybe they will accept them. Spoiler alert; they won’t.

I hate how intersex babies are mutilated every day around the world simply because of how they are born while trans children and young adults are still being denied access to LIFE-SAVING resources like hormone blockers, HRT, surgery, etc. I hate how long the waitlists are for trans people in places like the UK and Canada are to transition, and I hate how monetarily expensive it can be even with insurance in the USA, since this is the main reason why I can’t start T right now (that and the fact that I live with family members that wouldn’t support me transitioning).

I hate how anything can be a ‘girl’ or ‘boy’ thing. Things as simple as drinks for fuck’s sake. Why is a beer a ‘man’s drink’ and a fruity cocktail a ‘lady’s drink?’ Same goes for everything... clothing, movies, certain games, even basic chores like cooking and cleaning. Hell, even interests can be a ‘girl or boy’ thing. One time I was reading a thick book and this cis man (he knew I’m AFAB cause my parents misgendered me to him obviously) went ‘oh yeah us guys don’t read that much.’ EXCUSE ME SIR BUT I AM A GUY, AND I DO NOT WANT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH YOU!

I hate how when a trans person comes out as a child they are ‘too young to know,’ and when a trans person comes out as a teen they are ‘just going through a phase/copying trends,’ and when a trans person comes out as an adult then ‘they can’t really be trans because they never shoWeD thE siGns.’ There’s no age to realize you’re trans, everyone accepts their identity at different rates and that’s valid. And there’s no age to transition either.

I hate how when you come out as trans cis people magically expect you to suddenly not look trans anymore. How they expect trans men after coming out to have perfectly flat chests and no curves, how they expect trans women to suddenly grow boobs and look feminine af, and how they expect non-binary people to look as androgynous as possible. All kinds of bodies are trans, and you don’t need to medically transition to be trans. Some trans folks don’t have surgery or HRT or anything at all for whatever reason, and they’re still valid.

I hate how some cis people will misgender us trans people no matter how well we pass the minute they find out we’re trans. A trans man can have a flat chest, a full grown beard and a deep voice and the minute someone finds out he’s trans he’s suddenly ‘really a woman.’ I hate how this misgendering of trans people is one of the reasons why so many of us (41%) have attempted suicide, myself included. And I hate how badly cis people deteriorate our mental health just by refusing to use our pronouns and real name instead of our deadnames.

I hate all of these things, and there are so many more... but yeah, that’s what I mean when I say I hate cis people. I don’t hate cis people individually, I hate cis people because as a class they are complicit in my oppression and the way they keep upholding society contributes to our extremely high rates of mental illness, depression, and suicide. I’ve tried to kill myself too many times to count exactly because of all of these things. So yeah, call me a cisphobe if you want. I’m just a trans person that’s fed up with the transphobia, cisnormativity and cissexism that is shoved down my throat every day.

[elfyourmother]

once more, with feeling! because i really feel like this deserves its own post instead of tacked onto a long ass reply chain conversation, for the benefit of anyone else who might need to hear it as much as I do:

I really, really don’t want to tell you what to do, because I know how hard it is and how fraught these things can be, but I want to offer some encouragement if it’s not too presumptuous. and FTR I am the absolute worst at taking my own advice, it’s always been much easier for me to encourage others lmao but! there is room for all kinds of characters, and the kind of humblebrag race to the bottom stuff that goes on in other MMORPGs with PCs is honestly...kinda weird to me when applied to FFXIV’s player character and I don’t think it’s especially in the spirit of things. The lore encourages you to go ham! FF protagonists are OP by definition, even in FF Record Keeper the protagonist characters have higher base level stats and access to more Job schools than the other units. FFXIV’s WoL is no different and I mean as of 5.3 we even have a legit lore explanation we can point to for it if you really needed one to feel okay about it. WoL is literally the main character. They’re special and powerful by definition, sometimes in unusual ways.

And I know as marginalized people that isn’t something we’ve historically had a lot of access to in mainstream fiction by design, especially POC and particularly Black folks, and especially particularly Black women and even those who don’t ID as women but were socialized as and are viewed that way. we are told over and over again that power fantasies are acceptable for cishet able bodied NT white men and them only.

and you know what? that’s 50 tons of absolutely deranged horseshit and I’ve been pushing back on it since i was 9 years old pretending Mario and Luigi were Black girls going on adventures in my lil Lisa Frank Trapper Keeper I never showed anybody

like I said I’m The Worst at taking my own words to heart so I know it helps hearing it from other people, so I’ll just keep saying it: You’re Allowed. You’re allowed to have fun! You’re not hurting anybody, or trampling on their characters, or forcing anything on them. You’re allowed to take up space. You’re allowed to have flights of fancy, you’re allowed to indulge yourself, you’re allowed to have fun. Anybody who says otherwise isn’t worth your time and tbqh if they don’t like it nobody is forcing them to read your content or RP with you. follow your heart and have fun, you’re allowed. there is room here for everybody to have fun.

[phoenixfire-thewizardgoddess]

What is your opinion on straight passing privilege? I (bi) don’t think it exists, but a close (lesbian) friend of mine insists that it does bc “You can hold hands with your SO (nb cis passing man) in public without risking being the victim of a hate crime.” I have been researching but keep seeing this same argument coming up, and I’m unsure and don’t want to be making anyone upset if I’m being ignorant here.

I think that there's a lot of fucked up internet politics around who is and isn't allowed in the community. Which is ridiculous.

Gay, Lesbian, Bi, Pan, Poly, Ace, Aro, Trans, Intersex, etc.

The only people who shouldn't be in the community are cishets, and pedos, none of that 'it's a sexuality' nonsense, it's predation.

The concept of straight-passing is ridiculous, primarily because it's all based on assumptions. If you're in an m/f relationship, and you are both cis and heterosexual, it's straight.

But here's the catch, if you identify as any LGBPT+ then it's not straight.

Two trans people in an m/f relationship is not straight passing.

Two bi people in an m/f is not straight passing, it's queer babes, it's in the name. If you're bi and your partner is like, straight, it's still queer from your side of the fence.

It's the 'pick a side' argument from another direction, this straight passing nonsense. Where you are villified by the straights if you have a same-sex relationship (or fetishised, let's be real, every part of the acronymn has it's own p*rn category aimed at straight people with a kink), and if you have a relationship with the opposite gendered person, the queer community gets cranky.

Two things:

1) Is this friend between 13 and 25? Bc they could still be working this out or being mentored by t*rfs, or had some bad info. IT could be jealousy or fear of being open where you live. Perhaps you could question what makes her say that; has she had a bad experience, or did someone say this to her. where are you Are you in america? are there snake wielding jesus warriors near you? Blink SOS if you need an escape route, child

2) Who wins when everyone in the queer community is divided and policing one another? Telling everyone off for dating this person or that person or not at all

I didn't get an invite to the big queer conference to make these decisions, so like, they're not valid. It's some pocket of internet active idiots who think they can speak for everyone.

What we need to do is stop pulling this bullshit on one another and get back to asking just why the fuck it's not okay for people who are perceived as not-straight or cis etc to hold hands in public.

There's a problem for every facet of the acronym, babes and dudes and theys. Lesbians are heavily sexualised by straight cis dudes. Gays are heavly fetisihed by straight cis women. to the point where even saying 'I'm gay' is considered to be an obscene, sexual act that you should not let children be exposed to.

And there's always someone from the opposite gender who thinks they 'are confused' or 'haven't met the right (gender) person yet', or 'they could fix them with their magic genitals' or mumbled religious nonsense. There's such intense stereotypes that people can't stand women who look butch, but also you can't 'really' be a lesbian unless you are' or gay men can't just be, like, a normal dude, instead of some flamboyant in-your-face charicature.

Of course people who match the stereotype exist, too. And they get no respect for fitting into the stereptypes either, it's just another reason for disrespect. There's no winning.

Bi's can't talk to anyone without hearing a question of a threesome come up or being attacked from either side for coice of partner.

Pans, same, but also kitchenware jokes. Both Bi and Pan are considered sluts and whores and can't decide or are going to cheat, etc. Or the 'you're being special snowflakes', 'choose a side', 'you're secretly gay and won't admit / you're secretly straight and want attention' etc.

Ace/Aro - everyone under this banner gets the whole 'you just haen't found the right person' or 'when you're older/you're a late bloomer' or 'how do you know?' or 'maybe you're straight/gay and haven't worked it out yet?' invalidating them completely and trying to push sex onto them. The queer community has always let Ace and Aro in under the Bi banner, and they are welcome. But the internet community, usually young people, are tearing each other to shreds over it lmao.

Chill.

Non-binary, trans, intersex. They have been here for ages, but people from one community try to destroy their credibility, despite them existing since humanity has. It's big on p*rn and fetish sites too, lot of straight dudes think these things are hot and sexy, but would spit on trans people in the street. Hypocrites (I mean, every second low-brow comedy movie out there makes a thai-l*dyb*y joke, and how it 'doesn't count' like yikes).

Nb has only just been recognised, which is funny bc society literally made up gender and the rules and pretended that was how its encoded in DNA lmao.

Transpeople have it bad though. Between the cis straights, the cis queer community (primarily t*rfs and those who fall for misinformation) and the fetishists, and the medical community who treats them like an illness rather than people. Like, they are afforded respect if they 'pass', but even then it's still an EW factor.

Transwomen are seen as 'men in dresses who want to break into women's spaces' and treated horrifically; assaults are very high. Transmen are seen as butch women, and 'gender tr*itors' by the Crazy Motherfuckers we mentioned before; their assaults are high. They're not considered Real People unless they meet the ridiculously high standards for each gender; unless they perform Right.

I remember, but did not understand at the time bc I recall i was little, that there was a gameshpw bachelorette style and there was a big twist. You know what the twist was? That the bachelorette they'd been dating and trying to win over... was trans. I don't think that she knew it would be the big twist, either; of the two men remaining, bother were angry and one might have been sick. Might be on youtube.

But like, that's funny to the non-queer community. They put a huge fucking target on this woman's back, put her in danger of being hurt, abused, killed, by anyone who watched it. By the men who she had 'lied to' as they chose to frame it, of their weird white american families who could have sought revenge. Like yikes.

And intersex people (called h*rmaphrodites for a long time even by medical personnel) were also a p*rn category and/or medical curiosity for centuries. Not to mention all the cases of parents who just went with 'make them a (specific gender)' if there was mixed presentation, at birth, and got mad at the kids for being like "Hey so, you flipped the coin wrong and I'm ___" even thought the potential for this was always on the cards.

And the parents often make a big messa bout how their baby ___ is dead and gone, even if they DO accept the person/child as who they really are. It's like, I get it they have changed but you didn't mourn their first haircut or lost baby tooth like this and that was change too, chill.

-

Straight-passing is a projection and a weapon. Like, is it the people in the relationship's fault that society looks at the pair and decides they are m/f, straight and cis? Nah, it's what people are conditioned assume and that's on them.

We can't bring it into the queer spaces and keep perpetuating that shit, because it's nonsense. Queer people are dying in other countries and your friend wants to being smart-assed about the fact you hold hands with your nb datemate in public?

-

Nonsense. That's right up there with t*rfs and the gold-star bullshit that was going on for a few years there. Probs still is among the younger people lmaoooo.

'Passing priviledge' is a myth, and it is used to hurt people. Vulnerable people and those who need support / guidance and assistance from their queer communities more than ever. So try to talk to your friend or try The Whole Friend disposal services, either way, chill.

The real issue here is that any of us are at risk of a hate crime for daring to even show affection in public. That even in safe spaces, 'allies' and those wise enough not to be openly homo/trans/bi/pan/ace/aro/other phobic are still side-eyeing you and wanting to talk 'for you' without listening to the community itself.

We have bigger issues than this, and your friend (and some others on the internet) need to get a grip and prioritise.

[Insert strained analogy about being pro-child but childfree in a suburb where everyone got married out of high school and anticipates you and your partner will too, no matter how often you remind them No Thanks. But you babysat the other day and people thought you and your partner looked like 'naturals' when you took child to the park and played with them. And you remind them, hey, chill, we like kids too but it's not for us. And they get pissy and pushy.]

---------

I can only point it out from my perspective, I'm certain there other queer people from the above acronymn community who can present their thoughts on the matter to and what it means to them.

Thanks for the question, good-bi.

[adorpheus]

on fujoshi and fetishization

Lately, more and more, both here on tumblr and on other sites, I keep seeing people spew unfiltered hatred at fujoshi - that is, women who like mlm content such as gay fanfic and fanart featuring men with other men. And I don’t mean like a specific type of fujoshi, like the ones who are genuinely being weird about it, but just like a general hatred for girls (but especially straight identifying girls) who express love for gay romance.

I hate to break this to you all, but women (including straight women!) actually are allowed to like mlm fanfiction and fanart, even enthusiastically so. A woman simply expressing her love of gay fanfic, even if it is in kind of a cringey way or a way that you personally don’t like, is NOT automatically fetishization.

I’ve been on the receiving end of fetishization for my entire life, from a very young age, as many black and brown folx have, so I consider myself pretty well acquainted with how it works. Fetishization isn’t just like, being really into drawings of boys kissing, or whatever the fuck y’all are trying to imply on this god forsaken site. 

Fetishization is complicated imo, and can encompass a lot of things, such as (but not limited to):

1 - dehumanization, e.g. viewing a group of people as sexual objects who exist purely for entertainment purposes, rather than acknowledging them as actual people who deserve respect and rights

and

2 - projecting certain assumptions onto said people based on their race/sexuality/whatever is being fetishized. These assumptions are often, but not always, sexual in nature (like the idea that black people in general are more sexual than other races, etc etc etc).

I’m going to use myself as an example to illustrate my point. Please note this isn’t the best or most nuanced example, but it is the most simplistic. A white person finding me attractive and respectfully appreciating my black features as part of what makes me beautiful is not, on its own, fetishization. A white person finding me attractive solely or mostly because I’m a PoC is now in fetishization territory. Similarly, assuming I’m dominant because of my blackness (like saying “step on me mommy” and shit like that) is hella fetishistic. 

That being said, theres definitely a difference between how fetishization works in real life with real people, and how it shows up in fandom. 

Fetishization manifests in many different ways in fandom, but most commonly on the mlm side of things, I personally see it appear as conservative (or centrist) women who love the idea of two men together, but don’t actually like gay people, and don’t necessarily think LGBT+ people deserve rights (or “special treatment” as its sometimes dog whistled). These women view queer men as sexual objects for entertainment rather than an actual group of people who deserve to be protected from systemic oppression. I’ve noticed that they often don’t even think of the men they “ship” together as actually being gay, and may even express disgust at the idea of a character in an mlm ship being headcanon’d gay. In case its not obvious, this is pretty much exactly the same way a lot of cishet men fetishize lesbians (they see “lesbian” as a porn category, rather than like, what actual LGBT people think of when we read the word lesbian). There’s a pretty popular viral tweet thread going around where someone explains seeing this trend of conservative women who like mlm stuff, and I have also personally witnessed this phenomenon myself in more than one fandom. 

The funny thing is, maybe its just me buuuut.... The place I see this particular kind of fetishization happen most is not in the anime/BL fandom, from which the term fujoshi originates - I actually see these type of women way way more in western fandom spaces like Supernatural, Harry Potter, and Hannibal. I can’t stress this enough, there’s a shocking amount of people who are like, straight up trump supporters in these fandoms. If you want to experience it, try joining a Hannigram or Destiel group on facebook and you will probably encounter one eventually especially if you happen to be living through a major historical event. Like these women probably wouldn’t even be considered “fujoshi”, because that term doesn’t really apply to them given they aren’t in the BL/anime fandom, yet they’re the ones I personally see actually doing the most harm.

Of course this isn’t the ONLY kind of fetishizing woman in the mlm/BL world, there are other ways fetishization shows up, but this is the most toxic kind that I see.

A girl just being really into BL or whatever may be “cringe” to you, or she may be expressing her love for BL in a “cringey” way, but a straight woman really enjoying BL is not, on its own, somehow inherently fetishization. Yes, sometimes teenage girls act kind of cringe about how much they like BL and that might be annoying to you, but its not necessarily ~problematic~. 

That being said, IT NEEDS BE REMARKED that a lot of the “fujoshi” that you all hate so deeply, are actually closeted trans men or nonbinary people who haven’t yet come to terms with their gender identity, or are otherwise just NOT cishet. I know because I was one of these closeted people for years, and I honestly think tumblr and the cultural obsession around purity is one of the many reasons I was closeted so deeply for so long. STORYTIME LOL!!! In my early adolescence, I was a sort of proto “fujoshi”. I identified as a bi girl who was mostly attracted to men, or as most (biphobic) people called it, “practically straight”. I wrote and read “slash” fanfic and looked at as well as drew my own fanart. We didn’t use the term fujoshi back then, but that’s definitely how I could have been described. I was obsessed with yaoi, BL, whatever you want to call it, to a cringe-inducing degree. I really struggled to relate to most het romances, so when I first discovered yaoi fanfics (as we called them at the time), I fell in love and felt like I finally found the type of romance content that was made for me. I didn’t know exactly why, I just knew it hit different. LGBT+ fanart and fanfiction brought me an immense amount of joy, and I didn’t really think too hard about why.

At some point, in my early 20s, after reading lots of discourse™ here on tumblr and other places like twitter, I started to get the sinking feeling that my passion for gay fanfiction was ~problematic~. I had always felt a sense of guilt for being into mlm content, because literally anyone who found out I liked BL (especially the men I dated) shamed me for liking it all the fucking time (which btw is literally just homophobic, like can we talk about that?). In addition to THAT bullshit, now I’m seeing posts telling me that girls who like BL are cringey gross fetishists who inspire rage and should go die? 

Let me tell you, I internalized the fuck out of messages like this. I desperately wanted to avoid being ~problematic~. At the time, I thought being problematic was like the worst thing you could be. I was terrified of being “cancelled”, before canceling was even really a thing. I thought to myself, “oh my god, I’m gross for liking this stuff? I should stop.” I beat myself up over this. I wanted so badly to be accepted, and to be deemed a Good Person by the internet and society at large.

I tried to shape up and become a good ally (lmfao). I stopped writing fanfic and deleted all the ones I was working on at the time. I made a concerted effort to assimilate into cishet culture, including trying to indulge myself more deeply in the few fandoms I could find that had het content I did enjoy (Buffy, True Blood, Pretty Little Liars, etc). I would occasionally look at BL/fanfic/etc in private, but then I would repress my interest in it and not look for a while. Instead I would look at women in straight relationships, and create extremely heterosexual Couple Goals pinterest boards, and try to figure out how I could become more like these women, so I, too, could be loved someday. 

This cycle of repression lasted like eight years. Throughout it all, I was performing womanhood to the best of my ability and trying to become a woman that was worthy of being in a relationship. I went in and out of several “straight” relationships, wondering why they didn’t make me feel the way reading fanfic did. Most of all, I couldn’t figure out why straight intimacy didn’t work for me. I just didn’t enjoy it. I always preferred looking at or making gay fanfiction/fanart over actual intimacy with men in real life. 

Eventually, I stumbled upon a trans coming out video that someone I was following posted online, my egg started to crack, and to make an extremely long story short, after like 3 years of introspection and many gender panic attacks that I still experience to this day, I realized that I’m uh... MAYBE... NOT CIS..!? :|

I truly believe if I had just been ALLOWED TO LIKE GAY STUFF WITHOUT BEING SHAMED FOR IT, I probably would have realized I was trans way way sooner. Because for me, indulging in my love of gay romance and writing gay fanfic wasn’t me being a weirdo fetishist, it was actually me exploring my own gender identity. It is what helped me come to terms with being a nonbinary trans boy.

Not everyone realizes they are trans at age 2 or whatever the fuck. Sometimes you have to go through a cringey fujoshi phase and multiple existential crises to realize how fucking gay you are AND THATS FINE.

And one more thing - can we just be real here? 

A lot of anti-fujoshi sentiment is literally just misogyny. omg please realize this. Its “women aren’t allowed to enjoy things” but, like... with gay fanfics. Some of the anti-fujoshi posts I see come across my dash are clearly ppl projecting a caricature they invented in their head of a demonic fujoshi fetishist onto any woman who expresses what they consider to be a little too much enthusiasm for gay content and then using their perception of that individual as an excuse to justify their disdain for any women, especially straight women, ‘invading’ their ~oh so exclusive~ queer fandom spaces.

 god get over yrselfs this is gatekeeping by another name

idk why i spent so long writing this no one is even going to read it, does anyone even still use this site

*EDIT: HOLY SHIT WHEN DOING RESEARCH FOR THIS POST I FOUND OUT THAT Y-GALLERY IS BACK OMG!!! 

[chocopvffz]

My Problems with Fandom

It’s been a while since I’ve kinda just let out my thoughts and feelings on this stale hell site. It’s just now more than ever I’m having the weirdest realizations while I’m participating in any Fanbase. This topic may piss ppl off. But to that, I say fuck it, I’m gonna do it.

Around 2 years ago I took a backseat to actively participating in fandom. So I’d be more of an onlooker rather than someone who contributed. Just reblogging stuff rather than making my own content. Usually in fandom, things are said in the heat of the moment, with little thought and more emotions. Taking a step back I started to realize that while that’s fine in and of itself, You’re entitled to what you like and what’s interesting to you, but I’ve realized that people kinda settle for the bare minimum. Especially now that representation for marginalized groups is becoming the norm. Which is great, but there are still problems that plague us as a community.

I just finished watching Unicorn of War’s video on RWBY, and they delved into the absolutely garbage writing that surrounded The White Fang subplot. I highly recommend you watch the video, it’s about the bad representation of minority oppression and how it relates to RWBY as a whole. While this post doesn’t stem from that in particular. what did was though is how UoW confessed that they were guilty of completely ignoring how harmful the writing was for pocs, as well as downright silencing and downplaying poc that had a problem with the writing. Unicorn of War is not racist, the fact that they realized the type of systemic racism they’ve been inadvertently spreading is so harmful is a a step in the right direction. Here is where the problem lies. UoW said that they were a perpetrator of this because they were to focused on the representation the show did give the fans. They said that they lumped all of the genuine criticism of the problems with homophobes and bigots because they didn’t want to hear any of the criticism at all. RWBY has some pretty shit representation in ever field. UoW said that they were settling for the stuff they did get because they get so little, and their whiteness blinded them to listening and trying to understand why so man poc had an issue with the show.

Basically what I’m trying to say is that, a lot of the time In Fandom, ppl would rather settle for what they do have and what caters to them, rather than criticize a product of its faults and ask for more.

I’ve been scared to talk about She-Ra because the fandom is pretty scary. I liked the show. To me it wasn’t anything special. But it was a fine show, and I can’t wait for what the crew does next. But here’s where a lot of the issues come from for me. There are some problems both w/ the show, and the representation. Catra and Adora have been queercoded up until the very end where it does get revealed that they are in fact lesbians. Which is great and all but at the end of the day. They kiss at the very end of the last episode, nothing was explicit before then. But the thing is that Catra is an abusive manipulative person, that kinda just gets a pat on the back, and all is forgiven when she realizes she’s alone(both in the fandom and the show). I mean glimmer got more hate than Catra. The point I’m trying to make is that I’ve seen way to many ppl ignore the fact that they side stepped the development of Catra and Adora, and kinda get mad at the ppl that criticize that we could have gotten better rep. For a lot of the fans, at least from what I’ve seen, yall are okay with the problems the show has as long as you get some form of rep. Which is valid, but when that complacency spills over into silencing ppl with criticisms. This usually happens when someone has had another experience with the show where the thing that represents them isnt done as well. it rubs me the wrong way. Someone could see Catra’s behavior, liken her to a toxic person they knew, criticize how the show kinda ignores that. I can bet that some ppl would tell this person that they’re wrong, because she ended up where she did at the end.

This brings me to my last example, during my watch of Infinity Train, I started getting a little bit more involved in the fandom; reblogging, commenting. During the show I noticed a small amount (larger than I would have liked) making passive aggressive remarks toward Grace (the only black girl and protagonist of the season). They were all in regard to her having a redmeption arc. At first I was kinda in denial. Like most ppl are immediately after suffering an injustice, cuz despite her being an awful person at first. She gets better. And there are so little black women that are protagonists. I felt represented. But then I’d see ppl demeaning her in order to make her friend Simon (basically the antagonist) more sympathetic. Mind you he’s white. And after the show ended I had a weird encounter. There were many posts about how enthralling it was that Grace, a black women, telling Simon, a white man, that his problems were his own, and she doesn’t have to be the one to fix them. Most of the ppl that made these posts were woc. The show isn’t about race, but the fact that the character is black resonated with a lot of ppl.

Under ever single one of these posts, I saw multiple people, getting weirdly angry at them. Like “this has nothing to do with race, why are you bringing it up here.” Which I guess is fair, but no one says it as much to ppl when the post is about sexuality. So getting fed up, I responded to one of these ppl explaining how odd it is that the characters that get really popular are always of the same archetype. White Sad Boys, it’s the same with ships. Instead of critiquing the show or anything I wanted to call attention to subconscious biases in fandom. The person accuses me of calling them racist, tells me that race isn’t an issue in fandom, and tried to gaslight me into thinking that what I was talking about doesnt apply to how ppl choose who their favorite character is.

This issue here isn’t about the race, or the actual content in the show. It was about the person telling me that the empowerment I and other woc experienced while watching infinity train s3, doesn’t exist and we shouldn’t criticize ppl putting her down in order to uplift the antagonist.

Which leads back to the point I’m trying to make. So many ppl in fandom settle for whats there instead of trying to make things more representative of everyone. Representation can always get better, we just have to stop fighting ppl that give constructive criticism to the things we like.

And I’m completely guilty of this too, that’s why I took a step back. I don’t like silencing ppl when they try to criticize something that resonates with me. So I try to sit back and let them tell me what can be done better based on their experiences. I’m still struggling. I’m pretty sure I was ultra defensive with the person telling me that race doesn’t matter.

This happens a lot more with white ppl than it does with people of color. And this isn’t a dig on any white person at all. It’s just that white have a vastly different experience than a poc. A white LGBT person is going to have a completely different experience than a black lgbt person. Just like a cishet white person is going to have from a poc cishet person. And since we have different experiences, there are aspects of my life you won’t understand and vice versa. An abuse survivor is going to be more equip to tell us what works better than other things in a story that tackles those subjects. You see what I mean.

I just want everyone to take a step back and consider the criticism that is being made. And try to understand why this person may see it that way.

TLDR; We need to stop silencing marginalized ppl just because they criticize things we relate to, especially when it pertains to their experiences. It’s settling for the bare minimum when we deserve better. Just because we’ve got a gay character doesnt mean the show is perfect. It happens way more than we think. Especially now more than ever.

Sorry this is so long, and full of typos. I just needed to rant.

[takaraphoenix]

Might be an unpopular opinion, but: Just because your thing has a female lead doesn’t mean she needs to constantly battle the patriarchy.

Your “feminist take” on something, that really only ever happens when said lead is a woman, doesn’t need to always boil down to “look at them gross men! let me hit you over the head with rape culture! have some white men condescending on women of color! men and their superiority complex!”.

It’s... It’s just so tiresome. And, quite frankly, most of the time it feels like pandering.

Because the men whose behavior you’re calling out aren’t gonna watch that. They already knew they weren’t gonna watch that when you announced there’d be a female protagonist at the head of it. They will publicly trash it and hate on it, but they’re not gonna be your audience. You’re also not going to be able to use your thing to magically make them change their mind on their behavior.

Not that you would even if they were your audience, because seriously, most of these narratives aren’t subtle. There is a subtle aspect to rape culture and learned everyday misogyny that could be addressed, that the men in your story could grapple with, deal with and actively unlearn in ways that could make your viewer examine their own behaviors.

But 95% of these kind of feminist takes are downright vilifying men to a cartoonish level and, let’s be real, the men meant there will only feel attacked by that. Nothing will be learned from it, it’ll just stirr shit.

The people who are watching your show are the ones who are already painfully aware of the patriarchy and the fact that cartoonishly villainous (CIShet white) men actually do exist. Yes, we know. Yes, we know about condescending men, about entitled men, about rape culture. We know. We live in this world.

I’m not saying that a narrative of a female lead tackling the patriarchy has no business to exist at all - it’s definitely needed, it is part of the experiences we face as women and always pretending that life’s perfect is going to paint a false picture of reality.

But let us pretend sometimes.

I’m watching TV for the escapism. Sometimes, I want to see a badass alien woman just punch stuff, and the stuff doesn’t have to be a white man who objectified/belittled her, I want to see a warrior princess conquer evil, and the evil doesn’t have to be a not even thinly veiled metaphor for the patriarchy, I want to see women be powerful witches who defeat demons, and the demons don’t need to literally be men who also molest women in their spare time.

Basically every time, something is announced that has women at the front and center, they need to tack on that this will be a “feminist take” and nearly always, what that means is “we will show you men being gross, condescending and entitled and the women have to fight against that!”.

I really think you... you could write a story with a female protagonist that is empowering without always using the fact that she battles the patriarchy as the thing to show that she’s empowered.

Give me more women in leading roles, who kick ass and are empowered while also being an escapism from the real world shit that’s been piling up, instead of just being mirrors of horrifying everyday news headlines and scenes from our lives.

[illnessfaker]

[ cw: f-slur, rape mention ]

no reblogs pls. this is a long vent.

haha not to be a hysterical faggot crippled shut-in freak or anything but the way ppl talk abt the defensiveness around the f-slur that some gay/bi male users (and some transfem users) on here as if it's some kind superiority pissing contest thing and not primarily about...respecting the boundaries and experiences of those gay/bi male (and transfem) users. like...being on this site as a fag-adjacent person (i say that half-jokingly because it sounds silly on one hand but on the other that's the most accurate descriptor of my gender identity, lol) is becoming increasingly draining and upsetting with how "progressive" homophobia against gay/bi men is apparently becoming, like, a meme among lgbtq people and that's acceptable somehow bc lgbtq people aren't cishets or because it's "only online" and therefore doesn't matter.

like idgaf abt ppl who aren't gay/bi men (or transfem) using the f-slur in every single context possible. if they're affectionately referring to their gay/bi male (or transfem) friends with that word (so long as said friends are comfortable with it) that's one thing. who cares. i even rb'd something where a cis butch (iirc) lesbian was talking about a gay man she knew who she was affectionatly calling a faggot and the things she said warmed my heart. if they're throwing it around at every opportunity or using it as an edgy insult against random strangers on the internet, that's another. the users on here who do the latter also regularly display behavior that like...shows a pretty clear disdain for gay/bi men (or transfem ppl) not apart of their online or "irl" circlejerks and echo chambers, and that is in no way disconnected from their love of using the f-slur, lol.

the "it's only online and so it's unimportant uwu go outside" thing also really feels like such a spit in the face as someone who both lives in a rural area full of cishet white men with guns that might try to kill me if i walked out of the house in drag (not to mention i live with my bf and his family and his parents are homophobes themselves i'm sure), and is also someone with health issues that usually keep me at home and in bed when i'm not working. i didn't always live here but even in my hometown the only "lgbtq space" i had was the high school GSA which didn't do shit other than the day of silence and was attended by people i did not feel safe around (e.g. my ex-friend who was very emotionally manipulative and ended up raping someone.) i don't have any other lgbtq spaces to go to other than online ones. if i never joined tumblr i might still be a self-hating cishet girl, or i might be dead, who knows. like, i've accepted at this point that personhood isn't something i'm allowed in (outside of my whiteness) so fuck me i guess if we need to but the idea that other young, impressionable, and/or traumatized lgbtq people who only can meet other lgbtq people and learn about lgbtq things online for whatever reason don't deserve to have us make an effort on cultivating internet spaces that are as accessible and safe for them as possible, or that their experiences and feelings are somehow unimportant is just...vile. like ofc not everyone needs to "pander" to "logged on" disabled fags like myself maybe but if you have any kind of large following on social media maybe consider that the things you say and do on said social media have like...an actual effect on other people instead of pretending that it's "just online" and therefore consequences for your actions either don't matter enough (to you personally) or somehow don't exist.

but going back to the fag thing, most popular lgbtq tumblr users on my dash i see nowadays just...simply do not give a shit whatsoever about gay/bi men, to the point they're normalizing "progressive" and "acceptable" homphobia against us bc they've convinced themselves due to the bigotry some gay/bi men (often cis, white, and wealthy mind you) exhibit we are "the cishets of the lgbtq community," despite horrific violence still being committed against us every day and despite other lgbtq people being capable of engaging in that violence themselves. ppl make thinly veiled jokes and memes where the punchline is men having sex with each other or effeminacy as if those things aren't primary avenues for gay/bi men being abused, assaulted, and killed (including acts of abuse and assault of a sexually-driven nature), as if said jokes and memes don't serve to normalize the mentalities that drive homophobic hate crimes. it's not like...a coincidence that most lgbtq people who makes these jokes aren't gay/bi men (or transfem). this doesn't even get into how things like homophobia and anti-effeminacy can pretty much boot certain gay/bi men from manhood...or womanhood...or any place in gender altogether.

call me exlusionary if you want but i think it's fair to say that the chances of people who aren't gay/bi men (or transfem*) facing the repurcussions of those mentalities in any meaningful way, the chances of these people actually having lived as or going to live as "faggots" is any meaningful sense is slim to none, and that's why they're so comfortable participating in this shit, and that's why i'm triggered(tm) by them "reclaiming" faggot (which doesn't really involve reclamation bc calling random strangers on the internet or gay/bi men you hate a slur isn't reclamation you morons), because frankly if you're not apart of either of those groups, you're just not a fucking faggot. it's not your word just because some rando on overwatch called you it for picking hanzo in comp. period. end of story. it's also just extremely absurd to try and claim faggotry as something you experience while...readily and happily engaging in homophobia and fag-hate (which isn't synonymous with the former term but i'm talking abt ppl who probably seldom ever engage which discussions and theory surrounding how homophobia instrumentates itself in society - or at least that which doesn't conform to their worldview). within the gay/bi male community there's plentu of masc "straight-acting" gays who weaponize this shit against fem gays and they (should) get held accountable in the same way. you're not special.

and god, being told my gendered experiences as a fag-adjacent person where (white) cafab women are fully capable of engaging in social forms of "oppression" against me and other fags in undeniably gendered ways is somehow an outlier and therefore not reflective of broader social by (white) masc urbanite tbros with definitively more social standing than i'll ever have in my life, as if i somehow developed this understanding of gendered violence just based off my own life and not...the reported and sometimes even recorded experiences of countless other fags who get mocked and silenced because anything that deviates from a watered down, shoddy cis feminist take on gender is fake news(tm) or bordering on saying misandry exists (like no it doesn't exist but acting as if homophobic shit like anti-sodomy laws, for example, has zero to do with gay/bi men's manhood is just nonsensical). convos on here abt gender being mostly dominated by (white) cafab women or sometimes (white) masc trans guys is such a mistake lmao.

anyway i'm tired and stressed and pretty done with having "acceptable" homophobic shit shoved in my face on a daily basis both online and offline but nevertheless i must persist because i'm not lucky enough to have anywhere else to go, really. just...think critically abt ur actions regarding gay/bi male sexuality and gender-stuff pretty please. please.

( *disclaimer just in case that i definitely don't see transfems as some "type" of gay/bi men. there are transfems who identify with gay/bi manhood and/or faggotry. there are transfems who don't. that's entirely up to them. thank u. )