#just take my word for it that if they're a transphobe then they can go fuck theirself

[lylahammar]

Heads up. User "mornington-the-cresent" is a transphobe.

my reblog of a thread doesn't mean I'm endorsing every single thing every person in the thread has ever said so please don't send me stuff like this

[direquail]

You know the point of "protecting the children" dogwhistles, right? It's a reference to the idea that all queer people are child abusers. Super common belief among homophobes and transphobes, including (sometimes especially) gay ones.

It's also not just "a dogwhistle". When pressed to explain what exactly they want to protect children from, it's a ready-made emotional appeal to something that has broad social support. Most people, even if they don't like being around kids, are also not pro-child abuse. That's why conservatives go out of their way to invent (even if it's completely fictional) "reasons" why acceptance of gay and trans people amounts to child abuse. It helps them create an emotional connection with their target audience, and can be leveraged into logically ridiculous arguments like "well, if you don't agree with my platform, you must be pro child abuse, because I'm on the side of The Children".

"Protecting the children" is also super appealing to parents in particular, not because all parents are secretly authoritarians, but because it's super common to have a child and realize "Oh shit, I brought this person who can't defend themselves into the world and the world kind of sucks", and to feel horribly, horribly inadequate in the face of that.

I get very tired of people who mock, scorn, and ridicule people for falling for these rhetorical traps, or being snared by something that seems common-sense but disguises something ugly underneath. They are traps. That is what they're meant to be. That is why there are gay people who fall for anti-queer rhetoric, and get pulled into exclusionist or violently reactionary circles. We all have things we are vulnerable to, whether that is a history of being abused or a deep fear that we cannot protect our own children, who we brought into the world and are responsible for the protection of. And we gain nothing by mocking the latter.

I'm sure it makes some people feel great to say "well if you were really who you claim to be, you wouldn't fall for this shit", but frankly, that's a stupid-ass take. It misses entirely that these messages are carefully crafted by the people who hate us! They workshop these statements! They spend months or years trying to find the right message and when they find it they use the hell out of it, because it works. Because they are listening to the public conversations people are having online, and it doesn't take any level of basic agreement to be capable of regurgitating the party line word-for-word.

I am so sick of people who look at a deeply-embedded struggle over social and political ideals and think that this fight won't demand our whole brains and hearts and souls and yeah, we might fuck up because we care deeply and sometimes, people with bad intentions prey on that. On our grief and our fear and our rage.

And I'm frankly a lot more nervous around people who refuse to be aware of that, especially when they loudly mock the people who are willing to acknowledge their own fallibility and explore how they got ensnared in something. People are not moral machines, they are people.

[blitzwhore]

I just saw Blitzø get called Stolas stockholm victim I can't with this fandom anymore😭

😂 As outrageously incorrect and stupid as that take is, I'm going to go on a tangent here. I hope you don't mind.

I think every fandom has annoying people with awfully terrible takes in it. People with zero media literacy. People who hatewatch. People who think they're entitled to the exact show they would've wanted, which has nothing to do with the actual, existing show.

This is especially true for queer media, and especially true for queer cartoons. (Hi, yes. I was active in the Adventure Time, Steven Universe, Voltron, and She-Ra fandoms when those shows were airing, respectively. I've seen some stuff). Some people just can't handle queer cartoons, period. If the queer characters/ships are soft and wholesome, they're infantilising and boring, and if they're complex and nuanced and actually have conflict, they're abusive and problematic. You'll hear the same recycled arguments over and over again. Like, the shit some people are saying about Blitz and Stolas after The Full Moon? Is literally almost word-for-word what they said about Catra and Adora post-season 3 of She-Ra (and even at the end of the show).

Here's the thing, though! Those people and their bad takes are not what I want to think about what I think about a fandom. Those aren't the people I want to call the fans. They don't deserve that title. Not when so many other people are out there dedicating their time to making gifs and art and meta posts, and writing fic, and commenting/reblogging to show support, and sliding into people's DMs to scream and squee together about a thing they love.

At the end of the day, "fandom" is just a lot of people each doing their own thing. Which people you engage with and allow to stay within your line of sight will determine your fandom experience. Fandom can be a huge, convoluted, online space full of people who are constantly arguing with one another and whose takes make you unfathomably angry... Or it can be you and your 5 friends and mutuals who scream gleefully at one another in 2-note posts. You can't control what others post online, but you can control your engagement with it.

How? Well, here's what I personally do to avoid getting upset by people's stupid opinions online:

Filter 'critical' and 'anti' tags (eg. #anti stolitz #anti vivziepop #Helluva Boss critical #HB critical #vivziepop critical). Many people actually do tag their critical posts because they know it's the respectful thing to do!

If I come across a post that has one or more of those tags, obviously, I don't click through to see it under any circumstances.

If I stumble across a stranger's untagged post with hate/criticism that upsets me: I stop reading and BLOCK. Immediately. I don't look back. I don't finish reading. I don't engage. I just block block block. I <3 the block button, seriously.

If I feel my mind reeling from a bad take I just came across: I take a step back, close my phone, breathe, remember life is beautiful sometimes. Go back and watch an episode I really like. Clean my living space a little. Vent about it to a friend (but only if I really need to, because if not, I'd rather not dwell on it).

If I'm starting to feel the need to reply to someone's bad take (directly or via my own post), I instead make the decision to channel that energy into making fandom posts out of love. (I don't do this just with fandom. If I see something transphobic online, I usually react by reblogging a bunch of trans art or trans positivity posts on my main, for example). I like to think of it as putting some positivity out into the world to compensate for the negativity I just saw. So, for example, if I see someone shitting on my blorbo, I may make a silly post just saying how much I love blorbo. Or I'll make (or draft) a post about how interesting I find some of blorbo's actions. Or reblog another person's positive/interesting post about blorbo.

And finally, I stay the hell away from Twitter. Or at least, if I go on Twitter, I try my best to avoid any tweet that has text in it instead of just art. Even the people who have good opinions spend too much time arguing with the people who have bad opinions on there. I don't want to see people's bad takes! No, not even while reading founded and perfectly articulated criticism of those bad takes! So I just limit my time on Twitter. And again, if someone is putting bad takes on my TL (even if it is to counter them), I unfollow and block as needed.

All this to say, yes, it really fucking sucks to read the opinions of people who don't understand and who hate the characters and ships and worlds you love. Gosh it's the worst. But you can curate your fandom experience. You can focus on the things you can control. You have the power to decide if your fandom experience is draining or fun!

And because I don't know how to finish this, here, have a Stolitz kiss to heal you:

We will keep winning and there's nothing the haters can do about it. 😌

[leidensygdom]

I gotta say, one of the wildest radical transphobes' talking "points" is probably bathroom discourse. I can't even put to words how utterly detached from reality it is. It's terminally online stuff.

So, bathrooms. I don't know if somehow other people's realities are somehow vastly different from mine, but I feel like the extreme clear divide between "men's" and "women's" bathrooms is just not real. Where I live, stalls are often gendered, but how much they get used in that way is far less consistent.

For example: If the place had only the space to make one bathroom accessible, it's gonna be the women's bathroom. Always. It doesn't mean only disabled women have access to bathrooms- It means that the women's bathroom is also going to be used by disabled people. And this is common. Really common. Maybe it's because the women's bathroom tends to need more space- For pad dispensers and trash cans, for baby-changing stations (yes, I hate that these are only on the women's bathroom usually), and so on. Now- You see a guy enter the women's bathroom. Are you gonna micro-analize if the guy looks disabled enough to use it, or are you going to wash your hands and go on with your life?

Again, baby-changing stations are almost always located on the women's bathroom. It sucks- It should be in all bathrooms. But it's how it is. You see a cis guy enter with a kid. Or maybe not even with a kid- Just enters, wanders around, finds the baby-changing station, gets a diaper from the dispenser and leaves. Are you gonna throw a fit or just let this guy handle his kid?

Bathrooms get cleaned on the regular. A lot of times, you may wanna go there, and get told it's being cleaned, and just get asked to use the other gender's bathroom. Cleaning can take hours. If the men's bathroom is being cleaned and everyone is now using the women's, are you going to deem the bathroom to be the world's unsafest place or are you just go take a pee and leave?

Fucking hell, sometimes the stall you want to go to is incredibly dirty. It happens. No need to get on details. Just the kind of stuff that makes you want to not use it. Or maybe it's clogged, or maybe it's not working. Maybe there's a note saying "Broken, do not enter". Do you cry about it or just go find another stall- Which may be on the other fucking gender's bathroom?

Most times I'll use whatever bathroom is available. One is busy? Ok, let me get to the other one. I'm AFAB and while I don't present femininely, I still look like a woman to most people. Have I ever been in danger because I cleaned my hands besides someone with a dick? No. Grow the fuck up. This isn't even rare. People will switch bathrooms for speed. People will switch bathrooms because one of them is out of paper. Because one of them is out of soap.

The mall in my current city recently installed "Family" bathrooms. They're not being marketed as unisex, or inclusive, or anything. Just "family" bathrooms. For everyone. They're great. It's the bathroom everyone will use- Men, women, anything in between and outside of that, kids, disabled people, etc. There's a bunch of stalls adapted to different needs. There's accessible stalls. There's pad and diaper dispensers. There's stalls that have a big toilet and a little toilet so parents can go with their kids. There's tall sinks and short sinks- So disabled people and kids can reach.

And, to nobody's surprise, there's no reports whatsoever of any sort of assault in them.

I'm just. I don't know. I'm sorry you can't detach the existence of a dick near you from immediate assault. I don't know why that changes in the context of a bathroom- I've never (in my long life of using whatever bathroom) been in danger for that. And I'm talking as someone who has had some unsavory experiences in other situations. Grow the fuck up and maybe stop basing your views on imaginary scenarios y'all need to come up with to justify your hatred of a minority. Maybe if y'all got off your keyboards and went outside for once, you'd realize bathrooms work much differently from whatever weird ideal you have formed about them.

[txttletale]

I'm only saying that because when people made jokes and badgered me about being trans, it made me not wanna even come out :/ like people speculating if I was a girl or not

Hey I'm newly Transfem and have a lot to learn so I wanted to follow up on the previous ask about Aaron and his gender identity. Is it disrespectful to speculate on his gender because it could be misgendering? I don't think transfem is insulting, but I fear that a projection of transfemininity on aaron could be misgendering and disrespecting the identity he chose in death for whatever reasons he chose. Thank you for your thoughts and words.

i mean, i'm sympathetic to your personal account and i've heard many like it! but on the other hand i've equally heard people telling stories about how they felt unable to broach the subject but kept hoping one of their trans friends would say something or give them a push they felt they couldn't take themselves. i've gone back and forth on this kind of thing and i do think ultimately it is something where you cannot make a single proclamation that covers every circumstance. every person is unique and has a unique social circumstance--the only real answer when it comes to asking or joking about someone's gender is that 'it depends on the person and who you are to them and their stated comforts and discomforts and how well you know them and a thousand other things'

however that is all to do with interpersonal interactions -- i don't think any of this applies to bushnell, who is not going to be discouraged from coming out because he martyred himself for palestine and who is not here to read posts and be affected by them because he martyred himself for palestine. i don't think it's "misgendering" -- i don't think you can meaningfully 'misgender' cis people, because what misgendering is when done to a trans person is an implicit threat of transphobic/transmisogynistic violence, an implicit denial of the social reality of trans people's own self-understanding and an implicit voicing of support for the politics of depriving and subjugating trans people into the grave or the closet.

i think that is all aside from the question of whether it's wrong to speculate about bushnell's gender. obviously i don't think anyone should be making super bold definitive claims about his identity, or digging into his private life for information, or talking about his identity in exclusion to talking about the cause at hand. but i haven't seen anyone do that, is the thing. i've just seen a handful of trans women have what i think is a natural and obvious reaction to hearing that someone with the name aaron had a twitch account called lillyanarkitty and then being treated like they're spitting on his grave for doing so, which leaves a pretty bad taste in my mouth.

[elumish]

I think one of the most important unspoken skills of being a writer is knowing how to take critique and criticism of your work.

This is not about comments once work is published--this is about how to actually deal with and adjudicate feedback from beta readers, sensitivitiy readers, editors, etc. Because at some point, if you plan to go through any sort of publishing process, you will need to deal with feedback.

Especially for content/structure comments (as opposed to grammar/typos/etc.), most people have an instinct to get defensive. It's normal! I get it! I also get defensive. These stories are usually the product of many hours worth of work, of time and energy and emotion dedication. Having someone tell us there's a problem can feel like they're telling us that we did something wrong.

So first, recognize the defensiveness. You're allowed to start with defensiveness (if you're not a jerk about it). But recognize that you're being defensive, let yourself sit with it as long as you need to, and then figure out how to move past it.

The next step is to make sure you understand the feedback. Sometimes feedback can be confusing or unclear (the people giving feedback are human too) or it can be talking about a problem that doesn't really exist. You want to make sure that you know what they're actually saying and how it fits in the story.

Along with understanding the feedback, recognize when feedback represents a fundamental misunderstanding of your story. Sometimes people misread your story or aren't careful or just have a vastly different interpretation of your story than the words on the page, and they will give feedback that reflects that. You are allowed to say, basically, "this isn't actually commenting on my story but the reader's interpretation of my story" and move on. But sometimes a fundamental misunderstanding means that your story is confusing or unclear, and it may signal that you need to make changes, even if they aren't the changes the commener suggested.

When you're working your way through feedback, trust identifications of problems more than you trust recommended solutions. This is not to say that you should never follow people's recommendations (and what recommendations you follow may/should depend on who they are), but it is your story, and ultimately you know it better than they do. If someone gives the comment that the pacing doesn't work in x section and that you should think about adding y scene, you may realize that what would actually solve the problem better for the story is updating an earlier or later section instead.

Trust your understanding of your story but allow it to evolve. You know your story best and shouldn't change it just because someone had an idea--but you should also be flexible about your story and not stick to your original story just because it was the first idea you had.

Finally, learn how to be okay with having been wrong. Sometimes your idea wasn't the best. Sometimes what you wrote didn't work. Sometimes it was racist or sexist or homophobic or transphobic or ableist. Sometimes it was confusing or unclear. Sometimes it was a stupid idea. And when commenters tell you that, the only way to fix it is to learn how to look at something you love and say, yeah, okay, this was bad and needs to be fixed.

And as a postscript to it all--remember that critical feedback isn't a reflection on you or your writing. Every author in existence has gotten critical feedback at some point (or, if they haven't, it's because they have a terrible editor). Nobody is perfect on their first true, and nobody is perfect in a vacuum. Critical feedback is one of the ways that you and your stories get better.

[real-fire-emblem-takes]

hello mod goldmary here is the promised essay about alear's gender

so. let's start with the obvious. the "dragons as a metaphor for gender" thing. it is very easy to slot Fell Dragon and Divine Dragon into agab and gender identity respectively. Alear was a Fell Dragon, now they're a Divine Dragon. Alear used to be their agab, now they're something else.

i don't have the spoons to find screenshots rn so uh. just take my word for it lol. but in Chapter 20, after Griss does the big reveal (which can be read as outing in this interpretation), Alear's friends assure them that they are who they choose to be, not what they're born as. Timerra literally says "if you wanna be a Divine Dragon, you're a Divine Dragon." actually fuck it we're going all in with the metaphor. so Chapter 20 in this interpretation is basically: Griss outs Alear and Alear gets (understandably) really distressed; they lose all confidence in themselves, they believe their friends are better off not associating with them, they feel like they've been lying to everyone, and they're worried that the people around them will see them differently because of this. Alear's friends assure them that it's okay, Alear is their friend, they're not lying about their identity, and they even affirm Alear's identity (see Timerra's quote above).

speaking of affirmation, let's look at a place where. there isn't much of it. yippee, Sombron's transphobic now. "No child of mine shall live as a Divine Dragon. Death was this one's inexorable fate" yeah fuck you too bitch. in Chapter 20, Sigurd mentions that Sombron "turned his back on [Alear]" and that Alear's "life was in danger." basically, Sombron disowned Alear for being trans and threatened them with physical violence, which unfortunately happens too frequently to trans people. Eveyle also disowns Alear in her boss dialogue in Chapter 21. i don't remember the words exactly but basically Eveyle calls Alear a coward for turning to Lumera (in this metaphor, finding a support network that affirms their identity) and says that they are not her sibling.

Sombron then kills Alear in what is obviously a transphobic hatecrime (this is a joke, the actual scene fits better as a metaphor for child abuse)

the Chapter 22 flashback (the one where tomato Alear commits PatricideTM) is. augh. as Alear is dying in Lumera's arms, they lament how they wish they could be more like her. Lumera is their role model. Lumera is everything they're not in their mind, even though they did something heroic. they are who they wished they were, but they can't see that beyond all the pain and trauma they've suffered. the fact that they're a Fell Dragon is at the forefront of their mind when they finally fall asleep. their last thoughts before the coma are literally their dysphoria like. ough agh ow.

can you tell i'm normal about past alear

also yeah. the blue hair is just. dragon transition. lol

i will admit i'm. not totally sure where Corrupted Alear fits into this metaphor. uh. BUT Emblem Alear is Alear fully embracing their gender identity. they've had doubts in their Divine-Dragonness before (aka they wonder if they're really their chosen gender identity), but here they embrace it. congrats to them on their transition. i've always wanted to make that joke. the really interesting part is that they don't totally reject their Fell-Dragonness, though. yes, their Emblem form is fully divine, but their normal form? still red and blue. there are multiple ways to interpret this and I love all of them equally.

oh yeah. Alear's immune to transphobia now. Griss rubs Alear's Fell Dragon lineage into their face, essentially saying that Alear will always be their agab in this metaphor. Alear's response? "Lol ok. why are you such a bitch." pop off king (gender neutral)

AND THAT BRINGS ME. TO CHAPTER 24. i have. an entire thing written about it. on my blog. lemme see if i can find it

OK HERE IT IS:

ok so if we're going with the idea that Alear is a trans allegory then

does that mean Past Alear's interactions with Alear in chap 24 could be read as gender envy

(incoherent word dump about Alear's gender thoughts under read more)

“this is like looking in a mirror. what I see... bothers me”

suddenly i am not normal. i am pointing and screaming and sobbing

it's like if you ever look at someone who is everything you wished you were, and you hate yourself for it, you hate how you are, you hate that you were born like this, and attaining that is so clearly unachievable, it is literally physically impossible to change the body you were born with to ever match that. you hate yourself for even having those thoughts in the first place, because this was how you have always been and always will be, no matter what

and you have no idea it is actually possible to change this, because you grew up with the idea that this is what you are, you have to fulfill that role like this this and this, and if you don't you're defective and wrong. if you want to throw that label away in favor of something else, you're a failure and don't have the right to live. you grew up with this label and it doesn't fit right at all, like a shirt 5 sizes too small, but you have no idea it's possible to change that label into something right. that label defines you and sticks to you everywhere you go, it defines your relationships with others, it defines your relationship with the world around you, and you wish you were born differently, that you weren't so aware of this crawling feeling in your skin.

but you push all of that aside, because if your father realizes you feel this way, he'll kill you, like he killed all of your other siblings, and that terrifies you. you keep walking down this path that you hate, because it's the safest option you have. and being safe is better than being yourself when you don't even know what "yourself" is.

----

tldr Past Alear has really bad dysphoria but can't really do anything about it because they don't even know being trans is possible. and also that trying to experiment is incredibly dangerous in this environment

again i want to point out how Present Alear doesn't reject Past Alear. in fact, they seem to come to a greater understanding of themself afterwards.

when it comes to like. the trans lens of Present and Past Alear's relationship, i've always seen it as Present Alear coming to peace with their dysphoria. Past Alear vents all of their frustrations with their life, with themself (Past Alear comparing themself to the Corrupted and then immediately following that up with how much they hate the Corrupted. ough), and Present Alear listens. they provide assurance to Past Alear, and though that assurance falls on deaf ears, Present Alear never stops being kind.

so. yeah. Alear trans :thumbsup emoji:

👀

[a-faggot-with-opinions]

Responding To The "Aromantic Manifesto"

So I found this aromantic manifesto earlier today and I have many thoughts and opinions about it. Mainly that it's really bad, and it is homophobic. It uses a lot of big words and complicated language to sound smart, but it's not actually conveying good ideas. I'm going to respond to it piece by piece. By the way, I am aromantic, but I am also gay, so that's the perspective I'm looking at this through.

The main points of this manifesto, as outlined in the beginning, are:

"Romance is inherently queerphobic."

"The organisation of queerness around the celebration and pursuit of romantic desires and pleasures reinforces queer oppression."

"Queer liberation must abolish romance as its long-term goal."

Point 1 is bad because the activism for lesbian, gay, and bisexual rights has LITERALLY been all about being able to love whoever we want to. We didn't fight for centuries to legalize gay marriage to have someone say that us loving someone else is inherently queerphobic. Implying that gay love is somehow oppressing someone else makes you the queerphobic one.

Point 2 is wrong because we've been fighting for our rights for literal centuries, and we've already decided that trying to repress our sexualities for any reason, is actually bad and contributing to our own oppression. The only way to make real progress in solving queer oppression is by expressing ourselves loudly. It's okay to dislike amatonormativity. I dislike amatonormativity. But that doesn't give you an excuse to be homophobic.

Point 3 is even more incorrect. That's because a movement that is fighting for people historically marginalized based on who we love isn't going to have abolishing romantic love as a goal. It's okay to be aromantic and not want romance. The problem comes in when you try to force everyone else to repress their romantic desires because you simply don't like it. That's bad.

The next part is extremely insulting to me as a trans person. They compare gay men wanting to date other men and not wanting to date women to gay men wanting to date trans men. Newsflash, assholes: trans men are men!

If straight people can’t help who they love, then neither can gay people. Nor, one might suppose, racists and transphobes, and people who find disability and fatness unattractive.

This is an obvious homophobic argument. They're implying by this that gay men not wanting to date women is the same as gay men not wanting to date trans men, implying that men who don't love women are misogynistic. It's transphobic to compare the experience of being gay to transphobia. Tell me you've never spoken to a trans person in your life without telling me.

Queer oppression is not just the experience of prohibited desire. It is also the experience of hierarchical and violent desire. It is also the experience of undesirability.

What the fuck are they even saying right here? Queer oppression is literally about the experience of prohibited desire and the lack of experience of expected desire. I can maybe understand where undesirability comes into play, since especially as a trans person I get cis people trying to equate my sexual attractiveness with my worth as a human being, but experiencing hierarchical and violent desire?

This reads as someone saying that queer romance is inherently evil and we're oppressing ourselves and we're totally at fault for our own oppression. QUEER ROMANCE AND SEXUALITY ARE NOT INHERENTLY EVIL AND SAYING THAT THEY ARE IS HOMOPHOBIC, IT'S 2023. Why is this even a hot take?

The next section talks about the "privatisation of love," which is a model for why they think that queer activism has been missing the entire point. Let's see what this author has to say about that.

While the domestic sphere fashioned by heterosexual kinship relations has been historically designated as private life, queer intimacies have instead been regarded as a matter of public concern due to moral panics associating them with predation and perversion throughout history.

This is a very sloppy, incomplete reading of the way that homophobia works. I'm not going to get into my theory of how homophobia works in this post, but anyone who's actually experienced homophobia in their lives will tell you that this ain't it. For one example of how that's incomplete, in recent years queer people have been encouraged by society and especially the right to hide our queerness and abandon our culture in favor of mainstream society. This isn't trying to make us a matter of public concern, it's trying to make us disappear. This isn't how oppression works.

This next section focuses on how romantic love is allegedly used as a hierarchy.

People who regarded as romantically attractive are invariably upward-mobile, white-proximate, gender-appropriate, able-bodied, slender/muscular etc.

Maybe. Just maybe. That is just a reflection of how society views people who aren't white, aren't gender conforming, are disabled, and are fat. Racism, transphobia, ableism, and fatphobia weren't invented by romance. The way that romance in our society works simply reflects those things that already existed. "I just find them unattractive" has been an excuse to discriminate against people for ages. That isn't because romance is inherently THE hierarchy, but instead it's because it's used as an excuse.

Often, calling romantic partners “compatible” just means their placements on the romantic hierarchy are relatively equal in privilege. Calling romantically unattractive people “compatible” with each other, on the other hand, easily sounds condescending.

I don't have much to say about this. This is simply not how romance works. While compatibility is not a great concept and I have critiqued it before, this ain't it.

Queer romantic ideals remain incredibly heteronormative, only celebrating the most privileged and “compatible” of queers and condemning more marginalized queer people all the same.

This quote is really interesting because it's pointing out a very real issue with society (the fact that society encourages assimilated queers) and tries to blame queer activists for it. No, we do not want to assimilate. Society wants us to assimilate, and some of us try to do so. However talking to most queer activists will reveal that we don't want to assimilate. We want to be treated with basic respect.

Queer romance does not resist heteronormativity as much as it assimilates queer desire, making us hold on tightly to whichever relative privileges we have and hate ourselves for whichever we don’t.

Hello? This is projection. This is exactly what the person writing this manifesto has been doing the whole fucking time.

By peddling the illusion that romance can be made queer, heteronormative capitalism forces queer people to try solve their problems of undesirability and unhappiness privately by finding the “right” partner, rather than directing their anger towards public action.

Gay people in the past got into romantic relationships that often got us killed. Did we do that because of heteronormative capitalism trying to force us to find someone? No. What the actual fuck are these people even talking about.

We propose aromanticism as a counterpublic that responds to queerphobic violence by mobilising public resistance instead of escaping inwards. Aromanticism is a principled commitment to finding radically nonviolent ways of relating to others.

There's so much to unpack in this quote. Firstly, the author believes that aromanticism is a choice. It is not. I was born aromantic and even if I choose to get into a relationship that does not make me any less aro. This is also implying that (gay) romance is inherently violent, which is Homophobia 101.

If you already have a romantic partner, we are not asking you to “leave” them, but to aspire to love them in a different, queerer way.

There's no such thing as more or less queer. If you're queer, and you love someone, congratulations, that's queer love. It doesn't become more queer if you call it something other than romance.

I'm not going to go over the last part, but this last quote is some icing on the cake of homophobia we've just eaten.

Just be aware that similar hierarchies of desirability exist in sex as in romance.

It shouldn't be a hot take in the year 2023 that claiming that all sex is bad is a very culturally Christian thing to do, as well as being very traditionally homophobic. Sex negativity is weaponized against queer people far more often that it is against cishets.

To conclude, I'm just going to say that this manifesto takes real frustrations that even I have with amatonormativity, and turns them into denial that romance exists, and blatant homophobia. It's also very hard to understand, so if I misinterpreted something, please do let me know. While I do think that aphobia is bad, being homophobic isn't a solution and is just going to cause us to be hated even more, as well as alienating gay aros.

[20dollarlolita]

Heyy, I know this isn't really your thing, but do you think it would be bad for someone to get a wheelchair to cosplay at a convention, when they're not disabled? I know you go to cons in a chair.

That's a kind of complicated question.

So for starters, obviously there's not one person who can speak for every wheelchair user, so don't take my word as law or anything.

But the short answer is maybe? Probably?

First of all, if you want to learn how noodle arm your abled noodle arms are (and yes, you have abled noodle arms. Manual wheelchair users have arm muscles you've never heard about), try to propel yourself through a con for an entire day.

But to answer the question, first of all, it's not okay for someone who's using a wheelchair for a cosplay to take up limited resources that are intended for disabled people. If there's limited wheelchair seating at a panel, you better not be taking it up. You can get out of your wheelchair and sit, and you can't tell if another wheelchair user is able to safely and comfortably do it. If you're worried about people judging you for using a wheelchair and then standing up and walking, welcome to the reality that a lot of ambulatory wheelchair users, who can stand or walk, live all the time. Remember what that judgement feels like and make a note to never, ever pass it onto another person. Don't be using the wheelchair for cutting in lines or things like that. If there's a line for the elevator or the big bathroom stall, let other people go ahead of you.

But, I don't think it's inherently bad for someone to want to use a wheelchair at a convention, even if they wouldn't be using one outside a con, provided that they do not use resources intended for disabled people. I think that management of a convention seeing that there are more wheelchair users will be more likely to take into consideration wheelchair accommodations. I think that people who are using a wheelchair in public for the first time will learn very fast about how accessible their convention center actually is. There's a lot of things that I didn't realize were accessibility problems until they were problems that directly challenged my personal access. A lot of those things would cost zero dollars to change, but the people in charge either don't have the experience needed to know that they need to be changed, or they don't think it's a priority because wheelchair users are in the minority. Having more people aware of those kinds of situations is going to make a bigger pressure to stop those things from happening. For example, when was the last time that you noticed an a bathroom stall labeled accessible that had a door that opened inward? Most people I know wouldn't consider that a problem, but everyone who's been unable to pee because the stall isn't big enough for the door and their wheelchair is going to notice. The places I've been where moving the line over 5" to the left would make an inaccessible line able to accommodate my wheelchair (looking at you, Halloween Horror Nights). There's been "oh we have a ramp" and it's two 2x4's. There's all kinds of little things that cost no money that can be better, but no one cares until it's about them. You can get that perspective. You can learn how garbage it can feel.

I also don't want to ignore the fact that we frequently use cosplay to test out things that we want to do in our real lives. A lot of my friends who wear alternative fashion daily started out just wearing alternative fashion to conventions. Everyone my age or younger either a) has a friend that started out cosplaying characters of a different gender and then they later came out as that gender, or b) is that friend, or c) says weird transphobic BS all the time and so trans people don't want to be their friends. Deciding that you need to use a mobility aid is a really weirdly hard decision. I actually had a long period of time between "I need a mobility aid," and "it's okay if I use a mobility aid." I'm going to assume that there's people out there who are trying to decide if it's helpful and okay to use a wheelchair, who test it out by cosplaying a character in a wheelchair and seeing how they feel about it when it's part of a costume. I don't want to deny someone a chance to learn that it's okay to get a wheelchair and will help them.

But yeah, the short version is if your enjoyment of a convention using a wheelchair for a costume comes at the expense of the accessibility and experience of people who are disabled and don't have a choice about if they're going to be using mobility aids, you're a piece of garbage.

But I haven't actually been wearing cosplay to cons for a while (though I did cosplay Barbara Gordon at the last SacAnime) so if anyone in the disabled cosplay community has something to say about this, I'd appreciate the input. Like I said, no one can speak for everyone in this subject.

[metalheadsforblacklivesmatter]

Today's contribution for Disability Pride Month

Obligatory "I don't have this disorder. I'm raising awareness because I'm so fucking sick of women that drink while pregnant bitching about how hard it is being an 'autism mom'". (Autism mom in quotes because a) it's probably not autism and b) the phrase "autism mom" to describe "mom if an autistic kid" is stupid.)

(I'm going to use the term "women" instead of "uterus haver" not to be exclusionary or transphobic. But because I have a severe headache effecting my ability to find words. I am trans-masc. Don't cancel me. I'm not a FART.)

(This is not to demonize people that suffer from alcoholism. Addiction is a very real disability. This is to raise awareness for one of the only known preventable birth defects and hopefully seek help.)

Thank you for the people at @bfpnola discord for checking my post to make sure this doesn't sound eugenics-y.

Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD)

FASD (previously known as fetal alcohol syndrome) is a disability that can range from mild to severe dependant on how much the mother drank while pregnant. It only takes one glass of wine while pregnant to cause this disorder

I already know what the fuck this is. Why are you talking about it?

Because your only know about the severe cases diagnosed as fetal alcohol syndrome. You THINK you know what it is. But the reclassification has only come up in like... 2003? Fetal alcohol syndrome is like... the far end worst severity of FASD. And since the new information of it being a spectrum disorder, estimates have the disorder as high as 5% of the population (and I really think it's higher based on some information I'm about to share).

Fine. So what is this... spectrum disorder?

Very good! So this disorder is HIGHLY misdiagnosed as autism. So all those boomers bitching about "the rates of autism going up?" Yeah they probably caused it. Symptoms include low body weight, facial differences, poor coordination, difficulty maintaining attention, poor memory, poor emotional regulation, slower development, poor reasoning skills, issues with the heart, bones, and kidneys, shorter height, shorter head size,

I have all of those things. How do I know it's FASD and not the autism?

That's kinda the issue. The only real way you can know is ask your mom if there's ANY possibility she's had a drink while she was pregnant. I can't stress this enough IT ONLY TAKES ONE DRINK. For instance I have a lot of those issues, but my mom was so paranoid she wouldn't even dye her hair or drink coffee. Like there's NO WAY.

Like what do I do about it?

Mostly get your accommodations met and raise awareness. Like people are still actively drinking while pregnant because they are still under the pre-2000 belief that just a couple of drinks are okay. It's really not. Not to mention most women don't know they're pregnant until 4-6 weeks in. So they shouldn't be drinking if they're actively trying to have a child. Because that increases the risk.

What the fuck. People are drinking while pregnant? I don't believe you.

Each of these claims are linked.

30.3% of all women reported drinking alcohol at some time during pregnancy, of which 8.3% reported binge drinking (4+ drinks on one occasion)

According to the Center for Disease Control, one in 10 (10.2%) of pregnant women in the United States reports drinking alcohol in the past 30 days.

Despite clear evidence that primary prevention of FASD is possible if prenatal alcohol exposure is avoided, up to 80 % of women drink during pregnancy, many before pregnancy recognition

What? Women are drinking while pregnant? That's fucked up.

This is not to say people with FASD are lesser than.

But all of this "curing autism" when most of this "autism" is caused by a pregnant person's ability to stop fucking drinking for literally 5 minutes. THESE WOMEN THAT ARE DRINKING WHILE PREGNANT ARE THE ONES CAUSING ALL OF THIS GIVING "AUTISM". IF YOU DRANK WHILE PREGNANT. IF THERE'S EVEN A SLIVER OF A CHANCE THAT YOUR DRANK WHILE PREGNANT? ITS PROBABLY NOT AUTISM. ITS PROBABLY THIS DISORDER.

I'm just really fed up with all of these "autism moms" that also make "wine mom" jokes and making light of literal alcoholism bitching about how hard it is to be an "autism mom" because YOU'RE THE PROBLEM. STOP LAUGHING ABOUT YOUR ALCOHOLISM AND PUT THE DAMN GLASS DOWN.

But my parents are literally autistic

So they don't really know the generational effect of FASD because the new knowledge is so new. But since FASD is literally genetic issues caused by alcohol while you're in the womb. It's assumed that it can cause issues that are passed down.

But like this diagnosis is SO NEW that we really don't know much.

-fae

[transmascpetewentz]

A Rant About Masculinity, Cisnormativity, And Cis Gay Men

I was going to write a longer post about my ex-mutual, but I feel no need to put him specifically on the spot here because the issue is so much larger than just him, and because I really hold no ill will against him that I don't hold against all the TEHMs that reblog from him in complete support of what he says despite him claiming to be a trans ally. I think that there are two main things that contribute to the existence of a blogger like him, those being the intersection of how society feminizes both gay & trans men, and how a lot of cis gay men will perform trans allyship to make themselves feel better while still participating in a deeply transphobic culture and taking no action that targets cisnormativity in the gay community.

This ex-mutual is a person whose opinions, actions, and activism (or lack thereof) exist in a weird position. He often goes between fetishizing trans men to erasing us, to policing how we talk about our history. When I asked him whether he was transphobic, he replied talking about how he wanted to have sex with trans men, but I saw that he also made a post around the same time where he tried to "call out" a gay trans man for "fetishizing trans men" by... replying to several photos of trans men with "they're just some guys."

As you can clearly tell by now, he seems to be far more interested in feeling right and in trying to find problematic subtext in the words and actions of gay trans men than he is actually protecting us and being an ally. This is quite common amongst cis gay men who want to be progressive while not taking a stance against the TEHMism and toxic masculinity that poisons the community. And the reason behind this pattern of behavior is really simple: these men, due to their relative privileges not just for being cis but often for things like being white, thin, and perisex, oftentimes have other friends with those privileges, and if you have a large group of privileged people with relatively few people who do not have those privileges, you will likely develop bigotry. So the simple reason that these types of cis gay men do not want to confront their transphobia is because they are surrounded by others who have fallen further down the transphobia pipeline who may abandon them if they call it out.

While things like cisnormativity and toxic masculinity among cis gay men definitely do them a lot more harm than good, many will still uphold these ideas due to the way that cisnormativity benefits them relative to trans men and their lack of exposure to intersectional queer liberation movements. In my opinion, this phenomenon is what is behind cis gay men's performative allyship. They'll go on and on about how valuable gay trans men are to gay culture, but will be actively hostile to gay culture that first developed among gay trans men. They'll go on long rants about how the "toothpaste flag" is the worst thing to happen to the gay community. They'll distance themselves from gay trans men in any way they can when we're real people and not just words on a screen.

And due to many cis gay men's performative allyship clashing with their personal interest in upholding cisnormativity, they'll try to compensate for that by policing gay trans men. They'll accuse us of being the real transphobes if we step out of line or if we tell them that they're being transphobic for using obvious dogwhistles. They'll call a vague group of gay trans men "women" and call us the real transphobes for "hearing someone say 'women' and thinking 'trans men.'"

This brings me to my next point. Due to a lot of cis gay men (especially mascs/gender conforming, though fem/gnc cis gay men aren't entirely exempt) feeling hostile to the idea of having their masculinity challenged, they may contribute to feminizing other gay men who they perceive not to be as masculine as them for any number of reasons. One of these reasons being transness. Not to vaguepost about my ex-mutual even more, but he literally made a post saying "isn't it annoying when women will comment under a picture of any man saying that he's trans and gay?" This guy literally calls himself a trans ally.

I don't think that headcanoning someone as gay and trans is particularly female behavior, [redacted]. but again, this isn't a callout post of my ex-mutual. This is merely an example of something I've seen quite a lot of. This is exactly the reason behind my statement "the transandrophobe/femphobe/misogynist venn diagram of cis gay men is a circle." Because it truly is a circle. Toxic masculinity and misogyny lead to wanting to separate oneself from women, which causes one to see trans men as potential women necessary to separate oneself from. And, many times, this will lead to a hatred of feminine men, as the misogynistic gay man will see feminine men as being like women.

I don't know if I'm onto something about there being something to do with severe, collective trauma in the gay community causing a sort of "crisis of masculinity" within the community. But as I keep thinking about this, I think I am realizing that there is a lot more to this issue than at first meets the eye. Something to think about.

[weirdly-specific-but-ok]

they're/their, you're/your and it's/its

Idk suddenly remembered that a lot of you maggots aren't native English speakers and even native speakers sometimes struggle with this so I thought I'd try and help:

They're and their are both extremely common words, pronounced the same way, spelt differently, and with different meanings. Same with you're and your, and with it's and its.

Fun fact, pairs or groups like that are called homophones. Why? Because they hate gay people (I'm kidding, that's homophobes, with a b).

Okay, so THEY'RE is just a contraction (short form) of they are. When a letter (or more) is removed from a word, an apostrophe (the ' symbol) takes its place.

So they are becomes they're.

Which is how you can differentiate it from THEIR, which is a separate word, without any contraction, that's a possessive pronoun (transphobes everywhere faint at the mention of pronouns).

Possessive pronouns = words that indicate something belongs to something else, to put it as simply as I can.

Do not picture 2010 Wattpad bad boy kind of possessiveness. Don't do it.

The same thing happens with you are, it becomes YOU'RE. Which is why it's different from YOUR, which is a possessive pronoun again.

Similarly, it is becomes IT'S by removing the i of the is. Different from ITS, which is a possessive pronoun.

If you have difficulty choosing which one to use, the simple way would be to expand the contraction to see if the sentence still makes sense.

For example, They're going to yeet that out of the window. Is they're the correct word? They are going to yeet that out of the window. Yes, it makes sense.

What about, They're relatives are coming home tonight?

Expand the contraction. They are relatives are coming home tonight. It doesn't make sense, does it? You're trying to say the relatives belong to whoever the mysterious 'they' is.

The belonging implies a possessive pronoun, so the actual correct sentence would be: Their relatives are coming home tonight.

It's Wednesday (It is Wednesday), but The Tumblr sexyman ran into its hole (not it is hole, but its hole, as in the hole belongs to it).

You're reading this post (you are reading this post), but Your sanity is being ruined by this hellsite (not you are sanity, but your sanity, as in the sanity belongs to you).

(not for long, though, no one retains their sanity on this stupid site)

ANYWAY I hope I helped a bit with my weird ramble and if you're struggling with English, don't worry, homie, native English speakers around the world literally have fucking international competitions where the only challenge is to spell words.

(They're called Spelling Bees, look them up.)

(Everyone is struggling with English.)

(English is to languages what Tumblr is to social media.)

[sapphoscorner]

Btw the reason why I'm always so critical about the our life fandom is because I've been in fandom spaces my whole life I've learned when something is fandom drama (usually ships and opinions which is why it's dumb and should be ignored) and what isn't (calling out behavior in fandoms that make others (usually fans of color) uncomfortable)

I know I could just, not play Baxter DLC, And I don't but that doesn't mean that I can't look at it and point out its flaws because that is simply not how I consume media, me pointing out the flaws of something doesn't mean that I hate it. And as I said many times before, my issue isn't even Baxter it's his fans and how they treat him and how you can't say a single thing about them or they'll start Having a victim complex...which is dumb because this is a fucking 2D character get a grip.

I know I could also just make sapphic MCs with tamarack that doesn't change the fact that tamarack is heavily ignored and is preferred to qiu and some of you can't even spell their name it get their pronouns right (which is both racist and transphobic ESPECIALLY BECAUSE QIU SPELLS OUT THEIR NAME FOR YOU, HOW DO YOU MESS UP A THREE LETTER WORD).

What I'm trying to say is that I can Ignore those aspects, I can do that and I do because is not worth my fucking time but that doesn't mean that I can't get tired and rightfully want to speak out about it.

This isn't negativity these are conversations that need to be talked about because I don't care how much something it's a form of escapism for you, not pointing out the flaws of a community or the media itself isn't the way to go it is fundamentally going against critical thinking skills and ... lowkey it feels like you guys aren't respecting Kab (GB lady) as a person, she's a grown woman she can handle criticism. Also shit in fandoms need to be called out because they're never safe spaces for fans of colors and, surprisingly in this case, queer fans. If this is supposed to be a safe space if someone that is from a marginalized community you're not a part of calls some shit out, you sit back and listen and even if you are part of the community try to see where they are coming from instead of taking It as a personal attack

[odysseys-blood]

theres a lot of back and forth about paimon especially so i just wanna put in my two cents about it bc speculation on paimon and gender can be tricky and theres a lot to take into consideration. this isnt an end all be all post and not the best written but im just speaking from my place as someone who is trans (though i myself am tme) and works with gender themes in my own characters so this is gonna be kinda long

So! Paimon

a lot of the issue from the back and forth stems from how paimon is written by default. When you meet paimon, he's designated as just a pretty boy that likes to crossdress and they emphasize heavily that paimon is a man every time they talk about his femininity and how he presents himself.

Now crossdressing itself is not at all transphobic, hell drag is a big thing and its not uncommon for queens do figure out that they're transfem when they get into it. In fact a lot of queer people do push to erase gender boundaries within clothes because in the end....clothing is just cloth wear what you want be who you want to be, whether it be a woman wearing masc clothing, a man wearing femme clothes, or anyone just wearing something neutral feeling.

Where it becomes a problem is the push to enforce paimon's masculinity at every turn. While its good that paimon isn't a character that's put in to be played for laughs (as feminine men and trans women often are in media), it comes off odd in a way for paimon to have a feminine voice, dress femininely, love feminine things...and then at every point have it enforced heavily that paimon is a man. THAT is where a lot of the issue stems from at when you see it happening as someone who has seen transmisogyny (if this is your first time seeing the word, its transphobia that arises specifically for a trans woman being a woman. ergo the word being a mix of transphobia and misogyny) in practice it looks worrying. When you're someone who knows how to spot this kind of thing it can feel like paimon's gender nonconformity is being demonized (while they also highlight it. its an odd mix).

This isn't to say that it is a concious thing that's being pushed either i'm not saying the writers are personally transmisogynists at all, HOWEVER since transphobia and transmisogyny is rampant in society to the point where it subconsciously controls biases, thats how it can come off transmisogynistic. Think of it as similar to racism: even if you think you yourself are not racist theres still likely biases you have picked up or have been taught just because theyre so pervasive in society. This doesnt mean its your fault it just means its something that you have to unlearn conciously and put in the work to do so.

This is also not just a problem with whb because again like i said, its systemic. Think about other characters in media who are written this way, such as Bridget from Guilty Gear, or Vivian from Paper Mario. While these two are different in that their status as trans women have been solidified, the treatment they've gotten is largely the same. Especially bridget considering how she for the longest was the poster child for the "femboy" archetype and how femininity is enforced yet also discouraged in these characters until she was finally labeled transgender in gg strive.

All this to say...its messy and theres a lot of points to consider so there really isnt a reason to go at each others throats. Using paimon's canon pronouns and gender isn't exactly a problem and neither is choosing to instead see paimon as a transgender woman and using she/her pronouns. But at the very least it doesn't hurt to educate yourself also and understand why paimon's writing can come off transmisogynistic and transphobic. WHB is not a game thats heralding itself on being progressive (even if there are aspects to it that might seem so) so there's not much to expect from it in that regard but still we can be mindful and discussion isnt bad.

(also a footnote i dont think ive seen any transfem or tma players of whb in the tag....ever but if anyone is and wants to add on or thinks ive overstepped let me know)

[luvtonique]

Hot Take Time

Okay, I'm gonna make a hot take. I want y'all to understand that this is coming from a 34 year old man who draws furry porn for a living and has regularly interacted with well over a thousand customers in his life, as well as partaken in various online discussions, social media platform conversations, and I've been pseudo-canceled a few times, so there you go, now we know each other, run on sentence.

I need to get something off my chest and a lot of you (I'd very safely say over 95% of social media and people in the political system and even regular media) need to get this through your heads.

Here we go, ready? Say this out loud.

"Nobody is responsible for making you feel comfortable, except yourself."

That is something that people just don't seem to understand anymore. We're in this day-and-age of people doing everything in their power to convince other people to change how they act, change what they believe, change the words they can or can't use because they are "not comfortable" and they believe it will make the world a "better place" if other people adhere to a set of guidelines that these people have deemed are necessary for the comfort of the people setting the guidelines (at the expense, of course, of the comfort of the others who are being forced to walk on eggshells).

I don't know how so few of you have a basic moral of "Life isn't fair."

It isn't. Perfection is unattainable, and yet so many of you don't fucking shut the fuck up about how everyone "needs to act" or how other people need to "be better."

Shut the goddamn fuck up, holy shit.

Nobody needs to act different so that you can be comfortable, just fucking grow a spine, holy shit. I don't care WHAT they're doing. I don't care if they're transphobic, racist, sexist, misogynistic, LGBT activists, Trump supporters, Biden supporters, I literally do not give the slightest iota of a fuck. Do they make me uncomfortable? Of course they do. That's why I don't interact with them. For my own comfort I just don't. I do what makes me comfy, I eat pizza, I drink hot cocoa, I take a fucking nap, I take some painkillers for my joint pain, I do a weed gummy, I listen to music, I watch a movie, I sit outside and watch rain fall, I FUCKING RELAX.

I have rheumatoid arthritis and am in excruciating pain 24/7/365 and there is nothing I will ever be able to do about that. Do I complain about it? Sure I do. Do I appreciate it when people carry heavy things for me so I don't have to? Sure I do.

But do I stand there next to a heavy box waiting for someone else to pick it up and then go "EXCUSE ME. I HAVE ARTHRITIS. YOU SHOULD PICK THE BOX UP FOR ME. I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO TELL YOU TO PICK THE BOX UP" because I'm of some fucking delusion that everyone on earth has to cater to my disability?

FUCKING. NO.

You know why? Because I, unlike a fucking huge percentage of you all, understand that it is not everyone else's responsibility to cater to me and improve my level of comfort.

Especially if they're not getting paid to do that. If I were paying them, sure, that'd be fine. That's what maids are for, right? But they're not getting paid, and that's where it becomes a very bad thing.

Slavery.

But apparently y'all don't seem to understand that making people do special services or cater their behavior to you without any payment other than "not getting punished, canceled, attacked physically or screamed at" is literally textbook definition slavery. It is quite literally "Do this thing because I demanded it, and if you don't do it or if you do it in an unsatisfactory way, I will whip you."

Let's look at a hypothetical I made up myself.

Say there's a kid in school who, if they hear their name said out loud, attacks and bites the people who said that. There's been 15 incidents in a row, including two teachers being bit by this kid.

What's the solution?

Solution 1) Pull the kid out of school, contact their parents, suggest maybe therapy or putting them in special classes with a guardian of some sort, keep an eye on them, maybe they need to be medicated.

Solution 2) Tell the entire population of the school to stop saying the kid's name out loud and punish any kids who get bit because they broke the rule of catering to this psycho fucking bully.

How in the fuck do so many of you think Solution 2 is the correct solution? How the fuck do you think forcing 8 billion people to adhere to your specific demands via mass manipulation and forced control without any compensation other than "I won't bite you" is the correct course of action?

I have met people that literally their opening sentence is telling me how to talk to them and what things not to talk about around them, and when I asked "Why can't I talk about <completely mundane thing>" they literally had a fucking mental breakdown and got me banned from the Discord server I was in that they contacted me from.

And so many of you, SO MANY OF YOU will act like that's completely reasonable for them to have done and will say I AM THE BAD GUY for "DELIBERATELY ATTACKING THEM WHEN THEY ASKED ME NOT TO."

Holy fucking shit.

If you are so fucking bad off, so unhinged, that you have complete full fledged mental breakdowns over hearing a fucking word or because you scrolled past a text post you disagreed with or because someone voted for a politician you don't like, I'm sorry to say this but you desperately need to get your fucking head checked because that is NOT. FUCKING. NORMAL. BEHAVIOR.

"But Jay, being 'normal' is a social construct that-" SHUT UP.

Care for your own self, improve your own comfort and be happy with "Good enough" like the rest of the fucking world has been learning to do for fucking years, you actual fucking sociopathic manipulative shitfucks.

Thank you for reading.

~Jay (who has been labeled a transphobe for breaking up with a trans girlfriend after 9 years of her lying to him, manipulating him, forcing him to become trans out of emotional abuse, forcing him to attack his own mother, forcing him to pay for her HRT for multiple years and forcing him to be in a poly relationship while not letting him meet the other girlfriends she was fucking regularly while never meeting him IRL a single time. Yeah guess I shoulda stayed with her, I'm the bad guy for not continuing to let her abuse me because her abusing me was "making her more comfortable in the relationship." Listen. I hate to break this to you. But if you act like this, or defend these people, you are a fucking psychopath and I no longer give a shit what you think about me. You are a bad person.)

PS: I usually get people asking, when I make posts like this, "Jay, did something happen?" because y'all assume every time I wanna make a post like this, I just got out of a fight with someone and needed to vent. The truth this time is that this has been boiling up for the last 12 years I've been here on Tumblr, seeing more and more and more of this fucking manipulative sociopath behavior becoming more and more commonplace and accepted and more and more people are scared to speak out against it because if just one of you fucking psychos can damage our reputation and get us fired from our workspace, imagine what thousands of you could do. Well, I'm done catering to y'all. If you are my friend, I will gladly act a certain way around you to make you comfy because I always strive to make my friends, family members, ect. as comfortable as possible.

But if I haven't met you and I'm expected to cater to your comfort zone's rules before even saying hi to you? I'm just noping the fuck out of there because you are a sick, twisted pervert with a fucking power fetish who is blind to how much of a manipulative shitwad you are.

PPS: I know, the assumption here is "Jay's gonna start saying the gamer word to poke the beehive now! He's looking for a fight!"

No, I literally am not. Why would I? I'm trying to live and be comfortable why the shit would I go out of my way to rile the psychos up? I'm gonna just hang out with my friends and family and fans who love me and continue being a respectful person towards people who are respectful in return, rather than go out of my way to find horrible scumbag people and attack them deliberately because I wanna start a fight or some shit. Why would I wanna be in a fight? Why would I wanna deliberately troll or rile people up? That makes me feel bad. I was yelled at and beat by my father for 25 years why would I go try to get myself yelled at more? So take off the tinfoil hat, stop assuming I'm announcing I'm gonna be more openly disrespectful on purpose. I'm a respectful person, I don't attack people, I don't troll people, I don't do anything to deliberately harm anyone.

So I ask you very politely.

If anything you read here today has tarnished your opinion of me?

Please just block me and move on, holy shit. Do the right thing, make yourself more comfortable, stop interacting. Don't waste your time trying to "get through to me" just leave, it's not worth either of our time. Do that with everyone you strongly disagree with. If someone offends you so much you're shitting blood just block them. Why the fuck y'all gotta keep putting your heads in sharks' mouths and then complaining they keep bitin' you.

[neurodogical]

right obviously you can dislike something for whatever reason you like, but the way you talk about it still has an impact on the world around you? when people limply reference to Homestuck being “problematic” and Andrew being “problematic” it just evokes transphobic whisper campaign. this is how people treat trans girls on this website too, no? how many times have you seen camab trans people be avoided on “vibes” or “because they said something racist [citation needed]” like is it really necessary for you to contribute to a transphobic rhetoric in your discussion? you can just not like something you don’t have to act like there’s some deep political flaw with homestuck that makes it irreconcilably evil — people literally ONLY do this to camab trans people’s work, it’s nuts.

I understand that this means a lot to you, but my criticism of hussie and her work has nothing to do with their gender. you can criticize something while liking it, too. i agree that people criticize things harder when it's by someone whose TMA though, I've seen that happen. and I'm sorry that it's something that you need to look out for, truly. however, it's really strange to act like homestuck isn't very racist at times, though. do you not remember damara megido's entire existence? how about the manner of speaking of the condensce and other instances of them using aave in weird ass ways? people can grow and change yes, but i don't have to forgive racism and the groups she was racist against are ones im not part of.

I didn't say a thing about racism in my original posts, but somehow you knew to bring it up though... if hussies work spoke to you deeply, well, I'm glad you found something important to you even if it's something I really can't bring myself to like (speaking truthfully, "problematic reasons" aren't even my full reason for disliking it. honest! I was just in online fandom WAY too young, like 11 years old, and was the main moderator of a 15,000+ person homestuck facebook group for years, got taken advantage of by older people, etc.) I won't get further into it, but i don't like being called transphobic for just disliking a piece of media especially when I didn't even state my actual thoughts about it as a piece of literature, I just shared my broad opinion. I don't see how it's transphobic to dislike one piece of media created by a trans person. I never used the words "evil", I think that's unproductive and disingenuous when talking about literature, even if it's something i dislike more than homestuck.

if people take "I should go be transphobic now" out of "i hate homestuck and don't like the author much", that's their issue because they're not truly reading what I'm saying either and they suck. that is to say though, had i known that hussie was nonbinary before this entire thing unfolded, i would not have claimed she wasn't LGBT in my tags of that reblog. i haven't even read DTWOF and therefore don't have thoughts on it, i just had a visceral reaction to homestuck, remembered the hussie i made up in my mind over the course of 2014-2020, and said something rude that I wouldn't now. I'm sorry for how upset I've made you, but I'm allowed to have my own thoughts on a piece of media that's shaped a large part of my life.