#it's a weird fucked up story about violence and homosexuality and mental health

[re-break-my-bones]

re-break my bones (and set them right)

This is a blog for @townofcrosshollow's (also @signalhill-if) current writing project, an erotic horror romance about a depressed young man who discovers that the boy he was obsessed with in high school is suspected of murder. In case the previous sentence didn't tip you off, this blog is 18+ and may contain some risque imagery.

Currently at 10,300 words and on "chapter" 4. You can read the story here, temporarily, until I find a better way to share it.

Infrequently Asked Questions

Q: Content warnings? A: Yeah, a lot. Currently the gist is: self harm, violence, parental death, abusive dynamics, implied murder, suicidal thoughts, knifeplay, restraint, strangulation, and dubious consent. I mean, the consent is there, I guess it's whether it should be which is dubious. Q: Is this going to be interactive? You normally make interactive fiction. A: Nahhhhh, I considered it, but it just didn't feel right for this project tbh. Don't worry though, I'm working on a very atypical presentation for it that I'm sure will thrill and delight you. But I need to wait on art, and I need to get the damn story finished. Q: What is this story about? A: Borderline personality disorder. Q: Why aren't you writing Signal Hill? A: Borderline personality disorder.

[rextyles]

So, I talk about this a lot with friends, but I transitioned to a man at age 18 and went stealth for...we'll say nine years. (Last year I started identifying as bi-gendered, but that's another story for another time). One of the biggest stresses I give is that, realistically, it is much harder to be a man in society than a woman. In terms of this isolation, mostly, and yes--the perception of yourself as a predator, even when you're basically a tiny twink as many of us transmen can turn out to be. It's a frustrating situation particularly as, while I was a woman, I was assaulted, I have been through some of the worst shit of my life, and it was very, very difficult to live like that. All my life it's been difficult to meet countless female friends or transwomen friends and see and hear about the sexual harassment and assaults they go through, to see how society does treat them as either goddesses on a pedestal or children or objects.

So when I say that living every day, day to day, with the kind of starvation OP is referring to here as being to such a greater level this devastating to my mental health, I...do not want to under-exagerate that, or put down the realities of what women do go through. It is important to have lived on the other coin because I know how horrendous it can be. But it's also impossible to deny the sheer reality of men being incapable of caring for each other, of touching, of doing anything that isn't related in some way to violence or activities. Extra shitty because society seems to then push those men to dump all of that emotional need that's built up over a life time onto girlfriends or significant others, and their partner then becomes something of a caretaker in a significant way that is just frankly not healthy in the slightest.

I have no idea what the solution is apart from changing society at a fundamental level and reaching out to boys now who are young to try and reshape the world and society around us. It's a really, really difficult situation.

Do I regret transitioning? No. I got to be closer to myself, what I always have been, and seen and explored aspects of who I am to a profound level I never would've been able to otherwise. But the world men live in is pretty awful. It's very lonely. It's very isolating. And you don't even realize how touch starved or even just emotionally starved you are until someone breaks that barrier.

It's strange because men are also afraid of men. It's a weird situation because there's a very real guardedness around other men, strangers especially, and a lot more potential for open, accepted aggression and violence between them.

There seems to also be the concept that women are the only 'safe' ones. By this I want to give an example, while in Mexico I had a much older woman friend who would hug me. And while I normally am averse to that, there was this moment where it just struck me from no where the heavy impact of it. Like, it was just a motherly kind of hug and I nearly fell apart because I hadn't had anything like that for years, regardless of being surrounded by people. Just moments of touch that sometimes send me over the edge because, again, I'm just right out starved of any kind of connection, the kind you really can't get with friends as it's considered that with women it's only appropriate to get that kind of affection or give it if you are together romantically, and with men it is out of the question, period. In some countries and cultures even sitting within a certain amount of distance of another man is unacceptable and seen as "homosexual".

The whole system is fucked and I guarantee men all suffer pretty deeply from this across the board, absolutely. Also agree with OP that being dumb with dumb guy friends is great and I encourage (with all participants enjoying it obviously), and that the concept that men are inherently violent is bullshit. I can't stress enough that it's society, the way men are brought up and how they are taught/social interactions are framed, and the rules you have to play by that strains on you every day. I do tell people that there is a lot of fucked up shit going on in the world, women have every right to be guarded against men, are repressed, do deal with overwhelming violence and discrimination...but I still found it so much easier to live as a woman. There's such a heavy whiplash when you transition and boy the toll it has on you over time is tremendous.

Still bothered by the US cultural idea that men can only be non-romantically intimate with one another in war-like or competitive circumstances.

[m0th-punk]

This is something that's been on my mind for a long time. Long ramble under the cut

TL;DR: Grazer-razor has some of the worst black and white mentality I've ever seen and I can tell he has never critically examined his biases a day in his life.

Because I'm a terrible little gremlin who can't leave well enough alone, I've been reading these posts

Ignoring the absolute stupidity of these statements (I'm pretty sure the lack of rainbow logos is because in many middle eastern countries, homosexuality is a crime and these companies just want to make money. But I'mnot going into the nuances and implications of rainbow capitalism today.), something stood out to me.

Does Grazer... genuinely think nobody has ever criticized the Muslim faith? That we all ignore the homophobia present within the religion just because they're a minority? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've seen even some of the most staunch leftists criticize things like their horrible treatment of homosexuality or the rampant sexism often sanctioned by radicals. Even other Muslims, especially women and lgbt+ Muslims, have been critical of these things.

It wouldn't shock me if Grazer believedthat anyone who supports Muslims believes they can do no wrong. After all, he thinks any criticism of Christianity is hatred, and dismisses any harmful things Christians do as not being "real" Christianity in a classic case of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

Note how he didn't even respond to the first asks comments, just accused them of being me (because obviously any time someone sees his blog it's all my fault /s)

So it seems like in Grazer's mind, there are only two options when it comes to religion: Uncritically praise and defend everything a religion does no matter how heinous it is and justify it because it's done in a God's name, or condemn anyone who practices it as hateful terrorists. Because he doesn't see people doing the former for Christians, he automatically assumes that they're doing the latter, and vice versa for Muslims.

Also note how he gets mad when muslim faith is "respected" (again, homosexuality is criminalized in many of these areas) but then demands a secular children's show cater to his religion for the sake of his precious childhood.

(Also, can we just talk about the absolute fucking cruelty in this answer? There are people out there that had their childhoods ruined by abuse, illness, losing loved ones, homelessness, poverty, bullying, near-death experiences, having their countries torn apart by war, a shitty foster care system, teen pregnancies, and so many other things that can absolutely destroy a life.  Grazer's was ruined by…  *checks notes* a cartoon character supporting gay rights and a drag queen singing a cutesy children's song.  So yeah, if that's the worst part of his childhood he's pretty damn lucky, and the fact that he has the gall to still complain absolutely makes him selfish and ignorant. It's disrespectful, plain and simple, and if he were truly a good Christian he'd have some compassion.)

Okay, so Grazer has some weird "rules for me but not for thee" shit when it comes to religion. This isn't news. Where am I going with this?

Well, turns out he has this opinion about more than just religion. Know how I know this? His response to ESRB ratings and trigger warnings.

So it seems like Grazer sees the ESRB as some sort of moral compass, in a way. Something being rated E or E10 means it's pure and good and wholly unproblematic, while anything higher means it's evil and disgusting and he can't even look at it.

This is further confirmed by this post, where he flat-out states he sees the ESRB as deeming what things are and are not morally acceptable.

Now Grazer, I'm gonna explain this as best as I can, because it seems like you don't quite understand this. Read very carefully.

This is not the purpose of the ESRB rating system.

I repeat, this is NOT the purpose of the ESRB rating system.

The ESRB does not decide on what is and is not morally correct. It simply says "This game contains these topics, and as such is most suitable for people in this age group.". That's it. It's a guideline, not a rule.

Let's take cartoon violence, for instance. It's a very common warning the ESRB puts on games. Almost every game from Mario to Sonic to Crash Bandicoot and even Monster Tale has this warning. These games are all rated E for everyone. Does this mean those games are promoting violence to children, or claiming things like Bowser kidnapping Peach or Pinstripe trying to gun down Crash are perfectly okay and morally correct? Of course not. It's simply saying that these games contain mild, non-graphic violence, but most children should be able to handle seeing it.

On the other side of the coin, let's take a look at the warnings for nudity and sexual themes. Most games that contain these topics are rated T at the lowest and AO at the highest. This obviously isn't saying that nudity and sex are inherently bad or evil. All it's saying is that these topics are best handled by adults (And, regardless of morality, it is illegal to distribute sexual content to minors unless it's meant to be educational, like a health class textbook).

A few extra points:

. Games can be rated different things in different countries. Different countries have different regulations. Do you know why the blood in Danganronpa is pink? It's because in Japan, games with excessive amounts of blood and gore are given a Z rating (Japan's equivalent to an AO rating). They got around this by making the blood pink, securing the game its desired M rating. Meanwhile here in America, Mortal Kombat is allowed to show as many graphic, brutal deaths as it wants and still receive an M rating.

. ESRB ratings are not legally enforceable. I was so convinced as a 16 year old that the employees at gamestop would try to card me or something when I was picking up a copy of Bayonetta, and I was surprised when they simply rang me up in two seconds, no questions asked. It doesn't happen. For fuck's sake, one of the first games I ever played, at the tender age of four, was Soul Edge. A T rated game. The only instance ESRB ratings are legally enforced is in the case of AO ratings, as these games often contain incredibly graphic violenceor sexual content. If this outrage is coming from the idea that certain ratings will keep younger people from playing these games from a legal standpoint, don't worry. A nine year old is not gonna get arrested for playing Among Us. Just don't buy them GTA San Andreas or Leisure Suit Larry and everything will be fine.

. No two consumers are exactly alike. While one 13 year old may be perfectly fine with the jumpscares in Amnesia, another may be too scared to even go near the piano in Super Mario 64. That doesn't mean either of these games is rated incorrectly. The ESRB is there, once again, as a recommendation for the average consumer, and doesn't take individual experience into account. An individual experience is not their responsibility. It's also on parents (or you yourself!) To decide what the consumer can or can't handle.

"But Haley," I hear you say, "What if this piece of media DOES contain something morally bad?"

Well it's simple. You are allowed to like things AND still criticize the bad parts of it.

Hold on now, I'm not telling you that it's perfectly alright to enjoy things like Birth of a Nation or anything like that! Contrary to popular belief, there are some pieces of media that are truly too steeped in hatred and morally reprehensible things to be supported, even through a critical lense. The only merit things like that have is to serve as a warning: This is a terrible thing made for terrible reasons, and we should not allow it to happen again.

But outside of those rare circumstances, it's not so cut and dry.

Let's take a piece of media i actually enjoy, for instance, so you know I'm not a hypocrite: Persona 5.

Persona 5 is easily one of my favorite games in the Persona series. It does a lot of interesting stuff, the artstyle and soundtrack are (in my opinion) the best in the series, and overall it's very enjoyable for me.

But, like anything, it's not perfect. I'm incredibly uncomfortable with the hypocrisy the game has in regards to the sexualization of teenagers. While Kamoshida is rightfully condemned for his sexualization of teenage girls and Ann's persona awakening comes from rejecting this objectification, the game and story undermine it by not only putting Ann in a sexually revealing outfit, but also making light of Ryuji's sexual harassment by adult men (Allegedly Persona 5 Royal tries to fix this by making the men drag enthusiasts who think Ryuji would look good in drag and giving them more sympathetic personalities, but it's still really weird and hypocritical of the game to do this.). The teenage protagonist is also allowed the option to date adult women, including his teacher, and the game rarely if ever touches on the problems with this.

The game's homophobia also left a bad taste in my mouth. Aside from the aforementioned men who sexually harass Ryuji, the only other canon LGBT+ character is a bar owner who is either a drag queen or a trans woman (or both?). Sure, she's portrayed as being kind and protective of the protagonist, but there isn't much room to interact with her or learn more about her. On top of that, not only can the protagonist not romantically pursue his male friends (A feature that even the SECOND persona game had), he's not even allowed to give them gifts or platonically show affection towards them without the dialogue mocking him. The game that allows a teenage boy to date his teacher won't allow him to simply give his male friends a present.

And yet, despite those criticisms, I do still enjoy the game. I don't consider the game irredeemable garbage based on those poorly handled topics alone. And I also understand that for some people, those topics make them so uncomfortable that they don't want to play the game at all, and I completely respect that.

Criticizing the things you enjoy is not only normal, it's oftentimes healthy. Being able to step back and say "I like this thing, but I don't like the bad things it's done. This thing would be better if these issues were fixed." Sure, sometimes some people tend to complain a bit too much about the media they supposedly enjoy, but for the most part being able to acknowledge the bad with the good is a good skill to have.

Oh, wait, all of this means nothing because Grazer thinks that critically enjoying things is nothing more than an excuse to consume media he doesn't personally agree with. Okay then.

So if he can't even realize something as simple as "it's okay to criticize some parts of media that you otherwise enjoy", how can he be expected to look critically at a religion that he's been raised in and around all his life?

Soooo yeah, Grazer has some serious problems with black and white thinking that he refuses to acknowledge, further worsened by the fact that he's practically been brainwashed into believing that Christianity is the ultimate moral compass that everyone should follow. I understand that this tends to be an issue for neurodivergent people, but it's not an excuse for the actions he does that are related to these things (sending death threats to the ESRB, antagonizing others, etc.