#but with the tags thing i can block most of them

[dianight]

Let's talk about transandrophobia. And by that I mean let me monologue about my findings browsing the tag and checking related blogs.

For context, most of my (second hand) interactions with it are from additions to the posts of transfeminists where random people antagonize them. Also from knowledge about how a certain user who helped popularize the term and gets referenced on posts about it (and other adjacent pawns) just happens to be a piledriver for callouts that just happen to target trans women. So you will excuse me for being biased and not going into this with a naive mindset.

And I will say that I've engaged with this in significantly more good faith than it deserves. My hope was that perhaps most people using the term were doing it out of ignorance and not malicious intent. I haven't really "counted" or done any actual note taking for this, it's more of a general observation that coalesced over a few days after I did all that digging so numbers are rough estimates and not accurate numbers. I checked about 50 pages on both "latest" and "top" on the tag, aswell as checking the recommended blogs.

Ignoring certain users who use the tag to highlight how absurd the mere concept of it is, since it's just mainly one woman having fun(?) cluttering (neutral) the tag and a few others mocking posts about it; we can roughly put the people who talk about transandrophobia in 3 groups. There is potential for overlap and I reiterate, my good faith is going to skew this toward a more positive vision than reality.

The first group are mostly trans men and a few trans women who would define transandrophobia as transphobia targeted at trans men, which is not at all what the term means nor what its history or actual use is. This group was around 30-40% of the posts, but one has to keep in mind that this was from going over the posts with the tag on their blogs. Posts that would talk about their experiences being the targets of transphobia and calling it transandrophobia.

Not to sound condescending, but getting treated differently to your cis peers (before coming out OR even knowing you are trans), pushback against your transition and toward the closet, bureaucratic hurdles and general hostility to being "the other" is not a transmasc exclusive thing and it's in fact "just" transphobia. Even the supposedly unique to trans men experience of having issues with reproductive health... also happens to trans women, it's the general transphobia of medical professionals. It manifests in different ways, that's it.

Most of the transmascs on this group seem to be under the impression that transandrophobia is an analogous term to transmisogyny that simply describes the targeted transphobia to transmascs and transfems respectively. I understand their posts and it was painful to read many of them, but ultimately what they describe is called transphobia. Most of the (few) transfems on this group were making additions in defense/support of trans men on those same previous posts.

That's as good as it gets though. I really hope the 30-40% estimate is real because the alternative is grim, and as a disclaimer I have (over time) blocked a massive amount of those users who go on posts about transmisogyny to start fights. Those hostile users are very likely to use the tag and be part of the second or third groups, which means that accounting for all the people I've blocked the first group percentage is likely to be <30%.

The second group are cryptoterfs. Or alternatively, people with ideas so bioessentialist that they are indistinguishable from cryptoterfs. I have found only two blogs that were openly "gc" and straight up interacting with open terfs, but many of them had their rethoric and semirelated posts all over and sometimes even the recommended blogs would give it away. Possibly 10% of the tag users belong to this group.

The main giveaway beyond the previous ones seems to be a really transphobic view that what trans men experience as transphobia is really just misogyny. So when they experience that misogyny as trans men it's called transandrophobia. Don't ask me what logic this is, but I've seen it repeated on their blogs so whatever is going on in their brains they seem to commonly agree that trans men are "just" experiencing misogyny. The obvious implication always, always being that trans men are women, a very transphobic idea.

There were some users who are part of the previously mentioned overlap. They will have some posts that tangentially allude at that trans men = women idea but never quite reblog or interact or expand those transphobic views. But they would also be part of the third group.

The third group are transmisogynists. No other way to put it. And I don't mean it in the casual way, we are all kind of transmisogynistic due to society and that's it; I mean it in the openly in opposition to transfeminists and actively spreading hateful and harmful rethoric kind of way. More than half the users of the tag are part of this group.

It's a key difference but a very telling one; where the first group talked about their experiences and how they are affected by transphobia (incorrectly labeling it) the third group engages in reactionary behaviors, always blaming/harassing/critizicing transfeminists posts. It's a genuinely weird feeling to see a post you agree with, along the lines of "men benefit from patriachy" and the "critique" from these users being "how dare these [insert misgendering term] insinuate that trans men are oppressing them".

Reading anything in bad faith, calls for "unity" while at the same reblogging from and interacting with known callout spearheads, honestly shocking hostility to trans women all over their posts and a general very open opposition to any transfeminist theory. Like I was genuinely speechless at some of the posts.

Literally calling random trans women transphobic. Screenshots without context to make it seem like the OP is saying the literal opposite of what she was saying. Congratulatory posts about getting people banned. Straight up callouts.

And I was hoping that the first group would be the majority, with a few bad apples and the expected bad actors.

My conclusion is very simple. Stop using the term transandrophobia. It has no good faith uses, what trans men experience is transphobia since misandry is not a real structural force and misogyny is. Most of its users are hostile to and a danger to trans women in this website, and somehow terf rethoric is generally accepted by them.

Transandrophobia doesn't exist.

[anadorablekiwi]

About your tags on the post you recently reblogged from me,

I'm sorry I think there's a lot of stressful post that are from me... I'll try to tag them better so you can avoid them

Sorry again

Youre fine hun, and thank you 🫂 i honestly dont think ive even seen or noticed anything stressful from you! And i generously block tags to help curate my tumblr experience, and it works 90% of the time. Its just that once in a while a post slips through, and even then i can usually recognize its gonna be a heavy one and scroll past before i read too much of it

[triangular-static]

look i understand if people just don't like the idea of billford, i think we have a different internal concept of what shipping means (they're not good for each other at all but i need to dissect their dynamic like a bug. you understand. it's fun) but it's fine to avoid things you don't like, good for you genuinely

however people saying they like. don't see it. like. i'm not saying there's no platonic way to read it, i'm aroace spec myself i'm all for reading things in different ways. but i do think saying they weren't partners in any queer sense at all is trying too hard to go against what the narrative is trying to say, or missing it. somehow

anyway media literacy time if a character makes a joke like this

and the previous context of that joke within the show is that it's about an ex wife. what connection do you think the text is trying to get you to make.

and that's just from a writing point of view. not even noting that from an in universe perspective ford likely knows the joke from the same source as stan. and is therefore. placing himself in that role of the joke are you seeing where i'm coming from

(not to mention bill's side of this text which is. extremely manipulative but also does not read very platonic. again, it can technically be read as platonic! bill literally can manipulate ford's feelings. but the specific wording used is very much meant to look like possessive ex partner wording whether the character means it that way or not. it's coding. look again i'm not saying it was good for them i'm just saying there was something there.)

and then there's also the divorce/break up/rock bottom input on the website. like. how else is that supposed to be read. and the corresponding page in the book itself.

the language being used here. like yes he's saying it in a joking way but then there's the other side that isn't joking which is him crying at the bar. it's the both sides (the very coded language on top of the very genuine emotions and dynamic beneath)

i know most of us are on the same page with this i've just seen a couple people saying they don't see it when this is some of the most clear cut coding i've ever seen. and these are just the things that explicitly reference a relationship off the top of my head i'm not even including the general vibes of Everything

tl;dr it's barely even subtext anymore it's all but straight up text. what's not clicking have we forgotten what coding is (lighthearted i just enjoy the phrase what's not clicking. what's not clicking)

[agrebel18]

HERE'S A RANDOM GUIDE TO SOME (NOT ALL) TONE INDICATORS IF YOU'RE CONFUSED ABOUT THEM

/j is joking or joke

/hj is half joking or half joke

/srs is serious

/s and /sar is sarcasm

/gen is genuine

/lh is light-hearted

/nm is not mad

/nbh is nobody here

/pos is positive

/neg is negative

there's more but i don't remember them all lmao, feel free to add so we can help each other out!

[invincibleinck]

Only very extreme cults use force! Most do not. Especially mainstream ones. (Sects of Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnessess, Moonies come to mind for me first). Most cults use thought control/high control tactics (again, check out the bite model). Thought stopping is a classic example. Manipulation is not force. Cults convince members to devote their resources and their time of their own "free will". Also, cults aren't always all "bad". Many people in cults or who have left cults describe it as one of the happiests times of their lives (it's a strange thing). Again there's a lot of nuance, and there's a spectrum. Also no need to be an ass? (Again, take a page out of Buddhism). Not hiding. I just prefer to use tags/bullet points. Anyone can see them and respond to them. Block me if bothers you or at least properly respond with evidence to what I've said.

Anyways here's a fun reddit post going through the Bite Model and how the Jedi score on it: https://www.reddit.com/r/EmpireDidNothingWrong/comments/uyryik/mathematical_evidence_that_the_jedi_are_a_cult/

I don't agree with everything in the post but it's still a fun breakdown. Some points are too harsh and some aren't harsh enough. (Also I studied Buddhism for two semesters and Psych for four years in Uni so I ain't an expert but I've certainly studied the things I'm talking about).

OK, I may have said this before, but I’m going to reiterate this point. Attachments aren’t what people seem to think they are.

Let me explain. In Star Wars, when the Jedi referred to attachment, they are referring to what Buddhism would refer to as in a literal translation an obsession. Attachments is the most closest western equivalent to the direct translation. And these attachments are basically the cause of suffering. Why? Because they prevent you from spiritual enlightenment. These aren’t things like family and friends. These are unhealthy obsessions that crippled you and make you unable to progress spiritually.

And the other inspiration for the Jedi Christianity has a similar explanation, although with a different theological implication, but the general principle is the same. In Christianity there is the idea that this world is transient. It’s not permanent nor are Christians supposed to get attached to it. The idea is is that they live in this world, but they are not of this world. That is not to say you can’t enjoy the things of this world like going out to the movies or having a good meal or spending time with friends and family. But it’s being aware that at any time it can go away. Either through misfortune, such as poverty or even death. Clinging onto the attachment of this world leads to spiritual ruin because you cease to focus on the supernatural such their relationship with God and how it affects their relationships with others and focusing on the superficial and harmful things. Again, it’s similar to Buddhism, but their solution is slightly different than Buddhism.

And that’s where Jedi get the principle of non-attachment. From the Buddhist idea of unhealthy obsessions lead to not spiritual enlightenment. And the Christian sense of focusing on the material world interferes with the relationship with the Creator. That’s why I don’t get why certain people seem to think that “attachments are good.” They’re basically saying, unnatural obsessions that lead you away from spiritual enlightenment, or a relationship with the creator of the universe, and the terms of the Jedi is somehow good. It’s not see Anakin Skywalker for how well that works out.

[godsfavoritescientist]

I've been seeing a bunch of people adding disclaimers to their billford posts clarifying that they have critical thinking skills about abuse and abusive relationships, and I 100% understand that impulse. When I first made this blog I added disclaimers like that onto nearly everything. But, if it makes the folks adding those disclaimers feel any better: after I stopped writing essays trying to prevent people from taking my billford posts in bad faith, absolutely no one got mad at me in my inbox or on any of my posts, and I've been posting about billford for years now. In my experience the majority of people who are uncomfy with this ship nowadays will simply block and move on. Some folks will disagree no matter how many disclaimers you add, and that's ok

[lale-txt]

heartbreaking! one of your favorite artists makes fun of y/n fics!

[butchlifeguard]

swimming <3

just add water, katie ledecky / tumblr / me / "how swimming helped an ocd writer quieten their mind," oprah daily / "how does swimming help shape my body?" plunge san diego / "simone manuel has already won," the ringer / pinterest / tumblr / aristotle and dante discver the secrets of the universe, benjamin alire sáenz / instagram / the swimmer, john cheever / me

[tumblerislovetumblerislife]

wait tags aren't enough, i need to go more insane

FIRSTLY bringing back my discord reaction because. i stand by it okay.

okay so first thing i notice is the colour, the very monochrome red/salmon pink (?) in the background, their skin, even the hair. and then the bright contrast of the white shirt, the green pieces and words (AND WHAT WORDS THEY ARE!), the gold necklace. sidenote but i am IN LOVEEE with the way you render the necklace, it looks so slinky and fun. like not what a necklace looks like but what a necklace should look like if that makes sense?? it looks better than a real necklace basically. the composition?? oh my god. the rectangle that can't perfectly contain them is so fun, and then the words at the top and bottom (like teeth!) with "promise" emphasised like that! the ANGLE of them!! charles' completely focused expression, his lashes (the most important part!!!), his pointy ear and his wispy hair. what little we can see of edwin and what it hints at, the perfect hair and the back of the ear (which is so difficult to draw, i'm jealous of you!!) and the line of his neck and uh. his fingers. still so put together. also the lighting is just beautiful, i adoreeeeee the highlights over charles' eyebrows and eyelids, the side of his face, his chest, that seem to come from the bright background! ✨

SECONDLY NEW THINGS

comparing this against the previous version is insaneeeeeeee it's like spot the difference but difference is my sanity. no joke. i feel like i see the most difference in charles' face? so so gorgeous, i am in LOVE with the line of his nose and his lashes and his curls aaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!! THE GOLD MARCELA YOU ARE A GENIUS charles should wear gold eyeliner always and forever. thanks for coming to my ted talk. MULTIPLE EARRING CHARLES MY BELOVED and the NIP PIERCINGS?????? if you're trying to kill me you're. succeeding. holy shit. edwin playing with the piercings........

i've said this before but the angle is everything!!!!!!!!!! the subtle power dynamics, charles tilting his head up like that, even furrowing his eyebrows slightly.... and then the effect of this constrained rectangle with charles' head the only thing that pops out! and you know i'm crazy for that green/pink/white contrast we don't need to repeat this discussion.

AND YOUR TECHNIQUE?? the colouring and the shading and the sketch-like lines and the texture... it is everything i fear. dreaming of a date where you just show me your art techniques. holy shit

AND THE QUOTES??????? nick's quote will always be famous ofc (love those changes too, the added contrast and the sketchy quality of the blocks, but still matching the dark pinks!) AND CHARLES' BOOK OF SECRETS AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA i am NOT ready for the day that drops fr i'm telling you now

OVERALL

i did not think it was possible to fall MORE in love w nip touch art but you've managed to prove me wrong once again. JUST LOOK AT HOW HAPPY THEY ARE (okay okay i'll stop) charles in gold is everything to me. currently hyperventilating into a paper bag. if you care. also you dropped this 👑💍💖 they're yours now to do with what you will

10. in the meanwhile as you chop down our roots measure out D E V O T I O N add lantern oil stir the concoction counter-clockwise. leave it to simmer on the lowest heat. [charles' book of secrets] poem by me art quote by @wordsinhaled

[reinedeslys-central]

when it's been so long since you've read a fic that you forget about it and you find it in the search tags and start reading it again

and it's great, if a little familiar, but you've read a lot of these sorts of fics bc you like this tag a lot, so you assume it's nothing

but then the deja vu starts adding up and you start to wonder

and then moments before the great big Plot Twist Reveal happens you're suddenly like ah hell this is the bloody sundial fic again isn't it

smh this has to be the fourth time yet

[ranvwoop]

please look at these guys. they even had a little teaparty.

w/ @adhdo5's clockworklocusts :)

[sttoru]

ima tell u this now : if u hate on x reader fics, block me cus by doing that you r doing us both a great favour 🤚🏽 ion need any of ur negativity on my blog because this is a safe space for people who do enjoy x reader fics goodbye

[hana-bobo-finch]

ouuuughhh my birthday is in 3 days yaaaaaayayyynghhhh why was I cursed with having birthday depression school anxiety and seasonal depression (I get it in summer for some reason) all in the same month……………

[katyspersonal]

I find it very ironic how the same cultish looser that shuns people based on who they're friends with because she genuinely thinks if you believe something you can't have human interactions or treatment to those who believes otherwise..... will preach hard and proud against harassment for people's headcanons, ships and takes whereas being friends with the person who did harass people's headcanons, ships and takes. But why rules are always only for their victims and never for them? What's so hard about following what you preach? Go ahead, disown this person and be mean to everyone who still likes them and want to give them a chance, you SHOULD by the terms that YOU'VE chosen! But you won't, you'll rather cover their ass and pretend you haven't seen the evidence, to save the face, because should you ever admit a mistake you'll explode from the notion of not being so "holy". PEAK L0garius and Alfred behavior.

[edge-oftheworld]

if your fave says that someone makes them happy btw. the least you can do is believe them. if they say that they feel safe and a bit calmer and they’re getting a chance to heal. you gotta respect that. even if you have your own concerns and reasons not to be happy about it, in the end it’s their well-being and they have a right to live and to tell their own story however they choose. and if you refuse to believe basic evidence that’s right in front of you, you don’t deserve to scrutinise their life or who they have in it.

[anonyanonymouse]

🙈