#the important thing really is trans jawbone

[smudgefawn]

sandra lynn imagine fumbling three of the baddest bitches in all of spyre and also gillear

[chaotic-goodsir]

Some thoughts on the James Fitzjames tumblr discussions I've seen, even though I'm far from qualified to be commenting on any of this.

Not tagged because I really don't want to fight with or upset anyone, I just wanted to get some thoughts out.

I think we all need to chill.

He was just some guy. He did some good things and some bad things and then he died in unusual, terrible circumstances. It's interesting to learn about his life and death because it happened so long ago in a different time to ours. It's fascinating that today's archaeologists have been able to learn so much about his death using modern science. It's incredibly cool that a person's (any person's!) diaries can survive to tell their tale and create a kind of immortality.

He was a part of colonialism, a subject and object of propaganda, privileged and actively complicit in the British empire, but he isn't some Avatar Of All Colonialism. He's inspired a fictional version of himself with their own character and themes, but he isn't Blorbo From Our Show. Studying his life is not condoning or excusing his beliefs or actions. Celebrating the character is not necessarily ignoring the real life inspiration. Making morbid jokes is upsetting to some, hilarious to others, but at the end of the day he is gone. He can't hear them. Maybe he'd laugh. Maybe he wouldn't. Maybe he'd start making jokes of his own. Maybe some of his 'banter' would end up just being racist.

He was just some guy. He did bad things, he did good things, he died, and now thousands (if not millions) of people remember his story, though probably not in the way he hoped for. It's cool that we can connect to history like this and learn so much from it. It's important to be aware of his involvement in colonialism. It's important to be aware that he was a human being. It's important (at least, I think so) not to start tearing each other apart over a long-dead Victorian who, let's face it, would likely have made some tasteless jokes about each of our identities with that confident good humour of his.

We've claimed him as a trans icon and a patron saint of being (literally) consumed by hubris and so many other things he probably would have been baffled by. We make memes about his jawbone and his pet cheetah. Some people have dedicated years to researching him (which is great!), others found out who he was last week because of a silly tumblr post (which is great too!). Plenty of people don't know a thing about him and don't care (which is completely fine!).

He lived, he died, he's interesting. He drew a fish with arms once.

We all need to chill.

Pun not intended.

[kimabutch]

I feel like the most common portrayal of dysphoria is someone looking in the mirror and not seeing what they feel like inside — probably partly because it’s an easy shorthand in art. And I’ve obviously felt some of that type of ‘visual’ dysphoria, whether it’s in the mirror or looking down at my own body.

But the type of dysphoria I feel the most is generally more tactile. For example, the feeling of my chest under my hands as I run them over my body, or of the extra chest fat when I lie on my stomach, or of too much extra movement there when I move. There are some almost purely visual things that make me dysphoric — for example, I don’t really have a tactile sense of my feet being too small — but they’re far outweighed by the dysphoria of touch and movement in various aspects of my body.

On the other hand, relief of dysphoria is also tactile for me. That’s always been the case — the best part about building muscle, for example, isn’t the way I look in the mirror but the sense of being stronger or even just feeling my own muscles — but being on T has magnified this.

I run my hands over my body and yes, there’s still the Wrongness of my chest, but there’s the delight as I feel the hair on my stomach and my hands that wasn’t there before and that feels so Right. I touch my face, and can feel my jawbone, less buried than it was under fat, and dotted with stubble. I lie on my back, and my hips are just slightly closer to the ground, from the reduction of fat on my butt; I can feel the way that fat redistribution makes my pants sit differently on me, and changes how I move when I run. I speak, and I feel that rumble deeper and deeper in my chest, and it’s a feeling so precious that it brings me to tears. 

I write this not just to celebrate how good I feel, but also because I think some cis people honestly have an idea of dysphoria being only “skin deep,” something that comes up when we see ourselves or are seen by others. And that type of dysphoria is real and valid, and relieving it is extremely important. But I think for most people who experience dysphoria, it’s rarely just about one sense.

And then, in the same way, things like HRT and surgery don’t just affect one sense; they’re not simply visual modifications. They’re a whole-body affair that change not only the way we look but how we move, sound, feel, and even smell. They change how we interact with and process the world in a significant way, and for me, so far, in a way that feels entirely like something that’s always been slightly wrong slowly shifting into place. And I know that I’m only of many trans/nonbinary people whose transition (both medically and otherwise) has given me a greater sense of connection not only with my own body, but with the world in general — a sense of presence in the world that was much harder to feel under the weight of dysphoria.

So. Yeah. That’s why experiencing dysphoria and transitioning are so life-altering for me.

[brinnanza]

man something I really love about dimension 20 is the like... casual polyamory? like sure with joren jawbreaker it's played kind of for laughs because ally yes ands jorens multiple partners and Brennan yes ands their yes and but even when it's introduced as a joke, it's still given the same sort of weight or importance as any other relationship.. like, in fantasy high, jawbone is poly but it's still a betrayal when sandra lynn sleeps with garthy because they hadn't talked about it. and with joren, like, yeah it's an excuse for Brennan to make jokes about how often joren fucks but it comes with a very sort of sincere reminder that poly relationships take work and opening your relationship is not a solution to communication problems

like idk I feel like d20 handles queer relationships and characters like they're just... matter of course? like. Liam just straight up tells joren "I'm asexual". Kristin applebees had a whole coming out thing but fig doesn't have to think about it when she kisses ayda. and like, there was a trans god. and polyamory is inherently queer imo even if everyone involved is cishet so that's all part of it and like... idk I don't have a point I just think it's very neat. I don't watch actual TV or anything recent so idk what kind of queer stuff is happening in the mainstream but something I really love about dnd actual plays is that they usually don't have like... corporate overlords. it's just people doing it because they love it and that allows it to be queer in a casual, messy way

[bellybiologist]

On Depicting "Aged Up Characters"

Just some rambling and ranting about something im coming across with work regarding character depiction.

First and foremost, most of my long-time followers probably already know that when it comes to fictional characters, i do not care about needing to age up characters to enjoy them and whatnot, cuz fictional. But also, i 100% understand why people age them up to properly enjoy them.

That said, i need people to at least kinda explain to me what they need to see to consider a character aged up.

This is mostly for patreon work and commissions, cuz this pops up really often???

I don't subscribe to "traditional traits" of what makes a person appear "aged up." Stylistic choices aside, i generally try to make a character look as much like how they are canonically as possible with more realistic proportions, barring me changing traits to something i personally find more attractive (see me making literally every character i like chumby with a tumby). My drawing actually being seen as "oh hey, its THAT character" asap (preferably, on sight) is very important to me.

Real people don't always have the (mis)fortune to get all the traits that people need in order to appear like an "adult" to everyone.

Not everyone gets taller after that last growth spurt they got at 15.

Not everyone gets facial hair, or hell, they decide to stay clean shaven regardless of the level of hairy they achieve.

Not everyone gets broad superman shoulders or huge tits

Not everyone gets a Dorito-faced bad touch senpai chin. (this one drives me up the wall because round face shapes are CUTE and not everyone gets chiseled cheekbones or jawbones at 18, god dammit.)

A lot of these traits are only seen as "adult traits" mostly cuz hollywood really fucked us because they depicted a LOT of teenagers in media using adult actors that are deemed conventionally attractive. So most people's perceptions of what looks like an adult is pretty warped.

IMO, subscribing to traditional traits of being an adult, or simply appearing older, limits what you can do when designing a character, and also comes with othering people who dont get those traits in reality. I, myself, for example, am pretty short compared to most amab people of the race on my mom's side (which is black). And when i shave, people tended to think i was like, 16, even in my mid-20s because my filipino genes kept my face relatively roundish too. (Which is to my advantage being a trans woman, but thats not my point.). Most traits that are taped onto a charatcer to "age them up" dont apply to me when i became an adult. Then this becomes more difficult when you add in stylistic choices in art (see: chibi art)

So where i stand, i dont care for traditional adult traits because most of them are dumb anyway. But, im more than amenable to depicting them for work and art if asked!

When people ask, i follow up to ask them to clarify how they'd want them to appear "older" or "aged up" or "adult" and one of two things happen:

they never explain what would they want to see and magically expect me to read their mind or something

They literally don't know what they're looking for.

Which is problematic to me because, some people dont change at all as they get older. Genetics just be like that; Some of us grow into our final proportions once we hit 15, and das it.

So my choices in this situation are to either take a wild guess at what they want, or just do nothing and leave them the same (the latter often being suitable enough to most situations since my style is semi-realistic enough in terms of proportions, which leads me to think its less them wanting them aged up, and more to cover their own ass in case of implications). I don't like defaulting to "the traditional traits" to make them appear like an adult cuz it may end up not looking like that character after a point. Some of those traits dont even apply when you make them chubby or they gain weight or won't even be noticeable unless you put in something else as a frame of reference. ie. being fat diminishes the chiseled cheeks/chin that a lot of older male characters are depicted with, so to some who follow this rubric, chubby faces make people look younger.

But it also infuriates me because it goes to show that people are often just saying these things in order to adhere to demands of the political climate. Which, of course, is totally valid when you want to avoid Discourse™, but less so when you're not thinking about it critically and go around assuming that everyone reacts to and copes with the concept the same.

Also... it dumps all the brainwork on ME. >:T

I know i'm a badass artist and whatnot, but guesswork is my least fun thing to do to make sure some cartoon character looks suitably adult enough to enjoy guilt-free by one-person-in-particular

Taller? i can do that. Body hair? sure! Definitely. But you gotta give me something to work with. I can't read minds (yet).

So in the end. When you ask for commissions or make patreon nominations, tell me what you want. xD

[frogburglar]

on why sexual dimorphism and phrenology are not the same thing

since @guccigramsci so kindly requested that i do this, here’s a quick little analysis on why understanding that sexes are different does not make radfems racist!

to begin, i’m going to define sexual dimorphism and phrenology, so anyone coming into this with a blind eye can understand this and follow along.

sexual dimorphism: the condition in which two sexes of the same species exhibit different characteristics beyond the differences in their sexual organs. 

phrenology: the detailed study of the shape and size of the cranium as a supposed indication of character and mental abilities. 

so i’m going to begin by dispelling the myth that sexual dimorphism and phrenology are the same thing, since they’re not. sexual dimorphism in humans shows a clear difference between male and female bodies (not accounting for intersex individuals). what’s really cool about humans is that, while we are a species that abides by sexual dimorphism, our structures aren’t too different at all! they’re still more than enough to be noticeable, however. 

humans, for the vast majority of us, differ in the following ways:

1. males have narrower hips while females have wider ones. the female pelvis is larger than the male pelvis, which is more compact and narrower. the male pelvis is also less tilted than the female pelvis. (sources: b, e, f, g, k) 2. males are larger than females (in both weight and height). (sources: a, g)  3. females have more breast tissue than males. they are nearly the same, save from the fact that females develop means for the production of milk. (sources: h, i) 4. the fat distributions in males and females are vastly different. females naturally hold more body fat than males, as female bodies account for the care of a growing baby while males do not. females and males also store fat in different areas. females often will store fat in the butt, hips, and thighs, while males will often store fat in the stomach. (sources: c, d) 5. the skulls of males and female are different. females have a more rounded forehead and more rounded eye sockets. males have squarer jawlines, while females have more pointed ones. female skulls are lighter than male skulls. (sources: a, j, k)

sources for these claims: a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k

sometimes, there are outliers! there are outliers in every species, after all. but statistically speaking, these are some of the ways in which males and females differ biologically due to sexual dimorphism. (again, humans are on the lower end of the spectrum of abiding by it, but we still do!)

my arguments: acknowledging sexual dimorphism as a biological fact is not the same as acknowledging phrenology as a biological fact. acknowledging sexual dimorphism as a biological fact also does not make a person racist. 

1. sexual dimorphism, while not as extreme in humans as it is in other species, has been proven to exist in humans (look at all of the sources above). while this can be shown in the differences between male and female skulls, that is not only not the only evidence for sexual dimorphism, but it also is based in biology and not a pseudoscience. 

2. male and female is a biological reality. sex is a biological reality. gender is not. race is not. @guccigramsci seems to be claiming that race is a biological reality (X), but to claim that women of color have different bone structures than white women is often the same racist logic that TRAs will use to claim that trans women are women, since black women are women. in my claim that race is a social construct, i am saying that the differences between people within the same race have the same variance as the differences of people between different races (X). oftentimes, people will claim that you can tell someone’s race by their skull alone, but that is not entirely true. some anatomical features are more commonly found among certain races, but that does not make said anatomical feature a certainty for that race. 

“...can you really determine race from a jawbone? Probably not. Forensic anthropologists try to infer the ancestry, gender, and age of human remains by measuring their dimensions and observing their features with the naked eye. ...researchers have compiled a number of mandibular traits... that they think differ slightly between races. ...Racial classification is an inexact science, if that’s even the right word for it. Forensic anthropologists never make definitive ancestry pronouncements. They say a bone is “consistent with” European ancestry or “likely” of Asian ancestry. ...the discipline has its roots in the pseudoscientific 19th-century practice of using skull measurements to prove Caucasion intellectual superiority.”

3. race is a social construct, not a biological one. "If separate racial or ethnic groups actually existed, we would expect to find “trademark” alleles and other genetic features that are characteristic of a single group but not present in any others. However, the 2002 Stanford study found that only 7.4% of over 4000 alleles were specific to one geographical region. Furthermore, even when region-specific alleles did appear, they only occurred in about 1% of the people from that region—hardly enough to be any kind of trademark. Thus, there is no evidence that the groups we commonly call “races” have distinct, unifying genetic identities.” (i’ve already cited this source above but this section in particular is incredibly important).

“In one example that demonstrated genetic differences were not fixed along racial lines, the full genomes of James Watson and Craig Venter, two famous American scientists of European ancestry, were compared to that of a Korean scientist, Seong-Jin Kim. It turned out that Watson... and Venter shared fewer variations in their genetic sequences than they each shared with Kim.”

4. phrenology (the claim that you can tell a person’s personality by seeing what the bumps in their skull are) and sexual dimorphism (observing the differences between secondary-sex characteristics in males and females) are not comparable. (X - this source shows the difference between craniology and phrenology, and even straight up says that race is an indefinite science and sex is not)

in conclusion: i’m not a nazi you dork ass loser lmao