#i was just trolling the radfems

[raccoonzinspace]

Trans people are 100% valid and a bunch of lovely human beings. :D

[tra-archive]

This is the future men want. Join 4B today

[uramitashi]

"feminism is about equality!!" feminism has always been and always will be about women's liberation first and foremost; "equality", in some contexts, is just its natural consequence.

this means that if sometimes feminism is going to prioritize women's well-being in society over males' status/role, then so be it. as a matter of fact actually males' role in society hurts their human development so blablabla feminism can be for them too if you feel too sad at the idea of leaving them behind. i dont care.

thing is feminism isn't supposed to care about hurting men's feet to find its place in the world. theyll survive i promise you. and if they want to cry be emotional or whatever fucking oppression they think they have, they can fight the status quo (not feminism) to free themselves.

but it's not a feminist's job.

[2024skin]

Honestly I'm glad that I spent so much time orbiting radblr as a TRA because it led to my views changing, but I find it to be totally creepy behavior now that I'm on the other side of the fence (hello kettle, I'm pot!). Like, I pretty much avoid transgender spaces unless a mutual or somebody I love is engaging with them. So when I see anons that are clearly sent by people who not self identify as radfems, feminists, or "terfs," but still orbit this area often enough to follow our drama, that is weird af to me.

In hindsight tho, radblr totally does (or did) have people doing the same to tra blogs. Toppdyke used to be famous on transblr, and there were anonymous harassment campaigns targeted at various trans blogs (usually blogs run by afab people 🤔) that look very similar to the harassment campaigns we see on radblr. It's like no normal feminist or trans person wants to start an argument online, so instead these social spheres experience the worst of both worlds whenever they meet.

[femgoddess-hecate]

Ok I gotta know if any of y'all have come across people talking about the race/ ethnicity changing community yet.

I have half a mind to believe it's all people trolling each other (I can only hope it truly is) but with how wild the world is, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if people (assumedly young people) believed they could listen to subliminal videos and magically change race.

What gives me pause is the response from youtubers who cover this. It's entirely disdain and shock, and poking fun at them, especially since the majority of youtubers who cover it are not white themselves. I mean of course. Why wouldn't it be. These are blatant fetishizations of (mostly) asian ethnicities and completely racist portrayals.

But it makes me think. Why in this day and age, when everything seems to be acceptable, is this the thing where people draw the line, calling it weird, just a phase, it's impossible to actually do, etc. And yet if you claim to be able to change sex, it's crickets?

Don't get me wrong, it IS fucked up to claim to change race. It ISN'T possible to simply watch a sibliminal video and claim you're developing monolids or whatever they think will happen. So why, when race changers "claim" an Asian woman's face as their "race goal" that's weird (it is), but if a man were to do it as his "woman goal" none of y'all would have an issue with it? So many of the arguments against race changers can be applied to those who think actually becoming the opposite sex is possible.

[maslows-pyramid-scheme]

https://menalez.tumblr.com/post/723831790712848384/im-in-a-server-with-macroclit-and-at-first-i

do you support macroclit now?

i saw you ask about example of lesbophobia as if there arent PLENTY of examples of it online from osa radfems. just look through your follower list, i see who you reblog from i'm just so tired of BEGGING bi women to take homophobia seriously. we've been pointing out macroclit's lesbophobia for ages but you people just choose not to listen to us (people who live with lesbophobic every day of our lives)

My views on problematic/offensive women have always been consistent - I think we should criticise their actions/behaviour, but I don't think we should criticise them using the language and/or theory of the patriarchy.

(Yes, this includes Macroclit and her comments... I still don't think she should have been hounded for needing an abortion.)

[warcrimesimulator]

I forgot about "radqueers" lmao god that shit is still around?

[ms-hells-bells]

yes, i am also obviously most worried about the young, vulnerable female fans. the impact of their idols being self hating about their bodies and weight will have a massive impact.

but sending asks saying 'lol why do you care about the health of (asian) men' (yes, they specified their race for some reason? ew) and 'good, they should suffer quietly' makes you seem like a psychopath. feel free to not care, you don't have to care about any celeb, no shame in that, but the natural reaction to seeing a group of people who you (aka I) like the content of sickly and unhealthy is going to be concern. that's my problem, my thoughts, doesn't have to be yours. i just treat my blog like a personal diary. i'm not thinking about it or them frequently, it doesn't occupy much of my mind or time, i just saw something and made an on the spot post, then stopped thinking about it until i got more asks.

[swaggedup247]

under a cut as to not spam (hopefully this shortens the post in notifications bars. if it doesn't... sorry...)

what makes one definition more valid than the other (out of the two shown in this thread)? why is the identity definition more valid than the biological one? is it because its more inclusive? if so, WHY is being more inclusive better for what is, by design, an exclusive word? WHY should be go by feeling and identity?

is it because the sex-based definition is "impossible to define"? if so, how do you know whos a cis woman and whos a trans woman? whats the difference? how do you know if someone has a DSD ("intersex")?how do we tell the difference between a hen and a rooster? in strictly biological terms. even though some women cannot bear children (and childrearing shouldn't be a female person's only purpose), they are still cis women, not trans. how do we know this? some hens cant lay eggs, but that doesn't make them roosters.

if a definition is defined exclusively by opting in, it's going to be nonsensical since there's no MEAT there. i could say "a canadian is anyone who identifies as one", but then would a russian whos only ever lived in russia their enitire life be able to call themselves canadian? can they get canadian citizenship on that metric alone? were they born with a canadian birth certificate? what if they never got a russian birth certificate despite being born in moscow. can they then say they were born in canada, since you can't prove they were born elsewhere? what if the political border changes and suddenly moscow is technically in finland? are they canadian now? (i understand that immigration is a thing, but i'm talking about someone who was born in one place and only ever lived there. the comparison is imperfect, but it doesn't have to be perfect since i'm just trying to make you understand my point. i can identify as being 6 feet tall, but that doesn't change the fact that i am 5'5". even if i wear platform shoes to be taller that is still my height. i don't have any "woman feeling", but i think that even you would agree that i am a cis woman by your own definition, since i do not identify as trans).

furthermore, i disagree with the definition you posted. what if i dont identify with the "cultural roles and expectations" of woman, but i also dont identify as a man or agender? in fact, i find the cultural roles of both sexes to be regressive and misogynistic. you could argue that the identity is opt-in (which is probably what you're thinking right now after reading this paragraph, because that is what *I* would have also thought a few years ago), but i've already explained why i don't like opt-in definitions. hopefully my comparison was understandable to you but i can try rewording if it was not.

i don't understand why someone would support a definition that involves people identifying INTO sexist, regressive gender roles by necessity of being born in a sexed body. i would much rather say "i am a woman not because society has decided that i must be nurturing, rear children and be meek and submissive, but because i am a female human being. i am a woman as much as a female horse is a mare, or a female chicken is a hen." I too used to see gender the exact same way you do (I have read your posts. we were the exact same) but I simply found the sex-based definition to make more sense, and frankly it's more progressive to me than insisting upon defining gender by sexism (which is what that definition you gave does, at its core). And I understand I’m using the same arguments you are- opinion based rather than factual! But again, this is why I think one definition is superior over the other, which is something that i haven’t seen you demonrate. I would rather reject that dichotomy entirely, but still acknowledge what i go through in a female body in a sexist society. Other definitions are either nonsensical, cannot actually define a term accurately, or are based in regressive stereotypes that i cannot support identifying into (or out of, since that's pretty much impossible to truly do in our current society even if you "pass" perfectly). This is why I cannot support them.

I understand that language exists to communicate (which is what i assume you meant by the "imagery" comment?), which is actually the main reason why i can't be 100% on this myself (arguing under your terms, at least). However... again, what makes up that imagery? And why does that necessitate identity-based (opt-in) definition? is it right to say that someone who looks like a female person is a woman? what about a very feminine male who looks like a woman, but who doesn't identify as a trans woman or nonbinary? can we call him a woman since words are used for the imagery they invite? i hope i understood your point correctly here lol.

you express that you care about defining cis vs trans differently, showing that you DO actually care about accuracy, which is why i'm using accuracy-based arguments for the most part. i just don't think it is concise or helpful for any reason other than to be inclusive, which it doesn't HAVE to be. i just do not find it helpful even if people are pushing for one definition over the other (which is what i'd say that cultural definition is). I understand that you think that a trans woman is a woman who is trans. I agree that they are trans by their own definition (since it’s relevant to their identity), but i just don’t think that calling them a woman like a cis woman is is helpful. If a man took hormones, looked identical to a trans woman in every way, but still identified as a cis man, i don’t think you would argue that he must be a trans woman, would you (and if we can't accurately identify this gender feeling, what makes it bad to question someones trans status? if someone says "im fine" but are actually angry, does that suddenly mean they truly ARE fine because emotions cant *really* be defined and their identity matters more?)? It’s impossible to clearly define this outside of feelings and identity, and i hope my very long winded post has at least explained why i don’t like those definitions, even if you personally disagree.

I'm not interesting in arguing the specifics of the definitions (like you said yourself, language is complicated, im sure you could pick apart literally any word and i've already gone into way more detail than i probably should have for easy readability), but presenting one definition without explaining why it's superior to the other isn't really helpful when the entire point of the original post was "you call us terfs when we don't identify as one, but you object to calling someone a man/woman when they don't identify as one. this is hypocritical" if you disagree that it's hypocritical, *why*? why does your definition matter more? why is it more helpful to society? WHY does it matter more? you seem to believe that the definition of woman is special somehow, and different from other definitions since it's a cultural role. i technically agree that it is a cultural role, however... i just do not think it can exist as an opt-in definition. why does someone identify as a woman, something that used to refer to female humans? why have that feeling to begin with? i know you argue that you can't explain a feeling, but i honestly think this is a cop-out that doesn't really address the point you're responding to. how can *I* know it even exists, since as i've previously stated i do NOT experience this feeling? i do not believe in souls, or that someone can have a gendered essence in a body of the opposite sex. and furthermore, why does feeling like a woman make you one? if someone feels like a woman but still has a male body, why is it wrong to call them a man? what gives someone the right to control other people's perceptions of them? where does that woman feeling come from? if it's cultural, then i'd say that gender roles are stupid and i choose to not acknowledge them. if it's innate, then it must be related to sex. if it's sex dysphoria, then again, why does that MAKE somebody a different gender?

i understand it's nice to not make someone feel bad by misgendering them (i typically try to use the pronouns people ask me to even if i think it's silly) but that feeling isn't an argument in itself. and again, it doesn't address the original point about hypocrisy unless your argument is "well that definition is different from this definition because i said so".

furthermore, even if you (hypothetically, general "you") agree that it's not helpful to society but still think it's objectively correct because we aren't "above language", WHY? that definition you posted was made up at some point. it was at one point understood that "woman" meant "adult human female" (even if people may not have used that exact wording, we as a species that reproduces knows how to identify males vs females. it's not our only purpose but it IS where those words came from), but it was changed to an identity definition. so i fail to see why that can't come into question (perhaps i'm getting ahead of myself, but i've seen a lot of these arguments that go nowhere so i'm just trying to explain my entire point right off the bat). if the sex-based definition can come into question, then the identity-based definition can too. language can evolve, but what if that evolution is harmful? i would argue that it is, as i've previously explained. i know you must agree with me that this is something that CAN be questioned and contested, since you wouldn't be arguing about definition at all if you weren't (since again, the identity definition hasn't existed for all of time). so- when can one definition override an another? what makes one superior? i think that exclusivity at the cost of murky definitions and supporting regressive gender roles is not worth it.

I say this mainly because I do not think anybody replying to you is actually making their point clear. I don’t even like arguing, it’s just frustrating. I agree with the people arguing with you at their core, to be clear, but they're not actually making a point based off of what was actually said (only implied community "truths"). I doubt I will change your mind and we will probably continue to disagree but I hope I explained the point a little better, since I want everyone to actually understand each "side" no matter where they stand, even if they choose to reject it (which is your right). If I didn't actually explain it well, sorry for making you read this. Even if nobody actually reads this since it's a wall of text, lol. I just want to be clear as to not drag on an endless, unproductive thread (which is basically what this is).

So... You do realize you are by definition a terf, right?

are you sure you want to start talking about definitions

[raccoonzinspace]

Pardon me putting the "radfem" tags on my post about trans positivity. I was just trolling the radfems a bit.

My opinion on trans people still remains true, though. They're a wonderful group and I wish them the best.

[kkoffin]

live laugh love normalise blocking people who do nothing more than waste ur time

if you read something and you think “jesus that’s so stupid” do not follow up with “i need to point out how stupid this is”. everyone knows how stupid it is. just block them and move on. If a post is tagged “fucking radfems” you are likely not gonna be changing their opinion. unless your reply to a stupid reblog is something you want to share, something you want to say, and their comment helps your point, then don’t bother. Don’t waste paragraphs on trolls. go write a book instead.

[shamebats]

Genuine question as someone female with gender dysphoria: How do you feel about the argument that trans identification is an expression of self-infantilization I've consumed a lot of radical feminist/gender critical material on the topic and I want to hear it from the opposing view. What I've read suggests as follows:

Only children have bodies without secondary sex characteristics; a desire to have a body which doesn't reflect your adult sexual development is a childish desire to escape adulthood

A lot of female transgender people love things like cartoons, anime and video games for children

Many of the same people also reject being called "women" and prefer terms like enby or boy, which are childish-sounding or usually only applied to children

A lot of transgender people, especially on Tumblr, can't drive, don't work, don't have sex and don't want to have children

Reading this has demoralized me a lot; I'm very proud of being an adult, I'm happy being employed and living a life that would be unthinkable to a child, I don't want to have an identity which will essentially turn me back into a child again, so this has definitely put me off trans identity. I wanted to seek a second perspective and you're pretty vocally pro-trans. I promise this isn't a troll ask- I do have radfem/GC beliefs but I'm open to other opinions. Thank you!

I have no idea what you're talking about. That's genuinely so much generalizing.

Darling, I'm on testosterone specifically to get hairier, more muscular and look older/my age for a man, the exact opposite of what you're describing, that's what testosterone does. I'm nearing 30, I haven't lived with my parents since I was 18 and have been working for about as long too, I have a career and a partner of 11 years who I'm getting married to next year. So I have absolutely no idea why you think that description of transness would fit my experience in any way? Except for maybe the no driving part which... babes, some of us live in these cool places called ✨ cities ✨.

Your stereotype is basically just your judgemental description of someone who might be unable to work, young and literally just asexual. Those are all perfectly fine ways of being and yes, some people on Tumblr will fit that description and logically, some of them will be trans/non-binary.

Some people want to have few to no secondary sexual characteristics, but that's not the most common trans experience, not at all? It's actually more common to just be fine with what nature gave you, especially for non-binary people.

You made up a strawman of a trans person you're inclined to feel angry about because of bigoted views you hold. Which makes you come off like a judgemental, mean person.

You know what being a mature adult means for me? Being capable of minding your own business and keeping inside thoughts on the inside, where they belong.

Most mature adults do not, in fact, spend as much time debating fictional teenagers in their heads as you seem to be.

It's so embarrassing for you, but don't worry, you can work on that! You can start by examining why that little made up trans person in your head is making you leave short essays in random people's asks about how displeased you are about how they're choosing to live their imaginary little life and what this obsession of yours says about you.

[sharp-rosee]

Hey funny story: I haven't been around Tumblr at all for months, but today someone told me menalez had deactivated or something so I came on here and looked it up. First result was a post by you, i checked out your blog and wouldn't you know it your most recent post had you defending me post mortem lmfao. I sent an anon to the other woman too but it seems she won't post it so to clarify to you: when I supposedly said "studies showing violence suffered by bisexuals are cringe and useless" what I remember thinking about that is that those studies that I've seen are never used to try to understand why bisexuals suffer such insane rates of violence (more than homosexuals) and trying to stop it. I've only seen them be used as battering rams in discourse when homosexuals criticize bisexuals. Which is crazy for such a serious issue and totally trivializes it lol. Also that my explanation for it was that such studies show that many abused people incorrectly id as bi for a time. You can disagree or wtv just those were my points, she made it sound like I'm cheering on women beating if they're bi or something. Also your defense of me (thanks queen lol) is accurate if you were wondering. I used to be sorta pro strict separatism but I outgrew the anger/ denial phase of "most women will partner with men" and reached acceptance. Most people are built for romantic partnership, that's just human nature, I can't be hating het women just because their lot in life in that means they're more likely to be abused. Just because I'm not drawn to men, or even much to romance, doesn't mean I should act like that's everyone else too and judge them on that standard, I accept reality and want women to be safe within that rather than pointlessly hate on them and get all worked up because some women have boyfriends..

Well I'm also a mean asshole, I'm sure you noticed, and I definitely would give the bi girlies on radblr a hard time here at the time lol. I don't have the "one side" sort of takes on this divide on radblr. It was funny but I can't feel the energy to that anymore since leaving tumblr, way too few bis or gays irl to care about that stuff. But at the end of the day these are my actual takes on all that disk horse. Funny to see it immediately on such a causal stroll around here lol

-sleep3r4gent

QUEEN I used to follow you ♡ at least when I was crypto a few years back I did.

Also, I'm glad you clarified because the way some women on here seem to hallucinate things they read almost makes me feel insane as well. Like you sending an ask saying you never thought of a certain perspective is not indicative of you agreeing and obviously one can change their opinions over time.

I really have no opinion either way tbh, I myself am straight and in a relationship, and have had others on my last blog send some anons calling me a "dick worshipper" and other misogynistic BS, but they stopped once I didn't let it bother me much. It's so obviously a group of trolls that it's embarrassing that they still believe it enough to keep bringing back the same users, some like you who aren't even misogynistic, to further their persecution complex.

It even is more annoying because these are the women who made Mena/Moideater leave, the above drama is a big reason why. The way radblr will still reblog posts from very racist blogs and not bat an eye but then freak out over a clique of women who aren't even radfems really does show what demographic makes up this site.

I know it gets exhausting to be involved in arguments, but it's nice to know you're still somewhat around. I hope you, Mena and Moid come back someday. If not I understand. But I'll never forget any of them and I haven't forgotten you 😭😭😭

[ventbloglite]

The sad thing is - I think it's actually very terribly easy if you're trans femme to believe that trans masc people are out to get you.

We've been raised on 'woman vs man' all of our lives. We've all internalised it as sacred truth.

Why disbelieve it now? Even as trans people it's so very difficult to not see 'woman' and 'man' as directly opposites with no overlap, natural enemies with 'men' as the villain (because there must be a villain, right?). Doing so is so much easier than actually wrapping your mind around and thus trying to dismantle the many systems which exist to enforce the patriarchy and it's narrow definition of 'acceptable manhood' to boot.

And it's not like feminists have never or don't understand that there's many little systems that need to be tackled. We fight for gender neutrality in job titles 'fire fighter not fireman' for example even though it seems petty because we understand that man=default is one of those systems. This is before we even get to the glass ceiling, pay gap, the misogyny of many medical systems etc.

It's just that for many it's easier to see all men as equally privleged and evil and therefore unable to have any issues, so surely faking it for attention or to speak over women if they do.

There used to be such a thing as 'mens liberation'. This involved undoing the misogynistic beliefs men had grown up with and tackling toxic masculinity etc. Basically trying to create healthier, happier and more informed men who would happily defend a feminist cause because they realise the cause benefits all.

It is the direct opposite of 'MRAs' who seek to believe much like radfems that the 'opposite sex' is the root cause of all of their suffering and should be completely wiped out or placed under subservience at best without actually (again) looking at or trying to grasp the many systems of oppression with exist and how to genuinely tackle the issues they're facing.

MRAs = animal rights/PETA types if that helps MensLib = animal welfare (actually caring about animals)

But in that same way trans masc (and even a good amount of trans femme and trans neu people who understand transandrophobia) who speak about the oppression they face FROM CIS PEOPLE AND CISNORMATIVE SOCIETY (with maybe a sprinkling of lamentation about lack of intercommunity support or specific things a specific trans femme has said which isn't any more ok than any trans masc being openly transmisogynistic) are 'animal welfare' types. They know what they're going through and just want a word to describe it.

But like I said, it's so easy, I know, as a trans femme to just believe when people tell you that this is another wave of men oppressing you. That they must be the same as MRAs because men are inherently privleged. That these anons claiming to be trans mascs targetting trans women for hate must be actual trans mascs because ofc men hate women, even though it could be literally anyone on anon including troll shit-stirrers.

It's honestly not a blameable offence to believe it when it's all we've known and been told. Men hate women, so obviously trans men hate trans women, right?

Cishet men are privleged, so obviously all kinds of men are privileged, right?

The hard part is going to be undoing that. Men and women are not opposites. Trans men and trans women are not opposites. We are not enemies with trans neu people being forced to pick sides or stay away and be called ignorant. It's not fun or good to relish in the suffering of another group, and it's not feminist to think that somebodies gender automatically gives them x, y or z negative traits.

[olderthannetfic]

A few years ago I used to be really into the Youtube artists community until it blewup with toxicity. Seemed to happen around the time Creepshowart was outed as a lolcow user. I went to the site to find more information and honestly it was so eye opening. Can’t speak for the whole low self esteem radfem circle jerk that makes up most of the site but the art threads specifically helped me realize something.

It was just full of people shitting on artists and their work, and at first it REALLY got to me, made me doubt myself and see so many flaws in my own work in a way that seemed impossible to overcome. But then they started bringing up actual professionals in the industry, people I looked up to and studied and they were saying /the same shit/ about these skilled artists as the amateurs they shit on from YouTube. It was so amazing to realize how miserable and full of shit they were (still are).

If anyone knows about Shannon (aka creepshowart) please be aware that most if not all online trolls are as pathetic as she is so don’t take them seriously. Truly the biggest waste of my time was ever caring what such chronically unhappy desperate wannabes think about anything let alone something so meaningful to me.

--

[spookymonth--man]

DO NOT ASK FOR MONEY. I WILL SIMPLY DELETE THE ASKS + BLOCK YOU.

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

INTRO!! (I needed a proper one.)

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

ᴀᴍ ɪ ᴀ ᴛᴏʏ ᴛᴏ ʏᴏᴜ, ᴍʏ ʟᴏᴠᴇ?

ᴊᴜꜱᴛ ᴀ ᴛʜɪɴɢ ᴛᴏ ᴘʟᴀʏ

ᴀɴᴅ ᴛʜᴇɴ ᴛʜʀᴏᴡ ᴀᴡᴀʏ

ɪ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ᴀꜱᴋᴇᴅ ꜰᴏʀ ᴛʜɪꜱ

ɪ ᴀʟᴡᴀʏꜱ ᴅɪᴅ ᴍʏ ʙᴇꜱᴛ

ᴡɪᴛʜᴏᴜᴛ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʟᴏᴠᴇ ɪ ᴀᴍ ᴀ ʙʀᴏᴋᴇɴ ᴍᴇꜱꜱ

ɴᴏᴡ ɪ’ᴍ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ᴇɴᴏᴜɢʜ

ɪᴛ’ꜱ ᴀʟᴍᴏꜱᴛ ᴛᴏᴏ ᴍᴜᴄʜ

ꜰᴏʀ ᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴡᴏʀᴋ ɪ ɴᴇᴇᴅ ᴀ ʜᴜᴍᴀɴ’ꜱ ᴛᴏᴜᴄʜ

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

Hello, my name is Avery ((or Donnie. Or Starz. Or Confetti. Or Donry. Or Partyguy. Or Cone (my friend called me a traffic cone LMAO). Or Steven (stealing names from my fave characters!!). Or Ruby (only on the occasion) Or Star. Or Bud. Or Veneer (my friend ALSO calls me this). ...Or Moon! Any of these work!))

My pronouns are He/They, along with some neopronouns and xenopronouns!! (Xe/Xem, Zey/Zem, Star/Stars/Starself, Byte/Bytes/Byteself, and Tech/Techs/Techself)

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

I am a multifandom, and am currently hyperfixated on the following:

Trolls (movies), Dandy's World, FNAF, Smiling Critters, Smiling Friends, Lego Monkie Kid, Slimecicle, Quackity, Heathers, Invader Zim, TMNT, Gravity Falls, Minecraft, Animal Crossing, and more! (the list will be updated later)

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

God has let me live another year and I'm gonna make it everyone's problem!

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

My straw.page!!

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

My silly friend, you should totally follow and interact with: @sir-qwillian-ferne

Soup's Adoptive Dad(™/j): @williamfnafton

Our lovely aunt!: @i-bless-your-heart/@juliasreblogs

Jazzy (im gonna crumple you/j): @jazzythejazzles

Friend!!: @url0calcrvckhead

Apparently my fucking child???: @beebisbeeble

Special little friend: @grcklebdrckle

Mutual i convinced to join Tumblr >:3: @oozesquito

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

ɪ’ᴍ ᴊᴜꜱᴛ ᴀ ᴛᴏʏ ᴛᴏ ʏᴏᴜ, ᴍʏ ʟᴏᴠᴇ

ᴊᴜꜱᴛ ᴀ ᴛʜɪɴɢ ᴛᴏ ᴘʟᴀʏ ᴀɴᴅ

ᴛʜᴇɴ ᴛʜʀᴏᴡ ᴀᴡᴀʏ

ɪ ɴᴇᴇᴅ ᴀ ʜᴜᴍᴀɴ’ꜱ ᴛᴏᴜᴄʜ, ʙᴜᴛ

ʏᴏᴜ ᴅᴏɴ’ᴛ ɴᴇᴇᴅ ᴍᴇ

ɪ ɴᴇᴇᴅ ᴀ ʜᴜᴍᴀɴ’ꜱ ᴛᴏᴜᴄʜ, ʙᴜᴛ

ɪ’ᴍ ᴏʙꜱᴏʟᴇᴛᴇ

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

INTERACT! :

Neurodivergent

Into any of my listed fandoms!!

Juggalos (i luv you guys sm man/p)

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

Meh...:

NSFW accounts (I'm hypersexual.)

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

Do NOT interact. :

Pedophilia

Zoophilia

Necrophilia

MAPsexuals or anything similar

Neo/xenopronoun haters

People who want to unnecessarily sexualize me/others

Incest shippers (YES THIS INCLUDES T-CEST)

Proshippers/Comshippers

1 man 1 jar + anything similar.

Terfs, radfems, and anything else

Endo systems??? Genuinely so confused on this one. Just dni for now. Don't follow. Don't nothing.

SYSTEM FAKERS??? IM NOT A SYSTEM. I DONT THINK SO ANYWAY? BUT UH. PLEASE DNI.

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

Thank you for reading. Have fun interacting, and hey! Don't be afraid to send in asks!! The box is always open!!

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

I got rid of the tag section i don't USE THEM ANYMORE

This is the character section now 😌

Chip

Cecil

Sylvester (Syl)

Donnie

Avery

Solace

Soup

Mod will just. Post in whatever they please.

NOT A SYSTEM THESE ARE FOR ROLEPLAY OKAY

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

ᴡᴇ ᴡᴇʀᴇ ꜱᴛɪʟʟ ɢᴏɪɴɢ ꜱᴛʀᴏɴɢ

ɪ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ᴅɪᴅ ʏᴏᴜ ᴡʀᴏɴɢ

ᴜɴᴛɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ɴᴇᴡ ᴍᴇ ᴄᴀᴍᴇ ᴀʟᴏɴɢ

ɪᴛ ᴡᴀꜱ ᴊᴜꜱᴛ ʏᴏᴜ ᴀɴᴅ ᴍᴇ

ᴡᴇ ᴡᴇʀᴇ ꜱᴜᴄʜ ᴀ ɢᴏᴏᴅ ᴛᴇᴀᴍ

ʙᴜᴛ ɴᴏᴡ ɪ’ᴍ ᴀʟᴏɴᴇ ᴏɴ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴏᴜʟᴇᴠᴀʀᴅ ᴏꜰ ʙʀᴏᴋᴇɴ ꜱᴄʀᴇᴇɴꜱ

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

Blinkies i customized myself using Blinkies.cafe !!

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡

Song: I Need A Human's Touch - TWRP, McKenna Rae

≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡