#unless you are talking about trans women talking about gay women talking about non-white womens experiences

[scholarofgolb]

guys i have to say something. didn't like the barbie movie all that much.

[wherefore-whinnies]

I have been thinking so much lately about how binaries like straight relationships vs gay relationships or cis vs trans or aspec vs allo or even white vs non-white are all just complete bullshit actually and feeding into them with your activism really does not help anybody.

like at least at this point lots of people in my circles know the men vs non-men stuff is trash and mostly just repackaged radfem rhetoric right. honestly all of these are in some way. they're just used to perpetuate new forms of exclusionism and new forms of normativity.

"ew straight relationships" and sentiments like "lol I forgot women can date men" aren't progressive or cool. it's putting down tons of queer people who are in straight relationships or relationships that appear straight. bi people, trans people, genderfluid people, aspec people, multigender people, lots more. "oh but I don't mean *those* queer people!" well people don't have to explain or prove their identities to you. it's none of your business. your activism *has* to include straight people because other people's identities are none of your business and you *cannot* know what the identities of the people involved are unless they choose to share it with you and they have no obligation to. forever expanding the scope of "cis het allo perisex etc. etc. etc." on and on and on will always be limiting.

"lol I forgot not all men have x body part associated with afab people" isn't progressive or cool. it's excluding trans people who choose to have certain kinds of gender-affirming surgery, for one. I imagine it also excludes some intersex conditions.

making jokes about strangers being eggs because they appear male-presenting and like flowery deodorant scents isn't progressive or cool. it is literally gender essentialism. it doesn't become cool to shove people into boxes just because you think they're now the "right" boxes.

I know I've done this a lot but I don't think talking about things "the allos" do in those terms is useful or helpful either. I mean even in all the posts I make about them I end up putting in footnotes like "so many aspecs do this shit too". so literally what is the point. it's really not helpful to be putting down allo experiences on the basis of people being allo when the a spectrums are so varied that every allo experience can also be an aspec experience.

and even white vs non-white is not a simple binary, as I've learned from some of my mutuals. mixed people exist. talking about whether someone is "[non-white] enough" just harms people and is just more exclusionism.

idk man subscribing to the notion that all these things are binaries seems immensely unhelpful to what we are supposed to be actually trying to accomplish which is letting people just be themselves and do whatever they want and label themselves however they want forever (I understand this is more complicated when it comes to race). so what if that also helps "the straights". focus on lifting people up and not on putting putting people down. otherwise we're just going in the same circles over and over while pretending we're doing it sooooo progressively this time.

[marta-bee]

I keep hearing Gov. Walz's slogan, "Mind your own damned business," in the news. I believe in it - quite a lot! - but I don't see a lot of people recognizing just what it demands. And that worries me, because we've been here before.

Back before gay marriage was legalized, one of the main arguments for doing that was it didn't actually affect straight peoples' marriages at all. Gay people being able to marry didn't mean a single straight couple would have to divorce, it didn't give them any less rights in any way, it just meant gay people had access to the same civil and legal apparatus to build their lives together and have it legally recognized. And a lot of people who didn't approve of homosexuality were still to support gay marriage, because they weren't being asked to support it. It wasn't about that, it was about being fair and not getting all up in someone else's business.

It got more personal after, because unless you're going to have a really narrow definition of what that marriage means, of course it's going to affect all kinds of people. Obergefell didn't go nearly far enough in this area, because gay people were still subject to all kinds of discrimination; as the pundits often quipped, in most of America you could get married on Sunday and fired for it come Monday morning. But even with just the gay marriage description, you have all kinds of businesses saying they didn't want to say they approved of marriage by baking a cake, setting up a wedding website, doing the photos, whatever. Because at that point (they felt) gay marriage did affect them.

I personally think we're all most free when we keep business separate from identity and beliefs. Gay people, racial minorities, women and other non-male genders, trans people, all kinds of groups along those lines should be hired (or not) because they can do the job well. We should buy their product or service because they can do it well (or not). They should be accepted as customers along the same lines. But what about someone who votes for Trump? Who donates to him? Who yells at a local school board meeting about librarians sharing filth with their kids? Who puts a "We support Israel" sign in their shop window or get caught on the news yelling racist screeds while yelling a MAGA hat at a counter-protester?

I don't have an easy answer to all that. I recognize there's a difference between identity and beliefs, though these days in America being in the Trump camp really does feel more like a tribe than an ideology. And emotionally, I sympathize with wanting to call people out for a lot of those behaviors. But rationally, if we're trying to focus on "Mind your own damned business," to focus on being neighbors and helping each other as neighbors rather than on the things they do and believe we disagree with, that does swing both ways.

I actually think this is the defining political question of our age: how much space do we need to make for people to do, say and believe things we find hateful in the public space, and when does that cross over into endorsing those things? To take one example: say someone objected to what HBCU's taught as "critical race theory" (not the actual thing but how right-wingers used the word), they though it was revisionist and anti-white. I'm honestly surprised this hasn't happened yet, given what's argued at the K-12 level. And say this person says, okay, if people want to go there and study that it's none of my business; but if they're using Pell grants and federally-subsidized student loans and the like, they certainly don't want to pay for that with their taxes. Their starting point is ridiculous (but dangerous) nonsense, but that's not the point I'm really interested in. Does minding their own business mean they can't object to their tax dollars paying for it? What if we're not talking about a HBCU but Bob Jones, Hillsdale, or Liberty University, schools with famously fundamentalist curriculum? Does it matter if it's not some universal program but an earned tuition benefit, like the GI Bill?

Or at a more local level: if your neighbor is always posting about how Hamas is a terrorist organization and we need to support Israel on Twitter, is that reason enough not to do your laundry at her laundromat?

I really don't think there's a straightforward, easy answer on all this. All kinds of factors play into specific situations. But I do think "Mind your own damned business," especially when we get into the nitty-gritty of lived reality, is a lot more challenging to us on the left than it seems at first glance. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's bound to involve growing pains, though, and probably a lifetime of struggling for that right balance. Good luck to us all (left and right) with that one....

[raviosrupees]

Super Specific Linked Universe Headcanons Pt 1.

All of the Links are autistic but they all have wildly different ways of presenting it. Ask me about their special interests, please. Please.

Warriors is in his 20s. He is an Aquarius. I'm right.

Sky is the ultimate straight cis ally, but he has bi wife energy. He is best friends with Legend, and they're kind of inseparable.

Twilight is a taurus, he's cis and bisexual, but leans towards women and fem ppl (and too hung up to think about anyone but one woman)

Wild is taller than yall think, 17 or 117 whatever is more convenient for him, zelda told him his birthday is november 7th (scorpio, ofc) and he just accepts that.

Hyrule is pansexual (mostly cis but might be genderfluid, he likes to wear feminine clothes and makeup)

Four is like? 3'8, and he's 20 yo but most people don't believe him. He's a trans boy, and most of the colors are too besides vio, who I think is either genderfluid or pangender, uses all pronouns. Four is bisexual but leans towards guys, though he loves his Zelda.

Legend is 4'10, 17 yo, born december 14th at midnight. he is trans, any pronouns, and bisexual.

Ravio is same height and age as Legend, and they're both born on the same day but ravio was born at noon. This really bothers Legend, he wants his own birthday. Ravi loves it.

also ravio is gay, asian/latino, chubby and has the best smile <3

war is cis and bisexual but he leans towards women, I think he's aromantic but probably could be romantically involved with someone.

Times eyes are more gray than blue

Sky 9 times out of 10 has no clue whats going on. Stupid and confused, and its perfect.

Twilight always knows where all of them are, and I don't even know if it's just smell. He has mom instincts "where are my kids, what are they doing"

Wild got mad anger issues pls calm down babe. Kind of scary. He lets hyrule braid his hair sometimes.

Hyrules eyes are more green than blue, and he has freckles all over his face and body (jokes he ought to get a kiss for every freckle)

Whenever Wind gets mail from his little sister, he reads it to the group. He's very proud of her, and she's very proud of him. She has a bunch of big brothers now.

Four + the colors are white-asian mixed (or looks like it yk, bc he's hylian) his eyes are dark brown.

Legend goes non verbal a lot, esp when they're stressed, but when she talks, she talks. I mean, hand gestures, ranting, cussing, pointing, "and you a bitch, and you a bitch." favorite curse word is cunt.

warriors ruffle everyone's hair, and they all hate it (esp four and legend, who claims he's going to choke him with his own scarf)

Sky likes to sing and dance, and wishes more of them would dance with him.

Twilight has slept as a wolf so often that it's practically natural for him, he really prefers it. Also, he takes all of his nightwatch shifts as a wolf.

Wild will teach literally anyone about edible flora and mushrooms and such, and foraging around hyrule, if only they would listen. Sometimes talks random animals ears off about his favorite flavor combos. Sky loves to listen and ask questions.

Hyrule will hand his favorite people random stuff as "gifts" like feathers, flowers, rocks, dead bugs (he's obsessed with bugs, he loves them so so much and they're all his friends) his favorite animal is a bumblebee

i know we all agree wind swears likek a bloody sailor, bc thats what he is, but how about him using random shit for swears like, "crabs cankles," "bilge-sucking" or calling the others landlubbers. also feel like he'd be the type to say "bite me" when someone disagrees with him.

Four keeps a bunch of books in his bag, and if their reading is disturbed they all have different reactions. Blue pinches or glares, Vio ignores you unless she deems what youre saying important, red gets physically distressed, and green will actually tell you to be quiet. (blue pinches a lot actually)

Legend is a very picky eater, especially with textures, this pisses wild off (wdym you dont like it YOU HAVENT EVEN TRIED IT)

Sky's Zelda is a bisexual virgo, and she knows everything.

Malon makes very good bread. I want to shove that shit in my face ong. Also she insists on giving each of the boys big hugs when shes sees them.

[terra-feminarum]

As a detransitioner, how much do you think gender identity is built by gender stereotypes?

I don’t know. But here is my guess.

TLDR; I think gender stereotypes affect gender identification a lot but it’s complicated and also capitalist concept of self is at play.

Long answer: First of all, I do “believe in gender identity”, as I conceptualize identity as a sense of self based on tangible real life experiences. I’m white. I’m a sister. I’m a gardener. I’m a woman who has been perceived to be a male for a certain time period of her life, but I’m not an actual male. And so on. Many people also identify with the gendered stereotypes that are connected to their sex. People identify with religions that might not be true in an objective sense, but the identities are true – people truly are Christians and such.

So what I think we’re talking about here isn’t gender identity per se but the disconnect between lived experience and the idea that you can feel you’re something you have never experienced. We’re talking about fantasy instead of identity. “I wish I was this-and-that, because my mental image of this-and-that is pleasant and my idea of what I actually am is unpleasant.”

Not all transgender people adhere to stereotypes.  What about trans women who just physically transition but never wear heels, make-up or act like stereotypes? They exist, just as there are trans men who are very feminine. Does it mean there aren’t stereotypes involved or are the stereotypes just more subtle? A lot of trans men watch drag and are very into wearing “women’s clothes”, as long as they won’t be perceived as “women” – so they want femininity but without the burden of all things associated with womanhood.

A lot of people with gender dysphoria say it feels entirely physical, like their bodies just don’t match the mental map they have of their body.  Their bodies feel foreign to them; they are repulsed by their bodies even when they are alone.

Could it be they have developed these physical feelings as a reaction to the social discomfort they feel about being associated with certain gendered stereotypes?

Human psyche is very capable of developing symptoms that feel entirely physical. There are people who identify as “therians”, non-human animals. They have phantom limb feelings of tails and ears they think they should have. If transitioning into a non-human animal would be possible, would these people be miserable unless they were granted the access to have the tail they always knew is part of their body?

And then there are conversion disorders. They aren’t analogous to transgenderism but they do highlight the power human psyche has when in distress. Conversion disorders were more common when people didn’t have the cultural vocabulary to describe their mental anguish. Instead, people became blind or deaf or paralyzed or had seizures, fully experiencing these things as true, but having no physical deficit that would cause the problem. That’s how powerful the human psyche is.

I wonder if we have the cultural vocabulary to describe the anguish sexism and patriarchy causes us? Or are we like a soldier who will become physically paralyzed instead of saying: I'm scared and I don't want to hurt anyone.

In addition, culture affects the mental disorders humans experience. Certain psychological phenomena are only present in certain cultural context where the symptoms make sense individually and on a collective level. I'm fairly certain gender dysphoria is like this. Many cultures recognize people who cross gendered boundaries and inhabit the social role of the opposite gender, both genders or either, but I don't know whether these experiences include any kind of distress over one's physical body or whether these roles resemble more something like butch lesbians or feminine gay men.

As far as I know, there isn’t any coherent theory explaining gender dysphoria as something universal and inherent. To me it looks like this: A person strongly believes or wants something (I’m a man). It is incongruent with the body the person has (a female body) and with how others treat that person (societal role of a woman with all the stereotypes attached). This disconnect between the want and the reality causes distress. Just like the disconnect between “I feel I should be beautiful” and the reality of “I’m not conventionally attractive” will cause distress, ruminating, excessive time in front of the mirror, plastic surgery. The distress isn’t caused the physical body itself (being unattractive or being a female) but the cultural connotations attached to this physical reality – like people thinking you’re stupid, or that you need to defer to men.

Personally my transition was very much affected not only gender stereotypes, but what these stereotypes caused: misogyny, lack of representation of women as complex humans, sexual harassment. One huge factor was that transition existed and I was able to find information on the subject, so my fantasy self became a potential real self, and so, in a way, it became reality at some point. If the means to transition didn’t exist, I doubt my dysphoria would have been too deep. After all, I’ve despaired over other things as a young teenager: I wished I could be tall, I wished I could be Japanese, and so on and so on. Alas, “racial transition” does not exist and becoming tall isn’t very viable either, so I grew out of these thoughts and learned to understand I’m actually a human being instead of a character I should and could design to be as cool as possible.

The current capitalist culture teaches us our bodies are changeable, and in fact, changing or enhancing one’s body is almost a duty. Existing just as you are is neglect. You’re expected to self-fulfill by changing your body. You are expected to design yourself like you are a character.

To be honest, sexism and homophobia in this society is so deep, I have empathy towards people who will solve their distress by transition. It's a very individualistic solution, solving nothing at the larger scale. But as much as I wished every woman would ditch make-up and heels and have self-respect, they won’t, either. And so some women transition into men, some women defer to men. There is still much to do.

In conclusion, I think to develop incongruence of gender identity, we need strict stereotypical gender roles, but in addition, it is driven by an individualistic culture of “self-development” and the cultural gaze being turned inwards, everything revolving around one’s one self and self-actualization. What is also needed is the idea of being able to change your sex, or changing the meaning of sex altogether. We rarely despair over something that isn't realistically possible.

[a-faggot-with-opinions]

hi, very sorry to bother you, but what does TEHM mean? thank you, i hope you have a good day/night

Don't apologize for asking, I love educating people on TEHMs, and it has become sort of my niche after a little while of doing disourse. It's important that everyone knows about TEHM rhetoric and how to avoid accidentally harming transmascs by platforming their talking points.

TEHMs are a violent transandrophobic ideology and hate group. They not only seek to gatekeep male homosexuality from trans men and transmascs, but also want all AFAB trans people to be dead. TEHM itself stands for trans-exclusionary (exterminatory) homosexual man, and the name is pretty self explanatory. They often use rhetoric that seems to be supporting gay men's rights in order to justify violent transandrophobic rhetoric.

If you think I am being hyperbolic or exaggerating, that is a fair response due to how much the impact of TEHMs has been downplayed even by other transmasc issues advocates, but it is easy to find examples of this rhetoric causing a lot of harm. While I advise against this for your own mental health if you are a trans person, searching for posts in the #tehm safe and #tehms do touch tags here on Tumblr will show you very clear examples of TEHMs being extremely transphobic and misogynistic, but still allying with TERFs because both groups want to exterminate trans people.

While TEHM rhetoric mainly targets transmasc MLM, they knowingly target non-MLM transmascs as well. Some common TEHM talking points and dogwhistles include:

Fearmongering about "fetishization of homosexuality" (being gay) by "straight women" (trans men).

Implying that transmascs are not subject to unique oppression, and that we are just "straight white women" "trying to feel special" (speaking out about the oppression that we face on a daily basis) or taking resources away from "real" (cis) gay men.

Calling transmascs "fujoshi" (unless the transmasc in question has explicitly said they are okay with it).

General complaining about women while still agreeing with radical feminists or radfem talking points. This is a massive red flag, and if you see someone doing this, 9 times out of 10 they are a TEHM or sympathizer.

This is nowhere near a complete list, but I post a lot about TEHM talking points and dogwhistles with the #this is your brain on tehm talking points tag.

Not everyone spreading TEHM talking points actually wants to kill trans people, or is even transphobic. These talking points are meant to fly under the radar to anyone except other transandrophobes. However, TEHM rhetoric has infiltrated a lot of discourse even amongst trans-inslusive MLM, and it is important to call that shit out wherever you see it.

Thank you for asking me this so I could educate you!

[papirouge]

"l also think they went hard on her bc she's very beautiful and nothing angers conservative men more than attractive liberal women lmao"

You are onto something here. I remember once in my country there was this polemic because a right wing politician said in a show he hosted that a female leftist politician had stated that pedophilia "had to be reinstated", which turned out to be false. This sparked a conversation in which a member of his political party (and also ex co-host of the show) also spoke up. He talked about how many middle aged men from the right would obssess over the young women from the left. He said that this guy was like this; he would say a lot of outrageous things about pretty leftist women just so they would go to his show and be near him. He also said even right wing women though he was too much and too sexist and pervy.

He also expanded on the right wing's men obsesion with young leftist women, saying how many of their conversations would focus on these women physical appareance. He also commented that male right wingers also had this delusion/fantasy where they believe they can 'save' these women from the left with their masculinity and rationality, and they compare themselves to the 'effeminate, somewhat homosexual" men from the left, believing themselves to be superior to these 'soyboys'.

Funnily enough, this same dude who would antagonize the young pretty women from the left just so they would pay attention to him, also tweeted something like "teen girl first anal", apparently confusing Twitter with the search engine. Once he also told a reporter he was attracted to her since she was 12 years old. He was 19 when she was 12.

Conservatives? Being hypocrite sex freaks? Color me shocked ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

This also confirms my theory that conservatives are ultimately only attracted by liberal women to have the satisfaction of taming/humbling them. Such gratification is impossible when they date doormat conservative pickmes. Look at all the women fawning at Musk or Andrew Tate... they aren't those they pick to date or breed with.

This obsession with tranny groomers and gay pedo of conservatives is peak projection. It's insane how the straight up pedo narrative of some conservative figures is glossed over, but someone being gay or with a gender identity is enough for them to suspects them of being a predator... I always said conservatives didn't care about pedophilia unless it was to dunk on liberals or "progressive" symbols (Epstein, Balenciaga, etc). They won't peep a word about conservatives caught with teens if not defend them (isn't Russell Brand -although not conservative got into conservatives good favor ever since he got vocal against the c0vid vaccîne- is accused of dating/sexually abusing a minor? and yet they're defending him like there's no tomorrow). Lately there's a twitter account who got suspended for accusing Musk of being a pedo (to get back at him after he accused a marine dude of being one when he refused his held when rescuing kids lost in a cave in Asia). I really think there's something to dig with him about it.... I'm still not over how fast Musk simps shrugged off his twitter side account where he role played as his own child and made sexual tweet.... His laptop should be investigated. Unfortunately the Musk savior syndrome is so strong, I think he could be caught raping a child people would still defend him, so.....

Sexual offenders & pedophiles are in the majority cis straight male so their obsessions to paint LGBT as these predatory groomers is lowkey insane. I've always said that since rape and sexual abuse stats disproportionately incriminate MEN they are desperate to find way of other'ing the issue. They'll either point fingers at non White men (so ugh, still men) or promote the idea that these stats are over amplified by false rape allegations 🤡

Aren't most father of teen moms grown adults? But suuuure, we should be focused on trans people in schools... controversial opinion but a drag doing a lecture in school is less concerning than grown men impregnating young girls...

I think the obsession with AOC of many conservatives also reeks from the fact they lowkey want to bang her.

[lunarsilkscreen]

TW: Why Black People hate the Gays (Rape)

Being gay has a sort of "white privilege" embossed on it in America. This has to do with a process in American slavery known as "Buck Breaking".

So lots of people online blame the gays for it.

In those times, Sodomy (with blunt instrument) was a punishment given to slaves on the same level as whipping. It's why "Sodomy" is illegal in the U.S. obviously, being gay is typically a consensual act these days, unless you're in prison where it's a power move, because nothing says "Cis Heterosexual Alpha Male" like f* another man in the a*."

It's only gay if you're on the receiving end. (That means that in this interpretation, every woman is *really* a gay man.) #malegaze #wtf_really #reallyreally?

Because of this, I've heard and read many black male comments IRL and online talking about how "Black men can't be gay" because it's punishment and willful submission to the white man.

This is where, I figure, queer-poc erasure happens in black communities. If a man acts "gay" or is transgender, it's a willful relinquishment of their own freedoms (to be cis heterosexual black man) and submission and acceptance of slavery and the inferiority of the black race.

White men also feel that way about queerness, but black people got it so much worse thanks to the GD* slavers, and lack of human rights given to slaves at that time in America.

I'd go over Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible again, and how it's about rape. (And not consensual gay sex) but you can probably already recognize how Sodomy gets twisted into "no gay sex at all".

Because there's that inherent *maleness* to it. A power struggle, that makes men lesser, and therefore men can't consent to it, and therefore sodomy can *only* be rape.

And this colors the world in which we view sex and intimate relations. This interpretation says "All Sex is Rape" unless you're married AND are trying to concieve. And since you're trying to concieve, even though it's rape, it's OK.

That view even suggests that consensual sexual relations *is* rape, but that certain forms of rape are OK, because you signed a contract that says the husband will provide for the wife and child.

"you can't rape women if they concieve because you're forced into a contract anyway"

But you can't be forced into a gay contract, so we just send all the rapists to prison so they can rape the non-rapists. Because you can't stop them from being rapists. But you *can* illegalize trans women so the straight rapists have people to rape too!

Does that mean prison is *actually* goals for some people? That instead of punishment, prison is a reward? And that society always seems to reward men and not women for sex related crimes?

Well. Unless you're Black anyway... *Sorry*

[queeranarchism]

Sometimes other white folks ask me the best way to be less of a Clueless White Person without demanding people of color expend effort teaching them, and I have a suggestion that will absolutely work. You won't wanna do it, but I'm going to tell you anyway. Step 1) Follow at least 50 more people of color on social media ASAP. Step 2) Read their posts, and don't reply to them unless they're addressed to you by name or they've addressed a non-rhetorical question to the general public. Not sure if it's rhetorical? Don't answer. Step 3) Make this a habit, over a period of years. That's it. Certain things will gradually start to become clear to you that used to be extremely opaque and confusing, and you will never have to waste a single other person's time educating you. Same goes for a man trying to understand women, a straight person trying to understand "teh gays," or any other group of people who has traditionally dominated conversations trying to understand a group who has traditionally been silenced/marginalized. The moment you enter a conversation between people your group generally dominates, you're tacitly asking it to accommodate you. Social media gives us an unprecedented opportunity to just quietly listen and learn how things really are for people. Don't waste it by butting in. "But I'm a straight middle-class white male Christian - this means I'll never get to reply to ANYONE!" If you're good friends, go ahead. If you're not, why does silence feel so much like hardship? Really think hard about this. You're so close to understanding. Also, #wellactually you aren't silenced at all. Thanks to the internet, we each have our own accounts and platforms where we can ramble as much as we want, and people can opt in. Witness me, white cis lady, doing just that, unsilenced "despite" my cis whiteness. I simply believe that not EVERY conversation is for or about me, and I also believe that the conversations that are not meant for me are worth listening to when they take place where I can witness them. Others' perspectives and experiences matter. And I also know that, raised as I was (white and affluent), I am primed to believe that my opinion matters and should be heard. I have to FIGHT that conditioning every time one person says something I disagree with on here. In my case it takes *effort* to stay silent. But for some people, speaking means fighting against their conditioning. Some people are raised to believe their opinions do not matter, and they are fighting that conditioning just to have these conversations, to make themselves heard. Social media gives them a place. In theory, being a woman should make it hard for me to speak up, but I was lucky; I missed that conditioning. My upbringing was largely free of sexism. So I have a very "white dude" tendency to talk over people, and it takes effort to just listen. But it's so, so worth it. I have learned FAR more about the reality of the world simply by quietly listening and observing than I have by "debating." I highly recommend that all of you, especially those of you who belong to one or more dominant groups, give it a try as often as you can.

Mishell Baker on Twitter (account https://twitter.com/mishellbaker/ no longer exists)

It’s so so important to learn that entering a conversation as a person with privilege changes the conversation. If you are a white person entering a conversation between people of color, you are changing the conversation. If you are a cis person entering a conversation between trans people, you are changing the conversation. Ask yourself: did these people invite me in? do they want this change? Can I not step in?

[kaedynce-is-a-writer]

How to Write an Autistic Character

So, you’re a neurotypical, otherwise allistic, or possibly neurodivergent person wanting to write an autistic character, but you’re not sure as to how you want them written?

Well, my fellow writers, you are in luck! In this post, I will explain how to write an autistic character while steering clear of any harmful stereotypes that are seen in neurodivergent characters in most types of mainstream media.

Now before I dive in, my biggest thing is to talk to other autistics! Like I will say in this post and many more in the future, autism isn't a "one size fits all" neurotype!

1.) The first thing I want to say to y’all is that we’re not all young cishet white boys. Some autistic people are non-binary, some are black, some are women, some are older than 25, some are gay, and let's be honest--it's okay! You're valid!

While, yes, quite a handful of autistic folks are boys, it's important to note that you shouldn't make all of your autistic characters young, white, cishet boys, since older folks, trans folks, non-binary folks, and women who are autistic and of a different racial/ethnic background need representation in media, too.

Another thing to note when writing autistic characters is that not all autistic LGBTQ+ folks are on the asexual spectrum. I've met a few autistic people online who are asexual or otherwise aspec, and they are some of the most amazing people I've met. However, as I've said before, not all LGBTQ+ autistic people are aspec. Some are lesbians, some are bisexual, and some can be pan, too!

2.) The next thing I want to say is that autism isn't a "one size fits all" neurotype. What traits can be displayed in one autistic person aren't always necessarily as prominent in another autistic person. One autistic person can be extremely extroverted whereas another can be introverted or non-speaking (they can still communicate with other people using AAC or sign language!) One autistic person can be hypersensitive to loud sounds whereas another autistic person can have a hard time hearing things (auditory processing disorder). I am actually the latter of both of these statements (I'm introverted as hell and I'm bad with putting my thoughts into words most of the time and I need to have closed captions on when I'm watching TV unless it's something that I've watched a million times). But as I've stated before, autism isn't a "one size fits all" neurotype, meaning that no two autistic people are the same.

3.) The third thing that I want y'all to note is that we stim. A lot. More-so than the neurotypical/allistic population, even though everybody stims in some way, shape, or form. Stimming can be used as a way for us to express our emotions or needs, whether we're happy, trying to evade sensory overload episodes (sometimes it's unavoidable and I understand that, I went through those too), or whether we're in a meltdown and need to go someplace where there's less sensory input. Some of the most common stims are hand-flapping, rocking back and forth, and vocalizing random sounds we make! There are other types of stims, too, such as smelling things (olfactory), looking at things that mesmerize us (visual), and listening to the same song on repeat sometimes (auditory). And even feeling things that are soft can count as stims, too!

4.) When it comes to emotions or humor, we are not like Rain Man or Sheldon Cooper. This is one harmful stereotype that you need to avoid like the plague when writing an autistic character. We promise you that we are not emotionless, nor do we lack a sense of humor.

However, autistic people do tend to struggle with reading social cues and pick up one's emotions based on looks (I had a lot of trouble doing this as a child, and trust me, I still have trouble with this), and the former part of the statement may end up causing autistic people to either be left out of the conversation altogether or interrupt said conversation. But unlike what most mainstream media with an autistic character says, we actually do experience the same range of emotions that a neurotypical and/or allistic person would, and we do have a sense of humor.

5.) And the last thing I want to mention is that autistic people have intense fixations on certain subjects, otherwise known as hyperfixations and/or special interests.

What is your autistic character's special interest/hyperfixation? Do they do research on their special interest/hyperfixation? Do they do artwork based on their special interest/hyperfixation?

An example of special interests I'd like to give is actually one of my own. I'm very much a metalhead/alt kid of sorts, and my favorite band tends to be Linkin Park. If I'm asked about Linkin Park, I will be more than likely to give an infodump on the band's history, given that I'm not overstimulated or burnt out from the day's activities. This also includes the history of people within the band, like Chester or Mike (since those are the two members that I know most about).

More will come in part two! Stay tuned!

SOTD: "Therefore I Am" -- Billie Eilish

[icaruskeyartist]

What is your opinion on the recent videos by Finntastic Mr. Fox and Goddamnit Malcolm where they talk about the supposed male privilege trans men seem to have after transitioning "fully" or to the point where they are no longer perceived as anything other than cis men? Idk if you watched them or anything, but it would be cool to get your thoughts if you do

I had not watched them at the time of getting this ask, so I proceeded to watch them so I could answer to the best of my ability

Finntastic Mr. Fox So for Mr. Fox, I do find myself wholeheartedly agreeing with what he's describing, and I appreciate that he says from the start that it's men and masc people who pass as cis men who experience male privilege, as well as him explicitly pointing out that he is part of an extremely lucky few that gets this privilege.

Side note, his fucking hair and eyes holy shit.

Anyway, part of what he's describing, how trans men are still affected by misogyny, either from people weaponizing our bodies as insults against us, how many of us carry trauma relating to being seen as women and girls growing up, and how we still need access to gendered health services even if we're completely stealth. I look at that and call it transandrophobia.

The other things, how trans men who can pass will often go stealth because it's so much easier than to be out and questioned and nitpicked constantly, how they will often feel alienated from the queer community (cause let's be real white, passing men like Mr. Fox here would be heavily judged unless he chose to out himself as trans or was super gay and even then likely side-eyed because he is a passing white man). That's also transandrophobia. It's all about the intersection of being a man who is transgender and all the complications that come with it.

The whole Bahamas thing is heartbreaking. I can't imagining having to renounce part of your identity just so you can feel comfortable in your own body.

Goddamnit Malcolm Oof, you gave me a goddamn movie didn't you lol? I realize I didn't have to watch it but I wanted to answer your question.

So this video was much less structured and there a few :/ moments for me that I'm fairly certain are more from speaking in the moment than an actual disagreement from these people's values and my own. Plus we get some non-white and non-binary perspectives! Always a plus. I took some notes so I'll try and make sense of them now.

My biggest takeaways were about how there's a huge adjustment when you are perceived as the opposite gender you were raised as. I should mention that all the men here appear pass even when some of them are on the shorter side (there's only one clearly nonbinary individual on the panel). It also sounds like they all started to socially and physically transition after growing up perceived as girls and young women. Important disclaimer here because people who learn and transition younger or who cannot pass will have different experiences.

Also important, even if I don't say "seen as a cis man" every time, when I talk about passing or being seen as a man, please assume I'm talking about being seen as a cis man unless otherwise denoted.

If you're raised as a woman, especially in a more liberal household, you're taught to speak up for yourself and demand the space you deserve. Makes sense right? Generally, societally, gendered expectations means that women are meant to be submissive and quiet so you have to combat that expectation. But when you switch and are perceived as a cis man, you can be seen as aggressive and off-putting for being so pushy.

This oddly enough ties back to some of the complaints I've seen on reddit where trans men in irl circles feel like they're not allowed to speak up -- a combination of their upbringing as "women" and the perceived privilege of identifying as a man in a feminist space gives trans women more chances to talk over them. It's where I think the "socialization" argument comes into play a bit. Because we have a panel of men here talking and agreeing that they were raised to be outspoken and had to quickly learn to tone it down or were cognizant of how it could be perceived should the be seen as a man demanding space.

There's also a big thing about race. We had two non-white dudes explain how they're often seen as more aggressive now than they did when they appeared to be women, especially Victor, who mentions that white feminists are far more likely to be racist to him when he points out they're being racist. There's also talk from a majority about how weird and off-putting people found them to be mid-transition.

They also highlight a lot of problems men, cis or not, face: having to be aware they are seen as more of a creep to people on the street, the inherent distrust people have about men with children, the lack of or perceived disinterest in a community, and how queer spaces treat men. There's a little thing there about how some queer spaces are trying to combat the privilege men face by banning cis men -- which, say it with me, leads to transandrophobia. Because they're designating cis men to be men and trans men to be non-men.

This "no cis men" allowed treehouse ends up not only alienating people who desperately need a community but it's a bandage on the problem, not a solution. And it reinforces the idea that cis men don't need/deserve/desire a community and traditional toxic masculine roles.

Also also, the limited emotions that's allowed to be displayed by men, the apparent ability to use any man for physical labor -- Tranye summarizes it well when he talks about weaponizing his vanity to not be used like that. Reminds me a bit of the idea people seemed to have about trans men protecting trans women in bathrooms.

And of course, being a visibly queer trans man? A whole host of issues they understandably didn't get into.

I do like they talked about what trans men can bring into the male community. The idea of using our stories of womanhood to protect women, of forcing cis men to stand down and question their misogyny and generally gross behavior, etc. It was all good. I dislike the fact they choose to label these traits of community building, emotional expression, et al as "feminine," though it was near the end of the video and a good shorthand to say "these qualities usually associated with femininity" when you're talking on the spot.

I also didn't like the idea of "men know masculinity is fragile" just because I've talked about before that trans masculinity is fragile and there's nothing wrong with buying the "boy products" because it makes you feel good, that sort of thing. I got a video about that somewhere...

But I'll leave it with this quote from Tranye because I feel like it summarizes everything they were saying about trans masculinity, trans male privilege, and transandrophobia (though they don't use the term):

"Trans men are the trash men who have to pick up the broken pieces of masculinity."

It's a hard job and not everyone can do it, but I want to be one of those that can.

I hope that answered your question at least? Maybe once all this shit dies down IRL I'll join Malcolm's discord and see if he'd be up for talking about transandrophobia as a concept.

[gothhabiba]

Hi. This question is in earnest. What does non-binary mean to you as a femme woman? I am butch and being non-binary feels as classed of an experience to be as being a woman. Being treated like a gnc person informs my identification the same way being treated like a woman does. What does it mean to be non-binary if it’s not a classed experience? Again, not trying to be a tool, just trying to understand better because I’ve learned a lot about gender from your blog.

hello & thanks for the question!

firstly I’m not sure why my identity as a fem or as a feminine-presenting woman / lesbian is relevant here, unless you’re under the impression that I identify as nonbinary--I don’t

I feel that some distinctions are being collapsed here--being gender nonconforming in presentation (presentation of course being what the term “gnc” tends to refer to, I’m not trying to argue that e.g. any gay person is “gender conforming”) is not the same thing as identifying as nonbinary. it’s entirely possible to be both, or only one or the other

treating nonbinaryness like a “classed” experience in the way that materialist feminists theorise women as a “class” would require arguing that how patriarchy extracts surplus value from one “class” for the benefit of another is specifically organised in one way or another around nonbinary people as a group (the exploitation of labour of course in part structuring what a “class” is for mat.fem.s)--I’ve never seen anyone try to argue this

assuming that all you meant by “class” is, like, a cohesive group defined by similar enough features that it’s reasonable and helpful to be able to talk about all of them at once (allowing for structuring differences in the form of race, class, &c.): I don’t think that there is just one coherent, cohesive “nonbinary” experience. I think that arguing that there is, or that one should be defined, is taking all the teeth out of what the term and conception of “nonbinaryness” are designed to do, aka challenge the naturalised sorting of people into gendered groups. calls for the articulation of a “nonbinary experience,” the consolidation of a “nonbinary aesthetic” that is clearly legible as “nonbinary” to your average outside observer, the inclusion of a “nonbinary” option on government identification, &c., just sound like people wanting to create a third gender, which of course gets no one anywhere

that tendency & those desires are led primarily by white afab nonbinary people, & I think you can kind of guess why--those are the people who are allowed to pretend that their specific experience of being nonbinary is or ought to be applicable to everyone, who don’t automatically see the danger in creating what basically amounts to a government database of trans people, who are in love with taxonomy to the point of insisting on one specific group identifier with plainly identifiable characteristics that everyone with x experiences can or ought to be “sorted” into, regardless of e.g. any specific genders or gendered experiences nonwhite or non-Western people may have within their own ethnic communities

the strength of “nonbinary” identification and theorising is in the refusal of naturalised gender categories, the challenging of the naturalisation of “gender” and “sex,” an insistence on a multiplicity of experience and the usage of language that is sensitive enough to capture that multiplicity. all of those strengths are eroded or lost when “nonbinary” is turned into a catch-all category of its own (in talking about the broader material motions and epistemologies of patriarchy--of course there are other contexts where it may be perfectly appropriate). that is, the entire point is that it doesn’t “mean” just one thing to be nonbinary

of course “woman” is subject to the same sort of splintering (not every woman is treated the same, has the same relation to global patterns of labour, &c.) but if we’re talking about e.g. how you tend to be treated in public, this is part of a much older conversation On Here about gender & perception where my argument was basically, you’re not solely sorted into “man” or “woman” by others but also a host of other qualifiers including, like, “failed / inadequately feminine woman,” “effeminate man,” whatever, these are all going to have to do with an interaction between your perceived asab & your perceived presentation according to any individual person, & these perceptions are all highly contingent and subject to shifting. I really don’t see any possible way that a marker of specifically “nonbinary” identity exists that other people can reasonably read or know to structure their perceptions around--but from your question I think you’re thinking more of gnc presentation in the first place!

[zire-in-space]

This Is Always Going To Be My Pinned Post

I'm through with humanity right now, as so much shit has made me go batshit insane over the extreme marginalization by other marginalized peoples. So I'm making this my official pinned post to rid and block anyone that are these things below:

Anti-semetism: I couldn't give two fucks if you are a redneck conservative alt-right winged asshole or some wannabe woke anarchist or progressive. There are no differences between a white or black anti-semite and I make no fucking exceptions for it.

Homophobia: Pretty much the same as above I do not give two shits if you are democrat or republican, and I definitely do not let any homophobic hate on my blog, whether from a black or white personor anyone in between.

Transphobia: I dont care if your a lesbian/gay person, if you're black or white, if you're a woman or not, a feminist or not, a Democrat or not, I do not allow any type of Transphobia on my platforms.

Sexism and Misogyny: Again, I do not care if you are white or black, democrat or conservative, man or not, lgbtq+ or not, I do not tolerate nor allow sexist or misogynistic shit on my blog.

Racism / Prejudice / Colorism / Anti-Blackness etc: I couldn't give a thought of a fuck for this shit, I do not care if you are black and support or are a black fake woke activist for BLM or if you are some white degenerate All Lives Matter supporter or activist, or if you're a asian or hispanic or muslim or native american. I. Do. Not. Care. What. Race. Or. Ethnicity. You. Are. I do not tolerate any racism nor marginalization from anyone.

****addition to the racsim/prejudice part:***

(I also do not want anyone playing Oppression Olympics with my posts. There is not a marginalized group that is more oppressed, nor is there one less oppressed. This is always a move made by some of the black community or lesbian/gay terfs to both ignore/wave away issues related to other marginalized groups, but also to be able to discriminate and marginalize other groups (who are non-privileged). I am aware other communities do this aswell, however I have been seeing a pukable amount of this within those two communities. Those who defy this rule will be blocked and reported.)

***end***

Xenophobia: Another I-don't-give-two-fucks-who-you-are thing. If you are black or white, lgbtqa+ or a cishet, woman or man, I do not want nor tolerate any xenophobic slurs or hate speech at all. And again my tired ass don't care if you are some fake woke anarchist or centrist or liberal or conservative or progressive. I do not care.

Albeism: I do not care who you support. What race you are. What religion you may be. I do not accept any excuses nor give any exceptions or listen to whatever dumbass arguement you will give to be an albeist piece of shit.

This post will stay pinned for as long as I want. Until people realize they cannot try me with their prejudice asses, until this blog is a total blockade away from any of the things above, and a true safe space for any and everyone who is a decent human being, it will remain this way. I do not care. Unless you are getting depressed by my posts and want an occassional cute comic or oc backstory then you go to my asks.

This blog is a safe space for those who want to crack a joke to chill out. Talk about controversial stuff but also understand you cannot say that the amount of given humanity towards certain groups is a debate. Maybe bring awareness to an issue without the stress of aligning withsome dumbass strict blm usage or with hateful xenophobic rhetoric. For trans women to go to talk about feminism and their support without the stress of terfs and radfems. For lgbtqa+ people to feel welcomed without the dreaded feeling that the people of this community I want to build will suddenly harm them with their sexuality/gender identity. For non-christians to go to and not get pitted against the bible or god or jesus and feel like they can practice their religious beliefs without being hunted or mocked for it. For black people to go to without the dreaded fake woke white people demanding blm focus on blue lives matter instead of focusing on their brothers and sisters and other colored peoples. For nuerodivergent people to go to without the constant albiesm hate and rhetoric from nuerotypicals.

At this point I could not care less if my blog only had colored, immigrant supporting, lgbtqa+, non-christian, nuerodivergent or disabled pro-choice feminist women in it. As long as it takes to make all of Tumblr understand and know about my blog and that it is absolutely inclusive and extremely progressive and anti-capatalist and pro-choice.

Till then, this post will be pinned.

[aggressive-positivity-network]

So I (A white cisgender heterosexual woman who likes pumpkin spice lattes and Animal Crossing, so yeah) grew up in a very, VERY LGBTQ+-phobic household, and that translated into me having basically no knowledge on the LGBTQ+ community. Could you do me a massive favor and just lay out straight the words and phrases and generally help a dumbass out?

Oooh, no problem! And believe me, you aren’t a dumbass. I knew next to nothing for a while, and I grew up in a very supportive household. I just didn’t have the means to learn about it.

Here’s a phrasebook for some common phrases you might hear:

TERF: Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist; they believe that trans women should not be included in their fight for gender equality, and that because trans woman “used to be men” they shouldn’t be allowed in women safe spaces because they might rape someone. Sooo yeah. Keep away from them. They are pretty nasty and misguided. Also known as radfems.

Pansexual: Attracted sexually to anyone of any gender identity.

Panromantic: Attracted romantically to anyone of any gender identity

Bisexual: Attracted sexually to two or more genders.

Biromantic: Attracted romantically to two or more genders

Pan/Bi Discourse: Some people think pansexual and bisexual should become one or the other because they’re very similar to each other, but whether you identify as either of them is a personal choice, and you shouldn’t let anyone dictate your identity - ever. You can even be both at the same time, if you choose to identify that way! Honestly, it isn’t that big of a deal which one you choose, as long as you feel comfortable between them!

Demisexual/Demiromantic: Needs to form a strong emotional bond with someone before pursuing a romantic or sexual relationship. They probably wouldn’t enjoy speed-dating or sleeping with someone they just met. They might not experience sexual attraction for someone unless they knew the person very well.

Asexual: Does not feel sexual attraction for anyone; however, they still might like to have sex, may be neutral about sex, or might even be repulsed by it. Most people confuse this with chastity (not choosing to have sex, usually for religious reasons) or abstinence (choosing not to have sex until married). However, they still might get horny, or want to pleasure themselves. The usual difference is having it with another person. If they see a hot guy, for example, the immediate thought may be, “Wow they’re attractive,” rather than, “Have my babies.”

Aromantic: Does not feel romantic attraction for anyone; this may mean that usual romantic relationships don’t appeal to the person, or that shows of romance (flowers, dates, etc.) doesn’t appeal to them. However, they can still have very strong platonic relationships, and still do enjoy sex, but might not develop crushes or want to go on a date with someone. They might marry platonically, or marry romantically on certain terms.

Grey/Graysexual: Anyone who is in that “gray” space between being asexual and being sexual. They might like the idea of sex, but hate the product. They might have fantasies they’d like to live out in the bedroom, but not actual sex. They might like sex, but under certain conditions. People have their own names for the different facets of graysexuality, but are all under this umbrella.

Grey/Grayromantic: Anyone in that “gray” space between romantic and aromantic. They might like huge shows of romance in novels, but wouldn’t be a fan of it happening to them. They might have a crush on a person, but would never be in a relationship with them, even if asked. Graysexuality also has different names for different facets, but it’s still all under this umbrella.

Queer: Usually used as a temporary or even permanent label for when someone is still trying to figure things out. They know that there is something inside of them that’s different - but they’re not quite sure yet.

Non-binary: People who are neither male nor female, and are outside the gender spectrum. A few have androgynous (gender-neutral) styles or body types, but no matter what they wear or what they look like, they are still non-binary!

Trans: Someone who was born gender, but knows in their heart that they are another. Someone may be born a boy, but always feel like a girl, vice versa, or both genders may change to non-binary, bigender, genderqueer, or genderfluid. Being trans simply means you are making the physical and/or mental transition from one gender or another.

Transmasc: A trans person that presents as masculine, with both clothes and manner.

Transfemme: A trans person that presents as feminine, with both clothes and gender.

Bigender: Someone who identifies as male sometimes and female sometimes.

Genderfluid: Someone who drifts from one end of the binary spectrum (male on one side, female on the other) and may have several sets of pronouns. They may feel more feminine one day, more masculine another, and somewhere in between later that week.

AMAB: Assigned Male At Birth; this has no bearing on current gender identity, but it’s medically useful and can help trans people talk about themselves before they transition.

AFAB: Assigned Female At Birth; this has no bearing on current gender identity, but it’s medically useful and can help trans people talk about themselves before they transition.

Two-Spirit: A Native American who identifies as the traditional third gender, with both a masculine and a feminine spirit inside of them. It’s a pretty new term, and not all Indigenous people choose to label themselves or others that way.

Femme: A woman who dresses and acts in a traditionally feminine way.

Butch: A woman who dresses and acts in a traditionally masculine way.

Beard: Describes a partner in a relationship that exists for the purpose of keeping someone’s true sexual attraction status a secret. A gay man might have a relationship with a woman, who would be considered his beard.

Queerplatonic Relationship: A relationship that is a mixture of the traditional platonic relationship and the traditional romantic relationship. People included in this relationship can raise children and own a house together, but most likely won’t participate in sexual and/or romantic activities.

Polyamorous Relationship: A relationship that includes three or more people at any given time. This may look like a couple having an open relationship, where they can date others as they please, or it may be a set few people that stay together. Two people can be attracted to one other person, three people can all be attracted to each other, two couples can have sexual or romantic relations with each other’s partner - there are infinite combinations, and, as long as it’s healthy, they’re all valid!

I hope this helps! This is not an exhaustive list, but these are pretty much the basics and a little bit more. If you have any specific term you’d like me to define, I’d be more than happy to! Also, if I got any wrong, please feel free to correct me, and I’ll edit the post as soon as I can!

Also, who’s your favorite Animal Crossing character? I like Blathers a lot! Nerds and professors have my entire heart.

[itsclydebitches]

(WLW anon) I really don’t like the “bad rep is better then none at all”. I hate that. We should want good rep, because bad rep has been used time and time again by homophobes as to say we shouldn’t get representation. To me it’s not “gay can have the same flaws as het”, it’s “fix the flaws in the het”. Also I know Renora being independent was a good, I was just saying in comparison BB. Also, yes, they were separated, but also didn’t stop thinking about each other. Especially bad with Yang.

Indulge me for a moment because I want to take a trip down memory lane and list some—just some—of the queer rep that has been important to me over the years:

Ellen comes out both as herself and as her character… years later, she’s a hated millionaire who is criticized for how she treats her staff

The wildly influential Buffy gives us two women entering a loving relationship… except then Tara is killed off, Willow goes evil for a time, and Buffy comes under fire for Joss Whedon’s everything

The beloved and respectable headmaster of one of the most popular book series ever published is revealed to be gay… except it doesn’t count because it wasn’t in the text and now all of Harry Potter is cancelled because JKR is transphobic

Kurt is an unambiguously gay teen in a hugely popular TV series, acting as one of the first overt representations a generation has seen… except he’s way too stereotypical and Glee is a joke now

Orange is the New Black gives us a number of queer women, including one of our first trans characters… but isn’t it problematic that they’re all criminals?

Brooklyn Nine-Nine hosts an out gay captain and gives us a bisexual coming out story that resonated with many, myself included… except now we’re supposed to hate all the characters on principle because they’re cops

Korra and Asami walk off into the spiritual sunset together… but they never kiss or anything, so that doesn’t count either

Steven Universe gives us a queer relationship and a wedding… but it’s an issue that this is just a kid’s show and, really, does it count when the rep is embodied by space rocks whose entire species only creates a single gender? Feels like a cop-out

Same with Good Omens. Yeah, Crowley and Aziraphale clearly love each other… but you never see them kiss or declare their intentions. It’s great ace rep though! Unless you want to level the criticism that asexual characters are always nonhuman

A character intended to be a minor guest becomes a show staple and eventually declares his love for one of the two main characters… except then Castiel immediately dies, Dean doesn’t respond, and they never meet on screen again

I finished Queen’s Gambit the other day and the main character had a one-night stand with a woman! … but everyone is talking about how bisexuality is used to represent her lowest point, so that’s bad too

I could go on for literal pages. Some of these arguments I agree with (Dumbledore), others I’ve pushed back against quite strongly (Crowley and Aziraphale), but all of them are valid criticisms depending on what part of the queer community you’re in and what your expectations are. My point here is that it’s all “bad rep.” I mean that seriously. If anyone reading this is scrambling for the comment section to say why [insert media title here] is actually fantastic rep, I guarantee that someone disagrees. Or if they don’t, give it some time. Just wait until the characterization becomes offensively outdated, or another part of the story ruins the relationship, or it comes out that the author did something truly horrific, or the terminology changes and it’s labeled as “problematic” now… just wait. At some point, any rep we feel is good rep now will be criticized, cancelled, and dragged through the mud. The rep that I personally haven’t seen much push-back against—like the beloved Captain Jack Harkness in Doctor Who, or Schitts Creek that just won a ton of awards—is wrapped up in the criticism, “So it’s all just about able-bodied, cis, (mostly) white dudes, huh? :/”  Even the argument that queer characters need to be written by queer authors doesn’t hold up. I absolutely adored Sense8. “Wow, a gay main character in a loving relationship with another gay man, both of whom enter a loving poly relationship with a woman, another lesbian trans main character who marries the love of her life on screen, an entire cast arguably queer due to them sharing orgy scenes centered around the emotional intimacy they share, everyone survives, and this was written by two trans women! Great, right?” Well, not according to the wealth of opinions explaining how Sense8 is horrible rep, actually. Every piece of rep we’ve got is either currently flawed or will become flawed in the future.

So what do we do with that?

That’s where my “I’d rather have bad rep than no rep at all” comes in. For me, that’s not waving the white flag. That’s not an oath that I won’t expect better rep in the future (I do) or that I won’t criticize the rep we get (BOY DO I), but rather just an acknowledgement of reality. The vast majority—if not the entirety—of rep is “bad rep” in one way or another, but I’d still rather have it than nothing at all. Because I’ve lived just long enough and studied media just enough to know what nothing looked like. It was watching all queer characters meet untimely deaths. Before that it was watching queer characters be derided and treated as jokes. Before that it was nothing but coding, where queer characters didn’t exist except in our own headcanons and interpretations. Obviously “bad rep” covers a very large range of issues and “They haven’t even confirmed this relationship yet” is a bigger issue than “This queer character embodies one or two, mild stereotypes,” but ultimately I’d take any of it over nothing at all. And enjoying what we’ve currently got doesn’t mean I’m willing to settle for it indefinitely.

To use an iffy analogy, imagine there’s a factory. This factory makes plates. So. Many. Plates. Big plates, small plates, plain plates, decorative plates, plates for every possible occasion in your life—and everyone with a steak for dinner is pleased as punch. You though? You’ve got soup. You need a bowl. Your entire life you’ve been struggling to eat your soup off a plate (it doesn’t work) and listening to friends and family claim that the plate with a slightly raised edge could be a bowl if you squint (it’s not). To say it’s frustrating is an understatement.

But then, one day, the factory starts producing bowls too. Hurray! Except as soon as you get your hands on one, you’re told you really shouldn’t be using it, let alone praising it. Look at the state of that bowl! It’s cracked right down the middle, ugly as hell, shoddily made all around… you’re not really going to settle for that, are you? And no, you obviously still want the factory to produce better bowls, but at the same time, this is a bowl. You’ve never gotten one before and you can finally enjoy your meal, even if the soup leaks at times. Sometimes a lot. But you’re still feeling better about your meal than you ever have before. And what you then begin to realize is that lots of the plates are a mess too. They also have cracks, they’re also ugly, many are also shoddily made. The difference is that the factory is producing so many plates at such a rapid pace that every steak eater is able to get by. One plate breaks completely? You’ve got a thousand fallbacks. Don’t like the look of this one? A thousand other options. You disagree about what “shoddily made” means? Luckily there are enough plates that everyone can find what they prefer! But the bowls… there’s only a few. Some are really expensive. Others are only available for a limited time before they suddenly disappear. Your bowl breaks and you have to wait months, years sometimes, to get another one. You’re constantly told to go buy this one obscure bowl no one else has heard about and yeah, you like it... but you’d also like to buy one of the bowls everyone is already enjoying. You find yourself looking at the plates and thinking, “I’d like that. I’d like to have so many options that the flaws, while still a problem, are much more bearable.” You’re still going to demand that the factory get its shit together, you’re still going to (rightly) complain about the awful quality of your bowl… but it’s still nice to have a bowl, period. There are still things you like about it, even if it’s a mess: the color, the size, the beauty of the shape of it. Its potential. You’re still pleased you have something to enjoy and that helps serve the need you’re looking to fill, even if that something is imperfect.

That’s “bad rep is better than no rep.” To bring this very long response back to Blake/Yang, I don’t think their problems negate their benefits. Is their relationship currently non-canonical and filled with a number of writing issues everyone has a right to be angry about? Yup. I express that anger a great deal. Are they still half of a team on a very popular show that is (presumably) set to be canonized as queer? Yup. I’d much rather live in a world where big shows like RWBY try to include queer rep and fail in a multitude of ways—with the expectation and hope that they’ll continue to improve—rather than in a world where authors a) don’t care or b) are too scared to try. Because that’s where a “good rep or no rep” stance leads. The danger isn’t homophobes because they’re, well, homophobes. It doesn’t matter if the rep is good or not, they hate it on principle. But if queer authors writing for other queer identities, or allies writing queer identities, or even queer authors writing their own experiences (like in Sense8) continually come under non-stop fire for their attempts… there’s a good chance that many people won’t ever try. We’re already seeing that here on tumblr with young authors admitting that they wouldn’t touch [insert topic here] with a ten-foot pole because just look at what happens when you get it wrong. And authors will get things wrong because authors are fallible people forever unlearning their own ignorance. So though it might sound strange coming from a blog that has turned into such a RWBY critical space, I am glad that RWBY’s queer rep exists, despite all the frustrations that I share about it. I think a RWBY with various types of “bad” queer rep is better than a RWBY with no queer rep at all, particularly when “bad” or “good” is so intensely subjective. There’s a middle ground between passively accepting whatever we’re given, and tearing into rep with such ferocity that we end up rejecting it all. There’s a space where we can be critical of rep and embrace the parts that work for us, simultaneously.

I hope and expect the het rep will get better too, but… that’s never going to happen instantly. To quote RWBY, there’s no magic wand we can wave to fix all our problems. Rather, it will take slow, plodding, meandering, lifetimes’ worth of work to see that change occur and I personally don’t want to spend the one life I have waiting for that perfect rep to show up. Because it’s unlikely that it will. While we work, I’d rather find the good in what rep we’ve already got.  

[i-did]

Do you think trans Neil fics are just a way for people to enforce more heteronormativity into Andriels relationship? From what I’ve seen it just seems like an excuse for writers to feminise Neil more which is really harmful to trans male stereotypes. Not to mention the smut seems like an excuse to write about penis/vagina sex. Idk if I’m overthinking this but it’s the feeling I get and I’d appreciate someone else’s perspective on it

I think the fact that the vast majority of trans representation in fics is smut is pretty telling. I also am unfortunately nosey and back when I still read smut (I rarely do these days, it just makes me feel bad these days instead, haha) I would check out the author, and they were often women, presumably or openly cis since Fandom is an overwhelmingly (but not exclusively) AFAB space.

So far all the trans men I've personally spoken to have mentioned that they can't read any trans fics and actually actively avoid them.

NSFW LANGUAGE

There is also the discussion of language and misgendering of genitals in smut fics, as well as how differently the characters (who are being written as trans) become. Trans andrew fics are dominated by smut as well as writing him as a bottom and very sexual and ... okay I genuinely can't think of another word for this besides "cockslut" so sorry about the informality of language. But they wrote him as a cockslut, and same as neil. Trans men can be tops, and often are because of bottom dysphoria, and anal is still a thing trans men can enjoy, anyone can.

We have a pretty good idea how andrew and neil act during sexual acts together since we are shown andrew jerking neil off and andrew sucking neil off in the books. So when because they're afab they suddenly act very different during sex it can be... suspicious.

Its also important to discuss language used during smut fics as well as what is included and what isn't. Often chests are mentioned, not so often with top surgery in mind, and body hair isn't. Trans men on testosterone are very aware of their body hair and how it has changed, and usually proud of it. I think even a passing remark about how one of them (pre or post op) would have chest hair or a happy trail would be good to mention, when happy trails are often mentioned in cis smut but omitted in trans smut.

Also when having sex with a trans person (yes speaking from experience) it is best to openly and honestly discuss what they are comfortable with and what language they like. Consent is always important to be discussed and when/if your partner has dysphoria that is another element to be considered and discussed. Some trans women get dysphoric about anal, some don't, some trans men keep a shirt on some don't some people keep their socks on some people like some words that others don't. Its best to assume someone doesn't have a misgendering kink! Its not that common and all kinks should be discussed beforehand anyway. Dirty talk should also be discussed, what words are good to use vs not.

A lot of the language see in ftm trans smut (because there is next to no mtf trans smut) ((not that I think it would be much better but who knows I haven't read it)) refers to the genitals with dirty language associated with women (tits, pussy, cunt, etc) but doesn't mention the trans man's erection, in fact I haven't seen any mention T-cocks/T-dicks. Its also best to assume your partner doesn't like those words and use vague terms unless otherwise stated, using general words such as hole is still hot and also not misgendering their genitals. Some people do not see this as a form of misgendering, but not everyone does and the reason people I've talked to about this (and myself) don't read these fics is because the language makes them uncomfortable so we avoid it all together. (As well as the other problems discussed).

The fact that effects of testosterone are hardly mentioned makes me feel like these fics are more so existing for the often afab non mlm consumers of smut fics who use them as porn to get off to and increase their self insertablility. I'm honestly curious about this psychologically, I know some people don't realize they're trans until moments like this, but I also know fully confident cis and sometimes het women get off to gay porn.

Regardless, obviously writing trans neil is not problematic, and same as writing trans andrew fics. But its important to note how you or the author might have changed the characters canon personalities, presentation, reactions during sex and preferences during sex. And also why there is so much emphasis on sex, when people who are trans are trans not just during sex, but also... when they're not having sex, which is most of the time like everyone else. Its also important to note which one you choose to prefer being trans and why, I know a lot of non Americans who only use the word for binder as a chest binder and not a folder assumed neil was trans until it became apparent he wasn't written with the intention of so, but I've also seen people choose to have neil be trans because they think "trans men are just hotter" and if you're not a trans man,,,, maybe. Don't say that. Because that's fetishizing trans men.

END NSFW

Whatmack wrote a good fic where neil is trans and its not just a device for smut, in fact its not about his genitals and sex at all, its about WWI and is really good but mind warnings, its called "in flanders fields" i believe.

Also I'm told I'm an overthinker a lot but honestly? My mind is blank a lot of the time lmao. And then when its not blank I'm just... thinking. I don't think I'm an over thinker regardless of what others have told me lmao, I think they just don't realize how often I'm actually just vibing. Also "overthinking" can be good. Analyzing things and what they mean can be important and questioning stuff is also important. Obviously if you're getting anxious than overthinking isn't good and its overwhelming instead, but a little overthinking is good because some times I feel we under think things and don't analyze what they could mean.

When I have a reaction to something or an instinct idea about something I try to assess why. Do I hate Kora? Why? Do I think she's arrogant and unlikable? Or am I actually being misogynistic and potentially colorist against her, and if she were a white male character would i question her personality and actions as much as I do when she's a woc, much less be annoyed by them? (I love Kora, this is just an example lol)

Also sorry I keep answering these like always 3 am my time which means for a lot of you guys its even earlier in the morning, (whats up Australia, New Zealand, Europe, the Philippines, and other awake places)