#of cis people seem to think that and its frustrating

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

aita for calling my boyfriend babygirl

let me clarify upfront: my boyfriend has never expressed discomfort with this, and says he likes it, so it’s potentially a non-issue, but it’s still bugging me. this has been ongoing for a little over a month and i feel like i’m going nuts. forgive me if any of the language i use here isn’t correct, i don’t know how else to get the ideas across - feel free to correct me if i could be saying things more inclusively. sorry that this is rambly also. small nsfw warning (nothing too explicit)

i (22m) have been dating my boyfriend (19ftm) for a little over a year. i’m cis and he is trans. admittedly i’m not like… the most well versed in trans issues but i love him more than life itself so i really try to be respectful of him. he was bullied pretty severely in highschool, not just for being trans but his gender identity was no small part of it, and even though he’s not super dysphoric day to day he’s definitely got some boundaries about it. there are certain compliments he likes and some that upset him (he doesn’t enjoy being called pretty or cute, typically) and he’ll snap at people for referring to him with feminine names or titles like “sis” “girl” etc even if it’s done jokingly.

the thing is he’s rarely, if ever, done that with me? i call him pretty and cute all the time (because he is) and he’s always been fine with it. admittedly the first time i did it i didn’t know it was something that usually bugged him, but he’s never said anything to me about it. everytime i have he’s seemed happy. he’s very outspoken, i pretty firmly believe if it was a problem he’d say something about it - again, he has no issues being firm about this boundary with any of his other friends and family. i was doing this before we started dating, so after we started dating it sort of bled into pet names

again, it was never something i asked him about expressly, but at some point i started calling him, like… princess, babygirl, etc. i only ever do this in private, when its just us or when i’m pretty sure only he can hear me, for a few reasons. my boyfriend doesn’t really pass (entirely his choice. he doesn’t bind his chest and he doesn’t want any gender affirming surgeries or hrt - again, he’s not super dysphoric day to day, he only gets upset when it’s commented on and he can bounce back from it pretty quickly) and again, it seems like it’s always made him happy. at the risk of tmi, it especially seems to make him happy in the bedroom, which is another reason i avoid dropping these pet names in front of anyone else. it’s private and i don’t think it’s anyone else’s business.

so. to put this mildly. we went to a house party together recently and i got super smashed. it was a pretty big party so we were sticking by each other, and when you’re drunk and your partner is there… well, yeah. i was admittedly being pretty handsy. he didn’t tell me to knock it off or anything, he was reciprocating. at some point he started talking to his best friend from highschool (19mtf, i’ll call her Z) so i reigned myself in but i was definitely still drunk and horny and being clingy. i don’t know Z all that well - she and my boyfriend are very close but she can be pretty harsh, and i appreciate all she does for him so i like her, but we never talk unless he’s there. i’ve had maybe one one-on-one conversation with this woman ever.

they’re talking. i’m also there. i’m not trying to rush him but i definitely want to get home. the conversation lulls and i take the chance to ask my boyfriend if he wants to leave soon, and because i am aforementionedly drunk and horny i drop one of those earlier pet names. before he can respond to me, Z snaps at me. she says not to call him that and that i was being a creep - this alarms me and was kind of frustrating since i wasn’t even talking to her, and i recognize i’m not in a headspace to argue? with her? so i just tell my boyfriend to come find me when he wants to leave and i wander outside. he finds me about 5-10 minutes later and we head home.

it doesn’t get brought up again that night but a day or so later i text Z to ask her what she meant by me being a creep, because it was bugging me. she says that it’s obvious i’m fetishizing my boyfriend’s gender identity, that the fact i call him those things brings up major red flags, etc. i tell her that my boyfriend doesn’t have an issue with it. she says it doesn’t matter and asks me why i want to call him those names in the first place, and posits that maybe i don’t actually want to be dating a boy - that i just like the idea of dating a boy and actually want to be with a woman. i’m gay, so this is VERY out of pocket to me. i tell her my boyfriend is not a woman and end the conversation there, but it DOES stick with me. so, very belatedly, i ask my boyfriend what he thinks of all this. i adore him so much and i hate hate hate the idea i could’ve been treating him like that, even unintentionally. he says the pet names never bothered him and he’s never felt like that, and that he’s fine with me specifically doing it because he trusts me and knows i don’t see him as a girl.

so, whatever. she has a problem but me and my boyfriend don’t. i try to move on, but the next time i see her she asks if i’ve apologized/reflected at all. i tell her no, because my boyfriend said i have nothing to apologize for and it seems like a non-issue. she is now avoiding me, refuses to be in the same room as me, and will declare to anyone who asks that she doesn’t want to be near someone who fetishizes trans people and she doesn’t feel safe around me. my boyfriend tries to talk to her but she insists i need to apologize at the bare minimum, but to who? even if i did apologize to my boyfriend i wouldn’t mean it and he wouldn’t want it. Z is his long-time best friend, i can’t exactly go the rest of our relationship just avoiding her. so i have no damn idea where to go from here.

on some level, i worry she’s right? i honestly don’t know why i started calling him those things. i think it started as a joke but i just kept doing it when i noticed he seemed to like it. in hindsight that was maybe shitty of me, but i trust him to tell me when something i do is making him uncomfortable. it’s not like i can do that over, but if he ever told me to stop i would. it’s definitely true that if you saw my boyfriend on the street you’d probably assume he’s a woman, but i’ve never been attracted to anyone who actually identifies as a woman before. i’ve only ever liked men, and no matter what he looks like he is a man. this whole situation did make me think about how i think about him, and i’ve realized that, like… i want to have kids with him one day, and ideally i’d like him to carry them. ideally, but id never make him. if he decided tomorrow that he wanted to medically transition and go the whole nine yards i’d support him. he’s my whole world, i just want him to be happy. but does the fact i want him to carry children prove her right?

i’m just. confused. i feel like i’m running myself in circles. Z knew him in highschool so she was there when bullying over his gender was at his worse, so i get why she’s protective. she’s also trans herself so she undoubtedly understands this stuff better than me. but i’ve heard it’s normal for trans people to have complicated relationships with gender, so it’s normal to be okay with gendered language from some people and not others (like only letting close friends use certain pronouns for you). i figure it’s like that, but it’s not my gender so… i don’t know. should i just stop calling him those pet names altogether, even though i know at this point he enjoys them, to be safe? am i an asshole for calling him those things in the first place / would i be an asshole if i kept doing it?

What are these acronyms?

[pawberri]

thank you for all the posts you've made, your takes are always so refreshing to hear.

I want to know your thoughts (if it's okay with you, you can also totally ignore this) about all the "men hate" I see online. like I (poc transmasc non-passing) get it, there are genuine societal gender problems. transmisogyny does exist-women face more challenges than men do. but it genuinely hurts when women, especially trans women, think it's funny/quirky to call men trash or say they want all men dead or whatever. idk I just am hoping someone else understands, you know?

There's a lot of nuances to this question. First, I just want to caution against focusing too much on trans girls as the perpetrators of this. A lot of the asks I get from trans men seem to really fixate on trans women as the perpetrators of hard line gender essentialism. I really think trans girls are not the main people we should be focusing on here. If a trans woman is saying this stuff, take the time to analyze her ideology outside of that pithy comment and consider how much trauma and how little power she has in the world. That said, trans women are affected by this kind of ideology just like us, and they rarely have the power to wield it against others in the way cis people can. I know it hurts to feel isolated by your own community, but that kinda gets into my second point.

Part of dealing with this is learning an impulse progressive cishet dude have had to get used to over the decade. Sometimes, "men are trash" or even "kill all men" are not literal phrases. They are things women say when they're in the throes of trauma to vent their frustration. "Men are trash" in particular is generally pretty lighthearted and used to complain when you have a bad date or something. You have to get used to analyzing what someone actually means and airing on the side of empathy. You, as a man, are the one with some amount of systemic power over that woman, so you are the one who needs to prove you are dedicated to not being a misogynist. The same thing happens when my friends say they hate white people. I have to assume they don't hate me given that I'm their friend, but that I still have some of the negative traits of whiteness. I need to care enough to be a good friend by being anti-racist and checking myself on my behavior. I need to be willing to prioritize their comfort over mine. That includes not becoming this meme:

Now that that's established, there ARE times when "all men are evil and should die" is an actual ideology. It's an ideology that hurts tons of minority groups before it hurts the most powerful, but it's also not really great if we assume it only hurts cishet white guys. Following it to its logical conclusion, it just proposes a reversal of oppression dynamics. This gender essentialism is a key part of radical feminism, trans exclusionary or not, but it leaks out of that community to general feminism all the time.

As a young person on Tumblr and Twitter, this deeply affected me. I internalized the idea that you can "just be a girl." It was repeated by some trans girls, but also a LOT of TME people. It was framed as trans inclusive, but it's trans inclusive in the way "political lesbianism" is lesbian positive. It posits gender as a moral choice that is completely up to the individual and unrelated to biology. It's the lazy version of "gender is a social construct." I felt sick and disgusting for wanting to be a boy because tons of well-meaning friends of mine had made it clear that "being a boy" was a choice, and it was the wrong one. "Boy" was a social category that could and should eventually be eradicated. Trans women were conditionally supported because they, in theory, made this future possible. This didn't amount to actual support, of course. It was an ideology mostly spread by afab queer people that mostly benefited afab queer people. There were a few trans girls who spread it, maybe some due to genuinely believing in the ideology and some due to social pressure, but there were also a lot of people straight-up grifting as trans girls who used this thinking to feel powerful in a niche community of teens. Remember fucking Yandere Bitch Club???

At a certain point, I genuinely thought of being a man as an unambiguous moral failing, and I lashed out at out trans men because of it. I wanted to feel powerful, and here was a type of man in my community I could shame and exclude. I still feel bad for making a bunch of ~girls only~ stuff in HS that excluded the one out trans dude at our school, my friend, because he was just a ~binary man~ and leaving him with no friends and no community. I treated transphobia like it wasn't a real oppression on its own and, in doing so, perpetuated transphobia. It happens a lot.

I wasn't really able to accept that there was nuance to the concept of manhood until I read this article while struggling to accept my own gender:

This is a pretty seminal piece of writing. It has its flaws, of course, but the empathy and intersectionality it highlights was life-changing. It also shows that this kind of thinking is largely perpetuated by TME people and hurts trans women greatly.

Gender essentialism is a bad ideology, it's a transphobic, transmisogynist, racist, etc etc ideology. It's literally essential to patriarchy. But it's also very easy to repackage into leftism and easy to dogwhistle. As a result, it's natural to be hesitant when you see someone saying they hate all men, but you have to tread extremely lightly and actually care what they're attempting to express. Because, yeah, men as a social class still hold power over women. They still have reason to fear and hate men.

I'm writing a comic about this stuff, actually, so look out for it in the future..........

[zan0tix]

May I just say I really really appreciate your approach to and respect for the transfemininity embedded in Homestuck. Like the fact that you depict Jake as a kind of "genderfuck" (for lack of a better word) character without trying to divorce that from transfemininity as so many others do, as well as being able to depict Roxy with certain clocky characteristics without disregarding her femininity or making it feel fetish-y, is all really admirable in my eyes. It gets extremely frustrating seeing large swathes of the fandom constantly trying to separate the story of Homestuck from transfemininity despite it having a transfem enby author, so I really appreciate that you don't shy away from it in your art :)

I am so glad!!!!! Its something ive Always noticed in like every fandom since i first got onto the internet the disparity between the amount of transfems i knew vs how often their story got to be uplifted in fandom spaces or get to be celebrated how transmascs did considering how queer dominated they are but then i grew up and realised how badly male centric queer spaces are too😭

Homestuck is one of the spaces that has a big amount of transfems openly engaging in fandom activities and that makes me really happy to see! since i often see gross rhetoric from transmascs or cis women about fandom spaces abt “who is allowed” and “fandom being a safe space” cough blatant transmisogyny (sobs everywhere its so bad)

I DONT UNDERSTAND HOW PPL BRUSH PAST HUSSIE BEING TRANS SO OFTEN ISNT THAT INSANE. To me it reframes homestuck how the creators of the matrix being trans does. Like I dunno maybe that informed the works presentation of gender somehow. Maybe all the commentary and critique and displays of frustration at the contradictory nature of gender but especially trying to fit “being a man” in society came from somewhere when they were writing it 🤔🤔🤔 hussie said it herself that alot of homestuck was just stream of consciousness. Everything that comes out of daves mouth near the end seemed very plausible to be a reflection of hussies own journey realising that Actually these boundaries of what defines A Good Man and A Good Woman are ridiculous and no person can possibly live up to that no matter what were told from birth.

But i try my best to reflect the innate transfemininity of homestuck and the majority of its cast, its something integral to the works themes and just the community who built it! It saddens me how skittish other transmascs are about engaging with or portraying the transfeminine stories when its just. Practically textual. And all you need to do is Listen and empathise. I love learning how other feminine people see themselves in this story like how often do you get such a menagerie of in depth fem characters. And i love seeing what the experiences transfems see echoed in homestuck are because its all such insightful stuff About femininity and its beauty and its ills all at once. Roxy..kanaya.. wipes tear from my eye.

I want to actively include and celebrate transfem features and bodies as much as transmasc ones get to be around here and i am glad my jake and roxy do feel that way 🥹🥹 my aim with my designs is to make them feel like some everyday people youd see, no fetishisation/sexualisation or demonisation, just Existing and appreciating. Because i know how much it can mean to see yourself in something and for that to be treated with care and kindness. Its why i create in the first place! Because of how others creations gave me that comfort when i couldnt find it elsewhere

I feel similarly about how people portray fat women or just like. Women in general. its sad how badly the whole sexualisation = acceptance warps how people portray things fatness or transfem features. Never ever saying these things arent hot or sexy or to be appreciated. Duh. I think how i portray jake says enough abt what i think of that LOL just that It feels like its the only way people try and show theyre accepting? Which just feels so gross and dehumanising the only way they think to display they feel empathy is through saying “Yeah i can get off to people like you”😭

Rlly bad in society in general so also in the homestuck space. Worlds hardest challenge is liking the alpha kids. Im so sorry for what they do to you jane and roxy🥲🥲🥲 Its baffling because Homestuck is Prime Example Numero Uno of how to humanise characters. Just display them being people; their thoughts, their feelings, their insecurities, their passions, their woes, their loves, their losses. So much can be communicated through how a character speaks with their friends.

I wana do that for jake and roxy! They get to be dimensional too! I like showing their laughs and their sorrows, just them Existing with the people around them. They get to be a part of the lighthearted comedy just as the rest of them do. They get to be a part of all the gender and sexuality insanity going on in their friend group, can point out their flaws and mistakes and insecurities. I dunno its rlly not that hard to just empathise with them and want to tell their stories.

I am so invested in the raw unabashed Humanity of homestuck. Its just one person pouring their brain contents into this huge thing and it displays the best and the worst and the absurdity and the questions. Its so interesting and hussies transness IS JUST BAKED INTO IT. Thus the characters contain that too and it kinda stinks of transmisogyny to throw that out!

YAPPING TOO MUCH OMG but i rlly appreciate this ask🫶🫶🫶makes me so happy to hear

[everything-transmasculine]

I’m very sorry to be ranting in your anons but I’ve found myself incredibly frustrated and I don’t know where else to talk about this. I keep seeing “trans men should maliciously comply and use the women’s restroom” posts every time I open the trans UK subreddit. Often the posts are made by trans men and transmasculine folks but honestly? It’s frustrating nonetheless. It ignores the fact that the ruling treats us as not male enough for men’s bathrooms but too male for women’s bathroom. It ignores that cis women assault and oppress trans men and transmasculine people, too. Not all transmasculine people are treated like poor confused little girls. Those of us that can’t feasibly be detransitioned to a cis standard are treated like dangerous perverts too and transphobic cis women absolutely respond to us and our presence with hostility. It makes me feel like me and other transmasculine folks are little more than props rather than, you know, trans people that are part of the community. This hurts us too, we’re in danger too. If other transmasculine people want to do that, all the more power to them. But it’s been a community wide sentiment and I find it frustrating that the community overall seems to think we’re not in enough danger to warrant protection and caution too.

I’ve seen posts pushing back against this idea too, which is nice and heartening especially because there’s loads of supportive comments as well. But there’s always people pushing back, often nitpicking the wording or sometimes outright denying that trans men and transmasculine people are also affected by the ruling. And I can’t help but feel sad and upset about it.

no problem at all anon - thats what im here for!

the people making these sort of comments do seem unable to comprehend the fact that cis women are able to perpetrate violence as well - their cisness and their womanhood doesnt exempt them from that whatsoever. i mean from a personal standpoint, all the times ive been harmed, harassed, etc, were by cis women. cis women have pushed me out of jobs, cis women have harassed me sexually, cis women have degendered me, cis women have been the root cause behind almost every transphobia-based violence that ive experienced. so to me, personally, its insane and baffling that the sentiment of “transmascs should just use the womens bathroom!” exists. like you said - those of us who cant feasibly detransition are othered and seen as violent perverts, those of us who pass are seen as dangerous men, and those of us who dont pass and can detransition shouldnt be forced to just to piss out in public. and thats without touching on how much worse its going to be for transmascs of colour. cis women hold power over transmasculine people by nature of being cisgender, to argue otherwise is counterproductive.

the invisibility of transmasculine people - other than when used as a prop for other people - is dangerous, full stop. we, as a community, should be uplifting all trans voices, and not just using transmasculine people as a “gotcha” or a prop in other peoples stories. its important not to forget - what affects one of us affects ALL of us. equal rights for everyone, one of feminisms core tenets, means equal rights for EVERYONE.

[transmutationisms]

hiii caden, any chance you could simplify/reword this post? as written it is rather difficult for me to parse. <3

hiya, sorry, stuck this in drafts and forgot it was in there 🙈 let me try to rephrase

there's a common issue i see (not just on here) where people try to make blanket statements about how motherhood / parenthood / children are valued socially, but they're thinking only in terms of individual attitudes and misunderstanding why the relevant politics result in statements that might seem contradictory at first. so for example, someone observes that there is, broadly, pressure to have and raise one's biological children. however, someone else points out that this logic doesn't apply to all people equally: in particular, racialised people and poor people are actively discouraged from having children, including by overtly eugenic means like forcible sterilisation (this still happens today!) and welfare policies.

what i was saying in the post was that there is not actually a contradiction between these two positions, despite one appearing 'pro' natalist and one appearing 'anti'. the trick is that the politics that drives both positions (the state's efforts to manage and exploit its population; a politics of human beings as biological resources; hence, what foucault termed 'biopolitics') demands not just the reproduction of a labour force and military reserve, but also the designation of subaltern populations who are considered as a biological threat to the nation / race / national future, and who must therefore be discouraged from reproducing and ultimately eradicated. the politics that highly values one population (eg, the white / 'native born' / able bodied / straight / cis couple and their biological children) is the same politics that inherently also devalues all others (indeed, the attributes that are valued are defined in part through the process of comparison/contrast; these are political designations in the first place).

it's just a common frustration of mine that people try to discuss this as a matter of personal attitudes and are therefore unable to connect natalist and eugenic policies to the biopolitical logics that drive them. it leads to really pointless conversations where people just kind of throw up their hands and act like these attitudes are contradictory or internally inconsistent; they're not. the consistency is not in a uniformly 'pro' or 'anti' position wrt childbearing; it's in the logic that demands and prizes certain bodies and populations, and scapegoats and attempts to eradicate others.

[genericpuff]

(disclaimer, this is coming from a heartstopper fan! i love heartstopper this is not hate!!)

i think at least part of the annoyance with heartstopper isn't just that isn't a light fluffy ya series, it's also that its another example of how the queer media that gets the most mainstream attention tends to be this kind of light fluffy ya stuff that focuses on two conventially attractive queer boys or men and it also tends to be written by people who aren't queer men on top of that, so not only can it feel very samey but it can feel like other queer people are relegated to side characters in the stories of cis gay men. and as someone who loves heartstopper i get that on some level.

btw by "written by people who aren't queer men" NOT saying that isn't not written by queer people. alice oseman is genderfluid and aroace, becky albertalli is bisexual, etc. and while i think the point is still valid there is a misogyny element in that a lot of the focus is put on things that are written by women or people they perceive as women while tumblr darlings like good omens and ofmd (written by presumably straight men) don't get the same treatment.

nah y'know what, that's fair, I can get how frustrating it can be for a lot of popular queer stories to feel samey, I've definitely gotten BL-fatigue in the past on platforms like WT and Tapas because many of them ARE the same and feel like they're just piggybacking off trends for the sake of clout (and this is a problem in the heterocis romance stories too, don't get me fucking started on how dark romance has turned into torture porn where vulnerable women are constantly being victimized by rich powerful men and we're just supposed to root for that ??), but it's one of those things where like, what might be seen as just more corny shit could very well be the revelation another person needs that they're gay / trans / etc. that the story helped them realize. there's just a point where i see these arguments against cheesy popular queer stories that teeter dangerously close to being queerphobic and, as you said, misogynist, simply because "it was written by someone who i perceive as a woman so that makes it BAD!"

and I didn't mention it in the original post because I didn't want to @ OP in any way but in the comment section they literally said "i dont think heartstopper itself is all that bad but it has pretty much aimed the direction of all mainstream gay comics towards wholesomeness instead of anything more interesting so i want to destroy heartstopper to destroy heartstopper clones" and that gives me massive ick because it implies their sole reasoning for including it was "chill and happy queer stories bad, if a character doesn't suffer enough then they're not interesting"?? why can't LGBTQ+ audiences have more 'vanilla' stories that aren't all sad and angsty all the time? are we not entitled to the same corny romcom vanilla shit that the heterocis are entitled to? why do LGBTQ+ characters - and by extension, people - have to suffer to qualify as being 'interesting'? You're already interesting, you're you! like i'm sorry, are we trying to scare people straight??? 😭 shit, that's even a plot point that's touched on in Heartstopper itself where Nick is questioning his sexuality and he starts googling shit and it's just ALL the terrifying news stories of queer kids being ostracized / bullied / murdered / etc. and as much as it's important to be aware of the ongoing issues so we can keep fighting for our rights, we ALSO need to find balance and remember to celebrate the stories that AREN'T that because we need something to be hopeful for, something we can find peace in. I don't think Heartstopper is some deeply profound piece of work, but it also doesn't seem like it's trying to be? It's a low stakes celebration of the LGBTQ+ experience that's very warm and comforting, especially for those who are the same ages as the main characters who are often being persuaded by the grown-ups around them that it's a death sentence to be gay / trans / etc.

and it's not like we HAVEN'T had popular pieces of queer representative media that explored things outside of cheesy BL, like are we forgetting about Nimona which explored both the gay and genderfluid experience in a very accessible and fun way while still being mature and not pandering to its audience over how society has made monsters out of queer people?

(and even then I'm sure there are folks who would argue "actually, here are the issues with Nimona" , and that's fine tbh, we can like media and appreciate what it brings to the table while also discussing what it lacks in, such as what we're doing now with Heartstopper! progress is a never-ending journey!!)

and also okay, not me trying to be argumentative in the slightest BUT I don't really get the argument that 'other queer people' are being sidelined for the main characters? unless there's something I'm missing here lol (I will apologize for that because it's admittedly been a while since I've re-read Heartstopper so I should probably go do that to refresh myself on it). like i say that in the sense that Heartstopper is clearly meant to be about two gay male teenagers. just like how Nimona is about a shapeshifter who is not a girl or a boy (they're Nimona!) and a gay man who are both trying to change the system that's other'd them for years for the better. that is the story Heartstopper is trying to tell and it achieves that. it also has a trans character plotline that I could see people arguing feels sidelined but I think there's a massive difference between 'sidelining' and just having a B plot ? my honest take with that is not every piece of representative media is going to be able to cover every single topic, it's just not doable for one piece of media to be a monolith for everything, the same as how one person can't be a monolith for an entire community of people. BUT that doesn't mean works like Heartstopper and Nimona can't inspire others to also lend their voices into the medium and create that representation that's needed. That's why we need ✨variety✨ and Heartstopper is part of that variety by offering a more vanilla cutesy story full of good vibes for people who want that sort of thing.

IDK, I think there's just a lot of nuance that's being missed in that poll, and in the difference between Heartstopper inspiring more people to write happy cozy BL stories vs. implying that it's had an actual negative influence on modern art and media in the same way that series like Homestuck and LO have to the point that people think it needs to be destroyed, like wtf LOL Like they're not even comparable IMO and a lot of the arguments I see people making about why it is just feel a little backwards, and those arguments obfuscate the real issue which is just "popular thing is popular and people like to piggyback off popular shit". That's a fact for basically any niche and genre, these trends come and go. Even if the whole cutesy BL trend passes one day (which it will) it'll be replaced by something else that people will also inevitably find samey and boring after a while. This is not a concept that's unique to LGBTQ+ media, it's universal.

Balance is important and I think finding that balance is as much a responsibility on the shoulders of the consumer as it is on the creator. And I don't think Heartstopper deserves to be put into the same camp as stories like LO which literally straightwashes its canonically queer characters and gives those queer identities to nothingburger characters who are easy to shoo out of the plot to make way for the heterocis ones (while still parading itself around like it's actually 'queer rep' which... it really isn't.) Like all three of the comics in that poll are vastly different, serving different audiences, with different goals and intentions. It's comparing apples to oranges to pineapples.

The worst Heartstopper has to offer is just a low stakes plot that might not appeal to everyone or feel 'samey' which yeah, valid, but in the grander sense of whether or not it's had a negative effect on queer media just for being... cheesy? And inspiring other people to write stories like it? I don't get the argument, it feels like it's severely missing the point of what we're fighting for here - to live happy little unbothered lives - but that's just me ╮(￣ω￣;)╭ I'm definitely not trying to be a dick about it in any way and I don't want anyone to think I'm not open to the opposing points here, I do agree with you on the oversaturation of samey BL stories, but it just rose some massive red flags to see Heartstopper next to frigging Homestuck and Lore Olympus LOL

[ofmdsalt]

i do think it’s funny that the gentlebeardies who proclaim their love for the revenge crew don’t actually talk that much about or create content for the revenge crew. they don’t give a shit about the “boatful of queer poc that Izzy sold out” (LMFAO) unless they can use the crew’s diversity as some kind of moral gotcha. they care about GB because that’s the only thing that matters about the show in their eyes. and it’s so fucking unoriginal!!! just endless regurgitated post about “omg they’re soooo in love~~ and isn’t it great that love conquered all their problems~~!” it’s unoriginal derivative dreck unless they have to invent new ways to lie about how izzy deserves the death penalty.

oh anon you get me

you have no idea how much i hate the diversity of the crew being used as a literal weapon in this fandom when it comes to demonizing izzy and washing Ed and Stede of any of their wrong doings.

im frustrated by the use of the crew in season 2 only because it was so painfully obvious to me that the budget cuts really affected the ensemble. the way the Swede and Buttons were written out of the show felt rushed and like it came out of nowhere, especially as those two characters, felt the 'least' developed out of the rest of them. so giving them both this long winded set up to be written out was too clunky for me.

i miss when Frenchie was singing and strumming along on his lute. i miss when Jim was Jim, because lbr that was Vico in s2. it just felt like Jim wasn't there anymore. i can't say what happened in the writer's room at that time or what sort of material Vico was given or if it skewed more to improve, but a lot of what was established for the characters in s1 was missing for me.

the rhetoric of this being the Ed&Stede show i think did more harm than good. the assertion that the other characters are only here in service of Ed and Stede's development reduces the sense of scale and scope and also agency these characters have.

a lot of the foundational aspects of GB as a ship i think falls a bit too much into fan service. people talk about how revolutionary and groundbreaking the ship is as a cis gay couple on screen. as if it hasn't been seen before. like i didn't get the wow moment of Stede in the mermaid costume as other fans did. Stede's dream at the beginning of season 2 with him killing Izzy and then colliding with Ed in this romantic gesture of love and passion on the beach is straight up fantasy for Stede, but i think fans took the idea of Stede literally killing Izzy a bit too seriously because that is Stede's fantasy. he wanted his reunion with Ed to be simple and understandable. that it was all Izzy's fault when the reality of the situation was so much messier and complicated. like David and the writers were literally telling us that Izzy is not the enemy here because this moment on the beach was pure fantasy. and fantasies can be dangerous

and then the fans said that Izzy deserved it, should have had his second leg shot and amputated, that he deserved to die, that he's still a nuisance even in death despite the fact that he's dead. that is both a master manipulator but also a cringe fail loser incapable of doing anything right. and it's like. okay. you don't seem to understand this character either.

like a lot of the problems in this fandom have existed before and will continue to exist in other iterations. every fandom has its ship wars. every fandom has long ass call out posts about characters they don't like. but let's not pretend this is anything revolutionary

what i've noticed is that this fandom will reach a burnout period and it's probably already upon us. the constant need to be like 'we're trending!!' when all algorithms are dog shit and glitchy as hell doesn't mean anything. plus the fact that there are only two seasons, less BTS content to go around, it's all coming from the same overdrawn well and eventually it will come up empty.

it's okay to step back. it's okay to leave a fandom for a bit and come back to it years down the road. it's okay. but all of this is exhausting

[driftwooddave]

Most of my online spaces lean either heavily female, or heavily nonbinary. How this came to be, I do not know, but it is thus. This next bit, might be coloured a lot by my personal experiences in those spaces... but I saw someone make a post that, if it was not about one of the spaces I am in, there are a lot of odd coininciendes, but even if its not, it at least felt aplicable to that space, and relatable to several others. The post boiled down to 'I have been in this space for years, but after realising I was a trans man, and especially after I shared that, it has felt very hostile and unsafe'... and while my heart goes out to them, all I can think of is. "I never thought the leopards would eat my face"... Because several spaces I frequent, and that one in particular, has always felt hostile as a man. Open hostility, things like 'kill all men'... that was always an everyday occurance. They just didn't mind so long as they were not part of the people the group was hostile to. I am glad to have someone speak out about the issues, and I have every hope that they can take their experiences, and learn from them... But at the same time, its frustrating to see someone have been in that space for years, and never see the problem, until it harms them. Also didn't help they used language in their post once or twice made it seem more like they were 'trans men also feel unsafe when you say 'kill all men', let's say 'kill all cis men instead'', than 'lets not say kill all men', but that might be me reading too much into it. IDK... It's just... can people really not see these issues, until they face them?

[cartoonrival]

I ALWAYS GET SO SAD WHEN PPL USE THE DECLARATION OF WOMANHOOD EP AS PROOF AKANES CISHET. Like i get that they wanna defend ranma from akane saying transphobic shit throughout and attacking her at the end, but i'm begging them to rewatch and consider her pov: up until that point she had been able to tell herself "i'm not REALLY bi because ranma's not a real girl" and now suddenly that excuse is pulled out from under her and guess what? She's STILL very clearly attracted to ranma and she panics bc she's 16 in japan in the 90s. she'll insist ranma's a boy one minute and then buy her an expensive dress and take her to get ice cream the next. she's literally not even mad at ranma for being a girl when she chases her at the end, the thing that sets her off is ranma dismissing her when she's worried about them not being able to get married as girls. homegirl did not handle it smoothly bc she was also going thru it hardcore

look man. ive talked about this episode before. i know its widely adored but i personally strongly dislike it because ranma acting so wildly out of character really annoys me even though the ice cream shop conversation is objectively revolutionary. because ranma acts so ooc throughout that whole episode i consider it to have very little bearing in terms of tgirl ranma support. but that episode is BIBLICAL for bisexual akane. the staunch refusal by fans to see anything from akane's perspective is fucking nuts. from akane's pov the PLOT of that episode is essentially EXACTLY what you said: ive been using "hes not ACTUALLY a girl as my excuse for being in love with him this whole time but now suddenly it seems like he IS actually a girl and it turns out im still very much in love with him, and im terrified to face what that means". also honestly i think akane was also annoyed that ranma was acting cowardly... bisexual or not it is true that this isnt really the person she fell for. because ranma was acting weird. so i think we should give her a little credit for that reasonable frustration as well. but in that ep she so very clearly thinks girl ranma is really cute and pretty and wants to do stuff that makes her happy and see her in pretty dresses and to be quite honest that bit at the beginning where boytype ranma is trying on her clothes and getting frustrated and dysphoric that they dont fit her right, and akane says "they dont fit me right either" makes me a little craaaazy that solidarity between cis and trans people wrt body image.... anyways everyone wants to hate akane so bad and read her in bad faith but for some reason insists on bending over backwards to read shampoo as gay

[antlered-vixen]

Hi! I really look up to you, I guess because of your age and because of what you've gone through. It must be hard to transition so many times, but it must have given you a lot of perspective.

Can I ask you something? How do you keep going? I can't find a community that welcomes me. People here are hurtful, and hateful- why do so many transfems online hate transmascs and intersex people? I don't hate them. It makes me want to cry. All I do is exist, and they tear into me for my identity.

Do you know how to find people who are kind, and don't put you down for who you are? I thought that maybe you've experienced some of these same things.

Sorry if this seems like a vent. You don't need to reply to it if it's too much or makes you uncomfortable.

Hey there.

I imagine I am older than you and possibly more experienced, yes, so I'll be glad to share a few things I've learned on existing as an intersex vaguely transmasc person.

1) Community rarely is and in fact should not generally be an echo chamber of people comprised of the exact same overlap of identitarian labels. A politics of compassion, mutual aid and community cannot be built with complete sameness as its main pillar.

Sure, yes, most of my friends are queer of some type. But I have befriended and become close with people gay and bi and straight, trans and cis, intersex or not. I've even dated outside what might be perceived outside my normal pool, taking no particular offense if for example someone generally identified as a lesbian tells me "well, you happen to be just ambiguous enough that even though I know you're not a woman, I find you hot in a butch way". Whatever - respect my name and pronouns and we're fine.

Identities and boundaries of attraction, friendship, commonality of experience and whatnot are very fluid and complex. "Your people" is not some preexisting uniform niche you will ever find - you have to bring them together yourself.

2) Transfems, as some kind of villified monolith (for the love of god enough of that!), do not hate intersex people or transmascs. Many are rightfully frustrated with people who think misandry is a thing - it's not.

Yes, transmasculine people are oppressed in ways unique to their experience, but not because they are trans, and also men. Because being men per se isn't a category that is dismpowered. They are oppressed in unique ways because they are specifically trans men, and therefore not fully offered the privileges of manhood, and in fact often perceived as failed/fraudulent men and/or failed/fraudulent masculine women. That's just plain old transphobia.

Transmisogyny is a word that exists to point out that being a woman is, in and of itself, a category of oppression, and that can overlap and intersect with the specificities of being a trans woman.

Honestly, we are actually all of us with our heads way up in our arse if we see fellow trans people as some primary foe - we hold little to no systemic privilege over one another, as trans and trans-adjecent genders are frankly at the very bottom of the hierarchy of gendered power, and out there in the real world our access to resources, our professional opportunities, our housing situations, our medical care, is decided almost entirely by old cis men in power and maybe sometimes the occasional powerful woman a la Theresa May.

Our material conditions are not going to be struggled for over comments in a Tumblr thread, I promise you.Keep your pain and tears for the class war, and to fight against the structures and systems that meaningfully decide the circumstances of your life.

And if the occasional trans woman is being mean to you online and doesn't actually have a good point... just ignore her. Every single group of humans has annoying people in it, even trans women, who are, you know, a complex and diverse group of fallible human people.

3) Many people will question the truth of your experiences, because a lot of intersex people undergo coercions and cruelties incompatible with what people want to believe is "the state of modern civilziation".

Surely not! Surely people are not given hormones coercively, shadily, by some family doctor! Surely babies are not mutilated with money paid under the table! Surely teens are not lied to and given T-blockers under false pretenses! Surely we don't live in such a world!

Worse yet, you will surely hear "impossible; teens given hormones is not to easy or common - that's a TERF argument", which is such a silly position. No, teens are given hormones easily, as long as it is in the service of maintaining and strengthening the gendered systems of categorization and assignment, rather than disrupting them.

If explaining politely avails nothing, ignore. You truly gain nothing by arguing online. Ultimately those unwilling to truly summon empathy and imagine experiences very different from their own will not learn it suddenly, this 18th of January, on Tumblr.

4) The best way to get people to be kind to you is by being kind to people yourself.

Suffering and grief is a nasty process, as it often closes us in on ourselves and makes us bitter and solispistic and self-obsessed, rotisserie-chicken turning our own trauma and worldviews in endless self-examination and writhing. It's understandable, but it's also not good for us, and it can make us, unintentionally, poor friends and poor partners, when we are so lost in our own self-narrativization.

Break away from that at your own initiative, be more extroverted and kind to others and curious about them and their lives, and empathetic, and believe me, it will be returned, eventually, by those who will make good friends and companions.

Ps.

You can reach out in private. I won't bite.

[allthebrazilianpolitics]

hi! could you possibly share the intercept new report about gay men and their misogyny? i know this isn't really about br politics, and im not even sure if it is in English, but i think it is really important to be shared

I hope it's not too late 😅

-

Gay men and misogyny: no more ignoring this problem

'Don't talk about vaginas around me': for a long time, we ignored the disqualifications of women and the feminine made by gay men. No more.

"If I liked women, I would have become a gynecologist."

"The law of gravity is a crime against women."

“Funny” gay guys, usually white and showing a certain hatred towards females, are a very common social type in contemporary pop culture. The character Felix “Bicha Má” ["Evil Fag"], played by Mateus Solano, from the Brazilian soap opera “Amor à Vida” [Love For Life], is an easy example in Brazilian lands – the sentences that open this text are his. But this sharp-tongued young man who directs much of his bitterness towards women, including friends and relatives, has never only lived on screens: he is a common presence in our daily lives.

"Oh, don't mention a vagina around me, I get all messed up."

"My goodness, this singer was beautiful, but she got old and ugly."

"Get out of here, I don't even like cracks."

I can't say how many times I've heard phrases like that from fellow gay men. For a long time, these ways of disqualifying women – despite the certain discomfort felt by every person who is repeatedly the target of prejudice – were endorsed and reflected by women ourselves. Offenses dressed as “I was just joking” have largely naturalized these forms of disqualification, but the good news is that, in an environment in which feminism has gained ground, what seemed to be just a joke is now named by the right word: misogyny.

This is a delicate subject, since we are talking about people – mostly cisgender gay men – who have been and still are victims of a series of violence, whether at home, at work, on the streets. Perhaps it was precisely this that made us, cisgender or transgender women, leave the discomfort of being made fun of in the background. After all, confronting homophobia in a sexist country like Brazil is no simple task. But if this machismo affects homosexual men, what can we say about its presence in women's daily lives? And what can we also say about the homophobia directed at cis/trans homosexual and bisexual women, especially invisible and also targets of “jokes” by gay men?

“I had a very close gay friend, like a brother. We went out to parties together and often slept in the same bed, at my house or his. Several times, as if he were joking, he said that he was terrified of vaginas, that he was born through a cesarean section so he wouldn't have to go through one. He'd gesture the sign of the Cross and said ‘God forbid’, smiling,” says Adriana Conceição, 47 years old, a telemarketing operator from Recife who, like several other women, took a while to classify the guy's actions with the right word.

Game developer Renata Gomes, also 47 years old, found herself at the center of a virtual outrage after questioning a post by a gay Brazilian film critic living in the United States. In the post, he talked about missing Brazil, since people worked a lot more in the USA. Faced with the possibility of his speech being reductive and stereotypical, he began to treat Renata as “ugly”, “militant”, “frustrated”. Furthermore, several of the critic's friends entered the comments to reiterate the delegitimization of Renata's speech.

Younger people also identify the problem: aware of the issue, Curitiba university student Nicoly Grevetti, aged 24, listened to several people who circulate in LGBTQIA+ spaces about the subject and wrote a text about it. In it, she also identifies how pop and queer cultures, supposedly safer and “modern”, also present misogynistic elements.

One example is the use of the term “fishy”, constantly evoked to define drag queens who closely resemble cisgender women (that is, who have a high degree of “passability”). The expression refers to the smell that these women's vaginas supposedly have. “[Cisgender] women grow up believing that their private parts are disgusting and spend their entire lives using products to reduce their natural odors, which can lead to various diseases. Having female genitalia as something disgusting is so common for this group, that you can find countless reports of women talking about it on the internet,” she wrote. The topic was the subject of discussion in the famous series RuPaul’s Drag Race, generating academic works like this one. Cisgender drag queen Victoria Scone, a former participant in the show, also spoke on the topic.

A few months ago, I experienced a significant episode of this machismo and misogyny that had been attenuated for a long time in relation to gay men. I was in a doctor's office very close to a shopping center in the south of Recife. After the end of the consultation, the dermatologist – homosexual, white, in his late thirties, and anti-Bolsonaro in the last elections – lightly tapped my hand and said: “Okay, now you can go for a walk in the mall.”

Especially on that day, I was rushing to finish presenting a lecture that I would give the following day, online, at the University of Coimbra. Obviously, if I wanted to window shop or spend the afternoon reading celebrity magazines, it wouldn't be a problem (in fact, I love it). The point here was the doctor's obvious intention to fit me into the cliché of the futile and consumerist woman, a sexist and anachronistic way of disqualifying the female gender. Icing on the cake: while I was leaving, the gay boy warned me not to forget to take “the boss” to my next appointment. He was referring to my romantic partner.

If it's feminine, it's smaller

The misogyny present in the practices of part of this population is so evident that it goes beyond the boundaries of gender and occurs between equals: it is common to see it operating even among gay men themselves. Research I carried out in partnership with Professor Ricardo Sabóia, from the Federal University of Pernambuco, analyzed the relationship between body and celebrity on the Grindr app. I was astonished by both the hatred towards what is socially seen as feminine and the extremely high level of normativity, standardization, and even elitism. “'I'm not into effeminate guys” is a constant, as is “I'm not into fat guys”.

In this environment of extremely high value for toned biceps and abs, being masculine – and looking very masculine – is the strongest currency. Thus, men seen as “little women” are disqualified. This is what researcher Carlos Alberto de Carvalho calls “misogynistic heteronormativity”, in which the masculine and masculinities are placed as positive – on the other hand, femininities and the feminine are valued negatively. It is, therefore, an environment of hegemonic masculinity and subaltern masculinities.

The global soap opera “Terra e Paixão” [Land & Passion] currently features an illustration that refers to this scenario, with the character Kelvin (actor Diego Martins), an “effeminate” gay man in love with Ramiro (Amaury Lorenzo), the masculine man, self-declared heterosexual, who desires the other person, but still doesn't know how to deal with the situation. What diminishes the power of the first is precisely its proximity to what is considered “womanly”. But, looking at Grindr, even the desirable “brucutu” [Brazilian slang for a brute and rude man] has his limits: issues such as level of education have weight in the app used mostly by gay and bisexual men, where it is common to read “no illiterates”.

The LGBTQIA+ culture, in which rich and middle-class white homosexual men repeatedly appear to discriminate against other peers from the same community, is a central sociological issue for discussing social inequalities not only in Brazil, but throughout the world. “Queer cultural production has helped to reproduce class distinctions based on the hegemony of representations of middle-class gays”, writes Lisa Henderson in the article “I’m not/I'm not into: circulating meanings in the presentation speeches of the Grindr app”, by Rafael Grohmann. In the same text, Juan Marsiaj summarizes: “Such a strategy can lead to the acceptance of a type of gay (white, middle class), seen as a model of citizen-consumer, and a greater marginalization of all other 'debauches' who do not fit this way. In more Brazilian terms: there is a risk of accepting rich gays and further marginalizing poor queers.”

Discrimination on the part of this part of the queer community was evidenced in a historic episode in the 1970s, in super liberal New York. In June 1973, the Christopher Street Liberation Day Rally took place in the city, a demonstration held in favor of the rights of the queer population – which, at that time, as we will see, in fact was basically limited to white, middle-class gay women and men.

But, among the public, was the activist Sylvia Rivera, a transvestite who in 1971 had created the Revolutionary Action of Street Transvestites, STAR. Rivera had been trying to get on stage for some time, but Jean O’Leary, a lesbian white radical feminist, acted to prevent her from participating. A sample of how, many times, cisgender homosexual/bisexual women also enact the same discrimination as homosexual/bisexual men.

When he finally managed to grab the microphone, Rivera took aim at the hundreds of mostly white gay men and women present. Her speech is a synthesis of the violence experienced by queers who are too effeminate, too poor, too black, or too latine.

“I've tried to speak out here all day for your gay brothers and sisters in jail. They write to me every damn week asking for help – and you don't do a damn thing for them. I lost my job and my apartment for gay liberation… and you guys treat me this way?” she screamed.

The anger had yet another weight and meaning: alongside another important name, the transvestite Marsha P. Johnson, Rivera went down in history as one of the first to face police repression at the New York bar Stonewall Inn, on June 28, 1969. The conflict was the trigger for a fundamental civil movement for human rights – so much so that the date ended up becoming what was then called International LGBT+ Pride Day.

The question remained: how could that engaged audience repudiate the person who, at just 18 years old, spoke out against violence that was not directed just at her? How could they recriminate someone who pulled the trigger that would benefit precisely that white homosexual population?

Rivera and Johnson, who lived in a shelter, were profoundly different from the majority of the public who would return to their comfortable homes after the demonstration. Unlike Rivera, the daughter of a Venezuelan mother and a Puerto Rican father, most had not spent nights in jail or suffered police rape. The activist died homeless, alone, without the care she should have received. Marsha P. Johnson, the decorated, made-up, smiling, super queer transvestite, was murdered and her body thrown into a river.

Thinking historically and humanly about both is a central issue in the debate on hatred of “feminine” and other diverse discriminations present among the LGBTQIA+ population. The right-wing has long opened a war against women, and the rise of red pill assholes is just one of the phenomena of this reality. It still includes names like former federal deputy Daniel Silveira, who broke the plaque with Marielle's name alongside Rodrigo Amorim. [Note from the translator: Marielle Franco was a black bisexual favela-born leftist councilwoman who was assassinated by militias.]

But, as it turns out, misogyny is not exclusive to right-wing radicals and conservatives. And if Sylvia and Marsha were on the front line to guarantee the rights of millions of people, without distinction of creeds, race, genders, and degrees of “femininity”, it is worth asking: when will cisgender gay men, mostly white and middle class, join, with emphasis and strength, debates such as the right to abortion, employment, and wages, issues of life and death for the majority of black Brazilian women? When will the majority of this same group take a stand on the thousands of rapes that mainly victimize girls and teenagers? What collectivities, after all, are we talking about? As Jorge Ben would say in the song Zumbi: I want to see. We're here.

Source, translated by the blogger.

[velvetvexations]

My apologies if you've already been sent this post, but I came across it a few days ago and haven't been able to stop thinking about how laughable (and frustrating) it is. https://www.tumblr.com/princessefemmelesbian/766811116737363968/maybe-im-just-being-dramatic-but-it-does?source=share "[...] to say nothing of the fact that the largest people in this group (including, but not limited to, its creator!) have misogynistic rape/detrans kinks centered specifically around preying on lesbians and trans women [...]" "[...] defended viciously by every single transandrodork that I’ve ever encountered who argued with me (a lesbian!) that actually there’s nothing wrong with getting off to the corrective rape of women because two consenting adults can do whatever they want in the bedroom (yeah, right!)" Ignoring the fact that half of this is just lies, these people keep contradicting themselves when it comes to transmasculine people and kinks. I have seen several TRFs complain about transmasculine people attacking transgender women over their kinks, including, but not limited to... FTM detransition, forcefeminization, and misgendering. Why is it okay for one side to do, but not another? Are transgender men evil sex puritans or misogynistic porn addicts? Be consistent! (also worth nothing that OP scoffs at the idea that you don't need to justify your kinks when mutual consent is present) Beyond that..."die-hard, raging Zionists?" What? I honestly find it incredibly disgusting how these people will tack on any negative label just to further other and demonize people they disagree with. Tumblr discourse has nothing to do with /genocide,/ and I can't put into words how disrespectful it is to conflate the two, especially when this post seems to be addressed to young teenagers. I don't want to leave a big essay in your inbox, so I'll stop here, but it's nuts to me how these people can write this infantilizing, vilifying, lying nonsense and think they're in the right.

these people will never acknowledge that trans men into dykebreaking from the dom perspective are a vanishingly small demographic that are one or two Tumblr bloggers away from total extinction while there are about a billion transfems into dykebreaking

there is literally a very popular transfem user on this website who has TERFs comparing her selfies to disguised selfies on a trans supremacy kink dykebreaking blog

why do cis people like this think they're safe for transfems

why do transfems think cis people like this are safe

[spaceytoxinz]

TODD INGRAM HCS THAT NOBODY ASKED FOR

Im returning to my roots, this is about comic todd btw cause hes a dick and i hate hjm [hes my second favorite ex next to gideon]

He’s still easily flustered ofc, though not really in the sense where he gets bashful and coy like the anime conveys, he just gets frustrated about it. He will either deny the situation at hand or straight up tell someone to shut up when they point it out. Usually happens when he’s conflicted with his own thoughts regarding his sexuality or when proven wrong about smth

This is an old hc i had based on seeing this one image like early last year and immediately thinking he was zesty:

Hes definitely in denial about his sexuality. absolutely bisexual [duh] but he has internalized homophobia and focuses more on “potentially coming off as gay” than realizing he can be bisexual. Especially since he kept putting up this whole “fuck you im a rockstar” type of act. Seems very macho. Almost forced at times even if most of it comes from a place of genuine arrogance. [Angel lore implied lmfao oops]

His awakening was probably from joking around with his guy friends about gay shit [the straighter they are the gayer they act, i thought people were joking around about it] and one day they did something a little more physical as opposed to just saying gay shit [realistically they probably whispered in his ear from behind or smth] and from that day forward he’s had to convince himself that occasionally everyone thinks about getting physical with someone of the same sex but it “doesn’t mean anything”

basic but he dyes his hair blonde booooo obvious hc

surprisingly a decent cook. Originally he would make the typical cis”het” man meal [rubber tires with fried rat or smth idk] but because hes vegan he practically had to teach himself how to make food that wasn’t bland. Dont get me wrong, vegetables on their own can taste good but i feel like if anyone had to eat nothing but steamed vegetables with nothing else for a long ass time, it would drive them insane at some point. [plus envy probably told him to get his shit together and cook a decent meal for once]

Hes not ripped to me, hes like slightly pudgy. idc if its canon that he has abs or whatever. Hes still muscular ofc, but like its not super obvious unless he flexes. I guess like a sleeper build but everytime i search it up, it mostly shows skinny sleeper builds. Maybe ill draw it one day. just look at his arms in that image above.

out of all the evil exes he truly believes that hes the absolute MOST important one. Like everyone else does too but his level of arrogance is up there with Gideon’s. Unlike Gideon though he probably never shuts up about it, ESPECIALLY to Lucas. Its mostly because he punched the fucking moon. He doesn’t even like Ramona anymore. He’s just annoying

Nobody in the League fucking likes him. He probably gives Matthew and Roxy weird looks. Gideon straight up doesn’t care for them. The twins can tolerate Todd but talk shit about how annoyingly arrogant he is behind his back. And Lucas?? MF GOT PLAYED BY THIS ASSHOLE. Todd originally didn’t bother much with lucas and would sometimes tease him about their whole high school ordeal but when Lucas pointed out his faults, Todd just got defensive. So now he hates Lucas for nearly no reason when Lucas has more of a reason to not like Todd.

Hes still thought about doing it with Lucas at least once during their bickering lmao

Hes also tall as shit. Tallest in the league at about 6’. This is based on the video game sprites though so idk if it counts as comic Todd. But him and Lucas are not the same height.

alr im tired it’s almost 2 in the morning. I just make it sound like hes pissed al the time

[thatweirdtranny]

responding to your recent #transandrophobia post: yeah. it’s almost like radfems have been invading the community since the 1970s and before and the only way trans women can feel safe to discuss transmisogyny is to assimilate into the radfem status quo. transmascs do it too when they talk about afab socialization. all trying to paint cis women as the most oppressed gender and trans people’s oppression as just a fraction of what cis women experience. where trans women get the social consequences of womanhood and trans men get the biological consequences. this is wrong. really the narrow definition of womanhood and manhood is equally the problem as sexism is, so radical feminism and its adjacent movements will never completely and respectfully define trans experiences. arguably, transandrophobia is so much less terfy and more accurate of a term than afab socialization but gets more backlash because of radical feminism. trans women see transmascs trying to assimilate into radfeminism and approximate themselves to cis women and that rightfully upsets them, so they try to assimilate into radfeminism even harder too. both artificially constructed “sides” would be better off abandoning radical feminism completely. doesn’t mean people can’t hate men on a personal level, but making that your politics will always have consequence.

my take is basically: we need to root out all forms of radical feminism (whether exclusive or inclusive of different groups of trans people) from our communities and spaces and i definitely think there are plenty of trans people of all genders falling hook line and sinker for radical feminism, but that the creation of terms like transandrophobia and transmisogyny and exorsexism are critical to combating all forms of radical feminism and transphobia

i think hating men is a core part of being a radfem, and it’s the easiest radfem dog whistle to spot. it’s a huge component of transmisogyny AND transandrophobia. therefore, hating men and the bs justification for hating all men needs to be stamped out. make there be social consequences for it. you can’t claim to want gender based liberation if you paint all men as inherently enemies and all women as perpetual victims.

most of all though my take is we need widespread solidarity between all groups of trans people. it frustrates me to no end that a vocal group of trans people (of all genders!) have such a problem with transmascs creating terminology for our oppression and discussing our experiences, instead of leaning into solidarity. we could all be united but instead we have the current climate of discourse that seems to repeat itself every couple years. that’s why i like the term transunity — it reframes the discussion to be around radical solidarity and discourages infighting between different groups of trans people.

[tfem-confessions]

Can people stop fighting over "this cis character is transfem/transmasc" in fandoms please. It's really frustrating as a transfem who doesn't have the most visible transfem experience and is such never sees headcanons that align with my experiences (Gender, intersexness, and a lot of other things that shape my identity like being neurodivergent) from others unless I make them myself. A lot of people really seem to be focusing on only the most visible kinds of transfem/transmasc and insisting it must be canon and everyone else who sees the character in a different way is transphobic. Why are we all fighting over headcanons. Can't we enjoy seeing varied perspectives on characters and acknowledge while I don't personally see xyz due to my own experiences, I can respect that someone else got there likely due to also seeing themself in that character.

Please can we stop acting like gender is a limited resource that can only be experienced in a small amount of ways. Media analysis is great and all, but I don't think we can really gatekeep who sees a character as what in good faith without being harmful to each other. It can feel like people are invalidating your experiences to not see the same, sure, but that isn't a reason to harass someone else or tell them their ideas are explicitly wrong for not matching yours on something so subjective as gender.

Gender is soooo subjective. Its a construct after all, I think transfem, transmasc and transneut characters can all be very easily seen as one or the other. What some may see as egg behaviour, others will see as newly out behaviour, because its reflective of our own personal experience and journey with out trans identity.

I can really understand how seeing discourse on how xyz character CANT be transfem can be super frustrating, because how do you know?? What you see as transmasc insecurity could be a transfem egg insecurity, and vice-versa.

We all had our own experiences with gender (even cis people) and trying to put clear boundaries on that just seems odd.

[emmersreads]

My Top 5 Best Books of 2023

Scrolling through bookstagram's endless reels of folks bemoaning the state of readerly types - new publications are disposable crap, everyone else is reading too much, etc - it might seem like 2023 was a terrible year for books. But, of all my longlists, this one was the longest, and the one I had the most trouble cutting down to only six. I read 119 books in 2023 (you can read my round-up of my five worst here), and here are my five favourites. Every single one of these books deserves to top your tbr for 2024.

Read the post on my blog!

Honourable Mention: Yellowface - R. F. Kuang

R.F. Kuang has figured out how to use irony and its a good look on her. Kuang’s political messaging is great — I particularly enjoyed her depiction of the publishing industry’s white fragility as deeply stupid — but we already knew that. I would expect nothing less from the author of Babel. The think that elevates Yellowface in particular is Kuang’s self-awareness in depicting Athena, the Asian writer whose novel the protagonist steals, as a talented literary wunderkind, but also as frustrating and not necessarily innocent in the problem of who is allow to tell ethically-loaded stories. I’m definitely looking forwards to her next project.

Fifth Place: Small Worlds - Caleb Azumah Nelson

This is the diverse romance novel you’ve been looking for. This is the inspiring hopepunk novel you’ve been looking for. This is the insightful and emotional coming-of-age novel you’ve been looking for. Small Worlds is all the more comforting and heart-warming because it is primarily about persistence and joy in the face of crushing personal failure and devastating systemic violence. Caleb Azumh Nelson’s motif of relationships in which both partners must break up in order to become the kind of people who can be in a long-term relationship with each other is a kind of romance arc I unexpectedly love. This entry in particular gets extra credit for its incredibly good audiobook adaptation. The audiobook is narrated by the author, whose southeast London accent and obvious emotional connection to novel make it the ideal way to read.

Fourth Place: Breasts and Eggs - Mieko Kawakami

After a couple of truly miserable memoirs this year I declared that I simply did not want to hear writers talk about motherhood. I spoke too soon because then I read this. Breasts and Eggs is in incredible reflection on being a woman that has something to offer if you love being a woman, if you hate it, or if you feel ambivalent about it. I don’t like children and can’t imagine ever wanting one — to the point that I find the endless angsting about the conflict between writing and motherhood faintly nauseating — but I found that this was the first book about being a mother that had something interesting to say even for people who never want to be mothers. Kawakami’s novel-in-translation has (for the anglophone reader) a sense of strangeness both in form and content. The book’s approach to gender and family is often intimately familiar, but just as often introduces a perspective that is deeply strange to a western reader, provoking us to think about our own assumptions about the importance of family. I particularly liked the scene in which protagonist Natsu visits a bath house and encounters a woman in a relationship with a trans man in the female section of the bath. Natsu struggles through a long thought process of whether she ought to be offended or not. Would she be similarly offended if she encountered cis lesbian PDA?

Third Place: Penance - Eliza Clark

For me, Penance was intensely personal, like looking back on my own teenagerhood. I also grew up as a deeply strange child, something that was immediately recognized by the other children. That feeling of somehow being a different species from other kids, not doing anything right and not understanding how it is wrong, is something that this novel absolutely nails. That might be a strange association for a true crime story about a horrible schoolgirl murder. This is the dramatic extension of what could happen to five people who were once very lonely little girls, and I think reading too much into the ‘how could they do something like this?’ of it all is missing the forest for the trees and playing into the true crime gaze that the book criticizes. Clark is interested both in true crime that dehumanizes its subject matter, and true crime the aspires to humanize and platform them. Is it any more ethical to demand access to someone’s life out of love?

Second Place: He Who Drowned the World - Shelley Parker-Chan

Shelley Parker-Chan’s The Radiant Emperor duology is the best queer fantasy series out there. Period. He Who Drowned the World takes its engagement with gender and sexuality to another level. At least for me, there is something much more meaningful and impactful to the theme of gender as something performed in spite of difficulties, distrust, and lack of acknowledgement. Parker-Chan understands that gender is often unpleasant or even hateful. This isn’t a book for a brave new utopia where every bra fits on the first try, it’s for the present, where the wrong bra gives you a fibrous lump. If She Who Became the Sun was Zhu embracing her gender, the sequel is about Ouyang’s often deeply upsetting ability to accept his. His hatred of any femininity, first and foremost his own, isn’t an easy read, but I found there was something incredibly resonant in it to my own ambivalent feelings towards femininity. No one else depicts self-hatred this well.

First Place: Chain-Gang All-Stars - Nana Kwame Adjei-Brenyah

As soon as I finished Chain-Gang All-Stars I knew it would be my book of the year. I read a lot of great books but this blew every single one of them out the water. It is Gladiator by way of The Shawshank Redemption by way of professional wrestling. It’s the scifi sequel to The New Jim Crow and Ava DuVernay’s 13th. It’s the best love story of the year. Chain-Gang All-Stars is an exploration of the humanity of inmates, who, in this world, are objectified both due to their involvement in the criminal justice system (as in ours) and from the gaze of sports and reality entertainment. It’s hard to decide which aspect of this book is most technically impressive. I usually don’t like when a political novel tries to comment on too many different issues, but this book deftly balances deep and effective discussions on a huge range of topics. I especially appreciated its engagement with an inmates’ personal feelings of guilt and culpability within a carceral system that doesn’t care at all about remediating the harm they have caused. This deft political messaging is combined with an insightful depiction of the ambivalent success of professional athletes, multidimensional characters, and a touching romance. My favourite part of the book was how effectively it traps the reader. I understand and agree with all the condemnations of the exploitation inherent to entertainment in watching primarily BIPOC athletes destroy their health (this is about wrestling but also boxing and American football), but I still found myself thinking about just how incredible this book would be as a TV series. The use of complicity as a theme is unparalleled.