#but some of us (including feminine cis women) don’t want kids

[thecorpseinthisbed]

we need to make like a support group for trans/gnc ppl with pcos bc if i see one more tik tok about what i need to cut out of my diet to lose weight or how much shaving makes some magazine cover looking tradwife feel insecure i’m gonna kms

[bullshit-tqia]

Male/female doesn't account for abusive behavior displayed by cis women including the high rates of domestic violence within the lesbian community. Cis women have been very violent and aggressive towards me. I remember a couple cis women tried to hit me for wearing makeup as a man (yes I'm a trans guy). I've tutored plenty of kids where the girls were more aggressive and confrontational than the boys.

I'm starting to think all of this is American bullshit. I've seen MUCH less infighting and radfem bs from the Hispanic trans community. At this point the difference between the Hispanic and American communities is like the difference between magical realism and absurdism. The male/female socialisation, the radfeminism, the baeddelism, the transandrophobia, etc. is so absurd because it's coming from people who view gender as being absurd as opposed to an abstract concept that influences our lives in the form of how we express our identity and how we relate to others.

You’re citing a flawed study, the belief that lesbian relationships are more likely to be abusive is a massive assumption. The statistic is simply whether someone has experienced domestic violence, but not whether if that violent relationship was a lesbian relationship or not. In reality the levels of abuse is congruent with the amount of abuse in heterosexual relationships. The idea that lesbian relationships are “more likely to be abusive” is right wing propaganda that you believed.

Anecdotes are anecdotes. You can’t seriously act like a few examples counteract studies that interview thousands of people and follow them throughout multiple years. That’s silly, and to a certain degree, arrogant.

It largely is “an American problem,” but you don’t understand how it is. In the US you’re going to have more liberal views on trans people and the country is more individualist in nature. This is the same in other western countries, where they’ve had an explosion in the amount of people identifying as trans.

Sure, you can say “well, left-handedness also grew exponentially,” but the fact of the matter is that well…being trans was solely seen as a medical condition for the longest time. A condition will drive someone to seek help for that condition. If being left-handed was seen as a condition, we would also see similar patterns before and after greater societal acceptance because it is a condition that occurs naturally.

And what’s even more ridiculous is that in some studies, around 9% of teens identify as transgender—which is higher than the rate of people who identify as gay! To assume that somehow being transgender is more common than being gay or intersex is so unfounded historically, you have to ask what other things could be causing this increase? At some point, it can be a social contagion—which is why it affects AFAB people so much more, because the patriarchy makes women very, very insecure.

As I put in my last post, the childhoods of transgender men, cishet women, and lesbians are very similar and are not distinct. Meaning that the lived experiences of transgender men aren’t that different from cishet women. If this is the case, a transgender man describing his life will be very relatable to cis women, leading them to believe that perhaps they are trans too. “How else can we feel such similar levels of humiliation about being feminine?”

I realized this when talking to my mother about being trans, as she told me the story of her second wedding, which she did only for my sister and I to have an example of “what love should be.” She HATED her wedding, she hated wearing the dress, she felt humiliated that everyone was looking at her, she wanted to curl up into a ball and disappear. She didn’t want to be caked up in makeup, she didn’t want her feet to hurt while wearing heels…she didn’t want to do any of the performance at all. It would be hard to say that somehow me and my mother are so completely different in how we feel. And science says we’re not.

The fact of the matter is…there is no difference between “non-binary” and gender non-conforming. Yet one identifies as trans and the other doesn’t. Although the fact that the majority of non-binary people transition (the requirement for being trans) and that all human beings on this planet are called by “they” pronouns once in awhile and that none of us 100% align with the ideal of what being a man or woman is. All of us differ from our culture’s understanding of being a man or woman, none of us are perfectly binary in personality or with our physical bodies. All of us are non-binary. To say you’re non-binary is to say that the gender binary actually exists…but it doesn’t. Gender is not the sexes. And even with the sexes there can be some variance between the two most common sexes. It really isn’t representative of reality at all to say that there is a gender binary. The idea of the binary differs from person to person.

My father, for example, thinks white cars are very feminine. This is not a societal trend. Many men drive white cars. It is just my father who sees them as driving a “car for girls” if they drive a white car. My father’s opinion on what makes something feminine or masculine has no impact on greater society. It’s just him who thinks that.

And like with what many trans people say, pronouns ≠ gender. But that logic should be applied to non-binary people as well. Sure, they use they/them pronouns…but pronouns don’t equal gender. Just because you use third person pronouns doesn’t mean you’re non-binary or trans. It’s crazy how inconsistent people are logically. If you don’t plan to transition or you are not transitioning, you are not trans. You are gender nonconforming at the most. You are cisgender.

In other cultures, like the Hispanic community, you’re going to have lower rates of people identifying as trans because transness still retains the idea of it being a condition, not an identity.

“As I suggested previously, the observed relationship between IDV and %NHS probably reflects the combined operation of at least two distinct factors. First, non-homosexual persons probably constitute larger apparent percentages of MtF transsexuals [lesbian trans women] and gender gender dysphoric persons in more individualist societies because these societies place a higher value on individual self-expression (including cross-gender expression), despite the possible socially disruptive consequences of gender transition in men who are typically middle-aged, are often married, and have usually pursued traditionally masculine occupations. Second, homosexual persons probably constitute larger apparent percentages of MtF transsexuals [heterosexual trans women] and gender dysphoric persons in less individualistic (or collectivistic) societies because these societies place a higher value on inclusion and often provide socially approved transgender roles for pervasively feminine, androphilic gender dysphoric men.”

Anne Lawerence, 2010

Per scientific study…a lot of our community are simply cross dressers or gender nonconforming people…

This is why in more collectivist cultures, you aren’t going to find these arguments, because they focus more on social cohesion rather than individualistic expression. High rates of individualism in certain societies cause people to put their own experiences before others, making them less willing to “compromise” with greater society. That’s how we have these arguments, there are so many conflicting experiences and ideas that are held equally as important.

But this idea that “nothing can really be true” and “everything contradicts” is in of itself not true. Logical reasoning and scientific predictability is the truth. Scientists scan statistical responses and make sure you’re not being dishonest and account for the fact that your own interpretation of yourself may be wrong. Which in of itself is a very scary thought to many trans people, who are wholly convinced in their identity.

But this is something that I’ve at least recognized in myself since I was very young and just starting to explore my identity, that I may be wrong about me being trans, and that I shouldn’t bury the doubts I have in my identity and rather I should explore those doubts to make sure I’m making the right decision. I often go back and meditate on this thought and I sift through all the jumbled justifications for my transitioning and try to see just how my body feels in response to the idea of detransitioning. I clench up, I feel discontent, my stomach flips, I detest it. Then I think about continuing my transition and I feel okay. No stomach flipping, I’m relaxed and content.

I never bury my doubts or try to justify my lack of thinking with “well, only someone who really is trans would have these doubts,” because it’s not impossible that someone who isn’t trans would doubt whether they should transition. How do you think we get detransitioners? They began their own journey by doubting what they were doing. It is very possible you are lying to yourself…that you aren’t thinking, that you have never been sure…and if this thought scares you, it should. Because you should be 100% sure whether you actually want to go down this path or not.

Here’s a good segment from an article by Kay Brown, a transgender researcher focused on the science of being trans:

“Question: Are gender identity trajectories and changes in youth-reported gender identity associated with depressive symptoms over time?

Findings: In this cohort study involving 366 sexual and/or gender minority youths (aged 15-21 years), 1 in 5 (18.2%) reported a different gender identity over time. Youths transitioning to a transgender or gender diverse identity reported higher levels of depressive symptoms at baseline; depressive symptoms disparities were explained by exposure to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender violence, but frequency of gender identity variability was not associated with the level or changes in depressive symptoms.

Meaning: In this study, changes in gender identity were not associated with depressive symptoms, suggesting that gender identity exploration is a normal part of adolescent development for some youths.

Note the deliberate conflation of ‘transgender’ and ‘gender diverse.’

Let’s examine the paper and its data. While having data is always good in some respects, the conflation of gender dysphoric subjects with non-gender-dysphoric ones limits the utility. Further, the lack of important data makes interpretation and fitting it together with previous studies difficult, reducing its utility to the general study of gender dysphoria. Missing from the data are the subjects sexual orientation and if they have actually socially transitioned in any real sense. (After all, suggesting that one is ‘detrans’ would require that they had in fact ‘transitioned’) In Table 1. they list a number of data.

The subjects are grouped into four categories, ‘cis’ (non-trans), always trans/gender diverse (TGD), became TGD, and stopped being TGD (‘desist’/‘detrans’). Looking at the data, knowing that they have conflated gender dysphoric subjects with non-gender dysphoric (transtrenders/non-binary) subjects, can we still gain any data beyond the authors well meaning, but harmful hypothesis? Interestingly, yes, a little, from the text of the paper,

‘While 20 of 32 participants (62.5%) in the TGD group reported hormone use, only 6 of 28 participants (21.4%) in the cisgender to TGD group, and 1 of 32 participants (3.1%) in the TGD to cisgender group had used hormones. Use of puberty blockers was reported by 12 of the 92 participants who identified as noncisgender (ie, binary transgender or genderqueer and nonbinary) during the study; the majority were from the TGD group.’

Diving a bit deeper into a break out of the groups into ‘cis,’ ‘binary trans,’ and non-binary in this graph, we can get a better picture of what is going on.

“Thus, we can see that the three groups may in fact be somewhat correlated with more generally understood and recognized groups, specifically, the TGD group looks to be mostly HSTS/Early-Onset, the ‘cis to TGD’ is likely adolescent onset AGP/AAP mixed with a growing number of “non-binary” TransTrenders, while the TGD to cis group is likely TransTrenders/Tucutes vacilating in their self-declared identies to become ‘desist’/‘detrans.’ Note that the TGD-to-cis group was roughly twice as many female subjects as male, very much in keeping with earlier documentation that “non-binary”, etc. is primarily a female phenomena. The other two groups are roughly equally male and female. Note that the ‘binary transgender’ in the TGD category is stable and the same percentage as the number that is on HRT. From this, we can deduce that the majority of those who are transitioning and obtaining puberty blockers and HRT as teens are HSTS and not AGP/AAP.

While I can’t fault the authors intentions of showing that transsexuals are not mentally ill. I do castigate them for failing to differentiate actual gender dysphoric teens from the social hangers on, the LARPers, who pretend to be. Instruments that fail to explore and use the actual DSM-V criteria are actively harming transsexuals, giving the false impression that teens with gender dysphoria will desist/detrans with time.

No they won’t.”

Kay Brown, “Well Meaning Researchers Are Hurting Hurting Transsexual Medical Access”

Gonzales Real A, Lobato MIR, Russell ST. Trajectories of Gender Identity and Depressive Symptoms in Youths. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(5):e2411322. doi:10.1001jamanetworkopen.2024.11322

[variousqueerthings]

Daniel LaRusso: A Queer Feminine Fairytale Analysis Part 1 of 3

Disclaimers and trigger warnings: 

1. These fairytales are European, although there’s often overlap in themes globally. I know European fairytales better, which is essentially the reason I’m not going to branch out too far. I opted to also stick to Western movies so as not to narrow things down, but also in particular “waves hand towards all of Ghibli” amongst many others. There’s a reason the guys in Ghibli are so gender.

2. TW for discussions of rape culture and rape fantasies

EDIT: FUCK I’M A GOBLIN CHILD! FORGOT TO PUT A MASSIVE MASSIVE THANK YOU TO @mimsyaf​ WHO HAS BEEN THE NICEST, KINDEST EDITOR ON THESE THOUGHTS AND CONTRIBUTED SO MUCH TO THEM AND GENERALLY IS A WONDERFUL PERSON!

Part 2

Part 3

1. Introduction

I recently wrote a little thing, which was about Daniel as a fairytale protagonist – specifically one that goes through some of the kinds of transformations that are often associated with female protagonists of fairytales.

I used quotes from Red Riding Hood, Labyrinth, Buffy The Vampire Slayer, and Dracula, which, as an aside – the overlap between fairytales, horror, and fantasy and the ways each of those genres delve into very deep, basic questions of humanity and the world is something that will always make me feral. I will be generally sticking with fairytales though. Also I am very excited about some of those Labyrinth concepts going around!

I’m going to use “feminine” and “masculine” in both gendered (as in relating specifically to people) and non-gendered (as in relating to codes) ways throughout this, depending on context.

To be binary for a moment, because sample-sizes of other genders are low, women are usually able to fall into either feminine or masculine arcs, although sometimes the masculine-coded woman can become a “not like the other girls” stereotype and the feminine-coded woman a shallow cliché – in both cases they’re also under more scrutiny and judgement, so it’s always worth asking “is this character not working for me because of the writing or because I have ingrained biases? (Both?)”

Men don’t often get feminine-coded arcs. Because. Probably a mix of biases and bigotry. But there are some that seem to have slipped beneath the shuttered fence of “Sufficient Narrative Testosterone,” and Daniel LaRusso is one of them.

2. Some Dude Comparisons (Men Doing Manly Action-Hero Things like being trans symbolism and loving your girlfriend… seriously those things are hella manly, I wish we saw more of that onscreen…)

a. Neo

Much like Neo The Matrix, whose journey is filled with transgender subtext and specifically and repeatedly references Alice In Wonderland, Daniel doesn’t go through quite the kind of hero's journey usually associated with Yer Standard Male Hero, especially the type found in the 80s/90s.

Neo is my favourite comparison, because of the purposefulness of his journey as a trans narrative and the use of Alice. But I’m sure there are other non-traditional male heroes out there (but are they trans tho? Please tell me, I want trans action heroes).

Neo “passes” as a socially acceptable man, but online goes by a different name - the name he prefers to be known by - feels like there’s something inherently wrong about the world around him and his body’s place in that society, and then gets taken down the rabbit hole (with his consent, although without really “knowing” what he’s consenting to) to discover that it’s the world that’s wrong - not him. And by accessing this truth he can literally make his body do and become whatever he wants it to.

Yay. (The message of the Matrix is actually that trans people can fly).

Neo is – kind of like Daniel – a strange character for Very Cis Straight Guys to imprint on. He spends most of the first movie unsure about what’s going on, out of his depth, and often getting beaten up. He is compared to Alice several times and at the end he dies. He loses. He has to be woken up with true love’s kiss, in a fun little Sleeping Beauty/Snow White twist. Yes, after that he can fly, but before that he’s getting dead-named and hate-crimed by The Most Obvious Stand-In For Normativity, Agent Smith, and being carried by people far more physically capable than he is (people who also fall outside of normative existence).

Trinity and Neo in The Matrix. The fact that a lot of the time neither of them is gendered is something. Literally brought to life by true love’s kiss.

I’m not about to argue that Daniel LaRusso is purposefully written along these same thought processes, so much as the luck of the way he was written, cast, directed, acted, and costumed all came together in the right way. And this is even more obvious when compared to That Other Underdog Fite Movie That Was By The Same Director as Karate Kid.

b. Rocky

The interesting thing about Rocky is that he is (despite being a male action icon) also not written as a Traditionally Masculine person. Large portions of Rocky – and subsequent Rocky films – are his fear and insecurity about fighting vs his inability to apply his skills to another piece of work and wanting to do right by his girlfriend (and future wife), Adrian. The fighting is most often pushed onto him against his will.

Much like in Karate Kid there is barely any fighting in Rocky I. Most of it is dedicated to how much Rocky loves Adrian and the two of them getting together. The fight is – again like in Karate Kid – a necessary violence, rather than a glorified one (within the plot, obviously watching any movie like this is also partly about the badassness of some element of the violence – whether stamina or the crane kick, it’s all about not backing down against a more powerful opponent).

Rocky is played by Sylvester Stallone. He’s tough, he’s already a fighter (albeit in the movie not a great one yet), he’s taking the fight for cash – so although he’s also soft-spoken and sweet, you’re aware of the fact that he’s got those traits that’d make a male audience go “Hell Yeah, A Man,” or whatever it is a male audience does watching movies like that… cis straight men imprinting on oiled muscle men sure is a strange phenomenon, why do you wanna watch a boxing match? So you can watch toned guys groaning and grappling with each other? Because you want to feel like A Man by allowing yourself to touch the skin of other men?

Apollo and Rocky in Rocky III. This sequence also includes prolonged shots of their crotches as they run. Sylvester Stallone directed this. This was intentional. Bros.

Daniel LaRusso is not built like that. But that doesn’t really have to matter. Being smallish and probably more likely to be described as “pretty” than handsome, and not having a toxic masculine bone in his body does not a feminine archetype make. It just makes a compelling (and pretty) underdog. 

c. Daniel

So where does the main difference really lie? Between Rocky and Daniel? Well, Rocky has the plot in his hands – Daniel, largely, does not. Rocky is acting. Daniel is reacting or being pushed into situations by others. Just like our boy Neo. Just like Alice in Wonderland, Cinderella, Snow White – just like some of the women in some contemporary(ish) fairytale films like Buttercup (Princess Bride), Dorothy (Wizard of Oz), or Sarah (Labyrinth).

This isn’t a necessary negative about stories about girls and women, so much as looking at what it is girls and women in fairytales have/don’t have, what they want, and how they’re going to get it. It’s about power (lack of), sexuality (repressed, then liberated), men, and crossing some taboo lines. It’s also about queerness.

3. The Karate Kid Part One: Leaving Home

Daniel LaRusso is a poor, skinny, shortish kid (played by a skinny, shortish twenty-two-year old) who doesn’t fit in after having been taken away from the home he was familiar with against his will. Not every male protagonist in a fairytale leaves of his own will, and not every female protagonist leaves under duress – Red Riding Hood, for example, seems perfectly happy to enter the forest. However generally a hero is “striking out to make his fortune,” and generally a heroine is fleeing or making a bargain or being married off or waiting for help to arrive. She is often stuck (and even Red Riding Hood requires saving at some point).

Daniel then encounters a beautiful, lovely girl on the beach, puts on a red hoodie (red is significant), is beaten up by a large, attractive bully, loses what little clout he may have had with his new friends, and generally has a mostly miserable time until he befriends and is saved by Mr Miyagi. To do a little Cinderella comparison: Miyagi is the fairy godmother who pushes Daniel to go to the ball in disguise as well, and that disguise falls to pieces as he’s running away.

Then Daniel asks for help, Miyagi gets him enrolled in a Karate Tournament, and starts teaching him. Daniel wins the tournament and gets the girl, the end.

While Daniel has chutzpah and is a wonderful character, none of the big events are initiated by him, except for the initial going to the forest/beach (and within all of these events Daniel absolutely makes choices – I’m not saying he’s passive): Lucille takes them to California, Miyagi pushes him to go to the dance, Miyagi again decides to enroll him in the tournament and trains him, and only because Kreese doesn’t allow for any other option, Ali is the one who more often than not approaches Daniel, and even their first encounter is pushed by Daniel’s friends.

Daniel really is at a dance/ball in disguise and receives a flower from a girl who recognises him through said disguise, it’s unbearable! It’s adorable! I get it Ali, I fucking get it!

Daniel’s main journey within this – apart from not getting killed by karate thugs (love u Johnny <3) and kissing Ali – is to learn from Miyagi. He’s not necessarily a full-on feminine fairytale archetype at this point, although there are fun things to pull out of it, mainly in the context of later films and Cobra Kai: the subtext of karate and how that builds throughout all the stories, the red clothes, the themes of obsession, his being targeted by boys whose masculinity is more than a little bit toxic and based on shame… more on all that coming up.

He doesn’t technically get a home until they build him a room at Miyagi’s place, but he definitely leaves the woods at the end of this one, trophy lifted in the air after being handed to him by a tearful Johnny and all.

And then they made a sequel.

4. The Karate Kid Part Two: Not Out Of The Woods Yet

Daniel’s won the competition, Kreese chokes out Johnny for daring to lose and cry, more life-lessons are given (for man without forgiveness in heart…) and Daniel and Ali break-up off-screen, confirming that TKK1 was not really about the girl after all, which, despite Daniel and Kumiko having wonderful chemistry, is also an ongoing theme. Daniel enters the screen in The Most Baby-Blue Outfit seen since Tiana’s dress in Princess and the Frog? Or that dress in Enchanted? Maybe Cinderella’s (technically silver, but later depicted as blue)? 

(Sidenote: At everyone who says Sam ought to wear a callback to that suit,  you are correct and sexy).

Surprise, Miyagi’s building him a room.

Double-surprise, Miyagi needs to go to Okinawa.

Triple surprise, Daniel reveals he’s going with him, because he’s his son dammit.

The Karate Kid Part Two is maybe the least Daniel-LaRusso-Feminine-Fairytale-Protagonist of the three, because it’s not really his movie. Daniel runs around with Kumiko (aka the most beautiful girl I’ve ever seen), continues to be The Best Non-Toxic Boy a middle-aged Okinawan karate master could ask for, lands himself another Built Karate Rival (twice is just a coincidence, right? Right?), and eventually doesn’t die while wearing red again – twice: When Chozen almost strangles him to death at the Miyagi dojo and then during the final fight. The Saving Of The Girl (both the little girl in the storm and Kumiko) actually puts him in a more traditional masculine space than the previous movie did, even if the main theme of the film is about compassion and kindness and by the end, once more the boy whose masculinity is built on rockhard abs and matchsticks is on his knees. Daniel just has that power over big boys. It’s called kick/punch them in the face hard enough that they see stars.

There’s an aside to be made here about how much Daniel really is an observer in other peoples stories in this, although he is the factor that sends both Chozen and Kumiko into completely different directions in life (Chozen and Kumiko main characters when?) Anyway he comes out of it presumably okay, despite being almost killed. Maybe a few therapy sessions and he’ll get over it. Too bad Terry Silver is lurking around the corner…

5. The Karate Kid Part Three: The Big Bad Wolf

Alright people have written Words about the third movie. It’s fascinating. It’s odd. It’s eye-straining. It’s like olives – you’re either fully onboard the madness or it’s too off-putting for you (or you’re like. Eh, don’t see what all the fuss is about either way...). It’s basically a non-consensual secret BDSM relationship between a guy in his thirties (played by a Very Tall twenty-seven year old Thomas Ian Griffith) and a 17/18 year old (played by a shorter twenty-eight year old Ralph Macchio).

Also recently we got more information on Mr. Griffith’s input on the uh… vibes of the film. Apparently it wasn’t just The Sweetness of Ralph Macchio’s face, the screenplay (whatever that amounted to in the first place – release the script!), the soundtrack, the direction to not tone it down under any circumstances, the fact that Macchio categorically refused to play a romance between himself and an actress who was sixteen, no: it was also TIG coming up with fun ways to torture Daniel’s character and suggesting these to the director. Clearly everyone has fun hurting Mr Macchio (including Mr Macchio).

The point is that aaallll of that amounts to that Intense Homoerotic Dubiously-Consented-To D/s subtext that haunts the movie and gives a lot of fun stuff to play with. It’s also a film that – if we’re analysing Daniel along feminine-coded fairytale lines recontextualises his role in this universe.

The Fairytale goes topsy-turvy. Through the looking glass. Enter Big Bad Wolf stage right. Karate is a metaphor for Daniel’s bisexual awakening. 

“Oh, when will an attractive man touch me in ways that aren’t about hurting me?” he asks after two movies of being hurt by boys with rippling muscles. “Why do men continue to notice me only to hit me? Do you think wearing red is making me too noticeable? Anyway, Mr Silver looked really good in his gi today.” 

Daniel’s diary must be a trip.

[neworleansspecial]

There’s been a push lately of including more trans characters and trans headcanons in fanwork lately, and that’s a good thing! However, most of the time, the content that gets promoted is by cis creators as opposed to transgender creators speaking from their real world experiences. While it’s important to boost trans voices, that’s not to say you can’t or shouldn’t write trans characters as a cis person. 

Please note that this post is not an attack on cis writers! Far from it, in fact. I would say the majority of the time, cis people writing harmful content are doing it unintentionally- they probably just don’t realize that it’s a problem. The main goal here is to educate on what’s harmful, why it’s harmful, and what to do instead. In addition, some trans people, especially young trans people, can fall into these tropes too- after all, all of us were raised in the same cis-centric society. 

That said, trans people can write about these tropes if they choose- we’re allowed to discuss our own experiences or those we identify with in a way cis authors can’t or shouldn’t because of our different relationship to gender. If you’re transgender and you write using these tropes, that’s okay! But remember to be self-critical, too; are you writing these tropes because you enjoy them or because they reflect your experiences, or are you writing them because that’s what cis people promote or it’s what you think trans narratives must be?

This particular post will focus on common tropes in writing about transgender characters, and why they’re harmful, as well as ways to counteract them in your writing. As this is a long post, it’s under a read more. Thank you to @jewishbucke​ for all his help and support.

For the purposes of this post, let’s lay out some basic definitions so that we’re all operating on the same playing field and understanding.

Cisgender (cis): Someone who identifies with the gender they were assigned at birth.

Transgender (trans): Someone whose gender differs from the one they were assigned at birth. Trans people may or may not experience one or more kinds of dysphoria. The level of dysphoria a trans person experiences is not relevant to whether or not they are transgender. 

Dysphoria: The discomfort caused by a disconnect between someone’s gender and the one they were assigned at birth. Dysphoria can be physical (related to the body), emotional (related to their feelings/sexuality), or social (related to other’s perceptions of them). 

Gender Expression: The way a person outwardly expresses themselves and their gender. This can include but is not limited to pronouns, clothes, hair style, and name.

Transmasculine: A transmasculine person is a trans person whose transition is aimed at becoming more masculine. Trans men are transmasculine people, but not all transmasculine people are trans men. Transmasculine people are transmisogyny exempt (TME), meaning they do not experience the specific combination of transphobia and misogyny that affects transfeminine people. 

Transfeminine: A transfeminine person is a trans person whose transition is aimed at becoming more feminine. Trans women are transfeminine people, but not all transfeminine people are trans women. Transfeminine people are transmisogyny affected (TMA), meaning they experience the specific combination of transphobia and misogyny directed towards transfeminine people.

That being said, my point of view making this post is as a transmasculine TME person. I can offer my personal perspectives and experiences, but I cannot speak over or for the specific experiences unique to transfeminine people and trans women. If you are transfeminine or a trans woman, you are absolutely welcome to add on or correct me if in my words, I said something harmful to you and your community. We are all in this together and it is never my aim to overstep boundaries on something I do not understand. So, now that that’s out of the way, let’s get into tropes common in transgender narratives. 

The Cis Savior

To start with, one of the most common tropes is the Cis Savior trope. This is commonly associated with the Trans/Cis trope, which I’ll elaborate more on later. The Cis Savior is often not the main character, but a supporter of a transgender main character. They can be a close friend, a family member, a love interest, or a coworker. 

In this narrative, the trans person is engaging in behavior harmful to themselves, often related to methods of their transition. The most common one you may have seen or written is the transmasculine person binding unsafely. In that example, a transmasculine person binds (flattens) their chest with something such as ace bandages, which are extremely harmful and can damage their ribs. The Cis Savior finds out about this behavior, scolds the trans person, and purchases or gives them a safe alternative like a binder designed to safely compress breasts. While this example is probably the most common one, it’s not the only one. In general, the Cis Savior trope is when a cis person finds out that a trans person is hurting themselves in some way and rectifies it with superior knowledge of safe practices and/or better resources than the trans person has access to.

The reason this is harmful is because it perpetuates two common misconceptions: first, that all trans people hate their bodies to the point of willingly harming themselves to relieve this self-hatred, and second, that cis people know better about trans issues and bodies than trans people themselves. That’s not to say that neither of these things is impossible. Trans people are not a monolith and there probably are trans people like that, at least for some point of time in their lives. In some situations, especially in reference to trans kids or people who have recently realized they’re trans, it’s possible that they don’t know their behavior could be harmful, or that there are safer alternatives. The problem lies in the repeated framing of this trope as the only kind of trans person and the idea that they can and will be destructive towards themselves until a cis person who knows better comes along. 

Instead of writing narratives like these, consider the following alternatives: 

A trans character behaves safely and explains how and why.

A trans character behaving unsafely is supported and educated by another trans person as opposed to a cis person (although this is something you probably shouldn’t be writing as a cis writer- some narratives are better left to us when it comes to the actual experiences of being transgender. Write about trans characters, not being trans!).

A trans character looking into transition on their own finds a supportive community. 

The Gender-Non-Conforming Trans Person

The Gender-Non-Conforming (GNC) Trans Person is a trans character who presents excessively similar to the gender assigned at birth as opposed to their actual gender- the trans man who wears dresses and makeup, the trans woman who has a buzzcut and hates skirts, etc. Like is pointed out above in the “Cis Savior” trope, trans people like this can and do exist! Some trans people are GNC for various reasons- personal style, sexuality, being closeted, or just because they feel like it. 

Narratives about the GNC Trans Person are very focused on the trans person presenting in a way that does not align with their gender, and is often No-Op (Does not have or want gender confirmation surgery) and No-HRT (Does not have or want hormone replacement therapy). It’s also often combined with the “Misgendered” trope. Trans characters in this trope seem to be extremely against presenting the way “expected” of their gender. For example, think of a transfeminine character not wanting to shave, be it their legs, armpits, face, or any other part of their body that cis women are expected to shave. This can lead to the character being mocked, dismissed, told they are not “really” trans, fetishized, and/or misgendered. These characters are often described as not passing as their gender.

This trope is harmful because it plays into the rhetoric that trans people are faking it or attention seeking. Like stated above, GNC trans people can and do exist. In fact, in my personal experience, a lot of trans people are GNC in some way or another. What is and isn’t considered conforming to gender is very strictly based on cisheterocentric ideas of gender presentation, and fails to take into account the intricacies of being transgender, especially if the person in question is also LGB. Trans people don’t have to conform to the restrictive societal views of what acceptable gender presentation is in order to be “really” trans. The stereotype of highly GNC trans people comes from the idea that they’re choosing to be transgender as a means of attention seeking, which simply isn’t true. Trans people didn’t choose to be trans- it’s just another part of them, like their eye color or the shape of their nose.

Instead of writing narratives like these, consider the following alternatives:

A trans character having fun with gender presentation- why not shop from both sides of the store?

A trans character expressing gender-nonconformity in smaller ways.

Multiple trans characters with different gender presentations.

The Misgendered Trans Person

The Misgendered Trans Person is another common narrative in which a trans character is misgendered, whether it be on accident or on purpose, by a cis character. This can be a family member, an old friend, or a complete stranger. This trope also includes dead-naming, the act of referring to a person by a “dead” name that they no longer use as part of their transition.

When it comes to this trope, it’s usually with a narrative similar to the Cis Savior- the trans character is defended by a nearby cis one. More often than not, the Misgendered Trans Person trope is also combined frequently with the Forced Outing. In this story, a trans person is referred to by pronouns they do not use- in particular, those associated with their assigned gender at birth- as a means of causing angst and discomfort. They may also be called their dead name, also to create drama in the story. For example, consider a trans character hanging out with their family, and their mother uses the wrong pronouns for them, causing the character discomfort. This also includes narratives about a character realizing they’re trans, in which the character is referred to by the wrong pronouns and their dead name until they realize they are transgender. More to that point, as a cis author, you should never write a story about someone realizing they’re trans- as said above, write about transgender characters, not about being transgender.

This is harmful because it minimizes the very real pain and dysphoria that can be caused by misgendering or dead-naming. Changing names and pronouns are often the very first steps trans people take in their transition, and an instrumental part of their identities and journeys. Consider it in terms of your face. You have your own very specific face and it is an integral part of yourself and identity. Imagine someone repeatedly insisting that it’s different. They tell you that your eyes are a different color, or your jaw is shaped differently. It would be uncomfortable, and it’s wrong. Obviously this isn’t an exact or fair comparison, but names and pronouns are not just words when it comes to identity and trans narratives. 

In terms of alternatives to this trope, there aren’t any. 

There is no acceptable or reasonable way to write a character being misgendered or dead-named as a cis author. This is especially true when you take it upon yourself to make up a dead name for a character. No excuses, no arguments. Just don’t do it. 

The Self-Hating Trans Person

The Self-Hating Trans Person trope is where a trans person’s dysphoria, be it physical, emotional, or social, is so extreme that they hate themselves and their bodies in an all-consuming way. This character is incapable of loving themselves and will often rely on a cis character for positivity, support, or self-esteem.

It would be impossible to acknowledge this trope without considering its ubiquity- while the description above is clear and severe, it overlaps often with many other tropes and less intense versions of it have a tendency to appear in most trans narratives. It’s associated with the trans character wanting to be cis (often worded as wanting to be “normal”), behaving in ways dangerous to themselves, and/or refusing to accept comfort. For example, a couple common uses of this trope are unsafe binding in transmasculine people, self harm or mutilation, and conversion therapy. The Self-Hating Trans Person narrative typically involves the character being aggressive toward people who question or try to combat their self hatred as well. 

As touched upon in the Cis Savior trope, this is harmful because it perpetuates the stereotype that trans people must hate themselves, and be willing to go to extreme lengths because of it. Plenty of trans people don’t care that they’re trans, or even like that about themselves. The idea that being trans is something that should make a person hate themselves implies that it’s bad or wrong, which it isn’t. There are some trans people who do have these negative feelings- and of course deserve all the support they want and need- but plenty of trans people don’t feel that way. Trans people can and do love themselves and their bodies. Some trans people don’t have severe dysphoria, or may not really have any at all. Trans character’s narratives shouldn’t always be about suffering.

Instead of writing narratives like these, consider the following alternatives:

A trans person who loves themselves and their trans body. (Be conscientious of straying into fetishistic territory, though- trans people are more than their bodies! When in doubt, ask.)

A trans person whose unhappiness is about something else, like losing a pet.

A trans person being loved and supported by their friends. 

The Forced Outing

The Forced Outing trope usually goes hand-in-hand with the Misgendered Trans Person. This trope includes a trans person, either closeted (not out, pre-transition) or stealth (not out, post-transition) having their identity as transgender being revealed to one or more people without their permission.

When it comes to Forced Outings, this usually happens around a cis love-interest, and is typically followed by said love-interest assuring the trans character that this doesn’t matter to them. Another common response is the trans character becoming a victim of violence, such as a beating or sexual assault. For example, a trans person gets “caught changing” and is outed to the person who sees them, without their consent. The “caught changing” is another common way this trope is expressed, usually in a bedroom, bathroom or locker room. Sometimes there’s a happy ending. Sometimes there isn’t.

It should be clear why this trope is harmful- outing someone, be it as transgender or gay or any other LGBT+ identity, is not just disrespectful, but it is extremely dangerous. Just because you wouldn’t react poorly doesn’t mean others are the same. Outing a trans person in real life could get them hurt really badly, or even killed, on top of being outright rude and presumptuous. While this is fiction, it’s important to recognize that the media we consume affects the way we view real world situations. In your story, things may turn out fine, but the harsh reality is that in real life, it usually doesn’t. Trans people can and do get killed when they’re outed. Besides that, it follows along with the rhetoric that someone is “lying” if they don’t immediately disclose that they’re transgender. Trans people do not have to tell you that they’re trans, especially if they don’t know you. 

Instead of writing narratives like these, consider the following alternative: 

A trans person already being out to and accepted by their loved ones.

The Predatory Trans Person

The Predatory Trans Person is usually same-gender-attracted (SGA) and/or transfeminine. They prey on cis people by coercing them into romantic or sexual relationships. Sometimes the trans person is considered predatory because they didn’t out themselves beforehand, or they use their being transgender as a means of guilting someone into having sex with them. It often overlaps with the PIV trope.

These narratives often revolve around sexual situations, and tend to focus on the cis partner as the main character. It prioritizes the comfort and feelings of the cis person. They’re uncomfortable, but can’t say it for fear of being seen as transphobic, or making their partner angry. For example, the cis character and trans character go on a few dates, and the trans character is presumed cis until they get to the bedroom. The trans character is pre-op and “convinces” the cis person to have sex with them anyway, despite them being uncomfortable. The most common form of this narrative is the transmisogynistic telling of a trans lesbian “coercing” a cis lesbian into sex.

This is harmful for two reasons- first and foremost, it paints trans people as being inherently predatory. It implies that trans people are only trans in order to have sex with those who otherwise wouldn’t be interested in them, reinforcing a long-standing transphobic notion that being transgender is related to sexual deviance and/or fetishes. Trans people are not inherently predatory. Trans people are not just rapists in disguise. Second of all, it makes assumptions about the genitals of trans people. Some are pre-op or no-op, of course, but not all of us are. Some trans people have had bottom surgery. Some trans men have penises, some have vaginas. Some trans women have vaginas, some have penises. And even those who haven’t had bottom (gender confirmation) surgery are still allowed and able to enjoy sex with the genitals they have, and use language regarding their genitals that they feel most comfortable with. There’s nothing wrong with that. 

Instead of writing narratives like these, consider the following alternatives:

A trans person having sex with another trans person.* 

A trans person and a cis person having consensual sex.*

A trans person participating in nonsexual intimacy with their partner.

The Genderbend

The Genderbend actually refers to two common transphobic tropes; the first is headcanoning a cis character as being trans as the opposite gender. In other words, headcanoning a cis woman as a trans man, or a cis man as a trans woman. 

It also refers to the common fandom trope of genderbending (also known as cisswap) to make a character of one gender into the “opposite,” typically associated with changing their physical characteristics to match this new assigned gender.

Narratives about the Genderbend trope rely on two primary assumptions. They assume every character is cis by default, and that certain characteristics are inherent to certain genders. The cis to trans version of this trope often focuses on a “coming out” story in which the character realizes they are trans and comes out to their loved ones before pursuing social and/or medical transitioning. 

Cisswap, on the other hand, completely avoids the concept of being transgender, and instead makes the character into the “opposite” gender while they’re still cis. This often comes with physical changes, such as a character made into a girl getting wider hips and a more “feminine” facial structure, as is associated with cis women.

These narratives are harmful because of the assumptions they make about all characters/people being cis by default, and that these characters must have the common physical characteristics associated with that body type. The Genderbend in which a cis character is headcanoned as the “opposite” gender perpetuates a harmful rhetoric that trans people are really just their assigned gender at birth with a different presentation. It pushes the idea that transfeminine people are men in dresses and transmasculine people are self-hating women, both of which are misconceptions behind a lot of transphobic violence people face. 

Cisswap relies on the idea that presentation or physical characteristics equate to gender, and that in order to be a gender, someone must look a certain way. This is not only harmful to trans people, but to any person who does not fit strict western binary beauty standards. It also fails to acknowledge that gender is not a simple binary of man or woman, but a spectrum that includes a multitude of identities. It should also be noted that the Cisswap trope relies on standards of gender and presentation that are intersexist, racist, and antisemitic as well. In general, the Cisswap trope is harmful to many marginalized groups of people, including but not limited to trans people.

Instead of writing narratives like these, consider the following alternatives:

Headcanoning/writing a character as being trans while keeping their gender the same.

A character being nonbinary.

Creating new OCs who are trans.

The Bottom Trans Man/Top Trans Woman (PIV in Trans/Cis Relationships)

The PIV (Penis in Vagina Sex) Trope is exclusive to Trans/Cis relationships, and typically revolves around same gender relationships. In the PIV trope, a pre-op trans person has penis-in-vagina sex with their cis partner. 

In these narratives, the focus is very heavy on the pre-op genitalia of the trans person in the relationship. It’s most commonly seen in m/m fanfiction, in which the trans man has vaginal sex with his cis partner, but also exists in f/f fic in which the trans woman engages in penetrative sex with her partner’s vagina. That’s not to say that trans people can’t or don’t enjoy sex this way, but in this particular trope, it is specifically written in a way that focuses in a fetishistic way on the genitals of trans people and makes broad assumptions about the bodies trans people have and the types of sex they enjoy. These narratives write all trans men as bottoms, and all trans women as tops. 

The reason this is harmful is because of the way it generalizes trans people’s bodies, their relationships to them, and the way they engage in sex. Of course there are pre-op (and no-op) trans people who do enjoy PIV sex with their partners, but that does not mean all trans people have those bodies or have that sort of sex. There are trans men who are tops, and trans women who are bottoms. There are trans people who have dysphoria about their genitals, and those who don’t. Some do not or cannot enjoy PIV sex, and that’s okay! The other common issue with this trope is the way that trans people’s bodies are described. Trans people often use words for their bodies that you might consider “anatomically incorrect” because it’s the language that they feel most comfortable with. 

Instead of writing narratives like these, consider the following alternatives:

A trans person having sex with another trans person.*

A trans person having non-PIV sex with their partner.*

A trans person participating in nonsexual intimacy with their partner.

The Trans/Cis Relationship

Finally, the Trans/Cis Relationship trope- this trope isn’t inherently bad- there’s nothing wrong on its own with a romantic pairing being between a trans and cis character. The specific dynamic this is about is the trans character requiring reassurance, validation, or other kinds of support from their partner that a cis character would not ask for. 

This trope is very commonly associated with Cis Savior and PIV tropes as well. It focuses on the trans person being in a relationship with a cis person who they depend on to “validate” their gender, help with their dysphoria, and protect them from transphobic behavior. It tends to infantilize trans people and make them into someone who cannot function outside their relationship with the cis character. For example, a transfeminine character relying on their boyfriend to make them feel “feminine” enough in their relationship. While Trans/Cis relationships are not inherently bad or wrong, it can be very easy to fall into a trap of writing the cis character as the Cis Savior, and often comes hand in hand with PIV sex when it’s a non-heterosexual couple.

The reason that this trope can be harmful is that it implies trans people are not enough on their own- that they need the support of a cis person who decides they’re “normal” in order to stay mentally well. It comes back often to the Cis Savior trope as well. Trans/Cis relationships written by cis authors may fall into these traps without meaning to. Beyond that, trans people can- and often do- date each other. In fact, some trans people are t4t, meaning that they choose to only date other trans people because it’s what’s most comfortable for them and may be safer depending on the situation they live in. Trans people do not enter relationships based on who will make them feel “valid,” but on who they love- the same as everyone else. 

Instead of writing narratives like these, consider the following alternatives:

A trans person’s partner being trans as well. (Although, again, be mindful to write stories about trans characters, not about being trans!)

A trans person being emotionally supportive of their cis partner.

A trans person being single.

Thank you so much for sticking with me during this! I know it’s long, and that it’s not easy to read things that make you question things you’re used to, or to reevaluate things you may have written in the past. Once again, none of this was an attack! The goal of this series of posts is to inform and educate, rather than shame. People who make these mistakes often do it because they don’t know any better, or haven’t been exposed to anything besides these tropes. I encourage you to look at what other trans people have said about portrayals, and when writing trans characters, look for someone who would be willing to beta for you if you’re unsure. When in doubt, ask. And remember- write about trans characters, not about being trans! There are certain nuances to being transgender that, as a cis person, you simply don’t have the background or experiences to write on, and that’s okay! We’re all learning and growing together.

*If you absolutely want to write sex scenes involving trans people, the best thing to do is to get a trans beta- and listen to them- as well as use language that may not be what you consider anatomically correct. Trans people may call their genitals by words that don’t “match” for their own comfort, and using language that focuses on pre-op genitalia can come across and/or be fetishistic. Be mindful and respectful when writing these scenes.

[nomoregoldfish]

I Promised You The Moon rant

Just binged it and this was from the episode by episode reaction/discussion with my partner in crime @glossyboy.

First of all, Oab stole the show, singlehandedly, which he's not supposed to. I don't think anyone expected it including himself. In the very top post when I searched his name on tumblr, he said this lol

But the truth is he played one hell of "villain" that required a very nuanced performance and he delivered it in a believable and graceful manner. Jai became the catalyst of the entire season and his rather complicated relationship with Teh was the highlight of part 2.

EP 1

From the very beginning it's clear that part 2 is very much a Teh's story rather than a balanced story about two young people's journey as a couple in the next chapter of their lives. It makes me uncomfortable they made Oh-aew clingy and pessimistic without giving him any character development.

The best part is probably the opening scene where they went paper-rock-scissors to decide who's gonna buy condoms. It felt authentic, the expectation, the hesitation, the mischievous act, all fits their characters well. Other times ep 1 was more like two adult kids playing house, literally in an empty giant ass upper middle class apartment.

EP 2

It's great that they poked the femininity vs. masculinity issue through Oh-aew, but stopped right there at the surface. Missed a perfect opportunity to go head-to-head with the controversial topic, start a debate, crush the stigma of femininity, bring something new, be a real game changer of the BL genre, and most importantly give Oh-aew some concrete character development. Part 1 showed us a gay character that's very comfortable with his sexuality and femininity, that's almost revolutionary in Asia, not as a comic relief but a leading role. Oh-aew questioned his own sexual identity once in that bra wearing scene, it's straight out of comfort zone, BOLD, and transgressive. So I expected more from part 2.

That's it? And they're already sophomores? Can't believe Oh-aew's character has been marginalized like this. It's pathetic.

But I love the brutally honest conversation at the end where Teh vented his rage and despair regarding his frustration of acting. He was acting like a dick because he's disappointed, and scared. Teh again was not afraid of showing vulnerability, making the reconciliation very realistic and touching.

EP 3

Dare I say I freaking love ep 3! The unresolved (partially sexual, but not entirely) tension between Teh and Jai was over the roof! And the built-up to their kiss was very authentic, which paled Teh and Oh-aew's much sidelined storyline, including the long anticipated sex scene (still can't believe it happened right after Jai explicitly instructed Teh to do it after the two spent a whole night bonding, like wow! Totally TRANSGRESSIVE and to some extent, kinky.) Teh looked up to the senior, idolized him, wanted to be good for him and make him proud, thirsted for the validation from him, which was mixed with affections. The workshop diary was a brilliant idea to let them open up to each other and eventually bring them close. This was what a meaningful arc of a story looked like. By contrast, there isn't a single moment between Oh-aew and Teh in part 2 that made me go "Damn it's soooooo hot!"

I know Jai/Teh wasn't the endgame but I appreciate the storyline so much. It's a very bold move considering it broke the over-glorified "one true love in one's life" fantasy of its target audience, mostly young cis women. The popular narrative of "you can only love one person through your life/one true love" in romance fictions/chick flicks was totally smashed. And it wasn't written just to stir up things between Teh and Oh-aew, it wasn't a silly fling. Instead, it's meaningful, complicated, natural, and realistic, delivered by nuanced and excellent acting from two young actors. It's hilarious that fans hate Jai with a passion and call him names.

And big news, Jai is bi?! Bravo! He's radiating bi vibes since his first appearance.

I kind of gave up at this point, the season wouldn't do Oh-aew any justice. Like my partner in crime pointed out, the costume design literally threw some "incongruous female fashion pieces" on Oh-aew, made him dye his hair red, without...making any actual point of his personality or his character development. Wardrobe was supposed to make a point in storytelling. Yes, PP wearing pink is cute, and? There's nothing else for Oh-aew. Unfortunately he's reduced to this sulky, crying, and wronged partner in a failing relationship.

EP 4

Oab again was killing it. The tension between Jai and Teh...from the rehearsal in front of Oh-aew to the dressing room pep talk, was incredibly intense and hot AF.

Was it a manipulative relationship after all? Oab was so good at conveying a character with many faces. Jai's a mentor to Teh, also a good friend, their relationship was genuine. He's also ambitious with his own goals, he used, challenged, provoked Teh in a way that benefited them both. It made sense the title of part 2, I Promised You The Moon, was from Jai's script. He promised Teh what the junior wanted the most, a bright future in acting. Teh's unconventional and unspoken feelings for Jai was the best part of the entire season in terms of creative writing, it's complicated, fragile, delicate and completely heartbreaking.

The after talk in the hallway was so well-written. It's funny (Teh joking about playwrights always write about their EXs is gold), intimate yet meticulously controlled, no one lashed out or wept. Both knew what they signed up for and Jai particularly made it clear about his motive and the purpose of the "special workshop" beforehand (or right away.) Yet it's no one's fault that Teh got carried away. He's younger, he's immature, he's more into it, it's totally natural. It's so romantic when Teh's singing karaoke in the bar with Oh-aew, yet he couldn't help but desperately staring at Jai on the floor, knowing he and the man who just turned him down were never gonna happen, they were done, but he's still madly attracted to him and his talent. He fancied Jai, at least the idea of Jai, a playwright, a director, someone knew him better than himself. That hurt beautifully.

EP 5

Teh/Oh-aew endgame at this point was pretty meaningless. Oh-aew as a leading character never got any solid character development over a span of four years. What happened between Jai and Teh wasn't just "cheating", though they surely made it look that way, like Teh's empty promise of "I won't see him again after the show ends". No matter how Oh-aew and Teh eventually reconciled, there's no emotional connection, no sparkle anymore between the couple.

But I knew for a fact they had to. Otherwise it's too much of a risk financially for the series. The creators had to take the easy way out like most traditional romances—one of the most contrived and formulaic trope where the male leading character made a mistake (usually cheating) and realized he's wrong, he deeply hurt the female leading character (Oh-aew was merely a girl substitute in part 2), then he completely changed for hell knew what reasons, started doing every nicest thing in the world to try to "win" the female character back. It has been feeding the emotionally-deprived cis female readers/audience who are frustrated with heterosexual relationship irl for decades. The formula that made romance outsell other genres of fictions combined in the 60s and 70s still sells today, under the name of boys' love. It's pathetic to see Oh-aew confess to Bas that he always "lost" to Teh. Love shouldn't be some kind of game or competition, there isn't winner or loser in love. Love is spontaneous. Oh-aew didn't lose because Teh developed feelings for someone else, and he didn't win when Teh begged him for reconciliation. People change, people move on.

And as predicted, they went for it. The ending was so absurd and tedious.

Overall, Jai's probably the hardest villain to play, he needed to be REALLY GOOD to be "the bad guy", to make his role conceivable. Oab absolutely nailed it with his talent and experience. He's not even my type or extremely good looking yet I'm 100% SOLD. I immediately re-watched the scene of him kissing Teh back hungrily at the end of ep 3 like I used to re-watch Teh/Oh-aew's steamy make out session at the end of episode 3 part 1. Coincidence?

I like some parts of both seasons for the same reason, each challenged and tried to break some outdated/contrived narratives in the BL genre. Part 1 took on the sexuality taboo by showing two same sex characters sexually attracted to each other, no more "I'm not into boys, I just happened to fall for someone of the same gender" or "pure love" bullshit. By staying true to the characters' sexuality and actually showing it with explicit, intense (and beautifully shot) scenes, the gay characters were normalized. They weren't just pure and innocent, no one was. And it created two of most unconventional gay characters in Asian pop culture, Oh-aew, a beautiful boy who's very comfortable with his own sexuality and femininity, not passive at all, taking initiative to pursue what he wanted; and Teh, a sensitive, caring and vulnerable boy who cried a lot, he's confused but also sweet and brave.

Part 2 tackled the "You can only love one person through your life" trope with a very nuanced story of "cheating". Yet neither carried out what they started. Part 1 fell short of a revolutionary piece that stayed true to "adolescent sexual turmoil", dismissing bisexuality and becoming a typical unrealistic BL fantasy in the end. And Part 2, ugh, forced a "happy ending" that almost no one digs. I understand it's extremely difficult and risky to disrupt the established norms of a genre. But sometimes being transgressive and progressive could be the same thing. A story, an artwork, has to challenge something in order to create something new and compelling.

[transmascjfk]

i'm,, trans and hc chihiro to be a male..

i'm sorry, but i don't quite understand how that's transphobic. could you please explain how chihiro is transmisogynistic? (sorry if i come off as rude - that's not my intention and i genuinely just don't understand, though i would like to!!)

What is transmisoginy?

"Transmisogyny is a distinct category of transphobia in that transmisogyny mainly focuses on trans women and other transgender individuals who demonstrate femininity, whereas transphobia is a more general term, covering a broader spectrum of prejudice and discrimination towards transsexual and transgender individuals. Julia Serano states in Whipping Girl that "when the majority of jokes made at the expense of trans people center on 'men wearing dresses' or 'men who want their penises cut off' that is not transphobia – it is transmisogyny. When the majority of violence and sexual assaults committed against trans people is directed at trans women, that is not transphobia – it is transmisogyny." "

Chihiro is written to mock trans women, to say that in reality trans women are secretly men, she is a man who is weak and uses being trans as a way to escape her problems, this is a thing that is also said to trans men a lot, that theyre just trying to avoid the hard parts of being a woman by becoming a man. Even if the writters intended it to be like that or not (which they probably did because transphobia is a big thing that happens a lot, obviously) it's still transmisogynistic. Thats that on that

This is a pretty common transphobic trope actually, the "Turns out this one character was actually from the opposite sex??!!", theres more examples of this in other games outside Danganronpa.

But also her experience is pretty different from other examples, her experiences are way too similar with trans womens experiences.

This is mostly for the cis people who call her a crossdresser and refuse to change their mind, on it, sit down.

Written by a trans man.

Don't tell me whats transphobic and what it's not transphobic if you're cis. Just sit down and read.

Tw: transphobia, transmisoginy, death mentions and blood in the pictures.

The game implies a lot of stuff with her dialogue, it doesn't straight up says "I don't want to be a woman anymore, I'm a man" like everyone claims it does.

[ Alt text 1:

Chihiro Fujisaki: I'm going to get stronger...and accept who I am... ]

[ Alt text 2:

Chihiro Fujisaki: Strong enough so that when someone says "even thought you're a boy" I'll be okay. I'll get better! ]

[ Alt text 3:

Chihiro Fujisaki: I wrapped myself in lies. I'm weak. I want to destroy that version of me forever! ]

[ Alt text 4:

Chihiro Fujisaki: ... I want to change. ]

[ Alt text 5:

Chihiro Fujisaki: I have to change. I don't want to be weak anymore ]

She goes to Mondo not because hes masculine, but because she admires him and his strength. She never once says it's because shes a man or because Mondo is a man.

[ Alt text 1:

Chihiro Fujisaki: Maybe talking to Mondo about it will help give me some courage... ]

[ Alt text 2:

Chihiro Fujisaki: I admire... your strength... ]

These dialogues can be read in two ways, the first one being the one the game tries the hardest to put in your head thats shes a man, all of this guessed by other people btw not what she herself says. Which is really transphobic, because she was written as a trans woman and then theyre like "uh no actually hes a man, because he was born as one but hes a coward so he started to dress as a woman to hide from his problems. Because thats what people do right? People who dress as their oppossite gender are so pathetic, specially men amiright? Ahaha"

Reading it in this way really weird, you're doing a lot of mental gymnastics because you would literally call her a trans woman with all of this if the rest of the trial, that consists of cis people assuming shes a man, didn't happen. And sadly you're following transphobic ideas by this. Because the canon is transphobic and transmysoginistic.

And the other way is just read what she says, that she just wants to be stronger and stop lying to everyone, basically about being cis, because shes not, shes amab (assigned male at birth) and thats probably what she said to Mondo, but most people when a trans person who already passes or is in their transition comes out many people tend to think "oh so youre your gender assigned at birth and not the one you claim to be?", because they don't get what being trans is and they think only "biological gender" is a thing. Basically, misgendering and invalidating the trans person.

I can guess all of this just because of how vague they decided to make her dialogue, not even showing how she tells Mondo about being amab.

What did she said to Mondo? "I'm trans"? "I'm a man"? "I was born a man"? We dont know, because they didn't show it and she died right afterwards and then everyone was like "Chihiro was secretly a man" to solve the case and thats it. A lot of people in the discourse get their information from Monokuma who isn't either Chihiro or even Mondo. Monokuma knows many things but he can't read minds to know if she was really trans or not, only she could say it but she died so she couldn't explain if shes trans or not.

[ Alt text:

A youtube comment by Gail Frisbee, posted 4 days ago, this comment was edited by the autor. The comment says:

"It's honestly increible to me when people try to argue that a scene in which a female-presenting character gets their genitals groped and then is posthumously referred to as a male from that point on can't be transphobic just because that character calls themselves a boy in some other side content later. It's on about the same level of intellectual honesty as claiming that Quiet from MGS5 isn't really fanservice because she totally breaths throught her skin you guys.

As it turns out, if you really dig down deep into the lore, Chihiro is a fictional character and the same people who wrote the genital investigation scene also wrote the lines that character says in the game as well. It's a shocking twist, I know." ]

Her fears of being outed and people founding out her secret (being trans) or being transphobic is used as a gross big twist. A trans woman being used as a mockery of trans people? Great totally normal (/sarcasm)

Read this post made by a trans woman. I'll be using this only part but it's still a great read.

[ Alt text:

So. There is a lot to unpack here, but I want to start with something that specifically hurts me as a trans woman, and that's how the game flippantly uses real world horrors trans people face as shocking reveals and twists. You can go down the list for "worst nightmares" of trans people incluiding:

Threatening to be outed against your wishes

Outing yourself to a trusted friend and being met with rejection, or worse, violence

Having your body and privacy examined and invaded

Having your deadname used and being misgendered after death, when you can't correct them ]

Now, let's go to her backstory for a bit. I will be using the wiki for this. (Which sadly uses he/him for her 💔)

" When Chihiro was a child, he became the subject of harassment and bullying. He was always told to "be a man" and that he was "so weak despite being a boy", and because of that, Chihiro slowly but surely began to develop a "weakness complex". In order to escape the bullying, Chihiro began to dress as a girl so that people wouldn't bully him as a weak boy. "

This doesn't sound like a normal crossdresser, this sounds like a trans woman who was bullied for being different when she was younger, like many trans people, and then she decided to transition because she's a woman, she wanted to be more feminine and stop being seen as a person shes not. Specially after so many people tell her to basically man up when she doesn't want that, because shes not a man.

Have you ever heard of the classic stories of "since I was little i knew i was different, i was a boy who liked playing with dolls and was more feminine than the rest" or "i used to be a tomboy when i was little, i had mostly male friends, i liked playing with car toys and was more masculine than other kids" coming from trans people? This just sounds as these types of stories to me.

People also like to say that alter ego uses he/him pronouns and says shes a boy. Many trans people can misgender themselves for personal reasons too guys, she could've been trying to misgender herself because she didn't felt like she wasn't enough to be a real woman, this happens a lot to trans people. If people constantly tell you that you're not actually transgender or you just feel like you're faking it then you might actually believe it, thats were most "detransitioners" come from. And thats basically what they made her, a detransitioner.

Some of you might also don't get how shes trans because you think she doesn't perfect or exact trans stereotypes. Trans experiences can be similar on the feeling of not fitting in, dysphoria, etc. But trans experiences, stories, transitions and complete lifes can be very different, because we all (including cis people) live different lifes, experience, process and cope with things differently. So i can understand why you might not get her being trans coded at first, don't worry. But try instead of just not caring because you don't get it at the first try, to see what trans people say.

This whole discourse its mostly cis people talking over trans people about their own experiences (incluiding the dead trans coded characters experience) saying if theyre valid or not and denying stuff not wanting to learn anything, completely refusing to it because "In canon hes a boy" ok then in canon shes written in a transphobic way too but most of you don't care about that. You would rather call her a crossdresser than try to acknowledge how obviously trans coded she is and how thats used as transphobia.

The way most cis people act in this discourse is very transphobic to me to be honest, if you think you're a good ally but act like this then you should get more educated on the topic as a whole and about trans people too.

-the trans Chihiro flag to finish this up, she has a bit boobie! good for her! good for her.

[misterbitches]

hi! this is long as shit i’m sorry. i hope it makes sense. i ahve adhd and like 5 million learning disorders so this is just word vomit cos there’s so many words in my brain. my b.

i’ve had such a tough day so thank you for replying and sharing! @yeedak​ 

i was thinking about what i wrote and i meant to clarify that as well. some cases are fine for both parties and it’s not like you weren’t consenting and it seems like you were happy! same with my friend who was dating a 20 yr old. if they’re happy you know i’ll clown on ‘em but yea. so for anyone that sees these posts your relationship with your partner who is older or whatever. i’m some dumb girl on the internet okay. ill side eye older ppl tho

i think a lot of people feel the same way you do now (me included.) it feels really good at the time but alter we can see the dynamics playing out. i’m 29 now and i think aging is just such a huge process. it’s wild how you at 31 are a totally different person, right?

and the US racism is probably some of the worst ever in its iteration because of slavery which started from europe etc but USA is so fucking unique bc of columbus bringing slaves here and displacing indigenous peoples or hispanola and because america is so influential the way it views race, particularly with black people as objects, has so deeply permeated into the current historical psyche globally. it’s fascinating to track how necessary anti blackness is to the flourishing of america but also the world at this point. also want to point out how fuckign scary sinophobia is here especially for covid. one is a straight historical line (black ppl + the US) and the other had to be manufactured and to continue to exploit the non-white americans and keep antiblackness in tact.i could go on about this all day. the pain of this place is immense.yet as bad as it is here, this is still the only place i truly feel safe as a black person. because of the unique experience we have in america and through the diaspora especially because we are veyr much ocncentrated here. it would be nice to like move to norway and have some alleviation financially or get free healthcare it’s just not feasible if no one looks like me. it’s fucking tough. 

i hope you don’t hate it here though and people treat you with respect. but as you know being a woman and jewish and an immigrant....shit is tough. the USA is a hellhole. :( america is so deeply tainted and desperately bad because it was founded on strife and blood and there’s no way to reverse that and what this country did in turn when it gained enough power and could capitalize off of the colonial forefathers. this is why we hsould all luv revolution!!!

HOWMEVERRRR 

boy oh boy oh BOY OH BOYYYYYYYY. well wlecome to the world of BL lmao especially as an adult with some obviously deep perspective just given your background. it is a fucking mess and it’s a hard mess to like but it pulls you in. i approach it like i do with soap operas since these are essentially telenovelas, you know? just like the drama at a billion. but the tricky part of that is like....what parts of it do we understand for critiquing? because so many of the shows are so bad at being like good pieces of things to look at just production wise and story wise. but i feel like these shows ask us to take them seriously, so why shouldn’t we take the content seriously? and this is being primarily peddled to young girls. 

i bring this up often but i read this thing about yaoi and the interest younger women/girls have in BL and its fascination with pederasty essentially. this component i think is key when we talk about who gets affected by these things the most. society in general is bad 4 girls bla bla we know lmao but in “more sexually conservative” societies it may be harder for these girls to feel safe even expressing normal emotions romantically and sexually and particularly with guys. some people hypothesized, and i think i agree with this hypothesis, that they can live through the casualness of BL. they don’t feel threatened because they can put themselves into the shoes of the other character. oftentimes, the more feminine or the younger. this was in conjunction with the age gap aspect (they say pederasty as well because there’s unethical age gaps that r gross and that is indeed what we would at least call a touch of sexual abuse if people dont feel like calling it an obsession with youth and power and uhhh young ppl and perhaps kids) where maybe girls could see themselves in these situations as the person being saved, loved, taken care of, and sadly also sexually active and penetrated. 

i think that’s just one aspect of it but i do think there’s validity in who gravitates towards it. i cannot imagine seeing this stuff and not getting enough information as a young kid, i sure as fuck know i didn’t!, and seeing these things and you look at it with 0 critique because you’re young and you may have no interest in it or you simply cannot understand what is wrong. no one is teaching you these things and these shows confirm it. and it is wild how intrinsic patriarchy is to BL although in its existence it also can’t be in line with patriarchy given the nature of two [cis] men!

it begs the question about the replacement aspect. is it just so girls can put themselves in these characters shoes? if so then that means we believe that gender is so interchangeable within our relationships and interactions and that doesn’t seem right. there’s more to lgbtq+ than just existing; it’s finding ways to communicate, finding a family, safety, your people, being a free person. there’s a lot to gain and a lot a lot to lose. and a gay man is also not a woman because those are also two distinct experiences.  especially in societies that have a more hidden aspect to sexuality (idk how to word this bc the BL industry would NEVER survive in america but in a way there’s a more “progressive” look at homosexuality but it’s still fucked up because we live in a Society, you know? at the same time look at what we are doing to trans kids. literally waging war so it’s bonkers how we all collectively have some real progress happening but at the same time not at all. the concept of ‘ladyboys’ and the frequency we see trans people in thai shows is wild and something that we absolutely do not see here in the US. still, none of these groups feel safe or are getting better material conditions in either place. we just show the ways we can try and tolerate oppression witout eliminating it imo)

to me it is clear: it’s money. which most things exist to make money so. but also who is the audience for these shows? and they have to market towards them. all that said all hope is not lost there are some decent shows. it’s just like regular media on TV though where it’s so fucking saturated as an industry that it’s literally sifting through garbage. and there are some days when you can handle the trash and others where it really fucking hurts to watch the violence, the rape, the manipulation, the violations, the stupid messaging. i have never seen more people trying to do mental gymnastics and seeing if things were “technically rape” than in teh BL fandom and that is so fucking sad.

i came into these shows at 28 with almost 0 clue of what as media BL was like esp as media that countries can use as soft power with the revenue. but i realize like...i’m 29 now and so many people don’t have a sizeable, though not huge, amount of life experience. and i wonder for people on the internet who are usually searching for something if they spend so much time on it like what a 15 year old girl thinks. what a 20 year old girl thinks. 

it is incredibly problematic and so awful but there’s also some rewards. if you haven’t i would definitely watch i told sunsset about you which i don’t think i’m going to finish and i doubt i’ll watch the second installment (watch this be a lie) but when i say some fucking impeccable storytelling and art? phew. now that is a fucking piece of media that works. it takes from moonlight heavily and you can see like...the artistic dedication is there and the story makes its world and sets up its stakes extremely well. 

i think because this is marketed towards much younger people too they know they dont have to try as hard. but they SHOULD because then you can have a fucking masterpiece like that. i think even this prolific gay thai filmmaker (who is like solidly against the government) who is so respected (and who i like a lot! if u wanna know i can tell u lmao but the films are very uhhhhhhhh “artsy”) would like i told sunset about you. i wish more people had budget like that and also just cared about the stories. it’s the fucking magic of art to figure out what you can do but there is very little incentive honestly. idk i am very pessimistic. there are days when it’s really a great pick me up and distraction but it is never a place i would love for to feel seen or heard but i’m more of the mind of i never trust the mainstream until they prove me wrong ;) 

or i never trust the mainstream and i still buy into it anyway and then cry when i don’t like what i see adn i yell “BOO GET OFF THE STAGE!” when an old man won’t leave a teenager alone

[crossdreamers]

This trans woman supported the “gender critical” TERFs. Then she realized that she had joined a transphobic cult.

Sometimes trans people end up supporting the ones that that belittle and marginalize transgender people. This is not as strange as it sounds. They might have grown up in the same transphobic culture as,  let’s say,  religious fundamentalist fanatics or the trans-exclusionary, “gender critical”,  radical feminists (TERFs). Even “normal” culture reflects the fear of sex and gender variation. Do they internalize the transphobia and/or the homophobia of the surrounding society. 

This twitter thread of @Kinsys gives us one such story.

//I'm having this massive *duh* moment right now. When I first started becoming popular with the GC [Gender Critical/Trans-exclusionary radical feminist] crowd, a lot of trans people tried to sway me away from it. They called me bootlicker, quisling, TERF, truscum, and more. Some of the more compassionate ones tried to warn me.

"They'll turn on you eventually", they said. I didn't think so. At the time, I was still wet behind the ears and confident that I could good faith my way into solving the problems. I didn't see prejudice, I saw legitimate concerns and people frustrated by their inability to speak.

I realized that they needed a voice, someone who could stand up and speak The Truth, and on whom the accusations of transphobia would sound utterly absurd. 

 After all, I am trans. 

 After all, I was defending Reality. 

 But looking back, it turns out I was joining a cult.

It's suddenly clear to me that I was, in fact, bootlicking. I just couldn't see it because it wasn't GC boots I found so tasty. It was an entire lifetime of internalized homophobia and transphobia. I was driven to justify my existence to facsimiles of my family.

It wasn't just that, though. It's not as if I didn't, and don't, genuinely care about women's rights. In fact I cared very much and still do. But there are many perspectives on women's rights, and I chose to defend the one that most closely mimicked the values of The Cult.

It was, on some level, a subconscious attempt at putting myself through another unorthodox round of conversion therapy. I wanted to agree with their views on trans people, because if I could then it might be possible to redefine myself by them. I wanted to fix my transness.

Earlier, reading a long, cathartically ranty blog post linked by @surfacingwater, I began to realize a rather pesky truth I've been trying to hide beneath an attractive labyrinth of nuance: I have never truly accepted that I'm LGBT.

Alongside my love affair with GC ideas, I was also busy exploring Blanchardism [this is a reference to the transphobic autogynephilia theory]. If GC ideology represented my mother's perspective (I was a small child when she became the first to tell me, bitterly, that trans women were mutilated men), then Blanchardism represented my father.

It was cold observation, and required unflinching reflection. It was a new echo of so many moments in which my father grabbed my jaw and forced me to look him in the eye, admit I wasn't telling him the truth, and open my soul to him or else Hell.

GC ideology wanted me to believe that trans women are all just mutilated men, and fuck our pain, our effort. Especially if you're one of those fetishists Blanchard was kinder but no less firm: it's cool you are who you are, he said. Just admit that you're a perverted fetishist.

It's easy to see why this eventually created a mental health crisis. But while I was in it, being torn three ways, it made it possible for me to entertain the notion that I was actually Cis. It let me gaslight myself into believing I could actually be a straight man.

But I was never a straight man. I was always a queer. In high school, people identified me as a "faggot" and it didn't matter how much I protested. They bullied me just the same. And I knew on some level they were right. I knew I was different. I knew it showed.

So I worked to fix it. I spent years learning unnatural body language. I learned to pass for straight, most of the time, anyway. "Why do you look like you're posing all the time?" People would ask. "I'm not!!!" I would snap, while double-checking that I wasn't sitting wrong.

I've tried to hash this out a thousand times, invalidate it over and over but the truth is that I'm a really feminine human. I was a feminine kid, a really, really scared one. I wanted to be anything other than who and what I was.

But reading that long post was like a reflection of everything I spent my entire life trying to avoid. I wanted to be liked, because if people like you they don't abuse you, and in my world abuse was the default. So much so I couldn't understand why trans people fought back.

It was, and has always been, a desperate attempt to generate an illusion of control. But we can't control it. And I can't stop existing as myself any more than anyone else can. I *am* everything I was ever afraid I'd be: Trans, Homosexual, Fetishist, Irrational.

And I finally just realized that I don't need to justify my fucking existence. I don't need to tell you the contents of my soul, father. They're mine. I can keep them, I can love them, and if society hates me for them that's on them. It's not me, society, it's you.

And with this I finally understand what I should have figured out long ago: Justification isn't possible. We have a right to exist. We have a right to exist exactly as we are, without needing to justify it, without needing to prove our value.

And all these people bitching about "biology" can fuck right the fuck off, because this *is* my biology and it's not a joke. Most importantly, our suffering isn't about you. That's the whole GC problem: they're actually narcissistic enough to believe we're about them.

As for Blanchard, maybe he's right, maybe he's not. Maybe he's sometimes right, maybe not. Maybe he was then and isn't now. I don't know. The truth is I don't care. I don't see how on earth it matters. What matters is how we treat people. What matters is how we treat ourselves.

And no one is going to give us a space. We spend our childhoods rejected by boys and kicked across the yard by men loudly wondering why we don't hurry up and stand. Then these supposed women's rights groups accuse us of trying to infiltrate as if they're the center of our world.

And god forbid anyone come out as an enby: all of society will join in on the mockery. Sections of society shuffle us around endlessly like hotels that have only just happened to fill up, sorry. Try the next one, they'll take you.

So we have to fight for rights. We have to. Because being nice won't work. Being nice just means you get to be privy to 1001 conversations about how horrible people like you are. Every word indirectly slicing your self-esteem to ribbons. But at least they aren't calling you a man.

The fight isn't about what we always were. It's about creating a new way to look at the world that includes us as normal. It's about preventing further abuse. It's about solving the problem for future generations. That's what rights activism is about. That's why it matters.

And to all the actual TERFs out there bitching about how "the mask has fallen" and how I'm "showing my true colors": It's cause for celebration, no?//

Thread and comments here.

Top illustration by Henry James Garrett @henryjgarrett.

[bubbelpop2]

Gay and Tumblr etiquette: a guide

This is a compilation of rules that keep the lgbt community a safe space for all. A lot of the older gays are getting sick of seeing recycled bigotry, and we’re here to tell you what the general opinions are in the real world. Some of the content in this post contains not necessarily gay content, but cay culture. Gay culture is all about the lack of heteronormative toxicity, the promotion of critical thinking, teaching the youth that they need to rely on themselves and friends instead of the government, because the government doesn’t really care, and the abolition of White Christian ethics being forced onto people.

You need to read this essay. [x] You need to know your history. It’s important, you need to know it. This is the baseline you need to know. ACAB.

If you want to know more than just the baseline: [ here ]

Don’t debate transphobes, racists, or n@zis. Don’t debate them, block them. Do not reply. You are giving them a place to express themselves. This emboldens closeted racists and transphobes. Don’t do it.

If you disagree with someone who isn’t any of the above, carefully consider their argument. Could they be right? Is it a lesson that you’re just not ready for? Block them, ponder their words, and consider your stance on the subject. Only a fool walks away from an argument more convinced than ever that they are correct.

Pedophiles are not in the lgbt community. Pedophilia is not a kink nor is it a sexuality. It has been proven to be a mental illness in which the brain is shaped and ordered incorrectly. 

“Queer” Is not an inherently harmful term. It is a term that the community has reclaimed, and many people identify as queer. By calling someone who is queer “gay” or policing THEIR right to be called queer, you are erasing history. Queer is a term that people have used in the lgbt community since before stonewall. Queer isn’t your term to take away, especially if you’re not queer. 

“Gay” Is an umbrella term. If someone LIKES being called “gay”, no matter what the complex rules of their attraction are, respect it. Don’t insist that they belong in a certain box according to your definition of different sexualities. 

If someone is questioning their sexuality, don’t push them. The point is for them to FIND OUT what they’re attracted to, and what they like best. Whether they turn out to be gay, straight, bi, or ace, leave them the hell alone. Especially if they’re a kid.

“Terfs” used to be called “political lesbians” because people who were not wlw would take over lgbt spaces and advocate to “kill all men” and would point actual wlws against men. This is terrible. Bisexual wlws deserve to express their sexuality fully without judgement. Trans lesbians deserve to express their gender without judgement. ANYBODY who is amab or trans, or attracted to amab or trans people, deserves a safe place to express themselves. We got rid of these “political lesbians” and stopped them from poisoning the minds of bisexuals and trans men. We can do it again. 

(” queer is a slur “ was started by terfs. stop saying it if you’re not a terf.)

Nonbinary is not a fad. Nonbinary people have always existed. It is not new, and you are not allowed to police other people’s gender.

There are a lot of things to gender as a whole. Your gender, what you identify as, is a large part of your identity. Some people identify as female, some people identify as male, and some people identify as neither, both, or any combination of any other genders! This may be confusing, but that’s okay. You don’t need to completely understand someone’s gender, and someone may not even understand their own! What IS important is that you respect their gender expression.

Gender expression is mostly just two things. Pronouns, and Presentation. Pronouns (He/She/They/Xhey/Ect) are for the person who has them. Pronouns don’t have to “match” your gender. Your presentation doesn’t have to “match” your gender, either. It’s all about your comfort. You don’t have to understand someone’s gender identity, but you DO have to respect their name and pronouns. Always.

Mogai is a great term, even if it’s not popular. Mogai is an all-inclusive term for all people who are not allocishet.

Being ace does not make you straight. Being aro does not make you straight. Straight = You are actively and wholly attracted to the opposite gender. It is the lack of attraction to the opposite gender that includes them in the community, as well as the constant harassment from both straight and gay people for being “broken”

“Femboy” Is not an inherently harmful term. Calling a trans woman a “Femboy” without her permission is. People who use the term to refer to themselves, or to refer to people who are comfortable with the term, are not infringing upon anybody. You need to stop taking away terms from gay people because of what transphobic pieces of shit do. Yes, shitty transphobes refer to trans women in porn as femboys. This doesn’t mean that who the term was ORIGINALLY meant for, which is, gay feminine men, can’t use it to describe themselves. This is far too similar to “queer is a slur” for me to change my mind on this. A lot of people identify as femboys, and use the term for their comfort, leave them alone.

Truscum and Trumeds are gross. Their entire personality is built off of policing other trans people’s identities. They want trans people to act like they’re cis, and conform to heteronormative societal standards. Their opinion is that it’s flamboyant trans people’s fault that cis people are transphobic. Which is simply not true. Transphobes are Transphobes because they’re bigots. It is never, in any shape or form, the fault of the oppressed for being oppressed. Ever.

Your love for the oppressed should come before your hatred of the oppressor. This does not mean that you expressing your hatred is “performative” in any way. You’re allowed to hate the oppressor, verbally, and often, so long as you, personally, know which is more important.

It is not okay to call people out. Calmly talking to people, or simply blocking them, is best. It is not okay to send hate anons. It is not okay to interact with bigots willingly. It is not okay to do something that is mean-spirited.

Be gay do crimes. (As in, fuck the police, they’ve always been against every minority. Including us.)

Disabled people are beautiful and loved. All gay spaces should be accessible.

The people that lead the protest that sparked lgbt rights across the world were black trans women. Remember that. Remember it good and well. 

Autism isn’t shameful. People with autism are worthy of respect and admiration.

Punk culture is antifa and gay culture. Bigots like punk fashion, and dress in punk fashion. We call these people “posers” and they should be beaten if spotted being a bigot at a punk function. Punk culture is all about being against the systemic oppression of the lower class and marginalized. Many punks go to protests for human rights and better work qualities. 

It is neve okay to police someone else’s identity. Period. 

It is never okay to police someone’s kinks. Pay attention to actual abusers and rapists, not fictional and 100% consensual scenarios.

Child touchers get their heads bashed in with baseball bats.

It’s not okay to bully people for shipping anything. Yes, anything, including abusive ships. Quit telling people to kill themselves over fictional people. What you SHOULD be worried about, is straight white boys who romanticize REAL abuse towards REAL people, not people just minding their own business and expressing themselves via FICTIONAL characters. Don’t tackle ships, tackle rape culture in real life. Go outside. 

It is never okay to police someone’s writing, art, or artistic expression. Yes, dark and violent content included. The idea that you can be punished for thoughts or expression of thoughts, regardless of if you’ve ACTUALLY harmed anyone, is white and Christian purity culture. If you think this is okay, read this: [x]

The above is in the same mindset of soccer moms that say “people who play video games are inherently violent” which is simply not true at all. Here’s an interesting post on a similar topic that will interest you: [x]

Just follow lace code. Doc martens have a lace code in the punk community, If you’re not a racist, follow the lace code. 

mosh pit etiquette [x]

more about gay punk: [x]

That’s all I could think of for now! Any other queer elders wanna have a stab at it?

[goblin-gardens]

cw Rowling’s transphobia - I understand if you don’t want to engage further with the topic, but would you want to talk about the ways it sunk into hp? Or is there a good post or article to direct me to? I am trying to unlearn hp’s impact on me - not your job! - I only ask because I went searching myself, and only found lists of recent examples out of her stories.

No problem, nonny! I can’t think of any specific article or anything, but I’m always happy to write a rambling bit of nonsense about my own opinions!

(disclaimer: JKR wasn’t actually my biggest fantasy influence as a kid-- that was probably Mercedes Lackey or Tamora Pierce (both writers with their own issues) and Ursula K. Le Guin-- so I don’t have much nostalgia for the HP stories themselves, more nostalgia for my friendships that included things like reading books or seeing movies together. I know these books are very, very important to some people, but I’m actually not one of them.)

OK so. The biggest clear “A Transphobe Wrote This” signal I can recall is the descriptions of Rita Skeeter. Her evilness and duplicity is telegraphed by her “mannish hands” and over-exaggerated makeup, and if I recall correctly she’s one of the few female characters whose facial or body hair is ever mentioned. One has to wonder if JKR was using these signifies of “imperfect“ femininity (that plenty of real cis women exhibit!) only as indications that Rita wasn’t to be trusted, or if she was actually.... writing her version of a transgender woman. (I think the 1st one, but still.)

Aside from that most blatant thing, there’s more subtle gender stuff throughout the books, that maybe in isolation isn’t a big deal, but when taken all together gives a sense of what JKR thinks Men are, and what she thinks Women are, and how those two things are fully separate on every level, from biological to career choice to personality.

Like how Hermione, often characterized as stubborn, logical, and rules-oriented, suddenly becomes Ron and Harry’s therapist/Feelings Translator/mom on the camping trip in book 6, cooking and tidying up and telling them what their feelings mean when she’s never actually been especially good at feelings before this-- and also she’s annoying and nags the boys in a very Mrs. Weasley way, all of the sudden, and is prone to bursting into tears-- it’s as if once she Became A Woman (at 17 or whatever) her own personality is superseded by What A Woman Is.

Or take Tonks, after she marries Lupin. It’s just like, Boop! She is so fulfilled by being a wife and mom-to-be! This is what she’s been waiting for her whole life! She’s glowing! Of course I’m not saying female characters can’t enjoy marriage and motherhood, but..... Tonks says like 2 lines after she gets married and they’re only about being married. She was wild and rebellious (and queercoded) but now she’s settled down and is ready to start her true purpose: having a baby within a year of getting married and Making A Home for Lupin, who needs a calming feminine presence in his life.

The fact that every character ends the series with a spouse of the opposite gender (or who’s dead before the books start, like McGonagall’s husband) isn’t just twee “happily ever after” heteronormativity, there’s transphobia wrapped up in it too. The fact that adult women come in three flavors: “Evil and Sexy”, “Evil and Feminine But Childless”, and “Mom” isn’t just sexism, it’s transphobia too. Because in addition to being obnoxious about who they consider women, TERFS have fucked up perceptions of what womanhood is, and straight TERFS especially tie up their transphobia with a nice sexist bow on top, so even when they’re talking about cis women, they’re weird about it.

You say you’re trying to unlearn HP’s impact on you-- that’s interesting. A lot of people talk about the good they’ve taken from the Harry Potter series, how it’s taught them acceptance or bravery or to see the magic in the world. (I think that a lot of the people who say this were reading HP as they were growing up and could very well have learned these things on their own because that’s what a lot of growing up is.) Lately this sort of statement goes along with disappointment that this thing they feel is Good and a part of their own Goodness was created by someone who they now know is Bad. Let me offer you something (an olive branch? a piece of floating philosophy? some bullshit?) If these stories inspired you to be more accepting and kind, if you used them to open new doors in your own mind about what “goodness” is and how you can foster it in yourself, then that’s a positive impact and fully separate from anything JKR says or does. You are not literally made up of your long-time fandoms and formative influences and nothing else. You are more than the sum of the words you read-- you’re also your own perspective, your own insight, and your own choices.

[greentrickster]

For Larry, representing Mind means letting his creativity flourish and learning to recognize his internal bias, which includes both his views of girls and women AND what it means to be strong for him. So maybe it's also about how stiffling unfair social expectations can be and other people putting you into a box? Like internalized fear of doing things deemed feminine or girly? Which could fit with why Larry uses his brush brute-force mostly at first.

Something like that, yes! The mind powers for him definitely revolve around accepting his creativity, and also, very key, around accepting that not being smart doesn’t make him less valuable, or an idiot. Our society is wildly built around the concepts that intelligence is key and that not being intelligent is Bad, that characters and people have to be smart, if it’s not overt, they’re just ‘smart/intelligent in a different way.’  You’re not allowed to be dumb, even if you’re the best, nicest person on earth in every other way, you can’t be dumb. I don’t see people talk about this much, but I’ve thought about it a lot. There’s a few other more pressing problems we need to deal with before this starts becoming more addressed, though.

Anyway, the brush thing is almost certainly his inadvertent reaction to all this. He’s not smart, but he is pretty tough, so play to his strengths, you know? It’s a matter of being told he’s not good at something so many times that he never thought to try. Then learning that being kinda dumb doesn’t stop you from being clever or wildly creative, and figuring out that him being the mind aspect of the trio wasn’t a mistake at all, he’s just using it differently than another person might. Then he starts bringing his other powers into play more often, and gets really good with using his buffs effectively.

And still hits enemies with his giant paintbrush a lot, because it’s fun and he likes it.

In regards to his toxic masculinity being dealt with, that doesn’t actually effect his powers at all - it’s actually a happy accident! And it all starts with Larry seeing his reflection pretty soon after transforming for the first time and thinking to himself, “Oh my gosh, I look cute as heck! <3″ And then having his brain catch up with his thoughts, the societal expectations that are still prominent in 2000/1, which is when this is approximately set, catching up next, and a very tiny, “Oh no.”

Because one thing kids are super good at picking up on is what’s safe to do socially and what isn’t. Being part of the crowd just as a safety thing is pretty huge for most people right through high school, most kids don’t even really think of doing anything else in third grade. So we’ve got a kid here who knows that the reaction he just had is something that could get him ostracized by his peers, even today in 2020 guys tend to get serious flack for wearing skirts and dresses, and good luck convincing anyone you’re straight if you like to do so. We talk about the LGBTQ+ community’s struggles a lot, which is fair and important, because those issues need some serious work to get fixed, but there’s some pretty nasty social expectation cis straight men and women have to deal with, too, in regards to how they have to behave and dress if they don’t want their gender and sexual orientation to be constantly called into question.

And this is 2000/1. Kids still commonly used ‘gay’ and ‘r*t*rded’ as casual insults back then, just casually in public. You can bet solid money that this is not an environment Larry feels safe to be fully himself in, or even necessarily able to notice he’s not being fully himself in until this happens, because he does genuinely like a lot of classically masculine stuff and he’s nine, he might not have noticed.

So he does the only thing he really knows how to do - double down on what he knows is ‘safe’ and sadly increase the toxic masculinity for awhile. Enough that Phoenix and Miles notice something’s up, because Larry’s always been flirty around girls and trying to show off how tough he is, but up until now it’s been more along the lines of ‘doing this because this is just how everyone around me is behaving.’ They’re nine, and nine-year-olds are generally just mimicking adults and older kids when they do ‘romance’ in a play/practice sort of manner. But now he’s really throwing himself into it, and really complaining about how much he hates the costumes they have to wear, and so on and so forth.

It peaks about a third of the way into their story, not because he’s confronted about it (because Larry’s good at deflecting and distractions), but because while they’re fighting/tracking an enemy they run into someone else being picked on for the same reasons Larry’s scared of people picking on him for. And Larry has the choice of standing up for them or ignoring it. And he wants to ignore it, he’s so, so aware that standing up for someone else like this can switch the bully’s ire to you instead. Except he’s not just Larry anymore, he’s Yellow Brush, and he’s supposed to be being a hero, and ignoring situations like this isn’t what heroes do. So he stands up for the other kid, and part of it involves him saying, “So what? I’m a boy and I’m wearing a dress and I like it! And you can’t say I’m not tough, because I beat up monsters, so there!” And then the instant the situation is over Larry runs off and has a meltdown, because he just blurted out one of his deepest secrets in public and, in true nine-year-old fashion, is now 100% certain his friends hate him and will never want to talk to him again.

Then we get a bonding and reassuring on a riverbank scene, or on a beach if there aren’t any rivers nearby, I dunno, I don’t live in California, and Larry apologizes a lot and Miles and Phoenix tell him that they don’t care, he’s still their friend, and Larry starts slowly improving and escaping that toxic masculinity trap he’s been stuck in for so long.

Side effect of this, girls actually start finding him more tolerable as a result, and Larry is happy but has no idea what to do with this, and finally decides that he should probably wait until he’s way older to figure out girls better, “Like, you know, when I’m twelve. I’ll probably have it really together by then.”

“Well, twelve is practically a teenager, so that sounds about right.”

(One of the fun things about writing kids is that beautiful, sadly incorrect view they have of how quickly one accrues maturity and the ability to be a fully-functional member of society.)

So basically, yes, the issues you mentioned are very much addressed in Larry’s arc, just for slightly different reasons than suggested. ;)

Thanks for the ask!

[beyond-far-horizons]

Katara’s potential in LOK and importance of older female role-models in life and fiction

This was not meant to turn into a meta and yet has done! Just a disclaimer I’m still working my way through The Legend of Korra but have mostly been spoiled by reading some great analysis on here. So this isn’t meant to be a comprehensive take and also isn’t meant to disrespect the people who like Legend of Korra or this particular aspect of it. It’s just a subject very close to my heart and my work as a creative practitioner, student of psychology and media analyst, so I really wanted to discuss it. 

Contains some spoilers esp for Season 1.

So I’m biting the bullet and getting into LoK despite reservations. I overall really loved Avatar the Last Airbender and Katara is one of my favourite characters. I admit one of my biggest issues with starting LoK was hearing how her character and agency were drastically reduced compared to the original series.

Now I know LoK gets a lot of flak for a variety of reasons and it was always going to be hard following such a beloved series as A:TLA and trying to do something different. However I’m actually enjoying certain aspects including Korra herself, despite the fact she can be bratty and immature at times (which squares with her age and upbringing). I also find the premise of the Equalists and especially their mysterious, terrifying leader Amon really interesting and I just wish the creators had done more with that plot line. (I forever seem to be going on about missed potential in the stories I consume!)

However the more I continue the more I’m annoyed because I realised we were robbed of Badass Grandma!Katara and also more matrilineal mentoring/bonding between her and Korra. 

Spoilers but I wanted to see Katara go toe to toe with the villains esp give her being intimately connected to their history. I wanted to see her deal with the shadows of the past, the history of trauma associated with bloodbending and the Fire Nation and also the very intriguing points Season 1 was trying to make about the role of bender vs non-bender and the Avatar themselves. All things Katara was deeply involved with as someone who experienced inequality firsthand, fought relentlessly to abolish it and was the previous Avatar’s finder, teacher and later his wife. 

Katara being Aang’s first mentor and implied to be Korra’s waterbendering tutor adds yet another dimension and potential to explore. That whole relationship must be strange for everyone involved but I’m always a sucker for female bonds, found family and intergenerational friendships.

I know LoK is about the new cast taking over - Tenzin fills the role of Korra’s mentor figure onscreen and is loved by many. There are lots of ways to tell a story and the creators focused on Korra’s issues with airbending to contrast her personality and development with Aang’s, as well as to flesh out Aang’s family and the rebuilding of the Air Nomads. 

Yet I miss the potential of seeing wise fierce mentor!Katara on screen. We fans love callbacks, so seeing Katara in action as she used to be would be a joy, and older more powerful characters need not overshadow younger ones. For example Uncle Iroh was beloved and integral in A:TLA despite the fact we saw very little of his backstory. He didn’t take over Zuko’s journey, he aided and complemented it. Plus Toph gets her chance to shine.

There was so much to play with, especially in Season 1 (and would have been a nice reference to Aang meeting Katara first and then Zuko and Toph later). So much contrast between Katara’s experience with Hama, her thoughts about her mother, Gran Gran and the reintroduction of South Water Style. The trauma of bad parental/mentor relationships vs the good examples one can use to alchemise negative patterns that A:TLA was known for (see Iroh, Zuko and Ozai for reference). I don’t want to get too far into spoiler territory but all of this links back to Katara, Hama and Water Tribe and I would have loved to see a further exploration of that and a contrast between her loving bond and fear for Korra vs the villains’ and their education. This would have created more depth between Korra and Amon and co (and wow do I wish that dynamic was explored further - does she even know what happens to him??), and between Katara and Korra and their respective journeys to shoulder their burdens and mature as people and women.

Just think about all those juicy, angsty callbacks we could have done to Hama’s haunting episode! How Katara could have decided to be a better mentor than Hama was to her. (Katara was always a good mentor but if there was any issues in her relationship with Korra re Aang etc this could have been a good place for dramatic tension and resolution.) Of course for all we know this did happen but we don’t see it because we don’t get to see Katara’s training with Korra or much of Katara at all in LoK apart from her failing to heal Korra.

Plus I adore badass ladies and badass grandmas, I have loads in my original fiction. I love people defying stereotypes and sadly there is still a lack of stories not only depicting a range of female role-models but female mentoring and matrilineal bonding.

Read the incredible bestseller Women Who Run with the Wolves by Jungian analyst Clarissa Pinkola Estés if you want to learn more about the power of storytelling, myth and female hero journeys and initiation. A key part of that book is how women have been historically and psychologically undervalued and harmed by the prevailing culture for centuries. Also how it has broken matrilineal lines of wisdom and support and distorted cultural values of how girls and women (not to mention boys and men) view the Feminine. This leaks down into our modern day stories via inherited psychological conditioning and unexamined tropes. 

For example - how many ‘wise old men’ figures can you think of in pop culture, myth, fairytale, religion? Quite a few I’d imagine. Now contrast that with the ‘wise old woman’ archetype...I guessing not as many. I’m sure you’ll find a few but I bet more often the words that come to mind are ‘witch’, ‘sorceress’, ‘crone’ etc. 

The Fairy Godmother (I gave you that one for free;) ) is an exception but she is a watered down version of the powerful, ambivalent figures of folklore such as Baba Yaga. Trust me if the Yaga was your mentor, as she was to Vasalisa in the fairytale Vasalisa the Wise/the Beautiful, you ain’t coming out of that encounter with a crystal slipper, you’re coming out it with a burning skull that incinerates your enemies and I’d like to see that tale popularised!

As mentioned Katara did feature in Korra’s life as a support, a vague mentor figure and a healer - in fact she is the one that initiates Korra’s heroine journey by supporting her decision to leave the stifling confines of her compound, go to Republic City alone and learn airbending. She also offers emotional and medical support during Korra’s traumatic recovery later on in the series. But mostly Katara’s involvement is at the peripheries of The Legend of Korra except when she was failing to heal her.

This isn’t to say that comfort and softness in female relationships are lesser than battle prowess or mental fortitude. Or that failure always bad, it is human and can be a powerful narrative tool for character development. I’m not interested in the infallible ‘Strong Female Character’ stereotype and neither is Estés. Her book illustrates that the Feminine encapsulates all of these qualities and many more and looking at the original Katara she was a perfect example of that. She was empathetic, intelligent, powerful, fierce, devoted, flawed, playful, angry.

I guess what I’m saying is that I miss that Katara and I miss the opportunity of  seeing Korra interact with and learn from that Katara, especially as they have so much in common in terms of shared history, powers, culture and even looks. I’m also missing the opportunity of seeing that Katara battle Amon and all the drama and backstory that could have ensued from those encounters! After all Katara took on her mother’s killer, Hama and the Fire Nation (including one angsty honour-obsessed Fire Prince and his powerful sister), you’re telling me she would have just let Korra, her family and friends be in grave danger in the name of ‘leaving it to the kids’ ESPECIALLY since her own history turned out to be so deeply connected to all of this? Nah...

It’s important for girls* to see a range of wholesome female characters and dynamics play out in their media from an early age, especially to rework and combat the historic negative tropes that our culture is still steeped in. It’s also important to address the devaluing of the elderly, in particular elderly women. The Legend of Korra does in fact build on this from Avatar the Last Airbender by having an even greater range of capable women and girls across ages and morality spectrum. Korra herself (who I’m liking a lot more than I thought I would), is a real stereotype breaker. Toph I’ve heard fulfils the ‘wise old (crotchy) woman’ archetype later in the series. I just wish, given how much I adore A:TLA’s Katara, that we could have seen her shine in an elder role too. 

(*I use terms like ‘girls’, ‘woman/women’ and ‘feminine’. I mean these to also include a broad interpretation of the Feminine than just the hetero/cis-normative one, but sometimes it helps when critiquing something to narrow things down esp something so already psychologically complex in a simple meta.)

[vampish-glamour]

This is what I’m talking about when I say mogai identities hurt and confuse gnc people, and get being gender non conforming mixed up with gender identity.

—

I’ve seen lots of stupid mogai genders. But this one takes the cake.

First of all. “A female gender” so you mean female??

But that part aside, this really pisses me off.

Gender and gender expression are separate. Always.

Your gender is who you are; how the world sees you. It determines what pronouns people use to describe you, and it is something that can’t be changed. (In relation to trans people I mean this not in the sense of ‘trans people will always be their birth sex’, but in the sense that ‘nothing can change the fact that a trans person is trans’. Because a cis woman will always be a woman, nothing can change that, and a trans woman will always be a woman—although for a portion of her life she may be the only one who views herself as a woman—, nothing can change that).

Gender expression is how you present yourself. Maybe you prefer suits over dresses, or dresses over suits. Maybe you wear makeup when you’re expected not to or don’t wear makeup when you’re expected to. Whatever it is, it can be changed because people’s sense of style and self change as they grow. For example, when I was little I loved the idea of big poofy princess dresses, now I want nothing more than to have a nice suit.

Expression is not tied to gender. Gender is something on the inside that people are born with. Expression is not, and it is subject to change.

But this mogai gender isn’t even about all that, which is why I’m not going into too much detail.

This mogai gender is about feminine women not conforming to gender role expectations.

Not just the expectation of being feminine, but the societal expectations.

Some societal expectations of women may include:

- Being attracted to men

- Focusing on family instead of career

- Having biological children and raising them

- Being a homemaker

- Being softspoken

- Being dainty/delicate

- Not being in a leadership role

- Being agreeable

- Many more.

So what this gender essentially is, is “if you’re a feminine woman who doesn’t conform to societal expecations of women, you’re this gender”.

I call bullshit. Not conforming to (often sexist) gender roles doesn’t make somebody a whole new gender. It doesn’t even necessarily make them gnc. It just means they’re not conforming to societal expectations.

Let’s go back to the societal expectation that women are to be attracted to men.

Any feminine gay or bisexual woman can relate to what this “gender” explains. Because by being born gay or bisexual they are automatically defying one of the biggest societal expectations of women. This goes double for gay women since we don’t have the capability to be attracted to men.

Not even gay/bi women though!!! Feminine straight women who might be focused on career over family. Maybe they’re loud and opinionated. Maybe they never want to have kids.

I think the thing that gets me about this “gender” is that it’s not even targeting gnc women. It’s not what I usually see, which is “if you’re a masculine woman you’re [X] and if you’re a feminine man you’re [Y]”.

It’s targeting women who feel comfortable in their femininity, but don’t feel comfortable with the pressures and expectations society puts on them.

It gets worse, though. I saved this for last, as a little cherry on top.

It explicitly states that “queer femininity” (gay/bi women who are ‘feminine’) “often subverts societal expectations” of women.

And guess what? They’re right. As I said, women who are gay or bi automatically don’t follow the expectations “placed on their gender” because they have attraction towards women. And gay women can’t have attraction to men at all.

But that doesn’t make them a whole other gender. That makes them a gay woman/lesbian or a bi woman.

A woman of any sexuality who feels connected to femininity but disconnected to often sexist gender roles is still a woman. Not some random gender born on tumblr.

If we look at the very last part of their fun explanation, we see that “this is a term for gender nonconforming women who feel that, though they consider their behaviour, presentation, etc. To be feminine, they do not conform to the expectations placed on their gender”.

In summary; a feminine woman who doesnt live ‘traditionally’.

I just... I can’t even summarize everything that’s wrong with this. It’s everything I’ve been saying when I say that mogai identities specifically target gender non conforming people. Especially girls. Now not only is it targeting presentation, but the discomfort so many women (especially lgbt women) feel with the expectations placed on them just for being a woman.

And that’s not okay. Not only is this “gender” a disservice to all the wlw who are questioning their gender because of their attraction to women, not only is this “gender” a disservice to trans people who are tired of seeing gender being treated like an accessory... but it is a disservice to any girl who’s ever felt alienated from being a woman because of her disconnection from traditional gender roles. To any girl who’s felt confused about her gender because of this disconnection. Don’t confuse girls about their gender just because they don’t want to live “traditionally”. Let them know that it’s okay to be a woman who doesn’t conform to traditional gender roles.

Stop equating gender non conformity with being another gender. Stop telling girls who feel disconnected from ‘traditional’ female roles that they aren’t women, but some other gender. Stop telling wlw that their experiences and feelings equate to being another gender.

*And as a closing note, I didn’t and won’t include the name of who’s post the “gender” came from. If you know who it was, do not harass them. I don’t think they thought this through, and I know they don’t mean any harm.*

[digitaldreams0801]

FU But Gay

In honor of this comment on Frontiers Unexplored that made me laugh my ass off, it’s time to talk about gay stuff in the Frontier rewrite. (Minor spoilers for chapters 15-17 and contains very over the top humor)

I mentioned this in an author’s note somewhere in some chapter (I don’t know which one, and it might be for a chapter that hasn’t been released yet; as of this post, I am writing chapter 49 but have only posted chapter 30), but everybody in this cast is queer in some way. Why? I’m gay, and I like writing about gay characters. 

Also, a very good point that I’ve heard brought up within the fandom is that when the Frontier cast becomes Digimon, they become something that isn’t at all confined by the boundaries of humanity. Gender? Sexuality? What are those? I only know Digimon. 

Bokomon stated earlier in the story that Digimon don’t have gender either since you know. they’re data. so I took that as an excuse to make everybody gay! You get to be gay, you get to be gay, and you get to be gay! 

Without further ado, let’s get gay. 

Takuya 

Takuya is bisexual and a trans guy. That’s right, transphobes! I sucked you in under the preconceived notion that all goggleheads are cis! Funny enough (not really), I actually had somebody get mad at me for the trans rep in this story before Takuya was even revealed as trans. They stopped reading after getting mad that I included nonbinary characters, but I didn’t care and kept going out of spite. Also, I want to say that since bisexuality doesn’t exclude nonbinary identities contrary to popular misconception, Takuya could feasibly get with Chihiro, so worry not to the people who ship those two (since there are more than I thought there would be). Takuya could feasibly use he/him and them/they pronouns, but he doesn’t have ~ a second gender crisis ~ until after the events of the story. Shoutout to Aguni, Vritra, and Alda for making that happen since they hate gender (probably). As of the time of the story though, Takuya uses exclusively he/him pronouns. 

Koji

Koji is pansexual and nonbinary. The main reason that this comment made me cackle so much is because it was right; Takuya and Koji are bi and pan respectively. Koji doesn’t really give a damn about gender; he just wants to be held and also to punch his father but that’s irrelevant. Koji uses he/him and them/they pronouns, but he doesn’t come to terms with that until after the story ends. He’s faster with it than Takuya, but it still takes a bit. 

Tomoki

Tomoki is asexual and panromantic. He uses he/him and they/them pronouns. Tomoki is one of multiple asexual characters since I myself am ace and love expressing that through the characters I write. Tomoki is baby, and we should all look after him no matter what. 

Izumi

Izumi is, much like Koji and Tomoki, pansexual. She comes out as nonbinary after the story, and it is definitely thanks to Zephyrmon’s influence. Zephyr would 10/10 cause that and not really give a shit about it. She uses she/her and they/them pronouns. 

Junpei

Junpei is bisexual and nonbinary. He likes he/him and they/them pronouns though he admittedly prefers the former. His romantic type is Koji or Izumi; there’s basically no in between. He’s a disaster bi but I love him and you should too. 

Koichi

Koichi is asexual and demiromantic. He doesn’t really mind much what the gender is of the person that he ends up with as long as they care a lot about each other. He’s also nonbinary like Koji and comes out as using he/him and they/them pronouns not long after the book ends. 

Chihiro

Chihiro is pansexual and nonbinary. They’re neutral on the gender of their partner but would probably have a bias towards other trans people because of their experiences with being nonbinary. They may or may not make gay jokes about themselves and Takuya for the hell of it they do. Chihiro uses exclusively they/them pronouns, and you will wind up on their shit list for insinuating that they are particularly masculine or feminine when they pretty clearly hate that. 

Yumiko

Yumiko is yet another asexual character, and she’s panromantic like Tomoki. She has a bias towards women, but she could still wind up with anyone who respected her. She uses she/her pronouns, but the Digimon sides of her don’t really care about gender (Fioremon in particular really doesn’t give a flying fuck), so that could easily change in the future. 

Hinoka

Hinoka is a demisexual lesbian who loves women. It takes a while for her to connect with others, but when she does connect with a girl, chances are Hinoka will wind up head over heels sooner or later. You know, as soon as she can figure out her feelings, but that could take a while. Hinoka uses she/her pronouns, but much like with Yumiko, this could change. 

Saki

Saki is pansexual and genderfluid. As of the time of the story, Saki is only out as pansexual and nonbinary, not having realized that they’re genderfluid yet. Like with a few others, the influence of the Digimon pushes them to realize that they’re genderfluid. During the story, they use they/them pronouns, though they wind up using any pronouns after the story ends. They laugh when people struggle to figure out their gender at a first glance to further feed their internalized chaos. 

Mayumi

Mayumi is pansexual and nonbinary. She comes to terms with being nonbinary after the story ends and starts using they/them pronouns in addition to she/her. Mayumi doesn’t really mind about the gender of the person she ends up with, and she would probably flirt with anybody if she had the motivation and the love for it. She doesn’t feel that way about anyone in the group, but she totally would if she did. 

Haroi

Haroi is simply demisexual, though much like Mayumi, he comes out as nonbinary after the story. He uses he/him pronouns during the story and later comes to start also using they/them. Haroi doesn’t mind the gender of the person he winds up with, but it takes a while for him to develop feelings. In conclusion, he’s baby. 

Closing Thoughts

What have we learned here today, kids? Everybody is gay. When you’re a Digimon, straight people don’t exist. Also, cis people are minimal because of Digimon gender stuff. If you want to headcanon the two cis characters (Yumiko and Hinoka) as nonbinary, go for it. You have free reign over your headcanons, and I sure as hell will not going to stop you. Woo for the gays! We won! 

Also if anybody is wondering about the influence of the Spirits since I brought that up I’m developing an AU focused around that and I’ll share the info about it as soon as the spoilers on it have been revealed in canon which will happen in chapter 39 the AU is called Spirit Fuse and it’s very interesting

Anyways, that’s about it from me this time. This post was pretty casual and goofy as far as my writing goes, but this stuff is all canon. Go gays! We win!

[infinitys-spirits]

Hi thanks for the response, I don’t hate you, and I want you to have a good life, I just disagree with some of views and am genuinely curious about what other people think, and I would like to address some of the tags.

First saying “lgb drop the t” is honestly not a good way to get your point across as most people agree that lgbtqia+ is something that should include everyone who is falls out of society’s norms on gender, sexuality, and anatomy.

I think something a lot of people don’t know is that trans women and men are biologically different and studies have show that trans women have a brian structure close to that of a cis women’s than a man, not only that but there have been multiple historical instances of trans people.

I of course you don’t have the statistics I wouldn’t expect you too, I just want you to have some perspective and maybe do a bit of research into the hate and oppression trans and other gender queer people face.

I know personally from being a trans person that it is not from my internalized homophobia (I don’t know why it would be) and is not autogynphobia. I struggle every feeling as if I was born into the wrong body and it makes day to day life pretty difficult so I hope you can understand at least my personal struggles even if you still don’t fully understand the trans experience.

And although I disagree with it please ask for a space or groups for only cis women with out making about excluding trans women.

I hope you have a nice day and thanks for your time :)

I’ll address each point individually to make things easy on myself.

1. Most TRAs approach us radfems with hateful intent.

2a. “Lgb drop the t” is a general radfem/gender critical tag that I use to spread my posts. It isn’t that deep. Plus, the LGB is united in our same sex attraction. The T was originally added to accommodate same-sex attracted people who also enjoyed crossdressing and considered themselves “transsexual”. The current trans rights movement is homophobic and its goals are antithetical to the rights and needs of the LGB. They ask us (I’m a lesbian for reference) to go under conversion therapy. They demand that we “examine our preferences”. I will never want a relationship with a trans woman because they are men. I will never want a relationship with a man and I never have. The trans movement says that if a son likes dresses, he must in fact be a girl. Radfems simply say that he is a boy who likes dresses and that that is fine. The same is true for girls, but a little more serious. Teenage girls, including myself at the time, often hate our bodies. We go from a regular kid to a sexual object during puberty. The trans movement says that these uncomfortable feelings must be dysphoria and that you’re actually nonbinary or trans. No, you’re just a girl who is uncomfortable with society’s expectations, and that is completely normal. Note that dysphoria is a real and severe condition, but often fades after puberty (I believe the stat is 80% of the time it fades? Don’t quote me, I’m new here and I only run this blog casually). Those with gender dysphoria often benefit from talk therapy to help them understand the source of their feelings. I’m sure a radfem who faces dysphoria can tell you more. (Forgive me, Tumblr’s formatting is being stupid and any new paragraph I try to make is a million meters down)…. 2b. The LGB isn’t the “weird kids club”. It was made for those who experience same sex attraction. It originally had nothing to do with gender identity or level of sexual attraction. I, for example, am sex-repulsed. I consider myself asexual. But I am only in the LGB for my same sex attraction towards women. Straight aces are not in the LGB. 3. Oh goodness the brain sex argument… Everyone’s brains are different. The only sex difference is in size. Men have slightly larger brains because they have larger skulls. If anything, differences within the male sex should discredit the brain sex argument. There is nothing in your anatomy that makes you desire to be more feminine or more masculine. To suggest there is is sexist. It’s like when old philosophers would say that women are just “natural followers” and shit. (My god I hate this. You’re arguing with the wrong person…) 4. The statistics. All you TRAs love to hype up about trans women getting killed. It’s unfortunate that anyone dies. BUT, the vast majority of TWs killed were in prostitution and killed by their MALE johns. They are also killed because of homophobia. But it’s still male on male violence. Consider the millions of females aborted or murdered in China’s one child policy. Consider the hundreds of thousands mutilated all around the world because of FGM. Consider those who are killed by domestic violence. Consider those who get acid thrown on them. There are billions of dead women in history who were killed just for having the misfortune of being born female. 5. I do sympathize with your struggles. You are AFAB, yes? If I had been a little younger when all this transgender stuff kicked off, I would’ve wanted to transition myself. I definitely want to be a man sometimes. I feel for you how you feel you are in the wrong body. Believe me or don’t, but I get it. I am you, in a way. You may not be a lesbian or bisexual and don’t experience internalized homophobia or biphobia. Only straight males experience autogynophilia. From your descriptions, it seems like you are dissatisfied with how the world views you. You just wanna be a person, right? You just wanna be yourself and get the respect you deserve no matter your appearance or your sex. That is completely normal and understandable. Most women feel the way you do. Even “cis” women. We all just approach it differently.

[thefudge]

Just out of curiosity, did you read JK's essay? I don't support everything in it but many parts resonated with me. Not to mention the horrific online abuse hurled at her, especially the countless, countless "choke on my dick" phrases thrown at her which are so violently misogynistic, it left me with a deep seated feeling of not only discomfort but fear as well. Idk I guess I just felt safe sending this because your blog seems more open to discussion from the other side instead of instant cancel.

i’m glad you think so about this blog and i hope that remains the case.

i didn’t have a chance to read JK’s essay until today (my previous ask about her was written before that) but here are some very, very imperfect thoughts on it:

the essay confirmed my previous take that she has inoculated herself against certain outside arguments but it’s also made me wonder about JK’s understanding of gender and sex. She is very attached to “natal women” and calling all people who menstruate “women” because of “common experiences”, despite the fact that her beloved de Beauvoir, whom she quotes in the essay extensively, acknowledged that “woman” is a social construct. JK herself at one point complains about having to comply with the rules of femininity while growing up and how it made her want to stop being female, so what is the truth? She argues that young girls shouldn’t be thinking about transitioning just because they are made to hate their femaleness but that’s!!! exactly what!!! pushing the term “woman” as sacrosanct does to girls!!! most of what JK felt in her childhood was the kind of misogyny which connects women strictly to their uterus. it made being male a better alternative precisely because of the gate-keeping of penis/vagina. a young girl who acted like a tomboy, for instance, would be criticized for trying to deny her sex, because deep down her biology still made her a “woman”. both sex and gender cannot be divorced from socio-cultural realities, because we act with our bodies and embody what we act. so, if we expand what it means to be a “man” and a “woman”, we liberate, not confine. JK wants young people to feel free to be whoever they want to be, but they must be called “women” when discussing menstruation or else (i won’t even go into the obvious addition that many cis and trans women exist who cannot or no longer menstruate).

Now, she does bring up some fair points about cancel culture and freedom of expression that I will level with, but the problem is that the nuancing she is trying to achieve also serves as weirdly specific dog-whistling. So let me address that:

(warning: spoilers for the Cormoran Strike series)

Right off the bat, we have this explanation added in her intro: 

“On one level, my interest in this issue has been professional, because I’m writing a crime series, set in the present day, and my fictional female detective is of an age to be interested in, and affected by, these issues herself (...)”  

and already, i’m asking questions. how is Robin Ellacott, one of the protagonists of the Strike series, “affected" by these issues, personally? she’s “of an age” to...what? be gender critical? there’s not a lot of that in the novels (unless you count Robin being tall and knowing how to drive well being framed as anti-girly...).  How does crime relate to it? How is she connected to this really? 

the real connection JK wants us to see because she’ll reveal it later in the essay is that Robin was r*ped in college. she’s a sexual assault survivor, which must make her critically engaged with the fate of trans women because....because underneath JK’s empty statement about her female detective....is the correlation that men “disguised” as trans women can perpetrate the same sort of horrific abuse.  she keeps making this correlation throughout the essay.

Here she talks about various people who’ve reached out to her:

They’re worried about the dangers to young people, gay people and about the erosion of women’s and girl’s rights. Above all, they’re worried about a climate of fear that serves nobody – least of all trans youth – well.

And again here:

“So I want trans women to be safe. At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman – and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth.”

This one is my favorite because it’s so twisted (here she’s listing her charity work):

“The second reason is that I’m an ex-teacher and the founder of a children’s charity, which gives me an interest in both education and safeguarding. Like many others, I have deep concerns about the effect the trans rights movement is having on both.”

“safeguarding”

hmmmm

What JK wants to spell out with these “common sense” arguments is that she fears that trans women are predatory, and the most convincing argument she can bring, ultimately, is that she herself has been the victim of sexual abuse and therefore, that potential fear never goes away. That’s a very dangerous leap to make. The climate of “fear” she mentions is also connected to cancel culture, of course. She fears women won’t be able to express their opinions online without receiving various amounts of vitriol. But you see how she has merged all three issues together? So that if you agree with one, you must agree with the others. Because yes, cancel culture often goes too far, and yes it is a real issue, but to say that the trans community shutting her down foments the same atmosphere of “fear” as boogie trans women hurting children in bathrooms and her being abused by her cis husband… that’s a veeery slippery slope. Instead of sticking to “freedom of speech” and whatnot, she keeps correlating these issues that should not be correlated (some of them being false issues, as well).  

Is there too much opprobrium around discussions of trans identity? Yes. Are there worthy discussions to be had about young women, homophobia and gender dysphoria? Absolutely. Can being trans become a fashionable trend/identity among kids, like the bygone goth and emo labels? Sure, but these discussions shouldn’t be had at the expense of trans people who have to constantly prove that they “mean” it. Because by stringing up all these issues together, JK is saying “the kids don’t know any better, and the adults are faking it”. Yes, cancel culture is impeding dialogue, yes, we shouldn’t shy away from discussing young teens’ identity problems, but if you pile up all of these things in a giant “trans women are the problem and they might be predatory too” milkshake, you won’t get anywhere.

I want to come back to this quote:

The second reason is that I’m an ex-teacher and the founder of a children’s charity, which gives me an interest in both education and safeguarding. Like many others, I have deep concerns about the effect the trans rights movement is having on both.

Beyond the (in my opinion) not very tasteful enumeration of things she’s done to help, JK’s mention of “education” there is veeery interesting. On the one hand, she probably feels that schools will try to censor “free speech”, but on the other hand, I bet she’s also concerned schools will not do enough censoring, so that impressionable kids become pressured into adopting a trans identity. You see how it flips on a dime? What does she ultimately want children to learn about this? Does she want them to be kept in the dark completely? Does she want them to be allowed to critique or invalidate trans identities without being censored? On this second point, things get complicated. Schools and institutions will naturally censor free speech.  Kids are there to learn how to express that free speech; they will be told “hey, don’t say that to your colleague, it’s not very kind” or “you need to structure your argument appropriately instead of just saying “I don’t like it””. Is there room for criticism in how schools operate that benevolent censorship? Obviously. Hell, Foucault & co. have been talking about this for decades. So what does this argument about education ultimately mean? What are we protecting the kids from? Imo, it goes back to that covert argument about sexual violence.    

Since I’m a teacher too, I’ll talk about my own experience: I brought some texts to my undergrad class about the trans experience with the goal of 1) building empathy, because literature is the grand unifier of experience and 2) showing different literary perspectives which i also included within literary theory. ultimately, the trans experience is about being human. we were learning about being human, nothing more, nothing less. if younger kids end up treating it as a fad it means that a) they need more, not less education,  b) parents and schools should work together to make them understand that being trans is not the same as being “emo”, for instance. this partially resembles the trend of white kids adopting black culture just because it’s cool, but not actually engaging with the black experience. who do you sanction for this? black people? because in this analogy, the trans community should be responsible for children not benefiting from education and parental support.

oh, I know what JK is saying. the trans community is responsible for shutting down conversations about this. it’s part of the general climate of tiptoeing around trans issues. yes, here I can agree with her that Twitter discourse either helps build sympathy or loathing for the “cancelled” person instead of seriously grappling with what that person has done. it’s the nature of Twitter and I hate it, but to go from that to saying women and young girls are in danger from other “fake” women really undermines her own argument. There are normal pitfalls as we try to incrementally do some good in this world. Cancel culture and the deplatforming and ruining of lives of certain individuals will not promote the cause and is certainly to be frowned upon, but JK will be absolutely fine. there are hashtags right now like “istandwithJK” and there’s a slew of people who support her. the misogyny she faces is deplorable, but we shouldn’t conflate valid criticism with trollish vulgarities. I don’t want to minimize the dangers of online culture; I know people have lost jobs and livelihood, but that is a discussion to be had under different parameters, admitting the responsibility of both parties (for example, maya forstater realizing that maybe saying some hurtful things about public figures and proudly talking about the “delusion” of transwomen will come back to bite her in the ass) and the fact that under capitalism, your job is always at the whim of appearances and simulacrums. essentially, you are the job. this is a state of things that deserves a larger discussion not on the back of the trans community. should we live in a world where you are allowed to say anything, free of consequences? some of us do, because we can say whatever we want in our head, in our room, in our house (other ppl aren’t so lucky), but the trouble starts in the public sphere. even if we wanted to build a public sphere where everything goes, we’d be at each other’s throats in five seconds anyway because we’re human. the most we can do is educate and correct where we can.  “facts don’t care about your feelings” discourse is often not informed by facts at all and forgets the vital importance of feelings.

anyway, that’s my incomplete take. still lots to think about and debate. ultimately, i think any fair points JK brought up were tainted by other bad-faith arguments and i wish she’d use this time to self-reflect because this isn’t a topic that should be breezed past in 3k words. nor should young trans ppl be called “adorable” (facepalm). i myself have many questions and constantly grapple with all of this, but since she’s a writer (and for better or worse, i still like her books), she is in a perfect position to investigate the matter with kindness and stop giving ultimatums. and i hope this post fosters discussion and doesn’t shut anyone down.

( forgot to mention that other nifty subplot in the Strike series about these really unlikable kids who are transabled and experience BID ( Body integrity dysphoria)  and want to have a disability. Strike is super-offended by them since he’s genuinely disabled and we as readers are meant to think they’re real pieces of shit, and while transableism is suuuuper complicated and my thoughts on it vary wildly, i do think those BID kids also stand in for other folks in her mind..again, food for thought.)