skippiefritz

[2129888]

i don't remember how i stumbled across this interview but i've never seen anyone mention it so i'm dropping it here <3 it's a little dated but still like super valuable and a decently in depth look at higuchi-sensei's previous works and how she works and thinks as a mangaka... personally i think it's the most i've ever learned from an interview of hers. super interesting stuff :0)

[hinderr]

Ok ok ill shut up about them now (<- lying lying lying)

[tenth-sentence]

It is also a striking reminder of how important it is not to be misled by our preconceptions about human homosexuality when looking at animals.

"Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity" - Bruce Bagemihl

[togglesbloggle]

Evolution, Metaphor, and the Meaning of Gay Alligators

A few times recently, I’ve run across discussions about animal sex that are wrong in interesting ways.  I don’t want to derail those conversations, and I certainly don’t want to call out anybody in particular, so I’m branching off here- but the most recent one was in the notes about the discovery (original paper) that most alligator sex is between two males.

Anyway, a not-uncommon element of these discussions is for somebody to frame animal homosexuality as ‘confusion’, particularly with simpler animals.  The idea behind this isn’t too tricky: it proposes that the animal’s sexual instinct is functionally oriented towards (or intended for) heterosexual coupling and reproduction, but that the perceptions and processing power of the animal’s brain are too limited to reliably distinguish between the sexes.  As a result, simpler animals of the same sex may occasionally copulate with one another by accident, as one of the failure modes along the way to biological reproduction.

If you are a card-carrying member of the Tumblrati, the word ‘heteronormative’ might well be in your brain already, and fast approaching your tongue.  You might be building an argument about how sexuality has social as well as reproductive functions, that a lack of human imagination doesn’t prevent evolution from building towards homosexuality for its own reasons, and anyway human sociolinguistic concepts are a lousy fit for animal behavior.  These are pretty good arguments, but I’m asking you to pause that line of thought briefly; it’s not where I’m going.

Animals confound us in an interesting way: their agency is without question, but their sapience is limited, and we struggle to imagine ‘what it’s like to be an alligator’ for that reason.  What is it like, after all, to be conscious but not self-aware?  So when we ask ourselves why an animal does what it does, we tend to use evolution as a way to paper over that gap, and say “well, the alligators must be having sex in order to reproduce and succeed as organisms.”  Persistently, in odd and elaborate ways, we make this assumption that animals are themselves pursuing adaptive fitness in a way that’s much more direct than humans do, as if natural selection were a motive for animal behavior and not just an explanation for it.

This is the deeper and more interesting error that I’m trying to chew on.  The ‘mistake’ theory of animal homosexuality assumes that animals are motivated to pursue biological reproduction, not because of what we know about them as individuals or as a species, but because of what we know about the forces that produced them.  This assumption gets silently made in the case of alligator sex in part because we often make this assumption, it’s nearly our default way of thinking about these things.  

I’m very sympathetic to this error!  Biology and especially anatomy is our go-to example of purpose in nature; questions like “what are your lungs for?” have obvious (if surprisingly sophisticated) answers.  Behavioral instincts are a little more complicated, but it’s still kind of the same thing- we can cogently talk about the reasons why we shiver when we’re cold, for example.  And every time we have this conversation, natural selection is looking over our shoulder waggling its eyebrows at us.  This kind of language can be very, very misleading, inviting a slip from “we <are born with an involuntary reflex to> shiver in the cold because it helps us survive,” to “we <agentically prefer or choose to> shiver in the cold because it helps us survive.”  It’s practically designed to trip us up like this.

I think this happened in our language because of the theological fights around evolution in the early days of its discovery.  You know how it was- Darwin, the monkey trials, all that nonsense.  Natural selection accounts for biological diversity and the seeming-purpose of natural forms in a way that requires no conscious designer (or Designer), and so what might have been a purely scientific discovery also ended up blowing a hole in the social and religious functions that that sense of purpose provided- and was called upon, in some ways, to fill that hole again.  Evolution got smooshed into a sort of theological shape, and now we have the sort of culture where the phrase “evolutionary imperative” feels like it makes sense to us instead of being an obvious contradiction in terms.

That theological shape comes back again and again when we try to speak poetically about natural selection, because it’s always lurking very shallowly under the surface.  In these failure modes, we talk about natural selection in almost filial terms, a generative entity that hangs out in a workshop occasionally holding up new animals for our perusal; it’s hiding behind Kipling’s ‘gods of the copybook headings’, NRx’s ‘gnon’, Scott’s ‘Goddess of Cancer,’ and so many others.  I did it a little bit myself, not three paragraphs ago!  I called evolution “a force that produced them,” like it was some sort of creator-deity sculpting gay alligators out of clay.  Like “what evolution wants” is something that a person can talk about…

Metaphors and language are hard, but I’ve been trying to think a lot lately about how to build a story about evolution in my head that doesn’t have this problem.  Something passive, you know?  Something that doesn’t have the property of being a designer, doesn’t tempt us into treating ourselves and the organisms sharing our world as if we were all agents of some Lovecraftian entity.

I’m not entirely satisfied with my answer just yet, but for now, I’m trying to let evolution be a labyrinth.  It’s filled with twisting corridors and strange rooms, dead ends and loops, and terrible, deadly traps.  It’s unfathomably large, and mostly empty- even though trillions and trillions of us have explored this maze, we’ve only really seen a small part of it, and out beyond the edges of our knowledge, there’s still mile after endless mile of quiet, dark corridors that have never known a footfall.  

It’s not a comforting place, and even though we were born here, it’s not really home; it’s not something built for us, or one that’s especially concerned with our wellbeing.  But the thing about this labyrinth is that most of the rooms have prisoners in them, strange and unfamiliar beings held in stasis and waiting for the door to open so they can spring into life and begin their own wandering.  And this is a treasure of a kind, if you want to see it that way; not wooden chests full of gold coins, perhaps, but something new and beautiful all the same.  And if that’s not reason enough to explore the maze, to go out beyond the relative safety of the room you were born in- then, well, there’s always the rumors that there’s a real exit, hidden somewhere among the twisting corridors.

It’s… not bad, I guess?  The metaphor has its uses.  

I think it does a decent job of capturing and illuminating lots of our moral intuitions; bioconservatism (and to a lesser extent, social conservatism) as a refusal to explore the maze, rejecting the insane dangers of exploration and the questionable rewards of the search and instead preferring to stay at home in the room where we were born– still trapped in the labyrinth, but at least alive, at least for a while.  It shadows that position with the correct amount of irony, reminding us that human existence follows from a four-billion-year history of discovery, adaptation, and mutation by nonhuman organisms; it reminds us that the discovery of human beings came at a terrible cost for those who came before us.  And importantly, it allows any given organism to be a thing-in-itself.  Sure, life originates in certain places and certain patterns according to the latent shape of the labyrinth (though my metaphor isn’t very good at describing that shape…), but it’s free to act as it prefers, and live or die by those choices.

My hope, anyway, is that by dwelling on this metaphor, and stepping back from all the talk about creators and purposes and imperatives, you’ll find it easier to see what ought to have been fairly obvious to us: alligators have gay sex because they think the other alligators are sexy, and they want to have sex about it.

The questions that follow after, like “why do alligators find each other sexy?,” are also important!  It is vital to learn as much about the shape of this labyrinth as we can, the better to traverse it safely, to explore it comprehensively, and maybe even to find the exit.  But those are different questions, and conflating them can only lead to confusion.  We must begin by acknowledging that we and our fellow-travelers on Earth do not exist for the sake of natural selection, and that any willful concessions to it are strategic, not moral.  The creatures all around us- human and otherwise- carry their own motives and their own reasons within themselves.  To live in the world as it is, we have to confront that radical pluralism head on, and not try to wipe it away by pretending these are all just masks over some domineering force of nature puppetting them towards inscrutable ends.

[mesetacadre]

hi, love your blog! have you heard of "maga communism"? i personally find it pretty silly, but it does open up some questions and conversations about reactionary/conservative beliefs within communist movements and individual communists (can you call a reactionary a communist?). most "maga communist" and similar tendencies i have seen were pretty exclusively on twitter so far, for example individual self-described communists being homophobic (talking about "bourgeois decadence" and all that, you know the story), but its also rather concerning considering the recent transphobic course of the CPGB, or the homophobic statements of the KKE. how to deal with such tendencies in the movement? are such tendencies compatible with communist thought? (i personally dont think so, but how do you change such tendencies?) would love to hear your thoughts on that!

MAGA communism is a US-specific subset of "patriotic socialism", patsoc for short. MAGA communism in particular peddles republican and other reactionary positions via pseudo-communist rhetoric. This isn't something new, almost if not all factions of the bourgeois political establishment use workerist rhetoric to some degree, such is their function to mislead the working class. The only thing that stands out to me from this sect is the outright self-labelling of being communists. Take even a shallow step into their positions however, and you'll find run-of-the-mill reactionarism and nationalism.

This is a very different phenomenon from actual communists taking some reactionary positions but who are otherwise quite "normal", and from actual socialist countries fostering some kind of patriotism.

Regarding the latter, the example I'm most familiar with is Cuba. Following their triumph in both national liberation from colonialism and the socialist revolution, one aspect of Cuba's strategy for security and that also was a natural rationalization of their victory was the proliferation of pride in the Cuban revolution. Critically, this form of pride is not like the usual (bourgeois, as in, the emergence of nationalism within the rise of capitalism) nationalism, but the expression of international solidarity with all peoples and honor in being one of the groups of workers who achieved self liberation. It's a pride of the Cuban revolution, not the Cuban nation in itself. There are no traces of superiority over other peoples in this kind of patriotism. This is categorically very different from what the patsoc types express.

"Normal" communists taking reactionary positions comes from a vestige of the capitalist culture that is hammered into every single one of us emerging because of an unfinished education in marxist philosophy. The solution to this is very simple, that is to continue the development of our mistaken comrade, and adequate punishment if those beliefs resulted in harm.

I also want to make dedicated points about the CPGB and the KKE. The CPGB, like most other historical Communist Parties in Western Europe, folded themselves into reformism within liberal democracy following the eurocommunist current that arose in the second half of the 20th century. The fact that the CPGB has adopted reactionary positions is a consequence of having embedded itself into parliamentarism, as the political consensus amongst bourgeois parties in the UK right now is that of transphobia and racism, they are following the same general shift that Labour has.

The KKE is a different story. I have talked to a (trans) militant of the KKE about this, as well as with another (cishet) militant. They say that the KKE's opposition to the introduction of homosexual marriage in the Greek parliament (which was thankfully passed) comes from a non-homophobic critique that was, however, badly communicated. The KKE has repeatedly proposed separating marriage itself from the legal and financial benefits that it carries. For example, instead of only being allowed to visit someone in a hospital if you're family or married, the KKE proposes that people should be able to authorize anyone to have these sorts of benefits without also having to marry them.

The voting against homosexual marriage was done on the grounds that the institution of marriage involves unnecessary state involvement in interpersonal relationships and abuse, since these benefits also sometimes lead to couples who can't afford to divorce. Was voting against gay marriage the best course of action? No, and the militants I've talked to agree. But it was never about the KKE believing that homosexuality is "bourgeois decadence", like some media outlets have twisted it, just like most ML Party positions are twisted in some way or another.

It also does not help that translations from Greek aren't that simple, and that can also lead to misinterpretation in subjects where nuanced language is very important, such as trans people. There are no separate words in Greek for "sex" and "gender", even though in English they are complicated terms with a lot of drawbacks, it is immensely useful to have separate words. So discussion in Greek about this, and more importantly translation, can very easily be misinterpreted or deliberately misconstrued.

I am not saying that the KKE is free from reactionary tendencies and that it's a paragon of absolute social progress, but just like it isn't that, it is also not comparable with crypto-fascists or glorified socdems playing into transphobic or racist tendencies. This leads me to a broader point about general reactionary thought in the past.

There is no doubt that people like Stalin or Lenin, or more appropriately the vast majority of ML parties in the past were homophobic (I'm using this term to also include transphobia and similar discriminations) and that they instituted policies that specifically hurt queer people. No serious communist today abides by those positions and those actions. And just like we can understand that an individual communist today may be insufficiently educated and express reactionary views and hurt people because of this, I think the analogy can be made that these past communist people and parties hadn't yet been sufficiently educated by practice and theoretical discussions. We can't ignore the harm that they did, but we can recognize that it was in no way necessary, and that it was counterproductive, so we can acknowledge those mistakes, carefully separate those elements from the rest of their achievements, and learn about them.

A good example of this evolution is Cuba. In the times of Che and Fidel, queer people were discriminated against and sometimes sentenced to forced labor, nobody denies this. But this was 50 years ago, and not only did Fidel recognize this mistake in this lifetime, he began the process of improving the party line on this which has resulted in one of, if not the most progressive laws regarding homosexuality in the world, in the form of 2022's family code, which you can read here in Spanish. I have copied part of article 4 below, which regulates the rights of people within a family, along with my own translation just below:

Artículo 4. Derechos de las personas en el ámbito familiar. a) Constituir una familia; b) la vida familiar; c) la igualdad plena en materia filiatoria; d) que se respete el libre desarrollo de la personalidad, la intimidad y el proyecto de vida personal y familiar; e) que las niñas, los niños y adolescentes crezcan en un entorno familiar de felicidad, amor y comprensión; f) la igualdad plena entre mujeres y hombres, a la distribución equitativa del tiempo destinado al trabajo doméstico y de cuidado entre todos los miembros de la familia, sin sobrecargas para ninguno de ellos, y a que se respete el derecho de las parejas a decidir si desean tener descendencia y el número y el momento para hacerlo, preservando, en todo caso, el derecho de las mujeres a decidir sobre sus cuerpos; g) el desarrollo pleno de los derechos sexuales y reproductivos en el entorno familiar, independientemente de su sexo, género, orientación sexual e identidad de género, situación de discapacidad o cualquier otra circunstancia personal; incluido el derecho a la información científica sobre la sexualidad, la salud sexual y la planificación familiar, en todo caso, apropiados para su edad; h) la protección a la maternidad y la paternidad y la promoción de su desarrollo responsable; i) una vida familiar libre de discriminación y violencia en cualesquiera de sus manifestaciones; j) una armónica y estrecha comunicación familiar entre las abuelas, abuelos, otros parientes, personas afectivamente cercanas y las niñas, los niños y adolescentes; k) la autodeterminación, voluntades, deseos, preferencias, independencia y la igualdad de oportunidades en la vida familiar de las personas adultas mayores y aquellas en situación de discapacidad; y l) al cuidado familiar desde el afecto.

And the translation (OC)

Article 4: A person's rights in the context of the family a) To build a family; b) to family life; c) to full equality in filial matters; d) for the free development of personality, intimacy, and the personal and familiar life project to be respected; e) for the boys and girls and adolescents to mature in a familiar environment of happiness, love, and compassion; f) the full equality between men and women, the egalitarian distribution of domestic work and care between all members of the family, without overburden to any of them, and for a couple's right to decide if they want descendants and the number and time to do so to be respected, preserving, in every case, the right for a woman to decide over her own body; g) the full development of sexual and reproductive rights in the familiar environment, independently of their sex, gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity, disability, or any other personal circumstance; including the right to scientific information about sexuality, sexual health, and family planning, in every case, suitably for their age; h) the protection of maternity and paternity and the promotion of its responsible progress; i) a familiar life free of discrimination and violence in whichever of their manifestations; j) a harmonious and close communication between grandmothers, grandfathers, other relatives, people who are affectionately close, and the girls, boys, and adolescents; k) the self-determination, wills, desires, preferences, independence and equality of opportunity in the familiar life of adult people and those in a situation of disability; and l) to affectionate familiar care.

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

Considering how often same-sex couples have been documented in birds, do you think extinct dinosaurs would have a similar rate of homosexuality? Similarly, what do you think the gayest dinosaur is?

100%. It's not even a contest. And, again, research suggests that indiscriminate sexual activity is the **norm** for _all_ animals! sex is just fun! (and, yes, refraining from sexual activity is observed in all animals! And preferential sexual activity! The baseline is just pan/bisexuality, rather than heterosexuality. There are diverse sexual behaviors throughout the animal clade because life is just DIVERSE.) Things try out different behaviors and not everything is about direct reproduction, that's a very misleading view of animal behavior. In truth, social connection and physical pleasure are, well, things animals like. And sometimes they don't. Who knew!

Gayest dinosaur, I mean, isn't it objectively the Albatross?

[wanderlust-in-my-soul]

Hi, I'm new to BL.

Have watched kiseki, the Japanese drama with the unlucky student, and now Pit Babe. I'm bored with too innocent dramas and I prefer adult story lines with good chemistry. Do you have some favorites from recent years? Would love to look up some titles.

The hornier the better 😉

Uhhh, nice ask! For the answer I made up two categories: the ones with mature storylines and the horny ones. Of course, the two categories overlap in places, but the categorisation was helpful for me for a better horny classification 😅 There are incredibly good series for both groups. And I'm happy to talk about them.

Let's start with the mature ones. And just so you know, this is going to be a very long list 😅

The Mature-List

180 Degree Longitute Passes Through Us

This series had us under its peculiar spell in 2022. I would rate the horny scale at 1/10, the chemistry between the two mains is terrific and the tension cutting, but that's not what this theatrical masterpiece is about. It's about acceptance, grief, guilt and the fact that all of this can either destroy you or make you grow and emerge stronger. Highly recommended.

Ghost Host, Ghost House

The series starts off rather funny and strange and develops over time into a profound story about grief, letting go and healing. It's all somewhat broken up by a love story with incredibly good chemistry and very nice NC scenes. These two can kiss! And yet nothing is easy and grief takes time and only when you have been able to mourn you can heal.

Goodbye, Mother

Nau Van travels back to his home country of Vietnam with his partner. Instead of telling the family that they are a couple, they are caught in the middle of a family drama. The film is very emotional, the characters are well drawn and the story told is touching and well written. If you want to watch something different from the "standard" series, you've definitely come to the right place. Highly recommended, but watch out for triggers such as violence and homophobia.

Happy Ending Romance

I would go out on a limb and say that the gif may be a little misleading here. On a horny scale, the series would be in the lower range. But it's still quite progressive for Korea. The story is very intricate and you have to be careful not to miss anything. An aspiring writer, disappointed and deceived by the publishing world, hides behind his own walls and those built by his partner, a well-known and celebrated author. Until a young publisher sneaks into our writer's life and tries to lure him out of hiding so that the world can experience his genius. Maybe it's the fact that it's about publishing and writing or because I just think the publisher with his fuzzy head and sunshine smile is so cute, but I loved the series!

I Feel You Linger In The Air

Horny? At times, yes. Mature? Definitely. A tragic story set in a past in which homosexuality was frowned upon and the male descendant was expected to take over the business and live his life according to the ideas of the head of the family. And that's where our protagonist Jom, a heartbroken young man from the current century, is thrown in by an accident. He meets Yai, a young man with whom he shares a very special bond. The chemistry between these two is outstanding and the characters are so well written. Such a beautiful series!

Innocent

I must admit, I was a little bit confused when I first started this miniseries. I put it to the side and some time later I started it again. And it finally clicked. It's not an easy series and yet it can give you back your faith in love and trust. Yu Shi has some really bad trauma from his childhood, but chooses to stay witth Wu Zheng and the latter is patient enough for Yu Shi to trust him enough for Noah to accept him in his life.

La Pluie

This series divides opinion. Some find it consistently terrific and well-written and others may have problems with one or two characters. I belong to the latter group, which spoilt the series for me towards the end, but I would still list it here. Because tastes are different and absolutely subjective. You should form your own opinion here. The bottom line is that La Pluie is about soul mates and whether it's something you choose yourself or something that is predetermined. The NC scenes are delicate and appealing and the basic idea behind the series was actually very interesting. It's thought-provoking and packaged in nice pictures.

Life: Love on the line (Director's Cut)

Itou Akira and ishi Yuuki meet on their way to school while walking on the white line. They become friends and fall in love. What follows is a portrayal of their lives as they struggle through high school and college and eventually arrive in adult life. And as in every life, there are obstacles and problems and the older and bigger you get, the bigger the problems become. A film well worth seeing.

Long Time No See

What happens when a contract killer falls in love and the person he's dating isn't necessarily who he claims to be? An excellent film in any case, peppered with a nice story, good NC scenes, great chemistry between the actors, a sister as the best mood enhancer and also very well choreographed violence. In other words, everything you could wish for. And I can't and don't want to say any more, otherwise I could spoil important things and we don't want that.

Moonlight Chicken

EarthMix with a very aesthetic NC scene right in the first episode? Oh yes! But apart from the fact that the two of them really surprised me in this series, Moonlight Chicken simply blew me away with its storytelling, the depth of the individual stories, the well-drawn characters and the emotions that the individual stories evoked in me. The series tells stories about new beginnings, about letting go of the past, about trust, about acceptance, about grief and anger and about finding relationships where you didn't expect to at first and that love can't cure everything, but it can make life a little more bearable.

Old Fashion Cupcake

Old Fashion Cupcakes is a story about adults for adults. It's a comforting series that gives you courage and makes you realise that you're never too old to enjoy life. Besides, the two of them eat the most delicious things and I'm constantly hungry while watching. It is so good to see Nozue open up to Togawa and let the younger one lead him back into life.

Rec

I went into the film without any great expectations. And after the first few minutes, I actually thought that it was just a couple who like to film themselves having s'x. But at some point I was so captivated by the depth of the film. I was really touched at the end and understood why the two of them indulged themselves so excessively and filmed it. I can't put the film on the horny list because it would somehow be out of place there.

The Sign

A current series about two cops who realise that they are connected by past lives. Fate wanted them to fall in love and so they now have to overcome the hurdles that this love entails together. Because in earlier times, this love between Naga and Garuda was forbidden. Yes, there are a few mystical elements built in and they look pretty cool! The two mains have no problems with closeness and the NC scenes are some of the best out there.

Before we move on to the horny list, a few shout-outs for good series, which I didn't want to write about in detail:

Light

Plus and Minus

Manner of Death

Step by Step

Jack o'Frost

My Tooth Your Love

Papa & Daddy

Tokyo in April is...

My Personal Weatherman

The New Employee

To My Star (1+2)

Triage

Our Dating Sim

We are now leaving the mature series and moving on to the horny list (mostly with serious topics).

The Horny-List

Bed Friend

In addition to really good NC scenes, there is a lot of trauma shown. It's not quite my cup of tea, but many others find the series really good. I'll leave my personal opinion out of it and just say that this series is pretty high up on the horny list. However, you should pay attention to the trigger warnings and there are quite a few of them, especially when it comes to SA in every conceivable form.

Cutie Pie

I was pretty hyped about the show until the seventh episode or so. God was I obsessed. After that, the magic that Zee had on me left me a bit. The story really isn't the best, but I think most people didn't necessarily watch the show for the story. The two of them have really good chemistry and that kitchen scene still makes me weak in the knees sometimes. Definitely up there on the horny scale.

Dangerous Dr'gs Of S'x

There is no gif for this. Even if I found it here, I wouldn't insert it. Japan has two sides, either innocent and sweet or hardcore (well not really, but sometimes you can get this image). This one is hardcore. It's not necessarily horny and there's even a pretty heavy story behind it, but this film is riddled with s'x… Not necessarily consensual, at the beginning definitely not consensual. If you're over 18 and can take it, check it out. The film is not bad at all. It's just a bit different…

KinnPorsche

Praised by many, but viewed by me with a somewhat more critical eye, I would still recommend the series if you don't have a problem with dub-con or torture or violence in general. The mafia story is softened somewhat by the love scenes and the slapstick humour is not for everyone. It's a lot about daddy issues and whether you like the characters or not is something you have to decide for yourself.

Love In The Air

I have my issues with the show, but the more I watch and the more I try not to be quite so critical of toxic and destructive phatasies, the more these issues leave me unconcerned. Will I ever watch the series again? Nope. Can I understand why so many people love this show? Of course I do. That's why I don't want to withhold it from you here. LITA has a total of two stories to tell about two friends and their love life. The second story is definitely not an easy watch. There is trauma and SA and some stalking shit and it really can hit you. But for both parts, the NC scenes are, hands down, some of the best ever.

The End Of The World With You | Love At The End Of The World | Till The World Ends

We would have a Japanese doomsday scenario, a Filipino one and a Thai one. I'll summarise it under one point. All three are very explicit in their depiction of intimacy. All three are somewhat confusing story-wise. I had fun watching all three. In contrast to Love at the end of the world, The end of the world with you and Till the world ends are definitely still quite restrained.

Only Friends

The GmmTV actors have taken over and caused a huge mess. A group of friends want to open a hostel as a college project. Whilst in the series this somehow slips into the background at some point and really only served as a location for flings and water adventures, people get to know and love each other and some fall back on old friends to make new loves jealous. Somehow everyone was trying to hurt someone else at one point. I have found a new icon thanks to this series and have cheered for Boston and Boeing in their many endeavours. If I had to say one sentence about the show it would be that it's pure chaos, but damn Boston and Nick... hot.

Playboyy

Okay. I know the majority don't like this series, but I think it's terrific. I'm always amazed at how artistic the episodes are. How each couple has their own special setting, so you know who's about to appear. Yes, there is a lot of s'x, not necessarily horny s'x. It's often used for storytelling or as a catalyst for what happens next. And Prom and Nont are my little favourites. I find Prom only half as attractive without glasses, unless he swaps glasses for a blindfold… Still, on a horny scale it is up there.

Pornographer aka The Novelist

A student runs over a writer on his bike, breaking the writer's arm. As compensation (and because he can't pay damages), the student agrees to write down the writer's story he was working on. It is pornographic literature and while the writer dictates to the student, a kind of relationship develops between the two. This is not a romantic relationship in the classic sense, it's not about a cautious approach and getting to know each other, but about the psychology of lust and manipulation, about loneliness and the desire for more. It's pretty deep shit and I can only recommend it. But always with the warning that it's not going to be an easy watch.

Sweet Curse

Here's a short film for a change. I love short films! And Sweet Curse is one of them. Min-woo is jealous of one of his closest friends Ha-joon and wants to curse him. Too bad when the haunting spirit falls in love with the handsome and kind-hearted Ha-joon. When Korea has the freedom, they go all out. There are some short films that you wouldn't have expected from South Korea. And this here it's quite high up on the horny scale.

Wedding Plan

God, I love this series. No matter what anyone says, it was so good to watch these two fall in love and slowly let their walls down until the clothes followed. A very amusing series in which both mains know what they want and, above all, that they want each other, even if the planned wedding of one of them got in the way a little beforehand.

Why R U

The series may lack a bit of story, but if you want it horny, the Fighter x Tutor storyline is definitely for you. You have to hand it to Zee, the man can kiss. It's not the most adult series, set in college, but the topics are sometimes a bit heavier and the NC scenes are definitely worth watching.

I hope I haven't bored you and that there's something suitable for you in this small selection 😊 It was so fun making this list! Thank you again for this ask!

[butch-reidentified]

Someone shared this to a gender critical lesbian group chat I'm in.

This is just heartbreaking. It's medical abuse, period. It borders on medicalized child slavery, given how much time this child will now be spending in doctor's offices and Quest labs and such, and how much money they will make off this family's decision to let the child transition medically, while the child receives nothing but a variety of health complications and a childhood spent in clinics. So deeply upsetting.

The parents say that Max, who is 8 years old in this, began having some breast growth A YEAR AGO. They cite Max taping her chest as proof of her dysphoria, proof that she's actually a boy, proof that she desperately and urgently needs medical intervention or she will surely be depressed forever, and will most likely take her own life because of it (note: this is not said outright, just my perception given the mainstream narratives and how the parents appear to be feeling in this video). This is just pure goddamn evil. What girl living in this screwed up world WOULDN'T tape her chest if she started growing breasts at 7 or 8 years old?!?! What girl in that situation WOULDN'T be terrified to her very core of puberty and all that comes with it? Hell, many (it not most) girls who aren't in this sort of situation are terrified of puberty.

"We know from studies and experience that if he changes his mind, we remove the blockade, and his body will naturally go through female puberty," (paraphrased from memory) is what that doctor told the parents. Just about anyone who heard that would interpret it to mean that the blocker is basically just a magical pause button, that it's safe, and that there are no consequences to use - the child's body will go back to exactly the way it was with no long-term effects. She is lying while not "technically" lying, intentionally misleading them. Just unbelievably morally repugnant....

We often hear about and talk about how the medical industry avidly supports gender identity ideology because transitioners are patients for life; they become highly lucrative pay pigs for the medical industry. Gender transition "healthcare" is a multi-billion-dollar industry. How is it that so many followers of gender identity ideology call themselves leftist/socialist/Marxist/communist/anti-capitalist, yet are utterly unwilling to consider that money could be a key motivator in the medical industry's decision to overwhelmingly support and promote gender transition, including for children?

How are we as a society failing GNC, homosexual, and female people so tragically?

[bambi-kinos]

Hopefully, this ask is a fun one! I've noticed that a lot of times you mention Paul is a bottom, and honestly, I agree 1000% per cent, but I'm curious how you came to that conclusion

For me, I feel like it was a result of tons of reading up on him, body language + his lyrics, and I think the whole control freak (misleading in a way too) part makes some fans think he's a top. Meanwhile, I sit here and think, nope, he's totally a bottom lmao

A lot of it is just wish fulfillment as a result of Paul's bus-sized ass. We're not the only ones thinking about it:

Like it would be a crime if John didn't fuck Paul in the ass. Right??? So it's easy to think "yeah Paul is a bottom" rofl.

But more seriously, I view Paul as a bottom for a number of reasons.

The first is simply how long John and Paul knew each other and how they naturally shaped each other's interests and desires. Paul may not have been that 'swishy' (i.e. effeminate) if he had never met John in the first place. It's easy to see how John and Paul's understanding of homosexuality would have shaped their presentation and the roles they took with one another. Like, in modern times two gay guys can just be Guys Being Dudes. They can both take shirtless selfies of themselves holding up fish with the 🤙 going "shaka braaahhh." In the mid 20th century this idea was not terribly widespread so even among gay people there was an impression of "well someone has to be the woman and it's not going to be me."

So I think that's a big part of it. It's impossible to know how conscious a decision this was but IMO John and Paul reached a consensus of some sort that Paul would take up the feminine role in response to John's masculine one. It's a natural (for a given value of 'natural') position for the feminine half to be the one who is penetrated. Paul, who has demonstrated a number of times his sharp awareness of homosexual activity and how society perceives it, would know this. And he took up that position anyway and kept with it, voluntarily. (And to be clear I think Paul stimulated John's butch attitude and grew that to make John more overtly masculine as well. This goes both ways.)

It's not hard to see why this happened. John is a lot more naturally traditionally masculine than Paul is, no matter what John said about being "soft velvet" and "le Oscar Wilde!!11!!1!" He's the one who got into bar fights and hammered the shit out of other men. He's the subject of a rumor about kicking Stuart in the head, not Paul. Personally I think Paul is perfectly capable of violence, even extreme violence, but he simply isn't perceived that way due to his feminine appearance. Meanwhile John is overtly aggressive and in your face about it, even when going through his druggie periods, which is simply a more traditionally masculine trait no matter how you slice it.

I guess what I'm saying is, Paul responded to and was shaped by John's personality and preferences. John likes to fuck, Paul leans more towards feminine expression, feminine = 'the one who is fucked' not necessarily 'the one who fucks.'

I don't believe they were thinking about this as teenagers (and I don't think they did anything besides circlejerking before Hamburg.) And Paul likes using his dick! However it seems obvious to me that John woke something up in Paul that would have naturally lain dormant under other circumstances. John had a habit of doing this for people, he woke them up to their higher inclinations that got them out of their boxes and I 100% believe that he nudged Paul's 'swishiness' awake and that Paul quietly used this to get out of the box other people wanted to keep him in. He was able to embrace this more fully while with Linda. For Paul, that swishiness comes packaged with a certain set of implications and to me there's no reason why he wouldn't embrace that.

That's not to say that he was completely gung-ho from the start. People who write Paul going 'wtf I'm not doing that' in response to John wanting to fuck him are writing material that feels 'real' for lack of a better word. But I also don't think it would be that hard of a sell once he got used to the idea. Really look at this gif:

John's interest in Paul's backside is overt. Paul seems surprised and a little overwhelmed in the moment but he also smiles a little in response to John checking him out. It seems to me that there's interest there, albeit tentative. In other words Paul seems okay with being the one who is piped.

It's a lot to surmise from a single gif, I know, but otoh we don't have a lot of these moments where John's feelings are overt and Paul responds to them.

In addition to all this, Paul is a curious hedonist. I think John could prevail on him to at least try it. Then I think Paul would enjoy it greatly. Anal orgasms are somewhere between clitoral and vaginal for me but anal sex is satisfying in a way that PIV isn't, and I think Paul would actively seek it out once he tried it and realized how good it is. Anal sex is extremely intimate and John paid close attention to his lovers, Paul is guaranteed a good time once John takes him to bed. And John would want to make that special for Paul especially once Paul did 'break down' and go 'alright I'll do it' as part of their kinky power game. John did like to make things sweet for Paul.

Paul has this whole thing about wanting to be John's second and not necessarily the leader. He enjoys being lead and dominated by powerful men who are at the top of their industry. Check out this quote from McCartney Legacy Vol. 1 in Chapter 26:

Paul explicitly giving in to a "strong and demanding" male after putting up a perfunctory fight that he had no intention of sticking to? What does this remind us of?

And look, Paul invites this himself very deliberately:

Paul is doing this on purpose. He shows his ass off to entice us, the viewers, into imagining his hole and putting our dicks inside said hole and inside him. Women appreciate a nice ass but lack the equipment to fuck it properly. Men do have the equipment and by 1965 Paul knows his effect on heterosexual men. He's very much dangling the fuckability of his ass as a carrot in front of everyone who wants to look. No other Beatle displays this kind of overt neediness for this specific kind of attention. Paul knows what he is doing.

Paul is a bottom. A needy and bratty bottom who enjoys being put in his place and has a thick kinky streak to be sure, but a bottom nonetheless.

The insistence that Paul is a top has always smacked of contrarianism, to me anyway lmao. It's always packaged with making fun of McLennon fanart where Paul is yassified and John is butch or with complaints that Beatle fandom is making Paul "too feminine" and John "too masculine." There's a lot I could say about it but for now I'll just leave it at this: it's usually paired with bitching that McLennon fans are having too much fun. Many are guilty of it.

John and Paul themselves acknowledged this dynamic between them in oblique ways. John, Paul, and even Yoko always imagined Paul as being a woman as well as acknowledging that Paulina would have been romantically attached to John. Paul acknowledged it with the "if I were a woman maybe I could have...." thing, Yoko said that Paul would be a "great threat" if he was a woman in her audio diary that she recorded in 1968/1969, and John also has a quote floating around about the potential that lay in Paul being a woman though I'll be damned if I can't find the stupid thing. And then there's the insulting "Lennon's Princess" nickname from Apple staff. They perceived the dynamic as well.

John and Paul, consciously or not, actively pursued this dynamic with one another. They enjoyed it and Paul voluntarily stayed in that role even during a time period where he might have been justified in going "okay we've hit the big time, no more of that!"

Just look at Paul's posture here lmao. John is shoving his erection into Paul's shoulder. Yeah he's trying to hide it but Paul is fine with it, shoulders relaxed with no tension in him at all. Paul wasn't just John's princess, John was also Paul's knight, and that comes with certain responsibilities as well as privileges.

John was overtly more stable when he had sex on tap. John and Paul actively lived together for months at a time where few people could get to them. Seems to me that Paul not only did his job but took a lot of pleasure in doing it and John reaped the benefits. Notably John didn't start falling apart until they stopped touring and his sexual access to Paul was bottlenecked. Then 1967 rolls around and John just sorta, moved in with Paul and noticeably got back on an even keel.

Many thunks are to be had my friend! Many thunks indeed and one of them is that Paul is a bottom. Not just that, an enthusiastic one that likes courting powerful and even emotionally unstable males capable of overpowering him.

Much to consider!

[gay-jewish-bucky]

Begging queer gentiles to understand that the centuries-to-millennia old link between queerphobia and antisemitism is what played a major role in Hitler targeting queer people. Jews have been blamed and killed for "corrupting gentiles into homosexuality" and have long been the subject of transphobic and intersexist conspiracies. Queer people being targeted was largely rooted in antisemitism.

Magnus Hirschfeld, who often is cited as evidence that the Nazis targeted queer people first, was a Jew! Many Jewish people were prominent in the early queer liberation movement in Berlin. So much pro-LGBT research and understanding, as well as development of successful SRS techniques, came from Jewish scientists and doctors who were actively fighting for queer rights.

These Jewish pioneers of queer liberation and trans healthcare are the people whose books were burned when the Nazis came for the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft.

Many queer people claim the end of the Holocaust did not bring liberation for queer people. While this is true to an extent, it is intentionally misleading.

Antisemitism and anti-Romani racism (because you never seem to remember Romani people were also main targets) neither started nor ended with the Holocaust. After "liberation" both groups still faced subhuman treatment (many dying in displaced persons camps after surviving death camps), social and legal discrimination, cultural genocide, violence, expulsion, and murder for their ethnic identities.

The narrative that things were magically better is just that: a narrative created by allied nations to sweep their culpability and failings under the rug.

You cannot separate Jewish people and queer people into two distinct camps that never touch, it's not only ahistorical and erases the existence of queer Jews in history as well as Jewish contributions to sexual liberation, but it also contributes to the modern alienation and exclusion that queer Jews face from the queer community.

Gentiles can reblog but are asked to listen and not to comment.

[txttletale]

in retrospect it makes a lot of sense that Roman culture's conflation of receptive homosexuality with femininity and degeneracy that it could easily be more like saying "that dude is such a faggot he literally wants to be a woman"

at the same time that feels so easy to project our own experience of transmisogyny onto, lol

yeah, i mean, like -- i'm cautious about transhistoricizing, i think it's not helpful and misleading to, like, draw a direct linear progression from anything in roman society to anything in the modern day -- but i do think it is very clearly something that can be analyzed as transmisogyny, that can be read in companionship and comparatively to modern transmisogyny and more recent historical transmisogynist tropes. i think it's instructive in seeing the usage of cultural narratives of transmisogyny as prebuilt discrediting narratives, as enforcement tools for masculinities, and as expressions of normative sexuality's cultural anxieties. i think there's a lot of important takeaways from the way elagabalus et. al are written about for queer theory and trans history and transfeminism specifically -- i just don't think any of it hinges on 'elagabalus was trans'.

[bindibites]

Hey so it's June 1st, start of pride month! But... it's also labeled as "World Narcissistic Abuse Awareness Day."

It's a day about educating people on narcissistic abuse, so that's what I'm going to do! (Spoilers, it's not real, and the guy who coined it was really shitty too.)

Narcissistic Abuse was coined by Sam Vaknin back in the 90s, an Israeli writer, philosopher, and physicist. A man who;

- Has claimed that being homosexual and having relationships that are gay is narcissistic because its wanting to make love with a reflection of yourself.

- That being transgender and seeking out transition is narcissistic because you are "disregarding your true gender."

- That not wanting to be gatekept from transitioning is entitled and narcissistic.

- Has no qualifications for psychology or psychiatry. (He even has a disclaimer on his website about how he's not a mental health professional, funny!)

- Was arrested and jailed for security frauds in 1996.

There's also a whole slew of him being misogynistic, a rape apologist, and Islamaphobic during interviews.

(Sources below the cut at the end of the post!)

So what is narcissistic abuse defined as?

"Narcissistic abuse is a form of abuse stemming from narcissistic behaviors. It can be emotional, psychological, or physical. Narcissistic characteristics can involve volatile behavior, lack of empathy, and aggression. Narcissistic abuse may include gaslighting, constant criticism, humiliation, and coercion."

Now, what's so bad about labeling this as narcissistic abuse?

The truth of the matter is that's it's misleading and demonizing people who have Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD).

All of the traits described are not exclusive to narcissists, and terms already exist for these types of abuse without putting the blame on those who have a personality disorder!

Emotional Abuse: "Emotional abuse includes non-physical behaviors that are meant to control, isolate, or frighten you. This may present as threats, insults, constant monitoring, excessive jealousy, manipulation, humiliation, intimidation, dismissiveness, and more."

Psychological Abuse: "Psychological abuse involves the regular and deliberate use of a range of words and non-physical actions used with the purpose to manipulate, hurt, weaken or frighten a person mentally and emotionally; and/or discomfort, confuse, or influence a person's thoughts and actions."

Those both sound familiar don't they?

"But Bindi! You can't tell me the abuse I went through isn't real!"

And I'm not! This post isn't to discredit anyone's experiences with being abused but is asking for a reflection on the terminology used to make the world better for all of us.

What you went through is real, but there's never an excuse for contributing to the stigma and demonization of people who didn't ask to be the way that they are.

Someone's disorder didn't abuse you, the person did.

And no, you can't separate narcissism from NPD. You aren't a narcissist without NPD. There is no way to get around using the term narcissistic abuse without it reflecting right back onto people struggling with a literal disorder.

Now, what actually is Narcissistic Personality Disorder?

NPD is defined by the DSM-5 as "a compromising pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), a constant need for admiration, and a lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts."

It is a cluster B personality disorder, a type of PD classified by difficulties regulating emotions and behavior. These behaviors can be considered dramatic, emotional, or erratic.

NPD is a manageable disorder through psychotherapy and medication management!

But big of all... while the exact cause of NPD isn't known, it's believed that a mix of genetic features and early childhood experiences can contribute to someone developing NPD. Some of these factors are accounted to being abused and neglected ourselves.

Many narcissists are themselves survivors of abuse and face constant calls to further abuse us for existing with a disorder due to the damage and dehumanization of narcissists caused by Vaknin.

The coining of narcissistic abuse and its continued, prevalent usage has done irreparable damage. It is dehumanizing, demonizing and has contributed to stigmatization that has made finding help resources and people willing to aid those with NPD a hell of a lot harder.

Dehumanizing people will always lead down a horrible path of people deciding who to target, who’s acceptable to target and inevitably more abuse, violations of peoples rights as humans, and excessive, avoidable collateral damage.

It’s also done damage to people who are survivors of abuse, because in the end its a term that really helps nobody and holds so little actual meaning when describing abuse because it’s inaccurate in its name and general meaning; there are other more distinct, non-harmful terms that get you so much further in describing the events you had gone through.

In conclusion, happy pride month! Stop parroting the words of a raging bigot and do some self reflection after reading this post.

Thank you.

Sources below the cut for your convenience .

Full text these exerpts are from can be found here (Transphobic & Homophobic)

Found here (Unqualified for the things he’s been saying)

Also formerly read directly as

links to Vaknin’s website , interviews and medium articles

here are some excerpts from these:

Jacobsen: You agree with First Wave Feminism and Second Wave Feminism, and disagree with Third Wave Feminism and Fourth Wave Feminism. What defines them?

Vaknin: First and second wave feminisms (in plural: there are many schools) were focused on leveling the playing field and fighting abusive and exploitative practices such as prostitution and pornography.

Starting with the suffragettes, they focused on the franchise (the right to vote), equal wages, access (to healthcare, education, the workplace, daycare), revising the dress code (“rational dress”), the right to own and dispose of property, and converting marriage from indentured bondage to an intimate, hopefully lifelong equal partnership.

The third wave was a psychopathic outgrowth. While claiming to be inclusive and permissive, it was a defiant and reckless attempt to “empower” women by eliminating all boundaries, conventions, and mores of any kind in all fields of life.

What women have garnered from the confluence of the three waves is that they should make their careers the pivot of their lives, avoid meaningful, committed relationships with men, and pursue sex as a pastime with any man.

Ironically, the third wave played right into the hands of predatory men (“players”) who took advantage of the newfangled promiscuity while assiduously avoiding any hint of commitment or investment. Third wave feminists internalized the male gaze (“internalized oppression”) and pride themselves on being “sluts”.

The fourth wave of feminism is focused on real problems such as sexual harassment, rape, and body shaming as well as intersectionality (discrimination of women who belong to more than one minority). In many ways, it is an offshoot of second wave feminism. - Prof. Vaknin on Misogyny and Misandry (Misogynistic)

Militant Islam is, therefore, not a cancerous mutation of “true” Islam. On the contrary, it is the purest expression of its nature as an imperialistic religion which demands unmitigated obedience from its followers and regards all infidels as both inferior and avowed enemies. Islam is a young religion. At a similar phase in the development of their respective religions, both Jews and Christians behaved the way Muslims do today: paranoid, hostile, murderous, suicidal, fatalistic, apocalyptic, and nihilistic. Death cults arose in all these three monotheistic faiths. - Islam and Liberalism: Total Ideologies (Islamaphobic)

Nonconsensual sex is a crime and should always be punished harshly.

But falsely promising sex by word or by abundance of unequivocal actions should be equally criminalized as a form of fraudulent misconduct.

Men should be able to recover costs and damages from these "playful" counterparties, including for distress and hurt feelings.

Promises - made verbally or behaviorally - are binding and should be kept: look up promissory estoppel and breach of promise (mainly in marriage). Leading on and misrepresentation should be a crime not only in business and should have adverse actionable and tort or public reputation consequences and not only in politics. - Sex or Gender By Dr. Sam Vaknin (Rape apologia)

McLean Hospital, NPD Provider Guide

[self-loving-vampire]

Transphobes (and other thoughtless people in general) are really invested in this idea that people have a cap on how many conditions they can legitimately have.

So they will say that a trans person is not actually trans if they have anything else going on. For example, with the ableist argument that trans people and their doctors are misleading and "recruiting" innocent and easily-manipulated autistic people (which is then also painted as some kind of eugenics conspiracy).

Like, they read "there is a correlation between autism and being trans" and their mind goes "those poor autistics are not Truly Trans they're just autistic sheeple who have fallen into the trans cult".

Even though autistic people are also less likely to be heterosexual and may in fact have higher rates of transness precisely because they may be more likely to question and reject gender norms as just more made-up neurotypical bullshit.

Similarly, there's another line of thinking that I have absolutely no respect for that goes "trans people are just traumatized and need therapy instead of transition", as if you can't be both trans and traumatized at the same time. It has to be one or the other, even though growing up trans (or autistic, which many trans people are) often results in abuse and trauma.

They used to say this same garbage about being gay or gender-nonconforming too, and those things were often treated as being basically the same as being trans.

Conservatives like Jack Chick and James Dobson treated homosexuality is "acquired", inherently disordered, and generally a result of psychic damage from child sexual abuse (blamed on queers, of course), looking at porn, or just not growing up with a "proper" pair of trad cishet parents.

[dykeiism]

whenever i see people talking about the purpose of mental health diagnoses, three reasons usually come up:

to encourage self-understanding

to concisely describe treatment options to professionals

to gain access to resources and accomodations

but it's hard for me to agree with any of these. given the harm associated with diagnosis, especially diagnosis of a personality disorder, i'm finding it increasingly difficult to justify diagnosing any mental disorder at all. below the cut is a breakdown of each of these three reasons, and why i believe that none of them hold up to criticism.

(1) to encourage self-understanding.

diagnostic criteria are so rigid that they discourage self-understanding. they fragment the human experience, categorizing it into easily digestible groups of "symptoms" rather than understanding a person's struggles holistically. this is why we have a phenomenon of people thinking, "well, my anxiety tells me this, but my depression tells me that" and "i'm having an intrusive thought but can't tell if it's coming from my ocd, ptsd, or bpd." diagnosis misleads patients into believing that, much like one might cough due to either pollen in the lungs or a respiratory illness, one might feel anxious due to either their generalized anxiety disorder diagnosis or their post-traumatic stress disorder diagnosis. a more accurate understanding of the human mind would necessarily involve doing away with the pathology of gad versus ptsd, and instead being able to understand that the anxiety might simply result from a combination of previous negative experiences, a naturally sensitive personality, and underdeveloped emotion regulation skills. a diagnosis is a description of a pattern of thoughts and behaviours; nothing more. my mental health conditions don't cause me to think or behave a certain way. rather, my thoughts and behaviours are similar to the thoughts and behaviours of other people who have also been deemed mentally sick. this makes it possible for doctors to use a certain diagnosis as a shorthand to describe my personality and skills (i refuse to call such things "symptoms") to other doctors. it does not mean that i have a sickness that causes me to think and act in certain way.

why would i want to understand myself through the lens of a psychiatrist, anyways? psychiatry is a deeply individual solution to systemic problems. we're living in a world that evolution could not prepare us for, yet we are told that there's something wrong with our brains if we're unable to adapt to these unprecedented living conditions. i refuse to believe that my brain is sick unless somebody has looked at my brain and can tell me where the sickness is. we must not forget that we're dealing with the discipline that understood homosexuality and hysteria as mental illnesses, and that initially understood autism to be a form of schizophrenia.

(2) to concisely describe treatment options to professionals

imagine, if you will, someone with post-traumatic stress disorder. all you know about them is that they have ptsd. now, recommend a treatment method for them!

nobody can give a good treatment recommendation based on that diagnosis alone. more information is needed: is the patient dealing with persistent general anxiety, sudden panic attacks, or a phobia? does the patient have compulsions? is the patient aggressive, anxious, or depressive? depending on the answers, the ideal treatment plan will be quite different.

now let's consider borderline personality disorder. there are 4 types of bpd and there are 256 possible ways to combine the 5 symptoms required for diagnosis (there are 9 symptoms in total). the personalities, cognitive abilities, and struggles of people diagnosed with bpd are quite diverse, and they will all require varying types and degrees of professional intervention. that being said, bpd is almost always treated with dbt and a few medication options including antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, and anticonvulsants. there are so many other disorders that are treated with dbt and the same drugs. so why make bpd, bipolar, ptsd, cptsd, and depression their own diagnoses? what reason is there, other than to fragment our struggles and generate stigma?

my wish for the future of psychiatry is that, instead of being diagnosed with a disorder that is simultaneously very specific yet inexplicably vague, patients will be told "your struggles are related to trauma and emotional dysregulation. i recommend that you take an antidepressant and attend dialectical behavioural therapy sessions," or "your struggles are related to catastrophization and unhelpful behaviours, i recommend that you engage in cognitive behavioural therapy."

(3) to gain access to resources and accommodations

there are better ways to do this. i don't think anyone should be turned away from the accommodations that they need. however, if resources are scarce and must be gatekept, then a simple interview or quotient test will be sufficient in determining the level of need.

[nonconformityhub]

https://www.tumblr.com/nonconformityhub/752900218271547392/a-few-people-had-issues-with-my-friends-use-of

Hi! I like that your blog is dedicated to exploring new language about various identities, but as a lesbian, please know that "bi lesbian" (or "mspec lesbian") is a harmful, lesbophobic and biphobic term.

"Bi/mspec lesbian" erases both identities (implying that bisexuals are under the "lesbian umbrella" and that lesbians are attracted to the opposite gender/men, both which are factually untrue). "Lesbian" is not an umbrella term for all sapphics.

Also, "bi/mspec lesbian" confuses the greater public (including cishet men) who are mislead to think lesbians are into them, therefore contributing to ("corrective") r4pe culture. Lesbians are not attracted to men and do not date men, period.

No need to co-opt "lesbian" by attaching "bi" to it, when terms like "bisexual", "sapphic" and "wlw" exist (not to mention that "lesbian" already encompasses women and woman-aligned nonbinary people).

Erasure and misleading language is the last thing we need in our community. Could you please amend/correct your post?

Thank you!

Hello! I appreciate your views but plenty of lesbians and bisexuals support this term too (see all the reblogs and likes on that post)

You may personally see no need to reclaim a historic interpretation of lesbian or no need for people who are fluid between bi and lesbian, bisexual homoromantic/homosexual biromantic, and so on to use the term bi lesbian - but they clearly see a need to, that's why it exists

The term has come back into use from the 1970s/80s/90s because people needed it to, language doesn't just come back when nobody needs it. People have a use for the word, many of said uses are described in the post and in those 70s/80s/90s accounts (poetry, interviews, all sorts can be found out there)

You'll also notice that the identity is yet to confuse the general public into thinking all lesbians like men or even enter public awareness, and if it does, identifiers provide resources and definitions for their identity like the infographic my friend made to clear these things up

I will not be 'correcting' the post because not only did I not make that infographic, but the information being presented is correct. It correctly tells you why people identify as bi lesbians and it correctly tells you the history of the term, you can think it's a pointless or damaging term but the information there is correct

By far the biggest reason people find use in it is because they are bisexual homoromantic or homosexual biromantic, and they're clarifying that the 'homo' part is lesbian - hence bi lesbian, bisexual lesbian, biromantic lesbian

This is my favourite carrd for talking about the historical and modern reasons for combining the two

Labels are personal and exist for an individual to understand themselves and express their experience of the world in a way that works for them, and we can't just decide what way works for them

[hussyknee]

Somewhat put off by the spoilers I've read about Mary and George. There's no doubt nearly all relationships in the British court were some level of sordid, but King James, to all intents and purposes, had genuine feelings for his three male favourites, most especially George Villiers. He was no Henry VIII. I don't know why they wanted to reduce the most famous and open homosexual relationship in European royal history to a comedy between a "cock-struck" old lech and a conniving courtier that led him by the nose and then betrayed and murdered him.

All evidence points to George at least being loyal to James (if you discount his love letters as simply sucking up to his benefactor) and even had a fond relationship with his Queen and his son Charles. He was in fact in France when James died, and reportedly cried when he heard the news.

It's even a little heartbreaking because this is right after Nicholas Galitzine played the closeted gay Prince Henry in Red, White and Royal Blue, who in the book is proud of the open and unashamed love between his ancestor and his lover, and the way even James's son Charles I honoured Villiers for accompanying him to the Spanish Court to ask for the hand of the Infanta.

“Actually . . . you remember how I told you about the gay king, James I?”

“The one with the dumb jock boyfriend?”

“Yes, that one. Well, his most beloved favorite was a man named George Villiers. ‘The handsomest-bodied man in all of England,’ they called him. James was completely besotted. Everyone knew. This French poet, de Viau, wrote a poem about it.” He clears his throat and starts to recite: ‘One man fucks Monsieur le Grand, another fucks the Comte de Tonnerre , and it is well known that the King of England, fucks the Duke of Buckingham.’” Alex must be staring, because he adds, “Well, it rhymes in French. Anyway. Did you know the reason the King James translation of the Bible exists is because the Church of England was so displeased with James for flaunting his relationship with Villiers that he had the translation commissioned to appease them?”

“You’re kidding.”

“He stood in front of the Privy Council and said, ‘Christ had John, and I have George.’’

“Jesus.”

“Precisely.” Henry’s still looking up at the statue, but Alex can’t stop looking at him and the sly smile on his face, lost in his own thoughts. “And James’s son, Charles I, is the reason we have dear Samson. It’s the only Giambologna that ever left Florence. He was a gift to Charles from the King of Spain, and Charles gave it, this massive, absolutely priceless masterpiece of a sculpture, to Villiers. And a few centuries later, here he is. One of the most beautiful pieces we own, and we didn’t even steal it. We only needed Villiers and his trolloping ways with the queer monarchs. To me, if there were a registry of national gay landmarks in Britain, Samson would be on it.”

Henry’s beaming like a proud parent, like Samson is his, and Alex is hit with a wave of pride in kind.

He takes his phone out and lines up a shot, Henry standing there all soft and rumpled and smiling next to one of the most exquisite works of art in the world.

“What are you doing?”

“I’m taking a picture of a national gay landmark,” Alex tells him. “And also a statue.”

Like all white liberals, Casey McQuiston tends to romanticise the crime against humanity that is royalty and also that house built by bunch of slave owners that has since housed a progression of genocidal war criminals. There's very little to like about any British monarch. But the relationship between James and Villiers is a significant part of gay history and there's no need to smear it even more than it's already been smeared the last four hundred years, contrary to the actual known facts.

Idk man. I'm sensitive to this stuff Ig. Maybe I'd be a little more positive about it if I watched it, but the trailer gave me "tee hee they're gay" vibes so Idk if I want to.

Edit: so it seems the trailer is misleading and the story is more complex than a "tee hee gay" comedy. I might watch it after all, even if the starkly visible age difference makes me a bit queasy. How tf is Galitzine nearly thirty and a babyface with those razor cheekbones?? Perfect to show how uncomfortable it looks for a middle aged man to get with a kid of twenty.