#i like my men bald with attitude problems and trauma

[pseudolife-archived4]

every once and a while on my personal blog i'm reminded of this interview from 2022 where elliot talks about how happy he is to see someone "who looks like me, or identifies like me being celebrated as a hero." in reference to gaz. implying he's gay. and i start to cry because it really be like that. gaz is gay. gaz is gay in canon, and elliot actively ships gazprice. and then i think about CANON LESBIAN KATE LASWELL talking about her fucking WIFE. and bisexual alejandro as confirmed by alain mesa. and how fuckin, neil actively goes out of his way to search and like soapghost on twitter (please, we have ALL SEEN THE LIKES, THE REPOSTS, THE UNPROMPTED AND EXCITED TALKING ABOUT IT) and how sam is EXACTLY IN THE SAME BOAT (and i suspect this is why soap was killed because YA CANT HAVE GHOST BE GAY NOPE he is the cishet male fantasy character despite... everything.), and that yulian ACTIVELY searches the makarov tags on social media (please note: NOT HIS NAME. AND NOT #MAKAROV BUT SIMPLY JUST MAKAROV AND MWIII) and SHARES ALL THE ART INCLUDING GAY SHIP ART with his fans in a group chat in instagram (YES BITCH, I AM IN THAT AND YES BITCH, HE GIVES OUT CREDIT. AND IF HE IS ALERTED TO STOLEN ART, HE CORRECTS HIMSELF IMMEDIATELY AND GOD I LOVE YULIAN MORE THAN I LOVE BREATHING) BUT HE DOESN'T HAVE TO DO THAT. HE DOESN'T HAVE TO DO ANY OF IT??? He also ACTIVELY LIKES art he's not even tagged in with ships with Makarov and other characters in the series. (1, 2) (he also.. likes ghostsoap???? again an unprompted LIKE ON TWITTER) but also that stefan (nikolai) has actively liked and retweeted nikprice art before and also he's really into the deadpool/colossus ship and that's a WHOLE ASS OTHER THING SURE BUT LMAO I LOVE! SUPPORTIVE! ACTORS!

I guess what I'm trying to get at is this: COD was probably not made intentionally for us, but the cast has made it so, of their own free will.

They've taken military propaganda and remixed it square enix style for people who don't get to see themselves represented in media ever, especially as heroes. (allow me to borrow Elliot's wording, it's so so so important okay.)

Well, except Vova Makarov.

And, yanno, the fact that the boys are literal war criminals. But you know what I mean aha.

THE CAST HAS MADE THIS A WELCOMING SPACE FOR THE LGBT+. AND THAT'S SO FUCKING RAD.

AND SOMETIMES I THINK WE NEED TO SIT BACK AND THINK ABOUT HOW COOL THAT IS. BECAUSE NOT A LOT OF OTHER FANDOMS AND SHIP SHIT IN MEDIA GET THAT KIND OF SUPPORT???

SO. NO MORE SHIP WARS. ONLY APPRECIATION FOR THIS CAST AND HOW GREAT THEY FUCKING ARE.

but also for fucks sake can i get some yuri content that man was so barking hot i'm still fuming about it.

[genderkoolaid]

Hi!

I (24 nb) am having a serious issue with girls my age being quite misandric and using radfem rhetoric in their speech.

The issue is I understand their fear and mistrust of men in patriarchy and with many of them having horror stories to share about bad heterosexual relationships. But i am deeply uncomfortable with misandry and i don't know how to effectively point out that no it's not good feminism to hate on men.

Do you have any resources you could recommend me to build a good argument? I want to be prepared for this kind of discussion because it keeps happening more and more frequently.

I know it's not the main topic you cover on your blog but as it is closely related to transandrophobia I was hoping you (or your followers) could still give me some advice.

I wish you a wonderful day

My advice would be to start with talking about the negative impact of misandry on women first (although don't use the word misandry, at least at first). Starting off with "it hurts men" in any regard will likely not go over well, but if you first bring up the issue in relation to a group they already really care about, they'll be more likely to listen. Also, I would reaffirm that having trauma or bad associations with men isn't the problem, they aren't obligated to associate with men in ways that make them uncomfortable or exhausted, and that they have a right to feel their emotions, be angry, be annoyed, etc. Affirm that your concern is with how their actions and attitudes could be causing real harm to others, and that anger being valid does not mean you don't need to take responsibility for how you choose to act.

Some potential talking points:

When women are perceived as manly or masculine, they tend to get viewed with the worst traits of masculinity: butches and trans women are seen as aggressive, violent predators who prey on sweet, feminine straight/cis women. The patriarchy doesn't just hurt women through their femininity, but through their (real or perceived masculinity as well.

Even inside queer spaces, butches are expected to fulfill toxic masculinity: they are expected to be sexually dominant tops, not be emotionally or physically "weak," not do feminine things, etc. Butches can get ridiculed by others, even partners, for not fulfilling these things. Things like balding and small penises, that are traditionally seen as failures of masculinity in the patriarchy, are also made fun of in queer spaces; it seems like queer spaces have issues with how they deal with (real or perceived) masculinity.

When spaces make jokes about hating men, put a lot of emphasis on gatekeeping men, etc., it makes it a lot harder for trans women and nonbinary people assigned male feel safe. Some trans women & genderqueers might not realize their gender because they are kept out of spaces that could've helped them realize because of how queer & feminist spaces act regarding men. Butch trans women and genderqueers often face heightened scrutiny because of their masculinity, from both inside and outside their communities. (Also, send them this article.)

^ As a result of all of that, maybe we need to be more careful with how we think and talk about masculinity. It seems like we are reusing a lot of negative patriarchal stereotypes about men & masculinity in ways which hurt marginalized people the most.

From there, you can bring up marginalized men: you can talk about how trans men, multigender/nonbinary men, men of color, Jewish men, fat men, disabled men, etc. are negatively affected by negative patriarchal stereotypes about men & masculinity- I emphasis that because its how I would go about referring to "misandry" or "antimasculism" without actually using a word. Since misandry (and anything that sounds similar) is such a trigger word for many, its important to set the foundation that there is a big difference between the MRA concept of misandry, and the transunitist concept of misandry. Transunitist misandry focuses on how sexism & genderism* is used to target marginalized groups (specifically trans* people). Transunitist misandry does not say that misogyny doesn't exist, or that men are oppressed in the exact same way women are; its saying that the patriarchy (as a part of kyriarchy) uses gender and sex to harm not just marginalized women, but marginalized men too.

My goal with this would be to introduce and try to convince them of the idea that Misandry Is Harmful Maybe, and then once they realize how its harmful, bring up the idea that this kind of stuff needs to be named. Once they generally agree with these ideas, I think it will be much easier to help them understand why misandry is bad even beyond marginalized men: because the patriarchy relies on harmful ideas and expectations for men, even as (dominant/non-marginalized) men have a different place and more rewards; because liberationist feminism must be concerned with universal liberation, and that means it must be concerned with everyone's wellbeing and liberation; because we cannot disnantle the master's house with the master's tools, and letting any patriarchal thinking in poisons the well of your feminist praxis; because it just makes you a meaner and shittier person. In my experience people who think in the ways you described are resistant (not necessarily for bad reasons) to any kind of criticism towards sexism/genderism towards men, so my tactic would be starting with areas (like women) that they are concerned with not hurting and show how misandry hurts that group. Connecting the harm of this way of thinking to something they care about is going to make them more open to seeing it as an issue in general.

*I use "sexism" to describe the system of oppression based on physical sex, and "genderism" to describe the system of oppression based on gender identity/presentation/roles.