#i know most people just aren't aware that it's harmful and aren't being malicious

[nearestend]

sorry but i'm going to need everyone to stop writing autistic / "gifted" (in quotes because i hate that term) characters who were little baby geniuses that skipped grades and graduated as valedictorian and were every teacher's pet because it's the most unrealistic shit ever and kind of just perpetuates this ableist misconception when in reality most autistic / gifted kids are more likely to be abused and exploited and bullied (both by peers and teachers), especially if they are not rich and especially if they are not white

[doctorbunny]

So I thought it'd be silly and detract from this post to talk about fandom underneath it But I've been looking for a way to talk about this and I think this is as good a start as any.

I keep seeing a lot of people confused as to why Kazui, assuming he is a gay/aro/other closet LGBT man would want to 'decieve' Hinako by lying to her about being in romantic love with her and marrying her

It makes sense, if you're young and from the right area, you might not know a lot of history, its certainly not taught in schools. For example, to many people 'gay panic' is a cute trope, wherein a person struggles with their newly discovered identity and not a legal defence people used to excuse the beating and murder of gay people

Kazui is 39 years old. He would've turned 40 in August 2020, meaning he was born in 1980

When the comic above about Bert and Ernie getting a civil union (not even marraige yet) was made in 2003, he would've been 23.

By the time gay marraige was legalised in the US, it was 2015, Kazui would've been 35 (and despite Kazui being Japanese, because other countries like to copy America, the US legalising gay marraige was absolutely celebrated by LGBT people worldwide)

(here's a section of Our Dreams At Dusk a manga that began publication months before the legalisation of gay marraige in the US showing just two states legalising gay marraige as being news worthy to LGBT people in Japan) The first Asian country to legalise gay marraige was Taiwan in 2019 Japan is expected to be the second... but they're taking their time

Gender identity and sexual orientation are also not nationally protected civil rights, meaning protection from discrimination depends on the prefecture you live in.

And this is without getting into darker subjects like higher self harm/suicide rates or violent crimes against LGBT people

I don't want to be doom and gloom, many people are becoming more aware and accepting of LGBT people. But Kazui had every reason to wish to remain closeted

For all people talk about a 'divorce stigma' I believe it is silly to have expected a gay man in the 2000's, when many people even in the states thought gay marraige was unattainable in their lifetime, to have considered that when he got married to someone in an attempt to conform to society Especially because most difficulty to remarry after divorce comes from views surrounding custody laws and adoption. A lot of people don't want to get in a relationship with someone who already has children since they don't view them as their own on account of being blood related. This is probably why Fuuta's mother left Fuuta and his sister with their father. It's very notable that Milgram lampshades how by Kazui's age he was 'expected' to have children but didn't. We don't know Hinako's opinion on having children, but its possible Kazui intentionally didn't have any with her for this reason (despite feeling melancholy he could've had a child Muu's age by now)

Shidou had children (the eldest of which he likely sired while still being in medical school), Mahiru was still in university and thinking about planning a family, Amane notes that her mother gave birth to her when she was Mahiru's age. (TLs from Rochisama)

These aren't malicious feelings imo. This is Kazui noticing a coworker he likes is romantically interested in him and taking a chance on her in the hopes that playing a role as a straight man will make him into one. (unfortunately the suit doesn't fit) There is a Japanese saying of 出る杭は打たれる 'the nail that sticks out gets hammered in' suggesting it is better to not stand out (interestingly, the below lyric is the same in Japanese and English but in French its more like 'I can't take it anymore, I'm different')

It's also worth noting that gay people getting into heterosexual relationships even outside of Japan, used to be Extremely Common. Like my mother has a co-worker who did it

In addition, Yokohama is one of the more expensive places to live in Japan. Mixed with his expensive looking wedding and the traditonal dress of the family at his wedding. It's very likely he comes from a wealthy (conservative) background which would contribute to pressures

I'm rambling a little, i'm quite tired. But I don't want people to think this means they Have to vote Kazui innocent. I don't know your theories. Maybe you think he's straight or sexuality is entirely irrelavent to his crime or you think he's gay but you just want to vote him guilty for some other reason. Any reason is allowed (although non-milgram fans trying to use him as a luck shrine has to be pretty weird)

I just think that when you judge Kazui as a gay man who 'lied' to a straight woman, you need to look at the context it happened in and the many real people who still exist in marraiges like that. Beware whomst you call deceptive or manipulative in a world were heterosexuals feel entitled to your immediate coming out.

[noperopesaredope]

My Wild Kratts Villain OC

Rosetta McBest

Absolutely terrible person (derogatory). Just the worst (affectionate). Best of my designs. One of the villains and a very real one at that (I really love making WK villains who are stand-ins for real issues). Rosetta here is an influencer who loves taking pictures with animals and posting them on social media.

Rosetta acts sweet and bubbly on the outside, saying that she "totally looooves animals," but is secretly very self-absorbed and egocentric, not actually caring about animals as much as she pretends to. She sees everything and everyone as potential content and a way to make money. Peak slightly annoying influencer, but not even in an overly stereotypical way. More based on actual problematic influencers and their legitimately toxic and messed up behavior. The ones who act like they care and think they are so charming and silly and likable when it typically comes across as annoying.

She can occasionally come across as charming, especially when she is being a bit more genuine due to excitement. During these moments, she acts very energetic and legitimately bubbly in a authentic way that doesn't come across as performative. She is also very flamboyant. Not quite as much as Donita, but more in a "how to make an entrance/hype something up kind of way. She is a diva of sorts at the end of the day, and it shows in a way that can be silly and goofy. However, when it comes to episodes where she is the main villain, Rosetta is usually very infuriating due to her actions and how much long-term issues they can cause.

She is peak wildlife tourist. If she watched "Tiger King", she would immediately go to a cub petting zoo and take five million pics with it knowing damn well about the truth behind the industry. Rosetta doesn't care. She occasionally engages in performative activism, saying she cares about nature, but then actively and knowingly engaging in harmful practices solely for her own entertainment. Because to her, everything is for her own entertainment. She acts like the world evolves around her, and not even in an unaware way, but in a way that is almost malicious, as though she doesn't even think of the needs of others.

I think her debut episode would be about her trying to steal a coatis to keep it as a pet, while making it extremely obvious she doesn't know anything about them and isn't qualified. She might even try to buy from the illegal pet trade.

At first, the bros may think she actually does care, but by the end of her first episode, they realize that she legit does not care in the slightest. She then becomes one of the antagonists of the series, though she doesn't appear super often. But when she does, she tends to cause a lot of problems, sometimes without even fully realizing it, but in the most obnoxious way ever.

Things she does:

Try to collect animals she has no idea how to care for just because she thought they looked cute and wanted the attention

Gets a bunch of Burmese python, gets tired of them after a short period, and decides to dump them in the Florida everglades (learned about this issue from fishinggarrett)

Might literally go to a cub petting zoo or something similar

Occasionally appears in episodes with Donita to buy clothes from her and whatnot

Disrupts fragile ecosystems by trespassing entering previously undisturbed habitats. All for the sake of some selfies so she can get likes. Honestly probably does stuff like that a lot (trespassing so she can take selfies in places she shouldn't go, thus disturbing the wildlife)

Climbs Mount Everest and litters a lot (not her worst crime and won't be super villainized since most people who do this aren't fully aware of the issue, but will definitely talk about this particular problem)

I'll think of more stuff later.

Basically, just imagine that influencer who apparently likes animals and nature but does the most problematic and harmful things possible. That is Rosetta in a nutshell.

[pynkgothicka]

Ｔｙｐｅｓ ｏｆ Ｙａｎｄｅｒｅｓ ＢＴＳ Ｗｏｕｌｄ Ｂｅ

Synopsis - Pretty simple, a set of hcs describing BTS and their tendencies as Yanderes

Warnings - Acts of violence, branding, mentions of kidnapping, Literal murder.

Authors Note - I'm going to be constantly filling my queue with headcanons just to keep you guys fed with more content, most of it will be fandoms I want to write for yet don't really have the time for a full fledged fic

A friendly reminder that all my works are dark fanfiction! Please if you do not like that do not read them! This is your final warning before hitting the keep reading button!!

Jin - Delusional

He will actively treat you as if you'd been together for years

Somewhere deep in his mind he knows that you two are not actually together but why would he face that reality when he could just change his own

Slowly as time progresses and he has you stuck in his clutches he's going to drive you to the point of believing the fantasy he's been living

When Jin kills he makes up some excuse that's he'd had in his head, like a guy you'd known for a while the entire time was stalking you and waiting for the perfect moment to kill you! He swears!

He'll begin change memories and things you for sure know about yourself

It's all in a futile attempt to change his reality to be yours as well

Namjoon - Overprotective

Joon will go to war over you

If anyone dares to touch you he's instantly onto them, attacking, yet he picks his fights well

Being connected to money knows men in both high and low places, willing to do anything for a buck

Joon will never get his hands dirty messing with shit like that. He's too busy pampering and protecting you to worry. Unless it's a instant thing that he can't wait to maliciously organize. He will take that risk to make you safer

Yet his overprotection is smothering, he'll lock you away and make you believe that your in danger 24/7

The world is dangerous and under his care you'll be safe and loved!

Yoongi - Possessive

He loves making the world aware of how yours his and his only

You belong to Yoongi.

He'll show that possession based on how you act, be good and he'll leave a few hickeys and what not, nothing too big of a deal

Yet act out of line and that turns into more permanent means such as tattoos, which he will gladly pay for

This possessive side of him also comes out when it comes to the people you surround yourself with,Yoongi often picking your “bad” friends off one by one claiming that he knows what's best for you

In the end your utterly alone, Yoongi controlling every aspect of your social life, always seemingly upping the stakes everytime you act out of line

Hoseok - Clingy

He can't live without you

So anytime you get iffy and are about to leave he makes threats to not harm you but harm himself keeping you trapped in this perpetual loop of not leaving him out of pity for him

This man will spend every second with our and if he doesn't he swears he's dying

If you aren't living together, he will blow up your phone 24/7 and even a couple of minutes late he goes into a frenzy and blows up your phone even more, then using that as an excuse to come over

Once he sees that your fine he just kind of stays there not wanting to leave, and he will find the smallest task to do in your house

When it comes to him actually taking out people he sees as bad for you, he does that in complete secrecy. He didn't want to scare you away

The one thing about him is that he rarely gets mad because by him getting mad he can scare you away and why would he ever want that

Jimin - Manipulative

Jimin can lie like a mf.

He's probably done it straight from the start, using his persuasion to make himself more appealing to him

The worst part is that Jimin remembers his lies, so he keeps up with what's he's told you and what he hasn't

A prime example is that he's told you that Wednesday nights he gets busy with hanging out with his friends, a form of designated him time. That was a cover up only used once while he killed a perv that came on to you constantly at work, but Jimin kept this up always leaving Wednesday nights, having that be some sort of allotted time for him to get his anger out and fuck up anyone who fucks with you

He's also always painted others a villian when you find out about some of the things he'd been doing, like telling your friends off and demanding for them to leave you alone

Hed claim that they'd hurt him or were planning to hurt him, and how could you say he was wrong, he was the most honest man you met your entire life

If you only knew how often he'd been lying just to keep you around

Taehyung - Obsessive

He has a shrine. That's right a shrine.

That's how obsessed Taehyung is.

His shrine is filled with little things he's kept as a form of remembrance to you. Like a strand of your hair or a pair of your panties he'd kept after snooping around in your room

And he will not let up his obsessive stalking and spying when you eventually decide to get with him and be official

When it comes to murder he has no qualms with doing it, plus he can just keep on hiding and hiding it

He just hides it better, and most his behavior is seen as romantic to you since well, you are a couple

He just doesn't know how to act in a relationship… right?

Jungkook - Self Indulgent

Literally everything he does with you or too you is for his own gain

Being with you, all apart of his own gain. Not only are you attractive but you will stay with him no matter what he does out of fear! That's perfect for him

He's a creepy dude, and won't shame you for thinking that, he's powerful too. His status just speaks for itself

Even when he kills for you, he makes sure that he gets some gain from it too, without that gain for the both of your or the couple as a whole, why would he even worry about it

[paperstorm]

I think most people think all gaslighting is malicious but it doesn't need to be. Gaslighting (especially when it's cultural) can be done unconsciously or unintentionally, or perhaps even intentionally with an awareness of impacting the other person but not realising that the impact is harmful.

For example - when you try to express an unpopular opinion but it's just dismissed or people behave like they can't understand how or why you could possibly think that, even when you try to explain. Imo ppl often react like that because they don't WANT to put in the effort to understand or deal with the discomfort of a new/unusual idea. They probably don't mean to criticise your intellectual capabilities but if it happens for long enough or often enough, it's easy to begin thinking "I must be dumb/stupid, I must have bad taste, etc."

Another example is when you're trying to get your point across but the other person disagrees with you by addressing everything else except the key point you're making. For example, with the Carlos situation, if someone says "I dislike his s4 plotline cz it doesn't fit properly with the earlier seasons", the general response (not including you in this) is "oh but it's totally possible for someone of his background to do what he did". Um yeah, but that wasn't the point? The point was that the show messed up the execution of a perfectly plausible storyline. But the execution is never addressed generally, instead the discussion is repeatedly directed to the motivations of the character. Which leads to the feeling of "am I shouting into the void? can ppl not hear me? am I stupid for thinking this when most others don't even think the problem exists? etc etc"

Sorry to go off on a rant about this in your inbox. But if always drives me up the wall when people get offended about words like "consent" and "gaslighting" being used, just because they don't realise that there's levels to those concepts.

I think that you're right, there certainly are levels. And some of the things you described could fall under the larger umbrella of the term depending on the specific circumstances. I think people get their hackles up pretty quick tho because gaslighting is a very specific term. It describes a method of emotional abuse where someone's sense of reality is repeatedly called into question in order to gain psychological power over them. It is manipulation with the intent of making them completely vulnerable to their abuser because they can't trust their own mind anymore. And The Internet™ (sweeping generalization, I know) seems to have somewhat decided it is actually a catch-all term that applies to things like any time someone said something that doesn't reflect your perspective or whenever someone disagreed with you and didn't immediately acquiesce when you demanded they change their mind. So people are, understandably, going to be pretty instantly offended if you accuse them of intentional emotional abuse when what you really mean is "you're kind of being a dick."

There is all kinds of dickish behaviour that doesn't qualify as gaslighting, like being dismissive or being unnecessarily rude or arguing with a point someone wasn't making (people do this to me all the time on here so I feel you on that one. The whole "I like mozzarella cheese" "oh so you HATE CHEDDAR???" phenomenon. It is endlessly frustrating when someone is putting words into your mouth and getting mad at you for something you didn't say. It is an unkind and lazy and bad faith way to interact with someone. But that doesn't necessarily make it gaslighting.) Things go both ways, too. People are allowed to just straight up disagree with you and not be interested in taking the time to understand your position. Like it would be nice if they were willing to hear you out and be open to a different perspective, but you aren't entitled to demand that they do so and they aren't being abusive if they don't want to, especially over something as ultimately inconsequential as a difference in fictional character interpretation. People can just say 'I don't agree' or 'I don't see it that way' and move on. Idk. I see what you're saying, I honestly do. And I can see how that would be super frustrating and lead to not a very nice fandom experience. But it's just really complicated.

[dgcatanisiri]

I genuinely don't want to be the guy encouraging harm on the actual writers of things. Y'know, that's a dick thing to do, writers don't deserve that, and a lot of times if there's something bad that slips through, it's probably more through well-meaning misunderstandings or encroaching deadlines preventing a better draft, things like that, it's not intentionally malicious.

But suffering through what Andromeda does with Gil, MAN do I genuinely feel the urge to reach through time and space and punch his writer in the face for the fact that he wrote a gay storyline in the most homophobic way possible.

Like it's not enough that he already reduces Gil to an accessory in the story of Jill's baby rabies, trapping him in a toxic friendship that we don't even get to call out as such, just have Gil wave off the concerns with "we ride each other like that" - Hell, if you're introducing your so-called "best friend" with the fact that she openly calls you a problem for being gay, which is what complaining about him not going to be in a reproductive relationship is, THAT'S A CRY FOR HELP. Subconsciously, it's acknowledging that this is not a good relationship and you want out.

To say nothing of how Gil will tell Ryder that Jill will say he "has a civic duty as a man" to reproduce. COMMENTING ON PEOPLE'S REPRODUCTIVE CHOICES IS BAD WHETHER THEY ARE FEMALE OR MALE.

You know none of this would fly if Gil and Jill swapped positions in this story. But because Gil's a gay guy...

But it really is worse that in zeroing in on the end point of "gay dads" it COMPLETELY ignores the fact that routinely, queer couples easily pass up the idea of becoming parents - it's more work than they're willing to go through, they live lives that aren't conducive to having/raising children, they have more passion for other things...

Like I'm not saying that queer couples can't or don't have kids, of course not. But, as a result of it being a situation you have to actively work at when you're queer, you're also more aware of the extensive labor that goes in to the act, and more willing to say that the effort is not worth the result for you.

And this storyline makes no allowances for that throughout almost the whole thing - the first time Gil brings up the concept, at no point does Ryder say "no, I don't want kids." It's just "where's this coming from?" and then "oh, you just realized this is going to call for people to reproduce?" As if a massive colonization effort like this wouldn't account for people who would be drawn in BECAUSE they tend to have a wanderlust and don't want to be tied down, or have a generous margin for error in reproductive population in the event of death in its myriad forms striking these people? So reproduction is NOT mandatory, and treating the colonists like they're salmon, especially when NO ONE ELSE is having this pressure (and we have things like the Vetra or Jaal romances, where there will absolutely be no offspring happening the biological way, but THEY'RE not getting pressured about THEIR "civic duty" to reproduce...)...

Then of course there's that bullshit of Gil saying that "[his father] brought me in to the world, maybe that's enough," which... This is NOT a statement you will hear from a person who had an absent parent. Never. Not a chance in hell. Even when you accept that your absent parent was not a part of your life by their choice and not because of something you did, that is still enough to say that "no child deserves to feel like their parents don't care about them."

And we REALLY should talk about how quickly they proceed to throw a baby into this mix - the game is justifiably nebulous about the time frame that takes place across, but we're still likely only talking a time frame of maybe a couple of months through the whole game, considering the length of the Ryder twin's coma and how it's not treated as concerning with how long they were out. And this is a relationship that you want to throw a child into? At maybe three months of KNOWING one another? Even acknowledging that by the time the baby arrives, it'd be closer to a year... If this were a het couple having a baby, you would ABSOLUTELY be questioning the wisdom of immediately throwing a baby into that set up.

But, y'know, BioWare wanted the brownie points of "gay dads!"

The one - ONE! SINGULAR! - thing I will give this shit sandwich passed off as a character arc is that Ryder can, at the decision point, outright say "no" to having a child, and Gil accepts it without question.

But then they just HAVE to undermine that by both bringing up the fact that Jill is pregnant afterwards ANYWAY, that if they're not dads, they'll still be uncles, that they're locked in without question to be part of random stranger's family plans AND the fact that there is no kiss on Meridian between Ryder and Gil unless they're having kids, so PUNISHING the people who don't have kids, which, as I keep hammering, IS ENTIRELY VALID a choice.

This is as heteronormative a storyline you can have while still ostensibly being a story about gay people.

I don't regret being part of #MakeJaalBi. But I DAMN. WELL. wish that the same mobilization effort had manifested to have Gil's entire storyline ripped out and replaced with something that actually got read by sensitivity readers. Because I refuse to believe this got anywhere within twenty miles of one.

[firesnap]

you aren't getting into the crimeboys abuse discourse?

Is there discourse or is it just people arguing semantics on ksusha's post?

I said in Socratic server yesterday, in the most dramatic and extreme example I could give, it's the difference between manslaughter and murder. Both manslaughter and murder end in death, but there's level of required intent and circumstances to elevate it on a legal level from one tier to the next. Manslaughter is saying it happened but the death was more a consequence of another action the intended effect. Murder is going in, with some level of knowledge, that you're likely to cause fatal harm or with that being the goal.

There isn't a term for abuse with mitigating circumstances that I'm aware of right now -- with disclaimer that I know barely anything about therapy and psychology. It's not malicious harm, but it doesn't negate that it happened. It's okay to acknowledge that Tommy sustained some long lasting scars from Wilbur. It's okay to admit that Wilbur knew, on several levels, he was hurting Tommy to some degree -- even if it was because he was trying to hurt himself. He still did it. Tommy still lives and mentions it and it still paints their relationship.

Honestly, I think the right take is that an abusive dynamic is not what the content creators meant for us to get from it, but abuse itself was a consequence of the story they did tell of a kid standing too close to an explosion hoping he could stop it.

So, uh, rambling, my take is that there was abuse, but they don't have an abusive dynamic? Hope that makes sense.

[0junemeatcleaver0]

Feeling just a wee bit torn re: attempting to heal the rift in the fandom. For, like, several reasons.

Not the least of which is the matter of theory vs. praxis. Everyone I have personally spoken to in this fandom has seemed to be on the same page. Racism is bad. Pedophilia is bad. Transphobia is bad. Etc.

But we're gonna have a damned hard time getting to the praxis bit if we can't even agree on how the stuff above actually manifests in a harmful way.

Not liking the casting for the new show doesn't automatically make you a racist. It simply doesn't. There are many non-malicious reasons for being hesitant to accept Jacob!Louis ranging from "I don't trust white showrunners to handle his story with the level of care it deserves" to "even from what we've seen of him in the Louis garb, he just looks like Some Guy™️ (I feel this way about Sam personally--I really think the only one ethereal looking enough to be a convincing vampire is Bailey tbh).

Shipping is not pedophilia. Can it squick you personally? Sure. I'd it well within your right to not want to engage in it? Also yes. There are ways to block things tagged for content you don't wish to see. But exploring power dynamics in fantasy is not the same thing as condoning real life abuse. Full stop. I've already reblogged a great break down debunking the notion that fiction negatively affects reality in any meaningful way and while the post is written in the aggressive tone of someone sick of having to have the same tired argument for the umpteenth time, it is worth a read.

And from what I've been able to gather, most of us are aware of and have blocked that one fuckhead TERF. Good on us for immediately agreeing on something and no, that's not sarcasm. Good job team.

And as far as praxis goes. Well. Again we're gonna have to reign it in and be realistic about what the "how" is going to look like.

Which is where I should probably address my own role in all this. Because I know as discussions continue, this post will make it onto the dash of someone I have long since blocked and they will immediately see it and think, "that's rich, coming from you".

And perhaps. We've all seen the callout post I made a while back. And it's hard for me not to continue to stand by everything I said. I still think that a lot of the white folks who were most vocally calling others (on this platform specifically) racist aren't great at allyship work. With the clarity of hindsight, I think that stems from being young, growing up under surveillance culture, and living in an era where slacktivism feels like the only thing available to them. The cause isn't malicious, even if the effects are.

Do I regret some of my phrasing and things I overlooked? Yeah. When going over the "listen to POC bit", I should have delved deeper into the fact that, quelle surprise, POC aren't a hive mind. You'll hear differing opinions. There's a lot of nuance there and you're going to have to cast your opinion net pretty wide, listen to all these different opinions, and extrapolate from there. Because having 1-2 black friends who agree with you means fuck all in a world where Candice Owens exists. People with opinions that are ultimately harmful to themselves exist in every group, sorry to break it to you. Allyship is hard because it requires building a very nuanced lens through which to view the world. It requires you to acknowledge the Candice Owneses of the world while recognizing the pain and fear that led them to having the opinions they do, as well as listening to and engaging in meaningful, educational discussions with people who hold opinions you view as ignorant. It's work. That's what makes it work. Screaming at someone will not change their mind. Trying to rationally 'debate' someone with illogical opinions will not work because they didn't use logic to form those opinions. And that's hard work! But it does work and it's worth it.

And I don't know that I drove all of that home in my original post.

Do I regret dunking so hard on SM at the end of that post? Yes and no. Working on yourself as a person is a continuous journey and while intellectually I know that the "bully the bullies" approach I took in high school (and that post) stems from growing up in a carceral society where punishment is in much higher a regard than harm reduction and education, I also won't lie to you and claim that deep down I don't sometimes feel like a good tongue lashing isn't earned on a 1:1 basis.

Which is another sidebar point, which is we should all be honest about where we may have individually dropped the ball here, and be honest with ourselves about why we did it to prevent such instances in the future.

At the end of the day, if I'm being 💯 honest, the only way in which I feel remorse for the end of that post is the constant wondering I've done since publishing it about how my vitriol may have impacted SM's friend group. Could they have otherwise seen him as being a disingenuous snake before having to ultimately oust him for treating his friends poorly? I may never know.

Yes, I have been told about that. Alexa, play Everybody Talks.

Anyway. Praxis.

Whatever we all decide moving forward, we all need to be on the same page if we're going to make this thing work. But I think before we get to that point, we're all gonna have to bury the hatchet, whatever that's gonna look like for those involved in whatever beef.

🤷‍♀️

[eowyn-is-a-radfem]

Do you think that cis people like me get to define what it means to be trans? Nah, it’s trans people right? I totally agree with what I think you're saying, which is that every trans person experiences dysphoria differently- physically, socially, sexually, etc. But that's not what I'm talking about.

I'm referring to people who decide to align themselves with the trans community in order to feel accepted- but for reasons other than actually being trans. One example is girls who hate what female socialization has made them feel, and recognize the societal perks of being seen as male (or just anything but female) and so they identify as nb or male. Then there are the trans guys that call themselves f*gs and shit like that. Like really? The worst is the creepy grown men who have a fetish for wearing panties and skirts who self-insert into lesbian porn to the point of "identifying" as lesbians. A truly garbage subset.

Mostly, I think it's kids trying to find their way through identity exploration. And that’s great. But that's not what the trans community is for.

Trans people aren't just misfits, gnc, figuring stuff out, etc. They have dysphoria and do whatever they need to do to feel comfortable with themselves. And sure, some trans people choose not to have bottom (or top) surgery. But it's not because they've always been perfectly fine with their genitals. That's a cis person.

I don’t include people who appropriate the suffering of trans people in my feminism. I don’t include people whose ideology and actions trivialize that suffering. I made a (half) joking post on my very obviously radfem blog about this, using “terf” as a play on words. 

Your knee-jerk reaction to my post makes me think you’re either the kind of person I’m referring to, or you've had some pretty harmful rhetoric drilled into your psyche. I don’t think you have any malicious intent, but I’m trying to make you aware of a wider perspective- and that things have... ya know, consequences. So much of modern "trans ideology" that y'all hate us for disputing actually harms trans people. It harms women.

Enforcing gender stereotypes helps no one. Not identifying with the things society tried to brainwash you into being DOES NOT automatically make you trans. The absence of "feminine" traits does not make a trans man, and the absence of "masculine" traits does not make a woman. Dysphoria does.

Modern trans ideology, MOGAI, TRAs, etc. do nothing but put people into even smaller boxes, further alienate people outside of these echo chambers, and reinforce principles of misogyny, homophobia, and in some cases even rape rhetoric ("if you don't suck my girldick you're a bigot/transphobe" kind of thing).

Most radfems are ex-libfems. If you want to read up on why, look up the tags ex libfem, detransitioned/detrans, transmed/truscum, stuff like that to start. Read, read, read. Whatever your stances, just be informed. 

Yeah I’m a terf - a transTRENDER exclusionary radical feminist