#selfsame
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Note
can you reclaim the f slur?
limp wristed fops were never in the closet. they define themselves by showing off their frocking frippery finery. fucks hard, imo.
how obnoxious of him to appropriate gay stereotypes when he's not even Real Enough To Matter! explicitly stays in the curio cabinet, even with a big bag of marvel cash! it's like he knows his life is fake!
if a word is fine to say due to the speaker's identity, then GASP i think we just said even bad nasty words aren't inherently bad and nasty. BUT it's totes proper to judge a person's moral character based on someone's identity like their gender, sexuality, race, creed, disability because some people are should be branded evil due to who they are and---uh oh. are we playing for the other team here???
"don't say gay" was supposed to be about converting a ~slur~ into an acceptable characteristic. it was not meant literally as "don't say gay, cause that's a bad bad word and a bad bad thing to be and that should never, ever change". broomstick twiggy friends of dorothy aren't any different, because that would be extremely fucking strange, peculiar, curious, and unusual.
there was an entire years long arc in the marvel comics about demanding people get publicly branded to avoid persecution. but that could mean fuck all to fops and their colorful wardrobes, right?
#i would like to thank the thesaurus and the dictionary and language itself#for being so cockeyed intertextual it can suck itself off#selfsame-sexual relations are definitionally not a slant reference to the inherent queerness of language#even when asking for my opinion you can't pry the dick out of the punhole#is that gay or straight or something unconventional?#idk labels don't confer morality so why we trying to judge people's morality based on their perceived sexuality?#das fuckin gaaaaaaaaaaaay#and so was civil war#funny enough fandom wanking gets a lot of people off but makes everyone feel worse#instead of sucking ourselves off perhaps we should get some more mature hobbies
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
android boy ^-^
#its me im the android boy#i have been thinking Very Much recently and um#i donot think im Supposed to be in a human body#i think i would be much more at home in a mechanical body humming with electricity from every wire and circuit board#like yeah im Future Tech but also im a cheapie low-end bot#with faulty wiring and batteries that are already wearing out#i look like a Person from a distance and even sorta up close but rip me open and its all wiring#as much as i look human there are human expereinces i can never quite replicate#and certainly cant understand#so while im programmed to strive for humanity#i will always be limited by the fundamental nature of that selfsame code#what does a robot know of human nature? nothing but want#anyways#and thats on chronic dissociation#or whatever#whatever the fuck#unreality /#<- i dont need reality check on this but jic for other folks#i am like. actually a little more comfortable in my existence now that i dont feel as confined to 'being human'
10 notes
·
View notes
Text
Seeing all of these Shaw fans bending over backwards to say how understandable his emotional outbursts and crappy treatment of others is, and what a great character it makes him and such. I’m wondering - where was this grace for Michael Burnham?
#so many of these selfsame folk are rejoicing or gloating at Discovery’s end#fuck them and the Captain Manpain they rode in on
8 notes
·
View notes
Text
#PLEASSE#WOKE UP TO A MILLION LIKES FROM ONE POOR YEARNING GAY#OPENED MY EMAIL MULTIPLE HOURS LATER AND SELFSAME YEARNING GAY FOUND MY AO3#hope u find what ure looking for man
1 note
·
View note
Text
had a dream last night that i was in a city where a whole district entirely consisted of fabric stores and yarn stores and 1 model train club & the architecture was lovely and there were trams everywhere
#found my utopia i believe#unfortunately in that selfsame dream a girl tried to climb onto an overhead wire mast but oh well#cant win em all
0 notes
Text
It's generally true that institutions don't make rules prohibiting things that nobody is doing (i.e., the existence of the prohibition demonstrates the existence of whatever it's prohibiting), but then I think about the moral panic back in the 1980s where people genuinely thought that shitty movies about white dudes dressing up in ninja costumes were teaching children to be ninja assassins, and passed a bunch of laws banning "ninja weapons" for which their only source of knowledge were those selfsame movies, with the result that, to this day, many jurisdictions have laws on the books prohibiting weapons which do not exist, and I reflect that every principle has exceptions.
13K notes
·
View notes
Text
[ID: Tag that reads
#washing the dishes tonight so i won't have to wash them tomorrow morning
/end ID]
ok well im going to build a good future for myself whether i like it or not
#yeah i've been doing this lately and unfortunately… it's nice#feels good 2 get up & make coffee in a clean kitchen in the morning#truly life sometimes is just. eventually choosing 2 inhabit the selfsame rituals you resented when they were pressed on you growing up#and having them feel different as an adult with autonomy who's experienced the alternative
152K notes
·
View notes
Text
How To Shut Up A Woman In Three Steps: The Transmisogynist's Guide
I - Her Tone
This is, by far, the easiest tool to wield effectively against a trans woman. If she is short in her responses, then you can accuse her of harassment and unwarranted anger; if she outright blocks you then you can simply claim that she only cares about her small-minded internet echo chamber; and if she engages with you at any length then you can quite easily nitpick her language and tone until she is thoroughly discredited.
Even better, she will most certainly become annoyed with you - in this scenario, all you have to do is argue that she is aggressive, hysterical, and quite likely a danger to society, and you will be believed by a great many people. This is, of course, because the trans woman's natural position is as a fundamental danger to society. Therefore, it takes very little convincing for an onlooker to come to that selfsame conclusion with some prompting. They may not even be aware that they are falling victim to their own inherent transmisogynistic bias, which is why this approach is quite beautiful in its simplicity! For those who don't immediately believe you, you can easily dismiss them as brainwashed idiots, syncophants, or both.
To drive your point home, call her a terf, a radfem, or a baeddel. If she has ever, in anger, spoken poorly of cis queers, or even better of transmascs, then this will become trivial to argue. Tell her that she is the problem, that she is contributing to community infighting, and that she should really be trying harder to work on this whole "trans unity" thing. Blame all oppression on her. For bonus points, when you tell her that she is dividing the community, you can also throw in the idea that should be making out with you instead of arguing. (This is, of course, because women primarily belong as sex objects to men, and if she would stop having so many opinions then perhaps she would understand this better.)
II - Her Privilege
This is an expanded version of the former tactic, because it requires a certain level of delicacy in the wording you use. However, people react quite strongly to the language of privilege, irrespective of whether that language reflects a material reality, and therefore this is a fantastic way to make a woman stop whining.
I would advise you to check if the woman is white; if she is, then you can easily accuse her of weaponizing her whiteness. (N.B. If she has not stated her race publicly, or if you can't be bothered to check, then this accusation will still work - if she is actually a woman of color, you may very easily claim that you were making a statement about white trans women in general. Further, it is not necessary for you yourself to be a person of color; as long as you position her as uniquely privileged in her whiteness, your own whiteness will remain irrelevant.)
In a similar bent, it is always quite possible for you to dismiss her theory as being "white." Always posit that she is championing a sort of wealthy white woman's privilege, always claim that transfeminism is at its core non-intersectional, and always claim that transfeminist theory in its entirety was created by the white woman - in this way, you may mark her as a privileged white bitch regardless of her race, national origin, or identity. (Under no circumstances should you mention or acknowledge the existence of trans women of color, as this immediately disarms your rhetorical weapon. In fact, if she brings up trans women of color, it is most necessary for you to claim that she is co-opting their experiences.) If you can imply that she is a racist while doing so, then you will be even more successful.
If this fails, then there are other similar cudgels you can implement to great effect: perhaps claims of intersexism, exorsexism, or sex-based discrimination. Call her a "perisex trans woman," a "binary trans woman," an "amab trans person." Say that she is speaking over the real victims; if you must combine multiple (or all!) of these terms at once in order to make her seem like a uniquely privileged party, then do so without hesitation. If she has ever had a bad opinion, or an opinion that you might frame without context as being a bad opinion, then simply publicize that. However, in the absence of such, see rulebook as follows: if she talks only of trans women in general, then you must bring up transmasculine nonbinary people; if she talks of transfeminine nonbinary people, then you must bring up intersex people; if she talks of trans people as a whole then you ought to circle right back around to claiming that she could never understand what trans men have gone through. Never concede that, say, an intersex trans woman exists, because that will inevitably lose you rhetorical ground.
Insinuate that she is herself the oppressor, that she is regressive and small-minded. In fact, if you really wish to run circles around her, then you can easily accuse her of upholding her own oppression by arguing that she is upholding a gender binary, enforcing sex-based division in the community with her language. If she describes herself as a victim of transmisogyny, then tell her that all people can be victims of transmisogyny; if she tells you that this is inaccurate, then simply argue that she is speaking over the real victim (you).
In fact, if you misgender yourself and claim to be oppressed due to your assigned birth sex, then she will have no recourse to fight back - because we all know that she is really a male, and therefore is silencing you poor natal women, who are the true arbiters of female oppression, and the real experts on misogyny. If you intend to utilize this specific tack, then I would personally suggest you use "they/them" to refer to her, because delegitimizing her womanhood is a key component to this argument.
III - Unpersoning
If both of the above techniques have failed (unlikely!) then you may now proceed to that age-old transmisogynistic technique: weaponizing her fetishes. This can be a bit more difficult to bring up naturally, but it is a last resort that can produce some fantastic results. Ask yourself the following: Has she posted about CNC? Has she talked about siscon roleplay? Has she ever engaged in a little/caretaker dynamic? Has she ever made a forcefem joke? In order, your claim against her should be as follows: she loves rape, she loves incestuous abuse, she loves to fuck children, and she personally wants to nonconsensually detransition every transmasc because of her violent perversion. It should be quite simple to get people to turn on her. If she has ever interacted with a user who has posted any of these things, simply consider her tainted by association and dismiss her in the same manner.
This is, as previously discussed, due to her natural position as a degenerate danger to society; simply reinforce that concept wherever possible, until she is driven away from her online circle entirely. Do not outright use the word "autogynephilia," but you can certainly suggest the actual tenets of the idea to wonderful effect.
This can be implemented via statements such as, "oh, so now the incest lover is going to tell me about the oppression i experience;" however, if you would care to be more subtle, then you can set up a slow-burn whisper network to turn her friends and acquaintances against her, or dedicate years to harassing her in her comments section whenever possible.
If she has pushed you far enough that this technique has become necessary, then it is clear that she must be a hostile force in the community who ought to be removed by any means. Therefore, it falls to you to try to get her to cut herself off from everyone who might support her - this will efficiently shut her up. If you can get her to kill herself, then it will silence her permanently (and cause you to win the argument, by extension)!
Just remember: what you are doing is noble and correct, because any woman who claims that a man has power over her is one who is better off dead.
2K notes
·
View notes
Text
an ad i used to get regularly right here on this website
how to explain to non-americans that the better call saul ads aren’t exaggerated for comedic effect they are super normie
#also seeing alexander shunnarah's name activated something in my brain. i couldve gone to that selfsame kami con where he was a guest in '17#it was only an hour away
76K notes
·
View notes
Text
chekhov's gun is actually so funny to me. you point at smthng and go There. That Thing There. then That Same Thing Will Be There Again. preferably Violently,
#like the fact that its so obvious in hindsight yanno#feels like every1 knows that if Whatever Thing Is There. every1 would be disappointed unless That Selfsame Thing Is There Again. Violently.#idk im sleep deprived in this heat 😭#sky speaks#chekhov's gun
1 note
·
View note
Text
bitches love me for my: knowledge of edible and medicinal native plants
#i be like “you know crushed-up firebush leaves will take away the pain from a wasp sting”#and those selfsame bitches be like “wait really?”
1 note
·
View note
Text
I’m drowning in work and I just don’t know what to do. It’s so paralyzing.
0 notes
Note
do you have any older examples of people playing around with pronouns (gender neutral or otherwise) in a queer way? most stuff I'm finding on my own is all mid to late 20th century :')
I think I have the perfect story for you! That of Zinaida Gippius, here is a quote from their article:
"A Russian poet, their discussion of their own identity is held within the culture and understandings of the Russian language. This is particularly relevant in the Russian language's use of grammatical gender, which is something that the English language is unable to capture in any meaningful way. Within their poetry, Gippius made a point to switch back and forth between masculine and feminine gendering, leaning towards the masculine. In the study of their poetry, this has been demonstrated for English readers through coloured text, with one colour used to indicate when they are using feminine gendering and another for masculine."
It was an interesting article to write, as there was a legitimate reason to use he/him/his pronouns, she/her/hers, and they/them/theirs, so we used all three.
Here are some interesting quotes about gender from them:
"The bodily differences between an actual man and an actual woman are important, of course. The body here should be viewed as a sign of the predominance in a given human being of the [Female] or [Male] principle […] the body itself is not integrally reflective of the [Male] or [Female] principle and, second, the body does not determine personality."
"I do not desire exclusive femininity, just as I do not desire exclusive masculinity. Each time someone is insulted and dissatisfied within me; with women, my femininity is active, with men-my masculinity! In my thoughts, my desires, in my spirit-I am more a man; in my body-I am more a woman. Yet they are so fused together that I know not."
"Thus, in all the tangled threads of reality—in all its minutiae, errors, and nuances—one may uncover the selfsame effectual Principles [pure masculine and feminine]: separated and conjoinable, conjoined and separable."
#queer history#queer#lgbt#lgbt history#transgender history#transgender#making queer history#answered
1K notes
·
View notes
Text
back on this. he sucks at empathy in the same way as i think dundy does (or at least in a similar way), in that he doesn't really feel the emotions of others. but he also struggles to extend any compassion or sympathy to HIMSELF really (as i have said. This Mariner Has A Lifelong Struggle With OCD.), and so his ability to do that for anybody Else is equally compromised.
which. i like the parallel between him and hickey in general but this is an interesting dimension to extend it into i think. like there are definitely points in the show where if ANYBODY would be allowed to feel a bit sorry for themselves it's those two. And Yet.
also. this isn't really relevant outside of my Imagined Backstory with him and hodgson. but irving is really good at holding a grudge. so while i say that hodgson was doing psychological warfare to him after they broke up on board hms excellent irving was also kind of doing psychological warfare back to him. (and to himself.)
for some reason i have had irving on the mind since i left rehearsal. i have no idea why.
#ollie considers#he and hodgson are very well suited#but not in a way that is baseline Good for either of them#just in a way where they get each other on a very schiller rodrigo and carlos level#(tun'd our hearts' soft concords to the selfsame note)#but that can get Very Fucking Messy
11 notes
·
View notes
Text
There's a post on r/relationship_advice about a young woman whose boyfriend asked her if his was the biggest penis she'd ever had sex with. She told him objectively no, but that bigger penises hurt her physically and make sex painful and unenjoyable, and his penis is perfect for her.
The boyfriend has been obsessed with this answer since, repeatedly demanding reassurance from her and constantly revisiting the topic even when she becomes frustrated. She describes one time they were on a call and she hadn't slept, and he was keeping her up at 5 literal AM making her reassure him about his penis.
This is how she frames the issue--shocker:
The responsibility being hers, to "do enough" to help her incredibly insecure and in-need-of-therapy man to get over an issue that she did not cause.
Men are being incredibly normal about it in the comments and making sure we know how severely oppressed and harmed they are by penis size comparisons:
Of course, further up in the selfsame post, there are multiple comments from women talking about how they dislike big penises, how their best lovers were indifferent to size; there are even men talking about how they're average-sized or small but have long-term female partners who love their bodies.
This generous male individual commented multiple times, but expressly stated that he didn't even finish reading the post:
His additional comment elsewhere:
In case it's unclear, the basic thesis of OldSoulMillenialMan's comment is that all men have a deep and profound insecurity around their penises, and need, emotionally, to hear "your penis is so huge, I'm terrified of it, it's going to ruin me, it's the biggest ever" from their women on this issue.
Putting the whole emotional labor aspect of this post aside, I took away a few key findings.
Despite women commonly and frequently remarking that they like average-sized penises, not just in "coed" communities like relationship subreddits, but in female-centric communities like the TwoXChromosomes subreddit, etc (which are all full of men, often moderated by men, and are definitely trolled, brigaded, and read by men, given how often women are solicited via DM from their posts in female-centric subreddits), men simply do not believe them, and believe there is no parallel for the "body positive" movement for them--the "body positive" movement which was begun by women, for women. The implication, here as always, is that the onus is on women to provide positivity for men, to provide help and comfort for men, to fix men's problems for them. Men never generate an internal movement directed at each other in order to heal the wounds they experience that center on maleness and manhood. They only ever want women to do the work for them. (There is also 0 recognition of how the "body positive" movement as such has been completely co-opted for profit by the beauty and fashion industries; nor any recognition of how beauty standards for women have actually intensified in the past 5-10 years.)
Men's insecurities around their penises and penis size can only be balmed by knowing that they're big enough to scare a woman, that they're big enough to "ruin" a woman. This really highlights the function of sex for men and the interpersonal function of the penis in heterosexual relationships: the function being penis as weapon. The penis is not just a genital organ a man happens to have, which he happens to use for pleasurable sex with his female partner. The desire is to use his penis to harm her. He wants his penis to be the penis that makes her suffer, that makes her scared and worried she cannot bodily accommodate him, that makes her "ruined" by the sheer size and suffering he causes with his penis. As feminists have discussed for a long time, this is a fundamental element of hetero male sexuality. "Fuck" is not just a word that means "to have sex"; "you're fucked," "fuck you," and other uses of the term clearly outline how to be "fucked" is conceptualized as an aggressive, violent, and degrading thing. Even when men are in loving partnerships with women, their deep-rooted desire is to be the ultimate violation and degradation their female partner experiences, because that is the meaning of sex to them.
295 notes
·
View notes