#no fucking man in the world is being oppressed for the fact of being a man

[justsomeoneunordinary]

i am getting so tired by all these "oh no poor boys and men" posts i am seeing on my dash - far more about men's issues and oh how much they suffer than i see about women nowadays and that's just sooo....

full fucking offense but women worldwide still earn less than their male co-workers do for the exact same job. in some places it's better than others but it's still a universal problem

women still have to work more to climb the career ladder and get a leader job than their male co-workers do. in some places it's better than others but it's still a universal problem

there are still, now in 2kfucking24, two countries left where women still can't vote

women and girls, especially immigrants, are the majority victims of sex trafficking!!! this is still happening!!!!! sex trafficking hasn't stopped!!!

every. single. woman i know - every single one!!! - has been sexually harassed by a man at least once! it even happened to me and i never thought it'd happen to bc i am someone considered rather unattractive - have even been said so, directly to my face, by men, which is a form of harassment in itself - and i have never heard of a woman who hasn't ever been sexually harassed even once. and hey, isn't it fucking nuts that this is something you just have to expect at a certain point as a woman? that this simply WILL happen one day that a man will come up to you and be a fucking creep or even worse???

women are still being told by men what they should and shouldn't wear. now, this year of 2kfucking24 the women's volleyball team was fucking finally allowed to cover their full body at the olympics instead of wearing their tiny bikinis!! and what happened on social media first things first was creeps talking about how disappointed they are now! because they couldn't leer at the ladies anymore!!

but you come on tumblr and people reblog posts about how oppressive it is for men that they can't show their feelings or they will be called weak and unmanly boohoo :( sure, that fucking sucks. i'm sorry you have such terrible friends, dude, and i really hope you find better ones - but that's not fucking misandry, you're not being oppressed for being a man, you're not being oppressed at all!!! this is people being mean to you, this is bullying at most! but misandry?! shut the fuck upppp

some time ago i saw a post abt how women should stop being afraid of going out in the dark and how it's fucked up to think of every man they meet at night outside to be a rapist. and i get that! i do somewhat agree with that! but a neighbor of my friend's had recently been followed in the evening on her way back home by a bunch of guys til her home, calling her a bitch and saying they'll kill her (she didn't even know them) and they even got into the house complex bc some idiot let them in. they only ran away once she called the police. back in my highschool days it not only happened once but twice that a girl from my school was followed home after her afternoon classes and was raped. recently, in my living area, two women were stalked at night and killed shortly before they managed to arrive home. and that's just what happened in my general area!!!! not to mention what happens in so many places all over the world!!!! and yeah, i don't think being afraid of going out at night now is going to do me any good, but i totally get why some women are afraid!!!! idk, maybe men should just stop creeping on women, rape them and/or kill them? so that women would not have to fear going out at night alone anymore? just a random thought but hey maybe i'm just hysterical :)

but no. let us talk abt "misandry" instead and how oppressed these poor guys are for *check's notes* women sometimes being unreasonable assholes to them

enough!!!

[melaninfury]

Synastry Observation 🕯️

Please don't take this as astrological facts. These are more my experience and perspective. The whole chart and aspects must also be considered.

👥 As much as I love a good moon in the 11th, I do recall every person showing some sort of over interest in my longterm goals and who I am friends with. It kinds gives they feel some type of way about the friends you make or can get very personally offended by the way you go after your goals and even the community you’re in. Of course more with affliction and squares to your eighth.

👥 I always recommend if looking into synastry for families/generational curses/childhood trauma/familial bonds to look at their Lilith energy between each other. My family member who birthed me has their Lilith retrin my 12th house. I always think they are trying to have power over me subconsciously or questioning my mental health (12 house). Over all a hidden opp at times but very dedicated and nosey on what plans or how to crack your code.

👥 Saturn in the 8th house is oppressive in synastry in many ways if not balanced. I find these individuals are pocketwatchers to your debt towards them even when they give it comes with some resentment.

👥 Yes that mans venus is touching exactly on your mars, I think your attracted and may want to you know. Yes your venus is touching their mars … yes they want you or maybe they have thought about it. In context to most sexual and relationship area this aspect creates the right tension. It is not as direct as mars wanting you in the first house it is a take you out to dinner first kind of fuck you.

👥 Mars in the 1st house either wants to fuck you, compete with you or argue, fight with you or just all of the above. At some point 🤷🏾‍♀️ to some degree maybe so.

👥 Uranus in the 9th may feel estranged to your dreams/goals/ideologies. They may come from a different religion that may demonize or judge your beliefs. They feel your way of life is a revolution to their own. It either tears you down or feels welcomed by its difference.

👥 If your parent has their neptune in your 10th house of Career/Legacy/Who your parents want you to be/Your social status...I do feel for the way they project and want to control you. Very controlling of the narrative of who you want to be. They project their own failures and need to do what they never got to do. Then they hold you to a lot of standards to make sure you turn out the way they want. They want you to live the life they projected onto you at birth or really young. Weird effect of Neptune/Afflicted Neptune/Capricorn Neptune in Saturn’s House

👥 10th house synastry is superficial. If I were to say anything else. No matter the placement, they all manifest this differently but in the same energy. If someone is falling on top of your tenth house make sure your relationship isn't based on appearance or the "idea" of you and what you bring into their status (life).

👥 As much as that Moon/Mars is gonna draw you is as much as it’s gonna fuck you over....you will be annoyed by what drew you in 😬. With this synastry are you ready to be madly in love on the plight than the mars actions that disrupt or activate the hidden emotional world of the moon, make you think your not 😃. if you don’t really want to feel that feeling, tension and resistance even though this is someone you want I recommend taking that shit slow please.

👥 See my problem with 8th house energy is its attention. Your sexual partners mars or moon falling in your 8th can really make them want you in that way but it’s the house of debt and others peoples money it’s inherently shadow like and has a touch of mystery. Like stop making secret passes at that lady in the dark or giving the eyes. Stop taking someone out to eat and taking them back to your place. Stop not ignoring the urge to touch….and touch…and touch all the time. Being so goddamn intimate. Yes that shit can turn really ugly really quick. And your not gonna “die” per say from synastry like this in the house of death but when they leave or if they hurt you it’s gonna hurt just as much as it felt good in the moment. You might feel like a part if you is actually dying. But y’all stay safe out there 🙂.

👥 Jupiter in your 7th house you say…well I SAY you want that man to be your husband, that woman to be your wife, their soul to be your equal, you want that partner title with them because they fit into your world and they elevate in the way you dream. Maybe they are your dream but I think you like em a bit to much, Jupiter is an abundance is it not, for better or for worse.

©️ All rights reserved melaninfury

[fixtheaxel]

She turned off reblogs so imma address it here.

NOT EVERYONE IS WHITE/WESTERN

YOU DUMBASS

When you mean 'societally acceptable', what you actually mean is

'normalised in western culture',

And that, was because of the 19th century dress reform movement. Also, overwhelmingly because it was a tool of feminist rebellion. Women were arrested en-masse, for wearing trousers in WW1, and yet they continued to do so, the clothing becoming an increasing point of protest, because before then, 'feminine' clothing, was extremely long skirt which were an actual danger to the female factory workers who were legally obligated to wear them.

The reason a similar movement did not be made for men, is because the male standard clothes were practical and not a legitimate physical danger. So the average man did not feel the need to protest these restrictions.

In fact men did not start using skirts/'feminine clothing' as a tool of rebellion en masse till the LGBT Rights movement.

On the other hand, feminine clothing has been GLOBALLY used as a TOOL OF OPPRESSION.

The modern day western world is one of the only places in World History, for perhaps all of human history, where men's clothing is more greatly monitored then women's. `

I will not mention the country where I am originally from because I feel like I've already said waaaaaay too much about myself online, and i'm paranoid.

But women and those AFAB are currently being shot dead in the streets of my country by morality police for- Not even wearing men's clothing- but just simply wearing SLIGHTLY TOO 'MASCULINE' (practical) CLOTHES.

So don't sit there in your fucking privilege and talk about how femininity in those AMAB is a more transgressive concept than masculinity in AFAB people.

Some of yall really need to learn about people outside your limited ass sphere

[freyanistics]

The fetishization of Hobie Brown

Side note: This post is not intended to start up the age discourse that surrounds Hobie. I am not going to get into it as this argument/debate comes up every so often and really doesn’t prove anything on either side you are on. I’m not dissuading anyone from absorbing any content of Hobie and saying it’s problematic EXCEPT for the things I’m pointing out in this post. If you see Hobie as a minor, that’s fine. If you view him as an adult, that’s also fine. Until the directors come forward and confirm his canonical age I am not going to bring up the same facts that is brought up whenever his age comes to discussion. This is just me bringing up a reoccurring issue I’ve noticed that doesn’t get too addressed by the community (and when it does it’s often pushed to the side)

The fetishization and inherently the oversexualization of Hobie Brown is not only problematic but also harmful. Black men being fetishized has been going on for decades since slavery times. I’m not going to go too deep into the history but if you’re interested this creator has a very good video discussing it.

With Hobie Brown being a darkskin black man that is part of the punk scene and comes off with a “rough” exterior you’re going to have people put stereotypes on him. Despite how he’s portrayed in the movie I’ve seen people headcanon him as this cold person who wouldn’t care about his partner’s feelings or come off as a womanizer that sleeps with a lot of partners without a care in the world. He fucks rough and is aggressive while the reader is this innocent person pulled under his spell. That’s where some of the problem delves with him being portrayed as this aggressive and sex deviant who doesn’t care about his partner(s) feelings. It’s a stereotype a lot of (mainly non black) people see black men as.

Despite the fact that Hobie in the movie shows to deeply care for his friends, even going as far as helping Miles who he didn’t even know up until now. He’s shown to be gentle when handling Mayday. Yet people still want to paint him as the polar opposite.

Take Miles G for instant. I’ve seen him get the same treatment with him being painted as a “gangster” who is aggressive and your typical gang lord despite him only having five minute screen time. While yes from that little time he does seem to be the much colder version of Miles Morales painting him out to be a thug goes into that dangerous fantasy a lot of people see black men. People (again mainly non blacks) view black men as this dominant and powerful man who is always aggressive in and out the bedroom.

The same can be said for Miguel who even the screenwriters have written him as “animalistic” and “feral”. Writing him off more as some beast than a human being.

Circulating back to Hobie there’s nothing wrong with finding him attractive the problem delves if you’re headcanoning him or viewing him as your stereotypical “hood” boyfriend who is deprived of any other emotion except for anger, jealousy, or this sex god who will beat up people for even looking at his partner. When we make these harmful stereotypes about black characters it starts to trickle down to irl and how we view actual people.

And we end up seeing shit like this on the daily. I don’t even have to explain why this is problematic.

All in all Hobie Brown is much more than just a pretty face. He’s a young black man living in an oppressive fascist society that he’s actively fighting against. He deserves to be treated more than just a sexy conveniently attractive guy but a much more complex character who’s backstory in atsv is still a mystery. If you’re just gonna sexualize him 24/7 and not see him anything outside of that you’re weird, and you’re even weirder if you headcanon with “he’s ugly but he got that big dick 🤪.”

[shorthaltsjester]

love (loath) this version of ‘empathy’ for characters that exists in fandoms that somehow means taking any articulation of the fact that x character is given responsibility and context by the story and that their poor choices lead to poor outcomes is actually a slight against the character (and implicitly somehow whatever oppressed group which they belong to or are alleged to belong to by sections of fandom)

to be clear this is something i’ve noticed in several fandoms which is why the beginning of this is general language but the pertinent example to my current frustration is liliana temult and the defence of her that lays on a claim that those who enjoy the narrative showing her poor actions leading to poor outcomes for her have somehow failed the empathy test is beyond incomprehensible to me. like even ignoring the very basic level understanding that fiction is a place to experience satisfaction in narratives that we cannot fulfil in non-narrative reality, it’s also like… holy fuck do I not want the kind of empathy that tells me it will all work out no matter what choice I make. it is actually imperative to human life that the choices we make have substance in the outcomes we arrive in, otherwise we would’ve long given up on the notion of free will. and to look at a narrative, particularly one built in the context of a ttrpg. a game notably influenced by the choices that players-as-characters make. and then see sections of an audience find it compelling and enjoyable that a character who has made categorically poor choices that have caused immeasurable harm to others is now dealing with the very obvious face-eating panthers consequences… idk man. if you see that as a lack of empathy i implore you to consider what role empathy is playing in your world.

like. if empathy to you is about comfort and stagnancy and not about growth and community, then sure i can understand how it might not be empathetic in your view to notice patterns and see their obvious outcome and acknowledge that . but as someone who has been in the position of making horrible choices with obvious outcomes, far more essential to my personhood was those who looked at me with careful but critical eyes than those who nearly babyed me into my grave. that’s actually why i love imogen’s choice to insist that liliana make her own choice and then quasi-encouraging her to stay, because it was a clear reminded to liliana that her choices have consequences, and one of those is that the terrible things she’s down in the name of her daughter have led to that daughter not being able to easily trust her.

and i think another thing that’s related that gets misconstrued with liliana (and as always unfortunately many such cases) is that the satisfaction of seeing her absorbed isn’t that it’s retributive harm done or some sort of punishment (at least not for me, skill issue if people in your fandom spaces are that cop-minded but, yknow, what can you expect from the thought-crimes capital of fandom spaces). the satisfaction is in the analogue (that i’ve seen well memed) to the face-eating panthers joke that liliana’s actions which have pushed an agenda that’s depended on the consumption and threat to her child and the children she specifically has aided in placing in danger via her choices, has led to situations where a) she’s ‘burdened’ by her care for imogen and the children (both of which she has played a hand in inviting into the context of danger) b) she is now the person in danger of being consumed after spending weeks simply shrugging off concerns about what might be consumed in the name of ludinus’ Just World™. like it’s not just ‘liliana does bad things, must be punished’ it’s ‘liliana has played a hand in creating a situation that is threatening to many including herself, it is narratively satisfying and engages in Common Narrative Tool: Irony to have that create situation negatively impact her directly.’

to that end that’s why the ‘if you’re like this about liliana you should also be like this about essek’ takes are beyond missing the point (without getting into the horribly built scarecrow that it is, understand that it’s actually undermining decades of feminist’s philosophical and political development to see a critique of a female character and go ‘well actually if she were a man you wouldn’t be saying that’ when it’s a provable fact that people Would be (and have been) saying that if she were a man. so not the feminist slay you think it is). like, as someone who Was just as interested in essek’s story having consequences as I am in liliana’s, there very much WERE consequences for essek that, just like liliana, were well contextualized and suited to the specific choices he made. they are ones that should be obvious even to the most surface read of the campaigns given that essek still appears in disguise years after the end of c2, should also probably be obvious in the rebuilding of relationships essek had to do with mn after they discovered his betrayal. like the notable difference between liliana and essek is not their gender, it’s that we’ve seen the end of essek’s story (in the sense of like. campaign containment, obviously his Story™ is ongoing) and have yet to see liliana’s— it’s entirely possible that liliana does get saved and goes on to repair her relationship with imogen (or goes on and is unable to repair it) or she just dies and part of imogen’s story is dealing with it; all of those are narratively satisfying. what wouldn’t have been satisfying, in the sense that would leave liliana feeling like a non-agent in a story dependent on her agency, is if her role was entirely dictated by imogen’s interest in reconciliation. because sure if you want to look very microscopically the current threat to liliana that exists is 1-to-1 caused by the fact that she’s been helping imogen, but taking seriously the story, the consequences bloom from all the choices that liliana has made leading to ludinus’ decision to trust her however far he does that made liliana’s choice a betrayal and affirmed ludinus’ strength and position so that he can do something like siphon someone’s life force away.

further the ‘why does liliana deserve to be funnelled and relvin gets off easy’ relvin doesn’t get off easy. once again the satisfaction of his narrative is that he did his best and it was insufficient and that cost him a relationship with imogen they both clearly wish for but neither can rectify. the consequence for relvin is that he’s in an empty house that is no longer home to the woman he loved or the daughter he was left to raise alone. surely i don’t need to unpack why i think someone who tried but wasn’t well equipped to raise a daughter with superpowers doesn’t need to evoke as ‘drastic’ consequences in their story as the stated right hand of the campaign’s bbeg for their story to feel complete.

and idk at least for me that’s the salient point; that the consequences that are happening feel like a plausible and suitable conclusion to the story we’ve seen of liliana even if she perishes at ludinus’ hand. it will be sad but it’ll be satisfying, and maybe i should have realized seeing the frequency with which parts of fandom have been campaigning to undo maybe the most weighty and narratively satisfying choices & consequence of vox machina’s story, but it’s truly confounding to me the amount of people treating the presence of any complex and non-traditional happy ending notion in a story set in a world defined by pyrrhic victories. like, empathy for vax isn’t saying he’s the puppet of a god that manipulated him into service, it’s acknowledging that he made a choice that he knew would have consequences and acknowledging that the consequences he demanded with that choice were pretty severe ones. that doesn’t mean i’m watching the end of cr1 seeing the characters destroyed by the loss of vax being like ‘dumbasses, they knew this was coming, vax chose this, these are his consequences’ it means that when i’m crying watching the end of cr1 it’s paired with my deep love for a story that takes seriously the weight of the character’s choices in the determination of their lives. idk man. maybe interrogate how much of your notion of empathy is dependent on individualism to the point of near complete alienation and get back to me on how empathetic it is to look at someone who has caused unarguable pain with their choices and say ‘no no it’s fine you didn’t mean to + you’re a woman :/‘ while the victims of those choices rot in their graves

[uniteds]

stuff that happened in the 2022/2023 football season that should send us into a coma but we’re too desensitized:

1. the whole ass world cup in the middle of the season. what was that

2. manchester united sacking ronaldo and announcing a sale of the club in the middle of the world cup

3. ronaldo getting dropped at the world cup and his replacement scoring a hattrick immediately after

4. keeping up with the belgians (world cup edition)

5. keeping up with the belgians (courtois saying he doesn’t respect kdb after stealing his missus)

6. ronaldo stans beefing with a little moroccan girl

7. the kingdom of saudi arabia buying newcastle united and then telling the premier league that they didn’t and the premier league going “oh okay if you say so”

8. megan thee stallion being romelu lukaku’s date to lautaro martinez’s wedding

9. pique cheating on shakira and then shakira releasing a diss track about it

10. shakira figuring out pique cheated on her because someone ate her strawberry jam and pique doesn’t eat strawberry jam

11. apparently the girl pique cheated on shakira with (clara) cheating on pique with pep

12. wagatha christie libel case

13. real madrid dropping a video accusing barcelona of fascism and the government of cataluyna getting involved

14. the pope coming out as a manchester united fan

15. the one napoli fan that basically made zielinski strip on the pitch

16. mount vesuvius park shutting down because napoli fans wanted to fake an eruption as a celebration

17. frank lampard taking everton into a relegation battle, getting sacked, and then taking chelsea into a relegation battle

18. on that note: chelsea were in a relegation scrap and finished 12th

19. mourinho lost his first ever european final to sevilla europa league black magic

20. whatever the fuck borussia dortmund did on the last day of the bundesliga season

21. anthony martial’s ex wife chasing his first wife down a french motorway with a baby in the passenger seat

22. psg suspending messi because he took an unsanctioned trip to saudi arabia and then unsuspending him two days later because they didn’t want people talking about geopolitics

23. the absolutely bizarre messi apology video released by psg

24. spurs refunding their fans’ tickets after being embarrassing

25. pep’s heartbreak over the fact julia roberts is a manchester united fan

26. chelsea scored one goal in the month of april

27. chelsea and spurs had six managers between them and won one match combined between march and april

28. mourinho fighting anthony taylor after the europa league final

29. milan derby in the ucl for the first time since 2005

30. luis enrique saying he’s cool with the spanish players having sex during the world cup as long as they’re not having orgies

31. luis enrique saying he doesn’t have sex anymore unless his wife wants to

32. man city charged with 115 counts of financial doping and trying to get the barrister in charge disqualified because he’s an arsenal fan

33. mourinho wire-taping himself to catch referees being corrupt

34. ryan reynolds and mac from it’s always sunny in philadelphia buying a football club and that football club getting promoted

35. pele died rip

36. women football awards sponsored by shein and klarna having a category for “male football ally of the year” and it’s just random men that went to one (1) women’s game

37. barcelona negreia case (how do you say calciopoli in catalan?)

38. infantino saying he feels gay, african, like a migrant worker, disabled, arab, and qatari

39. infantino saying he was oppressed as a child because he was ginger and italy is not safe for gingers

40. david alaba’s father in law getting arrested for being one the leaders of a far right group plotting to overthrow the german government

41. richarlison being tumblr’s it girl for a month and then not scoring a goal for the next four

42. juventus being in the middle of another corruption scandal and being docked points because of it

43. two teams getting investigated by the british government for playing football the weekend the queen died

44. gavi getting a yellow card in the first minute of a football match

45. pogba’s brother was arrested by french authorities for being part of a group-organized extortion attempt against pogba

46. richarlison getting a tattoo of neymar’s face and neymar paying him 30k to get it removed

47. iker casillas coming out, puyol implying they had a thing, and both of them retracting it in the most misha collins way possible.

48. sane and mane fight

49. zlatan retired from football

50. barca withholding about 50 million in wages from their players and somehow frenkie still didn’t want to join manchester united

[nekropsii]

Why do people call Porrim an MRA??? it's such a bad take I can't even begin to fathom the logic.

Uuuuugh. Okay, to my understanding, the logic is predicated on two concepts:

Kankri is Correct, there is no Misogyny on Beforus.

Since Beforus has a Matriarch, "complaining" about the Oppression of Women on Beforus is the exact equivalent... Men complaining about men being oppressed, despite us living in a Patriarchal society.

This is a terrible argument, because... Porrim literally explains in detail that that is not the case.

Yes, Beforus has a Matriarch... A Superficial Matriarch, where the woman in power is more of a Figurehead than anything. Law Enforcement and Politics are handled mostly by "Higher CIPs" - Ceruleans, Indigos, and Purples - which are predominantly born (hatched?) as men. ... If all of the Social Order and Politics are Enforced and Dictated by men... Then that... Is a Patriarchy.

So, we have it directly explained to us that Beforus is Superficially a Matriarchy, with a Governing Body largely composed by Highblood Men, who canonically benefit from the subjugation of women, because having women be of generally lower class than men means that... Men can cull women, potentially on the basis of being women. You know, that social system, enforced by the predominantly male-lead government that allows for what is essentially the ownership of people you deem incapable of caring for themselves as pets? The system that will take any excuse in the book? Sure, that may have been a social rule implemented by their version of HIC, Feferi fucking Peixes, but it's still being used as a weapon. Just because something was made by a woman, does not mean it cannot be used as a weapon against women in the name of misogyny. You think Alternian Culling doesn't work the same damn way?

There's a sharp cut of irony you have to feel at the fact that Porrim literally says that conversations of Misogyny on Beforus are often shot down using "The Matriarchy" as an excuse. If Misogyny wasn't a thing, why the fuck are Rufioh, Kankri, and Cronus literally, textually, purposefully Misogynists? Why the hell is Latula like that, then? I don't think this is a 1-to-1 allegory for the real world, man- Troll World Building has NEVER been a direct, clean allegory for the real world. I do not think she was ever intended to be read as an analogue to Men's Rights Activists, I think she was intended to be read as an Alien Feminist. If anything, this feels less like an MRA, and more like someone getting shut down for trying to have a conversation about how Misogyny Exists in, like, Thatcher-Era England or something. Well, there's a Female Prime Minister, isn't there? Misogyny is over, clearly.

Porrim is constantly posed as an Exposition Fairy on the same level as Aranea, just... With Politics and World Building rather than Character Analysis. Porrim is portrayed as cool, collected, and correct. Do you think Andrew Hussie - literal Andrew Hussie - would portray a fucking Men's Rights Activist with that level of grace and style? Because the answer is no! Every time a character is a Misogynist in Homestuck, they are comically terrible! Rufioh, Kankri, Cronus, fucking Caliborn! Hussie is a lot of things, and yeah, some of these things are bad, but none of these things include the label Misogynist. Hussie is well known for... Not doing that, actually, that's, like... A major appeal of the comic. The female characters in Homestuck are known for being really, really well written and really, really well handled!! If there was a Men's Rights Activist in Homestuck, we would know about it, because that character would be comedically terrible, constantly dunked on by everyone around him, totally bitchless, and posed as a relentless fucking menace who does not deserve to breathe the same air as any of the women in the story. You know, like Cronus! And Not Porrim!!

Also, can we all take a moment of silence to ponder how much of an L it is to have your entire point of discourse be based in the idea that straight up literal actual Kankri Vantas is correct? That is capital e Embarrassing.

[utilitycaster]

So I alluded to this in tags but did not want to put this on someone else's post and so: I have been catching heat for calling various members of Bells Hells selfish since the start, and to be clear, I will keep doing this, because I have precisely no respect for the intellect of anyone doing this, but I want to underscore that it's not just that I find many of the party's actions profoundly selfish/self-absorbed; it's been a growing pattern in the people who defend them.

It is selfish to fail to take into consideration the perspectives of others and to act out of your own pain in a way that hurts other people. I categorically reject the idea that being traumatized, abused, or experiencing negative things in any way excuses you from having to consider how your actions can harm others. In fact, failing to do this makes you a worse person; to say "the world hurt me and I'll visit this pain on other innocents" is ultimately, an indefensible position on moral grounds. That doesn't, to be clear, mean I dislike it in stories, which should have conflict and moral grayness. But I do not find these characters to be people I consider to be good, if this is with any consistency the frame of reference from which they act.

To say "the gods did not give me things and therefore they deserve killing" is profoundly selfish and vindictive. Having no love for them is one thing; actively wishing harm on them is, in fact, self-centered in the extreme. But that's actually not what I'm here to talk about in regards to Bells Hells' selfishness, both because I've found trying to explain that the gods are living beings and murdering all of them is, you know, bad, to some of the fandom has failed for the reasons I'll discuss later in this post. And, granted, this is a hypothetical, and we may look back in a month or so when the dust clears at a party that defeated Predathos and say "ha, good job guys," but should Bells Hells release Predathos deliberately? That is a betrayal of the Exandrian Accord. If you want to side with the man who destroyed Molaesmyr (and make no mistake, there is no way to do what he was going to do without siding with him; intent only matters if Predathos escapes despite Bells Hells giving it their all, not if they have slightly different motivations for fucking over their allies), that's a valid story, but to take the job and choose to fail to deliver? That is selfish. Someone else could have taken the job. The Doylist excuse that these are the characters the cast happened to be playing at the time does not, in fact, hold water; they could in fact have rejected the Moon Plot, or chosen to become the villains of this story. I would have, in fact, enjoyed that as a story! But this idea that they're not just assholes who think more about themselves and the shitty things various people mostly unaffiliated with the gods did to them during their childhoods than the vast destruction wrought by Ludinus across all of Exandria, is not one the narrative has ever supported.

What's really struck me, though, is a theme of selfish defenses in the fandom. I think bringing up personal anecdotes can be incredibly helpful! I found that some of the people who spoke about their experiences with PTSD in reference to Caleb, for example, provided incredible insight. Notably, the people I'm thinking about were not the ones whose conclusions were "so he's in the moral right to do anything to anyone ever because of PTSD" (and indeed they were usually people who celebrated Caleb as kind of an asshole). But those anecdotes do not override the experiences of other fans. Or, to dredge up some tiresome arguments, Beau is allowed to get pissed off at Caleb's behavior, even if his actions come from a place of trauma.

The two things that really stand out to me (outside of the bizarre ambient noise of white southern ex-Evangelicals acting like they're an oppressed class on that basis that has clung to the discourse like the slime it is) are the recent defense of Ashton on the basis of "punks/leftists are allowed to do this and I identify with Ashton so how could you be so mean to me, a leftist punk and therefore a good person and therefore I can do whatever and you have to like me," and the defense of the various Vanguard members (sans Ludinus) as being victims of a cult and therefore the trail of bodies they leave is fine because various fans have talked about having family in cults whom they forgave. I will speak bluntly here. I'm Jewish, and your argument of "you should be nicer to cult members because a lot of white southern people fall into cults, like one of my parents" is, to me, a combination of insulting, horrifying, and makes me hope your cultist parent gets hit by a car before they hurt more people. Should you wish to forgive your family? Fine, it's your business. To act as though it is a failure of strangers that they are not more generous towards a fictional character because you are sucking your own dick about how good you are at forgiveness? That is a level of entitlement that goes so far beyond the pale I struggle to imagine how you function in society.

I don't think Bells Hells are doomed to this epithet - they have a chance to do the the right thing - and I believe that those entitled fans can change. But yeah man, they - and you - have been really fucking selfish, and the digging in of your heels is doing nothing to convince me you're capable of even hearing the perspectives of others, let alone considering them.

[that-satireguy]

'when you go on and on'- when you're referring to traumatised people speaking on their trauma as 'going on and on', you've already started this conversation on a very bad foot. But lets go on to the rest of it.

'this strange concept that you are socially shunned for not medically transitioning'- this concept is strange to you? Is this the first time I get to introduce you to ✨transmedicalism✨ and the word ✨transtrender✨ and ✨medical misogyny✨

'or passing'- you don't think there are people who socially shun visibly trans people more than the ones they can pretend don't exist?

'reaffirming that trans men are nothing but traumatised women'-

This statement is absolutely fucking disgusting. What twisted logic is this?

'Yes. You were traumatised. BUt dont talk about it otherwise you're agreeing with people who want you dead. 🥰'.

Not to mention that this implies there is something lesser about being traumatised. I may not be a traumatised woman. But I am certainly a traumatised man. That does not make me lesser. That does not make me broken. That does not justify me being infantilised or treated as less than. This entire spiel of yours has pretty much just been 'you don't get to talk about being oppressed, otherwise you justify that oppression.' wtf is wrong with you?

Not to mention, this would absolutely not be socially acceptable to say to cis women. Imagine hearing a cis women go: '1 in 6 women experience rape/attempted rape and this has affected me deeply' and your response is- 'you can't say that! You're minimising yourself. YOu're equivalent to misogynists who say you're weak and stupid.'

Throughout this little think piece of yours you demonstrate not just a fundamental misunderstanding of what transphobic misogynists think about trans men, but just generally a contempt for victims of misogynistic abuse. In fact your argument is that victims of misogynistic abuse speaking on it, justifies more misogynistic abuse.

The last line really drives it home 'it is essentially that concept'.

'Trans men are systematically oppressed and infantilised, they are abused and treated badly and it is important to draw attention to the fact of the world we are living in' =/= 'Trans men deserve to be systematically oppressed and infantilised, they deserve to be abused and treated badly

[autolenaphilia]

The understanding of feminism on this site is absolutely terrible. To the point where people have no idea of what feminism even is. It’s especially annoying when people on here claim to be feminists, but contradict basic tenets of feminist thought.

And to be fair, feminism is a complicated and not united ideology at all. But let’s try to explain anyway. A basic tenet of any feminism is that society is a patriarchy. Women are oppressed and exploited, and men are the oppressor class. Men gain advantages for being men, which is what male privilege is. And feminism is about destroying this system of gendered oppression, the patriarchy.

This is as basic as it gets. And that we live in a patriarchy is easily proven. Patriarchy theory is a theory, but it’s a very well-supported one. Basic statistics and other evidence prove women are disadvantaged and discriminated against, and that men prosper in comparison. Misogyny is real, it’s an oppression that definitely exists.

Yet this basic understanding consistently eludes people on tumblr, even as they claim to be feminists and say “fuck the patriarchy.” People are at best reluctant to acknowledge misogyny as being real and lack understanding of it.

Talking about misogyny will get you accusations of being “terfy” when it’s just basic feminism. Even transfems get these accusations. I’ve already lamented that many people who are anti-terf (which you should be) don’t know what a terf is. What is actually “terfy” is having biological determinist and cisnormative explanations of who women are and what causes misogyny. In reality, trans women are very much women, and have to navigate the world as such. We constitute an especially oppressed subset of women, due to suffering from an intersection of both misogyny and transphobia: transmisogyny. The recognition of misogyny as an oppression we experience is needed to explain our experiences and suffering. We are not men, and are exiled from manhood and it’s privileges due to rejecting it and not performing masculinity.

Particularly disturbing are people who claim to be feminists and yet argue that “misandry” is a real thing. It’s often not said to be “misandry”, I’ve read words like “antimasculism” (more or less explicitly) used as substitutes for the term “misandry”. It is often phrased in terms of “the patriarchy hurts men too.” That the patriarchy is just harmful gender norms that oppress all genders more or less equally.

And those who adopted this have abandoned feminism, often without acknowledging it. They have abandoned the most basic feminist tenets, such as we live in a patriarchy, a society that benefits men. The idea that men do not gain privilege from being men and are in fact hurt by it is an anti-feminist idea.

It’s an incoherent way of analyzing gender. The question of who is the oppressor class in this analysis is eluded entirely. Who benefits from oppressing men via gender norms? Feminist theory is clear about men being the oppressor class who benefit as a class from the oppression of women. It’s a basic question, yet studiously avoided, sometimes in terms of blaming it on the system, understood as some impersonal monster, not as a system that exists to benefit certain people.

It also misunderstands how masculinity works. Sure, being forced to adhere to masculine gender norms hurts, I’ve been badly bullied myself for breaking them. But even if the patriarchy hurts men, it more importantly benefits them. It privileges men, because that’s the literal definition of patriarchy.

Masculinity benefits men, that’s why they perform it. The proper performance of masculinity is needed for being recognized as a man and thus given male privilege. It gives them power over women (cis or trans), even other men (like gay men) and degendered others, the ability to commit violence against them with impunity. Men who perform it are not the primary victims of masculinity, the victims of the violence done to prove masculinity are. And privilege is what men are afraid of losing if they appear non-masculine. It’s the fear of losing their status, of experiencing just a smidgen of the horrors trans women are given everyday. Men will do violence to avoid that. I don’t wish to downplay the horrors of being an openly gnc man (especially if they are also gay or queer in some other way). but they still have a privileged position compared to women in general, and especially transfems.

Of course, men are oppressed too, but it’s not for being men. Working class men are oppressed under capitalism. A long list of oppressive systems like racism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia and so on do oppress the men who are affected by them. Men thus often find their male privilege curtailed by these oppressions, especially if they are affected by several at once. And because of this there are indeed situations where women can hold power over men (white women do often hold power over black men in white supremacist societies for example). This does however just curtail their male privilege, not negate it entirely. You just need a more complicated analysis, that takes those factors into account. Still, all else being equal, men hold power over women. It’s when comparing gay men and lesbians, comparing disabled men and women, and so on, that you can truly see the privilege these disadvantaged men still hold despite the real oppression they experience. Women are also affected by these oppressive forces, and their effect is made worse by intersecting with misogyny. Men in oppressed communities still have power and privilege over the women in that community. Their experience of oppression looks different, but that’s due to the absence of misogyny, rather than the addition of any misandry (as another tumblr post put it, and which I can’t find now, so I can’t give credit. Would love to be given a link if you can find it).

And we have to be careful when talking about oppressed men, because their experiences are often exploited to justify anti-feminism. The fact that the oppression is real is exactly why it’s useful, because it can be decontextualized to argue that men are oppressed for being men. Propaganda often lies by omission, than by outright making things up. Warren Farrell, “the father of the men’s rights movement”, used the experiences of working class men dying in dangerous jobs and as soldiers in war to argue that male power was a myth, and in fact “men are the disposable sex” or “the expendable gender.” Those deaths are real, but the context that it’s due to capitalism exploiting the working class is removed, and instead attributed to their gender. The facts that working class women also suffer and die from exploitation and that capitalist men benefit from the exploitation of the entire working class are ignored. It also eludes why women don’t die as these men do. Women are kept out of many “dangerous�� jobs and the military in order to justify their subjugation as “the weaker sex.”

It’s a terrible argument, and Farrell and the men’s rights movement he helped create are openly anti-feminist and deeply misogynistic, denying women’s oppression. Yet I’ve seen variations on Farrell’s argument posted by supposedly “pro-feminist” blogs. Queer bloggers here will hold up the sufferings of gay and trans men as proof misandry is real, that men are oppressed for being men, ignoring that their oppression is due to homophobia and transphobia. And still against all reason still use the word “patriarchy” and being feminists, despite denying the analysis of society as a patriarchy where men are privileged for being men.

At least Farrell and his fellow proud MRAs are honest about rejecting feminism and believing patriarchy is a myth. I’m glad at this point that I was and am a fan of David Futrelle’s blog criticizing and mocking the men’s movement, because that has enabled me to recognize and criticize the arguments they use, a thing some people here clearly need some help with.

Often these bloggers bring up the ancient anti-feminist accusation of feminists not being a movement for equality at all, but about hating men and their masculinity. Anything critical of men as a class who holds power over women is understood as “misandry” or “terfy”, and so is any criticism of masculinity as a gender role. Criticism of masculinity are only made in the context of “toxic” masculine norms hurting men, never in terms of how it confers men power and privilege and how the misogyny of hegemonic masculinity hurts women and other people. I suppose in this kind of thinking my earlier criticism of masculinity as a tool for gendered violence is enough for them to call me a misandrist. And like I’m not. All men benefit from patriarchy, but if you are a man and don’t abuse women or are a misogynist, you are okay as a human being in my book. What else can I say?

These criticisms are not just taken as misandry, but as some kind of widespread norm, despite really only being made in feminist and queer spaces. So making a tumblr post saying “it’s okay to be a man, it’s okay to be masculine.” is seen as reasonable, despite that being literally what the vast majority of society already believes (including the feminist spaces that can reasonably be targeted by this statement). It’s a bizarre statement to make in a patriarchal society that favours men and expects them to be masculine. It again echoes MRA complaints about how society has been captured by a feminist conspiracy (with anti-semitic undertones, as any conspiracy theory has, that’s how MRAs answer the question of “who is oppressor class for misandry?” btw).

It illustrates how a bad understanding of feminist theory leads people into some rather right-wing positions, all while clinging to the banner of being a feminist or progressive. Our society is a deeply misogynist one, yet in response to feminist gains it likes to cloak its misogyny in a kind of superficial feminism. And acknowledging misogyny is a real oppression is hard when you grow up and live in a society that justifies it. It’s especially uncomfortable to do so if you benefit from it. It’s more comfortable to deny misogyny. But it’s work that needs to be done. Or else you can turn into basically an MRA while still believing yourself to be a feminist, which seems to be the trajectory of some people on this site.

[ceilidhtransing]

I feel like so much shitty discourse could be avoided if people more consciously bore in mind the fact that Mainstream Society and The Queer Community are, you know, meaningfully different spaces that often have different social phenomena and different issues.

Random example, there'll be a discussion about femininity often being prized over masculinity, especially transmasculinity, in some queer spaces. And there'll be a bunch of transmasculine people talking about being made to feel unwelcome once they came out, feeling pressured to identify as nonbinary rather than as a binary man as that receive less hostility, being increasingly isolated and othered once they started T, feeling pressured to act more feminine and GNC, being told that their presence as a man makes others in the space uncomfortable, etc.

And then inevitably someone will respond with something like “OP what fucking planet are you on. You're fucking insane if you think femininity is prized over masculinity in society. And the idea that nonbinary people have privilege over binary trans people - what is this fucking enbyphobic bullshit? God, some people are so stuck in an echo chamber of terminally online tumblr queers with their invented problems that they've forgotten what it's like in the real world.”

But was the discussion about wider mainstream society? Or was it very particularly about the queer community and issues that these people have faced specifically within that community?

The queer community is a subculture (arguably many subcultures but let's try to keep it simple), and it's totally, utterly standard for subcultures to - even deliberately, as an act of pushback - value different things from the mainstream culture. Aesthetics thought of as “weird” or “[insert slur here]” by the mainstream can be highly prized in the queer community. Identities that are all thought of as equally “fucked-up” and “cringe” by the mainstream can find themselves organised into some weird hierarchy of validity and oppressed-ness within the community. Politics which are considered extremely fringe and radical by the mainstream can be considered the default norm, even a necessity, in the queer community. Gender expressions that are seen as the most basic “normal” thing ever in the mainstream can be devalued by the queer community for “not looking queer enough” or “being straight-passing”. And none of this is a contradiction because this is pretty much how subcultures operate! They assert different values and cultural norms from the culture they exist within and that's partly what makes them subcultures.

So if someone's pointing out “I face this issue specifically when I'm interacting with queer spaces”, it doesn't do the conversation any good to assume that they're talking about mainstream society and attack them for “being deluded about how the real world works” or “inventing fake problems to sound more oppressed” or something. (And the inverse - someone pointing out “I face this issue when I'm interacting with the mainstream” and someone else responding with “I don't know what you're talking about; I never face that issue at all [in my exclusively queer friend group and support network]” - is far rarer, but it does still happen, and it's just as unhealthy for the discussion. Probably the most common example of this I can think of is when cis gay and lesbian people discuss homophobia they've faced, for instance to do with their gender expression, and someone goes “but that doesn't happen, because actually cis gays are a privileged group and I've never seen anyone attack their presentations” - yes, because the frame of reference you're using is the queer community, where being gay is pretty much the expected default, and you're forgetting that in mainstream society, even cisgender gays and lesbians are by no means “a privileged group” that experiences no oppression ever.)

People need to be able to discuss issues in the specific social contexts they're talking about without it being basically guaranteed that someone will misinterpret them and start jumping down their throat in anger at something that wasn't even said or implied. It is so bad for the community when people seemingly can't fathom that the dynamics at play might be different within queer spaces versus out in mainstream society and it leads to so much pointless toxicity and aggressive misunderstanding.

[phoenixremix69]

Sasuke, in my opinion, deserved to fuck off

and I don't mean that in a bad way. Sasuke and Team Taka as a whole were people who got firmly fucked over by the world and shinobi society and deserved to leave.

Juugo was born with an uncontrollable medical condition and the only one willing to "help" him was a genocidal madman that was allowed to do whatever atrocities he felt like because the hokage said to let him go that one time

Karin is a survivor of another genocide, and was only allowed to live because her mother and her were deemed useful enough to live as slaves, to the point where her mother was literally sucked dry of chakra and died. Only to be recruited by, oh my god, same crazy asshole. and that was somehow a step up for her

then Suigetsu, another genocide survivor over another uncontrollable medical condition. except in his case, the uncontrollable part was just him having extra powers with barely any downsides. and in fact, he was jazzed to be part of kiri. he was totally up for being a loyal shinobi and joining their most elite group. But fuck that, tube time

and finally, Sasuke Uchiha. another genocide survivor, except this time, the genocide was performed by the person he loved most in the world. a person who proceeded to torture him for a few days straight. and then got no consequences so for all Sasuke knows, he's been completely free to kill more people and ruin more lives. and the only comfort he has is that he's safe in the village, and that one day he'll be strong enough to kill him. except not. another round of torture and being reminded that he should be strong and the only way to be strong is to give up your bonds. so he does, he gives up on his friends and his village and goes to train with the guy promising him free magic powers. and he does it. he kills the man that's been haunting him for almost a decade. only to be told no, not only did that man love him more than anything, not only was he ordered to kill everyone by the village council, but that same council is still very much in power. In fact, one of them has been abducting orphans and brainwashing them into child soldiers for decades. and literally everyone knew. it's not like kakashi never told anyone, hell, he tried to kill the ninja dictator once. so sasuke goes to kill him, and the konoha council, and every leader who keeps perpetuating this bullshit system. and the whole time, his "friends" keep telling him. "Let it go! ignore the systematic oppression and subsequent slaughter your clan faced for decades. ignore all the atrocities the shinobi system has perpetuated and continues to perpetuate even now! come back to the village that's been fucking you over your entire life!"

Fuck that. at the end of the story, after naruto and sasuke's big final battle, and naruto tells sasuke to come bvack, he should've been like "fuck you. i might not have been right but you sure as shit aren't right either. so you know what i'm gonna do? i'm gonna take my actual team, and these chakra monsters that've also been oppressed and enslaved under the shinobi system, and i'm gonna jump in a dimension hole, and never come back. if you ever want me to reconsider, maybe try living up to your promises and start changing things for the better. i'd start with the actual slavery your girlfriend's "family practices

[babsaros]

hey. when cis society is oppressing a trans man, what he is experiencing is. In Fact. misogyny. i'm sorry i know none of us like to be reminded of our agab, and it hurts whenever people perceive you as the wrong gender. but a cis person hate-criming, assaulting, verbally abusing, etc, a trans man is not doing "transandrophobia" because they do not perceive him as a man.

they perceive him as a woman failing at her gender, as a woman who has been seduced and lied to and manipulated because women are so easily led astray, just like it says in the bible. they perceive him as a woman who has been mutilated. they perceive him as a dyke that needs to be fixed. if they are hate-criming him because they *do* perceive him as a man, because he passes well enough they aren't thinking he could be trans, then they're doing so out of homophobia, perceiving him as a gay man, a pervert, a sissy, a danger to children. OR, they are being transphobic but specifically because they think he might be transfeminine instead. when cis society oppresses a trans woman, they are able to do it on multiple levels at once. She's a woman failing at her gender, a dyke that needs to be fixed. Or she's an evil and grotesque crossdressing pervert, a rude caricature, a danger to polite society. she will never be doing enough to escape oppression entirely, no matter if she gets every surgery she can and wears makeup every day and passes perfectly, because she lives under a patriarchy, and she's a woman, so she lives in a panopticon, and HAVING to get surgery and wear make-up to be respected IS oppression, especially if the alternative is being hate-crimed.

trans women (and trans men who pass) are not experiencing "transandrophobia" when a 'queer women and nbs" event turns them away at the door for being too masculine. they are. IN FACT!! experiencing the byproducts of misogyny in a patriarchy!!! where the terfs and coward cis women running those events and occupying those spaces have been taught (sometimes through experience, sometimes by men, sometimes by women) throughout life that men = stronger and more dangerous than women ALWAYS. That they need to protect themselves at all times and always be vigilant. That men and women can't be friends without sexual tension (and so as queer women the mere existence of what they perceive as a "man" is a threat). That women need a separate sports league because they can't possibly compete with someone who has even a little bit "extra" (an unquantifiable amount actually because there isn't a standard range) testosterone. That women should cook and men should fix cars. i promise you, i promise i promise i promise. it's misogyny. like!!! you don't say cis gay men experiences "androphobia", bc that's not a thing!! you sound like fucking mens rights activists guys please! you don't say a black man experiences "misandrynoir"!! because living in a patriarchy fundamentally means men do not experience oppression based on their gender. its not happening. shut the fuck up. stop walking us back to 2014 can we please take a step forward and stop bitching about this. there are genuine issues in the world and i'm frankly sick of people who should be smarter than that needing to be gently hand-held through this fucking explanation for the millionth time and still stomping their feet.

[saisaixchan]

Re: the One Piece poll

Guys OP has a s literal army of trans characters, it's actually a plot point, there's literally so fucking many trans and NB and genderfluid people in OP its kind of fucking insane

There's Bon Clay/Bentham from as early as Alabasta in March of 2000, 3 years after the initial publication of OP

Bon's powers let him transform into other people, and he's the only member of a bad guy group with male/female partners who doesn't have a female partner bc he's both the male AND female partner in his rank

He doesn't need one bc he's both

Bon is also consistently one of the best characters who helps Luffy, and who deeply respects the bonds of friendship, and he deeply admires Ivankov (next in the list)

Plus, Bon Clay is only one of two in the villain group to become good guys and befriends the main characters

There's fucking Ivankov, Queen of Kammabakka Kingdom an island full of drag queens and trans people, with his hormone powers that lets him trans all the genders for himself and everyone around him (aka the Newkama in Impel Down- a literal army of trans people who help Luffy break out of prison so he can save his brother)

AND he's the second in command of the Revolutionary Army, a group actively against the World Government that controls the entire globe, and is fighting against it's corrupt politics and ideals, such as allowing slavery for the higher classes, fighting the racism against Fishman it's held up for centuries, and all that stuff

Ivankov is one of the most important characters in the series in regards to the world politics and the fight for freedom against the oppression of the WG, and he works with what are unambiguously the Good Guys in the world, who are headed by Luffy's father

There's Okiku in Wano, who its 100% trans and even gets the horny Sanji treatment

(which is kinda important bc there was some Bad Trans/Queer rep earlier in the series involving Sanji running from drag queens who were harassing him and for a while Sanji was pretty transphobic and it was a whole thing, but Oda seems to have learned or educated himself by this point, so yay)

Plus Okiku is a super strong samurai, fucking powerful girl go off, and everyone treats her as one of the girls and she's the best tbh she deserves the world

She's so sweet and kind and strong af and is just as much a warrior as the rest of her group

Plus there's Yamato

Who, to be very clear, is not CONFIRMED as trans, but has a lot of gender fuckery going on that he belongs on this list imo, come to your own conclusions ig

Yamato is 100% confirmed as the biological daughter of Kaido, which is backed up in several other sources and even a colorspread with only biological women, but everyone in the story itself refers to him as he/him, Including Luffy who calls him by Yama-guy/Yamao

(something Luffy only does for men- he calls Ivankov and other more genderfluid or femme leaning queer folks by -chan)

and Yamato calls himself the Son of Kaido multiple times

Yamato saw someone be so awesome that he wanted to emulate that person and become them-

but as an apparently separate decision, he decided he also wanted to be a man, too! Not just because of Kozuki Oden, but because holy fuck look at that gender, I want that for myself!!!

His identity as Kozuki Oden and his identity as Son of Kaido seem to be separate things, bc Kaido, Kaido's forces, Luffy (our main character who helps us understand how to treat situations), and everyone else around him at least acknowledges that Yamato, is, in fact, the SON of Kaido, and everyone, regardless of which side they're on in the war, respects that and treats it as fact

Meanwhile, absolutely no one treats Yamato like he's actually Kozuki Oden

And there's no sign of Yamato being forced to become a man because Kaido wanted a son- 1), he was called Oni Princess fairly consistently as a child by Kaido's forces, and 2) he only became known as Son of Kaido after Yamato himself decided he wanted to become a man

Yamato has refused everything forced on him by his father, and has run away, hid, and fought back at every moment he could, and his gender and pronouns were the only real decision of his own that have been respected as all his other freedoms were taken from him

(Which doesn't say much about his horrible father- Kaido was guided by an incredibly strong female pirate at a young age, and he has plenty of strong women among his crew. Kaido doesn't care about what gender his kid is, or gender at all)

So yeah while Yamato is not confirmed in the text as trans like many other characters are in much more obvious ways, and several sources confirm that he's biologically female, he still goes by Son and he/him by the other characters and by his own choice, so make of that what you will

Please enjoy this spread of Yamato in the Men's bath (he refused to join the women's bc no mixed bathing), and Okiku in the women's

Anyway yeah op has tons of trans, genderqueer, and genderfluid representation in it, it might not look it but it's been there since basically March of 2000 when Bon Clay was first introduced and it hasn't stopped since

[velvetvexations]

op of the werewolf comic was literally drawing himself, not "detransitioning her". presumably because he, being trans, didnt want to represent himself as a girl. thats common sense i fear

No, listen, it is vitally important we put a 19-year old on blast for drawing a boy in a meme instead of a girl.

I seriously can't stress this enough. This bullshit is all they ever talk about. They don't care about trans women except the ones who are compliant and into the same fetishes, they just want to hurt people and feel like martyrs online. Presumably hate crimes, transphobes legislating us out of existence, and campaign ads directly exploiting incarcerated Black trans women in support of a presidential candidate that wants us all dead, that's all, I don't know, too depressing, I guess? The TMEs stealing our memes and liking Rocky Horror, that's the real danger.

They call me a crypto-TERF because I think it's physically possible for a trans woman to cause harm to a trans man, and yet, I don't see them on any TERF's blocklist!

God, can you imagine not being on a TERF's blocklist? That would be so humiliating for any transfeminist with thousands of followers that regularly engages in aggressive activism!

Are they scared of actual, genuine transmisogynists? Is that it? Are they just cowards? Because they'll release the hounds on a nineteen year old drawing a silly meme where the girl happens to be a boy this time instead, but blogs that actively fantasize about murdering everyone with XY chromosomes, what, that intimidates them?

Or maybe they're just scared of seeing what TERFs actually think since they're so insecure in their femininity they have to pretend transphobes see them as women and only hate them exclusively. If you spent literally five seconds on a TERF's blog the fact that they feel the same contempt towards cis men would be glaringly obvious and that would emotionally obliterate these people. They wouldn't survive. Literally they would die because the idea of one person in the world mentally classifying them as men makes them have a screaming panic attack, which is also why they think getting included in a "hey guys" in a group that otherwise consists entirely of cis women and a parakeet is a deliberately cruel assault on the very soul of trans women everywhere rather than something to shrug off and politely ask to be excluded from in the future. I wish we were teaching trans girls to FUCKING COPE ONCE IN AWHILE instead of insisting that no, actually, you should have a fucking hysterical meltdown over fucking everything at all times regardless of context because no one will ever love you except for other trans women, assuming they aren't tainted by cooties from close proximity to t-boys, and you should never make friends or have sex with anyone else.

And isn't "this person drew themselves, a boy, instead of a girl, and that's bad" at the heart of it? Because just like TERFs, they see trans men as casualties in the gender war at best and willful traitors at worse. Usually both! Men will get "I want to impregnate him" jokes and that's fine, because like, sexual harassment and invalidation of one's identified gender isn't bad on principle or anything, it's entirely a matter of social karmic balance, men oppress women therefore you can do or say anything you want to a man, but like, make sure you only go after trans men, okay, because they might "socially murder" you by making a post about how you were objectively an asshole to them on their blog but saying things like that to a cis man could result in ACTUAL FUCKING MURDER WITH A FUCKING BASEBALL BAT.

[traegorn]

How bad is it that I'm in a sphere where I feel like I can't reblog your video, because what if my friend's followers think it's "abuse apologism", and I think it says something about the internet and left spaces when a necessary conversation is drowned out by "be pure or else" as if a lot of people when they were kids weren't growing up in shitty homes or- especially nowadays- being convinced of shit by people who want to cause harm in internet spaces.

Like I saw a video of a trans woman talking about how people are waiting for the "good people" online to not be perfect once so they can attack and harass them into oblivion and that resonated with me, especially since if you can't get better, you're not even going to try.

Like, I grew up in a deep, white, red state/southern-esque town. I was raised by very heavy racists, transphobes and my extended family were exceptionally not great.

The shit I believed from what I was raised on wasn't great, because there's a level of isolation. Be fucked if anyone found out the general thought processes I had as a teenager/just sprouting adult.

Have I changed? Yeah. It's been nearly a decade, change happens, I grew, I am trying my best to pull others out of those mindsets.

But man, it sucks that no matter how much good you do, what you've done to rectify things, one small blemish, as bad as like saying the r-slur as a teen sometimes (as an example of something small) can ruin your life.

And if people haven't changed, it's not like anyone's actively saying "you have to tolerate the behaviour as it happens, you can't decide not to associate with that person". In fact if they hurt you, you should probably tell them and if they refuse to stop hurting you, absolutely cut them from your life.

But this one and done parasocial purity politics stuff is so much like how the Church was that I definitely wish people would like think for a moment before doing the exact line of thinking that "committing one sin will damn you forever to hell" came from.

And the fact that I feel the need to disclaimer things, lest someone think I'm condoning people who are deeply bigoted and causing direct harm, kinda just proves the point.

If no one can heal and become a better person, then no one is going to even try and unlearn those lines of thinking.

But these ppl don't care bc well, it's giving them a chance to "fight back against oppression/harm" (read, cause harm while calling it justice).

And then ppl wonder why others will completely separate themselves from their group.

Sorry for the ramble.

I mean, if you don't say it, they won't hear it.

Whether or not they listen is up to them. You can't really control that.

We're all human. We were all different people at some point. We have to be willing to let people learn and evolve. And like, it's hard. The easy thing is to view the world in black and white and treat ostracize the "impure." The world seems so simple when you can categorize folks as "good people" and "bad people."

We have to be able to forgive folks who truly want to be better.