#im not anti nonbinary

[cat-doggy]

I think a, not really new, but still new pet peeve of mine is when ppl say stuff like "mspec monos aren't valid", "lesboys/turigirls/gaybians aren't valid", etc, but then proceed to say stuff like- "You can just say you're (mspec)sexual (mono)romantic or (mspec)romantic (mono)sexual!", "But nonbinary lesbians are valid!", etc. Like- you know that is one of the reasons why someone uses the mspec mono label, right? And that not every nonbinary person is afab and that multigender people exist, right?

It annoys the hell out of me- and my system members too

- Fry/Chat

[inkskinned]

okay is she being actually immature or is it just a woman over 30 expressing a human experience you find to be immature.

like yeah. at certain ages... let shit go. im not defending the real immature shit. im not defending the karen you're picturing. i worked in retail i hate those people too. (once somebody got mad at me because she didn't like how our winter window decor was a snowman smoking a pipe. i wish i was joking).

but men at 57 will write books about how 17 year old girls are soooo sexy. they will invent worlds where women have to be naked for "armor reasons." they will write songs that treat women as objects. people rush to defend them. meanwhile a woman at 35 will be like "heartbreak is hard, actually" or "i feel betrayed by a friend" or "i am struggling with something emotionally." immediately people will say stuff like this woman is 35 by the way. by the way this woman is SO OLD to be experiencing this. BY THE WAY.

im 31, almost 32. the other day a poet was blasted online because at her "big age", she had written a poem about feeling unloved. top comment was "this woman is 29 by the way." this woman is too old to still be useful, by the way. she has to behave better . maybe if she was a good wife and mother she could stop existing loudly, and the story could continue on without her. this woman has served her purpose, by the way. she's so cringe, by the way. at 29 - so old! - she still hasn't figured out that her existence should be one of shame.

[ash-and-starlight]

Hello, I saw you say in your 2024 short book review that Iron Widow sucked? May I ask your reasons? I've had this book in my hands multiple times and thought of buying but never did, and by what you said, and accounting for us seemingly having similar tastes, I think you might give me a good idea about what to expect from the book and whether I'd like it?

So yes just. Your thoughts on Iron Widow and why it sucked would be awesome if you could find time for it

Have a nice day!

udhghh ok honestly the reasons are so many and i cant even string them together correctly so i really just recommend going on the goodreads page and reading the one star reviews bc they all illustrate point for point why i think it sucked so much. like ok reason one is that its simply not well written. like its marvel level jokey "oh he's right behind me isn't he" kinda writing. Reason 2 is that the plot is just all over the place nonsensical, there are in-universe things that you're just supposed to accept at face value but just make zero sense once u think about them for longer than 5 seconds. It professes itself to be a girlboss feminist narrative and its the furthest thing from feminist u could ever find. wu zetian sees herself (and is framed by the narrative) as the only hashtag woke hashtag empowered woman that exists and goes on thinking every other girl she meets is a dumb whore. this never gets disproved. she never changes her mind. (which is not WRONG per se but at least dont market it as a #feminist book just for clout). Also like. i was expecting for the heroine's story to bear some resemblance to the hystorical wu zetian's story and uhh idk if this changes later on but so far their stories dont rlly have a thing in common. AND i like the author a lot i think they're super knowledgeable & must've done a ton of research for this so why,,, did they decide to basically discard all of it,, and also it should've gone through a few more drafts,,, one beta reader at least- anyway the things that i DID like were the qi based mecha system. that was conceptually rlly cool and i always love a mecha situation. and the fact that the love triangle got resolved in an ot3 (..... not that i liked any of the characters enough to care...)

[angellic-critique]

Reminder that this is the level of drag 'representation' angel dust gives :/

This is bottom of the barrel feminization towards drag performing arts :/

And since helluva boss fans are only do passive as to read everything at surface level only here is the Spitting definition of drag queens/kings

At no point is it intrinsically all about just sexual performance or sexual drive, it can be a factor or a small portion but it is not just a large generalization as much as people are trying to make drag performing seem to be.

Drag is an art form. It is a statement. It is a person of beauty and the love and appreciation of fashion and expression!

Angel Dust is the complete opposite of sex workers or drag performers at all! If AD is supposed to resemble the theme of abuse in industry [something she already failed to portray with fizzerolli] and the toll that sex workers and addicts within the industry for that matter, we have no clue how he will act in Hazbin but the sneak peek of him in leather gives me no hope if the implication is that he will purely be centered around valentinos abuse. Considering someone on the team ship's and actively adores the ship that is Angel x Valentino

How can you claim to support sex workers while actively seeing them as purely fetishism gay yaoi bait THAT YOU ACTIVELY MERCHANDISE AS """SEXY""":/

There is nothing to angel dust besides the appeal of a feminine man being sexually abused.

[wanderingcritter]

This coyote is going to the Seattle Pride Parade for the first time this weekend and I'm so crazy excited >w< ☆.°✧🏳️‍⚧️

Catch me around wearing some of my pins that I made :3

[cowboy-robooty]

imma be so fr rn i think its homophobic when people are fine with yuri but go up in arms about yaoi. like seriously. because its so fucking stupid to act as though yuri is somehow less fetishistic than yaoi when legit the entire fetish appeal of lesbianism in yuri is the fact that its "so pure and untainted by men". Straight men who consume yuri love it because they have a thing for purity in a similar vein as straight women love yaoi for being guys "sinning" and shit. I think both of these sentiments are foul in their own respective ways and its plain ignorant to act as though the "purity" of yuri is made out of a respect for lesbians instead of fetishistic appeal. And dont get it twisted rn and think im saying yaoi and yuri both suck; you know i love both of these genres, but i can criticize it without saying the genre as a whole is some evil demon shit. Straight erotica also houses a plethora of problematic themes and sentiments because every genre is going to have issues, especially when its lewd content. Lewd content is made TO BE fetishistic because well... its lewd; the problems that arise are not black or white matters and I think that if people are willing to enjoy straight erotic manga critically but unwilling to give the same grace to yaoi or yuri then thats plain homophobic. Because when people act as though yaoi and yuri having these problems means that the genres as a whole are unsalvagable while straight erotica can still be excused, it implies that homosexuals are obligated to be BETTER than heterosexual content to be accepted. It creates this idea that homosexual content is somehow inherently more dirty and needs to make up for this fact by being morally superior in other ways. 50 shades of gray and twilight can exist with a littany of foul tropes and problematic themes that are completely put into a fetishistic light, and yes it recieves mockery and is called cringe (because it is), but how come thats all it gets while some yaoi has the same shit going on and is treated like the entire genre as a whole needs to be exterminated??????? nobody has ever said that all shitty novels made for lonely women need to be demolished because of twilight and 50 shades of gray, and anyone who has gets called out for their misogyny because its fucking stupid to act like an entire genre of content should be killed for some cringe loser shit being mixed in with it. All porn has problematic tropes, and its so homophobic to act like specifically the genre of gay men having sex is the most egregious offender of these tropes while passing off yuri as fine because the problematic tropes it houses feed into the idea of purity.

Like oh my god, the majority of yuri is not made for lesbians. Even though it is made by women, these women are not fucking queer women. They're straight women who are feeding into the misogynistic ideals of pure, feminine women remaining pure and feminine by keeping untainted by men while exploring eachothers bodies. thats why yaoi and yuris problems mirror eachother in that you see an abundance of heteronormativity in yaoi (big semes, small ukes; with the smaller feminine one being lured into a tainted world of sin by being gay or whatever) while yuri has the opposite problem with a lack of body diversity because it focuses on ideal feminine ladies remaining untouched by "sin" by only touching eachother. Why do you think that around the same time yaoi was full of shit like junjou romantica bullshit yuri was also notorious for being boring as hell with two girls thats have no personalities making out together? Because BOTH of these genres had these issues much more severely in the 2000s-2010s. Yaoi was too crazy with that sinning fetish while Yuri was too boring with that purity fetish. Its also so stupid when people keep using examples from that era of yaoi as evidence that western mlm work is sooooo much better and superior compared to the entire fucking genre because its comparing shit from ten years ago to shit made now. Idk if you remember but literally ten years ago pedo bear was a normal thing that was goddamn EVERYWHERE online. Culture changes and i can assure you western gay media was not so squeaky clean during that time either; but this is a whole 'nother enchilada to be devoured another time.

Anyways in short; its homophobic as hell if you embrace yuri but shun yaoi. All you're doing is showing you have a fundamental lack of understanding concerning the roots of yuri and who yuri is actually made for. You're acting like gay men having sex is inherently "dirtier" than straight people having sex and that they need to compensate by being more morally righteous. I'm not saying that the different problematic tropes found in each type of erotica is good and shouldn't be changed, but its homophobic to excuse straight porn while refusing that same grace to yaoi. And it disgusts me seeing people continue to perpetuate the sentiment of gay men being seen as sin and lesbian women being seen as pure (in an almost baby-fying way) only wrapped up in a new convoluted form of packaging while acting like theyre protecting homosexuals.

[rebellum]

I feel like... Perhaps... Arguing that transphobia is defined by murder and that anything other than murder doesn't even matter... May NOT be conducive to fighting for trans rights.

Like... people want the right to exist as they are. They want to have access to hrt and surgeries and prosthetics. People want access to clothes that fit them and reflect how they want to be seen. People want access to medical care (eg. Getting screened and treated for sex-based forms of cancer can be impossible if you have the "wrong" sex listed to receive those tests). People want to be respected and treated well. People want to not be sexually assaulted and beaten and abused. People want to have access to housing and jobs, and the protection to not lose those things for being trans. People want access to shelters for homeless people or survivors of domestic abuse. People want name changes.

Acting like all of those things don't matter because at least they weren't murderered by an individual (and instead die of suicide or state violence, or survive and suffer) isn't okay.

[butch-with-a-deep-voice]

I’ve always wondered why stone butches are exclusively a lesbian thing (as far as I know). Like, you never hear about gay men where one doesn’t want to be touched sexually, so it’s not a gay thing. You don’t hear of straight couples where that’s a thing either, so it’s not a woman thing.

The only reasons I can think of are that women have more sexual baggage and feel more vulnerable (and are less horny than men generally), so it’s unlikely a man would want this. And then on top of that a man in a straight relationship is unlikely to tolerate his girlfriend not wanting her genitals to be touched ever, so a straight woman who felt like this would probably just be single. But then again, I’m sure there are men who would be happy to be sucked off by women during casual sex with no reciprocation - and I’ve never heard of that either!

But are there other reasons do you think? Is it butch women having hang ups about their female genitals being touched, or about feeling vulnerable to a partner because they are masculine as a woman?

I find this so interesting to think about.

While I can see where this line of thinking comes, from I would like to challenge it for a couple of reasons.

The first being that stone lesbians have a long historical association with the term. For many of us, our stone-ness stems from trauma and that cannot be separated from it. The identities, what they connote, and the safety they bring to the lesbian community can never be devalued or disassociated. And I am specifically talking stone. Both top and bottom, butch and femme. This isn't a hang up about "female genitals". I have classically "male" genitals and still identify as a stone butch. Stone comes from a collective understanding of our needs, and how factors in our life made us not okay with certain things being done to us, and saying "yeah, those needs are okay actually. That's desirable. I'm not broken." So firstly anon, I'd like you to ask yourself where your perceptions of stone stem from.

Secondly though, while I can see where you're coming from, I really want to challenge the notion of men not wanting these things. Of men always wanted to be touched, wanting sexual attention. This speaks to a deep issue of stigmatization/generalization of male sexuality. As horn dogs. As sexually hungry machines. I challenge the idea that there aren't men who don't want acts associated with stone tops/bottoms because I know men personally who do. I know men who are sex repulsed. I know men who only ever want to eat their cishet girlfriend out, top her, and focus on her, never once asking for reciprocation. I know men who have that classic "infinite libido" of male hood but are the biggest power bottoms on the planet and would rather eat glass before topping someone because it makes them feel dysphoric. Makes them feel wrong.

As for "women are less horny than men", have you seen lesbian tumblr? Have you seen booktok? Some of us are SHAMELESS. Feminine libido has nigh on infinite potential for some and it is a beautiful thing that should never ever be swept under the rug with a generalization like that. Men are expected to have limitless libido and this too must be challenged. Growing up male, before coming out as trans, it was an extreme source of shame that my sexuality didn't align with the other boys. That I didn't experience sexuality the same. I got bullied incessantly for not being a sexual deviant, and I wasn't the only one. This idea of the ever-hungry masculine directly attributes to toxic masculinity and ideas perpetuated by patriarchal relationship standards.

Part of how I think collectively we can evolve and heal our understanding of sexuality and healthy sexual practices is understanding your needs intimately, regardless of gender or sexuality. Learning how to effectively communicate those needs, and subsequently accepting when others have their own needs (including when they don't align with yours, not everyone is compatible and that's okay). Just like how a classic stone4stone relationship seems to be what will be my ultimate ideal match-up, everyone's needs deserve to be met and honored by a partner with needs that align with theirs.

Stone top/bottom, stone butch/femme are incredibly unique and important identities within the lesbian community. Claiming stone for myself has helped heal years and years of shame and trauma around my sexuality that I never thought possible to heal. Those terms I can argue stay in the lesbian community for the various historical and cultural implications. But I also really do need to stress how much we should accept the experiences associated with stone being applicable to everyone, even if the terminology may not be.

[thehealingsystem]

being an open trans person online is an exhausting experience at best and a traumatizing experience at worse

[hanzajesthanza]

nooo like reading maria janion's such comprehensive overview of vampires and what defines a vampire and how the myth changes through times and authors, as entirely expected, has contributed to my regis brainrot.

because though it's obvious how many tropes regis subverts as he literally talks about himself, it's more overwhelming when they're all summarized focused on examples from across history and the literature canon, and pretty much hitting none of them or fucking with all of them. because it's not that he just doesn't fit in within his own fantasy universe, but that he doesn't fit in within the broader canonical definition...

"my personal vision of fantasy (...) he is not the typical vampire bloodsucker, according to the dictates of the canon" ... uggghhhh sapkowski, in his witcher, by challenging all genre expectations and tropes, creates all of these characters that don't fit in anywhere, neither in their universe or in the broader canon. and thus, can only find fraternity with each other

i was just reading like 'so... so he doesn't fit in *anywhere*... 🥺'. regis in baptism of fire explaining how he doesn't conform to either vampiric expectations of vampires (socially, for his personal principles) nor of human expectations of vampires (biologically, for his literal existence). but it even goes farther when you look beyond the witcher and to the broader literary and mythological canon. in practically every understanding of a vampire he would not be recognized as one of them... and does he even want to.

[euarchontoglires]

hi does anyone else here self ship with Luigi FROM SUPER MARIO instead of a real ass person

[cringefail-loser]

"but you don't look gay"

oh I'm sorry hold on lemme just-

[cloud-based-and-rainpilled]

Old Gay VS New Gay discourse is so interesting to me as a “new gay” (milennial) growing up around “old gays” (boomers)

Old gays refuse to adapt to new nuanced gender and sexuality labels, feeling they’re superfluous and not “real issues.” New gays refuse to understand the point of view of a community not that long ago that was ravaged by AIDS and was (and is) straight-up illegal in public to be in most parts of the world

It’s a microcosm of the boomer/milennial dichotomy and imo shouldn’t even exist. There’s always been gay men VS lesbian VS bisexual disagreements and schisms and even proto-trans discourse about drag and androgynous presentation, but I’d like to think with a larger, more vocal community than ever, we’d come to an understanding that we don’t need to be fighting! We’re on the same side even with very strong disagreements!

Tl;dr if Boomer gays and Milennial gays could just rest thinking the other was cringe instead of completely disregarding and getting hostile towards the other we’d be in a much better place inter-community wise. But, to be honest, mostly I just see milennial gays completely disregarding the feelings of the people who made it possible for us to go outside idk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[loudnqueer]

A little introduction post

Hey y'all! You can call me Tash ^^

I recently came back to tumblr after deleting my og blog (which I had from like 2012 to 2019). I was very active in the queer community back then (specifically in genderfluid and aromantic spaces). I had no idea queer/lgbtq+ tumblr had become so *gestures at all the hate and infighting*

Anyhow, nice to be back and hopefully make new neat and nice connections ^^

You can expect lots of queer positivity, talks about complex identities and also some queer history and theory. I'm also documenting the whole process of getting on T and then the changes that happen as they come. You can find those posts under #transition things and #hrt:t

Anyone who isn't a queerphobe, terf, radfem, racist, misogynist, zionist, or some flavor of bigot is welcome!

My ask box is open for questions, discussions, and anything really as long as you are respectful. I will not respond to anon hate. Either insult me openly or block me.

[spacebugarts]

Lmao WHAT??? On tumblr of all places???

[wanderingcritter]

maybe there's something im not understanding here, and honestly at the end of the day i don't really care one way or the other this is a pretty exclusively online topic, but the whole "neo/xeno AGAB" thing is like... vaguely transphobic right?

and i am absolutely 100% NOT the person to try to tell others how they should identify or what labels they should be using, im literally a transmasc nonbinary mspec/queer lesbian transspecies werewolf who uses xeno pronouns for fucks sake, it doesn't really get anymore "queer as in wtf is going on" than that.

but from what i've seen and read about it, it kind of seems to be simultaneously reinventing and discrediting the definition of transgender. To directly quote the "AGAB Non-Conformity" infographic made by @/nonconformityhub,

"Those who reject their AGAB, are unassigned, or were forced to fit a binary sex at birth may wish to self-assign a different AGAB. It's based around the idea that we shouldn't be forced to stick with a falsely assigned gender."

like, am i not understanding something or is that literally just the definition of being transgender or gnc?? i think the thing that rubs me the wrong way about it is that it almost kinda implies that as a transgender individual you should or need to disclose the gender you were assigned at birth to others, which (unless it's for legal or health related reasons) you literally just don't. If you are a trans man, congratulations, you are a man. You don't have to be an "AFAB man", you're just a man. As far as anyone else needs to be concerned, you are male and have always been such. The whole point of being trans is to reject the gender you were assigned at birth because it's flat out not what you are.

Idk again I don't really care that much I don't think it's gonna single handedly set back trans liberation or anything of that sort, I just feel like we SHOULD be focusing on dismantling the system of assigning genders at birth to begin with and reasserting that sex ≠ gender, rather than simply modifying the system to appeal to certain individuals and disregarding preexisting communities trying to accomplish that goal, and would maybe just encourage everyone to look at this kind of stuff with some healthy skepticism