#people that treat me better because they assume i am a cis man for example will...

[uncanny-tranny]

What people often confuse, I think, is the idea that you can have specific benefits in different situations, but that is not the same as having systemic privileges for whatever identity/presentation/assumed identity or presentation that was given benefits.

If you want an example of what I mean, I have experienced some better treatment as people have recognized me as male, but society doesn't offer me systemic benefit because I'm a trans man - my transness, even in a context of being seen or assumed as a man, is not granted to me. I'm not saying that I don't ever get treated better in certain instances where I am seen as a man (even if I'm seen as a cis man), what I am saying is that that is different than systemic privileges. I think that difference matters, since people see systemic benefits as indications that people don't need help, or even that those people need to be "taken down a peg." This viewpoint isn't conducive to helping people, if that's what your goal is.

I use myself as an example just so people aren't confused. This is a complex topic that is, fundamentally, intersectional. If the only voices being heard are one type, we will be coming away with a dangerously narrow view of how social benefits and societal privilege work.

[earlmothraoffangbanger]

Thoughts on Community, Media Literacy, and How One Conducts Themselves on the Internet.

Before I get started I would like to preface this with the fact that I am currently sick from coming off of medication. I will do my best to be coherent and concise in my writing. Thank you for your patience. Feel free to send Asks if you would like to hear more from me or need clarity.

CW: Mild mentions of abuse, SA, as well as harassment in general. Feel free to not read, your mental health is more important than my ramblings.

In this section, I will cover things I have seen in the trans community that I feel need to be addressed. The most pressing issue I feel is this presumption of guilt or innocence based on an individual's gender identity. Point blank I want to say it is not okay to assume ill of someone purely based on their gender. This is misogyny and there's no other way to skin it.

I've seen this weird idea that Trans Women are infallible to criticism or being called out on bad behavior just because they are trans women. On the opposite side of the spectrum, I have seen people say that all trans men are terrible based on the fact that they are men. If you believe this you are playing into misogyny and mysoginysic ideals. No one is absolved of criticism in this world especially if they are actively doing bad things. You can still be a trans ally by calling out the bad behavior of a trans person just because they're being a bad person or behaving poorly isn't a reflection of their transness it's a reflection of who they are as a person as a whole.

The whole point of the feminist movement is to give people more freedom regardless of gender. To break down the barriers that gender poses. This is not only for cis women but trans women as well as cis and trans men and people who fall under the nonbinary umbrella. Saying trans men have it better than cis and trans women is actively counterintuitive to this goal. Saying cis men have no issues is also counter-intuitive to this goal. For example, many men are taught the only emotions they can have is happiness, anger, and horny and because of this many cis men have poor emotional regulation While this can and does harm society we also need to remember the negative impact this has on cis men be it men that fall under the binary as expected by society, are nonconforming to said societal standard, or trans men who are already not seen as a man enough for some people and constantly have their manhood under fire. Cis men also continuously have their manhood under fire if they dare show any sort of "vulnerability" such as crying or actually being in love with someone. This also comes back around to harm cis and trans women as they can be seen are not feminine enough if they have even just one masculine trait.

This is not to say that cis men don't have an advantage in society, I am painfully aware of this fact. We just need to remember misogyny affects EVERYONE.

Another thing I notice is that trans women can tend to be treated overly delicately which is something that stems from how society treats women in general. For example, there is this media "critic" (if you know me you know who I'm talking about) who despite having actively harmful and downright racist and fatphobic takes on the media she attempts to criticize there are those who think she can do no wrong because she is trans. Her fan's arguments are always "She is a trans person of color there by default you are over-criticizing her." This is actually harmful as it the person in question is not expected to take any responsibility for any of her harmful retoric and actions. And that's just about her takes on media. I'm not even going to get into to the actual allegations of crimes levied against her.

I'd like to conclude this section that just because someone is (insert characteristic here) doesn't mean that they are by default a good or bad person. you need to look at them as a whole and what they're actually doing and saying.

Next, I just want to say not all media has to be happy and nice to be good media. Some media has darker stories to tell and in doing so bring concepts to people that they may not have thought about before. For example, I would have never known that my father was abusing me had I not watched shows that painted his exact behavior as abuse and not okay. Up until that point, I had just thought "Well dads are just like that." Sometimes the stories that are being told bring much-needed awareness to those who need it. That is not to say that you have to consume this media I'm just saying it has a right to exist and a purpose.

Lastly, this is a comparatively small section but I feel is just as important. If you tell people that you want to rape or sexually abuse them or you tell them to kill themselves or you doxx them you are a bad person. There's no other way to look at that. I've seen so many people do this over just little things like disagreeing on headcanons or even someone just liking a character. This could not be a more extreme overreaction. Stop doing this and if you see people close to you doing this stop them too they deserve consequences for their actions. It's disgusting when people get away with this.

Thank you for reading my rambling and have a good day!

[jdenvs3000w24]

week 3 - Privilege

This week's readings sparked many conversations between myself and friends, in this course and not, mostly about the invisible backpack idea and the $100 race video. I found myself realizing by talking with friends that I had what some would consider to be a rough upbringing, at least relative to them. Most of the details I'd rather not put out on the internet for anyone to see, and I don't want this to be a pity thing anyway. I bring it up because I had a realization; that I shouldn't be so hard on myself. I want to be clear that I know there are others who struggled much worse than I did growing up. I am a Canadian-born, white, cis-gendered man, and I recognize there is a privilege to that. I just wanted to talk about how the race imagery really resonated with me. We're all running the same race in university, and in life, but some have to run longer and faster to reach the same point, and that's just how it is. There's no reason to resent the people ahead of you in the race and there is no need to pity the people behind you. We are in this race, or more so a journey, together.

To me, privilege is relative to the situation, but in general, it is characteristic of someone who has an advantage over another in some aspect due to a specific characteristic or experience. A common example is white privilege, where not only does being white in a nation like Canada shield you from being racially discriminated against but the laws of this country were often written in a way that benefits white people in particular. One could have privilege relative to another in a financial aspect, and because of that may have had more opportunities to play sports, learn skills, do better in school, get a higher paying job, etc. As a nature interpreter, we must recognize not only our own privilege but the privilege or lack thereof of our audience, to ensure they benefit from the experience we provide. While in general people who choose to go on a hike with a nature interpreter may want to be there, there's no guarantee they may have the experience or skills we might assume them to have. Therefore we must be mindful of the areas we choose to go to. Perhaps we want to cross a river by walking across a fallen tree. We might assume that since the water is relatively calm, even if someone were to fall in, they should be able to swim across anyway. But maybe one of the people we are leading never learned how to swim, making that river crossing an extreme risk we didn't account for. 

The point of the matter is, everyone deserves to be treated equitably in an interpreter-led excursion. I’m curious to see if y’all have the same view as me, or maybe there's something you'd like to add.

Till next week

o7

[ghoulpoole]

About Those Wait Times

Or, Hospitals Are Not Allies

I live in Portland, OR USA and have been receiving gender affirming care from Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU), which is the biggest hospital in Oregon. It is well-respected in the Pacific Northwest for its trans healthcare.

OHSU has a Transgender Healthcare Program that claims to "provide support, information and advocacy [and] connect you with OHSU providers who are international leaders in caring for gender-diverse patients of all ages."

I am writing for all trans people to say not to believe that. If OHSU's trans healthcare is respected, it is only because it is better than nothing.

The Transgender Healthcare Program (THP) is a decentralized organization at OHSU. It is not a hospital, or a hospital wing, or a clinic that pays its own providers. It is a loose collection of aligned providers of different specialties and clinics. It has a dedicated staff of six people. Incidentally, it is directed by a cis man with no experience in providing care to transgender patients.

The THP is ineffectual for a few reasons. It is under-resourced by OHSU. It has no direct authority over healthcare delivery. And it has no effective way to advocate for trans patients because it has no actual power in the hospital's organizational structure.

Here is a personal example.

I have scheduled a consultation with OHSU Plastic Surgery for facial feminization surgery. This consultation was scheduled in 2023 to take place in 2026. That means the surgery won't take place until at least 2027, four years after the initial consultation scheduling.

Wait times like this are just as common for breast augmentation, double mastectomy, vaginoplasty and phalloplasty. Obviously, this is unacceptable.

The THP has no satisfactory answers for what is causing the wait. They say its due to high demand. They say if you want to know more specifics about the queue, reach out to the clinic where the physician is housed.

Of course, the clinic usually won't tell you anything either. I know, because I have tried to find out.

Indulge me in a rant about the point of "high demand". Let's start with some numbers.

Let's assume that roughly 1 percent of the population in the Portland metropolitan area is trans. That's roughly 33,000 people. Let's be generous and say that 1/3 (11,000) is not interested in taking any steps toward medical transition. So, that would be a potential patient pool of 22,000 people.

According to the Oregon Health Authority, roughly 20,000 Oregonians are newly diagnosed with an invasive cancer each year.

At OHSU, there is an organization called Knight Cancer Institute, named for Phil Knight (the founder of Nike). The Knight Cancer Institute is a single building and org with radiologists, surgeons, oncologists, researchers and admin staff all focused on the same mission of treating and curing cancer.

Given the size of just the local trans population, why does the THP not have its own building, its own providers, and a large admin team to give transgender people the care they deserve?

Well, for one thing, the Cancer Institute had an initial over $600 million infusion from Phil Knight. But, this funding was conditional on OHSU matching it. So, the point is clear: transgender healthcare is not taken seriously by OHSU like the treatment of cancer is, even though lives depend on both.

If a person who needed a colectomy were asked to wait four years for the procedure, it would be an outrage. It would be medical malpractice. The person would die before they get the surgery. I view the wait times for gender affirming surgeries with the same seriousness. Its malpractice.

And also: high demand? High demand from whom exactly? From trans people who are maybe 1-2% of the population? Or from rich cisgender people who are willing and able to pay out of pocket for cosmetic procedures from the same physicians?

Clearly the THP is failing to advocate for trans patients to receive the services they need in a timely manner. They are also failing to connect patients to services. The THP has an intake form on their website for new trans patients that asks for a great deal of sensitive information.

One would expect that this would lead to a phone call, or even an email conversation. But instead, new patients get emailed a pdf list of resources and are told to talk to their provider. THP staff has said in personal conversations that this is due to lack of appropriate staffing to screen intakes.

So, if the THP can't connect trans people with resources directly, and can't influence access to services, what exactly does it do?

It pays lip service. It is a way for OHSU to claim they center gender-diverse patients without providing them the care they deserve. The efforts of a caring and hardworking administrative staff for the THP go to waste.

The THP should be its own Knight Cancer Institute. It should have its own payroll and providers. It should be able to make its own income. It can't do that now because most trans patient dollars go to the clinics where their providers are housed.

It should be run by a trans person, a queer person, or at the very least a cis person with real-world experience in treating trans people. The current director is none of these. There is no indication that he has the slightest idea what the trans community needs.

The THP in its current form likes to think of itself as an ally to the trans community. It touts itself as one of the most robust transgender healthcare programs in the US. If that is true, I wonder: how low is the bar? In many places in the US, trans healthcare doesn't exist. Should we be thankful? Should we accept the unacceptable as better than nothing?

I don't. I won't. In its current form, the THP is is complicit in harm done to trans people. For years we wait and wait. Some die waiting. I for one am tired of being polite and not saying anything while standing in line.

[fischyplier]

You like Brendon urie? /genq

Hi thanks for the question! I just want to preface this by saying I know the controversy as of late surrounding him. But I'd like to explain somethings first. If I truly believed he was a deplorable person I would not be listening to his music. And sadly I see a lot of rumours mixed in with actual things he's done. So without context most people would assume the worst. I stopped listening to his music for 2 years until I read some posts that cleared up a lot of confusion for me. The blog that explains every detail of this complicated situation is brendonuriegotcancelled. The allegations have been debunked along time ago. But I will not make excuses for his past racist behaviour. I believe that since 10 years ago he has bettered himself in that regard. I am not trying to change anyone's mind on who he is. I don't know him personally. But I believed he has changed and it is 100% genuine. If we can't give chances to those trying to learn and do better, we are not treating them with dignity or as a human. I am black so when he lip synced the n word in a song it honestly hurt. I saw a new clip where he was rapping a song and didn't say it so he learned. At least there is no malicious intent, he didn't say it angerly to a black person. I want to specify, I don't think it's ever appropriate for a non-black person to say the n-word. For example, Tyler Joseph was asked by black fans to speak on his platform about BLM since other artists do. Even Brendon wrote a long statement on his instagram that was very sincere. Just a heads up, he scrubbed his instagram because of the hate he received, and most likely death threats. So Joseph ignored his fans, posted a photo mocking the movement and I stopped listening to his music. Because I can't just all of a sudden not pay attention to BLM. Like Joseph, a white cis man with with privilege can. Brendon created the Highest Hopes Foundation that aids people of colour, the LGBTQ+ community and human rights a few years ago. By the way, before he was accused of disgusting allegations. I am explaining this because I have been harassed for listening to his music. I am asking for peace and understanding. Otherwise respectfully to anyone reading this and still wants to send me nasty messages, unfollow and block me right now. I have been incredibly stressed out because I can't enjoy something that brings me so much joy.

[bonestructureandcontempt]

40+ hours into Cyberpunk 2077, I've been thinking a lot on the "is this game transphobic?" discourse. I enjoy the game a lot. It's the perfect game for me in a lot of ways. And I would say it has possibly one of the best examples of a transwoman in a AAA videogame ever. But unfortunately, it has some jarring limitations on player agency and roleplay opportunities. Limitations that are directly tied to your player character's gender. Limitations that I think shouldn't be there and wouldn't be there if the developers put a little more thought into character creation.

I realize I am a couple years late to the party with this take but man, tying your character's pronouns to what their voice sounds like is a really dumb idea. Especially when we live in a world where the Saints Row games exist and found a way to sidestep this issue. Why CDPR couldn't just copy them is beyond me.

I'm a cis man, so take my opinions with a grain of salt (or don't listen to them at all), but I feel like there's three ways to alleviate this issue:

Write and record in-game dialogue to include every combination of pronouns. Voice tone, body parts, and pronouns are all their own slider that don't affect each other. Possibly more labor intensive, but guarantees more freedom in character creation to players.

Pull an Animal Crossing. Don't even bother having NPCs acknowledge the player character's geneder. Every player character is they/them. Not a perfect solution, may prove alienating to some.

Have I mentioned just straight up copying how Saints Rows does character creation? It's pretty great. Voice, clothing, and appearance isn't locked to gender in ANY WAY. Doesn't allow for pronouns other than he/him or she/her, but still pretty inclusive.

Still, despite the botched character creation, I can't write Cyberpunk off completely because Claire Russell exists. Think back to Krem Aclassi in Dragon Age: Inquisition. Many would say that he is good trans representation. Many would also say it is slightly undercut by the fact that you, the player, find out he is a trans man by asking an insensitive question about his transition. Krem is voiced by Jennifer Hale, a cis woman.

And then in Cyberpunk there's Claire Russell. You can find out she's a trans woman in two ways. The first is you can read her bio in the pause menu. The second is she will mention her transition while explaining her backstory about wanting to avenge her husband who tragically died in a street racing accident. This is shared of her own volition with no opportunity for the player to treat her any differently because she is trans whatsoever. You may only choose whether or not you wish to complete her questline. Claire is voiced by Maddie Taylor, a trans woman.

I love Claire, she's a great character. It would be disingenuous of me to say that the developers didn't put care into creating and writing her. It is nice to imagine that even in a future as dystopic as 2077's, gender affirming care happens and isn't questioned or commented on. But then again, as Stacey Henley pointed out, Claire stands out because she is the only known trans person in Night City period. The rest of the city exists squarely on the gender binary and assumes you do as well no matter how you make your character.

This isn't me "canceling" Cyberpunk or telling you not to play it if you're interested in it. As stated before, I love playing the game. This is what we call "good faith criticism." I think games like this can and should be improved upon to better represent the real world and the real people who play it.

I'd be lying if I said all this didn't spring to mind in the wake of another action RPG coming out this year set in the universe created by perhaps the most well-known transphobe in the world today.

[rittz]

thoughts about being trans, idk where else to put them so here u go

it’s not like i don’t have trans guy friends to talk to about this, it’s just usually in the form of jokes or passing comments rather than an actually serious conversation. also, the transmasc people that i’m closest to identify more with the label “nonbinary” than i do-- it’s not like they couldn’t understand or relate to things i’m saying, but i’m just assuming that they probably don’t feel the exact same way i do

anyway, as a trans person we get often asked “so why do you feel like a [gender]?”, and the answer is usually some variation of “i just feel like it”. this is the most accurate but also vaguest possible answer, so i kinda wanted to break down my personal answer to that question?

basically, i identify as a man because i identify with men. in a general and also personal sense. gender stereotypes are something that trans people by necessity both embrace and reject. i relate to gender stereotypes about men more than those of women-- i’m less outwardly emotional, i like being handy, i don’t like kids, i have questionable personal hygiene, etc-- but obviously these things alone don’t make someone a man. however... you can’t deny that there is some general truth about behavioral differences between men and women (bc of society, not biology). men and women both experience different problems in the world, and each have trouble understanding the experiences and problems of the other. generally, i can relate to the experiences and problems of men more than those of women, even if it seems like i shouldn’t (for example, i am not afraid of walking alone at night, even though i am very tiny).

i, from a young age, have had a constant yearning for more male friends. i would occasionally choose to play video games as a male character. i was upset that i couldn’t be in boy scouts. i have been jealous of my younger brothers being treated by my parents the ways i wished i was treated. when i imagined myself older, i pictured myself less like my mom and more like my dad. when i’m around men, i want them to treat me like one of them. i want to be seen as a man.

and i think that’s what being trans really boils down to. wanting to be seen as someone other than how everyone sees you. wanting what you see on the outside to match how you feel on the inside. this obviously extends to nonbinary individuals, who face their own struggle when it comes to presentation. but at the end of the day, i think that presentation is equally important to gender identity as internal feelings. i mean, i think we’re all familiar with the research proving that transitioning makes trans people happier. surgery is an invasive, expensive, painful process that i DON’T think is necessary for every trans person, and HRT isn’t always easy to get. but changing a name, getting a new haircut, dressing differently, binding, etc. counts as transitioning. you don’t have to hate your body to be trans, but wanting to alter it in order to better connect your internal identity with your presentation, i think is necessary in order to consider yourself to be trans. 

i will admit i am confused by “GNC trans men” i see on tumblr and insta, who use he/him pronouns but exclusively present femininely. i’m not talking about trans guys who don’t yet pass, i mean trans guys who don’t want to. i don’t harbor any ill will, i’m just confused. if i understand being trans to mean “wanting what you see on the outside to match how you feel on the inside”, you can see how. doesn’t that make you feel dysphoric? don’t you want people who see you to read you as male? how is your life different from when you didn’t identify as male but presented the same way? this isn’t me trying to gatekeep on who’s “trans enough”, and especially when it comes to nonbinary identities it’s arbitrary to harp on presentation like this. but like, what’s going on here?

taking a turn here that will come back around, an extremely key component to why i identify as and with men is my sexuality. i have always idolized, envied, and evoked various queer icons from media and real life. the hunky, grunting, macho, hetero version of “man” never appealed to me the way that the fashionable, artsy, flirty, homo version of “man” did. drag queens, my mom’s hairdresser, glam rock stars, i could go on. associating my more feminine qualities with GAY stereotypes instead of FEMALE stereotypes suddenly made more sense, and made me feel less dysphoric. it’s also something that took me a long time to realize, because i had surrounded myself with queers who were mostly attracted to women. transmascs and butch lesbians historically have a lot in common, but personally, i didn’t relate as much to lesbians as i did to drag queens. in dating and loving men, i developed my understanding of them. but my attraction to men was why it had taken me so long to realize i felt more like a man-- i thought i was just some weird straight girl.

now, am i calling these “GNC gay trans men” with long pink hair and poofy skirts and conventionally attractive bisexual boyfriends “weird straight girls”? ...well, not to their faces. but i have to admit that i’m thinking it. these people would never go to a predominantly-male gay bar, these people would never be harassed on the street. i’m not saying i know someone’s identity better than they do, but i don’t agree with the liberal utopian ideal of “let everyone do whatever they want as long as they aren’t hurting anyone” when taken to mean that we can’t question other people’s choices. “why do you feel like a man?” is a question that, coming from another trans person, isn’t inherently transphobic. it’s not “forcing” someone to “prove” their “transness”, no one “owes” me an explanation of their identity. i’m just confused. i don’t disapprove of the way these people live their lives, i just want to know why.

a straight girl being feminine is different from a gay man being feminine, because it has less to do with personality and more to do with society’s historic view of gay men as closer to female than male because of the loving and fucking men aspect. an AMAB gay man wearing makeup and a crop top probably just wants to look good, but he is also signaling to other men that he’s gay via gender non-conformance. by being AFAB and female-passing, wearing makeup and a crop top is not GNC. in fact it’s pretty GC, and gay men will not recognize you as a gay man.

it’s easy to say “gender is fake so do whatever you want”, but like, we have to acknowledge reality. time is a social construct too, but we still use days of the week when talking to each other. strangers will treat you differently depending on what gender they interpret you as. different people will be willing to date you or not. you have to choose which public bathroom to go in. if being misgendered doesn’t bother these people, then who cares? but if it DOES, which it usually does, wouldn’t you want to take steps to prevent being misgendered in the future? if your desire to present femininely is stronger then your desire to be seen as male, then like... why call yourself a male at all? ultimately nothing these people do will really affect me in any way. it just makes me wonder if these people will eventually go on to present as male, or if they will later ID as nonbinary or even cis. i encourage people trying out different labels and exploring their identity, so it’s not like i think these people SHOULDN’T identify as trans guys. it’s more like, i wish they were able to articulate WHY they identify as trans more than “because i said so”. not wanting to be a woman doesn’t automatically make you a man, it just makes you not a woman.

maybe i’m particularly cynical because of the MULTIPLE times that people with larger online followings who identify and present this way have later turned out to be lying, manipulative people. hopefully it goes without saying that i do NOT think that everyone who identifies and presents this way is a toxic liar. the reason i bring it up is because some people genuinely can’t understand the possibility or purpose of misleadingly claiming a marginalized identity, but it can and does happen. an analogy could be made here about white people claiming indigenous heritage. we all WANT to believe what people say about themselves, and asking for “proof” is a social no-no. but we shouldn’t just... automatically trust everything someone says about themselves, right? and as bad as i WANT to live in a world where gender doesn’t matter and everyone default uses neutral pronouns and there are no divisions in clothing stores and bathrooms, we don’t live in that world (yet). when you are AFAB, /extremely/ femininely presenting, and have little to no plans of transitioning, saying “i am a man” will not make other people see you as one. and if you don’t want to be seen as a man, then maybe you aren’t one.

[olderthannetfic]

I just realized it’s Fandom First Friday and the topic is meta!

For months, I’ve been slowly working my way through How To Be Gay by David Halperin, which talks about drag queens and how certain aspects of gay male culture appropriate from women to empower gay men. (Halperin uses the word ‘appropriate’ extensively, not necessarily in a negative context.) He brought up some points I thought were highly relevant for thinking about slash.

Last February, I went to Escapade and chatted with a bunch of acafans. To my total lack of surprise, they too love Halperin’s book and had the same reaction I did. I thought when I finish the book, I’ll write up some meta. But I got busy, and it’s a long, dense book. So then in August, I went to the final Vividcon. There, I ran into Francesca Coppa and mentioned this idea. Her response? “Oh, I just wrote a journal article about that.”

…

AHAHAHAHA! Oh god, we are the same person.

(NB: We are not actually the same person.We just have similar first names, similar fandoms, and similar flists back on LJ, have done similar fandom history oral history projects, go to the same cons, and have both been on the OTW board. Laura Hale once went so far as to “out” me as her. And now we like the same academic books too. Heh.)

So, obviously, now I have to write meta about this, and Fandom First Friday is the perfect time to take a stab at it. I have so much more to say and I want to go back through How to be Gay and pull out many more amazing quotes, but better to write something than wait for perfection.

What I found the most interesting about Halperin’s analysis was that he points out that women may find these funhouse mirror versions of femaleness upsetting, and those feelings are completely understandable and valid, but they don’t make drag any less empowering or significant for gay men. He neither thinks that we need to get rid of drag nor that women should stop having those reactions.

He also talks about how subtext is often more appealing than text: when he first started teaching his college course ‘How to be Gay’, on which the book is based, he assumed that students would connect more with literal representation of their identities. That’s the narrative we push: now that we have literal X on TV or in a Broadway show, we don’t need subtextual old Y anymore! Instead, many of his students loved things like The Golden Girls and failed to connect with current gay representation.

It’s a long book, but what many of his ideas boil down to is that a Broadway show that is massively subtextually queer allows the viewer to identify with any of the characters or with all of them simultaneously or with the situation in general. It’s highly fluid. Gay representation often means a couple of specific gay characters with a rigid identity. Emotionally, that can be harder to connect to.

Sometimes, allegory gets closer to one’s own internal experiences than literal depiction does.

Coppa’s article (book chapter?) is about exactly that. It’s titled: Slash/Drag: Appropriation and Visibility in the Age of Hamilton. She uses Halperin’s book but extends the idea further. I particularly liked her example of how female fans use Bucky to tell stories that are essentially (and often literally) about rape. His story is about a loss of bodily autonomy and about having one’s boundaries violated in a way that is familiar to female fans, but he’s a male action hero, so those stories don’t have the same visceral ick factor as writing about literal rape of literal women.

Partly, that’s due to how society treats men vs. women, but it’s also about which fans are writing these stories and which fans are the target audience of them. Just as a cis gay man appropriating Joan Crawford to talk about his experience of gayness isn’t really for or about women, most slash fanfic about Bucky being victimized isn’t really for or about cis gay men.

It was on the dancefloor at Vividcon that I realized that, as a woman, I have this unconscious feeling like I am appropriating gay men’s culture when I’m into Joan Crawford and other over-the-top female performers. It’s ridiculous! How can I be appropriating a female celebrity from gay men? But it’s an experience I share with lots of other women. Telling women we have no right to things is the bedrock of our culture.

That feature film Slash, which featured a bunch of cis male slash writers was inspired partly by the male director going on Reddit and finding a bunch of gay guys saying that slash squicks them. He felt that he was being progressive by erasing women.

On Tumblr, the fujocourse gets reblogged not just by toxic pits of misogynist, delusional bullshit like thewoesofyaoi, but also by seemingly reasonable fans. Hell, I’m pretty sure I used to suffer from this problem myself: I remember a time when I felt like I, as a bisexual woman, liked slash better, differently, and more correctly than straight women did.

I no longer feel this way.

There are lots of reasons for caring about slash, some of which are just about the pretty, some of which are more about gender, and some of which are more about sexual orientation, but after seeing decades of arguments about who is allowed to like slash, I have come to the conclusion that none of them are valid. All of them are “Not like the other girls!” and hating on femaleness. Some of the fans who do this are female and some are not, but it all boils down to not feeling like women have a right to a voice.

And then there’s Halperin calmly asserting gay men’s right to self-expression!

It struck me like a bolt of lightning because it was so self-assured. He never doubts that there’s something valid and important about giving gay men space to explore their own emotional landscapes. Literal representation is important, sure, but so is the ability to make art that speaks to your insides, not just your outside, and that sometimes means allegorical, subtextual art played out in bodies unlike your own.

“Fetishization” a la Tumblr often means writing stories with explicit sex or liking ships because they’re hot. Sometimes, it means writing kinks that are seen as dark or unusual. Frankly, this sort of fujocourse boils down to thinking that sex and desire are dirty and that m/m sex is the dirtiest of all. I do write some ~dark~ kinks in my fic because, for one thing, I’m a kinky person in real life, and for another, I often use fic to explore the experience of having dark thoughts and wondering what that says about me.

A lot of slash writers are exploring feelings of victimization. Another big chunk of us explore things like rape fantasies from the bottom: maybe we have and maybe we haven’t experienced assault in real life, but for all of us, having that kind of rape fantasy brings up questions of whether we’re asking for it, whether it’s okay to be into that kind of thing, whether it means something. Another chunk of us are exploring a different kind of “bad” thoughts: feelings of aggression, violence, dominance. In my own work, I’m interested in sadists and how they come to terms with their desires, but I think slash is also often a way to explore any sort of violent, dark feeling, not just rape fantasies from the top. Society tells us women aren’t allowed to have dark thoughts–hell, that we’re not capable of impulses that dark. Sometimes, it’s easier to write even a relatively banal action story about a male action hero because he, in canon, is allowed to have the feelings and impulses that interest the writer.

The fujocourse is all about saying that women aren’t allowed to have dark impulses ever. That we’re not allowed to be horny. That we’re not allowed to enjoy art for the sake of an orgasm. When we depict people not precisely like ourselves, we’re overstepping. When we make art for our own pleasure instead of devoting our lives to service, we are toxic and bad. Any time. Every time.

It’s just another round of saying that women’s pleasure is not valid and women’s personal space should not be respected. No hobbies for you: only motherhood.

And yet that’s not actually what most slash fans think. I was heartened to read Lucy Neville’s Girls Who Like Boys Who Like Boys: Women and Gay Male Pornography and Erotica. A friend read it recently and was trying to guess which quotes were from me. I have to admit, I was playing that game too! I honestly couldn’t tell, until I looked at demographic info, that some could not have been mine. They sounded so familiar. On Tumblr, I tend to wade into meta discussions, so I see a lot of loud, divisive views. I especially see a lot of views that, over time, make me start to wonder if I’m a crazy outlier. Intellectually, I know that this is all down to bad curation of my dash and a love of browsing the meta tags. I didn’t realize how much it had crept up on me unconsciously–how much I had started to feel like I had to justify and explain the most basic and common experiences of being a slash fan.

What was interesting about Neville’s book is how alike many of the women sounded. Now, no one book represents everybody, and she makes no claims to have figured out the exact size or demographic breakdown of fandom. Her focus is on women who like m/m material, whether slash or porno movies or anything else. At the same time, though, she surveyed heaps of women, and the responses were amazingly similar. Nearly every quote in that book strikes a chord with me. Nearly all of them, with a few minor variations, could be something I’ve written. Gay, straight, bi, asexual: we all had many of the same things to say about slash and what it means to us.

So, some brief, and more digestible thoughts:

Slash is “overrepresented” in meta and scholarly literature because people still ask us to justify ourselves constantly.

People ask us to justify ourselves because they assume that “good representation” is literal representation.

There are key emotional, psychological aspects of our experiences that are often better expressed allegorically, whether we’re gay men doing drag or women writing slash or any other sort of artist.

Here are some choice quotes from Coppa. (I will restrain myself and not just try to quote the entire thing. Heh.)

“There are endless transmedia adaptations of characters like Sherlock Holmes or Batman, so it is clearly not appropriation that’s the issue: it is the appropriation by the other—by women, in this case.

One could argue then that it is our awareness of this appropriative doubleness—of the familiar characters acting in an unfamiliar script, of the female storyteller animating the male characters— that boots slash out of “literature,” with its illusions of psychological coherence (see Edwards’s Chapter 3 in this volume), and puts it instead into the category of performance, itself so often associated with the fake, the female, the forged, the queer. My argument in this chapter is that it might be useful to compare slash to other forms of appropriative performance; drag comes powerfully to mind and, more recently, the musical Hamilton. These are forms where it’s important to see the bothness, the overlaid and blurred realities: male body/Liza Minnelli; person of color/George Washington.”

“In his book How to Be Gay, David Halperin (2012) discusses the ongoing centrality of certain female characters to the gay male cultural experience and takes as his project an explanation of why gay men choose those particular avatars and what they make of them. Halperin argues that gay men use these female characters to articulate a gay male subjectivity which precedes and may in important ways be separate from a gay male sexual identity (or to put it another way, a boy may love show tunes before he loves men, or without ever loving men). The gay male appropriation of and perfor- mance of femininity effectively mirror—in the sense both of “reflect” and “reverse”—slash fiction’s preoccupations with and appropriations of certain (often hyper‐performatively) male characters in service of a female sensibility; in both cases, appropriation becomes a way of saying something that could not otherwise easily be said.”

“A character like Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne speaks, obviously, to boys who are getting mixed messages about what successful manhood looks like in the twenty‐first century—it was hard enough in the old days to be Charles Atlas, but today you have to be Charles Atlas and Steve Jobs at the same time, which is a problem of time commitment just for a start. But these characters speak to women, too: differently. The doubled nature of the paired male characters taken up by slash fandom—these aliens, these costumed heroes, these men wearing man suits, men in male drag—make them appealing sites of identification for women, or proxy identities, to use Halperin’s (2012) term; that is, they provide “a metaphor, an image, a role” (185). They are sites of complex feeling.

But what these characters are metaphors for, what they make us feel, is not simple, singular, or easily reducible. Halperin takes hundreds of pages even to begin to excavate the complicated web of meanings around Joan Crawford; I am not going to be able to unpack any of these iconic male characters in a few paragraphs, and it is also the nature of fandom to build multiple and contradictory meanings around fan favorites (and to get into heated arguments over them).”

[In Halperin’s class] “Works that allowed gay men to be invisible were preferred to those where they were explicitly represented. “Non‐gay cultural forms offer gay men a way of escaping from their particular, personal queerness into total, global queerness,” Halperin (2012) writes. “In the place of an identity, they promise a world” (112). I would argue that slash offers something similar—that queer female space, as well as the ability to escape the outline of the identity that you are forced to carry every day—and that for gay men and slash fans both, the suggestion that you would restrict your identification to those characters with whom you share an identity feels limiting.”

“Visibility is a trap,” Phelan (2003) concludes, referencing Lacan (1978) (93): “it summons surveillance and the law, it provokes voyeurism, fetishism, the colonialist/imperial appetite for possession”—and fans on the ground know this and talk about it in very nearly this language. Again, this is not to say that fans—or gay men, for that matter—do not want or deserve good representations: female fandom, slash fandom included, championed Mad Max: Fury Road, Marvel’s Jessica Jones, and the new, gender‐swapped Ghostbusters, all of which have multiple and complex female characters. Rather, I am arguing that representation does not substitute for the pleasure or power of invisibility; for, as even the most famously visible actors say, “But what I really want is to direct.”

[hollywayblog]

How “The Umbrella Academy” Surprised Me

In many ways, good and bad.

This is a spoiler-free review of season one of The Umbrella Academy

I remember when The Umbrella Academy comics came out. It was 2007 and I was a broke thirteen-year-old living in suburban Australia (a cultural wasteland!) so I never actually read them, but as a rabidly obsessed My Chemical Romance/Gerard Way fan, I managed to fold The Umbrella Academy into my identity anyway. I’m not sure exactly how that works, but hey. Adolescents are powerful creatures.

As a distinguished almost-twenty-five-year-old (I’d like to acknowledge that I took a small break here to have an existential crisis) my walls are free of band posters and my eyes are no longer encircled with that thick black eyeliner that always managed to look three days old and slept in, but I still got kind of a thrill when I learned that The Umbrella Academy was being adapted into a Netflix show. It was something I had always assumed I would end up reading, back in the depths of my emo phase (which is probably more accurately defined as a My Chemical Romance phase) but then just kind of forgot about. So, great, I’m simultaneously being reminded that this thing exists, and freed of the nostalgic obligation to go seek out the comic and read it. As much as I love reading, comics have just never been my thing.

Then the trailer came out. Honestly, it kind of killed my enthusiasm. It just looked kind of generic. Apocalypse. Superpowers. Bold characters. Lots of action. My takeaway was a big ol’ “Meh.” Frankly, without my pre-existing attachment to Gerard Way and the very idea of The Umbrella Academy, I highly doubt I would have given it a chance - not because it looked inherently bad, but just because I’m a hard sell on the kind of show it appeared to be.

But it’s Gerard Way, man. I had to watch at least one episode.

The Umbrella Academy centres around the famous-yet-mysterious Hargreeves family. The seven children - six of whom have special powers - were adopted by Reginald Hargreeves, a cold and severe patriarch who didn’t even deign to name them. He made them into “The Umbrella Adademy,” a crime-fighting squad of tiny children who would later dissolve after a tragic incident. Now they’re grown up, and Dad’s dead. His spare and tense memorial is what brings the adult Umbrella Academy back together, and this is where the show kicks off.

We’re treated to a rather clumsy beginning; a gripping opening scene followed by an unimaginative montage. We get a glimpse of each of the Hargreeves’ regular lives, leading up to and including them learning of their father’s death. It’s a heavy-handed introductory roll-call, complete with on-screen name cards. It’s a baffling waste of time, considering we don’t learn anything in this montage that isn’t later reiterated through dialogue or behaviour. We don’t need to see Klaus leaving rehab to know he’s an addict. We don’t need to see Allison on the red carpet to know she’s a movie star. It dragged, even on a first watch not knowing that the whole thing would be ultimately pointless, and I’m surprised no one thought to cut it and let us go in cold with everyone arriving at the mansion for the memorial - an opening that would have both set the tone and let us get to know the characters much more naturally. Maybe it feels like I’m focusing too much on this, and that’s only because it gave me a bad first impression - and I want anyone who reacts the same way I did to stick with it. It really does get better.

The further we got from the montage the less gimmicky it felt, and I started to sense some sort of something that I liked about this show. Stylistically it was interesting, and there seemed to be an underlying depth; room for these characters to be more than brooding ex-vigilantes with daddy issues. I was intrigued enough by the end of episode one to keep watching, and was gratified as the series went on and truly delved into those depths. There was a memorable turning point for me around episode five, where Klaus (the wonderful Robert Sheehan) was given space in the runtime to visibly, viscerally feel the effects of something he had just been through. It sounds so obvious, and so simple, but it’s something that is frustratingly glossed over so often in fiction. You know. Fallout. Feelings.

It wasn’t just that moment, though. Prior episodes laid the groundwork, developing not just Klaus but all the Hargreeves. Each character feels real and grounded, each of them uniquely good, uniquely bad, uniquely damaged by their upbringing. It’s this last point I particularly appreciate, this subtle realism in the show’s execution of abused characters. We see how siblings growing up with the same parents does not necessarily mean they got the same childhood, endured the same abuse, or that their trauma will manifest in the same ways. And certainly, it’s important to see the different coping mechanisms each of them have developed. Furthermore, there is a lot more to each of these characters than just their trauma. There are seven distinct personalities going on, and I have to applaud the writers for this commitment to character. It was largely this that kept me hooked (I’m such a sucker for good characters), and to my own surprise very invested in the way things unfolded.

I love the tone, which found a cool rhythm after the pilot. The pacing was decent and the character development balanced well against the plot. I like the little quirks that remind you of the show’s comic book roots, like Pogo, the talking ape and Five, the grouchy old man in a teenager’s body.

Weirdly, I like the apocalypse stuff, which they managed to put their own spin on despite it being such a played-out trope at this point. I like that the show found small ways to go in unexpected directions, even if the overarching plot and big twists weren’t all that surprising. And most of all I love that in a world saturated with forgettable media, I woke up today still thinking about this show.

Even if not all of my thoughts were so generous.

See, for everything I love about this show, there are also quite a few things that rubbed me up the wrong way. I can’t list them all without going into spoilers, but I think it needs to be said that there are like, a fair few problematic elements in this show. I couldn’t help but notice that while women and people of colour are the minority in this cast, they also seem to cop the worst abuse. Only two of the Hargreeves siblings are female. One of them has no powers and the other’s power is influence (a non-physical power). Their “Mom” is literally a robot created for the sole purpose of caregiving; she dresses and acts like the epitome of a submissive 50s housewife. The Hargreeves sisters are also the ones most likely to be left out or ignored when it comes to making decisions, with one of them even literally losing her voice at one point (yikes!). Beyond that we have some truly disturbing imagery of violence being inflicted on women of colour almost exclusively by white men, and the fact that the only asian character is um… well, he’s literally dead. Before the show even starts.

Overall the problem is not just insufficient diversity, with white men taking up most of the screen time, dialogue and leadership actions, but the way that the few female and non-white characters are depicted.

These are all depictions that, in a vacuum, would be innocuous. I mean, just looking at the root of many of the show’s problems exemplifies that - the root being that all of these characters were white in the source material (uh, a problem in itself, obviously). It wasn’t a problem, for example, when Dead Ben was not the only Asian character but just another white Hargreeves sibling. And wouldn’t it be nice if we lived in a world where you could race or gender-swap any character and have everything mean - or not mean - the same thing. But life is more complicated than that. Art is more complicated than that.

Honestly, I’m not sure if we should give props to the developers of The Umbrella Academy for diversifying their cast when the fact is they did so - and I say this gently - ignorantly and lazily. Race-swapping willy-nilly and leaving it at that ignores a lot of complex issues surrounding the nuances of portraying minorities in fiction, and leaves room for these kinds of harmful and hurtful tropes to carelessly manifest. So many storytellers don’t want to hear it, but let me tell you writer to writer that it does matter if the person being choked is white or black, male or female, trans or cis. It does matter who’s doing the choking. Camera angles matter. Dialogue matters. It’s all a language that conveys a message - about power and dominance and vulnerability in the real world. Because art doesn’t exist inside a vacuum, as inconvenient as that might be. Having the empathy to recognise that will actually make us better storytellers.

In shedding light on these issues, I am not dragging this show. I am not condemning it. And although it is problematic in itself, I’m not even saying it’s problematic to enjoy it. I’m pulling apart the lasagne, looking at the layers, poking and prodding at the individual ingredients and saying, “Hey, the chef probably should have known better than to put pineapple in here. Maybe let’s not do that next time.” I’m also saying, “When I get a mouthful with pineapple in it, I don’t enjoy that. It’s jarring and unpleasant. But it doesn’t ruin the whole meal for me.”

I’m getting better at allowing myself to dislike something on the basis of its shitty themes. To not have to justify myself when something is problematic in a way that just makes it too uncomfortable for me to watch. That wasn’t the case here. I won’t lie; the bad stuff was no afterthought for me. That kind of thing really gets to me. It does ruin a lot for me. But in this case, the show redeemed itself in other ways; mostly by just being a compelling story with characters I liked. I’m trying not to justify that too hard either.

So I liked The Umbrella Academy, and I hope it gets a second season. I also hope that the creators will listen to people like me who want to be able to enjoy their show even more and create more consciously in the future.

And please let Vanya be a lesbian.

The Umbrella Academy is out now on Netflix

Watch this show if you like: witty characters, iconic characters, complex characters, mysteries,  dark themes, superpowers, vigilantes, comics, dark humour, epic stories, shows about families, stylistic TV shows, ensemble casts, character dynamics, dramedies

Possible triggers (don’t read if you care about spoilers): suicide, child abuse, claustrophobia, addiction, violence, violence against women, violence against women of colour, death, torture, incest, self-harm, pregnancy/childbirth, kidnapping/abduction, blood, mental illness, medication/themes of medication necessity, blood, manipulation/gaslighting, homicide, forced captivity, guns, hospitalisation, medical procedures, needles, PTSD, prison rape reference (1).

Please feel free to message me if I failed to include a relevant trigger warning and I’ll include it.

[wakraya]

Alright, let me put a few points of stuff I’ve seen on the tags to rest here.

1) Jades Are A Rare Caste.

They are implied to be less plentiful than other castes, yeah, I believe Seadwellers are also rare? But here’s the thing- We have six Jades. When someone says “There’s twice as many Jades as we have Rusts or Bronzes”, it sounds like, shit, yeah weren’t they supposed to be less abundant? Except. They’re still, in total, just Six. Alternia is a planet. Lore-wise, they may be a less plentiful Caste, but they’re not even... In the double digits. This is not even the population of a neighborhood, Xefros’ suburban area likely had more Trolls in total than there are Trolls in this Troll Call, and besides it’s likely all Jades are in the same place for some reason- Jadeblood School is the biggest headcanon right now, for example, so... Why wouldn’t you have a bunch of Jades there?

2) Jades Are All Female.

This is a straight-up misconception, yeah they’re mostly girls, but canon still leaves room for Jadeblood boys. So Male Jadeblood? Yeah, can happen, and there’s nothing going against the canon here.

3) Trolls Have No Concept Of Gender.

This one is honestly baffling to me because I haven’t heard about this until the discourse today. I am assuming this comes from the fact Troll Reproduction doesn’t care who provides the genetic material? Their reproduction is not tied to gender, which has made people assume Troll junk is the same for both guys and gals. Except... That’s about it. Even though it’s silly because they’re bugs and implied to be hermaphroditic, they still show sexual dimorphism. And even if they didn’t, they still have a concept of Gender, merely based on the fact there’s Troll Boys and Troll Girls? He/She divide? With Hiveswap expanding on it and showing us there are, indeed, NB Trolls that prefer They/Them. This Gender Divide is actually talked about by Porrim, who also implies that while Fuchsia-down Alternia seemed a Matriarchy, Purple-down it was actually a Patriarchy, informing us that not ONLY is there sexual dimorphism, but also, a cultural divide. By saying that Lanque can’t be Trans because Trolls have no concept of Gender, you’re either mistaking headcanons for actual canon... Or being transphobic by equating genitalia to gender. In which case, fuck off.

4) Trolls Don’t Care About Fashion.

This is something Karkat says, and I believe Kanaya also implies she cares about it more than it’s usual? But Fashion in Troll Culture, seems to be exactly like Mail. Karkat mentions there’s no Mail they do not get a Mailbox with a Flag, yet we see Xefros get mail! Except it’s not Mail. It’s parachuted delivery straight from a website. There’s no standarized Mail system on Alternia, but that doesn’t mean companies can’t deliver things themselves, directly to their Hives. Similarly, Trolls have no concept of Fashion- They don’t care about things such as trends, variety, being dressed properly. And... Hiveswap doesn’t break this. They have more colorful clothes, and some look pretty good! But. Look at Cirava. They’re an absolute fashion disaster. Diemen is just dressed like a hot dog. The Jades all seem to wear uniforms of some sort. Fozzer and Marsti, Skylla, they are more akin to work clothes. The Soleil Twins and Marvus are more flashy, because they’re likely part of a spectacle. Most of them are either a sort of uniform or outfit that’ll fit whatever they’re doing, or a basic color with their symbol somewhere. And you can go from Bright Pink Bathrobe Stelsa, to Pirate-Clad Remele, and back to Punk Denim Elwurd. Not being Fashionable can be about trends, they may simply dress however they want, because of their interests, or their jobs.

But let’s think about this another way. Let’s say that, yeah, they did retcon Troll Fashion- Would... Would you really be mad if they retconned Troll Fashion. Like... Would you be happier if every Troll shown was wearing a plain black shirt with their Symbol, and pants or a skirt, with slight variations of a jacket or a tank top. I don’t think there’s a single Hiveswap design I dislike, and they’re all visibly varied and easily recognizable, and tell a lot about the character, which is like. Character Design 101? So I honestly don’t know what the complaint here is exactly, except Canon Purity.

5) Hiveswap Ruined Fantroll Variety

How. First of all, the entire previous point. Just, expanding upon basic Troll Clothes, showing us the extent of how Trolls dress. But also like... What did they limit exactly? We’re going to learn more about Trolls and Troll Culture and Biology, of course headcanons are going to clash with canon, but so far, what have they limited? I’ve heard about Horns, but like... These horns have all been so varied, and sure there’s stuff like hooks with Ceruleans and Jades, and Four Horns with Golds but... This pattern is also broken, with Azdaja having three, for example. We’ve seen new Psionic colors, we’ve seen stuff like Horn Piercing, we’ve seen Troll Twins, we have seen horns where the orange part starts at different heights than you’d expect and even some of the parts jutting out having their own red-orange-yellow coloration separate of the main shaft of the horn. If anything, until now, there’s always been headcanons for Horns, like, “Oh this is their symbol so it’ll be like this”, or “this is their caste, so, they’ll have big horns”, but no, we have Purples with small horns, we have Bronzes with curly horns downwards, we have a cerulean with super uneven horns, we have a gold with three horns, we have a teal with flat horns, we have rounded horns, we have hotdog horns. I’ve heard people wonder about some Horn Shapes in the prior weeks, about how they didn’t match their restrictive headcanons, and NOW you tell me they’re restrictive? There’s also been complaints about caste roles and stereotypes, and I feel people really forget that Alternia is a Tyranny that forces the inhabitants in roles they are most likely not happy with, specially for the lower castes. Like... Rusts are disposable, and likely to be bound to a life of servitude. Because they’re the lowest of the low, society treats them as such, and there’s stereotypes like Indigos being strong, but that’s not any more restrictive than Psionics being a Gold-only thing, and much like we see Zebede not having Psionics or Elwurd and Mallek having normal eyes to every other cerulean’s messed-up ones... There’s exceptions to the rule everywhere. There have always been.

I’ve also seen complaints about no mutant bloods or things like Albinism and such? And like... The fact they didn’t include it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. We actually got Freckles with Zebede, so it already implies skin conditions are a thing, so Albinism could happen, if anything we have more PROOF that it may be a thing! Complaining about a lack of Limebloods and Violets, too, is just nitpicking, we know there will be Violets eventually, but either we haven’t been shown right now, or they’re just. In the sea. And we’re in the land. And Limes are likely to be a plot point, I’m expecting at least ONE Lime (Fiamet), if not more to show up at some point, and if there’s NO Limebloods I’m sure there will be at least talk OF Limebloods and their whole, you know, extermination, which is a canon thing that happened.

6) The Game’s Representation Is Bad Representation

Listen... Listen. I have friends ecstatic that there’s at LEAST three non-cis characters in Hiveswap (One trans boy, two NBs), without counting the possibility of other characters being Trans (Pretty much anyone could be), or NB (Like, I think about half of the characters don’t have pronouns on their bullet points?), not to mention, further acts with new characters. Hell, even Xefros or Dammek or Joey could be Trans. We. Literally know nothing about these characters, our information is so limited, and yet there’s already people cheering about it and super happy to see representation and I’ve seen one person in the tag encouraged to come out because Lanque is Trans. There’s also at least two Jewish Trolls, plus the possibility of Kanaya being Jewish as well, either her, Rose, or both. And yet, even though they have simply said this, in good faith, respectfully, and trying to add diversity to their roster, and even though we literally know NOTHING of how it’ll be handled yet, you... Bash them for it?

Like, okay. Lanque. The big topic today. He’s not particularly masculine, but as has surely been repeated over and over and over again, not all trans men are masculine, and not all trans people suffer dysphoria. And yeah, it’s true! It would be nice if there was a more masculine trans man! It would be great if there were trans girls! It would be great if there were more diversely coded NB characters! And there may be?? There’s going to be more characters, if not in this Act, in future Acts, and of the ones we’ve seen, many of them could still be NB or Trans. Like... Again. We’ve got three bullet points from each character. Like, I’m sorry you didn’t get a trans character that you could identify better with yet? But that doesn’t mean you have to bash the one we got? When there are people genuinely happy and encouraged about it? You’re not being progressive. You’re being an elitist asshole, if you only accept 100% perfect representation suited to your tastes, and everything else is garbage, or god help me, ‘fetishization’ or ‘disgusting’ (I have heard both on the Tags), like seriously. You’re being the oppressive one. You’re the one making representation harder than it should be.

Oh and if you’re on the OPPOSITE side of the spectrum and simply being Transphobic or saying how all of this is ‘pandering’ to the audience, really I have nothing to say, if you cannot have basic empathy for a group of people finding representation in a game which source material is extremely queer, and have to resort to bashing it down, screw you.

7) WhatPumpkin Are Doing A Bad Job

This is your subjective opinion, and I’d dare to say, a wrong opinion, but let’s not go there for now. WP has suffered a lot of hate for some reason? There have been lies and slander and bashing for absolutely no reason. People hate Cohen for some reason, and have demonized him, when so far what I’ve seen about him is that he’s a pretty chill dude. The writing of Hiveswap wasn’t like, a masterpiece? But it was fun and it got a good bunch of chuckles out of me and made me care for the characters, and even got me a bit scared and sad at some points during the game! It has that Homestuck Spark, and if you say ‘it’s not like Homestuck’, you’re... I’m sorry, you’re just an elitist, or simply don’t like the style anymore? But it carries a very similar charm.

I’ve heard complaints about Hussie not being involved in the project- Which is false, he did write the entire story FIRST THING, and is overseeing the whole project with the rest of the team. There’s also been criticism towards WP ‘failing’ at representation (Before actually seeing the representation apparently, again, we know NOTHING about the game and how it’ll handle stuff so far), and also accusing WP and Cohen specifically of adding representation because of Woke Points and like... WP are Queer as Heck? I don’t know all of them, I don’t even know how many people are working at WP. But they’re not all straight 100% for sure, and I believe they’re not all cis- And even if they ARE all cis, I also doubt a group working on such a Queer game would NOT hear out from Trans friends. What I’m trying to say, is that they haven’t shown at any point disrespect of ignorance regarding the diversity they want to tackle, they’re not doing things out of bad faith, and we haven’t seen how they handle it yet. Even if they didn’t handle it ideally! Does it need to be absolutely perfect, there can be missteps on the way there, god dammit if someone’s trying to better themselves but not quite getting it right you don’t insult them and tear them down! You show them what to do better next time or where they are mistaken, by pessimistically ignoring what they’re trying to do out of spite you’re discouraging good will and being an asshole! Which leads me to my last point for now.

8) They Could Have Told Us We Were Misgendering Lanque

This one is... Really, a bit ridiculous. Okay, let me explain. If someone is Trans and you misgender them accidentally, they’ll tell you quickly and you’ll, hopefully, correct yourself. Obviously. When the Trolls leaked, everyone latched onto Lanque as ‘Butch Lesbian’, and clung to that hope, and now that they were proven wrong, there was salt, at first, and THEN came the talk about Misgendering Lanque. And let me tell you, I think this is very selfish of everyone saying it.

What WP likely thought would happen is that they’d reveal Lanque to be a Trans boy, and people would be like “Oh! Nice, Trans Rep!”. Sure they could’ve told us back then but... Why? Lanque is not. A real person. He’s a fictional character, he’s not going to be offended because you thought he was a butch woman for a few months, in fact the SILHOUETTE alone ALREADY had people clinging to him as a butch woman. If he were a real person? Of course there’d be a quick correction. But he’s. A character. He’s just a god damn character. Who is Trans, out of good faith by a very Queer company, showing us a Trans man, who is a character, and expecting that, like NORMAL PEOPLE, we would not do something like THIS.

When you criticize WP for not telling us Lanque was a Trans Man, all I’m seeing is a shift of blame, not wanting to simply admit you were wrong and jumped to conclusions, and like- Even if there was Fanart or Fanfic of Lanque calling him a woman briefly, shipping him around mistakenly, who cares? You just. Go. “Okay, I’ll change it” or “Whoops haha this was from when we didn’t know he was a Trans boy!” Why the militant hatred? Why the absolute disgust shown today? I can’t understand, I simply cannot understand why your first reaction to “Trans boy Jadeblood” is “WELL I THOUGHT HE WAS A BUTCH LESBIAN!! I WASN’T WRONG BY ASSUMING THIS, WHATPUMPKIN WERE FOR TRYING TO MAKE THEIR GAME MORE DIVERSE”. It’s like... You just. Correct it? You just correct yourself? And yeah you can want more masculine Trans boys, that’s fair! But dismissing what we got, entirely, and insulting it, and getting like THIS, and blaming the team, it just seems.

Narcissistic. It seems narcissistic and extremely self-centered, and perfectionist to the extreme of not wanting anything other than a complete and absolute ideal, that may fit you but may also not fit others.

In conclusion?

People are happy about representation. This isn’t destroying diversity or representation, this is not reducing customization of Fantrolls, this is only building MORE on the already expansive system, and giving us representation and hope for MORE representation in the future, and if you cannot be happy for a genuine, good natured, and honestly, perfectly fine attempt, if you cannot feel empathy for the people who did feel for this representation, if you can only want to find reasons to bash something down and demonize something good and point out how BAD and NOT GOOD things are and how MUCH BETTER they could be, then honestly, you’re a deeply unpleasant person.

Give things time. Give people with good intentions chances. Learn to backpedal and learn from mistakes and simply correct yourself when you’re wrong instead of going down a hateful spiral. Learn to separate fiction and reality. Just like... Think, for a moment, when you’re writing something down- Is it a jaded opinion, or an objective fact? Will it hurt and discourage people who’re genuinely happy or trying to make others happy? Why do more harm than good when there are good intentions paving the way?

I just simply cannot understand the basic lack of critical thought and empathy of some people I have seen today, and hopefully with this I can make my opinion on the whole absurd Discourse that transpired today clear.

[preevelynn-blog]

ManyVids Interview

Tell us about your cult:

I am the High Priestess of the Cult of Yith. We are a cult that is dedicated to learning all there is about consensual sexual perversion and deviancy. We accept every kind of gender identity and expression and sexuality.  The main goal of our cult is to collectively have as many different kinds of sex and orgasms as possible for the sake of knowledge. We only condone fully consensual sexual interactions and fully condemn any kind of nonconsensual sexual act. The Yithians collect data on all the different kinds of sexual activities that our cult members are a part of and they add it to their grand libraries that hold knowledge from infinite places and times.

The Yithians are a species of highly evolved extraterrestrial (and sometimes terrestrial) beings who can  swap their consciousness with individual creatures through not only space, but also time. A Yithian living on prehistoric planet earth could potentially swap bodies with Genghis Khan, or Abraham Lincoln, or a random person living in the year 2045. They can swap their consciousness with creatures and beings from anywhere in the universe at any time. This is how I first came into contact with them. They must have taken control of my body in the past because I now exist in strange dreams that involve them. I understand that all they seek is knowledge and I’ve always seen knowledge as power, so I’ve created the Cult of Yith to use my own talents as a sexual deviant to help the Yithians gain knowledge about human sexuality. It’s very convoluted, I know. The bottom line is that if you join the Cult of Yith and you have interesting, fun, consensual, and unique sex eventually when the Yithians come back to Earth and claim their rightful place as rulers of the planet, we will be given the role of librarian in their grand libraries for our contributions. Plus your life will just be better with a religion that fully supports your odd kinks.

What role does music play in your life?

Music plays many different roles in my life. The biggest role music plays in my life is that of a way for me to communicate. Music is also a friend, an enemy, a religion, and many more things. I am almost always listening to music unless I am sleeping and I create music every single day. It has a near constant presence in my life. I create music for all the porn that I make. It may not be very good, but it’s something I made and that makes me proud. My favorite art has always been art that is provocative and socially conscious. I think in American society right now we need to be pushing for sex work to be more protected, socially and legally, and music is a great medium to do that. Music can be a wrapper for a message that makes a message an easier pill for humanity to swallow. I love to make music that focuses on and is influenced by sex work, intersectional feminism, and the rights of genderqueer people while theatrically wrapping it all up in a recognizable package, such as the imagery of a religion or cult. *hint hint nudge nudge* Music, and all art forms that I indulge in, are a way for me to unapologetically say what I want to say.

What do you see as the major issues facing the LGBTQ+ community in adult entertainment?

I think one of the most glaring issues faced by LGBTQ+ people in adult entertainment is the remaining stigma around trans and gay performers and the silence of many cis industry members about this topic. Performers and managers steer away from gay and trans people for a lot of different reasons and some of these reasons are direct reflections of a past that’s already been thoroughly gutted and exposed as idiotic and queerphobic. There are some very stark differences between how cis and trans performers in the adult entertainment industry are treated. For example, segregation between cis and trans women is alive and well on MyFreeCams to the extent that MyFreeCams doesn’t allow trans women to perform on their site even though they are supposedly a “women only” cam site. In their rules and wiki there is a lot of trans exclusionary language. On their wiki it says “Natural-born women” only and on their official site rules they say nothing about disallowing trans women, but they do say “No men.” So if a trans woman can get through the background check (Which I did because they don’t ask for a picture of your genitals) and gets banned from the site, what rule did she break? It’s pretty safe to assume she only broke the “No men” rule even though she isn’t a man. MyFreeCams won’t address the issue at all and when I got banned from their site my account was deleted, they took all the money I had earned during my show, and I never got a response as to “why” I was banned. Their silence protects them.

This is a really important issue because MyFreeCams is probably the biggest cam site in the world and they sponsor so many huge events and conventions related to sex work. So you’ll have safe spaces and events for MyFreeCams models that are essentially spaces and events for women, but trans women are excluded. MyFreeCams is a huge part of the industry and they should treat all women equally, we should demand better from the large companies that represent the different aspects of sex work. Just a reminder to all cis models on MyFreeCams, 40-50% of your hard earned money is going to supporting this behavior. I understand you might not have the privilege to leave, but that’s not stopping you from emailing MyFreeCams asking why trans women aren’t allowed, or from putting them on blast on social media. On other issues too, we should not be silent. When MyFreeCams is transphobic we need our cis allies to call them out and be loud because they don’t care about what trans people think. If you’re an ally and your manager is being homophobic don’t be silent, call them out. Homophobes and transphobes don’t care about queer people, they will mostly only listen to other cisgender straight people. Power structures are torn down from the top, not the bottom. Please help.

What are your favorite fetishes? Are there any you got into thanks to making content? Any you keep for your private life and don’t film?

I think my favorite fetish is blasphemy targeted at Roman Catholicism. I got into blasphemy from doing private shows for ministers and active church goers who wanted me to really dig into their religion and basically replace their God with myself. I was raised Roman Catholic and I find the King James version of the bible to be very problematic and anti-queer, so I revel in the opportunity to tackle something that often puts me down. Whenever I do one of these shows I often start by detailing to my submissive the passages in the bible that condemn me as a trans woman, specifically the ones in deuteronomy, and explaining how their God wanted me to be in league with the devil by creating me this way. Then I will go on and explain how Satan and I are converting God’s own angels and humans against him by helping them to see the light of sexual deviancy. Then we do all kinds of naughty things in MY name instead of God’s name.

I find it refreshing and empowering to fight against something much more powerful than myself that actively oppresses me and people like me. The Catholic church is one such force and I revel in the opportunity to not only voice my opinions about the Christian mythos, but also to get someone who is a part of it to realize how anti-trans their own book can be. It is beneficial and positive for both me and the submissive and every single submissive I’ve done a blasphemy show with has returned more times than I can remember for the same experience.

Who are your: musical heroes, adult entertainment heroes, and political heroes, and why?

I don’t really have many heroes. I think some of my biggest influences when it comes to music and porn are Marilyn Manson and Natalie Mars. Marilyn Manson’s provocative style just really makes my inner goth girl squeal, and I think Natalie Mars is just so gosh darned physically talented. I wish I could take the things in my butt she does.

What is the most heartwarming thing you’ve ever seen?

That scene at the end of the Witch where the girl talks to the goat.

What is the most annoying question that people ask you?

It’s not a question, but I hate when guys want to talk about how they are straight, but they would still fuck me. Like, yeah… duh… if you were gay you would probably want to fuck a man?

What is something that a ton of people are obsessed with but you just don’t get the point of?

Ariana Grande

What sexual fantasy would you like to make a reality through making an adult vid?

I would love to recreate the exorcism scene from the Exorcist, but instead of Regan and two male priests I’ll be possessed and two sexy female nuns will fuck the devil out of me.

Say something to your fans:

I appreciate you all and if you respect and support me I respect and support you. <3

Fast 10:

The Best Topping/Ice Cream Combination Is:

Spaghettieis from Germany

One piece of entertainment I wish I could erase from my mind so that I could experience it for the first time again is:

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

If I could have an orgy with anyone on Earth it would be the following people:

Marilyn Manson (1994 version), Katie Marovich from CollegeHumor, and Peter Steele (Also 1994 version).

If you wanted to talk dirty to me you should say:

Describe giving me oral sex and then cuddling me.

The sexiest outfit I own is:

A lace bodysuit that one of my biggest supporters of the name Ser_Koopa bought me!

This sex toy I love and this sex toy I dislike:

I love my fleshlight and I’m not a fan of plastic prostate massagers.

If I could time travel I’d visit this era:

1994 for the metal or some time in the future when I’m not living way below the poverty line and I’m comfortable.

The best way to start the day is:

Yoga!

One thing I wish I knew more about is:

Stocks and investments

The one major sex tip I have for people is:

Communicate. It’s always a good idea to ask someone if they are ok during a sexual experience.

[aroworlds]

Could you talk a bit about amatonormativity and how it related to you? I know the 101 (aka the definition), but I have trouble identifying it in real life, discussing how it permeates in fiction, etc. and this is kinda weird but I think an informed discussion about it would help? IDK feel free to ignore it if you don't have the spoons for it, but if you want to it would be a huge help!

Anon, I told you this was going to be long, but … well, it’s long!

The problem is that amatonormativity is a wall I keep hurling myself against, as an aro and as an aro creative, and there isn’t much conversational space where I am permitted to go all out in talking about it. I fear discussing this with too much vehemence, to go beyond the hand-holding 101 conversations about being aro, in case I alienate the alloromantic folks who do support me. Alloromantic people aren’t interested in conversations that undermine their sense of the world, and aro-spec spaces are small; both things together result in silence.

Because of this, I think it’s reasonable that this is something hard to grasp, for aro-spec and alloromantic folks alike: the educative conversations are hard to find or don’t exist. When you add to the fact that for the last two years a-spec people have been fighting targeted hate, that our conversations have fallen back to claws-out defence or the shield of validation, how the hell are we supposed to understand our own experiences, especially something as-yet-unquestioned as the practical impact of amatonormativity?

I hope you don’t mind, but because this is so long, I’m going to concentrate on amatonormativity in media and its impact on me as a creative.

In terms of fictional media, I think amatonormativity shows itself most obviously in the concept of a happy ending–that two people in a romantic relationship is by far the most common variant. No, not all stories end witha romantic happy ending, but so many do, even if it’s only a romantically-happy-for-now ending. Think Disney films; think action films shoving in an unnecessary romantic side-plot because the hero gets the girl once the explosions are over; think every story where the guy got the girl for reasons we the audience are expected to accept without question.

Likewise, a film with a tragic or unhappy ending is often shown by a protagonist not falling in romantic love or the dissolution of a romantic relationship. While there are other forms of indicating tragedy, the lack of a romantic paring for a character expected to be in one is common. There’s a reason Romeo and Juliet has long been framed as a tragic romance even though the tragedy, I’d argue, lies more in the impact of feuding families on the next generation, not the death of two young people in a “star-crossed” romance.

Even genres that aren’t romantic in the sense that romance isn’t the focus of the plot will still include sexual and romantic tension between characters: many of the crime and thriller novels I’ve read, supposedly less romantic because they target a cishet male audience, devote a great many pages to depicting romantic relationships nonetheless. The majority of YA novels depict the development of romantic relationships (which is why I kept reading middle-grade books even when I was too old for them) and even low-romance adult fiction still has the protagonists having had or desiring a romantic relationship at some point. So many literary works deal with the breakdown of romantic relationships, affairs, being single, unrequited love, or the way dangerous or alien environments, or the tyranny of distance, places stresses on romantic partnerships. These often won’t have purely happy endings–often tragic or complicated–because they’re Literary, but they’re just as obsessed with romantic love as any romance novel. In constantly going on about romance’s failure without ever making the point that someone can be happy and self-fulfilled without it, literary works are as amatonormative as anything else.

Romantic love and relationships don’t have to be successful: we just have to show a character desiring these or struggling with these, just so the audience knows that the protagonist is human. Characters who are shown as disdaining romance, or being uninterested in it, are usually antagonistic characters who are beyond redemption, are aliens or robots, or are coded as robotic–characters who are literally inhuman or portrayed as such. There’s a reason that The Big Bang Theory’s Sheldon Cooper becomes a kinder, more “normal”, less-autistic-coded man the more he falls in romantic love with Amy, despite being introduced as extremely aroace-coded, and it’s called amatonormativity.

This is the point in the post where we aro-specs are giving the world that long, pained stare, and for good reason.

Romantic love as a marker of human worth is the most succinct way I can describe the impact of amatonormativity. It’s not a flawless summary, but so often romance is treated as a universal concept, relevant to all, because Western society uses the possession of or desire for romantic love as an indicator of a person’s humanity. Romantic love makes us human, and so romantic love is everywhere, unquestioned and unassailable.

Elements of a more expanded sense of amatonormativity include:

- The idea that romantic attraction, love and relationships are universal to the human experience (predominantly a relationship encompassing, exclusively, one perisex heterosexual-and-heteromantic cis man and one perisex heterosexual-and-heteromanticcis woman).

- The idea that romantic love is the primary form of love and all other forms, once one gains a certain level of socially-acceptable maturity or adulthood, are naturally secondary.

- The idea that romantic love and relationships are relatable to and attainable by all, and any failure to relate to it or attain it is a personal or moral failing.

- The idea that people who do not experience, attain or desire a romantic partnership are, after a certain age, childish or childlike, immature, robotic, alien, inhuman.

- The idea that sex (especially non-heterosexual or non-vanilla sex) is only acceptable, for a person of high moral character, when it comes paired with romantic love. (Characters who have sex without romantic love are often coded as grasping, hateful, calculating, predatory.)

- The idea that the attainment of romantic love and relationships is a marker of character development, growth, adulthood or redemption.

- The idea that because romantic love and relationships are universal, to not depict them in media is to render one’s work childish or uninteresting. (Every aro-spec creator of narrative media knows the impact of this one.)

- The idea that the lack of romantic love or relationships, or the desire for these, is an indicator of a person of low moral character.

- The unquestioned idea that romance sells, accompanied with the assumption that the inclusion of romance in a work (or the story-arc of a protagonist) is a necessary part of making that work (or character) appealing to all audiences.

- No comprehension that romantic attraction can be felt and experienced in a diversity of ways and strengths, particularly with regards to fluctuation, intensity and circumstance.

- Very little comprehension of the difference between romantic attraction and romantic behaviours.

- An assumption that there is a certain set of behaviours that are only or best experienced with romantic attraction. (Engaging in these behaviours without romantic attraction is also often coded as predatory.)

Please note that all these discussions of romance are based on an alloromantic model: romance in and of itself is not inherently amatonormative. Aro-spec people’s experiences of romantic love and relationships do not fit the above because they do not and cannot assume that everyone fits this assumption of romantic attraction being a universal, unquestioned human. If your depiction of romance doesn’t assume that romance makes us a worthy human and everyone experiences it, it’s probably not amatonormative.

There’s heavy overlap with ableism, misogyny, heterosexism, whoremisia, etc, and this must be acknowledged. Amatonormativity hits hard on its own, but it seldom hits alone. More often it’s paired up with another form of oppression, which means people who better fit its norms can deny its existence by claiming the problem is due only to amatonormativity’s current partner.

Additionally, most mainstream amatonormative works are going to be about cishet romances (the romantic relationship between a cis heterosexual man and a cis heterosexual woman, presumed to be perisex and both alloromantic and allosexual). Women are far more subject to the need to be shown in romantic relationships than men; men are more often allowed to travel through the narrative without being subject to a romance, although most are shown as at least desiring it. Each experience of marginalisation is going to shape in different ways how amatonormativity impacts us, and this needs to be discussed (especially because if we don’t, antagonists deny the existence of amatonormativity altogether).

(I will say that amatonormativity and misogyny have a strange relationship in that excessive romance is treated as feminine and emotional, and denigrated because of it. We all know how literature is valued and respected over fanworks and genre romance. Cishet men, meanwhile, have a long history of treating the having of a romantic partner as a trap–phrases like “ball and chain” with regards to a wife, for example. Despite this, there’s still an unquestioned social expectation that men experience romance attraction and have, will have or want a romantic partner.)

I’ll use my experience as a trans aro to give an example of this kind of overlap.

Amatonormativity in LGBTQIA+ media is coloured by the fact that LGBTQIA+ folks have been denied romantically-happy-endings until recently; the rise of fandom and LGBTQIA+ genre media has done much to change this. Yet both are, predominantly, romance narratives, to the extent that there is little space for anything else. This history leaves me in an awkward position. The need for love stories featuring trans characters and trans bodies as worthy of romantic interest and desire is profound. In a world where romantic love is seen as the only kind of love worth talking about, powerful and primary, it’s natural many trans/NB stories are about just that.

I feel like I’m walking on thin ice if I talk about how depicting romance as the only acceptable trans happy ending defines my experience of gender by romantic experiences--and yet that is exactly what I feel. Furthermore, this is a narrative many alloromantic trans people need and deserve. In trying to tell stories about me, an aro trans person, who isn’t a target of romantic love, my stories are seen by alloromantic trans folks as mirroring the narratives that have long harmed trans people, treating us as unlovable. My work cannot provide the validation–that they are desired and loved romantically–alloromantic trans folks are looking for.

The amatonormativity isn’t in the existence of trans romance stories, but the fact there are fewer publishing options, and smaller audiences, for non-romantic/aromantic/gen stories about trans love and identity. The amatonormativity lies in the fact that romantic love for trans characters is the love on which trans genre media centres.

As a reader, I need stories that talk about different kinds of love, love for myself and my own body, a radical self-acceptance that isn’t tied to someone else’s romantic interest in me. Instead, I get stories telling me that I am accepted, as a trans person, if my identity is tied up in experiences I don’t have and don’t desire.

The intersection of amatonormativity and cissexism results in its own peculiar oppression for me as a trans aro, one that I find impossible to navigate in a world where it isn’t understood that romance doesn’t have to be the primary form of expressing love and acceptance for trans characters and even trans bodies. I’ve seen so many posts on my dash about people proclaiming a want for trans storytelling while getting no benefit from this movement because I’m writing about aro trans characters. That’s more than a little disheartening.

This kind of intersection does a lot of damage to aro-spec creators who are otherwise marginalised (so many marginalised experiences come with a heavy dose of we are lovable, our love is important, we deserve the right for our love to be accepted and protected and acknowledged, much of this conversation centred on romantic love) but just being an aro-spec creator who creates aro-spec narrative media comes with an inherent disadvantage that is difficult to surmount.

I’ve got some numbers for this disadvantage, actually. My latest work, The Wind and the Stars, has had fifty downloads in its first month, and I’m actually excited by that, because everything else I’ve posted with the tag “aromantic” has gotten approximately twenty downloads in their first months. A couple of works didn’t break the fifty mark until three or four months in! By contrast, with the same amount of promotion but published under a brand new name with no back catalogue to help (unlike my other works), my explicitly queer paranormal romance story got three hundred downloads in its first month. How am I supposed to provide representation for my community when I don’t have enough interest in my work to justify the work of its production?

The tag aromantic helps guide aro-spec readers, but it actively discourages most alloromantic readers (who exist in far greater number) from reading, and most of them won’t have any comprehension of why. They just see romance as normal and interesting, and anything that subverts this, be it specifically aromantic or just gen, undermines this worldview. It happens so subconsciously it’s near impossible to challenge.

In a way, one of the most damaging aspects of amatonormativity is its lack of recognition. Most people have some understanding, now, on what misogyny is and what harm it might cause, even if one disagrees with it or has a 101 understanding at best. There’s a social model for beginning to understand this. Amatonormativity, on the other hand, has no such basis. It’s so unquestioned that few people who aren’t aro-spec recognise it or need to, and it’s often seen as a lesser problem. As someone who is struggling as a creator because of amatonormativity, to the extent that I don’t know how I can possibly survive as a writer, it angers me to see this treated as less important than other forms of normativity. No, nobody will beat me up on the street as an aro, but if I can’t keep a roof over my head because only a small number of people are reading my free books and I have no belief they’ll buy my next book, how does this distinction matter?

Amatonormativity silences, erases and oppresses aro-spec people. It substantially disadvantages us in how we are seen by others and how we interact with the world around us. And almost nobody outside aro-spec spaces wants to acknowledge it.

Sorry for the rant at the end there, anon. Does this give you some idea on how amatonormativity is demonstrated through media and how it impacts aro-spec creatives?

[just-a-black-boy]

Wish to add to this that like white queers from accepting environments especially should think about this. Like, I'm currently an exchange student in Japan and in my first week this white person came up to me and immediately assumed I was non-binary when they talked to me and started equating my experiences with their own as a white enby person while we were in the classroom and other people started walking in.

First of all, did not appreciate the assumptions being made about my gender identity by them. It was very invalidating as an experience and truly upped my "Is everyone around me constantly misgendering me?" Paranoia, and I basically started policing my appearance more as a result of the interaction bc I want to be stealth while Black and Trans in an incredibly conservative environment. I still get misgendered but if I correct teachers here they'll just assume I'm a cis guy with a softer appearance instead of that I'm trans, and if nothing else I value the certainty there is in that because it means I am Safer.

Second of all, we are in Japan and I am a Black Person, specifically a Black Trans Man. The person who spoke to me describes themselves as genderfluid and I am not trying to downplay their experience but our anguish being out in society and our sense for danger is inherently different. I've legally changed my gender in my home country prior to coming here and that's why I'm in men's dorms and have the confidence I do to affirm myself, because Japan is a country in which your legal gender and name are absolute. In those situations outing people or treating their queerness like a given can be dangerous depending on who hears, if nothing else we're part of a group of exchange students you can't assume none of the other people around us are queerphobic. Also, I do want to acknowledge that their whiteness puts them in a better position to me in which social perception is different. I was forced to react politely bc I don't want to be branded as "difficult"

You cannot assume that just because you think someone looks queer they'll appreciate it if you act like they are with them. People do not like being outed and they don't have internalised queerphobia if you came up to them with an expectation of immediate closeness and they reject that. Think about location, think about people's identity and fucking think about the factors (like race for example) that might make their situation a little bit more precarious than yours bc when you do stuff like this you're putting the onus on a stranger who you are unfamiliar with to avert and fix their own potential discomfort / genuine terror and or anxiety about being outed, especially in settings that are enclosed and public this forces them to go along with you and now they're in an even more vulnerable position.

Stop assuming that every other queer person is in the same boat as you, if you think someone is queer you don't have to mention it, if you mesh well it'll come up eventually when that person feels safe.

Young queers please understand that if you go up to strangers you’ve “clocked” as a fellow queer and just dive in with that, not only could you be seriously endangering that stranger, but you are seriously endangering yourself.

If anyone came up to me in public and went “are you… yanno… *limp wrists at me*” I would full-force punch them right in the mouth with no hesitation. I wouldn’t be sorry. You are not connecting with me. You are a stranger outing me against my will in public. I am not the only queer person whose fear response is fight.

[rpbetter]

As a female I get tired of seeing psa post about /It's important to treat female muses with respect/ or /Female muses deserve better treatment!!/ it's this constant thing I get slapped in the face by mutuals who reblogs that once in a blue moon, but ignore male muses or treat them like shit. I'm sorry to come off as sexist, I wish people would look out for male muses too and those who are gay since they get the short end of the stick and not appreciated. Don't get me wrong it's important to respect all muses regardless of their gender, but these post are coming off as quite feminist and Tumblr is known for being a man hater. I feel really bad for saying all of this.. I'm sorry for this rant, RPbetter. I just need to let it off my chest.

It's all good, Anon! I did tell y'all you could do exactly this!

I know, as in, I can actually feel the hackles of the RPC rising preemptively, this is going to rub people the very, very wrong way...so, I'm asking you to at least try to put that on hold and consider some things about this as a different view from what you've experienced before you get angry with Anon or myself.

Because I think the issue with this, and all PSA's that are especially full of delineation like these are, is that it isn't going to be everyone's experience in the RPC.

We tend to feel like the RPC is our little corner, or for some of you, vast empire. Sometimes, an overlap of both - our little area we have cultivated with our mutuals, our preferred resource blogs, all the blogs that branch off from us and the larger RPC specific fandom community we're a part of. I mean, I know my fandom is huge, my highly cultivated homestead within it is tiny.

I also interact with people from equally huge RPC fandoms. So, between the two, I see some major differences. The differences in some of the minuscule RPC corners I have people in can be even more extreme.

Example?

I have a mutual who is open to crossovers and spends time in three bigger fandoms with their muse. The muse is highly desirable in the fandom they come from, had no issue adapting and being desirable in the second big one, but in the third, it was quite different. Same approach that worked out wonderfully everywhere else did not work in this third fandom because the muse...is female in a male and gay ship predominant fandom. So, while this mutual never experienced trouble getting/keeping interaction and respectful treatment of their muse/themselves everywhere else, they suddenly got slapped with it there. It's often a problem of specific fandoms and their material.

Another example?

Myself.

My main muse is everything that the more hateful PSA's of this sort say is the desirable muse that unfairly gets all the attention and respect: extremely well-known main character, conventionally attractive, male, white, young, and the way he presents in canon, you can play with HCs about him being not being cishet pretty easily. Highly shippable muse that can be made even more so without messing with canon much, if at all.

So, you'd think that I would never have any trouble getting interactions, ships that I want, plots I want, and good treatment of my muse (I mean by other muns, other muns not being total assholes about my muse, what happens between muses, when it isn't directly due to the mun's attitude, is different), right? I don't.

Don't get me wrong, I have the interactions I want, they're perfect. I have the writing partners I always wanted, the best ships, stunning plots, but that's entirely because I am OC and crossover friendly. I'm open to accepting writing partners based purely on the writing. My own fandom does not like my muse, outside of one specific version anyway, the canon ship is not supported, the popular fanon ship is likely to get you a callout in the RPC.

In my fandom, the female muses do get more respect and attention for the most part. It's one of those fandoms pretty into...well, fandom as an act of activism. That's not to say, before anyone loses it on me, that creating or picking up a female muse is doing it for woke points. Just that there is a rather open prerogative in my fandom to create/choose muses based on the idea of "representation" and "fixing canon." If you have one that is like mine, you're automatically assumed to be a lot of really shitty things. Getting called a school shooter, love that for me.

The whole "respect female muses or die" take isn't necessary there, it's the take. Doesn't stop it from coming around weekly, though, so I do feel you on this, Anon.

Furthermore, I'd personally prefer it if we'd all consider getting back to the take of just respecting muse choices and writing, period. People are always going to have preferences, in one place it might align with your own, in another it doesn't. That's perfectly alright and does not mean anything horrible about those people unless they're actively being horrible with it!

Preferring female muses doesn't mean you're a radfem, preferring (or just having even one) a f/m ship does not mean this or that you're homophobic either, nor does it make a bi/pan muse suddenly heterosexual and "bad representation/you're just saying they're bi and that's gross." Just means those are the ships that developed.

Preferring male muses doesn't mean you're "part of the problem" or "taking the easy way," and having or preferring a queer ship does not mean you're a "nasty fujoshi." It also doesn't invalidate what someone has established about their muse's sexuality, a bi/pan muse isn't Gay Now because their primary ship is m/m.

And that's to say nothing of how weird, and often at least mildly offensive, all of this is to both muns and muses that are not on the gender binary. You should probably consider that before you keep implying to a mun that the muse they've established as not cis is exactly that.

Or, that writing a female muse might be impossible for some muns for more reasons than just preference, a thing that is valid enough on its own. A decent number of muns in the RPC are also not cis, this may be the only safe place for them to drop being gendered as they were assigned at birth, it might even trigger dysphoria for them to write a female muse. I know that I am incredibly uncomfortable writing female muses. It's a little ridiculous to keep dropping the implication to outright demand that everyone needs to do their part in filling the female muse quota in the RPC or they're misogynists and/or phobes.

My experience, and I am not alone in it, has been getting plenty of shit for having male muses only, always assumed to be cisgender and often heterosexual. Plenty of shit for not writing the canon as cishet, too...and plenty more for my main ships being with female characters because they're the ones that worked out and stuck around.

No one is lying when they say that there are places where their male muses and queer ships are not looked on positively.

The thing is, I also witness female muses being treated like shit, yes!

And I will say, that treatment is so much worse if the muse is also an OC, has a canon f/m ship they'd like to write or just to write a ship with a canon if they're an OC, or they're certain types of female muses. Because the demands do not stop at being female. You also have to write a Strong Female Character to be of interest, and she had better be available to shipping and smut while not presenting as too sexually open. It's become an impossible obstacle course.

I see it on the dash, I see absolutely valid complaints, and the majority of my friends write female muses. I'm very aware of the problems they've faced, bias against them does exist!

Example of this?

Writing partners who have both male and female muses experiencing, repeatedly, their male muses being picked over the female muses, and their emotionally softer or less sexually available female muses being chosen dead last. The writing is great, these muses are well-done and interesting, easy to interact with, but they'll get told on the blogs for the male muses that they're only interested in them, the other mun having missed that this is the same mun behind both muses.

And it always comes down to wanting to ship m/m. Even when the muse is established as being heterosexual, they'll just keep trying to push it into happening with their male muse. If your male muse is heterosexual, that is like a violent act against the whole RPC.

So, that's also absolutely not a lie either, it does happen, it is a problem. It's valid to be upset about this!

In my opinion and experience, these are both significant problems predicated upon the same, overall issues:

not respecting choices and preferences equally

performative activism in fictional communities

requiring personal information as justification in order to respect choices/preferences as valid and not problematic

not being interested in writing for its own sake and characters for their own sake, but rather, what they say about oneself/in validation and display of one's ideals and/or personhood

not understanding that just because a character is x, y, or z does not, actually, make them interesting or a good character, let alone to everyone

So, I really think the answer here isn't saying that there is a single problem with muse gender across the board, everywhere and without variables, and demanding that people "respect," a thing that actually translates into "you must accept all of x as writing partners no matter your interest in them or viability, as writing partners" all of any one type of muse. I think that's just weirdly pressuring and remaining at a distance from the incredibly simple answer of accepting that people have preferences that do not always benefit you, that you might even find offensive, but that's a right they have.

It's okay if you're not interested in the conventionally attractive, canon male muse, even if someone has HC'ed him as queer. It's okay if you're not interested in the Strong Woman female OC, even if someone has given her other labels of significance. It's okay if you're not interested in someone's well-developed, well-written female OC or canon, someone's male OC or canon, or someone's proudly genderless creature. (Again, don't come at me folks, I literally call myself that, it's a joke based on the way people who do not ascribe to the gender binary can be treated/viewed by others who do, thanks!)

Your likes and dislikes are okay! Even if they're "not inclusive," yes. So long as you're not being a fucking bigot, you're alright. It isn't anyone's job here to be correct the ills of reality in their fiction, let's just all start focusing less on the fine details and more on respecting each other regardless of whether individual preferences benefit us or not.

Forcing people to interact based on guilting or shaming them is the opposite of the answer. Always. And just because it is one extreme in your RPC area does not mean it's like this in everyone else's. I'm genuinely sorry that anyone has experienced negative things based on such ridiculous factors, but please, be sure you're not turning around and doing the same shit to someone else.

Going to repeat:

Forcing people to interact based on guilting or shaming them is the opposite of the answer. Always.

[linkbumble796]

Charmdate Mobile

Charmdate Mobile

Charmdate Mobile

Charmdate Mobile App

Charmdate mobile site. Chase personal loan rates. Chat avenue adult dating. Chat avenue de kosten.

Charmdate mobile site. Chat avenue sito di incontri. Chat avenue Strona mobilna. Chat Friends comment s'inscrire.

Whitman speed dating central. How to meet Russian and Ukrainian Girls with Charmdate.com? Is CharmDate safe? Real dates or just fake? Does CharmDate dating website work?

I guess one might say that the final couple of weeks of mine have been hectic relating to my dating life but it surely was price it. On this planet of online dating, messaging is what bridges the hole between seeing somebody’s profile and going out on a date with them. In contrast with men, online is charmdate.com legit ladies are more possible to use the internet to: ship and obtain email, get maps and instructions, look for health and medical info, use internet sites to get help for well being or personal issues, and get religious data.

It’s extremely simple for us to choose up on this, and it’s extraordinarily off-placing, not to mention insulting. I might adore it if men (cis, straight since that is my dating desire, private experience, and in addition because they are the worst culprits of nefarious dating habits) did not playact and perform for me, and faux to be one hundred pc aligned with my political positions,” says Natasha, a analysis charmdate contact and analytics skilled in New York City. She finds that males typically use this as a tactic to get laid, only to show their true colours later.” So the moral right here is this: You have to be woke, however in case you’re not, perhaps take the vitality you’ll use pretending to be socially conscious and use it to really better yourself.

Comparing No-Hassle Advice For charmdate.com

I believe males would much favor a modern lady who’s horny in her femininity by treating her man and her self well however doesn’t do all the charm date things in life for her man. If he is throwing his rattling socks around you tell that boy, you aren’t his mother, you do not have to say it in a seductive tone simply to be heard.

Feeling confident after surviving my first app date, I made a decision to strive another Tinder match. This guy was Danish, tall, and handsome. The pros end there. He appeared to mansplain every little thing to me, and I wasn’t feeling it. After review on charmdate.com I instructed him I didn’t wish to go dwelling with him, he ditched me and I known as an Uber. I by no means heard from him once more. My next few Tinder dates went equally to the second, so clearly I needed something new.

Current estimates state that between over 50% of marriages will end in divorce … Take into consideration that for slightly bit, let that sink in. Even in the event you account for people who’ve had a number charmdate of failed marriaged, clearly we as a society are doing one thing fallacious in the case of marriage; divorce rates should not be that high. Good dating site profile examples.

Major Elements Of charm date Across The USA

Diane, that sounds so troublesome. Best dating website. I admire your dedication to your marriage and to reuniting your loved ones. I like your awareness and how you are focusing on your half and on changing into the perfect charmdate mobile model of yourself. I additionally love hearing that you’ve got hope. I’ve a lot of hope for you too! I am eager to listen to how working towards the Intimacy Skills transforms your marriage.

Charmdate Mobile

At this level, your complete time is 5 or 6 hours. That is an enormous investment for her to make with a man that she hasn’t even seen face to face yet. 12) No woman shall borrow an merchandise of clothing charm date review with out asking the clothing proprietor’s permission, until both events have made an official choice to waive this rule within the context of their friendship.

Charmdate Mobile

Look intently for indicators of boastfulness, snideness or bitterness. Also, insincerity: the person who claims over and over again to utterly love” his or her life simply the way it’s, to be fully and totally” happy with everything charmdate.com in it. These individuals declare to have joined stated dating web site on a lark (my pal steered it and I figured why not?”). These behaviors counsel this particular person might need bother being trustworthy about his or her vulnerability or true motives.

It also makes your profile easy to skim, which is important as a result of individuals are inclined to multitask in relation charmdate.com to shopping profiles, identical to you in all probability do. In case your profile can drag her consideration away from Netflix, you’ve got won the first battle.

Work on all of the complaints your wife had about you through the marriage and whenever you speak together with her or see her, show up in a different way along with your actions. She could have see that you’ve modified not just hear that you’ve got. Be consistent together with your kindness not sporatic. Concerning her dating, it’s charm date scam your resolution about accepting that or not. You could say so long as she is dating others, you will assume the 2 of you might be separated and you’ll not be pursing her. She however, will need to perceive that she risks shedding you if she waits too lengthy to come back home. Again, though that’s your choice.

Charmdate Mobile App

Whether or not the date has gone properly or not, women can’t wait to tell their associates about it. Buddies, household and colleagues will undergo the date from begin to end: from the pre-date nervousness and what to put on, to the put up-date debrief. Women are usually charm date site completely satisfied to disclose extra personal data than males and will probably go into every single detail, from his sneakers to the variety of drinks they needed to whether they kissed.

[cassolotl]

Gender and sex are [not] different

Content note: Article refers to transphobia, TERFs, sex essentialism.

~

I have recently seen nonbinary people, even high-profile nonbinary people like Asia Kate Dillon, saying that gender and sex are different. This is bothering me a lot, for reasons I’ve struggled to articulate, but I’m gonna try anyway damnit.

Disclaimer: This is just the way I see things. I’ll back up my assertions where I can, but please do understand that I am the internet equivalent of some dude you met in the pub last week.

~

AN OVERVIEW / SOME CONTEXT

Sex and gender are both social constructs, which basically means they’re ideas that humans created. A penis is just a penis, but only a human would say that a penis (or a person with a penis) is inherently male.

The definitions of sex and gender are broadly agreed to be subtly different: sex is purely anatomical, whereas gender is an experience, a combination of physical, behavioural and psychological things that no one is really able to pin down.

I live in the UK, and here there is no legal difference between sex and gender.

The “sex” marker on your birth certificate can be changed with a gender recognition certificate (hormones and surgery not compulsory), and birth certificates are not connected to medical records at all. Getting that sex marker changed is very difficult and expensive.

You can legally have a different gender or sex marker on all your state-issued IDs and at most it’ll cause some bureaucratic confusion.

You can put any title on any record and some people will probably frown at you if you put Mrs if you’re an unmarried person but those people are legally speaking in the wrong.

Basically anything is legal as long as you’re not doing it to deceive or commit fraud, and the Gender Recognition Panel is way outdated and about to be dismantled anyway.

To put it another way, what the UK calls “legal sex” is actually just legal gender, misnamed. Even the sex marker on medical records is a gender marker misnamed.

To add to the confusion, linguistically speaking sex and gender are generally described in the same way - because until very recently, English-speakers have largely been unable to change their bodies and therefore unable to change the way the world treats them. Words like “female” can describe someone’s body and/or someone’s gender, while also describing the reproductive capacity of non-human lifeforms, the shape of the connecting end of a computer cable...

Because of the body/mind distinction, people who say that only we can define our genders will often comfortably say that sex can be objectively determined by an educated professional.

Doctors generally agree that sex is defined by:

the number and type of sex chromosomes;

the type of gonads—ovaries or testicles;

the sex hormones;

the internal reproductive anatomy (such as the uterus in females); and

the external genitalia.

Since finding out someone’s sex chromosomes takes months and is very expensive and largely unnecessary for most people, unless your doctor has found a pressing reason to test your chromosomes (such as signs that you may be intersex and it may affect your physical health in some way), you do not know your own sex. Yes, you. You have, at least, a (probably but not necessarily accurate) guess based on the information you have unequivocal access to: external genitalia.

This blog post assumes that misgendering people is harmful. It may not harm everyone, but it harms enough people that it’s a good idea to behave in a way that prevents that harm.

~

SEX AND GENDER ARE THE SAME

1: Sex --> gender

The idea that gender is defined by sex is an obvious wrong thing, so it seems like a good place to start. That’s the idea that your gender comes from your body. If you were born with a penis and testicles, you are a man, whether you like it or not.

Who does it: Some people (eg: TERFs) say that hormones and surgery simply “mask” your “true” sex/gender, and you can’t change your chromosomes or the way you were born. Some people (eg: some outdated gender recognition systems) say that your body must be changed in order to change your gender.

Why it’s harmful: It sucks for trans people. Either you can never be correctly gendered by other people, even when you pass, or you can only be correctly gendered by other people once someone has inspected your genitals or judged your facial hair or whatever.

What to do instead: Don’t say that gender is irrevocably tied to one’s body. Support the idea that people know themselves better than anyone else can, and trust them when they tell you what their gender is.

2: Gender --> sex

Who does it: If you’re on Tumblr you’ve probably read blog posts that say things like “I am female, therefore my penis is female.” A lot of us feel this way about our own bodies, and taking ownership of the language used to describe your body is a very positive thing. In the UK it’s supported by the medical system, which lets you change the gender/sex marker on your medical records just by asking the receptionist.

Why it’s harmful: It’s not - unless you start to impose it on others. It’s not universal. Some of us strongly feel and identify with the sex of the body; for example, Asia Kate Dillon is nonbinary but strongly identifies their body as female.

And then there’s Big Freedia, who says she’s a man because she has a man’s body. Her name and pronouns and presentation, everything that we use as gender cues, are decidedly feminine - but she is very open about her body being male.

What to do instead: Don’t assume stuff about people’s bodies or the language they use to talk about their bodies based on their gender, pronouns, presentation, etc. Don’t say that in general, for example, a body is female if it belongs to a woman. Respect everyone’s right to bodily privacy. Support the idea that people know themselves better than anyone else can, and trust them when they tell you what their sex is. But like, don’t ask, okay? Don’t even hint. It is none of your business.

~

SEX AND GENDER ARE UNCONNECTED

This is the one that’s been bugging me lately.

Who does it: I’ve seen nonbinary people go out of their way to correct people who equate gender and sex (or man and male, woman and female), and in doing so they state that sex and gender are never connected.

And it’s understandable! The idea that someone can be born in the wrong body has been central to the campaign of visibility and understanding aimed at cisgender people for quite a long time now. It counters the idea above, that sex defines gender, that has been socially prevalent for basically all of living ciscentric memory. A lot of us probably learned about what being transgender is by hearing the idea that your mind can be one gender while your body is another, and said, “damn, that could explain a lot for me.”

Asia Kate Dillon takes this to an extreme. I mentioned above that their gender is nonbinary and their sex is female, but they have also stated that sex and gender are entirely unconnected, for everyone. They insist that male and female are words used to describe sex only, and that it harms them when trans women call themselves female. They said that sex is defined by those five characteristics I listed in the overview, and if any of those characteristics doesn’t match the others then your body stops being male or female at all; a person who’s had a hysterectomy can no longer be called female in terms of sex.

Why it’s harmful: When people say to a trans person, “well you might be a man but your body is not male,” they are implying that someone’s biology would be relevant to anyone but themself, the people they may be physically intimate with, and maybe their doctor. On this level alone it’s personally very intrusive, in a way that no cis person would have to tolerate.

On a practical level, it allows people to exclude trans people from gendered spaces in which they belong on the basis of aspects of their body that may never even be visible, because their body is somehow more relevant (to gendered spaces like toilets and changing rooms) than who they are, and cis people can’t possibly cope.

There are two common excuses for excluding trans people from these spaces.

Random cisgender humans will accidentally see a weird body and be needlessly alarmed or frightened. (Frankly, not our problem?)

Some people are incurably violent or harmful because of their bodies; even someone seeing their bodies may cause harm. (That’s, at very generous best, insulting. In reality, if you are perceived as a serious threat when you walk into a room you become a target.)

What to do instead: Don’t make sweeping statements like “trans people were born in the wrong body” or “gender and sex are different and unrelated.” Support and respect people when they tell you about their own experiences of their body and gender. Encourage cisgender people to take responsibility for their emotional issues, improve and increase resources for victims of sexual violence, advocate for partially gender-neutralising spaces, and welcome trans people into gendered spaces where possible - and it almost always is possible.

~

THE MORAL OF THE STORY IS

Always respect people’s right to bodily privacy. Always.

If you feel like your sex is defined by your gender then great but it’s not true for every trans and/or nonbinary person. Similarly, if you feel that your gender and sex are independent of each other then that’s fine but don’t impose that on other people.

Barring unusual phobias, there is no need to ever consider the impact of someone’s sex on you personally. Unless you’re a doctor or you’re about to have sex or something.

In reality, there is a relationship between one’s body and one’s gender for a lot of people, otherwise gender dysphoria wouldn’t be a thing. What the connection is we may never fully understand, but that doesn’t matter. There is a connection for many people and it feels different for everyone, and that needs to be acknowledged and respected. At the same time, for many people there is no apparent connection between their gender and their body, but that doesn’t mean there can’t be one or that deep down everyone else is just wrong about themselves.

Gender and sex are complex individually, and their relationship to each other is complex too. Trying to logic it and sort it into boxes and make a flow chart of it just isn’t going to work. We can stop trying to teach each other, and start supporting each other instead.