#topic: transphobic violence

[just-positivity-stuff]

Just your friendly reminder that you CANNOT or SHOULD NOT call yourself a christian if you willingly promote hate of any kind (transphobia, homophobia, etc) l. God's whole thing was to love one another. If you willingly say how you're a proud transphobe, you're trash. Period. Being trans is not a trend. Being trans and transitioning saves lives, and refusing to accept them for who they are, deadnaming and misgendering them on purpose is what causes the trans suicide rate. Those people don't choose to be like that, they just ARE. Transitioning saves lives from suicide, so does something as simple as using their new name and pronouns. You're seriously the one who's messed up if you openly admit without thinking anything wrong of it of declaring yourself a transphobe. "Be YoUrSeLf" but not like that, right? They ARE being their true self by accepting who they are, and if you can't, as a Christian.. There's no hate like Christian love. Christianity promotes loving one another regardless of perceived flaws, not spreading hate. He would be deeply ashamed of you. You know WHY the suicide rates are so high for trans youth, and their estimated lifespan is so short? Hateful transphobes. They're murdered or killed for simply being themselves. People refusing to accept them for who they are, not using their new names and pronouns. They're not shoving their "lifestyle" on anyone. You know who DOES do that? Christians. You know what you're telling people, even your family, who may potentially be trans or LGBT? "I am not a safe person to come out to, I will openly misgender and deadname you, I do not care if it makes you suicidal". DO. BETTER. Don't have children if you cannot accept any possible outcome, including being trans. People don't choose to be trans, but you choose to be an asshole. So if family or friends suddenly distance themselves from you or suddenly cut you off, ask yourself if that's why.

This is a pro trans and anti transphobe safe space. Fuck you 🖕🏻

[ohnoitstbskyen]

The overwhelming misery of going viral on YouTube

In April of 2021, I posted a short to YouTube - a 60 second video in the format of their TikTok competitor. In the nature of shorts, it was a one-minute, necessarily un-nuanced hot take about a subject I like to talk about: character design. Specifically I made the mistake of lamenting that the character design of female heroes in major games tend to prioritize attractiveness rather than using their body shape to do storytelling about their lives or capabilities.

It did okay, garnering about 38k views in its first month. Didn't set the world on fire, but I got my point out there, and while there were some crappy comments, for the most part people seemed to understand what I was driving at.

The short had eventually climbed to about 100.000 views after a full year of being online, which is respectable, but in the world of YouTube Shorts a fairly middle-of-the-road level of success (these are extremely short videos being served extremely quickly to a huge base of users). Fast forward to November 8th of this year, and... something happens. More than a year after it was originally published, it starts gaining traction.

Slowly at first, a few thousand views, but by the 14th it's gained 80.000 views in a day. On the 16th, 400.000, on the 17th, 680.000. I have no idea why this is happening, there's no influx of viewers from any outside source, there's no topical news event that would make the video suddenly relevant.

I tweet about it, bemused by the sudden jump, but also hinting a bit at the other side of this story.

"There Is No Such Thing As Negative Press"

On YouTube, there is on the systemic level very little difference between positive attention and negative attention. If you create excellent work that brings joy into people's lives, they engage with your video and the algorithm reads that as success. And if you create miserable, hateful content that makes people angry and stokes them to responses of outrage, disgust or jeering, the algorithm reads that as a kind of success, too.

Hate-bait and rage-bait YouTubers operate in that latter space, churning out inflammatory or distressing content, hoping to elicit either reactions of horror, or gleeful cheering from people who like it when their favourite online personality trolls the Other.

But there's another way to garner negative attention, and that is to create content which is not at all designed to bait or elicit a negative response, but whose subject matter nonetheless produces a negative response from a certain kind of person.

That is the unfortunate slip-and-slide I have found myself on.

At the time of writing, the short sits at 6.8 million views, has been gaining on average 2 million views per day, and it still seems to be accelerating. Despite those skyrocketing numbers, however, it only ("only") has around 1300 published comments underneath it.

That is because, after the first couple of million views, I told YouTube to automatically hold all comments for review. That is, YouTube allows users to comment on the video, but those comments are not published until I manually approve them.

The reason I did this is... well, it's easier to show you with some pictures. Content warning, these are unfiltered YouTube comments, so expect casual bigotries.

These are screenshots from the "held for review" tab of my YouTube Studio backend. YouTube in recent years has gotten good at filtering out content like overt racial slurs and the worst of the worst insults, which is nice, but the filtered comments tab is still not a particularly pleasant place to read through right now.

Most of the comments are like what you see above: casually rude, fatphobic, homophobic, transphobic or otherwise unpleasant. Some of the comments are more intense, threatening me with violence, insulting me personally, "I hope your mom gets raped by a [racial slur]," and worse. The worst comments are a small percentage, but as you can imagine, they do stand out in the mind, and a small percentage of a huge number can still be a lot of comments.

And that's the thing. There are hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of comments. I scrolled for fifteen minutes and did not see the end of it. YouTube doesn't keep a visible count on how many comments are held for review, but I'd not be surprised if the 1300 comments count would have been doubled if I hadn't stopped it when I did. And since the video is still accelerating, that number is likely to skyrocket as well.

This provides me with the best theory I have as to why the video took off: the YouTube algorithm started showing it not to people who it thought would like it, but to people it thought would dislike it enough to react, to comment. And the more people did comment, the more the algorithm showed it to other people just like those who commented, who were also likely to dislike it.

This causes a feedback loop of negative attention, which the YouTube algorithm (horrifyingly) interprets as a success and an incentive to keep pushing the video.

Moderating this comments section is now physically impossible - I would need a staff of a dozen to handle it, which I can't afford and who I wouldn't want to expose to it, and while this deluge is going on, moderating the comments of other videos becomes next to impossible as well, since the "held for review" tab is utterly monopolized.

One fix for this problem, of course, is to simply disable the comments. But in my experience, doing that only encourages the worst of the commenters to seek out your other content and leave even worse comments there instead. In fact, a couple of dozen particularly irate people have already sought out my other channels to post insults there, adding to the stress and workload of dealing with all this viral "success."

How YouTube Makes YouTubers Worse

This situation is stressful, because humans are monkey creatures with monkey brains that do not like being exposed to a constant stream of rudeness, cruelty and casual bigotry. However rational you try to be about it, however detached and cold, it wears on you. It chips away at your mental defenses and becomes a constant source of low-level stress and misery.

But as far as YouTube is concerned, it's a huge success.

YouTube's systems are all set up this way. They celebrate increases in numbers with cheerful messages and positive green arrows and "helpful" statistics showing just how much things are growing - meanwhile, if you post otherwise positively received work that doesn't attract as much attention, it will give you dour "your content received fewer views due to lower interest this month" messages and greyed-out downward arrows. If you have a video that does really well on the numbers, YouTube will even play a little fireworks animation on its statistics to celebrate.

It's a form of not-so-subtle psychological manipulation. As a YouTuber you are dependent on your statistics to inform your work - if your rent depends on making those numbers go up, you essentially have no choice but to pay attention to them and let them guide your decision making. And so YouTube designs its systems to push its creators towards the behaviour that the platform finds most beneficial: numbers optimizing.

And the thing is, if I went only by the numbers, I would look at the success of this short and go "oh, there's a viable content strategy here!"

I could try and replicate its "success" by creating more content around the same topic, by targeting the same kind of outrage-baiting, by identifying the contentious subjects and trigger points brought up by the angry people in the comments and hitting them repeatedly, hoping to make engagement fall out.

YouTube would reward me for that, quite handsomely, in fact, even as mental health and professional happiness would absolutely crater. I don't have the personality for that kind of content creation, it's not what I want to do with my work, it's not the kind of person I want to be.

But I am not immune to propaganda. I have already changed as a person from doing this job, I know this for a fact. My priorities have shifted, my wants and needs have changed. Not for the worse, I believe, not yet, but the platform is constantly, constantly pushing on me.

It's unpleasant and it's stressful. It's hostile design, coupled with primitive and insufficient moderation tools, coupled with an aggressive algorithm which will go out of its way to ensure your relationship with your audience is toxic, if that toxicity produces better numbers for the platform.

Viral success is often thought of as a desirable thing, something which can launch a career or skyrocket an unknown to success. The reality is, it is mostly just overwhelming. I'm a grown man and I have done online content creation for a long time, and I have learned strategies to manage toxic comments sections over years of experience.

But imagine if something like this happened to a sixteen year old. Imagine if it happened to a teenage girl just starting out making videos. Or a trans person. Or, hell, any person from a marginalized community. I am sheltered by my privileges, but I have seen how dark it gets and how fast it gets dark for people who don't have those extra protections.

Well, it does happen to them, and no matter how rancid, bigoted and horrible the abuse they receive, they will log in to YouTube Studio to see happy fireworks and "Nice! Your video got 20 million views!" with a little green upwards pointing arrow right next to it.

You might have seen articles and thinkpieces around "creator burnout," and I want you to know that a huge part of what burns creators out is the primitive, profit-optimizing, hostile systems that power these platforms and monetize our worst experiences on them as "engagement."

In case you're wondering how much money I've earned from those 6.8 million views, by the way, it's about $20.

YouTube says they're rolling out full Shorts monetization next year, so I guess I just picked the wrong month to go viral.

---

If this story resonated with you at all, do me a favor and leave a nice comment under the work of an online creator you enjoy. It helps more than you might think.

You can tip me on Patreon or Ko-fi if you want to.

[myfandomrealitea]

That post you made about Harry Potter and how to not financially support and fund the franchise and put more money in Joanne's pockets felt like a lie because I swear I got the impression that even that wasn't allowed when the whole thing started

To be clear; I stopped. Completely. I compartmentalized it all and just stopped interacting with anything Harry Potter online whatsoever. But I always wished it would be fine to still be able to do certain fandom things without supporting her, but people were saying that even using the tag or reading the fanfiction or making fanart was still supporting the ip and not letting it die completely as a topic on the internet was indirectly putting money in her pockets.

It wasn't until I came across a post from a queer woman from somewhere in the global south with heavy OCD and intrusive thoughts or something like that, commenting on how hostile of a thing it became for someone of her affliction; the way people were treating it like do or die. Pointing out that no matter how much trans people and allys cut off their support of her, she has other large means of income that we won't be able to touch, and there will still always be transphobic homophobic Harry Potter fans that will continue to support her actively, putting that money in her pockets. Another thing she mentioned was the treatment of Harry Potter and Joannes bigotry in contrast to the treatment of FNAF and the creators bigotry. And lastly something about the USAmericanized nature of it? I don't really remember that part but I think I understood it at the time I read it (maybe it was something about all the other countries the IP is popular in who are probably more conservative and unaware or caring of the issues with her who will still put money in her pockets, or maybe it was something about American fans fixating and posing the support of her as the ultimate battlefield of Trans Rights to other queer and trans individuals trying to be quiet fans who are facing Much Worse in their countries)

Anyways after that I briefly started reading ao3 fanfic again, just put a filter for anything before 2019 or so, and then my interest more gently fizzled out.

I can't remember what my point is anymore, maybe just to bring these arguments to your attention(also I am not arguing against the financial boycott or ending of support for this woman through her ip).

Harry Potter will never stop earning money. That's just the flat reality of it; I mean, look at the likes of Elvis and the original Sherlock Holmes books and every other 'dead' media that's still earning money. Short of making Harry Potter an illegal piece of media, yes, there will still always be a number of people giving her money.

The goal is to give her less money. To turn Harry Potter from a prominent, profitable cashcow into a defunct piece of media that only select groups are still clinging to. To make it so that JK Rowling has to choose between paying her bills and funding anti-trans movements.

When something stops bringing in a certain amount of profit, studios start looking elsewhere. When a cashcow starts drying up, they stop trying to milk it as hard. Which in turn means less productions for JK Rowling to collect her pocketmoney from.

What would you rather; JK Rowling getting $100,000 or JK Rowling only getting $10,000?

Something is better than nothing. Damage reduction is better than open exposure. If everyone just rolled over and gave up because "things will keep happening anyway" the world will literally be a rancid, fetid wasteland of bigotry and violence.

I'd much rather watch JK Rowling fizzle out into a bitter old wench sustained only by the dogged support of other stubborn bigots than watch people willingly disregard and condone bigotry because its "easier" and "she'll be a bigot anyway."

I'd much rather JK Rowling only have $10,000 to donate to shitty movements over $72,000. Shitty movements can do a lot less with a lot less money.

[tossawary]

I'm interested in reading a nonfiction book specifically on the disabling nature of pregnancy, childbirth, and childcare, and how this intersects with traditional gender roles and legal + financial oppression within many societies, but I'm also interested in reading about the intersection of feminism and disability more generally. (Preferably something that is not bioessentialist or transphobic nonsense.) Does anyone have any recommendations?

Let me ramble beneath a cut here on the area of interest I mean here. I promise I mean none of this in a weird bioessentialist or transphobic way, I've just been thinking a lot about how the physical realities (limitations, dangers) of reproduction affect our social structures, both in an activism way and also a fantasy worldbuilding way. I think "Dungeon Meshi" set off my thoughts on these things when it delved more seriously into the pain of long fantasy lifespans and the unavoidable violence of the food chain.

More generally (not talking about "Dungeon Meshi" any longer), I've taken note of fantasy and science fiction worlds which incorporate technological advancements for the author's convenience, allowing characters to act more freely and sidestep more realistic consequences of their actions, without apparently considering what these advancements mean for the shape of a society. These advancements include: effective birth control, effective protection against sexually transmitted health issues, relatively safe childbirth, relatively safe abortion, and substitute breast milk for infants. (And often menstruation is never mentioned.)

In most of these generic fantasy worlds I've encountered, the way that magic (or sufficiently advanced technology) shapes society is not the point of the story.

(Side note: I'm going to talk a lot about fantasy worldbuilding here, but I want to make it clear that I recognize this is a very serious topic and real people all over the world suffer from a lack of care regarding these issues. When I suggest that I find exploring these issues in fiction "interesting" or "fascinating", it's stemming partly from frustration in seeing these real and concerning issues represented so rarely in exploratory fiction meant to give voices to our nonfictional concerns, not that I find people's pain entertaining.)

A magic tea that keeps a character from getting pregnant exists as a device so that the reader can enjoy those sexy scenes without having to worry about birth control. An author might make a magical people "immune" to infections for similar reasons; now the audience can enjoy the "thrill" of unprotected sex with an incubus (impregnation kink) without having to think about the ick of getting syphilis. Magical healing exists to get our favorite character safely through childbirth, not because the author is interested in exploring what this might do to a world's birth rates. Magical infant formula exists so that our characters can look after an abandoned newborn, instead of dealing with the historic tragedy of infant mortality rates. And so on.

Many stories have alternate focuses besides this kind of technological + social worldbuilding for a variety of reasons! They just want to write sexy scenes or intricate political plots or sweeping adventures! That's fine! Sometimes, I also do not want to fucking think about the violent and deadly history of human reproduction.

And many OTHER stories DO deal with these things! I have read fantasy stories that say, "Hey, if magical healing is a thing, especially a thing that works as well or even better than our modern medicine, people would definitely try to control access to magic for power. And the religions of this world probably have lots of opinions on it. And it would generally effect the culture of this world on a foundational level, huh?" For some stories, this kind of worldbuilding is their whole thing. I have read some fantasy stories that do at least somewhat take into account what magical birth control and potentially reproductive autonomy might mean for the people there, though I might personally think that this kind of freely available technology would revolutionize society to a far greater degree than those fantasy worlds often depict.

See, I don't believe in gender or sex binaries, people are a lot more complicated than that, biology is a lot more complicated than that, and restricting legal rights and medical care and social roles based on either of those things is ridiculous. But I don't think it's unreasonable to point out that there are significant biological differences between groups of humans. (With blurry lines to these groups! Intersexuality is very much a thing!) Reproduction is necessary for the continuation of our communities, and in our reproduction, the pregnant parent bears a far greater physical burden and risk than the non-pregnant parent, which is really fucking unfair to everyone, but it's just the way that nature has it set up and we have to live with that process at the moment.

(Side note: no one should have to be pregnant or give birth if they don't want to. I also believe that, ideally, no one should have to care for a child if they don't want a child. This rambling may accidentally sound like "women are DESIGNED to have and care for children" nonsense, but 1) no human being or anything alive on this planet was "designed" for anything, that's horseshit thinking that's incredible harmful to people who physically cannot have children or are choosing not to have children so as to not pass on genetic issues, and 2) childfree people can do whatever they want forever. I may interchangeably use "pregnant people" and "women" because I'm switching off talking about physical reproduction and historical/modern oppression.)

(Also, yes, polyamory is a thing in relationships, and also people won't always live in partnership with the other bio parent of their children for whatever reason, but just go with me here for now.)

Historically, pregnancy and childbirth is a burden than has been borne by women. Currently, around the world, this is still a burden borne largely by women. And I've been wondering a lot about how much the oppression of women in our societies intersects with the oppression of the disabled. Even in ideal pregnancy and childbirth and childcare, without medical issues, it is a process that is at the very least temporarily disabling.

Some rare individuals can basically do hard labor throughout their pregnancy, up until the day they give birth, and then they're basically miraculously ready to run a marathon afterwards. Sure, whatever.

Most people do not have this experience with their pregnancy! Even if they do not experience more serious medical issues (which are a very real risk), a pregnant person is likely to at least get tired more easily and require more rest, to experience nausea and have specific dietary and nutritional requirements, to have achy feet and an aching back and other achy body parts, to have their mobility restricted by their belly and by looking after their belly. And so on! This is just scratching the surface!

By the end of their pregnancies, many people are unable to work. Many people are forced to work through draining pregnancies anyway, to get the supplies or money to survive, and suffer a variety of health issues later down the line. This inability to work leaves a significant group of people (the people who are producing the next generations within a community!) reliant on the compassion of their partners, families, or larger communities.

What if a society does not have a structure in place for those who cannot work? And who have no one to look after them? What if a person's partner or family or community is abusive? A physical and financial power imbalance is created by the unavoidably disabling nature of pregnancy.

And then there's childbirth, which comes with a very real risk of death or permanent health issues, to those with the best of modern healthcare and without. I don't feel like I need to get into this one too much.

But even if childbirth goes well, even if both parent and child are perfectly healthy afterwards, childcare itself restricts the formerly pregnant parent's ability to do things. Even waving aside the recovery period after childbirth, in a situation without infant formula or pumping + refrigeration, the breastfeeding parent is going to be stuck feeding the child multiple times every day and must stay close to them. In most situations, it makes sense that the breastfeeding parent is going to take on a lot of the childcare, and breastfeeding may go on for several years.

And though many people have done many impressive things with a child strapped to their back, an infant is both helpless and fragile. Toddlers are still fragile and still incapable of doing many things for themselves. Any human being, whether or not they were the pregnant parent, suddenly becomes limited in what they can do just by holding a baby. Caring for any human being, including the injured and sick and elderly, can be an exhausting situation and most carers are going to need help. Caretaking is work that will put limits on your ability to do other forms of work to survive.

And non-pregnant parents also deserve societal support! Especially if they have lost their partner for some reason or another and are now the sole caregiver for a child.

Thinking about all of this has underlined to me again just how much disability activism does for all "other" forms of activism. No one is better positioned to see how our societies fail to help and to care than those who need help and care to survive. What if a person cannot safely work? What if the work they can do is not enough to care for themselves and their dependents? What if a person cannot rely on the "compassion" of their local community? What would society look like if it was legally structured to provide unconditional support?

Reproductive rights and bodily autonomy seems to often become a high point of control. I'm not criticizing fantasy stories where magical birth control is readily available and it's just not an issue! It's nice to imagine that! But I do think it's worth thinking about how things like effective birth control and safe abortion potentially completely changes the way a society operates, giving people new control over their own bodies and futures. It's worth asking what power structures keep women (and other marginalized people) oppressed within a society when technology / medicine exists that could let them live freely. Is it a class issue? A religious issue? Can women legally tell men to fuck off or are they basically property in this setting?

(I think a lot about that one anecdote someone told about how their grandparents couldn't share a bedroom at one point, because though the couple loved each other very much and wanted to have sex, they just couldn't risk pregnancy again after all of the children they'd had and they had no effective birth control.)

(I also think a lot about the woman who tweeted about how birth control was good not just for "family planning" but because she wanted to have sex and didn't want children. She's the one who created / popularized the iconic phrase "die mad about it", I think. Amazing work.)

(I also think about how long it took for "marital rape" to be recognized as an issue and I want to fucking scream. It's STILL an issue in many places / situations.)

A society that does not freely provide medical care and childcare can never truly have "equality between sexes". Looking around at countries which complain about "declining" birth rates ("women choosing not to have children!!!") while also making it hellish (medically dangerous + a huge financial burden) to be pregnant or give birth or have children... I think I see part of their problem. Historically and into the modern day, pregnancy requires making yourself horribly vulnerable to your partner / family / community, and given the choice, even if they may want to be parents, a lot of people simply cannot afford the risk and burden of giving a child a good life. Pregnancy and childcare are often disabling and a lot of countries around the world treat disabled people terribly.

So, I'm interested in reading more about disability and feminism, as well as disability and children's rights, and disability and a lot of things, honestly. Or maybe something that just talks about childcare and pregnancy across a variety of societies around the world? Everything to do with "women are inherent this and men are inherently that" is bullshit, but there is an unavoidable power imbalance in reproduction (pregnant partner versus non-pregnant partner, which has historically been women versus men) which looks like it may have influenced traditional gender roles somewhat within some societies.

So, I'm looking for book recommendations.

[compact-turtle]

Welcome To Your Local Yandere Bookstore

Greetings, fellow reader. Your bookstore owner, Turtle, is more than delighted to have you here.

-about your fellow bookstore owner,

-21, she/her, and trying to pass her college courses.

-about the bookstore + requests..

Will mainly be OCS

-however, will update if comfortable writing fandoms in the future

-I love requests and seeing your thoughts and comments!

-Note: I will try to get through your requests/asks. However, I can’t guarantee that I’ll be able to get through them all!

-> Book requests open <-

-the bookstore is welcoming to all but please be warned...

>Content Warning: Purely fictional. Does not condone real life behavior. Please stay safe in real life and look out for these behaviors in real people. Please block or refrain from interacting if uncomfortable with content.

18+ Blog that contains multitude of sensitive topics and content

Some Examples:

-violence, blood, etc

-Noncon/Dubcon

-Yandere fiction

Your bookstore owner will always try to include all trigger warnings for the story at the start! If she ever misses any, let her know and she will fix it.

-will not write…

-incest

-feet/watersports/urine/

-racist/homophobic/transphobic

-bdsm, S/M

-MASTERPOST LIST

Atticus (Yandere Farmer)

GENERAL VIBE AND LOOK

Fanart <3

MAIN STORY LINE

PART 1 PART 2

DRABBLES/THOUGHTS/ASKS

Random info about him

Sunbathing spicy nsfw

How would they be like with kids? (All Yans)

asks: Asks 1 Ask 2 Ask 3 Asks 4

Orion (Yandere Space Explorer)

GENERAL VIBE AND LOOK (under Atticus Link)

MAIN STORY LINE PART 1

DRABBLES/THOUGHTS/ASKS

Random info about him

I'll listen to you next time. Okay? (Spicy 1k follower nsfw)

Asks: Asks 1

Ivar (Yandere Soldier)

GENERAL VIBE AND LOOK (under Atticus Link)

MAIN STORY LINE

PART 1

DRABBLES/THOUGHTS/ASKS

headcanon

Asks:

Ask 1

————————————-

misc-yandere drabbles and headcannons

Yandere Bounty Hunter

————————————-

Anons

🪷

Please have a good time and enjoy your stay at your local yandere bookstore, fellow reader!

[genderkoolaid]

Jules Gill-Peterson also has a blog post where she literally says "Black and Brown trans women are in danger. White trans men are not." Which is just like cool, great, so one of us got murdered the other week but we're not in danger

That's bad on it's own, but I really wanna question why Black and Brown trans men aren't mentioned at all. This happens a lot, where people will talk about which trans people have higher rates of violence and only bring up trans WOC, and just. Don't touch the topic of trans MOC. Even though Black and Brown trans men are also extremely at risk and frequently victims of transphobic racist violence. Why do we act like Black and Brown trans men don't exist? (the answer is racist anti-transmasculinity)

[fairladyjenny]

i think the responce to transmisandry/transandrophobia has been mostly reactionary in that trans people (in my experience, transmasc and transfem and nonbinary alike) refuse to interact with the whole premise partly due to the underlying problems of "misandry" as a whole and partly due to bad actors' assimilation of the topic, but it's definitely unfair and dishonest to throw all transmasculine experiences with discrimination under the blanket term "transphobia" while separately recognizing the issue of transmisogyny [in the specific misogyny-based transfeminine experiences with discrimination]

the common (and very valid) justification for not wanting to see misandry as a problem relies on the correct premise that cis men, by default, face almost no gendered discrimination, and as such it is counterproductive to discuss such discrimination in the same optic that you would use to describe misogyny; transmisogyny is the extension of the common variety misogyny in a way which is specific to transfeminine people, with how some form of violence [mostly] do not apply to trans women and how other forms of violence are applied disproportionately, or are unique to trans women. in this sense, there is a strong case to be made about the existence of gender-specific violence against trans men too: they [mostly] do not face some forms of gendered violence, and have other forms of gendered violence, again, applied to them disproportionately

since i'm russian one of the examples of such disproportionately applied violence would be the draft: trans men who changed their documents when that was still a thing that could happen can be drafted (since F64.0 is no longer a valid reason to avoid the draft), and, henceforth, have to face unique transphobic violence, that, i hope, needs no explanation. yes, trans women who haven't changed their documents can be drafted too, and cis men and cis women can be drafted also, but:

1. some experiences of transmisogyny can be shared between not only transfeminine people (which is why the whole TMA/TME doesn't really make sense, if you happen to live in a v. supportive environment even as a trans woman you could experience no transmisogyny in your life, and vice versa); some experiences of other forms of discrimination can happen outside the particular group they're specific to also; there's no reason why this wouldn't apply here

2. it's painfully obvious that trans men are going to have very different experiences with the draft than trans women or cis women or cis men.

though, one could argue that at this point you're just making up more and more convenient little boxes with names that sound catchy for the purpose of melting down everyone's unique experiences in a pot, and that this could be counter-productive with how many identities exist out there... but this kinda goes both ways and why not just call all prejudice and acted out discrimination against specific groups of people "chauvinism" and be done with it. having specific words for specific topics is nice

[doberbutts]

I keep seeing posts about recent transmisogynistic events that are calling out horrible things people are doing to transfems, and every so often some people will list Transandrophobia Truthing as a crime/dogwhistle against transfems (on the same level as misgendering, death threats, etc) and I'm just so tired. How are we even supposed to defend ourselves without taking away from the issue at hand. I feel like they're just going "How can i make this about the people i dont like being bad so that people who agree with the main topic also agree with me" and not addressing the actual issue (rampant transmisogyny) It feels so callous

I've seen them too, though I have a couple folks who dm'd me about them and apparently a lot of the people claiming to be close to Avewy and also saying it's trans mascs' fault are people who she is not actually close with. I'm inclined to believe them since these folks have no history of lying to me in the past, so do with that information what you will.

As said before, on the heels of tumblr's ceo being as unhinged on main as possible and yet another child dead from transphobic violence, I am too emotionally exhausted and drained and frustrated to be coherent about anyone using these things to sew seeds of discord. I haven't liked how aggressive my notes have been getting and I'm also not really sure what to do about that.

In honesty, I am planning to uninstall tumblr for the duration of my surgery recovery. My blog will run from my queue and only my actual friends who I speak to off tumblr will be able to contact me. I'm also uninstalling my work apps for the same reason. I don't need the stress while recovering from major surgery during a time in my life that should be as stress-free as possible while I complete a stage in my journey I've been [somewhat literally] dying for for 18 years. I'll be back when I've got my dogs back again.

[cocklessboy]

Bafflingly, some of my posts are yet again getting notes from terfs and transphobes, so once again, here is a reminder that:

I am literally trans and extremely happy about it. Love being trans and injecting myself with testosterone and being hairy and having a deep voice and being called "sir" by strangers. It fucking rocks.

Trans rights and let people do whatever they want with their bodies and gender presentation forever.

Men are great, I love men, they are not evil or inherently dangerous.

Penises are not inherently dangerous.

Women can have penises and men can have vaginas and anyone can have any combination of genitals and it's none of your business what they have.

Trans men are men, trans women are women, nonbinary people are nonbinary, people's gender is whatever they say it is and I don't care how many times they change it.

Trans women are great, I love trans women. I love all trans people but trans women get a special shout-out because they really seem to have to put up with the most bullshit, hate, discrimination, and violence. I am giving every trans woman who wants one a hug and/or a fresh-baked cookie and telling you how beautiful you look.

Yes, every trans woman is beautiful, this transcends cultural ideas about what is attractive, they are all inherently beautiful.

Intersex people are fucking awesome too by the way, whether they're trans or cis or don't think of themselves in either of those terms.

No one is giving the surgeries you're all so afraid of to typical trans kids, but they sure as fuck are doing them on literal babies who were just born if they are visibly intersex and that is some fucked up shit and needs to be banned everywhere forever.

Conversion therapy is just torture, doesn't work, does immeasurable harm, and should be banned in every circumstance everywhere in the world forever. (That also includes conversion therapy for autistic kids, typically called "ABA therapy," just while we're on the topic.)

People can fuck around and explore gender and try something and decide it's not for them and transition and detransition and retransition and redetransition as many times as they want and that's all fine and cool.

Dysphoria is not a necessary part of being trans, you can be trans without dysphoria. Gender euphoria is more important than gender dysphoria.

Medical transition is not a necessary part of being trans, you can be trans without hormones or surgery.

Not all trans people know they're trans as children. Some of us don't figure it out until we're much older. (I was 35!) It doesn't matter when you realize you're trans, it's still valid.

Ignore whatever other people say about who you "really" are and whether you're "allowed" to be that. You are whatever version of you makes you feel the happiest with yourself, end of discussion.

Gender can also change. Genderfluid people are real and valid and awesome.

Trans people are in no way inherently a danger to children. While we're at it, neither are drag queens, I love drag queens too.

Misogyny is inherent in our culture and we are all touched by it but we can choose to fight against it, and that includes transmisogyny.

Medical misogyny is real and it sucks and we need to fight against it. (So is medical racism and medical fatphobia and all kinds of other discrimination.) These are structural problems caused by the way doctors are trained and not the result of men being evil. Female doctors are frequently just as bad or even worse in how they treat female patients.

Toxic masculinity is real and baked into our culture but it is not an inherent aspect of men or masculinity itself, it is something we are taught growing up, it can be unlearned, and we can fight against it.

Men are not inherently bad or dangerous, and if you hate all men you should genuinely get some therapy and work on that. Yeah, even if you were traumatized by a man, that doesn't mean they're all bad. The vast majority of them are good and awesome.

If you have been so badly traumatized by a penis that you can't handle seeing one, then I am genuinely sorry to hear that, but it is on you to avoid any place where people might be naked, and not on literally half the human race to hide themselves from you.

Women can also be aggressive, violent, and abusive. They are not all inherently pure and gentle and nurturing.

Most women are good too though, just like most men. People are mostly good!

Gender is not a binary but neither is "biological sex." Your third-grade education in biology was, believe it or not, extremely simplified, because you were a child, and does not reflect actual reality. If you can't face that, then I guess you are still a child, no matter how old you are.

Feminism is about how women are as good as men and can do everything men can, not about how women are weak and soft and men are better at everything. That's sexism, you're doing sexism, not feminism.

Fuck terfs, transphobes, radfems, "gender criticals," or whatever the fuck else you're calling yourselves these days when you realize once again that everyone hates you so you change your name to try to make yourselves sound like you're not a small, sad group of conservative extremists that, again, everyone seriously fucking hates.

Focusing on helping the people you love is more important and productive than focusing on punishing the people you hate, so once more: trans people are fucking awesome and I love every one of us.

Trans rights forever.

In the words of the legendary @drchucktingle, love is real. Now get out there and prove love and make your world a little brighter today.

Terfs please out yourselves in the notes so I can block you. 💖

[just-positivity-stuff]

[betterbemeta]

Not to navigate a nuanced topic or anything but you all understand that 'having a fetish for' is different from 'fetishizing', right? And that being sex-positive doesn't mean that everything's a free-for-all?

'having a fetish' is something that exists within the person who holds it. It's not inherently bad or good to have a fetish. Societal norms define what even is a fetish. A culture that doesn't associate breasts with sex will find a fixation on breasts to be weird, etc.

But 'fetishizing' something is to project over other people's bodies, forcing them to bear or play out those inner beliefs you hold. The fetishization of bodies can be system-wide, bigger than a single person, and often is. It is a form of violence that deletes the agency and personhood of the fetishized body in favor of how that body can be possessed or controlled.

The reason I am bringing this up is that while statements of desire are like... allowed... maybe understand that we all participate in power dynamics on the internet that may not be instantly apparent. Even if you create sexual art, write poetry, openly express your desires to your friends, which ARE all normal... you (probably) wouldn't in real life go up to complete strangers unsolicited and state, AWOOGA! I want to be choked by a redhead tonight! When this does happen in real life, it usually is considered to be sexual harassment, or creating an atmosphere of sexual harassment. Even if you're not talking directly to the redhead you're thirsty for.

And like. There's a difference between "I'm sexually excited by this art, the fat woman in it looks hot," however you want to say that, and getting followed out of the blue from a blog that contains posts like, 'I want to feed her until her belly pops' which is about control of the bodies of others, for sexual gratification. Anybody ethically engaging in that type of play would be doing so with mutual consent, it would be a kink scene and not fetishization of bodies that just exist out in the world, neutral of what someone wants from them.

Before you post or add tags, or follow on your kink side blog, think, am I putting this into a space where everyone's mutually consented? Is it a statement that would be protected by social freedom of expression or would it be considered an unsolicited sexual advance by a reasonable (see: not a homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic) standard? If it came in a large volume, (like, hundreds of messages and not just yours), would that context change?

I'm anything but the sex police; I want everyone to be as nasty as is safe for them to be, but. Typical netiquette doesn't cover this stuff, how power can turn what's normally private and none of anyone else's business into someone else's business in a big way.

[euniexenoblade]

hey someone i follow has been posting stuff about transadrophobia/transmisandry and i get that the concept itself is wrong due to the nature of intersecting opression but there were some valid points made. for example how trans men are treated as neither men nor women depending on the context, such as in the case of male on male violence where they are seen as valid targets but then denied due to percived femininity. (there was some other stuff but i cant recall it right now)

do you have any advice (other than just to block them). im bad at nuanced analysis and could use some help. i want to be able to understand if what was being described was regular transphobia or an actual unique form of opression

-a transfem confused about the current situation

(p.s. sorry if this is impossible to read im quite stressed as this person is one of my favourite users and i want to have a nuanced perspective of the topic)

"how trans men are treated as neither men or women" is literally ripped right out of literature about transmisogyny. Trans women are seen as a lesser other that is neither men or women. Like, if they want to talk about that point fine but it's literally a concept that's existed and talked about for trans women for over a decade. So that would at least be "transphobia" and not "transandrophobia," because it's not remotely specific to their experience.

I'm not getting into a point by point with this, cuz I don't want to be involved in this stuff. But transandrophobia was coined by a dude who literally talked about getting off to lesbians being correctively raped and consistently was very lesbophobic. Nothorses cites literal terfs in his renditions of how "baeddels ruined the LGBT" (baeddels never had a strong following a died out years ago, the idea baeddels still exist is bullshit perpetuated by transphobes/transmisogynists/kiwifarms esque types, it's the mean bad tranny Boogeyman ("what do you mean Boogeyman is misgendering??? It's gender neutral!")).

At the end of the day, transandrophobia shit is terf propaganda with a few instances of real actual transphobia transmascs experience sprinkled in. I don't care about these dudes talking about their experiences, I honestly kinda don't care even if they have a specific term for it, but "transmisandry" was primarily used by racist mras and "transandrophobia" is a terf ideology.

These people are just talking about transphobia. They want some special term because they think "transmisogyny" is some special cool thing trans women get to have, they don't actually see it as an intersection of two oppressive axes. They're usually not well read about transmisogyny and don't actually know anything about it.

As for talking to this person. Idk. Could just approach it that the word transphobia already exists and that the first point I mentioned is literally a thing transfems go through. Tbh w you I wouldn't know what to do if my friends start posting that bigoted garbage.

[djuvlipen]

Hello can you kinda explain the whole JK rolling thing and why people hate on her a lot cuz i seen ppl do nothing but hate on her and call her transphobic and i'm so confused on it as to why

Hi! Sorry I let this ask go ignored for a little while, it's a big topic so I wanted to answer it once I have some free time; I went looking for a post that could summarize the situation but, Tumblr being what it is, I couldn't find any. So here is a quick timeline, as I remember it, as someone who was a TRA on Twitter while most of it unfolded:

in 2019, Jo followed Magdalen Berns on Twitter (I also believe she liked one of her tweets and that's how Twitter users found out she was following her). Berns was a gender critical lesbian and YouTuber who was one of the first critic of TRA misogyny.

At the time, Jo was much, much more liked than she is now, obviously. This event caused some drama, it trended for a while, but it was quickly brushed aside and things went on. In my spheres (TRA Twitter), it was seen as kind of a bad look to follow Jo on Twitter following this, but you still could get away with it.

Jo has since explained that she uses the 'like' feature on Twitter to archive things she finds interesting and wants to have a closer look at. Many believe that she probably got interested in Berns' content while writing one of the Cormoran Strike novels, a crime novel series that often explores the themes of male violence and misogyny.

in december of 2019, Jo made a tweet in support of Maya Forstater, who lost her job after misgendering a non binary colleague.

After this tweet, it became forbidden to follow her on Twitter if you were a TRA. Things got worse in June of 2020, when Jo reacted to an article talking about period poverty while referring to women as 'people who menstruate':

Right afterwards, she made a thread going more in details about how transactivism harms women and LGB people:

(I'm pretty sure there was another, longer thread but I can't find it)

After this, former HP actors like Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson accused her of transphobia, while other actors (namely Evanna Lynch and Robbie Coltrane) defended her. She got thousands and thousands of death and rape threats, was called sexist slurs, and was threatened with doxing.

A few weeks later, she published an essay on her website, explaining her views. It is a very well-written and insightful essay that I recommend to read:

And that's pretty much it. As you can see, her position is pretty tamed. She has never been rude to anyone, she just defended sex-based rights, lesbians' right not to sleep with men, and using language accordingly. She helped thousands of poor women with her charity work, funded a rape crisis center, uplifted Iranian women, supported LGB activists and helped a hundred Afghan women escape the Talibans, but because of a few Twitter threads she made, her entire political activism has been misconstructed and boiled down to "she is a fascist who hates trans people"

[jebs-outerspace]

The Devils Lapdogs Intro Post

(Hi! This blog is dedicated to my Oc project, The devils lapdogs, which you can read here. This is an RP blog, an ask blog, and also a blog to post content about said Oc project. This is my first time making a blog like this but it’s for fun so I’m not too worried about "messing up")

🎤- GREETINGS FELLOW SINNERS! I hope we’re all having such a lovely night, day, noon, dawn, dusk, and evening. I know I am. Well anyway, before I divulge into this whole shabang let’s lay some ground rules, shall we?

THIS BLOG DOES NOT WELCOME YOU IF YOU ARE :

-A Proshipper/Darkshipper

-You are less than 16 years of age

-You are Xenophobic, Transphobic, Homophobic, Racist, Antisemetic, or Ableist

If we discover that you are interacting with this blog you will be hard blocked. It’s a matter of safety and comfort, not just for us but for you as well!

Well now that that is over with let’s work on the next part, the most important part ^_^!

A CONTENT WARNING, PLEASE READ BELOW BEFORE INTERACTING OR READING UP ON.

This story contains many heavy and dark topics that readers may find disturbing and triggering. I am warning you now of this, I am no longer responsible for your reactions to these topics once I list these off. Below is a list of content warnings and triggers, READ THESE CAREFULLY AND TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF. Though I don’t intend for this blog to be nearly as serious as the story and it’s mainly for a laugh, I do want people to know what they’re getting into story wise.

DEATH AND VIOLENCE

ALCOHOLISM AND MENTIONS OF IT

DRUG ABUSE AND MENTIONS OF IT

SUICIDAL IDEATION/ATTEMPTS/AND DISCUSSION OF

ABUSE (FAMILIAL, VERBAL, DOMESTIC, PHYSICAL, DOMESTIC)

SELF HARM AND THE MENTIONS OF IT

LOSS OF BODILY AND MENTAL AUTONOMY

DEHUMANIZATION

This concludes the forewarnings, thank you for reading ^_^

🎤-Wow, what a mouthful. Anyways, hope you did your reading! Shall we get into introductions? Or perhaps the plot! Oohoo I have always been known to be very indecisive!!

Ahhh, well, I suppose I’ll just show off the gang all at once!

The cast’s dialogue marks!

🎤-The Devil

❤️-Denise

🚬-Wilson

🍾-Casey

👹-Chico

🧸-Charlie

🕸️-Ari

🕷️-Orville

[the-s1lly-corner]

hey, may i request hcs of laughing jack + slenderman x nonbinary, afab!reader who gets misgendered/bullied a lot but is too scared to correct/stand up to ppl? happens to me a lot :[

laughing jack and slenderman x afab!nonbinary!reader

im so so sorry you keep getting treated like dookie- as a fellow afab nb i totally get your pain with the misgendering, people just need to hush up

notes: reader is afab and nonbinary, established relationships, both canon characters have limited knowledge of lgbt topics but thats mostly because they hardly interact with people or media

cws: transphobia, canon typical violence, mentions of stalking

laughing jack

doesnt get to interact with many people much, so hes a little limited on his knowledge- and given that he originally started existing in the Victorian era? hoo boy- hes not transphobic or otherwise lgbtphobic but there is some ignorance

can see himself as using some labels once he gets more educated on it, though! always headcanoned laughing jack to be gnc!

tries to help you appear more androgynous or masculine if thats what you want! he doesnt mind playing dress up with you, and hes definitely going to take it as a moment to turn it into a game and try to cheer you up!

openly mocks the people who bully you, as well as outright saying that theyre just a bunch of jerks who... dont deserve nice things to head their way.. to keep the description vague

similar to slenderman, hes going to go out and get some vengeance if things get ugly enough

he doesnt like going out without you, hes a bit clingy.. but the sight of you being so distraught really makes his insides coil like snakes.. does not like it at all

even tries to push for you to carry him around in his box so he can just jump and slash anyone who says anything- though thats not a very good idea... would give him away quickly

slenderman

he doesnt understand much about gender, and honestly? i can easily see him being agender, or maybe gender apathetic simply due to him not showing interest in his own identity. he rarely wants to be perceived anyway

despite not knowing much about it and not caring how others see him, he can understand just a little bit on why it matters to you- especially when youre seen as something youre not and harassed for it

rest assured that if he ever finds out someone is harassing you, he will silent them quickly. out right offing them or stalking them over a period of time, the result will end in you having one less person on your back... then two.. then three.. and so on

actually the fact that people seem to either go missing or skip town not long after messing with you makes many keep their mouths shut- and before you even think that might prompt someone to harm you under the guise that its YOU doing it, slenderman isnt going to let that happen

he listens to you if you need to talk about your feelings on it, hes unsure of how to verbally help you affirm your gender identity but if you outright ask him how he views you; he tells you that you pass in his eyes regardless of if you present more femininely, masculine, or androgynously.. though that may be because of his aforementioned limited knowledge on the topic... hes supportive nonetheless!

[fembrie]

Intro to Radical Feminism

If you've stumbled across my blog because you're interested in radical feminism, here are some FAQs and links to resources:

What is radical feminism?

Radical feminism emerged during the second wave of feminism, in opposition to liberal and Marxist feminism. Liberal feminists demanded equal rights for women without consideration of the broader social structures that oppress women. Marxist feminists linked women's oppression to capitalism, and therefore considered dismantling capitalism the key to achieving women's liberation. Radical feminists, on the other hand, looked beyond legal and economic systems and instead considered patriarchy as the system under which women are oppressed. (Note: the distinction between radical and Marxist feminism is not as clear cut today as it used to be, since radical feminism borrows some analyses from Marxism, and Marxist feminists also acknowledge the existence of the patriarchy.)

What is the patriarchy? Where does it come from?

The patriarchy is the system of social organization that grants men social, economic and political power over women, enabling women's subjugation. There are several theories on its origins. Marxist feminists might point to Engel's analysis of women's oppression, whereas radfems might look to Firestone's analysis in The Dialectic of Sex, for starters.

Are radical feminists transphobic?

Since radical feminist belief in the existence of patriarchy relies on the notion of two sexes, one of which acts as the oppressor sex, radical feminism lies at odds with modern gender ideology which dictates that sex is mutable. The notion that a person can identify in and out of their sex - and by extension in and out of their oppression - renders patriarchal oppression a meaningless concept. Whether or not this constitutes transphobia is up to you.

What is a TERF?

TERF stands for trans exclusionary radical feminist. TERF is a misnomer, really - radical feminists include anyone observed female at birth in their feminism, including trans and nonbinary identified females.

Is radical feminism white feminism?

Not at all. While feminists in the global south may not self identify as radical feminists, radical feminism is the branch of western feminism most closely aligned to the struggles of women outside the west. Radical feminists focus on issues such as sex trafficking, male violence and female socialization for instance, all of which are more likely to be experienced by racialized women. Moreover, the analysis of gender relations through the framework of patriarchy is applicable to women everywhere in the world. Liberal feminism lacks such an analysis.

How can I learn more?

This is an excellent overview of commonly held radical feminist beliefs

If you're interested in books on radical feminism, this is a masterpost on radical feminist readings. I would personally recommend Dworkin's Right Wing Women as a short and simple (but nonetheless powerful) introductory work.

If you want to read something shorter than a book, On The Woman Question publishes articles on popular radical feminist topics

If you are a podcast person, Redfem covers a variety of topics in radical feminism and leftist politics in general

I also highly recommend watching Kathleen Stock's interview at the Oxford Union if you're new to radical feminism to get a better grasp on gender critical arguments