#i love being a lesbian. i love the word lesbian. i love describing myself as a lesbian

[ilovefredjones]

lesbian lesbian lesbian lesbian LESBIAN!!!!!!! IM A LESBIAN!!!!! I LOVE LESBIANS!!!!!! I LOVE LESBIANISM!!!!! LESBIAN!!!!!! i’m a lesbian and i love being a lesbian!!!!!!! LESBIAN!!!!!!!!!!

[walnutcookie]

ive had an. Intersting relationship with my aromanticism honestly.

[cowboy-heart]

'interview with a butch' - a fake interview reflecting on butch-femme dynamics! inspired by the amazing piece by @llovely, which you can read here :)

(ID below read more)

[an original, interview-style poem called 'interview with a butch':

when did you know you were butch? I knew by the time I was sixteen, but that’s only when I found the word. I’ve been butch since the day I was born, at least since I was just a few months old and threw an earth-shattering tantrum whenever my mum tried to put me in a dress. (both laugh) your poor mum!

I remember being a little butch knight, chivalrous even before I was double digits. my best friend only lived up the road from school, but her parents were running late and she was scared to do it herself. so I walked her up the hill, her arm linked in mine, pride balancing on my chest. and when I got her to her door, I said that we should kiss like adults do when they say goodbye, and we took it in turns to kiss each other on each cheek. when I walked home I felt something the size of a boulder in my stomach, but I didn’t know what it meant yet, just that there was something about myself that set me apart.

how did you feel with your first femme? oh, man, even for a writer that’s hard to find the words for. (laugh) let’s put it this way: before I had my first femme, I always felt like something was missing in my relationships – not just in the relationship itself, but in me. I felt broken and wrong, unsatisfied and selfish. I thought that maybe I just had too high expectations or something. hell, even with sex I felt like something was missing, like I couldn’t find my own desire.

But then, then I had my first femme. How graphic can I be here? (laugh) as graphic as you want! okay, good!

watching my stomach hang over my harness, long nails in my hips, I felt like I had a second sexual awakening. I felt the most present in my body I’d ever been, and like I could be in them forever. I didn’t feel dissatisfied, or wrong. when their hand held mine and played with my fingers I felt lightning shoot through me. it was like realising I was a lesbian all over again. but even outside of romance, femmes are my friends, my family, my community. talking to femmes, being around femmes, I’ve never felt so seen and loved. I can handle every sharp look, every slur thrown my way, just because my armour was polished by femmes.

do you find your roles restrictive? they’re liberating. I think sometimes people see me and think that I had to fit into this constrictive box, that I disallowed myself to enjoy anything feminine. the reality is that for butches, we find the word we’ve been searching for our whole lives. I can’t even remember finding the word, isn’t that crazy? it felt second nature. it somehow perfectly described everything I’d ever felt, exposed me to a community of people who were just like me outside of my Tory town! (pause)

I think there’s a tendency even in leftist, LGBT spaces to think that masculinity is oppressive, and femininity is liberating and oppressed. but it’s really not like that. we’re punished for deviating from our assigned gender, whether you’re a masculine woman, or a feminine man, or something in between the two. I’ve had gay men try to convince me to let them do my makeup, I’ve had gay women tell me that they’re “so glad” I don’t have ‘toxic masculinity’ like “other butches”. femininity was a cage for me, something I had to imitate to survive the perils of high school, but it was never me. masculinity liberated me, and it’s not inherently toxic. I love to carry the bags, hold open the doors, cry in pride, protect those I love. and there’s nothing like coming home at the end of the day to a sweet femme, ready to rub my tired muscles. man, I’m not good at concise answers, am I? (both laugh) no, but I love it!

what do you think of people who see your relationship as heteronormative? they’re twats! (both laugh) now, that’s a concise answer! no, no that’s not fair. here’s what I’d say to them:

I see it as…a complex gender performance. no, that makes it sound like it’s play pretend. they’re complex gender��expressions, dynamics, play, desire, euphoria. a butch and a femme together is no more heterosexual than a bear and a twink, a top and a bottom. it’s a dance that we know in our bones, like we knew each other in a previous lifetime and we’re just falling back into our favoured rhythm. even every fumble and awkward gesture is a part of it. we fall into sync and into each other, we tenderise each other’s gender, affirm it, and love every minute of it. we’re not two sides of the same coin, you talk to any butch-femme couple and chances are our priori (edit: interviewee meant propositions) are the same but our conclusions are not; we’re the same side of the same coin, just one is the top of the tail and the other is the bottom of it. is that a euphemism? (laugh) take it as you will!

I’m no man, my femme is no woman, and I’m no less butch when I’m wearing a kiss-the-cook apron and cleaning their kitchen, and they’re no less femme when they’re putting together a shelf or driving me to work. To look at us and see a heteronormative imitation of cisgender predetermination is proof of their own lack of nuance – do you think all dogs are boys and all cats are girls, too? (both laugh)

I think in a lot of ways, butch-femme dynamics are inherently transsexual. or, in the very least, good friends of transgenderism. If you can’t see us for what we are then chances are you’ve got your own internalised gender biases to unlearn.

I’ve always been butch to my bones, but when I’m with my baby I’m on cloud nine. I feel desired, my gender revered and loved.

so, what you’re saying is, you feel seen? I do. we see each other and nurture each other. I’ve never really liked being called ‘beautiful’, but when it falls from the lips of a femme, I know that they’re not seeing me as feminine. I feel most comfortable to explore the depths of both my femininity and masculinity with them; I don’t feel restricted to a role.

maybe that’s what people are missing about it: our homes are temples of gender exploration and devotion.

end ID].

[historyinclusionist]

Harmless Personal Identity coining

Since the term I crafted has been picking up steam in a couple places, I decided it's time to make a official post for it and propose a flag. I'm not good at making flags and you're welcome to redesign the above one if you like this term.

Harmless Personal Identity (HPI) is an umbrella term meant to describe personal identities that people might assign to themselves, coin for others, make pride flags for, and so on, but not any identities that inherently cause harm. If an identity checks the following boxes, it can be called a Harmless Personal Identity.

Harmless: It doesn't encourage predatory behavior, racism, ableism, transphobia etc just by existing.

The identity is being labeled because it makes the person using it comfortable. Not to harm others by deceiving them. For example: LGBT people and systems are not intending to deceive others and simply want to live as they are. This doesn't mean that the term in question is completely free of criticism or couldn't be used in bad faith—I think every term that's ever been coined could be used in bad faith. This means that it may be unusual or strange, especially to people who aren't familiar with the social groups/contexts the term was coined in, but the definition doesn't encourage people to appropriate culture, speak over people of color, commit inc-st/p-dophilia/z-ophilia, or otherwise cause harm to themselves or another living being as part of that identity.

Example: "Transhawaiian" is not an HPI, because by virtue of it existing the coiner and anyone who uses this term are saying that "Hawaiian" is a feeling someone can decide they feel and apply to themself at will, instead of the racial minority that "Hawaiian" actually is.

Personal: Identities which are wholly self-determined and locatable only within that person's interaction with and relations to the world around them.

In general—Other people cannot determine your internal view of yourself because they cannot be you, therefore your identity is personal! Someone who's unfamiliar with xenogenders may tell me that I cannot be -insert gender- because -thing- isn't a gender, but my gender is inside me and I cannot possibly give them the ability to feel it for me. It is located only within me.

This includes labels that get called "contradictory", like identifying as a lesbian and a man at the same time. If you're not familiar with multigender and multisexual lesbian spaces that might sound strange, but gender+presentation and orientation labels are purely self-defined—they are the coiner/anyone who uses that term saying "this is how I would describe my attraction to -insert gender here-," "this is how I would describe my gender that only I can feel inside my head and can't physically show to someone else," and so on. A bisexual lesbian's identity is not saying that all lesbians are bisexual or that they should identify that way; It is saying that that individual determined themself to be bisexual and lesbian.

(This does not extend to, again, racism and cultural appropriation. Queer labels are a self-defined thing, whereas racial and ethnic identity and things like congenital disorders can have self-defined aspects but are largely on a completely different quadrant of identity and can't be "decided" in the same way that queer labels can.)

Identity: A self-applied label or understanding of yourself.

This one is straightforward mostly. I would like to note that this does include things like reclaimed slurs and derogatory words, since in those cases, it's that person who's been called that word choosing "you know what? I AM a -slur- and I love myself for it!" instead of it being used to put them down.

Ok, so what identities specifically?

MOGAI (xenogenders, neogenders, neo/newly coined orientations, presentation terms, neopronouns+etc)

Alterhuman (the entire alterhuman umbrella, excluding any culturally appropriative behavior)

Most plural culture/coined terms for plural experiences

Other identity umbrellas (Dissomei, desirdae, reclaimed xenoidentities, xenonatures, neurowiry,+etc)

And so on. Is it not a radqueer, transrace, transx, etc term or would you call it a "good faith identity"? It most likely fits here.

This also includes a category of personal identity I've been seeing more and more lately, which are these uncategorized identifications with specific words that have pride flags. Some examples: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Ok, cool, do I identify as this?

You would say "I use harmless personal identities"/"I support harmless personal identities"/I coin harmless personal identities"+etc. This is less an identity and more of a faster way to describe these identities.

TD;LR— Identities that are probably niche, but don't harm people like radqueer/transid/transrace/transabled do.

Tagging: @gender-jargon | @neopronouns | @radiomogai | @kiruliom | @aspectsofidentity | @beyond-mogai-pride-flags | @neopronouns | @antiradqueerguy

Alt flags and more things are beneath the cut:

Two alternative flag ideas which I abandoned, but you can use if you want.

The phrasing "locatable only within your interaction with and relations to the world around you" came from a Tumblr post by txttletale (lost link). This term and the author have no affiliation with them, I just thought it was a wonderful way to phrase this concept. This would later inspire me to coin the term History Inclusionist, which then led to me sort of backwards-coining HPI to describe it.

You don't have to be a History Inclusionist to use the term HPI and I won't tell you not to interact with me if you aren't one.

I might make subset flags later. Maybe?

[11/21/2024] I forgot to add that @kiruliom helped me adjust the flag colors. Thank you.

[is-this-yuri]

i think maybe the only thing that can't be yuri is trans men (unless a trans man feels differently about this)

hi let me tell you all a secret

i'm transmasc and also a lesbian. i consider myself butch. i'm in a relationship with a wonderful girl who is also a lesbian, and we joke about being yuri occasionally.

my pronouns are he/him, i have a beard and a deep voice, i've had top surgery, and to the general public i appear to be a cis man. i like it that way! i believe this aesthetic is as far on the butch side of the butch/femme spectrum as you can get. men, even cis men, can be butch. it just happens to be the default for them due to cultural expectations, so we don't generally think of it like that.

i never felt quite comfortable with the gendered expectations of being in a straight relationship. i've been reading yuri since i was a tween, and back then i considered myself a lesbian too. once i realized i wanted to transition to male, i thought i had to let go of the lesbian label, even though i didn't really feel straight. i even felt guilty and creepy for reading yuri, so i stopped doing it for a while.

i've always related to lesbian romance more than straight romance, so i decided to not let go of the lesbian label for myself. i'm also very lucky to be dating such an understanding girl that can look past my flesh shell and love the real me inside, and our love is very gay, despite appearances.

this may be a rare story, but it is real! yuri, yaoi, gay, straight, man, woman, they're all just words we use to imprecisely attempt to describe an infinitely complex reality. all words are like that. we made them up to create pretty much arbitrary dividing lines, and now most people insist on following those lines to a T. even though many people don't even agree on where those lines lie!

the truth is, words are fake. but love is real. self expression is as fluid as the blood in our veins, and true identities are as numerous as individuals.

and while yes, words are useful as a tool to communicate, they should not be mistaken for the reality they attempt to describe. the beauty of a tool that can change is that you can use it however you want. i will respect your words, and i'd want you to respect mine too. we can use different words to describe the same thing and still agree. there's no point in us telling each other we're using the tool wrong, as long as the job gets done.

what i'm saying is we should all take this stuff a little less seriously. describe yourself however you want, and i'll respect that! you can do whatever you want forever. but in a queer and open minded world, nothing and nobody are exempt from potentially being yuri.

[forthelostones]

𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐟𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 ➺ 𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐣𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐲 #4

anderson construction and landscaping had been parked outside your door since you returned home from university. as if the summer couldn't get any hotter, the business owner works overtime in your area. anderson is collecting new, loyal clients of your neighbors, cementing her permanence in your life for the next few months. what's to come of your girlish crush when she keeps showing up?

𝚠𝚊𝚛𝚗𝚒𝚗𝚐𝚜. 18+ (mdni); age-gap, young!reader, older!abby, butch!abby, slow-burn, suggestive language, thoughts of infidelity, ellie ft, smoking/drinking, mentions of parents, nickname: sweetheart, and modern au.

𝚊𝚗. everyone wow thank you so much for the love on for your eyes only! it means so much. here’s something a little different, hope you enjoy. any requests don’t hesitate to drop ‘em, xx jstar.

♫ 𝚙𝚕𝚊𝚢𝚕𝚒𝚜𝚝. hypotheticals by lake street drive ♫

https://arab.org/click-to-help/palestine/

I didn’t bother looking at my watch during our session and somehow I noticed the sun was nearly gone. A fist tightened in my stomach when I realized how long she had been in my presence without me being aware of the fact. I can’t remember a time when my social battery grew instead of depleting. 

Technically, I should be tired since I stayed up filtering through applications and cleaning my entire place simultaneously. But it was something about her that energized me. Even motivated me and made me excited about this project. She gave me a sense of agency, which I haven't felt in the last decade.

“You built these bookshelves, didn't you?” She snorted in disbelief as we traveled to the living room before her departure. 

“I did,” I said, in the kitchen as I fetched myself a beer, feeling proud at the recognition. 

I followed her manicured finger trace at the edge of the panels. She twisted her head sideways to read the dusty titles on the shelf. Even though I only saw her back, I knew her mouth was open in astonishment at my first edition copies of classic books, something I’ve been cultivating for twenty years. I bring the tinted bottle to my lips and stand with my free hand on my chin. 

She tucked her index into an original print of The Well of Loneliness. She looked over her shoulder quickly to check if I was watching her, which I was. I quickly diverted my gaze towards the floor and sipped. “I’ve had that book for a while,” I say. 

“Is it okay if I…” 

Her voice became silent, almost a whisper as if she’d be in trouble if she muttered a word about the novel. 

“Of course. Please.” 

I gesture towards the couch and she pulls the untouched book from the shelf as if it were delicate china and sits on my worn sofa. I bit the corner of my mouth as I saw her sit right where I lay my head and I took a seat on the farthest end away from her. She crossed her legs and brought the grey-shaded book onto her lap. The pages were stale and yellow-ish, almost crumbling under her careful touch. She followed the inside of the spine with her thumb, straightening the first page and a shiver traveled down my spine to my toes. 

“From the library of Abigail Anderson.” Her voice drops an octave, loose and saturated in a sexy chuckle. I wanted her to repeat my name just like that until her voice was hoarse.

I knew my cheeks grew bright red and I had the inclination to press the bottle to my face to cool my embarrassment. The embosser was a gift from an ex-girlfriend and she took the liberty of pressing it into every book I owned, even my most valuable ones. 

“You like that?” I smile, concealing my trembling lip with the neck of the bottle and thumb. 

“I wish I had one but my books aren’t special enough.” 

“What do you like to read?” 

“Same stuff you do.” 

That stuff is novels that exclusively includes women.

Her eyes linger with a glint that can only be described as fervor like she never met someone who read lesbian fiction. I didn’t break eye contact like I had been for the last three hours. I took another sip to hold back a large, toothy grin. Her phone vibrated with another ricochet of text messages, which she continuously ignored. But soon she broke our quiet pact by reading the messages and excusing herself to the next room. Her voice has a quiver in it although hushed. 

“Ellie. I’m sorry I just—okay. Okay. I know I am sorry. It just… Of course, I love you are you—alright. I’ll see you soon.” 

She comes back into the living room without moving back to her original spot. Her face was thick with an emotion I knew all too well. Dread. Maybe she needed an excuse to stay longer and I felt okay with that.

“I don’t know if you’re hungry or anything—” / “I’m gonna go—”. 

The jumble of words flusters us both and her grip tightens around her phone. The sight makes me think she could snap it in half right there. Ellie, her girlfriend, definitely gave her a stern talking to. The little cat-like girl I met on the street couldn't have made her feel so small. She brushes a stray hair from her face that wasn’t there. Instead of confidence, I saw her shrink down twice in size. 

“Oh, yea of course,” I rub my hot neck.

Her eyes dart towards the copy of The Well of Loneliness. 

“You can borrow it if you want to.” 

Instead of traveling around the couch, she let her body swipe past me as I rose from the couch. Our clothes mingled in a private dance just before she slipped on her shoes and fiddled with the door. With the book pressed to her chest, she turned to me, a mere two feet away, and thanked me. A silence fell between us. It wasn't awkward, but comfortable. I felt comfortable.

“Anytime, I’ll see you tomorrow?” 

What I wanted to come out as a statement became a question and I resented myself for it. I wanted her to know that I was going to see her.

“Hopefully. ‘Night Ms. Anderson.” 

“Drive safe, sweetheart.” 

A soft I will left her solemn lips and I watched the twinkle of her headlights illuminate my body. I raise my hand to wave her off but she turns her head before I can. I quickly tucked it away in my back pocket. My throat hardened seeing her car drive away.

As I closed the door, the lingering silence of the house struck me strongly. The missing book from the shelf made me feel hollow in a way. I was glad that she took it but I wish... I don't know. I finish my last sip of beer and toss the bottle out. I walk to the bathroom and turn on the shower.

The water offered me a clarity the cool breeze outside could not. I was relishing in a former life that I wish I had done differently. Craving someone who truly understood me and appreciated who I was. I never got that. My heart pumped with anxiety-ridden blood. Painful memories that I shoved away threatened to —

My hands are on the sparkling tiles, spread with 2 inches in between. I press my eyes shut and try to understand where I stand. It feels like the calm beads of water transformed into pebbles. Hitting my skin with an angry vengeance I could not place. The steam inhibits me from getting a deep inhale. I can't move. I open my eyes and soften my knees. I find the strength to reach for the knob and draw my body onto the floor. My knees come to my chest and I count until the water turns cold.

I opened the windows in my bedroom and listened to the chirping of cicadas. I close my eyes and walk backward onto the perfectly made bed. Instantly, my back melted. Why was I denying myself this? I lay with my feet dangling and was disrupted from the lingering sleep by my phone in the living room.

7:30 PM: What have you gotten me into Ms. Anderson?

She sat with the book in her lap, the only blankets around being a plum-colored top sheet. Her legs held the book and a small light illuminated the first page. Her thumb held the right page and her index and middle in the crease. I could imagine how she rubbed them against the paper like earlier. I stared at the photo and fell deeper into the elements of it.

7:35 PM: 400 pages is nothing, You'll do fine.

A bubble appears and vanishes.

7:36 PM: It's actually 448 pages, thank you very much.

7:37 PM: My apologies. 48 extra pages won't kill you.

7:38 PM: You don't know that...

7:40 PM: I think I do.

7:41 PM: Well, we can discuss what you think you know tomorrow...

My fingers twitched to reply but it was clear that she desired to be left alone. I couldn't determine why these casual conversations left my face aching, but they did. I reflected on how long it's been since I went on a date. The number enters my mind and burns slowly like a forest fire. The sides of my head throb as I slip under the blankets.

to be continued...

[cowboyjen68]

Hi!!

I just wanted to ask some advice from one butch to another.

I recently got my dream job of being a warden on a nature reserve (and i love it!), while interacting with people there I get called a young man very often (i am 18 lol) and it gives me euphoria to know im masculine enough to even pass as a man. I've also had some volunteers ask if I was a man or not (despite my feminine name).

But recently I got called a "lady" outside while out with my mother. It drove me INSANE I cried alot.

Don't get me wrong I do identify as a woman but I hate being seen as a lady.

I've even thought about using he/him pronouns recently and changing my name but i'm too scared to as most people won't understand bc im still a lesbian.

Is this strange?

ps love u and ur blog lots xx

This is an easy answer because I was 18 once and looked enough like a teenage boy that I got "hey sport" and "hey young man" all the time, especially when in my work clothes. I worked for The Mayor's Youth Corp in Iowa City in the summers of my 15th and 16th year. Mom and Dad let me get a work permit AND bought me a used Datsun Pickup so I could drive myself the 20 miles there and back each day.

I was a volunteer with the Corp of Engineers youth from 14 to 16 and Dad knew I was super excited about this job. Mom was not thrilled that I wanted to cut my hair but my "grand mullet" was really hot under the hard hat in the summer heat of Iowa. (in the 1980's boys and girls had the short in front long and permed in back look) We compromised and I cut the sides really short. (photo of my me at 16 in my uniform for reference)

Using "he" would never have occurred to me because "EWWW Boys". This is not to say, however, that I hated being mistaken for a boy, on the contrary, it felt good. When someone thought I was a young man it meant they treated me as such. They didn't talk down to me, I knew they assumed I was capable and willing to get dirty. I knew unconsiously that along with the mistaken identity came many perks. This was nothing I analyzed but little girls see very early on the difference in treatment they recieve from their brothers, male cousins and neighborhood boys. This difference leads us to become negotiators to control our circumstances and not entittled to treatment based on our skills and actual personalies.

When an adult recognized me as a boy, even for a second at first glance, I knew I didn't have to prove myself. They, for an instant, assigned to me words like "strong, capable, demanding etc". No negotations required.

When someone realized I was a girl they literally had a change in their face. They smiled at me, softened their voice. When I was called "young lady" or "Miss" it always seemed to be backed my the worst assumptions (in my mind anyway). Lady is steeped in all kinds of traits I didnt want assigned to me. "quiet, weak, likes to dress pretty"OR "motherly, submissive, meek" Nothing good in my teen brain, that is for sure. Lady felt so OLD, so married to a man and reliant on him for survival, so polyster pants and ugly flats and scratchy blouses with a flower imprint. NONE of these things are inherent to being a woman or even socially forced on us but that is not how things work sometimes. Words that describe people get stereotypes and myths and traits attached to them all the time. Woman and girl are no different.

I can tell you, the best feeling in the world when I was in that job was when my supervisor, who damn well knew I was a young woman, trusted me with all the same tasks as the boys. Who valued my opinions and abilities equally to the young men. He took time to teach me what I didn't know, just like with them and didn't assume I couldn't or didn't want to learn things on the job. He didn't shame ANYONE for not being strong enough or for getting tired or needing a break.

Don't let the assumptions of others force you into another box of conformity. You don't need a boys name or to use any pronouns you don't feel connected to just to please others. In fact, none of that effort will change perceptions of those around you. I can promise that one day being called Lady will just be another word that you can hear and know it does not change your personality or your interests or control the hope you have for your future. What does waste a lot of time and energy is trying to adjust things in your life to fit incorrect or snap assumptions about you as a person. You can never control the thoughts of those around you but what you can do is stop worrying about it and enjoy YOU.

You have a job you love and are sure to thrive in. You are solid in your sexuality and love of women, you are in a unique position to possibly change the perceptions of others when they think of "young women". Your interactions with the public are sure to effect the assumpions of at least some people when they think of young women and their roles in our society.

Congratulations on your new career and I bet you rock that uniform.

[thyfleshc0nsumed]

definitely ignore this if it doesnt interest you as a question but i'm wondering, you call yourself a butch , does that mean that you feel attraction only towards hard-line women? i'm interested because i've long felt a kinship with the butch identity and the promise that it makes to the individual and the community, but i'm not sure if i'd be considered a lesbian, per se. i don't see gender as a factor to be considered in my sexuality at all. for context im 19 and questioning my gender and sexuality after coming out of a 6 year relationship (11 months ago now, haven't dated since.) and i've been trying to get different peoples perspectives.

-modestmasc

Hi, thanks for the question.

Others may disagree but to me, being butch is an adjective first and an identity second. Frankly, I didn't choose to be butch just like I didn't choose to be CAMAB. I get to choose to embrace it, I get to choose to find it a meaningful experience, I get to choose to call myself butch, and I get to choose to love my experience being butch, but I don't get to choose to be or to not be whatever it is that "butch" is.

So, are you butch?

There's a phrase ive heard a couple hundred times over the last two years: "you're a member when you say you are." I like this phrase a lot. If you say you are, I don't get to doubt you. If you don't say so, I don't get to doubt you on that either.

So, are you butch?

We have such a beautiful variety of experiences, and such a wide variety of ways we talk about them. Many butch people relate butchness to "lesbian masculinity." Doesn't land for me, mostly on account of the 'masculinity' bit. To me, being butch is its own thing. I don't consider myself masculine in almost any way, I'm just butch, whatever that is. It's not so much that I think those who describe it like that are "wrong," it's just not been my experience.

The word 'lesbian' in there doesn't function to say "women who are only attracted to women, instead, it just means "women who are attracted to women." Even so, I personally would disagree with the premise that butchness is exclusive to gay people (I say gay as an umbrella term here), I mean I've met some butch ass heterosexual women.

Certainly as gay people, our experience of butchness is going to be different than that of a heterosexual, but like that's true for every facet of identity that can be paired with butchness. My experience as a young fat white bisexual TS butch woman is gonna be different than a middle aged able bodied Black person who's butch, and their experience is gonna be different than an elderly Puerto Rican butch lesbian. But no matter what, we're still all butch.

So, are you butch?

I consider myself bisexual. No fucking doubt I love men. Doesnt stop me from being butch.

So, are you butch?

[vidavalor]

Hello! I brought leek and potato soup this time! Hope you like something hearty 😊

Not a question but an observation: in the pub in s2, when Aziraphale admits heaven is sending someone to check on the 25 Lazarii miracle, and that he told them he made Nina & Maggie fall in love because that’s the first thing he could think of, Crowley says: “Do a little miracle, wiggle your fingers about, Nina falls for Maggie, problem solved.” And Aziraphale replies: “Ah, miracles don’t work like that.”

So. I guess this means that he tried, and found out the hard way that it doesn’t work, because heaven clearly doesn’t seem to be aware that miracles don’t work like that 😬

Who do you think he tried to cupid into being together? And also, I don’t think Crowley has such a huge knowledge gap about miracles that he wouldn’t know this already, so do you think he’s saying something else in ineffable husband speak here, too?

Allo @procrastiel 💕 Thanks for the soup! It sounds amazing. Coffee? Banana bread? *shares* It's fantastic, if I do say so myself. 😊

I think the scene you're talking about is saying something a little different if you look at two words the show is messing around with in this and other scenes-- passion and miracles-- so, let's do that for a bit...

In the pub scene, Crowley and Aziraphale actually don't have a gap in their understanding of "how miracles work" when it comes to love. They're actually just, initially, speaking of two different types of emotions: a pash versus a passion.

Because of Aziraphale's use of the word pash to describe his impression of Maggie's feelings for Nina-- and his tone when he does so-- Crowley mistakenly believes at the start of the scene that Aziraphale isn't very invested in Maggie and Nina having an actual relationship. Because of this, Crowley correctly states that doing a miracle would solve their issue. Miracles, in this case, do actually work like this. They can influence-miracle someone to replicate infatuation if they wanted to, which is what Crowley is suggesting, only because his impression from how Aziraphale has phrased Maggie's feelings versus the direness of them keeping Gabriel hidden for everyone's sake has led Crowley to think that such a miracle, while not really advisable, would solve their problem.

Crowley was not present for the scenes Aziraphale had with Maggie prior to the pub scene so he doesn't know how Maggie and Nina came to be roped into this whole 'miracle to protect Gabriel' mess. Crowley, in that moment in the pub, doesn't yet understand that Aziraphale wants to do more about this than just solve the issue when the angels show up to verify the miracle.

He doesn't know that Aziraphale has this other problem happening where he unintentionally hurt Maggie and now he is trying to fix it so he really does ship the shop lesbians now and he wants them to get real deal love.

Aziraphale isn't eager to tell Crowley the details about this at this point because, in doing so, he would have to talk more about his own emotions that led him to say the wrong thing here and he's not ready for that. Instead, he clues Crowley into the fact that he wants to see if they can help the women to fall in actual love without telling Crowley at this point the whole saga of how he messed up with Maggie by rejecting the influence miracle idea with:

"Miracles don't work like that."

By this, Aziraphale means what they both know to be true-- that love doesn't work like that.

Love isn't something they can miracle into existence. They can make someone appear infatuated with someone-- that is within their powers-- but they cannot make anyone actually fall in love. They can miracle up something of a manufactured pash but they cannot miracle up a true passion.

Once Crowley understands that Aziraphale is more invested in this relationship and how it plays out, he is then immediately into playing Cupid-- and also into using coming up with ideas as a way to seduce Aziraphale, romantically suggesting that they try to create a scenario like their own first kiss for Maggie and Nina.

To which Aziraphale, who was just not long ago listening to Maggie-- who barely knows Nina-- sob about a failed attempt at giving Nina, who already has a partner, a record, replies: "Doesn't seem likely," which he means as if to say: there is no way these mortal young ladies who barely know each other and who don't have the slightest idea about romance could ever vavoom the way we did and do and which Crowley playfully takes as Aziraphale jokingly rejecting Crowley's narrative of their romance that has them both dead set, made-for-each-other gone on each other ever since that moment. He grumbles and insists that it's true that if you get humans (them lol) wet and staring into each other's eyes, that it's vavoom, sordid/sorted, and pretends he "saw it in a Richard Curtis film" when they both know exactly what he's talking about.

There is some wordplay in "doesn't seem likely" itself. Seem is homophonic for seam-- part of seamstressing as sexual euphemism-- and likely is of the word like, which can refer to the body (as in, someone's "likeness" and, uh, the like.) Both words are in other scenes as well--("O, Flour of Ssss' Cot Land/When will we see/sea your likes again" 😂)-- but the word choice is mainly just underscoring Aziraphale's whole tone of: um, I wouldn't get your hopes up, dear, I know you love your rainstorms but I'm not sure they are capable of vavooming like us-- it might actually kill them. Please don't break my shop lesbians.

Their initial confusion over this comes from Aziraphale using pash-- British English for an infatuation, or what we in the U.S. refer to as a crush. It's first blush of attraction and not really fully developed. It's puppy love or just thinking someone is attractive without a lot of substance or developed emotion or intimacy. The word comes from passion but, bizarrely, means kind of the opposite of it in many ways, which is part of the wordplay around the word in GO.

Passion was originally a word developed as a result of high up members of Christian theocracy specifically to describe one thing and one thing only: the crucification of Jesus Christ.

It comes from the Old Latin root pati and the Old Latin passio, which mean to suffer and to endure. This word that was originally quite literally created by humans specifically and intentionally to describe the martyrdom of the pivotal figure in Christianity? It is the Grand Dame of Crowley & Aziraphale words because, as we know, it has then been further evolved by humans to also become the foremost word to describe erotic love.

Passion in the erotic, sexual love sense is also in the scene with talk of pash and miracles-- just in synonym form:

Vavoom: Alternatively, va-va-voom: Voluptuously sexy; of, or pertaining to, sensual pleasure; passionate.

It is primarily these definitions-- the erotic and the religious-- that Good Omens is contrasting but the other meaning of passion is part of the wordplay as well. For instance, as we know, there is a non-religious, non-erotic definition of passion and it is just to have a strong emotion for-- or interest in-- something.

If you are reading this post, it could be said that you are a passionate fan of Good Omens. In S2, Mr. Arnold and Mutt are both convinced by Aziraphale to come to The Meeting Ball based on their passions in life-- Mr. Arnold's love of Doctor Who and Mutt's love of the history of magic. Passion, in this definition, can refer just to things about which we are wild but that are not necessarily an erotic pursuit or that have any religious connection.

It's the erotic love definition, though, that is being most directly contrasted on Good Omens with the religious definition. It began in S1 in the 1.03 Cold Open with the Golgotha scene. Here, we had Crowley and Aziraphale in discussion as they watched the beginning of what would become called The Passion-- the suffering and death of Jesus.

As Jesus is being nailed to the cross, Crowley and Aziraphale discuss him and, in the process, the subject of Crowley's name comes up. It remains the most significant thing in the scene and on where the scene ends because the reveal of it-- something we do not fully understand until S2-- is the other definition of passion in the scene.

What we can see in S1 is that Crowley has gone by many names and Aziraphale is well-aware of the reputations associated with those personas that Crowley has been adopting. He sounds a bit jealous over Asmodeus, in particular, whom he-- and we-- know to be the Demonic Prince of Lust. While further story indicates that this is largely something that Crowley is play-acting to make everyone think that he's something that he's really not, it is a thing and Aziraphale is pretending to sound like he's not envious of the idea of Crowley's attentions being elsewhere.

It's off of that pretty terribly disguised jealousy lol that Crowley tells Aziraphale what name he's chosen for himself and it's the one we recognize that he has still in the present. We see that the name seems significant to Aziraphale in some way but we don't yet understand why. As a result, we don't fully understand this S1 scene until after 2.02, because we hadn't yet seen the Job minisode that came chronologically before Golgotha:

As a result of the Job minisode, we now more fully understand that Crowley's confession of sorts was really here, back in 33 A.D.. He changed his name to something with meaning to only himself and Aziraphale and we know now the circumstances that led to why. In doing this and telling Aziraphale, Crowley is admitting to Aziraphale that he's mad about him. The scene is visual wordplay around passion-- The Passion of the Christ and the passion of the Crowley.

So, there's the religious Passion that might become ever more important in a potentially Jesus-oriented S3; there are the passions-- the interests and hobbies of all of the characters; and there's the new pash of Maggie and Nina and its contrasting parallel-- the very old, romantic passion of Crowley and Aziraphale.

So, if Crowley and Aziraphale's language around pash got them mixed about miracles at the start of the pub scene...

...what are miracles to them, exactly?

We've already seen evidence that Aziraphale used the word basically interchangeably with "love" in his "miracles don't work like that." The two of them can perform supernatural miracles so there's always that level of it and there's the human understanding of and definition of miracles in play as well.

To us humans, a miracle may or may not be a word with a religious connotation. Either way, it is an event that is seen as supernatural or divine in its lack of a concrete explanation and its likely inability to be achieved through understood human means. It is always a welcome, positive event. It inspires a sense of joy and wonder in people. It is something magical.

Additionally, if you take apart the word a bit, as remains our strongest wordplay suggestion in the series from its opening war-in-warning shot, you have two other words of note: mir and acle.

Mir is a Russian word meaning peace and also a commune. In the West, it is most familiar to people as the name of the Russian space station in the 1980s and 1990s, which Crowley and Aziraphale probably liked. An acle is a kind of tree... which we could then add to the 'words related to the vavoomy canopy' list.

In true Good Omens form, it's actually the scene after the one in the pub that underlines the fact that the word miracle is part of their vocabulary-- and it makes not only the pub scene make more sense retrospectively but also some moments in S1 (the "real miracle" bit in 1941, Part 1, in particular.) The scene that shows them being a bit arch about the fact that they mess around with the word miracle is The Clue:

As Aziraphale explains the whole "Everyday" record thing happening with the jukebox at the pub in Edinburgh, he says to Crowley with dramatic flourish that is intentionally over-the-top-- even by Aziraphale standards-- that the mystery: "...is, as you might say, 'a miracle'" to which Crowley replies a dry: "Ooh."

Part of the wordplay is that the more usual way to say what Aziraphale says to Crowley here-- even if flirting with someone-- would be to say that the record mystery "is, as one might say, 'a miracle'". Aziraphale said "as you might say...," a joke on Crowley himself and both of them using miracle to mean more than the supernatural actions they were once assigned to perform.

The amusing thing is that we will learn that The Resurrectionist jukebox mystery actually really is a miracle, in all of Crowley and Aziraphale definitions of the word. It's a romantic action-- Gabriel's miracle for Beez-- that parallels the miracles Crowley and Aziraphale do to romance one another.

So, what's magical to the magical Crowley and Aziraphale? What's miraculous to these two who can perform literal, supernatural miracles?

Love.

Miracles are a kind of magic that inspires wonder and brings about feelings of communion, joy and peace. That definition is, arguably, what a lot of people would call the positive emotions associated with being in love.

To Crowley and Aziraphale then, miracles and the miraculous do not just refer to the supernatural but to the romantic.

If love is miraculous, then talk of miracles can also be talk of love.

If love is miraculous, then talk of performing miracles can also be talk, on one level, of making love.

You know what was a 25 Lazarii miracle? You and I the other night. We raised the damn dead, old serpent...

If love is miraculous-- and if talk of performing miracles can be talk of making love-- then performing supernatural miracles can be a form of flirtation and romance.

If love is miraculous, then expressing how precious the peace you find with your partner is to you is reiterating how much you love them-- especially poignant when spoken in the middle of a disagreement.

If love is miraculous, then to use supernatural miracles to alter your partner's space-- really: your shared space-- can be a way to tease or a way to comfort.

If love is miraculous, then performing a joint supernatural miracle together to protect each other and the contentious family that is currently staying in the guest room is basically getting engaged.

If love is miraculous, then all phrases people have that are related to miracles of any kind can also be phrases related to love.

For instance: Real miracle.

A "real miracle" in the human world is a subjective thing, based upon an individual's level of belief in magical thinking but, to humans open to it, something considered a "real miracle" is something both wondrous and true and, if love is miraculous in Ineffable Husbands Speak, a real miracle would be a way to describe true love.

Since Crowley and Aziraphale can perform literal miracles, though, and since they have a wordplay thing... there's also that real is homophonic for reel.

A reel, in this case, being the part of the fishing rod used to reel in caught fish.

A real/reel miracle (in Ineffable Husbands Speak): A supernatural miracle performed by one of them only for the purpose of romancing the other; an action the equivalent of expressing love for each other.

If love is miraculous, though? A miracle does not have to be a supernatural one. Aziraphale, in particular, is especially good at miracles-- acts of love-- performed only with human magic.

Finally, if love is miraculous, then:

"How about The Ritz? I believe a table for two has just *miraculously* come free."

[dykeulous]

about me.

hello! i am apollo and i am aspiring to be an author and an activist someday. i come from a small, underdeveloped “post-socialist” country. i hope my blog will be helpful to everyone, and i try to be as open-minded on most topics as i can be. this is how i would describe myself:

i am a butch lesbian with heavy sex (& social) dysphoria. i would refer to myself as transmasc, and i am still very much trans-identified, as dysphoria has caused me much trouble over my formative years, and it has been making my life a true agonizing hell :)). i approach trans issues with sensitivity and criticism. i try my best not to be black-and-white about things; and i always try to be well-informed before speaking on anything. i love gender acceleration, and i would describe my views as gender critical. i am explicitly anti-racist, anti-capitalist & anti-imperialist. my views align with marxist feminism/proletarian feminism & radical feminism– which is why i would describe myself as a dual system feminist. my analysis & beliefs come from dialectical materialism, rather than idealism, which is why i’ve found myself in opposition with most trans rights activists. i am for abolishing the prison system, and i believe rehabilitation should be the goal, rather than punishment. drug addicts & recovering addicts have a special place in my heart ❤️‍🩹. i’m not vegan, but i appreciate & love all my ecofeminist sisters: i try my best to be vocal about animal liberation & climate activism. i believe the bpd diagnosis is being hyper-sold to female people, and this is because of medical misogyny & institutional sexism– it is being used as new age female hysteria. oh, and i’m also autistic. i love autistic women, and i wholeheartedly want to smash medical misogyny whenever i see how my neurodivergent sisters are being treated. 🇵🇸 FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA PALESTINE WILL BE FREE!!!

my special interest is gender abolition (i’m very very passionate about this!!!) and marxist politics. my current hyperfixations are harry potter (i’m a slytherin 🐍), greek mythology & mlp. i unironically use the word kinnie; my highest kins are severus snape, twilight sparkle and diane nguyen. i love punk rock music, and i love riot grrrl. ask me about ww2, i used to be very hyperfixated on it last year– i reviewed a lot of ww2-themed movies critically & pointed their historical revisionism out. i am a slavic patriot by heart, and will punch a westerner who chooses to ignore our beautiful history. tito, lenin, che guevara, rosa luxemburg apologist. also i’m very interested in soviet history (the night witches are so fascinating!!), north korean culture & cuban cuisine.

if you wish to block me, go ahead. if you don’t, cool. i don’t block people, i allow a wide range of people to interact, and quite frankly, i think dni lists are useless. won’t hold back if you’re going to attack me. will engage in respectful arguments, and also will engage in disrespectful arguments, with the same energy you give me.

check out @pokegyns! it’s a group blog modded by nuancefem discord server members, owned by our precious pikalay @tirfpikachu.

links to some of the posts of mine i find quite useful for people who are going to hate-scroll through my blog, and also for people who are interested in radical feminism, but are scared we’re a hate group.

1. Intersex People, Transitioned Trans Women & Transitioned Trans Men

Are Trans Women Privileged?; Gender Socialization & Transmisogyny

Intersectionality Is Key: Our Issues Intersect, but They Differ

2. Feminist Praxis & Tactics: Separatism VS Proletarian Feminism; My Personal Critique of Radical Feminism

3. Transmedicalists VS Queer Theorists; Transmedicalism: The Sexism, Racism, and Classism

4. Listen to Dysphoric Voices

5. What Is Gender?; Gender Acceleration

6. The Word “Cis”

#ftminism is a tag i use to talk & ramble about transmasc-specific [or transmasc-adjacent] struggles that i feel can be connected to feminism in one way or another. i also sometimes tag transmasc positivity with this.

*Thread: Transness and Radical Feminism Can Coexist*

[stillarandom-radfem]

This post is going to cause controversy here on radblr. I already know that, and I'm ready for it. But there is something that I've just got to get off my chest, here. It's been bugging me for a long time now, but for the longest time, I couldn't quite find the words to describe my feelings.

Here's the thing. It's not that female separatists are wrong, necessarily, with regard to their arguments about male violence. OSA women like myself are at a greater risk of interpersonal violence from men, intimate partner violence does make up the majority of domestic violence statistics, men are the most likely people to rape or murder us, and yes, living without men therefore probably would improve straight and bisexual women's lifespan/overall quality of life in most cases. BUT. The way many female separatists (who are most often lesbians) go about presenting their arguments is not only unnecessarily rude to women who have done nothing to deliberately harm them (and, when it includes such colorful monikers as "dick worshipper" and "cock rider" in it, reasonably comes off as an attack), but it includes many of the same tactics that homophobes use against LGB people to make their point. I'm sure that homophobes doing that stuff to you is hurtful, but I'm also at least 99% sure that heterosexual women who are radfems (or rad-adjacent, if you prefer) aren't the ones leveling those attacks, and don't therefore deserve to be responded to with such ferocity. Two wrongs do not, in this case, make a right. And it needs to stop.

For example, you ask?

Acting like heterosexual relationships must be purely sexual, with no actual love involved whatsoever.

I see LGB people complaining about homophobes doing this to them all the time. "You think our relationships inherently obscene or kinky because you can't picture us actually being in love; all you can think of is the sexual part! You think a sizable chunk of the population is incapable of love or human connection, and that is dehumanizing!" Yes, I have no doubt in my mind that it is. But then look at what you do when you try to call out heterosexual/bisexual women for being with men, and you are doing exactly the same thing to us. You talk about OSA relationships, and the first and, often, only thing you ever bring up is the sexual aspect of them. The word "love" almost never comes up. It's like it doesn't even occur to you that OSA women might actually fall in love with or have very deep romantic feelings for their male partners, not unlike you, as a lesbian, may have or have had towards any girlfriends you have ever dated, any women you have ever crushed on, or, if you're lucky, your wife. Now, do OSA women have sex with our boyfriends or husbands, if we have them? Of course we do! Have you ever had sex with your wife or girlfriend? Or, if you're single, would you, if you had one? Of course you would, and you know it! Does that negate your feelings for her, somehow? No? Your relationships are not purely sexual just because there is sex involved? Then why would you assume that sex being involved would make heterosexual relationships suddenly be only sexual? Also, news flash: vibrators exist. So do dildos. Or women (including het women) could just use their fingers or a pillow. There are many ways for a woman of any orientation to get off without a man if getting off is all that she's after. If she is choosing to be in an actual serious relationship with a man, it's most likely because she's in love with him. You are trying to convince her that there is something more important for her to consider, in spite of her feelings. So, perhaps instead of insinuating that she is some kind of sex-obsessed slut who is screwing over her entire sex deliberately for the sake of a few orgasms, you can start start there, instead.

Acting like other people's sexual orientations can be changed (not yours, of course, just, you know, everyone else's).

I see homophobes acting this way towards LGB people all the time, claiming that the sex(es) you are attracted to is a choice somehow, shaming you for preferring the "wrong" one (or the "wrong" one at the moment, if you're bi). Which, personally, has always struck me as kinda weird, because they never seem to apply the same logic to themselves. They never stop to suggest whether their own orientation is a choice or not. I guess it's pretty obvious why they won't, because then it comes down to two possibilities: if they are with strictly the opposite sex by choice, then it's very probable that they are actually bisexual, and behave as they do towards gay people due to internalized homophobia, whereas, if their strict opposite sex attraction is not a choice, then they have just admitted that their own orientation is innate, so why would they assume everyone else's not to be? It makes no sense. And incels will take it a step further, yelling slurs at lesbians for only wanting to have sex with other women instead of them. It's all pretty fucked up and illogical, and just for the record, I think you all deserve much better. Of course your sexuality isn't a choice. And yet... I mean, I can't even begin to count how many lesbian separatist blog posts I have read full of women acting as if heterosexuality is a choice. "Ew, moids are ugly, dicks are gross, what's wrong with you, why would you choose that?!" Newsflash, gyns: we didn't. That's just our sexual orientation, and we didn't choose it any more than you chose yours. We may still choose to be celibate in spite of our orientation, or, if we're bi, we might still decide to only date other women. But we will still always have the capacity to be physically attracted to/fall in love with men, and for those of us who are straight, we can only experience that with men exclusively. That's just the way it is. We can't control that; it's innate. Some of you, upon grappling with this fact, immediately jump straight to the incel way of doing things and begin slinging the aforementioned colorful monikers (ahem, sexualized anti-woman slurs aforementioned in this blog post) for only being attracted to men instead of you. It actually smacks of sexual harassment, and then you wonder why so many straight women stop following/won't follow you. Or, leap right into calling us lesbophobes because we don't want to take sexual harassment like that from anybody, man or woman alike. Call me crazy, but the last time I checked, a "lesbophobic woman" was a woman who hates lesbians for only being attracted to other woman, not a woman who simply refuses to date/sleep with you. What, you have a right to bodily autonomy, but straight/bisexual women don't?! And yeah, I know, I know. "Stop comparing us to incels! Lesbians aren't predatory!" Well, true, most of you are not. The vast, overwhelming majority of you are completely fine and normal. But I always give the side eye to any notion of an entire group of people (any people) being all perfect, pristine angels carte blanche (a scant few people in every large enough group are going to be creeps), and if a scant few of you don't want to be compared to incels... Well, then maybe you should stop behaving like them. Because, when you explicitly resort to their same tactics, even I get the ick off of a few of you, and I'm probably the least homophobic straight person I know. 🤨🤨🤨

They call you "c*rpet m*ncher", "qu**r", "f*g", "d*ke", etc., over your orientation. You then call women (who probably didn't even call you that!) "dick worshipper", "cock rider", etc., over ours.

Enough said. Do I even need to point out (again) that these are almost all just a bunch of sexualized, anti-woman slurs? Do you really think that this is going to bring women over to your side, as opposed to just driving them away? And do you actually think that your female separatist movement is going to have any kind of major societal effect if you would rather drive women away from it, rather than bringing them in? It won't have any impact that way; it will only die out. And, look, I don't think that homophobes should be treating you like that, either. They most definitely should not. I have no doubt that them slinging those slurs at you constantly over your sexual orientation (which you can't control) is extremely hurtful and probably even scary for you. You deserve so much better than that. But, again, last time I checked "lesbophobe" means someone who hates you for only being attracted to other women, not a woman who refuses to date/sleep with you, and, from what I can tell, radfems appear to be, by and large, very pro-gay. Even when we, ourselves, are not. So, it seems very unlikely to me that we're the ones calling you names like that (unless you can show me receipts or something, in which case, go ahead). Until that happens, it occurs to me that people of all sexual orientations are pointing fingers, accusing each other of being sex-obsessed perverts, and calling each other names because, idk, maybe the drama is more interesting to some people than minding their own business? Or they literally can't wrap their minds around being attracted to that sex, so they attack anyone who is? Idk, it all seems very juvenile, and I should think there would be better ways to tell someone that some aspect of their lifestyle is unhelpful to the movement and/or mentally unhealthy to them than merely resorting to often sexualized mudslinging attacks. Honestly, no matter what your views on female separatism or sexual orientation are, can we all just agree to a ceasefire on the relentless mudslinging on all sides?? Please??? This is middle school shit, and it's really getting annoying. Everyone. On both sides. You're like a pack of schoolyard bullies. Stop it.

Again, I'm not saying that female separatists' arguments against dating/sleeping with/marrying and/or having kids with men are entirely wrong. Male violence is a problem for a lot of women, and refusing to be in relationships with them probably would reduce it greatly. But acknowledging heterosexual and bisexual women as being capable of romantic love towards whichever sex(es) we are capable of experiencing attraction to, acknowledging all sexual orientations as something innate that can not be changed and not a choice, and refusing to resort to juvenile mudslinging attacks will not take away from those facts in any way. So, I guess I just don't see what the reasoning is for so many female separatists to refuse to even consider them?

[bloggingboutburgers]

Ugh some people will always find an excuse to pull the "you don't need to have labels!" shit if you aren't gay or straight it's so annoying. And it's always done to people who are neither straight nor gay. No one will ever say "you don't need to call yourself gay/lesbian/straight, just say you like men/women! You don't need to have a specific label!" But it's suddenly completely fine to say about aspec and mspec people for some reason. Like I'll always be of the opinion that unlabeled people don't need to have any labels pushed upon them (including straight) and they are still a part of the lgbtq+ community. But how can you come to a post about someone finally finding the word that describes them correctly after such a long search and then pull this shit. It's just sad

(For context, this was in reaction to this - Sorry I'm replying so late!! TwT)

Tbh one explanation I can think of for this is that the human brain, especially in a societal context, likes easy things that can be easily put into easy-to-think-about boxes. And I guess some people can't be bothered to want to give a bit more thinking about other people around them. Kinda reminds me also of "The Lobster" (absolutely recommend it to aces and aros btw, the dystopia hit me hard as an aroace especially the start) with that scene at the beginning where the dude is asked "Are you looking for a female or male partner" and he's like "Can I just put down either" only to be told "For logistical reasons, no, only one or the other". The level of inhuman fuckedupness of this implied for so many people.

That said, if the "you don't need labels" statement is given from a place of love and validation and not one of erasure, it's absolutely valid as well! Not everyone will find or WANT to find specific labels that fits them to every degree. I personally define myself as aroace but haven't looked into microlabels for myself because I feel fine describing myself as aro and ace as is. Everyone should be free to define, in good faith, themselves how they want, without being dismissed for it, I think

[kawakalalala]

Can you describe what you envision Abby’s ideal partner to be like? Physically and otherwise.

still not feeling 100% so i apologize if this is all over the place

i love rambling & and this is a lovely question!

honestly the way i picture abby is kind of similar to the way i picture myself. when i write my fics, i never imagine myself as the reader. Weirdly enough, the dynamic i picture abby and reader falling into fits the dynamic of a lot of relationships i’ve been in, so i’m essentially just writing fantasies about my own long distance relationship and applying them to a fictional character. (that’s the most lesbian thing ive ever said)

i don’t think she has a type at all tbh, I can’t see her being picky in the slightest? I think she cares for people’s character over anything else. physically, she loves all of you!

i want my abby to feel like a real person rather than a stone top sex god with zero depth, no shade but i think our girl deserves more, especially because of how deep and complex her character is.

firstly, abby would def be w a girl who bosses her around a little! I think she tends to get forced into taking initiative in her day to day life, not that she minds, but theres a strong need deep inside her to be taken care of. she is the little spoon!!!

as a part of the tall masc community, a lot of us either go for large height difs in someone short, or or we’ll go for someone else tall. I think she has no real preference.

i think i see her going more for fems, but not exclusively.

nsfw!!!

this girl is a SWITCH!! she def leans top, but she’s not mean. she’s kind of quiet, and I think her match made in heaven would be a power bottom.

she’d go silent and red in the face watching you straddle her, hands and blown out eyes tracing your body.

“prettiest fuckin’ girl ive ever seen,” she can barely get the words out. she touches you everywhere you need to be touched, knows your body like its hers.

she doesn’t realize how hard she rolls her hips when you lean down to kiss her.

if you’re bold with your words, it goes straight to her cunt.

“y’like that baby?” you say, and tuck a strand of her hair behind her ear. she’s GONE!

she definitely loves eating u out but she secretly loves getting taken care of. she’ll never say she wants it, but you both know.

“all ive done is kiss you, abs, s’it turn you on this much?” she nods and holds her breath while you draw a line through her folds w the tip of your middle finger.

“such a good girl f’me,” a groan fights its way from her lips

“need you so bad,” she says, and your name rolls gently and brokenly off her lips, somewhere between a beg and a prayer.

you think she looks the best like this, hair plastered to her forehead, pupils wide, and lips swollen from your kisses, and her chest heaving, cunt clenching around three of your fingers while your tongue flicks at her clit, over, and over, and over,

and she comes w a gasp and a whine, hips stuttering, eyebrows weighing down her eyelids.

you plant a kiss below her belly button you see her abs tighten

AND THEN THEY KITH!

n u take a shower or a bath and she tucks her head into the crook of your neck while you run your fingers through her braid, and massage her scalp, and she swears she could die happy right here :(((

[purpurussy]

I feel like the "dan is bi" anon is trolling but just in case they're genuinely confused: yes dan said in BIG that he loved and felt attracted to his high school gf (although he also made it pretty clear that they did not have sex so idk where anon is getting the idea that he has slept with "multiple women" 💀), and he alluded to his attraction not being confined to a specific gender in the part where he talked about labels, but you're completely taking all of that wildly out of context and missing the point of the whole video by calling him bi. I feel like this is probably the part that's frying their brain:

(shoutout to the legend @goldenpinof for this transcript!)

But firstly, imo it was very clear from BIG, as well as other stuff he's said over the years, that he just doesn't like labels. Which I find very valid, it took me a long time to figure out how to label myself. I still don't know what my gender is lmao but I started saying "bi" for my sexuality because it's a widely-used term that gets the point across. And I think that's the thing here: he came to the conclusion that the labels "gay" and "queer" are the best descriptors of his identity, which do the most accurate job of approximating something extremely psychologically complex and multilayered and nuanced in a simple everyday term that gets the point across to other people.

Obviously words mean things and it doesn't make sense to just pick a label at random (like for example it wouldn't make sense for me to identify as a lesbian, since I definitely feel attraction to men as well as women and everything outside the binary, and am interested in acting on that attraction at times, so I wouldn't be conveying accurate information to other people if I used the label lesbian for myself) but a label is just supposed to serve the task of conveying relevant information to other people (if a lesbian feels some kind of abstract attraction to dan and phil, that doesn't mean that the alphabet council needs to immediately revoke their lesbian card!! Since the word "lesbian" still does a perfectly good job of conveying relevant information to other people. Likewise if a straight dude has a fun little gay dalliance with his college roommate, but has absolutely 0 interest in men beyond that incident, it wouldn't be remotely necessary for him to start calling himself bi if he didn't want to, because what would be the point in that if he's only interested in women? Like if he told a gay dude who found him attractive that he's bi, only to backtrack... Do you see what I'm saying here?). It's perfectly valid for Dan to use "gay" and "queer" as umbrella terms that in his opinion do the best job of describing him, out of the language that's available. If he's like essentially a kinsey >5 and decided to just round it off to a 6 at this point, who are you to tell him he can't lmao

(shoutout to the legend @goldenpinof for this transcript!

Human sexuality is often way too complicated to boil it down to a single label in a way that doesn't erase any of its nuance, and I feel like this is something he's struggled with in the past, especially with him being a public figure. He's mentioned multiple times that feeling like he had to choose a label was a factor that prolonged his decision to come out.

And this is not even getting into the impact that his trauma from his childhood and also from spending a chunk of his formative years in the public eye probably had on the way he identifies or the way he chooses to label himself. It clearly took so much courage and strength for him to finally be able to call himself gay/queer please have some respect for our brave troops

Ultimately the point is that he uses the labels "gay" and "queer", not "bi", and it really shouldn't be difficult to respect that. It's also not biphobic for him to choose not use the label "bi" (again speaking as someone who uses that label). It's just that he feels "gay"/"queer" are better descriptors for him and nobody gets to determine that except him!! :) He wants people to know he's gay so he calls himself gay and that's that on that.

There are definitely people on here who are way smarter and more well-educated than me who would've done a much better job eloquently discussing this topic without rambling all over the place but that's my take (if anyone would like to add to this please do so, I'm always open to learn more about topics like this. And I'm also not saying that the way I see it is the only objectively correct opinion, but anon is definitely wrong so 💀). Thank you for coming to my ted talk

[queermasculine]

Similar sentiment to the person talking about butch being a culture and not ftm lite, as a genderqueer lesbian it can feel difficult to be seen as a butch woman by people who only view the binary (want to be so clear I love butch women!!). But this page really reminds me that just because others view me that way doesn’t mean I can’t find pride in the term butch! It’s always the identity I’ve gravitated towards, and I don’t want to have to check any ounce of perceived femininity at the door (especially when I can’t check my physical body at the door) to fully embrace butchness. Idk if this makes any sense but this is easily my favorite blog I follow, thanks for bringing hot and strong people onto my feed as constant reminders.

happy to serve🙏 and yeah i really empathise with what you're saying. i personally identify in part as a butch woman (alongside transgender and genderqueer) but i don't always feel comfortable describing myself that way because of the overwhelmingly feminine association the word "woman" still carries.

like i've noticed that the more i describe myself as a butch woman to non-butch queers or straight allies, the more comfortable those people seem to get calling me words like "pretty" or "queen" or "lady", or "forgetting" that my pronouns aren't she/her, or otherwise ignoring the very obviously masculine presentation and preference that is so important to me. adding "butch" in front of "woman" seems to do very little to stop most people from projecting femininity onto me anyway, unfortunately.

so i think i understand what you mean when you say you don't like being seen as a butch woman by people who only see the binary. i don't much like it either, even as a butch woman.

[darkcircles4lyfe]

Love in Chaos

The way chapter 393 seized me from the inside out, brought me to my knees, smiling with fierce glee—it was all the proof I needed. All at once, a checklist I didn’t even know I was keeping started getting all its boxes ticked. I’ll admit that for some time, I haven’t been sure exactly how Toga’s story should be handled for her to get the care, nuance, and dignity she deserves. So I’ve been resigned, waiting to see what Horikoshi has to say about it. I didn’t know until I saw it, but I can tell we’re on exactly the same page.

This fight between Ochako and Toga—or should I say Himiko, since ya know, they’re both on a first name basis now—it’s a kind of breaking point for the overarching narrative and its themes. Here is where the big questions about hero/villain society are not only asked, but answered. Himiko, more than any of the other main villains, was branded with that label as far back as she can remember, without her having done anything except exist. Thus, she carries the weight of their society’s problems and becomes a symbol of the injustice in prejudice and fear, the brutal agony of being rejected by the world. I’ve maintained this resolve about the story for a long time: I will not be satisfied with an ending that constitutes a return to normal, or even a slightly amended normal. I know that it would be a disservice to Himiko if she were made to fit into society again, whether that be in death or reform or containment. Society has to change for her. After 393, I can tell that Horikoshi knows this too.

It’s the way Ochako steps up to this conversation so boldly and positions herself on Himiko’s side. When Himiko dismisses her words as fickle, claims she’ll go back on them and do horrible things to punish her according to hero society, Ochako comes right back and says no, this isn’t about what you’ve done, this is about you. I see you. I see your beautiful smile and I want to protect it.

Throughout her life, Himiko has not been treated like a real person, so of course this is what she needs. No lecture on morals could disarm her the way acceptance can. It’s also extremely refreshing and reassuring to see Himiko being taken seriously. I’m so incredibly excited for Ochako to accomplish such a completely transgressive act of unconditional love against this harsh world. I could stare in awe of the panels in this chapter for hours, how they’re drawn at the exact intersection of beauty, pain, and honesty. Grotesque violence and elegance. Power and vulnerability. I was so overcome that, for a while, I failed to register a crucial implication.

Enter: The Female Vampire Carmilla

She is referenced merely in passing, but as a rejected villain name for Himiko, speaks volumes. It’s difficult for me to find the words to summarize… perhaps you’ve heard by now that Carmilla is a gothic horror novella about a lesbian vampire. THE lesbian vampire, in fact—the one who popularized the trope. Knowing this, it is simple enough to apply the story of Laura and Carmilla in parallel to Ochako and Himiko, and register it as direct proof of the dynamic’s sapphic undertones being acknowledged and intentional. I mean. Look at them.

Yeah. But that’s not all. That isn’t what really makes it noteworthy. Put in context: Himiko has been called a soulless inhuman vampire since childhood, and shunned for it. To her, this or any villain name would be a reminder of her lack of agency in identity. Add to this the overall themes of 393 I just described, and suddenly it becomes clear that Himiko is set in contrast against much of what Carmilla, as a fearful narrative about the supernatural, represents.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Let me provide some details about Carmilla for those who aren’t familiar. The story was written in 1872 by Sheridan Le Fanu, and belongs to a genre characterized by a revival of Gothic aesthetics in service of providing mystery, intrigue, and suspense to a very Victorian expression of fear. On top of that, Carmilla directly influenced Bram Stoker’s Dracula, and set the precedent for many vampire portrayals to come. Many female vampire characters reference her at least in their name, and the novella has been adapted and reinterpreted countless times. Because of this, it is admittedly difficult to be sure of Horikoshi’s familiarity with the original, or pinpoint any other potential influence he may have picked up from another adaptation. One could quite literally write a whole book about the many iterations and widespread impact of Carmilla. This is why, however, I believe I can confidently say that Himiko being compared to a female vampire has implications that are felt no matter one’s familiarity with the origin of the trope. Certain things are baked into the definition through generations of media. The female (lesbian) vampire implies predation, deception, lust, a danger to innocent young women. She represents an inhuman desire that must be vanquished.

In the novella, the main character Laura becomes a fast, intimate friend to Carmilla, a strikingly beautiful and captivating young lady who has suddenly appeared in her life. Laura admires and loves Carmilla dearly, but feels conflicted in moments where Carmilla is overcome by a desire that is explicitly compared to that of a lover. She talks of blood, death, sacrifice, and unity all while holding her close and kissing her. Whether or not this is hot, or whether Laura reciprocates any desire is, I guess, up to interpretation. But one thing is for sure: the ending of the story is not in Carmilla’s favor. I’d argue it’s not in Laura’s favor either. Look, I was an English major. I’m very familiar with discussions along the lines of “is ___ gay?” and “is ___ a sympathetic portrayal of ___ ?” It’s definitely gay, but the rest is unclear. There might be a tangent to go on about how Le Fanu’s complicated relationship with religion may have informed his characterization of General Spielsdorf and the other men who hunted down Carmilla’s grave and destroyed her. Regardless, there is narrative injustice in the way Laura is removed from these events, sent home and only told about what happened later. She loses agency. Her narrations become distant and clinical. In the very end, she describes being plagued by visions of Carmilla, sometimes as her beloved companion, and sometimes as a fearful monster. To me, this represents the lack of closure she has, either to reconcile these two sides of her, or mourn her loss.

There is also so much we’ll never know about Carmilla herself. The finality of her condemnation silences the multifaceted character that was only partially revealed to us. There is an inferred humanity to her, a self-awareness, a true romanticism, that gets dismissed by the people’s understanding of what a vampire is: a deception.

Keep in mind this tragedy. Fast forward through countless vampire portrayals to the present, to Himiko. What a contrast indeed. Remember, she does not want to be called “Carmilla,” or “Vampire.” To make such a reference in a chapter that is showcasing Ochako’s acceptance of Himiko implies that the trope is being broken. It is as if Laura were to go running to Carmilla’s grave herself, throw her own body over her in protection, and shun everyone else’s superstition and desire for vengeance.

(footnote: the above is supposed to say “Himiko-chan” but you know who is a buttface)

Here’s the kicker: since female vampires are so closely tied to negative and predatory portrayals of lesbians, this humanization of Himiko also suggests that her queerness will likewise be treated openly and sympathetically, because there no longer exists an allegory that could be used for dismissing it. Ochako has already made monumental assertions in this chapter. By saying she admires her openness and envies her beautiful smile, and by presenting complete vulnerability in offering her blood, she swiftly separates herself from the lifetime of persecution Himiko has dealt with. It all represents so much more than those who mistakenly call it “yuri pandering” could hope to understand. This is the real deal. 

So what is this talk about romance they’re supposed to have? I firmly believe whatever Ochako says, it has to be a very surprising revelation, for both Himiko as well as us, the audience. Otherwise all the hype and mystery makes no sense. If Ochako has something so important to say, it can’t be to confirm Himiko’s assumptions. Whenever I try to dissect the exact possibilities, I get hopelessly tangled up in semantics, but ultimately I just hope to get Ochako’s perspective in full, especially as it relates to what other people think of her.

Actually, I had an idea while writing this. I saw someone on twitter (I think jokingly) bring up the All Might doll, like oh god, what if it comes up again. Ok but listen. There’s a LOT of potential symbolism in the token from Izuku that Ochako has kept being a doll of All Might specifically. We all know it calls to mind Izuku’s emulation of All Might, which resulted in the aspects of Izuku that Ochako herself admired. We can also easily infer that during the mission to rescue Izuku, Ochako saw the darker side of these traits. Okay, so here’s another wrinkle: All Might, as a near mythical figure, represents hero society. He’s the hero archetype, an upholder of the status quo, “peace,” and his weakening under all the pressure implies a flawed system.

Nighteye predicted All Might’s death, but also admitted that a strong enough collective will can change the course of his predictions. Ochako sites Nighteye’s own death as an origin for her beginning to question who exactly in this world needs saving. If you know my meta, you know that I believe All Might needs to die in symbol only. Right now, Ochako is throwing out an awful lot of things heroes take for granted. Things everyone takes for granted. The outcome of this fight could be a turning point in the war that completely changes the tone. If Ochako is to accomplish this by way of an intimate talk of romance, well…

Bye-bye, All Might!