#gay men misogyny

[wild-wombytch]

I'm really sorry you dealt with that shit. Bunch of misogynistic cowards. They have to attack in pack.

Thank you for sharing your story. They're like "not all men" but then they go full psycho, harass women and want our pets to die for disagreeing with them. Tell me about entitlement and privileges.

Oh I forgot to tell you that a drag queen and his friends harassed me a couple of weeks ago !

I was on instagram and saw a video about a “famous” french drag queen who does his horror burlesque shows in Paris. Lots of people left comments, some in his favour and some saying it was wrong and he was a freak. Mostly men. 

I said it was misogyny, a caricature of women and laughing at women’s oppression, turning it into a joke or a game for men and that was pretty much that. 

But the man the video was about, the somewhat famous drag queen pictured above, saw my comment and replied to me; he was offended that I said it was misogyny, he tried to taunt me, I didn’t reply. Annoyed by my lack of response, he sent me a lengthy private message, pretty much throwing a fit, telling me that I was obviously a very angry woman with issues and did not understand all the good he did to us silly ladies ; he said thanks to him women learn about their “femininity” and become “real women”, because he teaches them burlesque. He said he helped some women with breast cancer by reminding them to be feminine. He then ordered me to keep quiet and to delete my account, ending by saying he was absolutely furious by what I had said. All of this because I left a comment saying I thought it was misogyny. He didn’t go after the men calling him a freak, oh no, but a woman with an opinion ? Oh. My. Lord ! 

So I responded to him in a very… vehement and sharp way, basically telling him to fuck off, that he was indeed a misogynist and that he just made his case worse, told him not to contact me again then I blocked him. He screenshoted it and published it on his facebook official page, giving my instagram address, encouraging people to come and attack me. That’s how upset he was over one woman not endorsing him and not seeing him as her saviour. I started receiving tones of abusive message, mostly people telling me to “delete my account”, to “shut the fuck up”, “asshole”, that I was “the real misogynist” and a “homophobe” (?) but mostly they called me a crazy, hysterical, insane woman who should be sent to a mental hospital. Just boring misogyny covered in glitter to make it sweet. They also said I should be “ashamed” of attacking such a pure soul apparently. I laughed at them and blocked them one by one. 

Now, my instagram account was public at the time, it’s not a political account, I just mostly post pictures of nature, of my hiking and camping trips with my dog in the mountains or on the coast.

Since there were no pictures of me I guess they couldn’t call me “fat” or ‘”ugly” so they commented on my pets, saying my dog looked like a rat, that my pet rabbits were going to die, that animals were my only friends because everybody hated me and -obviously not understanding the concept of backpacking- saying I was a “tramp”, a “bum” living in a tent in the middle of nowhere. They don’t like homeless people I guess. Then the pseudo-famous drag queen came back on another official account of his, commenting on my pictures, encouraging the comments saying my pets were going to die and sending me private messages again, calling me “an old lady”, “lonely”, “bitter, “crazy” blablabla. Blocked him again, made my account private cause I didn’t want to manage all this shit and waiting for them to move on before I made it public again. Reported his post on facebook for harassment, facebook answered it wasn’t harassment, reported again, second review said it still wasn’t harassment, a bunch of my feminist friends reported it and finally a good facebook moderator deleted the facebook post about me confirming that it was indeed harassment. I still took a look a the comments before it was gone, it was pure misogyny, pretty much proving my point by saying how much I needed “a good dick” to set me right.  What a nice community of egotistic manbabies wearing make up and glitter. 

[womenaremypriority]

It is traumatic to live in a world where major world religions teach that your very existence as a woman was an afterthought to god, and you only exist to serve men. It traumatic to hear that there are people who think your existence as a gay person is sinful and evil. EVEN IF YOU WERE NOT RAISED RELIGIOUS. Knowledge of those belief systems and their prominence is TRAUMATIZING. It is okay to be angry about it. It is okay to feel grief about it. Knowing millions, if not billions of people, think you are inferior and deserve to die is fucking painful.

[prolibytherium]

Just in general I think trying to look to pre-late modern period history for validation of LGBT+ identities is an absolutely useless venture. Every single underlying human experience defined through the lens and framework of LGBT identity has always existed, but it's impossible to pin down Exactly who and what a figure might have been if they existed in this contemporary context and decided to self identify via these labels.

It's also a wildly reductive lens that flattens the complexity and variety of how sex and gender has been constructed across time in different cultures, how sexual norms have varied, etc. This is not a constructive approach to learn about history and you're never going to be able to fit historical figures neatly into little identity categories.

[intersexfairy]

with how we're all aware of how toxic masculinity leads men/boys to harass, assault, and abuse other men/boys, you'd think the fact they can be harmed by patriarchy and misogyny wouldn't be a controversial statment. *especially* marginalized men. but alas, many people have taken the "identity" in identity politics so literally, they just end up ignoring and reinforcing the harmful things they claim to be against.

also if you think the pain of the men harmed by toxic masculinity isn't a big deal because they're men... that is. that is literally you believing in toxic masculinity. like i thought we all knew part of toxic masculinity is that men shouldn't feel pain, they shouldn't cry, they can't ask for help or be truly hurt, etc. etc. and if they do any of these things, then they're not real men and not only deserve to be emasculated, but deserve to suffer. you just switched it to they are real men so they deserve to suffer.

and even though again, this is extra harmful for marginalized men, i shouldn't have to say that for you to care. if you only give support to people harmed by these systems when you think deserve it, you're always going to end up propping these systems up at some point. maybe you should stop that.

also. to any man reading this who feels like their pain doesn't matter: it does. you deserve to exist in a world where you're safe to be yourself and feel emotions, and get genuine protection and support. we all need to exist in that world. none of us deserve this hell.

[and-fishing-equipment]

the reason why so much lesbian media sucks is because it's not really about women loving women and more about women not loving men. i wish to live in a world where lesbian media can acknowledge that lesbianism exists as its own separate thing without any background ties to heterosexuality or lack thereof. it's not an "alternative" to heterosexuality, some people are just dykes because they think women are neat, not because men can't satisfy them.

[wild-wombytch]

Genuinely, I only care about this for the petty pleasure of seeing this pile of crap fall apart, like most people predicted it would. It gets bearable if you see it as Fifty Shades of Cringe. But it's unfortunately not a satyre despite how it looks.

As a lesbian, it hurt me to agree with the homophobes about it being essentially a giant Pride. This is sickening of pinkwashing and wealthy, misogynistic men speaking over the rest of us. I never felt so much distance between me and gay men until this. You know who could have sung instead of these misogynistic men? Stéphane. Hoshi. Pomme. All very popular openly lesbian singers. How painfully obvious the misogyny is when you see the ratio of these men vs drag kings. Even if it wasn't problematic in itself to have drag in the freaking Olympics and have kids around.

Paris Olympics also for some reasons give their official support to some LGBTQalphabet Pride House. And everyone celebrate this crap as something ~quirky~ and ~inclusive~. Ah, yes, the terrible exclusion of rich men. The ones who took over the movement and called to beat out lesbians. Attacking our bars. Trying to burn us alive during maches against sex trafficking. Now the only ones openly criticizing it is the alt right...we've been let down by the left and by the SSA community.

And beheaded Marie-Antoinette at Gojira's show? Really? She was humilated, framed and murdered awfully by men for having been forcefully married to a man when she was a kid. Her very children died horribly. She saw the heads of her very friends decorating the courtyard of her first prison. How much poor taste does it get? Can we let this woman alone and stop with the bullshit myths the Americans made in their films about her? Even the "let them eat cake" in the title of this article never happened. This is misogynistic revisionism. In truth, when you read the actual records of her trial, she was an incredibly dignified women until the very end, despite being dragged in every type of mud. A slut, a spy, a cheater, a witch. You want to be tasteless and psychopathic in front of the world? Then why Marie-Antoinette and not Louis XVI? Ah yes, pretty voice and dress. That's lazy as fuck a'd just men finding women's death funny and joking about it. Olympe de Gouges would have been equally tasteless but could have made a feminist statement of how women had been literally erased from human's rights and citizenship.

It's just people laughing at women's pains, death and humiliation while celebrating inclusivity. It's just recruiting normally reasonable people into the alt right or out of voting because they're tired to see this being celebrated as progress and representating them. The same alt right which will destroy women, gays, disableds, refugees and elders' rights. This is awful to see this happens because some fucking moid moron wanted ~trans/drag rep~ because they're so uwu oppressed for wanting to piss in the women's toilets and have their fetishs legally recognised and erasing the violence of their maleness in justice.

And that's just like. A rant for one day. You know they put 2000 college students in homelessness to house cops, right? That they violently destroyed the camps of homeless people, among which a lot of disabled and immigrants to chase them away from where it wouldn't be tv-friendly? That they put super evil anti-homeless concrete measures on? Like these lego concrete block, cementing holes under bridges, putting pick-nic tables where they normally lay tents, putting cops 24/7 to keep them from settling again and putting a literal sheet with dolphin on to hide graffiti, prob because they hate homeless people but everyone love dolphins, right?

And I'm not even touching the taxi strikes when the gov allowed foreign companies like über to travel but not the actual taxi from here? Or the attack against art and historical heritage. Or the lack of French flag, letting it for the alt-right. Or how they could have had a shit ton of wonderful French pop artists (Again, Stéphane, Pomme, Hoshi, Eddy de Pretto, Orelsan, Yseult, Superbus...actually, bring back all the pre-2010 artists) on scene and not this crap with very few of them being even actually French (and Lady Gaga, Celine Dion...m'okay. why. Just why? Give me Tanya Tagaq as a Canadian artist at least if we really need to have one. And Angèle instead of Gaga would have been neat as a singer from another country).

Anyway, that's your daily reminder that the Olympics are for bourgeois by bourgeois and always come at a terrible human cost, adding a deep slight to women and homosexual people to it this edition. Speak out. Support only the female teams, boycott the rest. This is the opium of the people. We don't want games, we want human rights.

So . . . . France opened the Olympics -- games meant for all nations and beliefs -- with this. Which includes a child.

I'd felt sorry for Paris because of the railway attacks. But now my feeling toward Paris and France is

I feel sorry for the participants who don't want this representing them.

I hope this shit has the lowest ratings the Olympics has ever had.

[andromacheflints]

*crosses out "doomed by the narrative"*

*writes "doomed by virtue of being a girl in a story that's ultimately about men" in its place*

[psychologicalwarclaire]

Is this piece of classic literature actually gay or is the author so misogynistic that he wrote the men as characters who actually think and feel and make decisions, never considering that he could do the same with women, so of course we're going to see chemistry between the men because the women are nowhere near as deeply written?

[samaspic31]

"Fandom is just for fun/escapism" means there's no quality threshold to meet to be allowed to contribute, and it is generally a space to share a common love for something rather than spend time hating.

It does NOT mean "everyone gets to publicly say, write and draw absolutely anything and be free from criticism, nothing can possibly have ties to real life harmful ideas and reinforce them, nothing should be taken seriously, everyone turns their brain off and analyzing fan content is pointless", especially since that attitude will automatically allow bigoted content to flourish and will push marginalized people out of fan spaces, or at the very least make those spaces hostile and put them in a position where they have to argue with the bigots empowered by that attitude. If it’s escapism, then make it an escapism that’s accessible to most people, which means being mindful of the consequences of the content put out, or else you’re just creating more spaces minorities are excluded from

[spitblaze]

gnc and butch women (cis AND trans) and transmascs are punished for performing masculinity past certain thresholds of arbitrary attractiveness because people that cishet society categorizes or clocks as 'women' are not supposed to perform masculinity. hope this helps 👍

[anouchan-jpg]

Young girls need to be shown and taught different ways of saying no and sticking to it. Be it rejecting food or help or male advances unapologetically and shamelessly. No woman owes anyone anything. Take up space, Interrupt people if they have interrupted you, be emotionally reserved, refuse to take responsibility of a random man's reaction to your attempt at drawing boundaries. You deserve to draw boundaries, you're not a free for all service to take what they want and leave. This involves, emotional, mental, physical, social and spiritual energy. You deserve to take up space. You're allowed to be human.

-A

[ghelgheli]

So a TMA is a feminized amab (for whatever reason)? Is the homosexual male a TMA? Since historically it was an amab person who was feminized because of their sexual attraction or behavior ?

see this is why even "transfeminized" is not a great term imo but there are only so many neologisms I can use before I read like a worldbuilding document. it's not about someone being feminine specifically, so it is not about just being "feminized". there is a history of the feminine gay man as someone who claims and is given space within maleness while still being subject to homophobia and anti-effeminacy. the latter is one of the first tools against the deviating man: it's why it is intelligible to accuse a straight man of being a sissy or a faggot if it even appears that he is straying from the normative. especially as queer subjectivities were territorialized over the course of the 20th century the cis gay man was firmly established against the transsexual et al. and even if these distinctions were blurred in the past they have been sharpened and calcified by decades of transmisogynistic entrenchment. which is to say that at least in general, the "homosexual male" (orange flag phrase) is distinguished from the transfeminized subject in large part because of the pains he takes to maintain that distinction and also to distinguish himself from women as a whole while insisting on membership among men.

[lgbtlunaverse]

I find myself growing a bit tired of the take that 'we need female mangakas because they won't oversexualize women/they can write female characters well/etc" firstly, it reduces women's art to the exclusively wholesome, which is just factually incorrect, but more importantly: we need female mangakas because women make great fucking art and shouldn't be pushed out of the industry because of misogyny. It's that easy. We don't need a specific thing that ~only women can do well~ for it to be wrong that the industry is so sexist. If every single male mangaka started writing female characters like they've been studying feminist literature for 20 years we'd still need female mangakas.

[tacticalfiend]

played Mouthwashing and loved it, don't think I have anything that insightful to say about it though. I will say, however, that the fan reaction to it is incredibly disappointing to me. Like do whatever you want I'm not your dad, but I find it a little contemptable that a game clearly about sexual assault and gendered violence is being completely eclipsed by fucking yaoi posting. There's so much to discuss and explore about Jimmy and Curly (and Anya!), but I guess that's just too boring when you can hallucinate toxic yaoi!!! (BUZZWORD!! BUZZWORD!!). It's kind of incredible how Jimmy seems to just.. forget or brush aside the violence he's inflicted upon Anya in favor of obsessing over Curly, and a majority of fans seem to be eager to do the same!

[anarcho-catboyism]

The fact that transmen/mascs get to experience having our oppression ignored and downplayed growing up as girls and then turn around and have our oppression ignored and downplayed during our transition is laughably disgusting. We really never grow out of being told "Shut up, you're supposed to be quiet and look nice".

[fernlessbastard]

You guys aren't ready for the conversation of how Quackity sincerely loves bottoming

I'm not at all saying he wants to always bottom, I'd say he still prefers topping most of the time, but whenever he's down to get something up his ass, he's DOWN to get something up his ass, if you know what I mean

(the switching applies to position only, tho. I sincerely can't see him genuinely enjoying subbing, and neither can I see Wilbur actually domming unless they're both being influenced by years of internalised homophobia and patriarchy and all that bullshit, but even then it's just cringe and they're just both pretending it's not cause it's easier that way (and the sex itself isn't like, actively bad, not to mention that it provides some degree of an emotional connection which they both desperately crave), plus it's still basically vanilla just with a little bit of dirty talk - that's how i see them in Pogtopia (with Q bottoming - if you want another huge post on their Pogtopia dynamic let me know cause I have so many thoughts on it and how their traumas affected them and their relationship and how complicated it all was))

That being said, man's 10000% intensely fucking traumatised

(tw personal hc and following the logical path from canon implications idfk)(also exaggeration) like, if he were ACTIVELY evil and had ZERO (even personal) moral code, then the amount of anger he feels towards Schlatt for taking away the enjoyment of it is probably enough to ignore all ethics and torture Dream so utterly unimaginably he ends up violating entirety of the Geneva convention, and then having 50 new ones written specifically to condemn his actions, just to break every single one of those as well on the way, just so that Dream gives him the revival book so that he can re-kill Schlatt with his own hands

Also he absolutely re-traumatised himself with Karl and Sapnap cause he was for sure like "I shouldn't be having an intense panic attack right now, I'm going to push all my energy into pretending that everything's ok and that I don't want to cry and scream and rip my skin off. I'm just being silly and dramatic anyway ha ha" which just resulted in them unknowingly hurting him all over again. I take no criticism. Q's got MASSIVE communication issues when it comes to validating his feelings and Karl and Sapnap are "everything's fine"-ing way too much on the daily. And whole Quackity should work on his issues, it IS a partner's job to at least try to check up on the other(s) (and vice versa), and Karl and Sapnap clearly always preferred to ignore any hints that something might be wrong as a general life rule. The relationship was immaturely focused on "fun and good vibes" from the very start, so any bad topic obviously felt out of place. It started off with lack of communication and it died cause of it too.

That's also actually why I will always firmly stand by the fact that Wilbur (during las Nevadas era) is the only person with whom he could ever heal, btw (yes, including Charlie as a hypothetical romantic interest). Cause Schlatt's abusive, Karl and Sapnap "deserve better" in his eyes (so he pretends to be fine until shit hits the fan and everything falls apart)(that also applies to his hypothetical relationship with Charlie). But with Wilbur there's enough distance to feel safe and call out his bullshit without retaliation in form of abuse, and on the other hand he doesn't care to pretend to be perfect - hell, he probably purposefully shoves his issues onto the guy cause he's like "you think you're so strong and stubborn you can handle me??? You think???? Think again." (Wilbur does the same btw). They're purposefully trying to push each other away, destroy the "relationship", show each other just how fucked up they are. They're psycho-competitive. Even being the first one to be "too much" and get abandoned turns into a competition.

But it backfires. They bond. They're real with each other. They're stubborn, they're determined enough to stay just long enough to see each other's walls crack. And once they do, the feelings are quick to spill. They're each other's only people to be GENUINELY themselves with - no masks, no manipulation, no bullshit. Just themselves. And that's the first, CRUCIAL step to developing a healthy relationship (or at least healthier than all their other relationships).

So with Wilbur he probably only tries to bottom either once he ACTUALLY begins to feel like he could maybe try to reclaim it, or even if he tries it in a self-destructive way, (considering their history+patriarchy and shit) Wilbur'd know and care enough to realise Q's just trying to hurt himself. And as shitty as Wilbur can be sometimes, he's not a bad person - he'd stop Q if things'd go too far, or give him (at least a temporary) safe space to safely go through a breakdown without hurting himself like that. He wouldn't take advantage of such a low moment, and he would know enough to recognise it's a low moment in the first place.

Anyway once they figure all that out and Quackity's genuinely comfortable with it again, it's for sure not uncommon for him to enjoy some nice aggressive pounding, all the while having one hand in Wilbur's hair, pulling it to hold him close, and the other hand on Wilbur's neck, lightly choking him as they're intensely making out

All that to say Q's a massive sadist but he's also a huge massochist and he'll absolutely have Wilbur on a nice leash and call him a pathetic, desperate, horny dog or something like that as the man's (purposefully) sloppily thrusting in and out of him, causing the most "carnage" he can (Wilbur will be double fisting Quackity and Quackity will be just looking at him unfazed like "your hands are small" (they're not)/hj)

Oh btw to clarify [TW ok more direct talk of SA so please be careful and take care of yourselves]- yes, I'm absolutely saying Q got repeatedly SA'd by Schlatt throughout their relationship. The guy was canonically generally verbally and physically abusive, AND basically the whole point of his character is that he's like, the epitome of everything wrong with society. Add to that the sexual comments which were constantly used to demean, insult, and objectify Q, as well as Quackity's intense, palpitable discomfort which noticeably grows each time the topic comes up when they meet after Schlatt's death during Las Nevdas era, it's a pretty safe bet to assume Schlatt didn't stop at "just" verbal and physical violence. Sexual violence is almost a guarantee when you consider all that context - it's hardly even "reading between the lines". And you can't tell me that in our society that views being penetrated during sex as something negative, especially for men, while viewing penetrating someone as an act of "conquering" and "winning" and all that a character who's supposed to embody as many of this world's faults as possible wouldn't shove his dick where it's not wanted, even just purely to prove he can despite lack of consent.