#especially not this blatantly

[cardentist]

I saw something earlier that I chose not the engage with directly, but I do think this needs to be said.

I think discussions around transandrophobia (or anti-transmasculinity, or just the Idea that trans mascs need to have language to put words to their experiences like all other trans people do) ARE often binary-centric, and that's a legitimate criticism to have about it.

but the Reason this happens is because the bigotry that trans mascs are currently facing is Extremely gender-essentialist, and in turn Extremely Binary. it's something I've been continuously frustrated with specifically Because I try to make an active effort not to cut nonbinary people out of trans and queer discussions. and it's often very hard ! because the arguments and positions people take act like nonbinary, intersex, genderqueer, and gnc trans people simply do not exist.

for many people the idea is that trans men and trans women sit on opposites sides of a seesaw, and if you argue that trans men experience X then you Must also be arguing that trans women Don't experience X. and trying to unpack and respond to that means having to Engage With It. which I've found Extremely frustrating, specifically Because I try to make an active effort Not to cut nonbinary and genderqueer people out trans discussions.

if, for instance, someone argues that trans mascs/"afab's"/"tme's" As A Group don't experience medial discrimination (while trans fems do), and it's on a post with hundreds upon thousands of notes, you're put in a position where you Have to center the medical violence that trans mascs experience.

because trans mascs being cut out of conversations about medical abuse and discrimination have had very real and disastrous consequences for trans mascs. it's important that people understand that trans mascs experience this not just as a byproduct of the abuse trans women face, but extremely targeted to them and their needs.

people believe that trans mascs don't experience oppression for being men, and they go further to state that trans mascs don't experience medical discrimination because they are men, and you simply can't address that without centering the discussion on the experiences of men.

and that creates an extremely Binary discussion, even when you make the active effort to include nonbinary/intersex/genderqueer people in the discussion. specifically BECAUSE a binary is being made and enforced already.

trans men are being denied their lived experiences, having the violence they face erased, Because They Are Men, and you can't stop the behavior without addressing the gender-essentialism that is Already There.

and It Is Unfair. it's absolutely Unfair, because nonbinary, intersex, gender queer, and gnc people are All hurt by this rhetoric. they're All hurt by this strict enforcement of gender-essentialism, but the conversation is centered around men and women by design.

the fact is, All Gender-Queer People Are Equal. (genderqueer meaning anyone who has gender in a queer way). and framing our experiences as being Inherent and Exclusive to any one type of person will Inevitably cut people out of conversations that actively affect them, simply because you didn't know that your experiences were shared.

BUT. framing the discussion about this as if the problem is that trans mascs trying to carve out a space for themselves is itself exorsexist is Also deeply unfair.

to tip my hand a little, the post I saw had specifically mentioned the talking point about trans mascs experiencing corrective rape with the intent of getting them pregnant and forcing them to detransition.

and it Is absolutely true that there are people who experience this kind of violence who Don't consider themselves trans masc, whether those people are trans neutral, genderqueer, or intersex. and it's absolutely wrong to bury that and insist that they Don't.

but at the same time, the situation is that trans mascs are being told that they Do Not experience physical violence, that they Do Not experience medical violence, and that the violence they Do face isn't gendered (whether that means insisting they don't experience misogyny, insisting that they don't experience violence Because they are men, or both).

so when trans mascs assert This Is A Kind Of Violence That I Experience And We Need To Acknowledge That we have to understand that the framing right isn't the trans mascs' Fault, right? we Understand that saying "trans mascs Don't have unique experiences" is harmful in this context Even When the premise is that there are no experiences that are solely unique to one kind of genderqueer person. not because it isn't True that all genderqueer people share experiences, but because people are very Specifically arguing that trans men's experiences don't exist and don't deserve to be acknowledged.

the fact is, transmisogyny as a term Exists, exorsexism as a term Exists, intersexism Exists, but the line is being drawn at transandrophobia (or Whichever term you'd prefer).

I Agree that the overall discussion would be healthier and easier to have if None of the terms we used were specific to a single identity, but instead discussed different types of bigotry under the genderqueer umbrella.

but that is not what people are trying to achieve by squashing transandrophobia. trans mascs are being singled out Specifically as not needing or deserving their own terms, while Also being cut out of other trans conversations. people preface their conversations about transphobia Specifically with "trans men don't experience this," and then tell trans mascs that they're Wrong for creating conversations that center themselves.

ideally, right this second, we could say "transmisogyny Generally focuses on the experiences of trans fems, exorsexism Generally focuses on the experiences of people who push the gender/sex binaries, transandrophobia Generally focuses on the experiences of trans mascs, intersexism Generally focuses on the experiences of intersex people.

but all of these experiences have overlap because they're all gender minorities, because all of these groups have overlap in members, And because people experience violence based on the way that the perpetrators of said violence Perceives them (not inherently because of the labels they identify with)."

but to get there we have to be willing to allow All genderqueer people to assert their lived experiences as valuable and important. this knee-jerk reaction to trans mascs that frame Their attempts as violent or unnecessary ultimately hurts people. and as long as trans mascs are put in this position, pushed out of conversations about oppression that affects them And told that they're not allowed to start their own conversations without being bigoted somehow, there will Always be a need to address it.

trans mascs Have to discuss the gender-essentialist oppression they're experiencing, and it's not their fault that the conversation has been framed this way to begin with.

addressing the problem of non-binary and genderqueer people being suppressed and sidelined and pushed under the rug Is Extremely Important ! it's an inherent part Of the conversation. but the conclusion cannot be that it's trans mascs fault for wanting to use a word to represent themselves when quite literally every other group in the queer community gets to have that privilege.

[lambmotifz]

sam literally offering himself to dean in 2.11 playthings, and dean not giving it to him because he doesn’t want to “ruin” his little brother

and this is why sam would initiate. AND he would prefer to bottom

[kvtnisseverdeen]

You are adopting a certain point of view, you have to at least defend it. There's no Hamas in the West Bank and they're still dying there so what's your excuse?

Israel-Hamas War: Piers Morgan vs Bassem Youssef On Palestine's Treatment 

[aroaceleovaldez]

HoO is so funny to me when you actually think about the ages of all the characters. Octavian is 18. Percy and Annabeth are 16, almost 17. Reyna is presumably 16. Frank just turned 16, Jason’s about to turn 16. Leo and Piper are like 15. Hazel’s like 14 and a half, and Nico is 13.

The Death Sibs are both the youngest and oldest on the Argo II. Octavian is a college freshman getting into petty drama with a bunch of high schoolers. He gets told to shut up at one point by a random 8th grader. Everyone is scared of the 8th grader. We Sent A 13 Year Old To Superhell and he came back weirder, Just Like Middle School. TLH was just three high school sophomores being sent to do a task and it going Exactly Like You’d Expect. Percy’s the only demigod on the ship who can legally drive (though Reyna gets her drivers license at some point before TOA). What Is Happening.

[anghraine]

I know this isn't only an autistic thing or always an autistic thing, but over the least few years, I've realized that a lot of my difficulties with humor are not actually with humor itself. If anything, there are specific kinds of humor that really work for me and I end up laughing so much harder and longer than everyone else that it's uncomfortable or embarrassing.

But a lot of popular humor fundamentally relies on saying things that aren't true. Sometimes this is drastic exaggeration, sometimes it's OTT parody that is far more about Being Funny than about the actual thing being parodied, and often it's flatly false and that's what is supposed to be funny about it. And yes, that's a humorless and ungracious way to describe that kind of humor—I don't mean to say that this is objectively bad or something.

I even understand the jokes intellectually. But in the vast majority of cases, there is something deeply unfunny to me about jokes reliant on something that is either obviously untrue or which I firmly disagree with.

I've seen quite a few posts recently about how, in online fandom, mocking your faves or being amused at other people mocking your faves is an important part of fandom culture. But for me, jokes about my faves based on things they actually said or did, or qualities they clearly possess, can be very funny, while jokes that are based on misrepresentations—even obvious, it's-all-in-good-fun-and-we-all-know-the-truth misrepresentations—are tedious at best.

For an easy example: Anakin and Luke Skywalker are two of my main Star Wars faves. Jokes about sand or Anakin mass-murdering children in his good phase or Luke being far less concerned than Han over the revelation of who his twin is or "it's not faaaaair" can still be really funny to me when told right. Jokes about Anakin obviously mind-tricking Padmé or Luke being obviously an eternally optimistic loser twink are intensely annoying to me regardless of context or delivery, not because they're comparably objectionable or anything but because they're not true.

Functionally this does cut out a lot of humor—especially online humor—but it's not that I literally don't understand it. I get it. I just don't get it.

[grimalkinmessor]

Just to put a lot of my posts and beliefs about Light Yagami's character in one post (headcanons not included):

• He does not do anything for purely moral reasons. The reason he started killing criminals was because he was curious, and then afterward his "crusade" was built from panic and spite. He thought using the Death Note was going to kill him, so he decided to take everyone he considered a threat to society down with him—that way he would still be good. He would still be remembered. If he can't live, then criminals don't deserve to either. The weight loss and the insomnia shown in the manga, were more likely results of a fear of dying than moral stress.

• Then Light discovers he won't die. This negates part of the spite, but not the need for a moral justification to keep himself "good". He no longer needs to be a martyr, so instead he's chosen to become a God.

• During this week and half of time, Light goes from being a bored, lonely, listless teenager disgusted with the world because it's not how his father taught him it should be, disgusted because if he can manage perfection why can't the rest of the world—to a boy with a new friend and a new mission that gives him purpose. Something interesting. If the world can't be perfect on its own, he'll have to help it. The world needs his help, making him its "savior".

• In comes L. It is no longer about Kira, no longer about saving the world from itself, even if he might tell himself it is—it's about the game. Kira was a fun pastime, yes, but L has made things so much more interesting. (Light and Ryuk are actually wildly similar in several ways it's just not immediately obvious). This game is more fun, too, because this time he has an opponent—one not so nebulous as "the criminals of the world", who offered no challenge. Light is still justifying his actions through a lens of morality, because he has to, but they're beginning to run rather thin.

• Both the broadcast and the obvious taunts to L through changing Kira's killing methods supports the above. "You're too stupid, L. If you were just a little smarter, we could've had some fun." Drawing L in was to progress their game, not Kira's goals. If Light truly only cared about Kira's vision, Kira's new world, Kira's righteous justice; then he wouldn't have continued to play the game after the broadcast. There was no way for L to find him without Light drawing him in—the Death Note is literally the perfect murder weapon. Light knew this, he just ignored it because he wanted to play.

• In the same vein: Yotsuba Light doesn't know he's playing the game. He's forgotten that there even is a game, and so he sees L as someone who's been duped, who either isn't as intelligent as he's been made out to seem, or someone who's being purposefully cruel just because he can. Either way, to Yotsuba Light, L's threat level has only increased, because Light no longer has any sort of weapon to go against him with. He can't even wield his own innocence against him, because his innocence is not certain. Even to himself. Yotsuba Light knows that he has to play along with L's plays of friendship and morality in order to secure his freedom, but he does not respect L or like him. At least, not until near the end, where they're closing in on Higuchi. Where his freedom seems closer....and yet he sees his own, true innocence as more tenuous than ever. Notably, even when Light feels positively towards L there, he still does not share his suspicions about himself with him. His own life still takes precedence over any sort of justice or morality he might have, because Yotsuba Light is still Light. And Light will always put his own self-interests first.

• After killing L, something interesting happens. Because the game ends, but Kira is still left. And Light was willing to take risks and make wild plans in his game with L, but Kira's goals always, always came after his own life. And when only Kira's goals are left, Light stops taking those big, potentially lethal risks. (i.e. bomb desk trap, killing Raye Penber in person by handing him pages of the Death Note, killing Naomi Misora in person right in front of the police station, writing Higuchi's name while sitting right beside L with the murder weapon literally in his hand, etc. etc.). Winning the game was worth dying for—Kira's ideals are not. Or, to put it even more simply: His pride is worth dying for, but his morals are not. Five years after his victory against L, he's presented with another game, but instead of feeling fearful and excited as he did with L, Light is angry. Arrogant and angry. Because this isn't a game to these opponents, as it was to L—they're playing against each other, and Light is merely a piece in it. This game is not like his game with L; it's more like his "game" with the criminals of the world. One with no true challenge, just another defense of Kira's world—worth winning, but not worth dying for.

• Light's pride is more important to him than anything. He needs to be able to take pride in himself and his actions. Pride comes before everything else, before Kira, before family, before L, even before his own desires and physical health. He does not enjoy killing—he just turned it into something he could be proud of. Into another mastering of craft. Light is not particularly sadistic, he's just spiteful. He'll only take pleasure in someone's suffering if they make someone else suffer first, especially if that someone is him. Attacking his pride would count as making him suffer, because that's the most important thing in the world to him. Even though Light also values his life incredibly highly, attempting to kill him wouldn't invoke as much hell-hot wrath as attempting to humiliate him would. And Light will always get even. Always. He does not forgive and forget.

• He believes every lie he tells himself. Every. Lie. He is a Good Man. He is Good Son. He is a Savior. He is Better. He is NOT Evil, he is Good. He's incredibly adept at not only fooling other people, but fooling himself. Even if he's vaguely aware of the truth, he'll take great pains to make sure that truth never comes to light—because it would crush him.

• Light does not take his own desires into account. If he likes or wants something that contradicts with the perfect image he's crafted, he purges it from his mind. Makes excuses for why he doesn't need it, or even convinces himself very thoroughly that he didn't even want it in the first place. If it's not something he can be proud of (or convince himself to be proud of), he doesn't allow himself to desire it.

• Light sees everyone as beneath him (family notwithstanding, Light loves his family deeply), and while it's a pyramid scale of how far beneath him they are, it's not actually ranked by things like gender, sexuality, race—it's ranked by morality and intelligence. The more intelligent and moral you are, the higher up you are on the scale. Light feeling hostile towards someone does not always mean he sees them as further down beneath him; with L and Misa specifically, it means that they're a threat. Light tends to only see people near the top of the intelligence pyramid as threats; evidenced by him dismissing Matsuda completely even with the knowledge that Matsuda was a marksmen, and yet him immediately setting out to kill Naomi when he found out she figured out one of Kira's secrets. With Takada and Mikami, he treats them exactly the same as each other because they're both on the same level of the scale—and he didn't hesitate to get rid of either of them. (Or try to get rid of, in Mikami's case). Everyone is either a tool, a threat, a criminal, a citizen, or family to him. People to use (tool, criminal), people to serve and/or placate (citizen, family), and people to eliminate (threat, criminal). Everyone falls into at least one of these categories for him.

• Light Yagami is a tragic character. And he's a tragic character because he refuses to believe he's part of a tragedy. He would rather swallow broken glass than be considered a victim of anything.

[drawnfamiliarfaces]

First - Next?>>

[rudolphsboyfriend]

I keep seeing white book reviewers complain about how Babel is so very in your face and obvious about its rage at colonialism as if they would not twist the meaning of the book to fit into their convenient little worldview and find a way to say 'ok.. BUT' if it were NOT so clearly and explicitly laid out I'm sorry but it's true.

[starlitsequins]

why is the argument "tsoa!patroclus is an unreliable narrator" brought up so often as a defense against the fact that he's so mischaracterized from iliad!patroclus? it's just blatantly untrue, because iliad!patroclus was a cocky bastard who was mocking trojans on the battlefield. its mischaracterization either way, he's not that insecure. whether or not you enjoy tsoa's mischaracterization is up to you, its fine, but there's no need to defend it and be wrong like that

[lambmotifz]

What make you think Dean is not a bottom?

i’ll never understand why 99% of spn fandom are so convinced he is a bottom with men when he’s canonically 1) straight (he said so himself multiple times, also jensen confirmed it) 2) homophobic (he HAS said things that are kinda homophobic and since he’s not canonically not straight, those things are just homophobic) 3) if we’re talking about wincest then it couldn’t be more obvious from their canon interactions that his primal urge is to possess/control sam in every aspect, including physically, and also regain control that john took away from him when he was younger (which also explains his repressed enjoyment of violence & sadism that he’s ashamed of). i often see shippers say that he “just wants to submit and be vulnerable” but i don’t get that vibe from him at all, especially when it comes to sam. on the contrary he is often shown to be physically violent with sam and he goes unhinged every time he loses a bit of control over him (which partly comes from his unhealthy obsession with the ideal version of sam). he enjoys having that power/control over sam because it gives him the feeling of stability, he feels confident when he knows sam belongs to him. also just because he lets women take the lead in bed doesn’t mean it’d be like that with sam because dean has completely different needs when it comes to their dynamic

[itsbeenliketenyearsitsprettywild]

Thing to remember about Cat’s magician theme: while yes, it does imply there’s some stuff that we just won’t get to see due to it being hidden, it’s also hinting at something meant to help us:

Don’t get caught up in any misdirection.

One of the big things about this music video in particular is that there’s a lot of stuff thrown at us really fast and quick, multiple times. A bunch of busy, flashy, dramatic sequences that are sure to draw most people’s eye and theorycrafting!

But, just as a magician uses their skills to get the audience to look away from the actual trick that they’re pulling, Kazui is subconsciously pulling the same stuff on us. Like, just in considering what one of the slower sections of Cat showed us:

People have already pointed out that the guy in the wedding audience is the same man who was bartending in Half. But I think there’s even a bit more past that that Kazui’s given to us as context. Which is to say: Consider the ring on his finger and the woman behind him.

Know what other woman in Kazui’s videos we’ve seen who has brown hair and been right next to this man?

Which actually puts the bar scene from Half into a completely different context.

The picture above wasn’t Kazui cheating on his wife: it was him getting to know the woman his childhood friend was going to marry. 

By having their meeting in a casual setting, with both Kazui and her sitting right up next to the bar where the guy was working, all three of them would get to talk and hang out when things weren’t too busy. And when things did get busy, Kazui and this man’s future bride would be easy to check up on via a quick look down the bar counter, with alcohol as an added social relaxant so things would hopefully never get too tense and awkward. With all this in mind, I think it’s really important we consider the art of misdirection when looking through the rest of Kazui’s Cat video: If our attention is being drawn to something in particular, look at everything else first.  That’s gonna be how we crack through Kazui’s shell and get to the truth.

[redvelvetwishtree]

[mari-beau]

Ugh. I thought the universe had finally decided to stop subjecting my ace-aro ass to the awkwardness of being hit on...

[waterberry-strawmelon]

just gonna go ahead and say this in advance—

if Riz does indeed come out in junior year, and he says, “I’m ace” or “I’m asexual” when referring specifically to his lack of romantic attraction, aromantic people are allowed to be upset about it.

[sinnbaddie]

Mischaracterization of Gojo and Geto.

I think my biggest struggle with a lot of JJK fans are just a complete lack of understanding towards Geto and Gojo as characters and their respected arcs.

Geto for example, his character arc was very clear cut. He questioned Jujutsu high and what values he and the society held and while he was in the middle of that, he suffered the near loss of his best friend, the death of someone he was supposed to protect and then became a shadow of said best friend.

All of this is what lead to him murdering everyone in the village, including his parents. It’s not to say he never cared for other people, but he didn’t really think twice about keeping humanity safe. Which is what lead to him becoming who he was; a genocidal racist. He never cared for his “adopted” kids as much as the fandom wants to push because it would be ooc for him to.

Gojo on the other hand is a bit more complex than Geto. He very much does care for his students and the bettering of Jujutsu high. However, i we’ve known since the beginning that power, wealth and adoration has always been something he’s had, so naturally it twisted his mind and what he truly values.

I’ve seen people say that his fight with Sukuna and “wanting to reach him” is ooc but that’s just not true. As much as Gojo cares, as much as he wants a society that’s safe for his students, his selfishness that was consistently fed through adoration and being “the strongest” is a huge flaw of his that will override that kindness he has.

I mean Gojo stating his own loneliness because of his power is reason enough to tell you that you’re wrong by saying it’s ooc for him to not care. He couldn’t form connections with the rest of humanity because of his power, he didn’t consider anyone an equal, which is why he felt so good when fighting Sukuna. Yeah he wasn’t on an actual high like he was when fighting Toji, however fighting an equal / someone stronger than him was reason enough for him to become “high” on power.

I interpreted Gojo’s lack of connection with humanity yet having a motivation to better it as a “monkey see monkey do” type of situation. He knows on a fundamental level that helping others is what should happen, however his biggest flaw sometimes comes out and it’s destructive for everyone else.

I just wanted to share because I’ve seen one too many times of mischaracterization for these two characters and it’s stressing me out with how wrong it is.

[likeabxrdinflight]

it annoys me deeply how good the amazon prime marketing team is for good omens, because fuck amazon, but also the spotify playlists they made for aziraphale and crowley are incredible. 10/10.