#long : (

[jingerpi]

[do not use this as justification for sexist bigotry, this is a personal thought relating to the investigation of ideas and not a statement meant to be derisive towards feminist theories.]

disclaimer out of the way, I've been thinking about transmisogyny a lot lately and it's really interesting to consider the nuances of. I think a lot of the objections to transfeminist theory simply come from sexism, but there is one point of potential critique that I think warrants further inquiry. to get at this we have to first clarify something else though.

the distinction of tme/tma might sound like an issue to a lot of transmisogynists, but most of their objections die away as soon as you clarify it's not "never ever experiences transmisogyny" and is perhaps more accurately "trans misogyny exemptable" as this gets at the reality of trans women facing transmisogyny regardless of what we do, there is no way out, we are the intended targets. other people face transmisogyny as a sort of warning, a clarifying statement that "if you are transfeminine we will Other you" and they're able to exempt themselves from this in most situations by clarifying "I am not a trans woman" regardless of the particular form that takes.

not everyone is able to exempt themselves from all gender related bigotry though. you cannot, for example, make this distinction (of not being transfem) to escape intersexism, which is why many intersex repeatedly experience gender based oppression and cannot opt out of it. this is oppression is fundamentally not an result of transmisogyny, it is a result of intersexism.

with that clarification out of the way, I think there is an understandable critique regards the simplification that

"men have power over women" <- correct, easily verifiable, almost everybody agrees. "Black men have power of Black women" <- still correct and non controversial (at least in feminist spaces). then you go to "trans men have power over trans women" and everybody freaks out, yeah? like people start to object to this understanding suddenly, even though we've only changed 1 thing, which we've changed before and nobody found issue with it in those other areas. many of these objections come transmisogyny, but I don't think it actually tells the whole story to write all of this off as transmisogyny.

I think why we run into an issue with this understanding (again, critique, not refutation) is that trans people's gender is often, perhaps even usually in flux. the statement "men have power over women" is trivially true, and is a statement on gender and misogyny. this comparison can be brought to trans men and trans women, but it's not without nuance, as the most basic information we can get from this is applied to gender, something which is often actively shifting for trans people.

the reason is don't see this as some kind of disproof of transmisogyny or something should be clear though, for two reasons (aside from the obvious statement towards trends rather than specific instances)

1. transmisogyny is fundamentally not the same thing as misogyny at large, and

2. though trans-gender is often shifting, we can use the prior distinction of exemptable and intended targets to largely do away with this problem.

despite the framework of misogyny not applying 1-1 onto trans people (many who identify as trans men have 'correctly' experienced misogyny), we can still see how it is useful to look at the intersection of misogyny and transphobia. While yes, trans men often experience both of these things, it is often not simultaneously like it is for trans women. As trans women transition our closeness to womanhood tends to increase so as our experiences of transphobia increase, so too do our experiences of misogyny- where as the opposite goes for trans men. it's not that one can't be sexist and transphobic to a trans man, they're not transmisogyny exempt in some metaphysical sense, but rather that for trans women our transness and our womanhood have a positive correlation, our transness and our womanhood are inseparable, we cannot denounce one by leaning on the other.

on the contrary, while trans men will still face transphobia and sexism which denies the validity of their transness and treats them with misogyny, as they transition their relationship begins to more closely match that of men, because of course they are men, this leads to them being able to escape transmisogyny not by being part of some magically 100% transmisogyny excluded class, but because they have the ability to meaningfully denounce trans feminity, to put down womanhood and to become "one of the guys", it's conditional, yes, but often the conditions are not to "pass" in the traditional sense but rather to express views aligning with the patriarchy and derision of feminity, i.e, misogyny.

I think we can see this in the popular responses to tme/tma discourse within the trans community: many trans men correctly recognize what is happening and stand in solidarity, transmisogyny is a genuine problem and it makes sense to talk about the intersection between misogyny and transphobia, trans men even experience both at times, so it is a good idea to stand against. Then, some men begin to talk about their experiences with denial of who they are and the misogyny that can come with that. This too is rather sensible, though it doesn't somehow counteract or disprove transmisogyny generally, it can be studied and acknowledge much in the same way we understand cis men are tested with transmisogyny to enforce what others call "toxic masculinity", despite them not being transfeminine. Then we have a third and wildly popular group, who appropriate the struggles of the second group, where co-option occurs by men who buy into or express sexist ideas for the sake of more fully exempting themselves from transmisogyny. Along with this, instead of recognizing the basis for transmisogyny as intersecting gender based oppression, because doing so would show their fleeting relationship to it, they redefine it as being intersection of two metaphysical identities generally, and thus "transandrophobia" is born, posed as being on an equal to transmisogyny, after all, they're both born from intersecting identities are they not?

of course, we know Androphobia is not something which actually exists, nor is Misandry - these arent axis' of oppression, and they largely know this too, but their goal is to obfuscate the ways in which marginalized men still benefit from their manhood. it takes what I think can be a rather genuine expression that trans men experience both transphobia and misogyny, and instead of grappling with the ways they can societally put down others to gain exemption from transmisogyny, the way their relationship to it is transient, they instead cling to it and invent new terms or fall on old bigoted talking points to justify doing so. "transandrophobia" yes, but also "sex based oppression" and "male/female socialization" these terms and rhetoric are regularly used against transfeminists by these trans men who have exempted themselves from transmisogyny, who have sided with patriarchy over their trans sisters, instead allying with the general terf movement at large and often implicitly misgendering themselves in the process.

and just to be clear, not exempting yourself doesn't mean you will experience the brunt of transmisogyny or to the same degree trans women do - you may be called slurs by bigots, may be harassed in given instances, or sometimes worse, but the systemic forces of transmisogyny go far deeper than negative interactions with individuals, and these transmisogynistic forces are again, aimed specifically at trans women. While I want to recognize the ways in which transmisogyny permeates all of society, do not see this and mistake it for support for the idea that everyone experiences it equally and their relationship is only changed by putting down transfemininity, it is and always has been about targeting transfemininity, the reason I clarify exemptable is due to society's constant enforcing of transmisogynistic ideas on everyone, even if the worst persecution is specifically and intentionally reserved for trans women

Lastly I want to say that these ideas are still developing and my understanding of them will likely change with time and discussion. I dont think these ideas are particularly new, they seem to underpin a lot of discussion on these topics, but this is my attempt to bring them from an implicit unspoken agreement into a more firmly expressed position. Doing so is necessarily going to expose flaws and I see that as a good thing, as doing so is required to elevate understanding of these theories to a higher level. Some of these flaws will be with my expression and understanding, and I will work to correct those, but some will likely be with the ideass themselves and it will take time for them to develop. Please read in good faith, thank you.

[k-eke]

Behold the biggest baguette ever created 🥖

Not a gif but wanted to post it there since it's really long lol

(Seems Tumblr can't handle the power of this baguette!)

[masterhallmark]

Rant incoming

I feel like the problem with a lot of Disney's live action remakes (and arguably Wish) is they're trying to appeal to a crowd that no longer exists, namely the people who used to claim that the Disney Princesses were sexist.

All the interviews tend to include, "Well she's not chasing a MAN anymore" which...almost no one sees the princesses like that, anymore. Virtually NO ONE still believes the princesses are man-chasing sexist caricatures of women.

Cinderella is now hailed as an abuse victim who stayed strong long enough to get help to get out of her situation. Anyone who says she should have saved herself is basically regarded as a victim blamer. And it's very clear in the film she wasn't looking to marry the prince, she just wanted a night off. She was the only one who wasn't in line to meet him. She didn't find out she met the prince until he went looking for her!

Snow White is now hailed for her negotiation skills, ability to calm down after extreme stress (she had a moment of panic and had to cry for a bit, but who wouldn't after finding out The Queen hired someone to kill you?), and ability to take charge of a house of adult men. And again, she was an abuse victim, this time trying to escape ASSASSINATION ATTEMPTS. While she dreamed of her prince, it was secondary to her main goal of SURVIVAL. There are also entire video essays about how Snow White gave hope to people during The Great Depression.

Everyone acknowledges that Ariel wanted to be human BEFORE meeting Eric. We all know she was a nerd hyperfixating on humans, and also standing up to her prejudiced father.

We understand Sleeping Beauty wasn't the main character, the Three Good Fairies were, AND PHILLIP WOULD NEVER HAVE BEATEN MALEFICENT WITHOUT THEM! He literally depended on them! WOMEN SAVED THE DAY! But even then, is it really such a sin for a girl to fantasize about romance and fall for someone with corny pickup lines?

We all understand Jasmine just wanted someone to treat her LIKE A PERSON. She rejected every Prince before Aladdin because they treated her like a prize. So why did they need her to want to be Sultan? How did that make her more feminist when she already wanted to be treated like an equal and have a say in her future? Is it only empowering if you want a career in politics?

We admire that Belle, despite living in a judgemental village, was kind to everyone (even though she found the village life dull), and her story teaches girls that the guy everyone else loves isn't always a good guy. What's sexist about teaching girls about red flags? And she didn't start being nice to The Beast until he started treating her with respect and kindness.

Do I really NEED to defend Mulan or Tiana? I think they speak for themselves.

Rapunzel was yet another abuse victim who just needed a little help to get out of her bad situation. In this case, she also needed to learn that she was an abuse victim, and that what Mother Gothel did WASN'T normal, much like many victims of gaslighting.

And don't get me started on the non-princess animals.

Perdita had a healthy relationship with Pongo to the point she was open to express her pregnancy fears to him, and was ready to TEAR APART Cruella's goons for daring to touch her puppies as well as adopting the other puppies. Like, she was so ferocious the goons mistook her for a hyena! She's basically that "I AM THAT GIRL'S MOTHER!" scene from SpyXFamily if Yor were a dog. She and her husband were a TEAM.....but they made a Cruella live action to turn her into a girlboss?! The literal animal abuser!? THAT'S the woman you wanted to put on a pedestal when Perdita was RIGHT THERE!?

Duchess kept her kittens calm after they had been catnapped and was classy as heck. Nice to everyone regardless of social class during a time period where that was uncommon.

Lady stood up to Tramp when she believed he had abandoned her and didn't really care about her. She found out he was a heartbreaker and was like, "Nuh uh. No. You are not doing that to me! You put me through enough."

Miss Bianca from The Rescuers was IN CHARGE the whole movie, and was willing to risk life and limb to save an innocent child. THAT TINY MOUSE TOOK ON ALLIGATORS! And she picked Bernard to accompany her because he was the only one who wasn't ogling her. And then in the sequel SHE DID IT ALL AGAIN! I wish I were as brave as her.

Like, the public haven't accused these ladies of being sexist caricatures since 2014 (Actresses and actors don't count, they're out of touch like the rest of Hollywood) yet Disney is operating under the assumption that the public still thinks that way, hence all the "sHe'S nOt AfTeR a MaN iN ThIs VeRsIOn" talk.

The live action remakes are trying to attract an audience that doesn't really exist much, anymore, and back when it did exist, was comprised mainly of people who didn't actually watch the films. The Disney princesses are no longer seen as sexist, and feminine qualities are no longer seen as weak or undesirable.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

You can't be a good feminist and hate men. It simply doesn't align with the goals of feminism.

Turns out people and movements constantly say and do things that are counterproductive their stated goals.

Feminism has a very, very long history of doing things that, at best, make feminists look sexist.

Earlier this year, loads of feminists insisted it was perfectly fine for a woman to say she was more afraid of a random man in the woods…

…than a bear.

And that was on top of the M+Ms analogy, Schrodinger's Rapist, the Russian Roulette analogy, and literal decades of claiming any group or society run by men is inherently sexist against women.

Feminism is built around a threat narrative of men hurting women. This is not a TERF thing, or a radfem thing, or even a "bad feminist" thing.

This is the structural core of the ideological edifice.

I'm going to start by apologizing to the men in my life for my "I'd choose the bear" comments. Demonizing half of the human population in favor of a wild animal that would kill us in a heartbeat is a form of misandry.

Oh, I see. Good for you.

Thing is, I really feel you're trying to blame this misandry on the "other", even when you discuss misandry widely supported by mainstream feminists.

That was your first priority in this post.

It's easy to say you're personally sorry for making those comments.

And it's a lot harder to explicitly say everyone on your "team" who did the same was wrong.

I will say you could've meant that, but explicit disavowal would be nice.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[princesssarisa]

In the past I've shared other people's musings about the different interpretations of the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice. Namely, why Orpheus looks back at Eurydice, even though he knows it means he'll lose her forever. So many people seem to think they've found the one true explanation of the myth. But to me, the beauty of myths is that they have many possible meanings.

So I thought I would share a list of every interpretation I know, from every serious adaptation of the story and every analysis I've ever heard or read, of why Orpheus looks back.

One interpretation – advocated by Monteverdi's opera, for example – is that the backward glance represents excessive passion and a fatal lack of self-control. Orpheus loves Eurydice to such excess that he tries to defy the laws of nature by bringing her back from the dead, yet that very same passion dooms his quest fo fail, because he can't resist the temptation to look back at her.

He can also be seen as succumbing to that classic "tragic flaw" of hubris, excessive pride. Because his music and his love conquer the Underworld, it might be that he makes the mistake of thinking he's entirely above divine law, and fatally allows himself to break the one rule that Hades and Persephone set for him.

Then there are the versions where his flaw is his lack of faith, because he looks back out of doubt that Eurydice is really there. I think there are three possible interpretations of this scenario, which can each work alone or else co-exist with each other. From what I've read about Hadestown, it sounds as if it combines all three.

In one interpretation, he doubts Hades and Persephone's promise. Will they really give Eurydice back to him, or is it all a cruel trick? In this case, the message seems to be a warning to trust in the gods; if you doubt their blessings, you might lose them.

Another perspective is that he doubts Eurydice. Does she love him enough to follow him? In this case, the warning is that romantic love can't survive unless the lovers trust each other. I'm thinking of Moulin Rouge!, which is ostensibly based on the Orpheus myth, and which uses Christian's jealousy as its equivalent of Orpheus's fatal doubt and explicitly states "Where there is no trust, there is no love."

The third variation is that he doubts himself. Could his music really have the power to sway the Underworld? The message in this version would be that self-doubt can sabotage all our best efforts.

But all of the above interpretations revolve around the concept that Orpheus looks back because of a tragic flaw, which wasn't necessarily the view of Virgil, the earliest known recorder of the myth. Virgil wrote that Orpheus's backward glance was "A pardonable offense, if the spirits knew how to pardon."

In some versions, when the upper world comes into Orpheus's view, he thinks his journey is over. In this moment, he's so ecstatic and so eager to finally see Eurydice that he unthinkingly turns around an instant too soon, either just before he reaches the threshold or when he's already crossed it but Eurydice is still a few steps behind him. In this scenario, it isn't a personal flaw that makes him look back, but just a moment of passion-fueled carelessness, and the fact that it costs him Eurydice shows the pitilessness of the Underworld.

In other versions, concern for Eurydice makes him look back. Sometimes he looks back because the upward path is steep and rocky, and Eurydice is still limping from her snakebite, so he knows she must be struggling, in some versions he even hears her stumble, and he finally can't resist turning around to help her. Or more cruelly, in other versions – for example, in Gluck's opera – Eurydice doesn't know that Orpheus is forbidden to look back at her, and Orpheus is also forbidden to tell her. So she's distraught that her husband seems to be coldly ignoring her and begs him to look at her until he can't bear her anguish anymore.

These versions highlight the harshness of the Underworld's law, and Orpheus's failure to comply with it seems natural and even inevitable. The message here seems to be that death is pitiless and irreversible: a demigod hero might come close to conquering it, but through little or no fault of his own, he's bound to fail in the end.

Another interpretation I've read is that Orpheus's backward glance represents the nature of grief. We can't help but look back on our memories of our dead loved ones, even though it means feeling the pain of loss all over again.

Then there's the interpretation that Orpheus chooses his memory of Eurydice, represented by the backward glance, rather than a future with a living Eurydice. "The poet's choice," as Portrait of a Lady on Fire puts it. In this reading, Orpheus looks back because he realizes he would rather preserve his memory of their youthful, blissful love, just as it was when she died, than face a future of growing older, the difficulties of married life, and the possibility that their love will fade. That's the slightly more sympathetic version. In the version that makes Orpheus more egotistical, he prefers the idealized memory to the real woman because the memory is entirely his possession, in a way that a living wife with her own will could never be, and will never distract him from his music, but can only inspire it.

Then there are the modern feminist interpretations, also alluded to in Portrait of a Lady on Fire but seen in several female-authored adaptations of the myth too, where Eurydice provokes Orpheus into looking back because she wants to stay in the Underworld. The viewpoint kinder to Orpheus is that Eurydice also wants to preserve their love just as it was, youthful, passionate, and blissful, rather than subject it to the ravages of time and the hardships of life. The variation less sympathetic to Orpheus is that Euyridice was at peace in death, in some versions she drank from the river Lethe and doesn't even remember Orpheus, his attempt to take her back is selfish, and she prefers to be her own free woman than be bound to him forever and literally only live for his sake.

With that interpretation in mind, I'm surprised I've never read yet another variation. I can imagine a version where, as Orpheus walks up the path toward the living world, he realizes he's being selfish: Eurydice was happy and at peace in the Elysian Fields, she doesn't even remember him because she drank from Lethe, and she's only following him now because Hades and Persephone have forced her to do so. So he finally looks back out of selfless love, to let her go. Maybe I should write this retelling myself.

Are any of these interpretations – or any others – the "true" or "definitive" reason why Orpheus looks back? I don't think so at all. The fact that they all exist and can all ring true says something valuable about the nature of mythology.

[aladdin-the-simmer]

Hazel Hair

Base Game Compatible

Hat compatible

All EA swatches

All LODS/maps

3 versions :

Download (Patreon) | SimFileShare

Follow Me : Tumblr | Twitter | Instagram | YouTube 

Hope you like it! 💖

[bedupolker]

Limerence & Lust: Part 2, Limerence and Lust practice self care

Part 0

Part 1

Part 2.5

[siryouarebeingmocked]

bogleech>Dude look at the comments on any major news story about anything, or spend maybe one minute on 2024 twitter.

I already do. I don't see people doing that.

Heck, a lot of right-wingers reblog from me, on this exact post, and I don't recall seeing it.

scars >Yeah eat absolute shit, @siryouarebeingmocked. Did you completely miss "your body, my choice"?

Yes, I did. In fact, I specifically pointed out elsewhere that I see a lot of left-wing people complaining about this supposed phenomenon, without a single example.

It's not actually anyone else's job to go out of their way to prove your case for you. Neither of you have provided a single particle of evidence.

And frankly, I've seen the left saying so much nonsensical and wrong things about the right - even just limiting it to this election (EG the Project 2025 hysteria*) - that I would need a lot of very good evidence before I would believe this is a widespread phenomenon that isn't just trolling.

And in the off chance you are right, I will say, again, that anyone wishing someone else commit suicide is absolutely wrong. No equivocation, no qualifiers.

Even if I believe the person is suicidal for bad reasons.

I will also say, again, that the pity/outrage party isn't helping, and helped cause the problem in the first place.

Eat. Shit. Buddy. I don't want to fucking hear it. Go read project 2025 AND SHUT THE FUCK UP

You mean the thing that Trump was never involved in, has actively disavowed, and you people spent more time and effort on getting worried about than his campaign platform?

Perhaps you should ask yourself why Trump's actual stated goals weren't bad enough for y'all to use against him.

Perhaps you should ask yourself if this post will actually be productive, or if you're just raging and spouting memes from your ingroup.

*This isn't the first time I've bought up an example, then read on, and the person I was talking to proved my point.

[r0sie-bun]

Leaked Volume 19 omake (?)

(I’m trying to get better at Fujimoto’s style lol)

[shpepyao]

sea wormy thingy that overtakes bodies of foolish mortals to travel on land

[mafleur]

花、コーヒー、詩

✿ バネ͏ ⋅ 𝟸𝟶𝟸𝟺

soundtrack of a peaceful, act one: ͏i. the garden dream. ii. galeria do tempo. iii. blizzard iv. forgive and forget. v. bicycle.͏

𝗏𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗀𝖾 ���𝗂𝗅𝗆 𝄒 𝗐𝗂𝗇𝖾 ⒌ 𝙿𝙸𝚉𝚉𝙰

𝗈𝗉𝗎𝗅𝖾𝗇𝗍ㅤㅤ𝓵𝗈𝗏𝖾ㅤㅤ...ㅤㅤ她;ㅤㅤ﹫𝗀𝗋𝖺𝖼𝖾.

𝖼𝗈𝖿𝖿𝖾𝖾ㅤㅤ{...}ㅤㅤ東京、ㅤㅤ日本ㅤㅤ⳻ㅤㅤ𝗏.𝗅𝗈𝗀¹

𝖺ㅤㅤ𝗊𝗎𝗂𝖾𝗍ㅤㅤ𝗅𝗈𝗏𝖾ㅤㅤ♡ㅤㅤ𝖻𝗒ㅤㅤ𝗮𝗽𝗵𝗿𝗼𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗲.

日付───𝒊.ㅤ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏͏𝗌𝗇𝗎𝗀ㅤ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏𐫅ㅤ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏♥︎ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ㅤ𝗇𝗂𝗀𝗁𝗍.

soundtrack of a peaceful, act two: i. perfume. ii. forest. iii. chum iv. love like that (words from her). v. fences. ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏

𝗀𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌𝗈𝗅,ㅤㅤ✿︎ㅤㅤ𝖽𝖾⠀⠀꽃잎ㅤㅤ𝖾𝗇ㅤㅤ𝖾𝗉𝗂́𝗌𝗍𝗈𝗅𝖺.

𝖿𝖾𝗎𝗂𝗅𝗅𝖾𝗌ㅤㅤㅤㅤ𝗌𝖾̀𝖼𝗁𝖾𝗌ㅤㅤㅤㅤ𓂃ㅤㅤㅤㅤ𝖺𝗋𝖻𝗋𝖾.

𝗌𝗈𝗎𝖿𝖿𝖾𝗋𝗍,ㅤㅤ𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗅𝗈𝗀𝗎𝖾ㅤㅤ𝖽𝖾ㅤㅤ“ㅤㅤ♡ㅤㅤ”

𝗈𝗁!ㅤㅤ𝗄𝗄𝗈𝖼𝗁ㅤㅤ성ㅤㅤ(𝗌𝗍.),ㅤㅤ𝖿𝗂𝖿𝗍𝗁ㅤㅤ𝖺𝗏𝖾𝗇𝗎𝖾.

𝖿𝖾𝖾́𝗋𝗂𝖼𝗈ㅤㅤ𓄹𓈒ㅤㅤ𝖾𝗇𝖼𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈ㅤㅤ๑ㅤㅤ왕국.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

That's toxic people in general, actually.

you know what? normalize ruthlessly mocking men’s interests completely unprovoked the same way they’ve spent years mocking pumpkin spice lattes and pop music and animal crossing and the sims and every other completely harmless thing women often enjoy. I Love Revenge

[staff]

tumblr tuesday: "hi"

Good day to everyone whose heads and hearts haven't left the Truham-Higgs vicinity since Thursday. Season 2 has us all in a tizzy, and luckily, the fandom's artists are right there with us.

(This is another one that goes out to everyone who has seen the second season. SPOILERS AHEAD. MILD BUT STILL SPOILERY. PLEASE BE WARNED.)

@sleepyraywrites:

@idkchatie:

@darkshadowswhitelight:

@oliverhangout:

@pixelated3d:

@indecisive-blob:

@artbean:

@stringcage:

@brbrbeatrice:

@lyxchen:

@smileyrice:

@letraspal:

@bernard-the-rabbit:

@carvifox:

@pitiplush:

[stelaernis]

❛ dream tiger ❜ ﹔ my dreams bear fangs and stare with a thousand gazes. based on govy0807.

[ydotome]

Toya Todoroki “Dabi” (荼毘/轟燈矢) - Boku no Hero Academia - Episode 146