#intersection has affected them and the people around them

[trans-androgyne]

As of today I've officially read every post in the transandrophobia tag for an entire year--in addition to running a discord server on the topic for six months--so I feel I have some amount of insight into the term and the little community we seem to have been building around it.

I've seen people stumbling into the discussion and having their mental health immediately wrecked, so I want to share a few quick and basic reminders/lessons I needed to hear a year ago.

You're not a transmisogynist for using the word transandrophobia. You're not an MRA or a TERF either and it's messed up to call you those things. I used to question myself constantly about these things, but I've also now spent hours looking at what real MRAs and TERFs believe and it is nowhere near my beliefs.

You're allowed to take up space. In physical spaces of course--your presence isn't a threat just because you're a man/masc--but also in discussions of feminism and transphobia. It isn't talking over women to share your experiences as a trans person. You experience gendered oppression and it's okay to talk about it.

People lie about us constantly. I'm always hearing things like we think trans women oppress us or so and so in the discussion said something transmisogynistic; do not take these claims at face value, look into them yourself or ask someone who has done so.

Stereotyping us is bigotry plain and simple. That includes considering us more aggressive, annoying, self-centered, toxic, attention-seeking, and misogynistic compared to other groups.

Sexism can very much target men and mascs. If you've been defining transandrophobia as solely an intersection of transphobia and misogyny, I implore you to just look up sexism to see how it can affect nonnormative men. I can give examples.

We have allies! When I found the discussion and saw the vitriol and violent threats directed at us I felt hopeless and alone, but now I know there are plenty of trans women and fems who support me having language. You'll find your people.

I have more to say and I'd be happy to talk to anyone new to the discussion, just reach out.

[copperbadge]

Hey Sam! Since it's currently AO3 donation time, I'm wondering what your thoughts are on it? I'm asking because you've written RPF and it's one of many "anti-AO3/anti-AO3 donations" people's favourite things to bring up when they're complaining about AO3 getting so many donations that it continuously obtains an excess of its donation goal whenever donation time rolls around? (Wow, how many times can I say "donation" in an ask?) Sorry if this question bothers you! I don't mean to offend or annoy.

Hey anon! Sorry it took a while to get to this, I don't even know if the drive is still going on, but the question came in while I was traveling and I didn't really have the time for stuff that wasn't travel-related. In any case, let's dig in! (I am not offended, no worries.)

So really there are two issues here and as much as some people who are critical of AO3 want to conflate them, they are different. While some criticism of AO3 may be valid, rhetoric against AO3 tends to misinterpret both in separate ways.

First there's the issue of what AO3 hosts -- RPF, yes, but more broadly, varied content that some people find distasteful or think should be illegal, which is a misunderstanding of the purpose of the archive and more broadly a dangerous attitude towards the concept of freedom of expression.

Second, there's the issue of AO3 generally outpacing its fundraising goals while not allowing monetization, which is a misunderstanding of the legal status of AO3 and to an extent a misunderstanding of philanthropy as a whole.

The longer I watch debates about content go on, the more I come to the conclusion that I was fortunate to have a teacher who really wanted to instill in us an understanding of free speech not as a policy but as an ongoing dialogue. It's not only that freedom of expression "protects you from the government, not the Justin" as the meme goes, but also that freedom of expression is not a static thing. It's an ongoing process of identifying what we find harmful in society and what we want to do about it.

Should the freedom to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater be restricted? Should the freedom to yell slurs at drag performers? Should the freedom to teach prepubescent kids about gender, sexuality, and/or safe sex? Should the freedom to wear a leather puppy hood at Pride? Who gets to say, and why?

I was nine when my teacher did a unit on freedom of speech and the intersection of "harm prevention" and "censorship", which is (and should be) a discussion, not a set of ironclad rules. This ambiguity has thus been with me for over thirty years, and I'm comfortable with the ambiguity, with the process; I'm not sure a lot of people critical of AO3's content truly are. Perhaps some can't be, especially those affected by hate speech, but RPF is not hate speech. It's just fiction. Or is fiction "just fiction"? This is a question society as a whole is grappling with, although fandom seems to be a little out ahead of society in terms of how explicitly we discuss it.

The idea that prose can incite violence or cause harm is both valid to examine (witness the rise of fascism on the radio in the 20s, on Facebook and Twitter in the past ten years; they're very similar processes) and a very slippery slope. Because again: who decides what harm is, and what causes it, and what we do about it? Our values align us with certain beliefs, but those are only our values, not universal truths. So AO3 is part of the ongoing question of harm and benefit both to society and individuals.

AO3 itself, however, has a fairly defined policy that it is not meant to police content; it is an archive, not a bookstore or a school board. AO3 refines its TOS and policies as necessary, but the goal is always open access and as much freedom of expression as possible, and if that's uncomfortable for some people then that's a discussion we have to have; ignoring it won't make it go away. But it has to be a discussion, it can't be a unilateral change to the archive's TOS or a series of snaps and clapbacks, and I don't see a lot of people ready to move beyond flinging insults. Perhaps because they were taught a much more binary view of freedom of expression than I was.

So, self-evidently, I support AO3 and I don't have a problem with RPF. Whether other people do is something we're going to have to get to grips with, and that's likely to be a process that is still going on when most of us are dust. I'd rather have a century of ambiguity than a wrong answer tomorrow, anyway.

But whether AO3 hosts RPF is truly a separate issue from its donation drives, because it's a criticism some people level at the site which exists whether it's fundraising or not. So people can criticize AO3's open policy and they can give it as a reason not to support the site, but it's just one aspect of the archive and the fundraising as a whole should be examined separately.

I think AO3's fundraisers are deeply misunderstood (sometimes on purpose) because even people who are anticapitalist get a little crazy when money gets involved, and this is, to fandom, a lot of money -- a few hundred thousand, reliably, every fundraiser. To me, a fundraiser that pulls in three hundred grand is almost quaint; my current nonprofit pulls in better than ten million a year and my previous employer had an endowment of several billion dollars. At my old job I didn't even bother researching people who couldn't give us a hundred grand.

On the other hand, AO3 is an extreme and astounding outlier in the nonprofit world, because basically it's the only one of its kind to work the way it does. It is entirely volunteer-run on the operational side (ie: tag wranglers, coders, lawyers, etc) and has no fundraising staff (gift officers, researchers, outreach officers) as far as I'm aware. To pull in three hundred grand from individual one-time donations, without any paid staff and without even a volunteer fundraising officer? That's insane. That doesn't happen. Except at AO3.

What people misunderstand, however, is the basic status of a nonprofit, which is a legal status, not simply a social one. (I'm adding in some corrections here since it gets complicated and the terminology can be important!) The Organization for Transformative Works, the parent of AO3, is a nonprofit, which indicates how it was incorporated as an organization; additionally it is registered federally as tax-exempt, which carries certain perks, like not paying sales tax, and certain duties, like making their financials transparent to a certain extent. (Religious nonprofits are exempt from the transparency requirement.) If you're interested in more about nonprofits and tax-exempt status a reader dropped a great article here.

Nonprofits, unlike for-profit companies, cannot pay a share of their income to stakeholders. Nonprofits don't have financial stakeholders, only donors. They can have employees and pay them a salary -- that's me, for example -- but if a nonprofit pulls in $10M in donations, my salary is paid from that, I don't get a percentage and nobody else does either. That's what it means to be a nonprofit -- the money above operational costs goes back into the organization. The donations we (and AO3) receive must be plowed under and used for outreach, server maintenance, further fundraising, services expansion, et cetera. You can see this in the 990 forms on Guidestar or ProPublica, or in their more accessible breakdowns on Charity Navigator. Nonprofits that do not put the majority of their income towards service provision tend to get audited and lose their nonprofit status. So nobody's getting paid from all that money, and the overage that isn't spent goes into what is basically a savings account in the name of the nonprofit. (I'm vastly simplifying but that's the gist.) Using that money for personal purposes is illegal. It's called "private inurement" and there's a good article here about it. The money belongs to the OTW as a concept, not to anyone in or of the OTW.

So the biggest misunderstanding that I see in people who are mad at AO3 fundraisers is that "they" are getting all this money (who "they" are is never clearly stated but I'm pretty sure people think @astolat has a special wifi router that runs on burning hundred dollar bills) while "we" can't monetize our fanfic. But "they" get nothing -- nobody even earns a salary from AO3 -- and you can easily prove that by looking at the 990 forms they file with the government, which are required to be made public. You can see the most recently available 990, from 2020, here at Guidestar. Page seven will show you the "highest compensated" employees, all of whom are earning zero dollars or nonmonetary perks (that's the three columns on the right).

Either AO3 is entirely volunteer-run or someone's Doing A Real Fraud. The money the OTW spends is documented (that's page 10 and 11 primarily) and while they may pay for, say, the travel and lodging expenses of a lawyer going to DC to defend a freedom-of-expression case, they don't pay the lawyer for their time, or give them a cut of the income.

Despite what you've read, the reason "we" can't monetize our fanfics on AO3 has nothing to do with the site being the product of volunteer handiwork or AO3 having it in their terms of service or it being considered gauche by some to do so; it's because

IT'S ILLEGAL.

I cannot say this loudly enough: It is against the law for a nonprofit to be used by its staff, volunteers, or beneficiaries to earn direct profit from the services provided by the nonprofit.

You can be paid to work at one, but you cannot side-hustle by selling your handmade friendship bracelets for personal gain on the nonprofit's website. If the nonprofit knowingly allows monetization of its services, it can lose nonprofit status, be fined, be hit with back taxes, and a lot of other unpleasant bullshit can go down, including prosecution of those involved for fraud. If you put a ko-fi link on your fanfic, you are breaking the law, and if AO3 allows it, they are too.

Okay, that was a sidebar, but in some ways not, because it gets to the heart of the real complaints about AO3 fundraising, which is that people in fandom are sick or unhoused or in some form of need and other people in fandom are giving to AO3, a fan site that is financially stable, instead of giving to peoples' gofundmes or dropping money in their Ko-Fi or Paypal. And while it is a legitimate grievance that there are people who are in such desperate need while we live in an era of unprecedented abundance, that's not AO3's fault. AO3 doesn't solicit actively, there's no unasked-for mailings or calls from a gift officer. They just put a banner up on their website, and people give. (Again, this is incredibly outlier behavior in the nonprofit world, I'd do a case study on it but the conclusion would just be "shit's real, yo.") You might as well be mad that people give to their local food bank instead of someone's ko-fi.

You cannot lay at AO3's feet the fact that people want to give to AO3 instead of to your fundraiser. That's a choice individuals have made, and while you can engage with them in terms of why they made the philanthropic choices they did, to blame an organization they supported rather than the person who made the choice to give is not only incorrect but futile, and unlikely to win anyone over to supporting you. We know from research that guilt is not a tremendous motivator of philanthropy.

It is also not necessarily a binary choice; just because AO3 gets a hundred grand in $5 donations doesn't mean most of the people giving don't also give $5 elsewhere. I support the OTW on occasion, and I also fundraise for UNICEF and the Chicago Parks Foundation and BAGLY and others, in addition to giving monthly to several nonprofits that I have longterm relationships with -- my alma mater, the animal rescue where I got the Cryptids, my shul. And I give, occasionally and anonymously, to fundraisers that pass through Radio Free Monday, which are mainly individuals in need, because I was once in need and now I pay it forward. These are the choices I have made. Nobody twisted my arm. I respond poorly to someone making the attempt to do so by attacking places I've given.

I think the upshot is, after all of this that I've written, that we cannot begin to come to grips with questions of institutional inequality in philanthropy, or freedom of expression and censorship, until people actually understand what's going on, and too few do. So all I can do is try and explain, and hopefully create a forum for people to learn and grow when it comes to charitable giving.

Archive Of Our Own and the Organization for Transformative Works are products of our community and as that community changes, we will necessarily continue to re-evaluate what aspects of it mean and how AO3/OTW express the community sentiment. I hope that the ongoing discussion of support for AO3 also leads to people learning more about their philanthropic options. But criticizing AO3 for fundraising by attacking it for fulfilling one of its stated purposes is silly, and attempting to guilt people into giving in the ways one thinks they should give rather than how they do give is just going to make one extremely unlikable.

As members of this community, we have to be a part of the push and pull, but it's difficult to do that competently in ignorance. So, I do my best to be knowledgeable and to educate my readers, and I hope others will do the same.

[pocketsizedquasar-3]

i mean, we knew this. but the fact that i’ve seen dozens and dozens of post focusing on queer ppl and telling queer ppl to take care of themselves and queer ppl that it’ll be ok and queer ppl to not kill themselves (which, not saying not to make those posts or that those posts are bad), and not a single, single post* checking in on or showing compassion to Black people, undocumented people and other immigrants, brown people, Muslims, Jews, or other religious minorities — basically, any and all POC in general** — is truly, truly emblematic of what we have known all along: white people fundamentally do not see oppression if it is not happening to them.

*the one or two exceptions were posts i saw before the elections, reminding Black&brown folks to stay safe (bc regardless of outcome, racist hate crimes spike around elections!), and the OPs of those were, predictably, themselves Black or brown.

**QTPOC of course exist. we exist especially at the most dangerous intersections of this violence & horrid effects to our health, mental and physical. but it is frequently clear when ppl make posts like this and consider none of the harm which we are subject to, only that which also affects them.

it does not occur to you to show compassion to us. it does not occur to you to show solidarity with us. it does not occur to you that we are in danger, and have been in far more danger than you, regardless of which color they slap on the white house. it does not occur to you that when you talk about violence against queer people, the vast majority of that violence will fall upon queer and trans POC, especially Black queer people. it does not occur to you that QTPOC exist at all, except when we can be used as a hypothetical argument.

white queer people are white before they are queer. white trans people are white before they are trans. white women are white before they are women. they are disappointed in the status quo only when it stops supporting them. they are aghast and appalled when they are treated like those people. they are shocked and disappointed when suddenly their whiteness no longer insulates them from being treated the way the rest of us are treated. baldwin of course said it first and best:

I think white gay people feel cheated because they were born, in principle, into a society in which they were supposed to be safe. The anomaly of their sexuality puts them in danger, unexpectedly. Their reaction seems to me in direct proportion to the sense of feeling cheated of the advantages which accrue to white people in a white society. There's an element, it has always seemed to me, of bewilderment and complaint.

white queer people, white people in the imperial core, are experiencing a fraction of the dread and violence that everyone else has been subjected to for years. you are afraid, rightfully so. but in your fear and your rage and whatever else, you do not look to those of us who have been fighting this violence for years. you do not offer us compassion and care the way you do with white ppl. you, of course, fall back on your whiteness.

again, none of this is new. we know this. we’ve known this. but it is frustrating nonetheless.

it does not occur to you that we are in danger. that we are dying. that we are being killed. it does not occur to you to to offer us the same hotlines and resources and reassurances and kindness and compassion.

keeping rbs on for now but if people start being weird i’m turning them off. don’t put words in my mouth. don’t say i said something i didn’t. i meant what i said and nothing else.

[a-little-revolution]

Hi, I saw that you have consulted on a lot of fictional writing, and as someone who has seen plenty of horribly insensitive works around my own disabilities, I feel like it's always best to run it by someone who is actually affected. I hope it's okay to ask you this. My Fabula Ultima team have been working on a world that is likely going to be reoccurring and possibly become written works based on our adventures in the future.

In the place of fantasy "dwarves" we have decided to essentially take the basic idea of "strong bearded race that lives underground" but gave them a different name, and actually made them taller than most humans (since without the horribly ableist origins, that would make far more sense anyway.). Would you consider this revamped fantasy race acceptable, or is it better to scrap the concept altogether?

Hello! A common thread I've noticed within fantasy writers and the race of mystical "dwarves" is that what they really want to hold onto is their culture. I think a great way to do this would indeed be to revamp them as no longer small, bearded men but instead change their height and appearance but keep the aesthetic. Or, if you want your race of small beings, diverge from the burly culture and make them diverse, humanized, intersectional and beautiful. Those would really be the only options to abandon fantasy "dwarves" all together without derailing your writing. But again, the best stories will always be the ones where disability, and little people, are naturally included in worlds like how ours needs to be - through inclusion, accessibility, radical love, community care, and fighting ableism.

[what-have-i-unleashed]

so uhhhhh long post ahead

(cw: emotional manipulation, toxic relationship, survivor's guilt, if there's anything more please tell me)

underverse-adjacent, so it's cross being in the same team as nightmare and killer only. xchara is there too but his presence does nothing to comfort cross.

cross is touch-starved because he was stuck in the empty world for such a long time, and he also craves interaction with another person. and ink used to be that for him until cross realized he could not depend on ink for his goal (restoring xtale) and he felt somewhat betrayed by that notion. this man has trust issues now, not only with other people but also with himself. can he trust himself to be attached to another person? can he trust his decisions, when his past actions only brought him more grief than they're worth?

enter nightmare and killer, who do not care about the morality of his idea to steal and hack the codes of other universes to create his own. in fact, they're enabling him and xchara, only because their goals intersect. but that is more than anything he could hope for. after xtale, after the situation with ink, finally someone is on his side, silently assuring him that what he's done is for the greater good.

killer… does not like cross, mostly because of the whole xchara thing. but someone has to teach the newbie on how things work around here, and it's not going to be nightmare for sure. so he takes cross under his wings, pointing out how things are done. his teaching leaves a lot to be desired though, mostly because he's a cryptic asshole who just won't say directly what he means.

but as cross gets to slowly hang around killer, being mentored by him, he starts to observe how killer carries himself and feels a nagging thought probing at his mind, a thought definitely not from xchara at all. killer is the only source of affection cross can have in this situation - killer is free with his physical affection, always touching cross like patting cross' head, glomping on him, or resting his arm over cross' shoulders. cross likes these gestures from killer, but he cannot show it because he knows what killer will do upon seeing a weakness. his morality and killer's are different - they shouldn't be compatible.

and yet, that nagging thought gets louder and louder in his head. why does he look at killer too much? why does he anticipate any form of praise from killer? why does he hate it when killer contradicts him? one day, xchara will bluntly tell cross that he has an obsession with that guy. it's exhausting watching cross acting like a complete middle schooler with a crush who adamantly denies it. and like, there's no freaking way, right? there's no way a person like cross can have a crush on a sadistic multiversal terrorist. he has better tastes than that!

and like, cross is partially right. he has better morals than that, but it doesn't stop his soul from latching onto the first person who can offer him some physical and emotion comfort, however little there is. but also... cross likes the idea of killer, because he doesn't really know killer. he's in that queer phase of "do i like that person - or do i want to be them". killer is, for all his flaws, a good soldier. he's dutiful by nightmare's side and an excellent fighter. he's decisive, witty, and scarily smart. everything cross aspires to be, his ideal self. he doesn't want to be unsure, he doesn't want to be scared, he doesn't want to be weak. cross' conflicts within himself are multiple, and no doubt nightmare and killer take notice of that.

cross wants to be decisive and self-assured, but he also wants to be told what to do, to follow someone's will. because he's scared of himself - he's still not processed the guilt over his decisions and actions in xtale. he wants control but he also craves guidance, so if he's wrong, at least it's not his fault this time, right?

and killer would play with his head like that. "it's ok, i can show you", "it's ok, it's up to you", "i'll take responsibility for this". if cross listens to killer, then every mistake is on killer's shoulders and not his. "you don't have to feel guilty, because i will be your sacrificial lamb" type of situation. but also, cross will feel he owes killer for this, and he'll stay, over and over and again and again, despite all the horrible things they've done, despite all the times killer guilt-trips him into doing something not in his morality. but it's okay, because it's killer's hands guiding him to do it, and cross will do it if only to make killer happy with him.

and i think sometimes killer will use his wiles to get cross to agree to be his lab subject. cross has such a fascinating soul, and killer won't mind tormenting xchara for a bit. killer will assure cross that this is just something to strengthen cross, to make him a better soldier. a little bit of praises and surefire conviction will get cross relax in his presence. nightmare sure has found a perfect toy for his bloodhound, something that will keep his interests up and boredom away in the down time.

[nova-moonlight]

𝘋𝘰𝘩𝘸𝘢 𝘉𝘢𝘦𝘬 𝘹 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦r

Blending into the background is an art form I’ve perfected. While some people seem to thrive on drama, I’ve learned that a quiet, unnoticed existence suits me just fine. In a world where everyone craves the spotlight, I find solace in being the invisible observer.

The classroom buzzed with the usual gossip. “That girl has no self-respect,” one voice sneered. “How can she forget—” Another started, but I’d heard enough. I slid my earbuds in, trying to shut out the whispers, but snippets of their conversation still sliced through. “Behavior… something… small.” It was relentless.

I let my head rest on my desk, eyes partially open, watching Su-ae from the corner of my vision. Honestly, I had to agree with the whispers. How could she stay with Minu, who was more like a distant shadow than a caring boyfriend?

Just as I was drifting into my own thoughts, a commotion nearby drew my attention. Eunhyuk, with his usual air of confidence, was gripping another student’s arm. What was going on? I didn’t care enough to investigate further and settled back into my pretense of sleep.

Being a ghost at school has its perks. I get to watch everyone without ever getting involved. It’s a peaceful existence that I’ve grown to appreciate. At home, though, it’s a different story. My family sees me, sometimes more than I’d like.

I have older twin brothers, Jin-ho and Jin-woo. They’re fiercely protective, though sometimes their way of showing it can be a bit rough. They’ll back me up if I’m in trouble but won’t hesitate to tease me if I step out of line. Despite their tough love, I cherish them deeply.

Our family setup is unconventional. My mom is a high-powered lawyer who brings in the bulk of the money, while my dad is the stay-at-home parent. We’re comfortably off but not rolling in riches, which is why I sought out my own job.

That’s how I ended up working at a nearby convenience store. I slip into my uniform, don my glasses—my trusty disguise—and become just another employee. No one here knows me as the quiet girl from school or the youngest child at home; I’m just me.

Early March

The convenience store is my sanctuary. I slipped into my uniform, feeling the familiar comfort of anonymity. The name tag is the only thing that marks me out here.

“Hey, can you stock the shelves?” my manager called out.

“On it,” I said, grabbing a box and heading to the aisles. Stocking shelves is a calming ritual, a contrast to the noise of my thoughts.

As I worked, a familiar face appeared in the store—Eunhyuk. It was odd to see him here; he didn’t seem like the type to frequent convenience stores. Ra-im was with him, browsing the drinks. I didn’t expect to run into either of them.

“Hey,” Eunhyuk said, catching me off guard. “You work here?”

“Yeah,” I replied, trying to keep my cool. “Looking for something?”

He shook his head. “Just grabbing a snack. Didn’t expect to see you here.”

“Small world,” I muttered, turning back to my task. Eunhyuk lingered for a moment, his presence a curious anomaly in my otherwise mundane routine.

“You’re pretty quiet at school,” he remarked.

“Not much to say,” I replied. Why was he even talking to me?

He shrugged. “Fair enough. See you around.”

As he walked away, I couldn’t shake the flicker of curiosity. Eunhyuk is one of those students everyone knows about but doesn’t really interact with unless circumstances align. We’ve shared passing glances and distant nods, but our worlds never really intersected beyond these brief moments. I’m aware of his presence and his reputation, but our connection remains superficial, marked only by our occasional, minimal interactions.

I finished my shift, the encounter long gone from my mind. Home was a familiar chaos. My brothers greeted me with their usual mix of banter and affection.

“Hey, loser,” Jin-ho called out.

“Shut up,” I shot back, grinning despite myself. This was our way of showing we cared.

“Mom’s working late,” Jin-woo said. “Dad’s making dinner.”

“Great,” I replied, heading to the kitchen. My dad’s cooking was always a highlight of the day.

Sitting down for dinner, I felt a rare sense of contentment. Despite the complexities of life, I had a family that cared, a job that provided me with peace, and a quiet existence that was uniquely mine.

[rebellum]

nooo i wrote a whole RESPONSE to this but then tumblr app crashed and then I had to type the whole thing out AGAIN on my computer and then in that time period the op turned reblogs off. Since they turned reblogs off, I decided to cover up their name, in order to kinda respect that.

my response:

No. It is important to create new words in order to discuss specific phenomena. That’s why words like homophobia, lesbophobia, transphobia, misogyny, transmisogyny, exorsexism, and transandrophobia were invented. 

Sure, lesbophobia is covered under “homophobia”, but lesbophobia is an important word for describing how misogyny and homophobia affect women’s experiences of homophobia. Transmisogyny is covered under “transphobia”, but it’s useful to have a term that specifically describes how trans fems experience the intersection of transphobia and misogyny, not just for being trans, but for being specifically trans feminine, and the ways that expectations of womanhood, femininity, manhood, and masculinity factor into their oppression because of their assigned sex at birth, their presentation, and their gender. Exorsexism is covered under “transphobia”, but it’s useful to have a term to describe how transphobia affects specifically people outside of the gender binary. Misogynoir is covered under misogyny, but the term was created to specifically describe how Black women experience the intersections of racism and misogyny. Of course my explanations here are a little reductive, each one of these examples has much more to it than what I listed. 

In a similar vein, transandrophobia is useful for understanding how transphobia, homophobia, misogyny, and the meta-epistemologies of those discourses affect trans mascs, not just for being trans, but for being trans masc. Oppression, both systemic and on individual levels of discrimination and prejudice, works differently for people depending on the intersections of their identity (assigned sex at birth, assigned gender at birth, presentation, gender identity, race, culture, ability, etc). 

So transandrophobia is useful for discussing specifics like:

The idea of “lost lesbians” and “the trans cult tricking little girls into mutilating their bodies”

The rhetoric of violence around testosterone-based HRT. There is the incorrect idea that people who take T become more violent because they are becoming more masculine. 

This association of masculinity with violence, and how that affects trans mascs. For trans people regardless of gender, proximity to masculinity puts people in danger in queer spaces. People are treated worse if they are trans masc, trans fem and don’t pass well enough to the surrounding people, or nonbinary and not sufficiently ‘safely’ androgynous (skinny, hairless, and white, with no prominent secondary sex characteristics). 

How trans mascs are treated differently when they come out, or when they start to transition. Many people find that people are colder to them, they experience higher rates of abuse, and if they are trans men they are told to not talk about their experiences because ‘they are men and can’t possibly understand misogyny’. The voices of people who aren’t trans masc often end up being listened to more about trans masc experiences, than the people who have actually lived through those experiences. Like, people are shitty to trans people that are masculine specifically because they are masculine.

Corrective rape 

Many people, even in feminist and trans spaces, believe that a man’s gender cannot factor into his experiences of oppression. Eg believe that the fact that they are men is irrelevant to trans men’s experiences, believe that a Black man’s masculinity has nothing to do with how he experiences racial oppression, etc. There are even some vocal people who believe that men cannot be oppressed, and that trans men cannot be oppressed, specifically because being men means they CAN’T experience oppression. 

The idea that trans men transition in order to try to escape misogyny 

Discrimination in reproductive healthcare 

A lot more, it would take ages to list the different kinds of transandrophobia

I also noticed you said “continue to feel its effects if they don’t pass”. But that idea is part of the issue: trans mascs continue to experience oppression for being trans masc when they DO pass. Even if someone is well passing, and stealth, they still directly experience discrimination for being trans masc through things like access barriers to reproductive healthcare, higher rates of abuse, sexual assault, etc. 

So transandrophobia (trans andro + phobia, not trans +androphobia as some people against the concept seem to believe) is, like other specific terminologies of oppression, really useful as shorthand for the specific forms of oppression people face not just for being trans, but for being trans masc.

[t00thpasteface]

i very deeply respect your mashposting and even though im not as enthusiastic about hawkahy as you are i think the content you make for them us delightful and some of the best mashposting on this godforsaken website. that being said, i wanted to know ur takes on the hawkeye & trapper dynamic, and the hawkeye & bj dynamic. Not in a shippy way, just in the World of Hawkahy what role do trapper and bj play in their relationships with hawkeye :3 this because i love that one comic u did where hawkeye is spunchbop and bj is Patrick its one of my fave pieces of mash fanart lol

(⁠๑˘❥⁠⁠ ˘๑⁠) first off, THANK YOU!! i'm soooo crazy about hawkahy and i really enjoy contributing to my fellow shippers, but i'm glad my art can also still appeal to people who are less interested the ship itself.

second, VERY fun question!! i wish i had definitive answers for yall, but you know me... i love to go "well idk it could go either way" ^_^;; really, it depends on what kind of tone and theme i'm looking for. i don't really write heavier stuff (because i have so much fun writing funny fic) so that kind of narrows my options, but there's a lot of potential i'd love to explore— or see someone else explore, if they're so inclined!

TRAP:

generally the trapper reading i typically default to is that he and hawkeye have a pretty casual FWB thing going on. trapper considers hawkeye a very close friend and hooks up with him at an intersection of bicuriosity and deep platonic affection, but hawkeye catches baddddd feelings and ends up genuinely heartbroken to find out their thing was lopsided. in this case, hawkahy would happen only after trapper leaves— mulcahy has a tough time trying to get noticed before that point :( but at the same time, i don't think mulcahy would pounce at the first opportunity, because i don't think an immediate rebound would be good for hawkeye nor mulcahy... but it could happen for dramaaaaa...

another version of the hawkeye-trapper rapport that i love playing with in my fics is trapper being generally very supportive but nonetheless slightly grossed out. i think there's a lotttt of comedy potential with hawkeye thinking it's okay to fuck a priest but NOT a married woman, and meanwhile trapper is pro-infidelity but anti-priestfucking (for whatever reason), and they squabble and tease each other about it the whole time.

it's also funny to think about is trapper trying to figure out whether mulcahy now gets the "one of the bros" back-slapping beer-chugging dude treatment, or if instead he's now slotted into the "go easy on 'em trap" category that protects hawkeye's ladyfriends from hearing trapper's bawdiest jokes and comments when hawkeye brings them along as a plus-one to the swamp.

trapper seems like he's pretty likely to sniff out that hawkeye and mulcahy are seeing each other even if they try their damnedest to keep it secret. i like to think hawkeye trusts trapper enough that he would go ahead and divulge it it up front pretty soon after it's official. trapper could probably even pick up hawkeye's crush beforehand... maybe even before hawkeye knows about it!

i don't see trapper as being too jealous of hawkeye spending a lot of time with mulcahy, even if it means hawkeye is now exclusive and not sleeping with trapper anymore. if anything i think he'd be pretty stoked that he's got one less guy to compete with for the nurses' attention. pretty sweet deal as far as he's concerned.

i do think there'd be some tricky navigating between how hawkeye acts with trapper and the STARK difference with how he acts around mulcahy, which you can see clear as day in the s1 finale, where hawkeye gets soooo soft and careful while talking to mulcahy. i don't think either one is disingenuous; i think hawkeye contains multitudes. hawkeye's not the type to fake sincerity. and to that end, i really don't think hawkahy should hinge on hawkeye totally giving up all the cruder parts of his personality (especially since mulcahy is really no saint either), so it could be pretty interesting to see that manifest in whether/how he's still maintaining a close friendship with trapper now that he's been seeing mulcahy regularly and trying to make a good impression.

BEEJ:

the direction bj goes in depends on whether hawkahy are already an item before he gets there. he does form that almost instantaneous trauma-bond with hawkeye on his first day, but i think if hawkeye admitted "yeah by the way the chaplain is my boyfriend" as soon it seemed safe, bj would be able to take it in stride as another weird little quirk of the mash he has to get used to. he's too hung up on dealing with all the gore to worry about who's banging who.

by contrast, i think he could potentially get pretty upset/jealous if hawkeye and mulcahy paired up a little while later. i can see him feeling really betrayed, like, "what do you normally do when i'm gone?" "wait for you to get back!!"

if bj still doesn't feel like he's really enmeshed himself into the unit— which i think on some level, he never wants to, because he's banking on dropping everything like a hot potato the second he can— then i can totally picture him just feeling completely lost and isolated when hawkeye is suddenly forgoing their boys-nite boozathons in favor of getting some priest pipe. like, at least trapper could always go find his own cuddle buddy to pass the time and had nurses lining up to volunteer; bj has basically nobody and doesn't seem inclined nor equipped to fix that. hawkeye is his liason to the rest of the camp, and bj isn't so great with people without having hawkeye there to help as both teleprompter and safety net.

basically i think bj wants to keep hawkeye within a very specific arm's-length radius— not too close, but not too far either, and hawkeye having so much private time with someone else could really get under his skin.

you could also have bj think the priestfucking is gross/bad on sheer principle like trapper did, even without the jealousy angle, and it'd probably hold a little more water coming from bj than trapper. however, it'd be funny if he's insisting it's definitely not a jealousy thing and he's being fully objective about it, but you can totally tell he's just jealous. x)

i admit i kinda love seeing bj get tormented, because he's got such obvious buttons to press and yet sternly insists that they don't even exist, similar to houlihan and frank. like, you can't just set that up and not expect me to rub my hands together and SLAM those buttons as hard as i can. ergo, bj getting jealous about hawkahy is supremely funny to me. i'm not too proud to admit that!

[sapphiphilic]

“Not moving on is worse.”

In the context of season two, I struggle to reconcile the intersection of sincerity and comedy, and the idea of what pains and traumas we are meant to understand at the deeper level of what trauma is with those that serve only the purpose of comedic timing. This isn’t limited to one character, but rather to the season as a whole.

Season one highlighted childhood trauma and the ability to move on from that, becoming the best adult version of oneself possible. We see this evident in Ed, Stede, and Jim specifically as we are allowed to explore their pasts and their traumas — and we can presume that no one on the crew of the Revenge is without trauma (Fang’s dog, anyone?) of some kind that they carry with them. Stede handles his traumas and how to process them through running away and avoiding the issue until he no longer can. Ed does something similar, though he is able to craft a facade to use as a shield and a weapon, even if he never delivers a killing blow himself. Jim dedicates their life to revenge.

We witness all of these characters allow the defining characteristic of love to be allowing themselves to be saved and valued for who they are — not for what they can offer.

When season two opens, we as an audience see Ed at, arguably, his worst (I say arguably because we didn’t see Blackbeard in his prime, so… do with that what you will, I suppose). We see how this affects beloved and treasured characters, as well as new characters that we have yet to fall in love with. We see Fang fall apart not once but twice within the first two episodes alone. In episode two, we see Ed — a much beloved and adored character who we know intimately — lash out when confronted for his behavior. He lashes out at his crew and physically mutilates his closest confidant for daring to question him. “But that’s piracy!” And you’re right! But don’t we watch the first episode of season one highlight how much Stede Bonnet wants to change piracy? Isn’t this show supposed to be about found family, and getting better, and finding healing? In which case, we’re watching Ed behave abusively in the wake of his mental struggles as he once again attempts to hide behind the same facade that has protected him in the past. Ed suffers this breakdown in response to not one but two perceived rejections from the two people he would claim to be the most important in his life, and in a classic mental illness fashion, he barricades himself off and settles into the persona that is everything he doesn’t want to be.

His crew fears him. They’ve been kidnapped and essentially held hostage under the man they believe to have murdered their crew — their friends — and are watching him continue to devolve. Enter Izzy Hands and Jim Jimenez. Izzy is well aware of his hand in Ed’s state. “Well, he instigated it!” He did. He wanted back a version of Blackbeard who he saw as safe territory: a necessary evil for the continued survival and safety of the crew, ship, and Ed and Izzy themselves. And then he watched Edward “Only Ever Killed One Person Personally” Teach fulfill the legend he’s always been known as, and watched him become someone who couldn’t care less about life or death or anything in between. Ed surpassed and buried the version of Blackbeard that Izzy wanted to return, and he was force-fed the consequences of this with an unavoidable cruelty. “Well, he deserved what he got! Violence was always on the table, because it’s piracy!” But once again, we’re operating under the assumption that the big themes of this show are healing from trauma and being worthy of being loved even if we’ve done bad things. 

While we’re on that topic, though, let’s explore that. Ed’s childhood trauma comes from his abusive father. He carries the weight of that abuse with him well into adulthood, as well as the weight of what he had to do to survive it. What he had to do to save his mother. This season sees him abusing those around him. Despite this, despite his erratic behavior and the mistreatment of his crew, he is still loved (by crew and fandom both, if I may add). He is still loved by Stede, despite the trail of blood he leaves in his wake. Stede is still longing to find him, despite knowing what he’s done and what he’s now capable of, and this continues to reiterate that idea of you deserve to be loved even when you’ve done wrong.

And then, Stede finds him.

We as an audience witness Ed make the choice to stay alive. We watch the thought process, we see that he chooses to fight for that love that comes alongside being saved. Being wanted. Being seen for who you are and loved because of it. And up to here, I’m on board. I’m excited to see what’s next and how Ed will reconcile for what he’s done and the harm he’s caused at the hands of his mental illness — because the truth is, we harm people when we aren’t adequately being responsible for our mental illness. This is a real-world thing. We lash out when we’re hurt, or when we’re rejected, or when we’re struggling. When we’re suffering, we often can’t see past ourselves to see whether or not we’re also causing others to suffer. This does not make us bad people — and it didn’t make Ed one. And then the “apology” came and went. The only member of the crew Ed really sits and ever has a drawn out conversation with about anything is Fang, and even this is somewhat shallow. Fang absolves him and moves on. We don’t get to see whether or not Ed ponders this conversation long-term or whether or not he battles with himself over how to move on. 

We’re left with a traumatized crew who semi-accepted a half-hearted apology and a beloved character who hasn’t actually been held accountable at all. “But he apologized and wore the bell and fixed that door latch!” Yes, and? He physically mutilated his first mate, instructed him to be killed, traumatized an entire crew — and this all takes a backseat to his relationship with Stede. And what a stunning scene between the two of them in the moonlight, where Ed finds it in him to ask to take things slow. Where he recognizes his needs and vocalizes them. I left this episode feeling so hopeful, because half-baked apology aside, Ed is actively learning to vocalize his thoughts and ask for what he needs when he recognizes in himself that something is going to be harmful to him. We had a kiss, we had Ed asking for help when he needed it, we had a proposal, we had “not moving on is worse,” and even knowing only three episodes remained, I left feeling like we had been so perfectly set up to see how things were only going to keep improving. 

In the first episodes of the season, we see murderous raids and mutilated first mates and two suicide attempts (though I suppose one was more of a mass murder-suicide attempt?) and these are all thrown together. In episode six, Stede deescalates a raid from a bloodbath of his own crew and sends another crew on their way with the lessons and values that he has been pursuing since the first episode of the first season. He then, in a parallel to the French ship of season one, causes a man’s death. This is highlighted as a turning point, something that can’t be ever moved on from. (“There’s no coming back from that.”) But what about the other traumatic events of the season that are treated as jokes? Izzy’s drinking, day in and day out, bottle after bottle after bottle — coping with the reality of his life and the way it’s been altered beyond recognition. The mop he used as a makeshift leg snapping, forcing him to pull himself away from the crew with his own hands. Lucius’s mention of being sexually assaulted and Stede’s look of disgust, the way he literally runs away from the conversation. Lucius never gets to air out his traumas, not really, not with someone who listens and tells him he’s safe and allows him to talk things through. Even Pete gets ill instead of being able to offer support.

I struggle to reconcile what is and isn’t comedy in this season, or what violence is meant to be taken for what it is. The Ed and Izzy breakdowns in episodes one and two sat far too close to my chest for me to look past them into comedy — and the suicidality of both men was glossed over and moved on from so quickly, never explored. Did Izzy’s “I wanna go” in the final episode mean he never moved on? That some part of him was still lying in that room with a gun to his head? You don’t become non-suicidal in a matter of days — is there still something lingering in the back of Ed’s mind? There was never a conversation about it, and there was never anything between the two of them that could allow me comfort in knowing that they had reached some sort of understanding. This season pulled domestic abuse, alcohol abuse, and suicidal tendencies straight from my own traumas and never held anyone accountable for any of them. There was no healing. There was no real talking it through. “Well, it’s not a rom-com, so—” Except it continues to be presented as one. Shortcomings of storylines of characters that seem to have been cast aside or mischaracterized this season aside, I cannot for the life of me reconcile how a show about kindness and moving on and being loved amidst all of your flaws could have a season so wrought with traumas and yet never discuss them. Never explore them in a way that allows me to move on. I love this show and there were so many good things about this season; I love these characters, and yet I feel so disconnected from it for the first time in over a year. Not moving on is worse, sure, but moving on without accountability leaves wounds unable to heal. How do you move on from that?

[literary-illuminati]

2024 Book Review #47 – City of Last Chances by Adrian Tchaikovsky

This book was recommended to me by a few different people, and in any case I am generally a pretty big Tchaikovsky fan. So of course I’m only getting around to reading it now, however many months later. Having put it off so long for no good reason at all, I can say that the book is in fact very good. Not Tchaikovsky’s best work (that’s still Children of Time in a walk), but a good read and one that left me curious (if not exactly excited) about checking out the sequel.

The story takes place in Illmar, the eponymous City of Last Chances – scarred and oppressed, tyrannized by cursed dukes and conquering imperialists, built upon a dangerous and unreliable route to other worlds and forever attracting the sort of people with no better options available to them. While the book has any number of characters, it’s really the city itself that is the star of the story – a story of how the theft of an imperial magistrate’s ward before he makes an experimental voyage through the gateway in the woods leads to a whole series of byzantine intrigues and bloody misadventures, culminating in an abortive revolution against the Pallseen who occupy and rule them. Which in one sense is an absolutely massive spoiler and in another just feels like stating an inevitability that was obvious from the first chapter.

The book was apparently quite heavily marketed as harking back to the whole New Weird trend of a decade or two ago – marketing that is lived up to wholly and entirely. The whole book absolutely drips with Mieville and Vandermeer. The oblique worldbuilding, the mundane day-to-day life built around the opportunities and inconveniences of some intrusion of the sublime, the awkward intersection of ancient magic and industrial bureaucracy, and so on, and so forth. The Reproach in particular feels very Area X (or very Roadside Picnic, as you prefer), but in general the city feels like absolutely nothing so much as Bas-Lag with the weirdness dial turned down from an 11 to a 5 or 6.

It’s a real triumph of the book, I think, that the world genuinely feels vast and strange even beyond the points where it matters to the story - that all the little asides and the ways something affects a certain character feel like just small parts of something far grander and more uncanny than anyone can hope to understand. Maybe I’m just painfully tired of rpg-system worldbuilding, but it’s an effect I dearly love.

Much like Bas-Lag, Ilmar is very clearly a magical fantasy city going through a magical fantasy 19th century industrial revolution (instead of steam engines its demonic slave labor contracted and imported from the Kings Below). The meat of the book is playing into the whole tradition of the idealistic, virtuous but tragic liberal revolution – 1848 in Berlin or Vienna, the June Days and Commune in Paris, Warsaw a dozen different times, Les Mis. You know the type. Students singing patriotic old songs, workers rising up against class oppression, ‘revolutionaries’ who are mostly cowardly nobles pining after lost privileges and criminal syndicate putting on airs being caught flat-footed by events. You can probably tell the basic story in your sleep. But for such a venerable genre, this book's honestly probably the best rendition of ‘fantasy 1848’ I can recall. Something which won it my instant affection.

The other thing the book just overwhelming shares with the Mieville’s Bas-Lag books is a very keen sense of the necessity of revolution combined with an extreme cynicism towards anyone who might actually carry it out. The university students are sincere believers, and also naive sheep the narrative views with condescension (at best). The professional revolutionaries are all power-grabbing hypocrites who have wrapped themselves in the flag. The workers syndicates have a real sense of solidarity among themselves, and also none at all to the demon slaves that are used and broken powering the mills and factories. And so on. The overall thrust of the book is a tragedy not in the sense of railing against the inevitable, but in the sense that triumph and revolution were absolutely possible – indeed plausible – but for the flaws and frailities of the revolutionaries who might have accomplished it.

Not to say that it's misanthropic – the book is very humane towards the vast majority of its POVs. Of which there are enough for ‘vast majority’ to be a meaningful term. It was something like 130 pages in before any character got a second chapter through their eyes, a feat I had previously only seen in Malazan – and that’s not including the chorus chapters which just give a half-doze vignettes from across the city. But yes, most characters (even the ones who are really just viscerally repulsive) are shown through their own eyes as someone who is at least understandable, if not particularly sympathetic. The sheer size of the cast in a 500 page book mean that no one character or set gets that many chapters from their perspective (you could easily have written as long a book about roughly the same events with half or less of the cast), but some of the dynamics that are very lightly touched on are just incredibly compelling. Its enough to make you wish this was a series that would ever get any fanfiction written about it, really.

Given the way the book is so deeply concerned with oppression and violence on the basis of culture, class, and nation – imperial occupiers, native population, refugees and immigrants used and scapegoated by both – it is kind of fascinating that this is a world where misogyny and (possibly? Not very explored, the only example of a queer relationship we see is hardly going to be concerned by normative society) homophobia just flatly don’t exist. Which would be less interesting if it was unusual, really – the same could be said about very nearly every recent sci fi or fantasy book on the same lines I can recall. Interesting because it is very much not the case in Melville’s stuff – the cultural impact of Ancillary Justice continues to echo down the years, I guess. So yes the imperial police inspector will extort sex out of a brothel owner in exchange for not stringing up the entire workforce for peripheral involvement with the resistance, but also this is entirely gender-neutral. Something very modern about how oppression is imagined relative to the ‘90s or ‘00s (or just a different genre of self-consciously feminist novel a few book shelves to the left).

But yeah, great book, I am compelled. No idea where the sequel would be going, but will probably hunt it down sooner rather than later.

[trans-androgyne]

Sorry if this is an irritating ask or anything, but could you please explain to me what people find wrong about the term transandrophobia? As far as I’m aware it’s literally just a word to describe trans men’s oppression. I’m not against the idea that it might have something wrong with it (as a transmasc person), but through all this fighting I’ve never once seen someone clearly explain what the problem is.

I’ve seen people claim that transmascs keep throwing transfems under the bus, but the only thing I’ve ever seen is actually the OPPOSITE way around, and only when I go searching for it (but that might just be because I make an effort to keep my dash free of that kind of thing) again I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, I just… don’t quite understand all this.

Sorry abt this rambly ask, I’m just tired and frustrated and I HATE that we’ve been pitted against each other

I will do by best to genuinely present and respond to the main arguments I have heard made against using the term. Apologies in advance for the length.

The most common in my experience is that “androphobia/misandry doesn’t exist,” or “men aren’t oppressed for being men,” based on the terms transandrophobia and its origin, transmisandry. It feels like a non-sequitur to me, completely bypassing the actual meaning of the term. Some people do include androphobia or misandry in their definition of the term, but many more don’t and just use it to describe the intersection of transphobia and misogyny in the lives of transmascs or even just “transphobia against transmascs.” I personally do believe androphobia exists in a literal sense—the fear of men that has serious consequences—but not in the way they mean it. They are attempting to paint us as MRAs, but nobody who gets any eyes on them using the term has ever argued that women oppress men as a class. MRAs are antifeminist, and the transandrophobia conversation is very much a feminist one.

The simplest is just that transmascs just “don’t need a word” to talk about their oppression. Our experiences are called “just transphobia” or “just misogyny” based on whatever they think applies most in the moment. Our theorizing is painted as useless infighting or just being jealous that trans women have a word to describe their oppression. I vehemently disagree with this one, I think everyone deserves language to describe their experiences. I think it’s impossible to ignore the way that both transphobia and misogyny interact to affect us in a new way (the very definition of intersectionality), and that we deserve to recognize and describe that intersection. Even the coiner of the word “transmisogyny” appears to agree with us on this.

Other people will focus on the term’s perceived origins. They frequently call the person who changed the term “transmisandry” to “transandrophobia” a “lesbophobic transmisogynist” and rape fetishist. From everything I’ve been able to put together on the matter, it seems to be that they’re referring to him having engaged in someone else’s detrans kinks as a sex worker on a private blog. I’ve heard from others he may have harassed people, absolutely cannot verify that. To me, it feels like another case of accusing trans people with kinks others find unsavory of being a sexual predator/sex pest, which people generally recognize as transphobic. In any case, even if every single part of their outrage was true, I do not think the behavior of a person who didn’t even come up with the ideas means that transandrophobia theory is inherently transmisogynistic.

In regard to “throwing trans women under the bus,” I think a lot of those ideas come from oppositional sexism. It’s assumed that what we’re saying is true of men must be the opposite for women. Trans women, including the woman who coined “transmisogyny,” have been using trans men’s perceived “opposite” experiences to prove their points for many years. They try to make a claim for transmisogyny by saying trans men don’t experience similar issues (violence, sexualization, demonization, safety issues, misogyny, trouble passing). But the reality is, trans men do experience those issues — some to a lesser extent, some in a different form, some just less visibly due to our chronic erasure — and have other issues of their own that trans women don’t face (like abortion rights issues). An attack on the idea that trans men have it easier is seen as an attack on transmisogyny as a concept. But it isn’t!! Transmisogyny is so blatant and oppressive of a system that it doesn’t need to compare itself to transandrophobia/trans men’s issues to have ground to stand on. Trans people are all harmed by transphobia in different, complex ways and none of us have gendered privilege.

Very few people engage with the actual meat of transandrophobia theory. We have really bad optics, I’ll give them that. It’s hard to like a word with “androphobia” in it, talking about men’s issues puts people on edge due to MRAs, and there are TERFs actively trying to recruit us. (The last part is used against us when it shouldn’t be, they try to recruit transmascs of all stripes for detransitioning and are only using us in particular because so many transfems have been awful to us because of the term. They are trying to widen that divide while most of us discussing transandrophobia are trying to close it.)

We (people who use “transandrophobia”) are often characterized as a unified movement that hates trans women (like in that post that blew up in the wake of predstrogen’s banning). We are not a movement any more than “transmisogyny” or “exorsexism” are. We don’t all believe the same things, the only thing we share in common is that we feel transmascs have a specific kind of oppression and deserve a word to describe it. And, obviously, we are doing our best not to perpetuate (trans)misogyny! The number of disclaimers I have seen people put on their post to make it exceedingly obvious to the piss on the poor website that they’re not talking about trans women is absolutely astounding. I’m sure our circles do have some transmisogyny in them, everywhere does! We do our best to combat it and I know my personal spaces have a couple transfems in them that help keep us in check. If we were being genuinely transmisogynistic, I would ask people to actually point to what they’re seeing that’s harmful instead of just dismissing all of us as evil bigots.

I think what contributes to the backlash the most is simply that trans men do not fit into current understandings of feminism well. People have gotten it into their heads that men are gender oppressors and not gender oppressed — which doesn’t shake out so well when you put being trans into the equation. I grew up hearing “ew men are gross” “I hate men” “kill all men” sentiments due to being in LGBT spaces. Some people really, really do not want to let go of the idea that men are bad and icky and dangerous and women are good and pure and safe, especially when it benefits them as non-men. Many transmascs themselves have internalized the idea that they are gender oppressors, traitors to feminism, more likely to be dangerous/predatory/misogynistic, and take up too much space because they are men/mascs. I sure felt like that before finding these conversations! I sincerely think that as we grow our transfeminism and heal from our gender essentialism a little more, this rhetoric will be left in the past.

[electronickingdomfox]

"The New Voyages" review

This one is actually a collection of short stories by fan authors, which makes the stories seem more like episodes of the series. It has also the distinct honor of being introduced by Roddenberry and most members of the cast. The stories are generally well-written and in character.

Some spoilers ahead:

Ni Var (by Claire Gabriel; intro by Nimoy) takes the plot of "The Enemy Within", but applied to Spock and the division between his Vulcan rational part, and his human emotional part. Besides the fact that I'm not sure such division works at that biological level, the two Spocks aren't all that different really. And it's not a very novel concept, specially right after a similar plot in previous book "Spock must die". But bonus points for Kirk giving the middle finger to his own reflection.

Intersection Point (by Juanita Coulson; intro by Doohan) is one of the best stories. The Enterprise is seriously crippled while navigating through an anomaly cloud, which is quickly contracting and threatens to crush the entire ship. Anyone who enters the cloud to retrieve a crucial component of the ship, is mentally destroyed by its eldritch qualities. Great tension and difficult choices.

The Enchanted Pool (by Marcia Ericson; intro by Nichols) is an attempt to write a fairy tale with Spock thrown in the middle for good measure. A bit of purple prose, and doesn't quite work. The resolution of the mistery is ingenous, even when convoluted.

Visit to a Weird Planet Revisited (by Ruth Berman; intro by Barrett) is actually the other half of a fanfic (Visit to a Weird Planet, not published here) where Kirk, Spock and Bones end up in the real world, right in the studio where they're filming Star Trek. Here instead, we follow the actors, who appear in the Enterprise and have to improvise to avert a danger. The other story was more fun, since Kirk and co. are more clumsy and hilarious in our world (being even "attacked" by fans), while the actors are just slightly less competent than their counterparts.

The Face on the Barroom Floor (by Eleanor Arnason and Ruth Berman; intro by Takei) is a really fun story. Kirk gets into a fight in a bar while in shore leave, is detained, teams up with a ratty thief, and crashes a party, while his crew search for him frantically. In the line of TOS best comedy-adventure episodes.

The Hunting (by Doris Beetem; intro by the editors) is a bit "meh". Spock goes into a Vulcan ritual which requires to mind-meld with a wild beast, and McCoy accompanies him. When Spock goes wild in the process, the good doctor has to hunt him and give him back his sanity. There could have been a more homoerotic fight between them, as in "Amok Time".

The Winged Dreamers (by Jennifer Guttridge; intro by Kelley) is another high point. The Enterprise crew falls under the influence of some creatures that make their fantasies seem real. So real that people can actually die if imagining the wrong thing. Spock is less affected, but slowly begins to hallucinate too, and the triumvirate fall into paranoia as neither they (nor the reader) can tell what's real and what's not anymore.

Mind-Sifter (by Shirley Maiewski; intro by Shatner) drags a bit at the beginning, when Kirk wakes up in a sanatory, his mind almost destroyed. It gets more interesting once Spock and McCoy start a quest to search for him. Great interactions between these two, reminiscent of "The Tholian Web".

After the eight stories there's still a little poem about Spock and Leila.

Spirk Meter: 10/10*. Not all stories are equally slashy, but the parts which do, are slashy in spades.

Ni Var has Kirk worrying about Spock all the time, and "human Spock" wondering if what he feels for the Captain is friendship... or love (something which happens too in one of Roddenberry's story concepts for a movie, around this time).

Intersection Point has a clear parallel between the anguish of a female crewmember, after a man (obviously her boyfriend) loses his mind in the anomaly, and Kirk agonizing once Spock has to enter the same anomaly.

The Enchanted Pool, where Spock refuses to kiss a beautiful female time and time again. Even when the woman assures him it's the only way to break a spell and escape. Even when Spock is doing far more dangerous things ALL THE TIME to solve problems. Of course, he considers the kiss a total waste of time once it doesn't work.

The Face on the Barroom Floor: Kirk is invited to a bar by McCoy and Sulu, who have found three women to pass the time, one for each. What does Kirk do? He gets out the bar two seconds later, puts on a samurai costume, and goes instead to a bar full of muscular, rowdy men, to get thrashed by them. Of course.

The Winged Dreamers has Spock wishing to stay on a planet with Kirk, just the two of them, for ever and ever. McCoy totally gets what's going on.

And I thought that Mind-Sifter would be about the love between a (quite unproffesional) nurse, and her mentally unstable patient, Kirk. But oh man, where do I even begin!? For starters, we have Kirk using his mind link with Spock to cry for help, across the galaxy and several centuries. And later he's concerned about how much can Spock read into his mind. Then we have McCoy informing the nurse that no, Kirk can't stay with her, because his love is his career and his... (trails off, having said too much). Gallant Spock carries an unconscious Kirk in his arms, and tells the nurse that, no matter how much she loves him, Kirk DOES NOT love her back (bitch!). If that wasn't enough, there's a lenghty conversation at the end, where Kirk almost melts in love and appreciation for Spock, and the Vulcan blushes at his own emotional display.

*A 10 in this scale is the most obvious spirk moments in TOS. Think of the back massage, "You make me believe in miracles", or "Amok Time" for example.

[katasstrophy]

I think everyone in the Bllk Fandom has agreed that everyone single guy would be intensely and stupidly obsessed when in love, but who are the biggest simps in your opinion and what is the simpiest thing they would do?? (Simp is used very affectionately btw)

nonnie, if they ain't simping, I don' want 'em ! tags. afab! reader. use of y/n once. suggestive themes in isagi’s. i think i use one bad word lol. kayla if you’re reading this the nanase one’s for YOU! 🫵

THE BIGGEST SIMPS OF BLUE LOCK (AFFECTIONATE):

—TOKIMITSU AOSHI

this hunk of a nervous wreck genuinely wakes up every day baffled by the fact that he gets to call you his romantic partner. it is beyond any semblance of logic he possesses why you chose to date him of all people — you asked him out, yet he was the one that almost keeled over from nervousness — and it regularly sends him down a neverending loop of self-doubt. your presence, however, soothes the brunt of that spiralling. it doesn’t stop his anxiety entirely, he knows that’s not how it works, but being around you dulls the noise in his head to a thrum he can manage, focusing instead on being in the moment with you. that’s why tokimitsu has the uncanny ability to spot you wherever you are, no matter the circumstances. he could be in the middle of an intense game with thousands watching from the bleachers or waiting near a busy intersection in shibuya to treat you to some umeboshi riceballs for your date, he’s so attuned to you, he’ll glance up and you’re there, cheering him on or giving him an enthusiastic wave with a grin that splits your cheeks apart, the sight making his heart beat erratically in his ribcage, this time not from nerves, but love.

���NANASE NIJIRO

this absolute sweetheart of a man is always talking about you, not that it ever occurred to him that he shouldn’t. he’s the type of boyfriend who finds a million ways to sneak you into the conversation while hanging out with his friends, completely turning the topic from him to you. a simple question of what were you up to this weekend? leads to an inevitable but hearty ramble of oh y/n and i went on a picnic back in kansai, and they made these super yummy wanpaku sandwiches- until basically everyone in his immediate circle can recount your life history. and nanase manages this so naturally, so effortlessly, that his friends don’t even notice they haven’t been told a single piece of information about how he’s doing until they draw a blank about anything regarding him, but can recall your great sandwich making skills and the promotion you recently received with great detail. on the occasion you go pick him up after late-night practice, his teammates frequently congratulate you on things you have zero memory of sharing. at your quirked brows, nanase only chuckles and rubs the back of his neck sheepishly, as if to say i just can’t help myself when it comes to you. he really is your most ardent supporter.

—ISAGI YOICHI

you know those how men wanna be treated when their boys aren’t around memes? isagi’s stance towards your relationship is the furthest thing away from that. he’s open and honest with his affection for you and doesn’t give a rat’s ass about who happens to see him being horrendously smitten with you. he spins around with you at the airport every time you come to greet him home even though he knows it’s super cheesy and the paparazzi may be watching. he rests your chin on your shoulder at formal events, gently swaying your bodies as he hugs you from behind to cure his boredom. he flashes a cheeky grin when you ladle him with sweet pet names, cooing right back at you. his teammates tease and make fun of him mercilessly for it, but isagi’s quick to spit back an aw, not getting any good pussy lately? sorry for your loss, humbling them so nonchalantly you almost forget to smack him for it. it doesn’t deter him in the slightest as he hooks a long finger past the waistband of your pants to pull you closer, ushering you out so you can go home and watch the newest episode of your show together, leaving his gobsmacked teammates behind.

—BONUS: RAICHI JINGO

he has such that’s my wife! energy. raichi would love to show you off and rub it into anyone’s face that he scored the fucking jackpot with you, so everyone can go cry about it while he gets to hog all your attention lol he adores you.

[manstrans]

“White disabled people want more because they think it’s unfair they’re not having what their white peers have”

I have not met a single black disabled activist that’s said this is the problem white disabled people have. Because it isn’t.

The major problem with white disabled people and the whiteness as a privilege is our medical systems.

- Dx’s are based around white cishet abled men. The further removed you get from this the more issues you face in the medical field.

- White people are more likely to be believed on their pain and issues, but more likely cis white men are.

- They’re more likely to be given accommodations and believed on their accommodations than their black counterparts

- Black people are more likely to be written off as lazy or unfit, because of their skin.

- Black people are more likely to be labeled as drug seeking and denied pain relief medications

- Black people are more likely to be ignored about conditions affecting them because “that cannot happen to black people” (skin cancer, the bullseye rash from that one tick, I’m fairly certain there’s more)

Like. Yes. White privilege exists for white disabled people. But not in the way of “I want to be equal to non-disabled people”.

Hell that argument is like, pushing their disability accommodations over other ones.

For example, someone forcing a black disabled person in their wheelchair not to talk about their wheelchair because they have anxiety or depression and it makes them feel worse.

Which is less an intersection of entitlement but rather white tears and how white people prefer centralized attention on issues.

Or when white people dismiss black specific issues and claim it’s because they don’t want a divided community.

So it’s no wonder they’re pulling the “trans men get preferential medical treatment because they’re men” because I don’t even think they know the complexities of agab and medical navigation, considering they don’t know race and medical navigation.

It feels very much so like someone who has read basic theorum someone posted, never engaged with the specifics of the situation with people who are advocates and is now parroting, but doing it poorly.

Because like, they’re not wrong, white privilege with disability is a thing.

But that’s not really it. At all.

Sorry for the long ramble, I know it’s not a focus of your blog and the issues you talk about. Feel free to delete this if you want.

yeah this is what I've heard too I think? correct me if I'm wrong but I think this is pretty solid

[melatonin-melanin]

menhera as a movement and how it can connect to race

most members of the menhera subculture tend to have one goal in mind, and it's to be able to improve their mental health one way or another. for those unaware, menhera is a mental health movement originating in japan, where the term was originally defined as "someone who seeks mental well being." you can learn more about it here.

a large aspect of the menhera subculture is creating art in order to vent your struggles. this art is expressed most commonly through mediums such as fashion, painting, and music. any topics are acceptable to create vent art from, and often there will be motifs related to the author's trauma. however, over time, menhera has been watered down to containing mainly medical motifs in creations, as opposed to the original intention of being an outlet for a vast majority of issues that people may struggle with. of course, this doesn't mean that people no longer use it to vent; there are still many active members of the community, at least overseas.

you might be thinking, "that's nice to learn about, but what does this have to do with race? isn't this about mental health?"

well, your race can directly impact your mental health in multiple ways. when it comes to race, it's important to keep in mind that it's not just the color of your skin. race, as it is defined in society, is also your hair texture, facial structure, culture, and traditions. race is ultimately a social category, as it is fluctuating throughout history and is solely determined by people in power. think about it: for those growing up in the U.S., did you ever have to fill out forms for mandated tests? do you recall that, as time went on, more and more racial categories were added as options to check off when asked for your race?

with all of these factors taken into account, it's no wonder that race can affect mental health. whether it's from racial discrimination in multiple communities and institutions, cultural-specific struggles, or trying to find one's own place inside and outside of race-based communities, any and all of these issues can be mentally draining and have someone questioning their self-worth. added to all of this, it can be more difficult for someone to receive help for these troubles when they're not surrounded with people who understand. not every person of color is going to understand what a person with a mental illness goes through, and not every person with a mental illness is going to understand what a person of color goes through, either. depending on the people around them, a person of color struggling with mental illness may feel much more hesitant about reaching out to others because of this.

menhera as a movement was created in order for people to express all kinds of feelings without needing any particular label for what they're struggling with. it lets you wear your heart on your sleeve, and embrace aspects of yourself that you have trouble accepting. you can be beautiful, despite everything. you can be beautiful despite having traits that you've felt so insecure about for the longest time, whether it be skin color, hair type, face shape, cultural significances; none of that makes you any lesser, regardless of what you may feel or what others may have told you. my own race has tied into many of my experiences with my self-image, and my struggle with that view is part of why i identify with the menhera subculture. for anyone reading this who feels similarly, this is sort of my way of saying that you aren't alone!

i feel that, although the medical association is most likely here to stay, the majority of the menhera community can also work beyond only acknowledging certain facets of mental illness. this isn't only referring to the acknowledgment of racial issues, but other intersecting traits that affect people's experiences with mental illness. gender, class, physical disability, orientation; all of these undoubtedly influence each individual's views on mental health, and the community should strive to be more open towards all of these different experiences no matter how messy or uncomfortable they get. after all, the purpose of menhera is to tell ourselves that we're pretty, cute, handsome, gorgeous, and all of those kinds of adjectives despite how our troubles make us feel!

[hero-israel]

Perhaps it's selfish of me, but as a non-Jewish person I really hate how the I/P conflict has invaded fandom spaces the past two months. People have been calling out celebrities left and right for so much as daring to express sympathy for the Israeli victims. I'll be going through a blog, after three fandom posts there will be a post like 'calling death to all (zionists)'. Insane conspiracy theories get thousands of notes (black friday??? spotify wrapped??? are they aware that the world does not revolve around america).

I wouldn't even be upset if it was posts passing around the links to donate aid or if it gave info on the statistics. Instead it's like suddenly everybody is an expert in Israeli history, suddenly their eyes have opened to the evil of the zionists, and suddenly they're all 'yaaaasss revolution kill the oppressor'.

All of these make me so angry because it's all fucking performative. Do they care about the earthquakes that have happened in the past two months? Do they care about the conflicts going on in other Middle-Eastern countries, some which have been going on for years? Do they care about the Palestinians being treated as second-class citizens in these countries?

'But they're not America's concern', well then neither is the I/P conflict. These people have zero connection to the conflict. Nothing they do or say will make the problem *disappear*. Yet they engage in useless 'activism' by harassing 'zionist'(mostly who are Jewish) blogs and sending them death threats.

It's horrible. Blogs which did not give two shits about Palestine before are suddenly cheering for Israeli deaths. Folks who have never opened a history textbook are using words like genocide and apartheid without knowing what they mean, and are doing blatant historical revisionism that even I, a person who has never lived on those lands, know is a lie (like Jews and Muslims apparently lived in harmony before the Europeans attacked??? Just say you don't know about religious conflicts that don't involve Christianity.).

I know I can curate my experiences, but it has been really disheartening to see so many otherwise rational people call out for blood everywhere on Tumblr. I can't even begin to fathom how much it has affected the people who are directly involved.

It feels useless to hope, but I genuinely wish there will be a day when people put all this effort in establishing peace rather than harassing random strangers.

We are at a terrible intersection. 20+ years of fake "joined struggle" newspeak has been absorbed by a rising generation that sees only despair in their socioeconomic and environmental future. It is all too easy for them to see their problems as unsolvable and inescapable - and also for those problems to be caused by Jews. What does one do when certain that their life is ruined, that it is the Jews' fault (bc "shared struggle"), and that voting is pointless? They will curate their daily life to attack and exclude Jews - in any space they can influence, including their fan blogs. It will feel like a counterattack - like punching up. As usual.