#vs how the world treats you based on actual gender

[earlyspringtranscendence]

i know this is FULLY the opposite of the point but i need a stuffed animal the exact size shape and most imptly weight of the meep bc im moping and having a meepsized stuffed animal would fix me

[lizzaneia-elizalde]

Don’t worry about the yanderes treating their daughters different vs sons request! That’s totally fine not to do it and it makes sense that it’d be answered as a gender neutral question. I’m glad you like my requests still with regards to questions about all your yanderes!

As a bit of a replacement question…(that you are under no obligation of answering; I don’t mind ever at all with your decisions on requests/asks, and you should never feel pressured by me or anyone else ever!)…what would be each yanderes’ dream date?

Yandere! Men and their dream date

AWW YOU'RE TOO SWEET! And I very much like this replacement request >:D

YAN! ARTIST

Of course, it's so obvious with Arlen. Painting dates! Anything that involves with you posing for him as he paints your visage, that would be a good date with him. Uh, you want to paint with him too? Sure, just pick up an extra canvas and brush, then pick what paint you want to use. As a change of scenery, it will be an outdoor type of date too, finding a space to paint the scenery, or each other.

YAN! DRAGON

He's not that much of a romantic man, but hey, he tries. So he transforms into his dragon form and fly you to the sky and wherever you want. Your personal uber will fly you to the ends of the world. Maybe find a new secret location where the both of you can just cuddle, talk, and destress from royal life.

YAN! THEATER ACTOR

Another obvious one. Being a theater actor, of course he's gonna love home dates! Wait, home dates? As much as Ignatius loves to be on the spotlight and also lives and breathes theater, the man needs a break sometimes. So, in an act of breaking down his walls, cuddling with you, cooking with you, or doing board games with you in the comfort of your home is very ideal to him.

YAN! BUTLER

Eh... Zero doesn't really have a life outside you, and doesn't really think for himself sometimes. And that meant the dates will be up to you. If you ask what dream date he wants to do, he'll probably answer based on what you want and pass it off as a coincidence. You have to really coax Zero to think more for himself.

YAN! SUGAR DADDY

Shopping dates. What? He's a greedy man. Of course he loves spending his money left and right and shower you with gifts and money. A good date will be spending a minimum of 100k dollars, a nice, expensive yet filling dinner, and maybe a passionate fuck afterwards. It is Rowan after all. You're his sugar baby, so do prepare to be spoiled rotten.

YAN! JOCK

Facade Damon would probably do the stereotypical "i'll teach you how to play [sport]!" type of date. Honestly, if you're not into sports, you would find this idea boring. But somehow, Damon made it fun and not annoying for you. Unveiled Damon would love just to have a date outside of the city where nobody that knows his himbo persona can see him. Maybe something comforting like pottery dates. But, both type of Damons would be up to an arcade date!

YAN! ASSASSIN

Azrael, being an assassin, probably did every type of dates one could think of for the different missions he took. So when you ask him, he would probably say something relaxing for once, which is a picnic date! Where he can just slump down, lie down on your lap, and relax. As long as it's just the both of you, he will consider it as a successful date.

YAN! EX-BOYFRIEND

Lee will forever regret hurting you, and breaking it off on that damned beach. So, his dream date will be a Beach date, where he will actually pay attention to you and shower you with the love you deserve. He will make it up to you.

YAN! COWBOY

How does a ride around the town sounds? Ooh, how about racing through the forest? Wait, you don't know how to ride a horse? Knoxx will teach you in a jiffy! Anything related to equestrian stuff will be Knoxx's dream date. Riding on the horse he gave you, and him on Red, and the both of you teasing each other while riding around will be the dream for him. And maybe you riding him too lol

YAN! EMO

If not Poetry dates, he will be down for Karaoke dates! He wants to hear you sing the song you love, and then Ashton will also sing the song he loves. Maybe a bit of a duet here and there, exchange of heated glances while serenading each other... Ashton will also probably spend like 50% of the date making out with you. Hey, don't blame him that you're just so irresistible.

YAN! WEREWOLF

Lyall would love to do camping dates! You, him, under the starry night sky. Cooking food over fire, feeding each other. Then Lyall will transform into his wolf and you would sleep on his fur inside a large tent. It's a night to remember for him if you would give him the chance.

YAN! EX-HUSBAND

Another tidbit from Inigo in the novel is that he actually owns a motorcycle back in his parents' mansion. So, as a throwback to the OG Inigo, this Inigo will love to do midnight motorcycle ride dates into the secret clearing he frequently visits when he was in highschool. It overlooks the city and it's a genuinely comforting place for the restless man. So, he would love to show you that place one day.

YAN! HOSPITAL CHAIRPERSON

Xavier would love to do a traditional movie date with you. The hospital work is already stressful enough, and being anxious about you is adding too much to his load. So, something simple and fun would relax Xavier. He will probably rent the whole theater just to make sure it's just you and him inside the theater. Or... He could just build a home theater. Yeah that's plausible.

YAN! VILLAIN

Eros would love to have a date with you where you both disguise as commoners and just roam around the capital. Eating streetfood, watching street performances... Especially if there is a festival going on, he would love to take you out to the square and dance with you freely, away from the eyes of the judging people. Just you and him.

YAN! POLITICIAN

What do we expect from the traditional man himself? Max would do a romantic dinner date with you. Something very fancy, maybe before the dinner, both of you would go into an opera, or a museum... Anything is fine for this man, as long as it's not too active.

YAN! MAFIA BOSS

Hades would want something fun, and something to keep his mind off the mafia bizz. So an out of the country date would be his go to. What? He's rich. He can afford that. Just, make sure he doesn't horde souvenirs... And stop him from making a plan to expand his territory... He already has enough.

[lilyginnyblackv2]

🙄🙄🙄

I’m not going to watch this video, because it will probably get my blood pressure rising. Could this title just be clickbait or ragebait? Possibly, but based on the comments I saw, probably not.

I bet it is filled with:

1. An inaccurate definition of what queerbait actually is.

2. A lack of understanding of past anime that have queerbaited (Getbackers, Saiyuki, Princess Princess, etc.) and a lack of anime that have existed in more nuanced and subtle queer spaces (Nabari no Ou - written by an actual x-gender, asexual mangaka, Tiger & Bunny, Samurai Flamenco (from my understanding), and possibly the anime series called Pet (I only watched like the first 3 episodes or so of this one). 

3. A straight or gay reading without a single glance at more nuanced queer interpretation of the pair (aka an aspec or queerplatonic reading).

Based on the comments (and the tagged sections of the video), it seems that there was a mention of how the female characters were treated in the series, but I wonder if there was any analysis on how which female characters were treated in what ways, how those female characters engaged within Japanese society, and what messages the series might be saying about Japanese society as a whole, and about the world of men (the hitman business Rei and Kazuki were apart of) vs. the world of women (the childcare business Rei and Kazuki enter into). 

Working three jobs now, I don’t have the time or energy to watch this video right now, but if anyone else does, please let me know if this is an accurate interpretation or not. I’ll update the post if need be. 

But, this is such a stale and broken take on the series and it saddens me that basically one of the only videos I’ve seen on this series, going actually in-depth on it, from someone with a decently sized platform is going with such a bland and honestly straight up wrong take (the series isn’t queerbait, since it was never ever promoted or advertised in a way to make you ship Kazuki and Rei). A show having queer subtext or a queer reading to it =/= queerbait, which is a specific marketing based term.

I feel like an interpretation like this one is missing out on the whole point of the series, as well as on various other messages and themes it is trying to tell. And if this is just a ragebait or clickbait style title, then that’s frustrating too, because it instantly turns me off from actually watching this video and what it might have to say and tell about Buddy Daddies as a series.

[liskantope]

Did I just make a half-joke in my last post about the 2010's brand of aggressive internet feminism being dead? Have I mentioned more than once in recent posts that the I consider it a happy development that the TERFish ideology seems to have siphoned away a lot of the visible "women are fragile because men are so terrifying" mentality in more mainstream feminism? Well, that was before I read the below post that is apparently making the rounds in the last few days about the "bear test" and the oh-so-nailed-it commentary on it claiming that the "bear test" illuminates exactly two fundamentally types of men:

This "bear vs. man" question is obvious to me a rhetorical sleight-of-hand playing on a convenient arrangements of cultural emotion-based ideas of what bears symbolize and how protective a man is supposed to be around his daughter having men in her life and so on. Treating it as a serious thought experiment leading to an obvious conclusion about the patriarchy or something would be annoying enough, but first post has to inject that familiar gleeful smugness about how the simple question is guaranteed trip us men up and expose our toxic mindset for all the world to see and illuminate the writer's perfect black-and-white view of gender relations. (It reminds me of the question designed to trip up atheists: "You're walking down a dark street at night and see some shadowy figures coming your way. If you were to discover that they are people who just came out of a Bible study, would that make you feel better or worse?" Except I think that old pro-religion argument, much as I've always hated it, actually rests on firmer ground.)

As for the follow-up social media post, it's nice to know that, as a man who sincerely believes probability-wise that the bear in the woods is a lot more dangerous to my hypothetical daughter than a randomly-chosen man is (an assessment supposedly no woman holds), I am now properly classified as one of those men who is more dangerous than a bear, or (to a more charitable reading) one of those men who is providing cover/excuses for / not doing his part to stop the men who are more dangerous than bears.

(I doubt very much that there's actual data around on chances of a young woman being attacked in the woods by a human man or chances of being attacked by a bear, but I'm willing to change my prediction if I learn that most species of bear ignore humans who wander into their midst like 99% of the time or something like that. Which would cast doubt on most cultural treatment of bears, of course and also kind of undermine the punchline of the "test".)

[blueiight]

re: choose violence meme Utena answer, I don't want to drag you into the wretched discourse lol, so no pressure to answer, but... okay so I haven't watched IWTV but from what little I see. you seem SO TAPPED IN to what's going on w interplay of the book VS the tv show's handling of race, gender, etc. so I am wondering... penny for your thoughts on Ikuhara's handling / not handling of race (and / or sexuality)... and / or the fandom's takes... orz

oh yeah im down& i appreciate the compliment!<3 im hesitant to over-speak, but i know ikuni & saito have explicitly said anthy is based off lalah sune from mobile suit gundam.. lalah is from bombay (mumbai) & was trafficked into the flannigan institute (2d space military experimentation) as a means to experiment n find the answer on newtypes, which r basically an esoteric arbitrarily defined concept from gundam to gundam thats exploited in the space age military apparatus. lalah sune in the uc gundam series is used as a plot device: its one of char’s greatest mistake/s in his culpability in lalah’s situation, therefore once again violating his father zeon’s revolutionary precepts on what the newtypes were for, and one of amuro’s greatest mistake/s in that he made a brief but rather profound bond w/ such a ~kindred spirit~ n ended up being the one who killed her. she ends up haunting both of them in char’s counterratack & while i thought that was enjoyable to watch.. its laughably easy to read lalah as a pretext for amuro + char’s later fixation on eachother (& tomino even encourages it). ultimately, lalah’s own characterization, much less any story arc on how she was the means to introduce newtypes in the gundam series is tertiary to what she represented to amuro and char. now why am i talking about lalah here? bc ikuni+ saito r explicitly inspired by her in making anthy n ima try to say my piece in how ikuni, and the rgu narrative in both animanga treat anthy (& akio, as a result of being her brother)’s racialization. a lot of shoujo animanga period always has the trope of the character or two at the most who r noticeably darker than the pale-skinned cast, yet theyre never really clearly defined as who or what they are much less is this used to supplement their characterization. with rgu, as u have discussed before, ikuni nem use eternity as a motif. like what does it mean to be eternal? n all. u have anthy and akio, these two darker skinned (indian) characters like lalah, being seen as the vanguard , the introduction to and the disseminator of this esoteric concept that ever eludes the rest of the cast. u have these indian characters who play into these new-age stereotypes , namely how the new age has coopted a lot of the indian faiths & refuse to see yalls cultures as something that actually evolves, but is stagnant + ‘eternal’. the modern world is outside, ohtori headed by akio is the cycle of life repeating over& over n over again. when it comes to the vitriolic protracted abuse + projection anthy faces thru the series, its implicit that this is bc shes a darker skinned girl in a sea of lighter skinned people & abused by her older brother. i cant say if it was ikuni nems intention in doing this but the canon is ample for this argument n how i read this idea of being the rose bride , the ultimate target for humanity’s hate to be a commentary in part on what it means to be a girl/woman of color. dios having the burden to save all of humanity is the archetypical prince, and the expectation on boys of color to prematurely ‘rise up’ n ‘be the man’ so & anthy pulling her brother away from this burden made her a target to all of Humanity, metaphorically for refusing to play the martyr. n ive faced shit in the past for articulating such& bc im a bw, ppl have seemed to misinterpret me saying this as saying ‘anthy is black’ LOL. the fandom is woefully reluctant to tackle this, bc there is no immediate white (european) involved. they want to say utena tenjou n em are ‘white’ bc theyre so eurocentric that this is the only way they can think. when these are japanese creators , creating characters n r relying on stereotypes of indian spirituality + people to define them in relation to the japanese characters. like its a reason they made anthy , the rose bride, the witch, based off lalah sune & not like. utena or shiori yk? the question of sexuality tied to this is rly weighted too, esp bc anthy (+ akio?) sport the marriage colored bindi, but i feel like that was the most intentional they went there

[djinnandtea]

so I got some interest on this post where I tossed out that I wanted to talk more about monster romance and race and gender. it's been really nice to see a few folks are also wanting to hear/talk about it! I'm not prepared to say anything at length [eta: this turned out to be kind of a lie] with any certainty or research to back me up, but I thought I could post a rough outline of sorts of what I'd want to research and explore further, just as a starting point for myself but also a jumping off point if anyone else has any thoughts or resources.

I guess I'll start with gender first. I'm new to the romance genre generally, but I don't think it's a surprise that the genre has always been dominated by discourse around who reads romance and the kind of gender dynamics presented in a lot of conventional romance books (which are generally heterosexual/heteronormative in a lot of problematic ways). I'm thinking of the harlequin romances my mom and grandma used to read, but also of the discussions around colleen hoover's work and then the dark romance sub-genre too.

this means that there's the obvi discussion to be had about content vs. context. who is writing the romance, what informs their writing, what messaging comes through via choices made by the author, as well as by the context the author is writing in. I'm sure if you've been reading romance--even fanfic--for a while, you're well versed in some of these conversations, even if just in a casual way.

after considering romance on a macro level, I think you'd then have to look at some of those more micro sub-genres. where are gender norms accentuated and exaggerated, and to what end? why is dark romance a thing, why do (usually) straight white women want to fantasize about being in that kind of relationship? what's the purpose being met? (this is all asked non-judgmentally, btw, as I also enjoy dark romance.)

and maybe there are folks who would dislike my comparing of monster romance to dark romance, but I do think the two are related, especially based on a lot of posts I've seen since joining this corner of tumblr. I think there's a lot of interest in exploring ideas around control and dominance that dark romance and monster romance provide contained space for. if you watched my YouTube video, I touch on this a little bit more at the end as well.

I'm sure I'm missing a lot re: gender (like all the stories being told about lgbtq+ MCs), but this is just some initial thoughts at the fore of my brain.

as for race...........well. lol.

there's the very surface level question around what percentage of monster romance FMCs are white. I genuinely don't have this answer, and I know there are a lot of nonwhite FMCs too! but I'd be really curious to know the actual numbers here. why? well, bc diversity matters. but also because of the decades long narratives around white women as victims of men of color, and how that narrative has been used to weaponize whiteness and demonize blackness specifically, and non-whiteness more generally.

I am def not saying that all monster MMCs = depictions of non-whiteness, I'm just thinking about the connections between equating non-white people/bodies with monstrosity. I'm thinking of the historical framing of non-white people and communities as sub-human, as savages, as beastly. inhumane. monsters have kinda always been a metaphor for the other, including the non-white other, and I think it'd be naive of us to assume that vestiges of that brand of racism (which is still alive and well) never inform the ways creators engage with monster romance and monsterfucking, consciously AND unconsciously.

I'm also thinking about orientalism. I'm thinking of the exotification and classification of the east. the way westerners invaded the eastern world and began treating the people there like specimens. I'm thinking about how othering and abjecting and exotifying a culture or community or person can create a power-informed version of sexualizing that culture or community or person. like, othering/abjecting/exotifying can lead to creating a perverted sort of desiring. I have a special interest here because I'm arab, so this stuff feels particularly personal, but yeah. it makes my wheels turn.

there's also a dehumanizing element of turning an othered body into a piece of sexual meat. I'm thinking about the way monsters in these books are always excessive, the way their penises are always massive. we can't pretend that doesn't seem a little familiar to the degrading ways white people have also discussed black bodies, too. like. I'm not saying wanting our monsters to have big dicks is racist, I'm just saying there are some aspects of the genre that I think deserve to be ~unpacked~ and considered in a wider context that takes this kind of stuff into account. not as a confirmed given, but as an avenue worth approaching with curiosity, if only to point out the ways in which it's NOT a product of racism/anti-blackness.

obvi this post is not backed up at present with a single source because I'm just thinking out loud based on stuff I've read previously over the years that I definitely would need to revisit, so I totally get if you read this and think I'm being ridiculous. but if you saw my first post and were kinda wondering what I had in mind when making it, this is it.

[iatrophilosophos]

I do think there's a dynamic that's a problem with popular/online queer theory *generally*, arguably most with tme non binary people but sumn to watch for across the board, where discourse and theory building primarily centers around early transition/early out experiences.

There's a lot going on that's good to talk about and understand when you first come out, *and* it's an inherently transitory life period of at most a few years that IMPACTS, but does not DICTATE peoples long term life experiences and desires. It feels like the people who are centered to speak the loudest on Queer Experience as a whole are often relatively privileged on other axies and crafting a worldview based on a chaotic disrupted time that is VALUABLE AND WORTH CARING ABOUT, and also should not be taken as an expectation of how stuff will be forever and ever as people grow, change, self define their social circles, drop into more comfortable alternatove lifeways, and so on. I think this dynamic also pairs badly with ageism against older queer people--even in circles that are less purist about how it's so scary and predatory to mix generations you see a lot of shitting on people who may think about gender and society differently than the current newgen terms and politics, *not just because they came out in a different time*, but because their analysis is shaped by years or decades of existing in the world as a queer adult.

I think u can see this pretty clearly with the transandrophobia crowd and the "the more arcane my gender labels are the more radical I am" crowd of mostly-TMEs. Transandro bros seem afaict to be split between men in their mid 20s thru early 30s, who have been out for a while and do not really enjoy being treated like A Dude in society and blame women for it, with varying amounts of actually attempting to build theory about older trans experiences vs. acting like their coming out story is retained as a permanent condition when it materially isnt; and younger men and boys who are genuinely struggling with the major disruption of coming out and being trans... and blame women for it, again with the view that their current experiences are a permanent condition and not a transitional period. The arcane gender labels = cooler and more oppressed(?) Crowd seems almost unilaterally young or early into gender exploration. I have so much time for people breaking into the joissaince of self-determination and a lot less time when people confuse that process with any kind of structural theory.

This is twee but like. Yall remember that "the moon has phases, it's still the moon" post? I think it's kinda like that. It matters to value and understand those phases and it's silly as fuck and plainly innacurate to build a star map on the assumption it'll stay in one phase in one place--and that map definitely won't help you navigate.

[imposterogers]

hello, I don't know how serious you were when you said "someone needs to psychoanalyse Harry Osbourn" but ask and ye shall recieve? I am running on 4h of sleep, and just write my penultimate final so, like, this isn't the most consise or detailed but it does answer every rhetorical(?) question you posed. I'm explaining all the psych stuff assuming you don't have any orientation to the bullshit I'm about to spew, and I'm adding in links wherever explaining this will take too long so.... this is going to be a little pretty long.

Now, ideally psychoanalysis would be done via multiple hour long session (like nearly 20+) where the client just talks about their past memories, childhood, how they feel right now and what they think. Occasionally we throw in a dream or two, to see what their unconscious desires are. Essentially it’s very talk based, and in person is obviously the best. Since Harry is (a) fictional, and (b) not giving me enough screen time in the movie to just use the words he says, I'm not treating Harry like a client. Instead I'm just taking what we know about him and applying psychodynamic theories to him and treat him like a case study.

Now, I'm not actually sure how serious you were about the Psychoanalysing

We’re beginning with two main theories, 1. Freud’s Psychosexual Stages of Development: where the exploration of sexuality, formation of gender, it’s influences on self and the desires of a person are formed. 2. Erickson’s Psychosocial Stages of Development: which tells us what social needs were met, what weren’t, and how that influences personality/behaviour.

Note: Because it’s Freud and the late 1890s, sex and gender are the same and only the binary exists. Thus, this theory doesn’t look at gender, sexuality and is VERY outdated. These explanations are only used for heteronormativity, and homosexuality is considered a perversion from norm (which I’ll go into)

#1: Infancy to Toddler-hood:

My guess, due to Norman being abusive, cold, distant and uses money/luxury gifts to show his affection (if any), shit hits the fan from Stage 1 of the Psychosocial Stages: Trust vs Mistrust (0-Toddler age). At this stage it’s super important for a child to be around their primary care givers. Not having a primary care giver (parent, grand parent, nanny — someone who’s there with the child forming a deeply intimate bond) leave children with a sense of mistrust in the world. It make’s them prone to insecurity, and give the child unhealthy patterns of attachment, generally making them very “hope-less” (as in they are more likely to feel hopeless, isolated and alone and not just like... pathetic).

Assuming Emily Osborn died like a year after Harry was born, it's been somewhat implied she died due to post-pregnancy complications, Harry didn't have his mom around during the v imp phase. Norman is said to have really loved her and there’s a chance that after her death, Norman blamed Harry and treated him terribly. Either way, this means Harry grew up without the necessary bond post age 1, which has fundamentally fucked him and his perception of the world. Pair with this the entitelement that comes with wealth, and it's just truly too much.

#2: Toddler-hood to Childhood:

Now I’m going to the phallic stage (ages 3-5, toddler to child). This is from the psychosexual development, Freud’s theory. (Note: not the same theory as mentioned in the previous point). The middle stages in both theories are somewhat irrelevant to explain why Harry’s so.. that, but I can elaborate if you need it??

During the phallic stage, the idea is that the (cis)male child struggles with the Oedipus complex. He develops an attraction for the parent of the opposite sex, but is threatened by the parent of the same sex and thus begins to imitate the same sex parent to win the opposite sex parents affection.

So the son is attracted to the mother, but is threatened by the father (this specific fear in men is called castration anxiety for boys). Thus they imitate their father and his behaviour, hoping to receive affection from women who are like his mom. This obviously can influence the way he treats women.

Freud says neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality are innate, they are instead how we resolve our phallic stage — heterosexual is normal way to resolve it, and homosexual is to deviate from the norm. Now homosexuality could be a fixation of this stage — not resolving the conflict with his father and being heterosexual, will make him gay.

But I think he’s bi, so Harry associates with his father the way Freud expects children to, thus making him attracted to women as per normal (and also, this is why he identitfes as male, and doesn't have gender confusion). But he has unresolved his issues with Norman and wants his fathers affection and love. Both his parents are equally unattainable to him, one is dead the other is distant. Thus, Harry has to deviate from the norm on an unconscious level, and wants his fathers approval which he will get via the same resolution. This just means he loves and seeks approval from both men and women, which just like... makes him bi???? (keep in mind, sexuality and gender spectrum is the biggest limitation to Freud's theory

#3: Childhood

I’m skipping to the inferiority vs industry stage (ages 6-11) in the psychosocial stages where the child learns to either be industrious — confident, social, ambitious; or feels inferior.

I think Harry became industrious, he was taught to be strong and be the ruthlessly aggressive bully, and was also doing that because it was what got him his dad’s approval. He unlearns it, but it is also his nature, in a more innate way.

This stage in the psychosocial theory, starts right where the phallic stage in psychosexual ends. So, I’m guessing that Harry resolves his sexuality crisis via Freud, but his social needs of love, belonging and care are still up in the air, which he resolves via Erickson’s. This appeases his base consciousness, he has two problems, they are solved. It doesn’t matter if it’s healthy or not, he is literally 10. He does what worked for him, and associates with his fathers way again making him the confident bully that we see him as.

So now we come to Peter... what’s up with that?

Peter is smart like his father. His need for his fathers love is thus projected here. There’s a sort of transference, his need for approval from dad is not only found in Peter, but like Peter actually genuinely loves him too. Emily, his mother, no idea what she’s like but let’s she loved him unconditionally, and he probably felt safe around her — Peter evokes those same feelings in Harry. Thus, his means of resolving his gender and sexuality crisis during the phallic stage is coming back to bite him in the ass, via Peter. He’s like the mix between what he needed socially, love and acceptance; with what he desires, approval from his father who is a smart man

Why does he treat MJ like that? Because that’s how Norman shows love and affection to a person. Norman just spoilt this boy with his riches, and didn’t show an ounce of love or affection, and thus Harry assumes spoiling MJ is how he can show that he loves her.

Why is he dating MJ, the girl his best friend loves. Remember that bit about attraction to the opposite sex parent, so you associating with the same sex to win affection? Well. He’s doing that… but wrong. He is associate himself with what the object of his affection (Peter) is attracted to (MJ), in hopes that he will become like said object of attraction (like MJ), thus winning over (because Peter will now want him). I am not claiming that Harry is normal, or ok. I’m just saying, this is how you can explain it.

Why take Peter out on these not-dates? Same logic as point 2, it’s how he shows affection.

Why does Harry ask Peter to go hit on MJ? Denial. The defence mechanism of denial specifically

I can go on, but I will stop. PS. Also, you’re right. Not only is Harry in love, he subconsciously desires Peter? Like on a carnal level.

harry osborn has been psychoanalyzed

[aikoiya]

Link 1/2 Thoughts

I just saw something for a Link 1/2 au &, honestly, it was pretty interesting as a concept. And, if that were it, then I'd actually be interested for basically the same reason that Ranma 1/2 was interesting.

However, it was listed as "translink."

Now, my issue with this is that, considering the idea that this au was based on Ranma 1/2, then if this au follows, Link wouldn't actually be trans in it. So, calling it as such is misleading.

For one, the curse of Jusenkyo actually physically turned Ranma into an actual biological girl. I'm assuming, with a natural, working womb, correct chromosomes, & everything. Which is very, very different from being trans because the most recognized meaning is not identifying or not being comfortable with the sex you were born into &, in many cases, going out of one's way to appear more like the sex you wish you were.

Ranma was perfectly comfortable with being a guy & Link seems to be a biologically identifying male & unopposed to crossdressing, at most, specifically when it's convenient or he deems it necessary. Which, crossdressing itself has little to do with how one identifies.

Ranma very specifically wasn't happy with being turned into a girl. Which also wasn't the sex he was born into. If anything, you'd think that modern fans would be on the warpath about how Ranma should have gender dysphoria from being turned into a girl. (Which, we all know that he wasn't. That boy was far more traumatized from everything else Genma put him through than that. If anything, he seemed to more so be annoyed with it.)

So, unless the Link in this au was specifically a born man who identified as a woman or a born woman who identified as a man, then even if he's turned into the opposite sex, he still wouldn't actually be trans.

Either way, the reason why the idea of Ranma 1/2 & Link 1/2 is an interesting one is how it plays with things that are hard to play with in a world where the general assumption is that men & women are the "exact same" in all but name & body-shape. (Which sometimes feels like the overall belief of those who support the trans movement blindly & without question.)

Someone put into a situation where they have to learn about the perspective of the opposite sex. The chemical & hormone changes that also change how you think, feel, & react to things. The highlighting & examination of the very real differences between men & women, not just according to how society treats them, but also biologically, mentally, & emotionally. Specifically, examining them both in a way that doesn't treat either as bad or less than, just different. Not to mention, how both have their benefits depending on the situation.

However, that doesn't mean that Link being trans & going through this sort of thing couldn't be interesting in its own way.

It can, actually. You just have to focus on the right things. Specifically, if you go the route of expectation vs reality. The "I wasn't expecting it to be like this" factor. Basically, the grass is always greener phenomenon. The realization that being the other sex isn't the fix-all that Link may have believed it would be.

Maybe he starts out being ecstatic with the change, but as time passes, he realizes that there are things about being a woman he either hadn't realized or hadn't thought completely through. For instance, the fact that he wouldn't have nearly as much upper body strength when he's a woman. Yet how this is made up for by the greater strength that he'd be in possession of in his lower body &, especially, his core. Not to mention, having to learn a new way to fight when in the body of one based around this redistribution of strength. One likely focused more on long ranged weaponry such as bows or magic. (Who knows, maybe magic comes more easily to women?)

Or agility, flexibility, & viciousness at close range. Perhaps Link starts using 2 short swords instead of one or dual-wields daggers? A style that focuses on rapid identification of weaknesses & relentless exploitation of said weaknesses with absolute ruthlessness. Because the longer a woman is in a fight, the more likely she'll lose. Not to mention womanhood's own monthly "curse of the blood moon" & the pain that comes with it. The being underestimated thing (though, that one can sometimes be a blessing & even quite useful in the right situation). The way that men will generally instinctively react to shield & protect a woman. Or even as simple as women just seeing a larger variety of colors than men. (Which may come as a surprise! I imagine that Zelda would find this fact interesting.)

(And aside from the having wanted to be a female part, most of what I listed, would still be 100% viable in a situation where Link isn't trans & has simply been turned into a woman or put under a curse that can switch him back & forth exactly like Ranma had been.)

Or, in the case of Link being born a woman, then the expectations & pressures put upon men. Not just from other men but also from women. This belief from women that men need to be both warrior & poet or many get squicked out. "Be strong & masculine, but also open up to me & show your emotions more, but don't cry despite what I literally just said, because that gives me the ick." (Which is odd, because one the one hand, modern women demonize stoicism, but then turn around & tell men not to cry because gross?) Like, it seems to be something that you have to thread the needle on. Also, the odd new expectation, & possibly even instinct, to protect women & children at all costs. The regular "just suck it up" or "toughen up" message they get. The not being coddled or treated like a priority. Remember, "women & children first." Which logically means, "men last." I've heard it said quite often that men are expected to prove themselves & are only accepted if for what they can provide. Meanwhile, in most situations, women are just accepted because women. So, maybe explore the consequences of that? In a lot of ways, men are replaceable. Especially when considering that, strictly speaking, they aren't exactly necessary beyond conception. Does a decent father's presence in a child's life increase the likelihood that the child will turn out more well-adjusted as an individual? Yes, but they aren't needed for the child to survive beyond conception. But women? Women are necessary, at least until the child is born. Or the way that people will generally be much nicer to women. This means that turning into a man may result in absolute shock as Link is suddenly confronted with being treated without kid gloves. As well as the realization that just because men don't show their emotions as readily as women doesn't automatically mean that they are unfeeling, cold-hearted brutes. Just that they keep those feelings close to their chest, which is something they seem to do as a self-defensive measure. And considering what we know of Wild Link, then I suspect that even a Wild born female would be able to commiserate with a lot of men on this fact & may even result in a deeper appreciation for them.

What would especially be damning for a Link who was born a woman would be experiencing Gerudo culture from the perspective of a male. Especially considering Wabbin's experience in TotK & Link's experience as the one who basically facilitated he & Perda's relationship.

Like, seriously. Ya'll should look up Norah Vincent. Especially her work, "Self-Made Man." It's a real eye opener.

Anyway, perhaps his dysphoria persists even in the body he'd thought he'd wanted, thus causing him to have to learn to accept himself as he is or be miserable forever. Thereby giving him a newfound appreciation for being a man. Or woman. Whichever way he was born here.

Think about it this way. If this was a case of female brain in male body like some people assume nowadays, wouldn't being turned into the opposite sex just result in male brain in female body or vice versa? Thus resulting in the same exact problem, just in reverse?

Also, keep in mind that specifically in this situation, I very much doubt that Link would've had access to hormone injections. So, just suddenly having such a drastic hormonal shift in where he hadn't had the chance to acclimate to the change in a gradual manner, should theoretically cause a lot of heavy adjusting. I'm talking major hormonal, mental, & emotional whiplash here.

Not to mention having to get used to the new center of gravity. The fact that clothes don't fit quite right anymore.

Just a big ol' mess.

LoZ Wild Masterlist

[beast-of-mosss]

Feel free to infodump at me about Viveras Lavellan (or Deshan) I love to hear about blorbos and I mean this genuinely

Hkkanejwjeiwjwj, I'll give you a rundown on Viveras and his relationship with Deshan! Although, I'm in a Dragon Age Server where it's mostly just people talking about their blorbos and being nerds- so,,,definitely hit me up if you're interested!!!!! :D!!!!

I'm so sorry for this long ass post as well as my sleepy brain writing. I'm mentally ill.

I'm a bit tired, but I'll try to form thoughts for you.

Anyway! So, we're gonna focus on Viveras Lavellan. He's still being developed due to my brain worms hyperfocusing on Deshan, but he's definitely more developed compared to Ren Trevelyan. These are just the run down of him, there's a lot more information about him on the discord.

Viveras Lavellan is a mage, and is the Clan's First. He's 19 years old and is 11 years younger than Deshan. When I was first developing him, he was kinda my shitpost voice piece for a lot of the dehumanization that the Inquistior (Deshan) faces/also anger at the disrespect of the Dalish by the Inner Circle. He also does,,,like elfroot weed and is lowkey an menace to society but only when Deshan is around.

He's a gender non-confirming, and he does like to wear dresses. He has an interest in fashion design which he picked up from an elder in the Clan. He's confident in his looks, and can act like a smug cat at times.

And just like most creators do, the Lavellan siblings' parents are dead- but Viveras was told by Deshan that they were abandoned. I have a wip scene of that, I'll link the little wip/teaser here:

Here's him in a dress!!

He's actually pretty aloof, and tends to daydream a lot, but he's quick witted. He's a lot more easier to read than Deshan.

He does show up at Skyhold, much to Deshan's horror, and is a bad influence to Cole. He tends to be passive-aggressive towards the Inner Circle, he does warm up to some of them. A lot of things are still wip with him, but I do know some more based concepts with him.

Where Deshan is the sun, Viveras is the moon. They both kinda foil each other (sweet lies vs. blunt truth, direct anger vs. Indirect anger, etc).

There's a shitpost/canon scene where it's the Judgement scene, and it's all serious and the criminal is Viveras and hes high off his mind. He snuck in, got some soilders to do elfroot weed with him, and somehow passed out on the roof of the barn. It's quiet, Josephine is reading off his crimes. Then all of the sudden "Keeper Deshanna is gonna fucking kill you!" And queue a chase scene and screaming.

Another shitpost/canon scene is Viveras, Sera, and Cole doing elfroot weed and Cole accidentally inhales it?? Or smth. Disappears for a week, only to show up in the fucking roof.

Viveras and Deshan relationship is tense and toxic. And it's Deshan fault. Deshan lies to Viveras, thinking rhat it's better to give him comfort than truth. They care so much for Viveras, and they want him to live a safe and healthy life. They don't want to lose him, so they lie and hide themselves from him. Thinking that it would protect him from the world and from themselves. Overprotective of him, and in a way-treating him like a child. And it's hard for Viveras, and although the Clan is his family, he does really want to have Deshan's approval and wants to be taken seriously by them. He wants to be let in, and he had tried many times before-but he gets shut down or shut out by Deshan.

He's hurt by them, and not knowing how to deal with that-he acts reckless. Putting himself at risk more just to gain that attention from Deshan.

He dabbles in blood magic, and instead of wielding a staff like any other mage-he wields the Blade of Tidarion.

They do eventually have a heart to heart, and do mend their relationship, but after Trepasser-Deshan's character growth takes a step back and they went back to bad habits. And once again, Viveras was pushed out and alone.

And he hardened his heart and turned his back on them, returning to his clan and helping the Clan in Wycome.

I do have a scene that I want to write where Deshan, once they finally pulled themselves together, tried to reach out-but is rejected by Viveras. Deshan only leaving him with a letter and a messenging crystal. They do this to let him know that they will always be there for him if he wants them to be? My brain is going foggy atm, but I want to leave a hopeful ending to their sibling relationship.

Here's his wip playlist;

[rametarin]

This is, in fact, one of the funniest things about TERFS.

Radical Feminists were slick in the 80s and 90s, because they believed since females were half of all oppressed groups on the planet, that being a woman was the ULTIMATE, MOST oppressed demographic ever. It was an attractive notion to young girls at the time when it came to the idea of oppressed vs. oppressor demographic histrionics, so it was readily adopted and the mantra, "oppressor bad, oppressed good" and "woman wiser, smarter, but subjugated and oppressed" so adopted.

They thought with such cut and dry logic, that a woman, no matter her demographic, was the ultimate oppressed lifeform, and that naturally the diverse assortment of women were all equal- unlike in the evil patriarchal man's world, that fought over resources and control and dominance and machismo and blahblahblahblah "women so much better."

But turns out, no, being a woman did not eliminate the interrelationship of race, ability, sexual orientation or gender identity, like they preached, and being a feminist that adopted class struggle theory was NOT the ready made, "we're all already equal so feminism gets to be THE voice of the disenfranchised and represent them even in their absence" like they thought.

White feminist? Best shut up, bitch; the people you're oppressing by being white are talking. Cisgendered? Shut up, bitch; the people you're oppressing by excluding from your club for not being biologically female but women are talking.

And suddenly white feminism was on the chopping block and an acceptable target. And just like that, white women were being treated not as friends under an oppressive regime, but being written about as co-conspirators and also oppressors, so they had to leave the council and just become supporters while the REAL oppressed minorities discussed what they were going to do; but they could contribute snacks and sit on benches in solidarity, though.

Then black men got called, "the white people of black people," and black men were told as men they were just one step less oppressive than white men.

Then black culture got called and told that it was no longer acceptable for their art and culture to be anti-gay and their culture of masculinity could no longer use women as objects without it being a problem.

Then white gays were told they were the oppressors of LGBTQ and to shut up, LGBTQ wasn't about them, and LGBTQ should be about non-white minority rights.

And then picture emerged with exactly how you're treated when you aren't on the Right Side of History of the ideological mob and exactly how it omits its malicious attitude towards people that disagree with it or won't submit to its totalitarianism, and understood more that the white men weren't opposed to freedom or equality, they were opposed to this hideous and dogmatic ideology and doublethinking it uses to co-opt the very real issues and struggles of misc. groups and demographics.

TERFs are just this hilarious remnant of radical feminism that is still trying to maintain any kind of coherent grip over feminism itself as a culture and movement, when it's just obsolete and retired. Still stubbornly holding out hope that people will downgrade.

TERF brand feminism has all the negative elements of Marxist class struggle theory and their stupid ideas of society, but also maintains just enough attachment to objective, concrete biology so it can subjectively interpret the meaning. So it's not ideologically pure enough and it isn't actually concrete or objective with how it understands reality. It's in its own bubble where a woman is a biological sex but also according to class struggle their the nature of that sex is oppression only a socialist society can elevate by arbitrary rules privileging women over men, that men are forced to contribute to. Making it insufficient for true, ideological class based ideology and yet too Marxist for liberals or conservatives to entertain as worthwhile. It's an ugly transitional animal between eons of change, still trying to exist as if it hasn't been replaced.

Rest in piss you disgusting top-from-the-bottom, headfucking belief system. Because Intersectional Feminism has also shed reference to concrete and objective reality, it'll be joining you soon- in under 20-25 years, is my guess.

Daily reminder that misandry it is just the first steps to becoming a terf. Just saying!

[radicalcoffeeclub]

"What can you achieve as a female lifter? There seem to be only 2 camps. The general public thinks a woman that touches a loaded barbell will wake up the next day as the SheHulk.

People with a bit more understanding of exercise physiology realize that this is obviously nonsense. One look around you in the average gym makes it clear that getting seriously big is difficult even for men. The statistic that women have ~15 times less testosterone than men is often quoted to explain that as a woman, you can’t grow much muscle anyway. So the common recommendation in today’s fitness circles is that women should train like men and should expect not to see much muscle growth.

The natural muscular potential of women

There is truth to this, but the causality runs in the opposite direction. Before I explain this, let’s first look at how the natural muscular potential of women compares to that of men. Percentage wise, how much muscle can a woman build compared to a man? Does it scale with testosterone so that women can build only ~7% as much muscle as men? Is it about half?

It’s 100%. Women gain the same percentage of muscle mass as men during strength training. In fact, women gain as much size and sometimes more strength than men [2]. The only difference is the starting point. Men start off with more muscle mass and more strength, but the relative increase in muscle size is the same between men and women.

Research on protein metabolism comes to the same conclusion. Women build just as much muscle protein after training and after meals as men. In fact, one study found that given the same level of muscle mass, women have a higher rate of muscle protein synthesis than men.

Women vs. men in elite sports

If you think this is all just silly theory from labcoats studying beginners, consider this. Elite, natural female athletes have 85% as much muscle as elite male athletes. The studied sports included Olympic weightlifting and powerlifting. The 15% difference can easily be explained by 3 factors.

Women have a genetically higher body fat percentage. Women have ~12% essential body fat to regulate their hormones compared to just ~3% fat in men. And you know, boobs.

People have lower expectations of women, even most women themselves underestimate what they can achieve physically compared to men. In a famous study, simply telling people they were on steroids increased their strength gains by 321%. These were advanced trainees already benching and squatting over 300 pounds (137 kg) before taking the fake steroids. Moreover, the androgenic-anabolic steroid protocol in question was just 70 mg of Dianabol per week. Giving that same dosage of actual Dianabol to advanced trainees improves strength by only a few percent. So what do you think it does to women when you tell them they have 15 times less testosterone?

There are more men in sports, so at the elite level, the selection to get to the top level is stronger. Elite male athletes are likely the best the male race has to offer. For women there may be more potential world record holders that will never know it because they don’t try.

What about testosterone?

Within an individual, more testosterone means more muscle mass. There is little doubt about that. Between genders, however, the relation becomes much weaker. In their study of elite athletes, Healy et al. concluded that “The difference in lean body mass is sufficient to account for the observed differences in strength and aerobic performance seen between the sexes without the need to hypothesize that performance is in any way determined by the differences in testosterone levels.”

How can this be? Testosterone functions differently in men and women, as I explained in my BioSignature review. In animals we have a good understanding of why testosterone is not needed for muscle development in women. It seems growth factors like IGF-1 and growth hormone take over the anabolic role that testosterone has in men. Growth factors are more important for strength and muscle mass in women than in men. Since women have just as much IGF-1 as men and women produce ~3 times as much growth hormone as men, this explains in part why having less testosterone does not limit how much muscle they can build. To make matters more complex, the sex hormones and growth factors interact and all these hormones also interact with your genes.

In short, saying women have less potential to build muscle mass because they don’t have as much testosterone as men is shortsighted.

The other sex hormone

Not only is testosterone not the great savior, estrogen is not the bad guy. Most people, even women, shun estrogen as the evil hormone that makes you bloated and does all sorts of negative things. Although it’s rarely described what exactly the negative effects of estrogen are, most people agree nonetheless that’s it’s bad for your body composition. This is complete nonsense. In my article on hormones and fat loss I explained the positive effects estrogen has on abdominal fat storage, but estrogen does many more awesome things.

Estrogen aids in muscle repair.

Estrogen is anti-catabolic and prevents muscle loss.

Estrogen protects your joints, bones and tendons from injury.

Estrogen does not make you fat. On the contrary, estrogen increases your metabolism.

These aren’t a few obscure and irrelevant findings I’m dragging up to support my point. Hundreds of studies have demonstrated the anabolic effects of estrogen. Estrogen is also crucial for your health, but that’s another topic. In short, estrogen’s bad reputation is based on nothing more than the poor intuition that if testosterone is anabolic, estrogen must be catabolic.

Why women aren’t living up to their potential

Women have the same relative natural muscular potential as men. They even have several advantages over men. So why don’t we see more muscular women?

Women are underrepresented in sports and in the gym. Even at the Olympic level there are fewer female participants. It is even true in science. There are over 50% fewer female participants in scientific studies than men.

Even if women go to the gym, most of them spend their time on the treadmill or playing with pink dumbbells.

We don’t have the same expectations of women. If a man benches a lot, that’s taken as a sign of social dominance. If a woman benches a lot, she’s seen as a freak, people get worried and men feel their pride sting and shrivel. I’ve heard from many of the women I train they’re approached in the gym ‘not too lift that heavy’ when they bench more than a plate.

Many women use contraceptives that harm their strength training progression. Many birth control pills impair muscle growth by decreasing androgen activity, lowering growth factor levels and increasing cortisol levels. It is primarily the progestin content of the contraceptive that’s harmful, because this competes with testosterone for the androgen receptor.

Lastly, the women that do actually train seriously in spite of the stigma often train like men, which doesn’t align with their physiological strengths. Since women produce much more estrogen than men, this gives them several advantages over men in the gym. Women don’t fatigue as much as men and women recover faster after training. There are many more important gender differences in metabolism, anatomy, neurology and physiology: see this article a full review of why and how women should not train like men.

Conclusion

It’s time we stop treating women like second rate men. Women have just as much relative potential for muscle growth as men. It’s up to them if they want to fulfill that potential. If they do, they should realize they’re not men and train to their strengths.

[nothorses]

This thread on Twitter (also give @Azure_Husky a follow!!)

Linked Article Transcript below

Content warnings for transphobia against transmasculine people, including violence and harassment It's easy to say that transmasculine people get male privilege and face less oppression than many other trans people, but only if you don't actually listen https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2019/8/9/1877651/-There-is-a-hidden-epidemic-of-violence-against-transmasculine-people

I hear pretty constantly from transmasculine people about the violence they face from cis people and the erasure, condescension, and "suck it up, you're the oppressor now" attitudes they get from other trans people. 

We are failing the transmasculine parts of our communities. We are failing our brothers and masculine siblings. We need to get better at listening to transmasculine people's concerns and working together rather than fostering hierarchies of oppression within transness 

Once transness is involved, shit gets complicated. Simple responses of "misandry doesn't exist because men have the power" assume transmasculine people have access to the same privileges as average cis men when frequently they don't. 

One of the saddest things about being someone who talks about this is that i regularly get transmasculine people giving heartfelt thanks for the smallest mentions of their needs & concerns bc they're so used to transfeminine people ignoring their existence or being antagonistic 

We need to do better. I refuse for some of us trans people to base our fights for equality and justice by stepping on the needs of other trans people. 

I see transfeminine people I care about and respect who will sometimes share "let's make a world without men" type things and like I have had these feelings too, I struggle under misogyny and have a bunch of bad experiences with (cis, especially but not exclusively) men. *and*- 

- i've seen too many of my transmasculine siblings' hurt as they are constantly lumped into "just as bad as cis men" baskets (which I also have feelings about but is a larger topic I think) & have heard from too many transmasculine people who have spent years in denial bc of this 

I've heard from too many transmasculine people who have put off transitioning, tried to avoid accepting their gender, because they internalized the constant stream of this shit. And I love trans people too fucking much to keep letting it go. 

I get that for many of our communities there can be some incredible trauma around masculinity, either because it was enforced on us against our will or due to violence and/or sexual assault. And i don't debate the validity of that trauma. 

And also we can't extrapolate our trauma into "this segment of trans people, by virtue of their gender, is worth less (or worthless)". 

I mean if we want to dig into it, a lot of us transfeminine people get attacked by transphobes under the auspices of trauma regarding specific genitals or gender expressions or body types. And most of us can agree that their trauma doesn't mean they get to denigrate us. 

Honestly I'm tired. And also I acknowledge that my tiredness about this cannot be even a mild fraction of the exhaustion of the trans people targeted and erased by this must be. 

So I'm calling on y'all and asking you to please do better by *all* trans people. I get the joy and relief in venting about men. I do. We live in a misogynistic society and a lot of us suffer under the hands of a specific gender and sometimes we need an outlet. 

But at the very least please be aware of when your venting is in a public space where it *is* going to harm and affect others, and specifically other trans people (since I don't have the spoons to get into a larger discussion about cis men currently) 

Know that every time we make vent-jokes (or not jokes) about how everyone who is masculine is worthless to us, we are directly damaging other trans people, and possibly painfully forcing some to deny themselves or stay closeted because who would want to become The Enemy, right? 

And I feel like I *have* to keep talking about this because if transmasc people stick up for themselves, I see how often they get shot down as just another "not all men" concern troll or like they're trying to talk over feminine people 

Hell I've seen threads where a transmasc person starts the thread to talk about transmasc issues and *still* people have declared it derailing or speaking over others. How do we address their oppression if they aren't allowed to discuss it anywhere? 

So as a transfeminine person I've got allyship privilege here where I may be condemned as having internalized misogyny or being an assimilationist or something but at least I can't be seen as just another dude talking over women

(i use the binary language there thoughtfully bc a lot of these Us vs Them dichotomies tend to erase nonbinary people or pretend that all nonbinary people are centre or feminine of centre on the gender spectrum) 

Just. Do better. Please. Like. Just listen to transmasculine people with an open heart for a bit and hear the intense transphobia and discrimination they also face and consider the impact of your words on them. 

It sucks to see people who are generally caring and thoughtful about many types of oppression just.. Let it all go when a chance to lump transmasc people in with The Enemy comes up. 

Addendum: I've had a couple people express concern that I'm saying that transfeminine people shouldn't address when they are facing transmisogyny from transmasculine people and I hope that it is clear that isn't what I am saying at all. 

Transmasculine people can be transmisogynistic, absolutely! I've had experiences with that too. What this thread is about is the fact that for *some* people, transmasculine people as a whole are considered less marginalized by dint of their masculinity and it isn't that simple. 

So saying broad statements about transmasculine people isn't "punching up". Its horizontal violence if it's coming from other trans people or can be punching down if it's coming from cis people. That is what this thread is meant to address. 

By all means we should be discussing and addressing transmisogyny. But transmasculine people discussing the specifics of their own concerns isn't in and of itself transmisogyny. We do no one any favours by trying to silence that. 

This thread isn't about transfeminine people never speaking ill of transmasculine people or vice versa. Its about calling-in a specific subset of transfeminine communities for treating transmasculine people as a whole as disposable and The Enemy.

[freddiekluger]

Why Cap Being Internally Closeted Is Not Only Possible, But Valid Representation 

i wrote this to a lot of mitski and onsind, so you can’t blame me for any feelings that bleed through

now i don’t know if it actually exists, but i’ve heard of there being a lot of discourse surrounding the captains story arc regarding his sexuality- i believe the general gist is that having a queer character that remains closeted to themselves is either unrealistic or ‘bad’ representation, and as someone who really treasures the captain and relates to his story so far a lot, i thought i might break this down a bit. 

i’ve divded up every complaint i’ve heard about this into four main questions which i’ll be covering below the ‘keep reading’, because this is gonna be pretty comprehensive. full disclaimer i reference my experiences as an ex-evangelical non binary butch lesbian a couple times, and i spent a year studying repression and the psychological impacts of high demand sexual ethics for my graduating sociology paper, so this is coming with some background to it i swear

the big questions:

can you EVEN be gay and not know it????

but isn't this just ANOTHER coming out arc, and aren't we supposed to be moving beyond those?

but if cap can't have a relationship with a man because he's a ghost, what's the point?

since cap's dead, isn't this technically bury your gays, and isn't that bad? 

1. "but is it really possible to not know? Isn't that bad representation?"

short answer: no and no.

before i get into the validity of the captain's ignorance about his own orientation as 21st century rep, let's break down how the hell the captain can be so clearly attracted to men and still not even consider the possibility that he might be gay, as brought to you by someone who literally experienced this shit.

the captain's particular situation is both a direct result of the lack of information around human sexuality he would have had (aka clear messaging that it's actually possible for him to be attracted to men. i don't mean acceptable or allowed, i mean physically capable of happening- the idea that orientations other than heterosexual exist and are available to him, a man), and a subconscious survival mechanism. the environment in which he lives is outright hostile to gay people, while the military man identity he has constructed for himself doesn't allow for any form of deviation from societal norms, let alone one so base level and major. as a result of this killer combo of information and environment, instincts take over and the mind does it's best to repress the ‘deviant’ feelings until a. one of these two things changes, or b. the act of repression becomes so destructive and/or exhuasting that it becomes impossible to maintain. the key to maintaining a long-term state of repression of desire is diverting that energy elsewhere, and a high-demand group such as the military is the perfect place for the captain to do this (this technqiue is frequented by religions and extremist ideologies worldwide, but that’s not really what we’re here to focus on). 

while the brain is actively repressing ‘deviant’ feelings (aka gay shit), this doesn't mean you don't experience the feelings at all. when performed as a subconscious act of survival, the aim of repression is to minimise/transform the feelings into a state where they can no longer cause immediate danger, and something as big as sexual/romantic orientation is going to keep popping up, but as long as the individual in question never understands what they’re feeling, they’ll be able to continue relatively undisturbed. you know how in heist movies, the leader of the group will only tell each team member part of the plan so they can’t screw things up for everyone else if they get caught? it’s kind of like that.

this is how the captain appears to have operated in life AND in death, and it’s a relatively common experience for lgbtq people who’ve grown up in similar circumstances (aka with a lack of information and in an unfriendly-to-hostile environment), and accounts for how some people can even go on to get married and have children before realising that they’re gay and/or trans. 

personally, while i can now identify what were strong homo crushes all the way back to childhood, at the time i genuinely had no idea. there was the underlying sense that i probably shouldn't tell people how attached i was to these girls because i would seem weird, and that my feelings were stronger than the ones other people used to describe friendships, but like-like them in the way that other girls like-liked boys? no way! actually scratch that, it wasn't even a no way, because i had no idea that i even could. i even had my own havers, at least in terms of the emotional hold and devotion she got from me, except she treated me way less well than cap’s beau. snatches of the existence of lgbt people made it through the cone of silence, i definitely heard the words gay and lesbian, but my levels of informations mirrored those that the captain would have had: virtually none, beyond the idea that these words exist, some people are them, and that's not something that we support or think is okay, so let's just not speak about it. despite only attending religious schools for the first couple years of primary, until i got my own technology and social media accounts to explore lgbtq content on my own- option a out of the two catalysts for change- the possibility of me being gay was not at all on my radar. don’t even get me started on how long it took me to explore butchness and my overall gender, two things which now feel glaringly obvious. 

when shit starts to break down, you can also make the conscious choice to repress which can delay the eventual smashing down of the mental closet door for a time (essentially when the closet door starts to open, you just say ‘no thanks’ and shut it again by pointedly Not Thinking About It). in the abscence of identifying yourself by your attractions, it becomes quite common to identify with a lack- in my case, this meant becoming proud of how sensible and not boy crazy i was, and in the captain’s case, this means becoming proud of how sensible and not sensuous/wild (aka woman crazy) he was, identifying with his LACK of desire for women and partying (which, even in the 40s, involved the expectation of opposite sex romances and hook ups). i’m not saying that’s the only reason he’s a rule follower, but i think the contrast between About Last Night and Perfect Day pretty much support this. (the captain getting on his high horse about general party antics that he inherently felt excluded from because of underlying awareness of his difference & his tendency to project his regimented expectations of himself onto others, vs. joining in the reception party, awareness of how the environment supports difference in the form of clare and sam, and relaxing his own rules by dancing with men- the captain doesn’t mind a party when feels like he has a place there.)

so the captain was operating in a high demand, highly regulated environment (primarily the military, but also early 20th century England itself), with regimented roles, rules, and expectations. working on the assumption that he wouldn't have had out/disclosing lgbt friends, he would have had little to no exposure to lgbt identities, and what information he did receive would have been hushed and negatively geared. while my world started to open up when i started high school was allowed to have my own phone + instagram account, resulting in me realising something wasn't quite 'right' within a few years (making me a relatively early realiser compared to those who don't come out to themselves until adulthood), in life the captain never had that experience. he didn't receive the information he needed, his environment didn't grow less hostile. with the near-exception of havers related heartbreak, his well disciplined and lifelong method of repression never became destructive/exhaustive enough to permanently override the danger signals in his mind and allow him to put his feelings into words. neither of the most common catalysts for change happened for him, so he continued as usual, even after his death.

BUT, and here’s where we come to why this is actually great representation, arrival of mike and Alison represents the opening up of new world. for the first time, the captain is actively made aware of the fact that his environment is no longer hostile, and better than that, it’s affirming. he’s also getting access to positively geared information about lgbtq people and identities, so option a of the two catalysts for change is absolutely present, and resoundingly positive. 

the captain’s arc is also relatively unique as it acknowledges the oppressive nature of his environment, but actually focuses on the internal consequences, and the way that systems like those that the captain lived in succeed because they turn us into our own oppressors. for whatever reason, we repress ourseslves, and often can’t help it, and i find that the significance of the journey to overcome that is often overlooked in more mainstream queer media. perhaps it’s just not very cinematic, or it remains too confronting for cishet audiences, but ghosts manages to touch on it with a lovely amount of humour and hope. Jamie Babbit’s But I’m A Cheerleader is another favourite piece of queer media for the same reasons.

not only does it show this, but as the captain continues to get gayer and lean into some of his less conventional traits (like an interest in fashion and the wedding planning), it shows lgbt people who have been or are going through this that there CAN be a positive outcome. it takes a lot to unlearn all the things that have painted you as wrong, especially when a massive institution is desperate to continue doing so, but you can do it, you can be happy, and it's never too late. (i've been meaning to say that last point for ages for ages, but a mutual beat me to it here)

2. not just another coming out arc

i absolutely support the demand for queer stories that don’t center around coming out (it’s like shrodinger’s queer: if you’re not coming out on screen, do you really even exist?), but i don’t align with the criticisms that the captain should already be out. for the reasons mentioned above, the captain’s particular story is fairly different to the ‘young white teenager who mostly knows gay is fine, it’s just everyone else that’s got the problem, but have a unremarkably straight sounding soundtrack, a trauma porn romance, and a cishet saviour’ that we keep seeing. the captain’s ongoing journey with his sexuality emphasises the overaching theme of the show: recovering from trauma and humanity’s endless capacity for growth, and i think that’s worth showing over and over again until it stops being true.

additionally, while the captain’s journey regarding his gayness is a big part of his character and story, ghosts makes it clear that it’s not the ONLY part, and being gay is far from his ONLY characteristic or dramatic/comedic engine. the fact that i’m even having to congratulate ghosts for doing that really shows how much film and television is struggling huh.

while all queer media is, and should be, subject to criticism, i think if it helps even one person then it absolutely deserves to exist, and i can say i’ve found the captain’s journey to be the lgbt story i’ve found that’s closest to my own, which says a lot considering he’s a dead world war 2 soldier who hangs out with other ghosts including a slutty Tory, a georgian noblewoman, and a literal caveman. 

3. if captain gay, why he no have boyfriend???? 

another complaint that’s been circulating is that since the captain doesn’t, and likely won’t, have a boyfriend, that makes him Bad Representation because it follows the sad single gay trope. i kind of get the logic from this one, and a lot of it is up to personal interpretation, but part of me really enjoys the fact that the captain’s journey towards accepting himself is separated from having a relationship.

coming out is often paired with having romantic/sexual relationships (either as the reason or reward for doing so). my own struggle with repression didn't end the second that came out, and i still struggle with letting myself develop & acknowledge romantic feelings as a result of actively shutting them (and most other feelings in general) down for years, and statistics show that lgbtq youth in particular tend not to live out their 'teen years' until their twenties. by not giving cap a relationship straight away, ghosts separates the act of claiming identity and sexual orientation from finding a partner (two things which are, more often than not, separate), and also provides some very nice validation to folks who have yet to have the relationship they want, especially when lots of mainstream queer media is now jumping on the cishet media bandwagon of acting as if every person loses their virginity and has a life defining relationship at sixteen. it’s essentially a continuation of the earlier theme of “it’s never too late”, and who’s to say the captain won’t get a gay bear ghost boyfriend to go haunt nazis with??? people die all the time, it could happen.

(also, i think him and julian will have definitely shagged at least once. it was a low moment for both of them and they refuse to speak of it.)

lots of asexual/ace spectrum fans have come out to say how much they’ve loved being able to headcanon cap as ace, and while that’s not a headcanon i personally have, i think it’s brilliant that ace fans feel seen by his character- we’re all in this soup together babey (and sorry for cursing everyone still reading this with that cap/julian headcanon. i’m just a vessel)

4. “okay, but cap’s a GHOST- doesn’t that make this Bury Your Gays?”

this is a bit of a complex one, but i’m going to say no as a result of the following break down.

Bury Your Gays (BYG), aka the trope where lgbtq characters are consistently killed off (and often with a heavy dose of trauma, while cishet characters survive) is probably one of my least favourite lgbt media tropes. BYG has two main points:

1. the lgbt character is killed, thus removing them from story entirely- hence the use of the phrase ‘killed OFF’ (killed off of the show/film)

2. the character’s death reinforces the perception that lgbtq people’s lives must end in tragedy, instead of being long and fulfilling, or are inherently less valuable. bonus points if the character is killed in a hate crime or confesses same-gender love right before they die (that one implies that queer love genuinely has no future!)

not every death of an lgbtq character is bury your gays, and i personally feel that the captain is an example of an lgbt death that isn’t. 

first of all, while the captain is dead, so are the vast majority of characters in ghosts. the premise of the show means that death is not the end of the line for its characters- for most of them, it’s the only reason we get to see them on screen at all. as such, the captain being dead doesn’t remove him from the story, so point one is irrelevant.

at the time of posting, we don’t know how or why the captain died, but we've had nothing to suggest his death was in any way related to his latent sexuality, so his mysterious death doesn’t actively play into the supposedly inherent tragedy of queer lives, nor the supposedly lesser value. that’s as of right now- since we don’t know the circumstances of his death it’s a little tough to analyse properly. while the captain’s life absolutely features missed opportunities and it’s fair share of tragedy, hope and growth (which seems to be the theme of this post) abounds in equal measure. the captain may not be alive, but we DO get to see him growing and having a relatively happy existence, that for the most part seems to be getting even better as he learns to open up and be himself unapologetically- that doesn’t feel like BYG to me.

while writng this, it’s just occured to me that death really is a second chance for most of the ghosts, especially with the introduction of alison. from mary learning to read, to thomas finding modern music, they’ve all been given the chance explore things they never could have while they were alive, and hopefully grow enough to one day be sucked off move on.

in conclusion,

i love the captain very much and i hope his arc lives up to the standards it’s set so far. i don’t know where to put this in this post, but i’d alo like to say i LOVE how in Perfect Day, the captain wasn’t used as an educational experienced for fanny at all. i am very tired of people expecting me to be the walking talking homophobe educator and rehabilitator, so the fact that it’s alison and the other ghosts that call fanny out while the captain just gets to have fun with the wedding organisation made me very happy.

here’s a few other cap posts that i’ve done:

the captain’s arc if adam and the film crew stayed

a possible cap coming out 

the captain backstory headcanon

if you’ve read this far,

thank you!

also check out @alex-ghosts-corner , this post inspired me very much to write this

[fanonical]

I really don’t see how JK Rowling is a terf. I mean, acknowledging that biological sex exists doesn’t invalidate trans people. In fact it completely validates them, as their experience and journey as trans people is based on the fact that they identify as different than their biological sex. (1/2)

Also, I think it’s completely fair to point out that biological women and trans women have different experiences. Sure there are a lot of parallels, but you can’t deny that growing up as a biological girl is different than growing up as a biological boy (and trans girl obviously). I would be happy to get a reply and discuss. (2/2)

answering this on the off chance it’s asked in good faith (which it definitely isn’t)

1. the word is “cis” not biological. there is no such thing as “biological womanhood”

2. if you agree there are usually somewhat notable differences between people with XX chromosomes and XY chromosomes (which trans people overwhelmingly believe, as well) then why would you think that believing sex = male/female (and a fundamental part of the whole world’s existence) would validate us? based on your opinions suggested here, there’s some obvious cognitive dissonance — you say trans people are valid but sex is real and somewhat immutable, but that trans people “identify” as another sex — if sex is immutable then how can trans people “identify” as another? you’re spouting literal terf rhetoric. the sex binary doesn’t help trans people at all.

3. trans people believe in “sex” we just overwhelmingly believe it is different to how Rowling and other terfs assert it to be. this belief is backed up by actual biologists who study sex. it isn’t fourth grade science class any more, buddy

4. being trans has very little to do with one’s sex but rather our assigned gender — which is different.

5. suggesting there is “one true biological femalehood” that all cis women experience that trans women growing up being perceived as boys/men don’t experience is not only transphobic, it’s completely ignorant of the multitude of experiences of womanhood. womanhood is perceived and treated differently in different cultures around the world; rich white women are going to have vastly different experiences with poor black women in womanhood; straight women and lesbians (see: Butch and Femme gender identities); even women from England vs women from the States. implying womanhood has ONE defining trait that makes trans women unable to experience it suggests these aren’t the major factors of womanhood — variables that change based on culture and surrounding. it’s pseudosociological nonsense.

6. even if everything else you were saying were true, Rowling has likened trans women using women’s bathrooms as “foxes pretending to be chickens to get in the henhouse” and said, downright, that trans people do not experience bigotry or oppression. she has also called for rights to be stripped from trans minors. she is a transphobe. she is openly transphobic. she follows terfs; she is followed by terfs; she associates herself with terfs.

any more asks akin to this will not be given the same benefit of the doubt and will be instantly blocked.

[daisyachain]

Since a few other anons have asked to hear your Ao no Flag opinions, I thought I'd ask as well. What do you think of Shingo and Kensuke?

Hahaha loaded question! Actually you've got great timing, the published translation really switched me around on them

First up, I'm still not sure how to read The Confrontation. First time (in a blur), I read it as Kensuke eavesdrops on Touma and Mami -> Touma admits his crush -> Kensuke barges in and beats up Touma -> Shingo joins in -> Touma responds and wins -> Shingo and Kensuke tell Taichi it's not their responsibility to like Touma and they're entitled to be homophobic about him.

Second time, idk if it was the translation or I was just paying more attention, I read it as Kensuke eavesdrops -> Touma admits his crush -> Kensuke barges in, grabs Touma by the collar and asks Touma aggressively if he's being serious -> Touma says 'bite me' and starts beating up Kensuke, who then fights back -> Mami tries to break them up, Touma throws her to the ground -> bystander Shingo then joins in on Kensuke's side -> Shingo and Kensuke feel bad about it after, Shingo calls Touma to apologize -> Shingo and Kensuke call Taichi to apologize to him for starting the fight and the rumour mill -> Kensuke goes to Touma's house to apologize

Based off of Reading #2, I do actually find them interesting! Not as good people per se, but a sort of benign neutral.

Kensuke

Kensuke isn't purposefully malicious, but he's so willfully ignorant and impulsive that it amounts to malice. He confronts his feelings honestly...by yelling at Mami and Touma in public and forcing them to react in the worst situation. Even if he didn't ever intend to hurt Touma (heavily implied by The Big Bad Awkward Convo), he didn't show it and didn't try to de-escalate when Touma started swinging. He doesn't hate Touma or Mami, but he hates that Touma and Mami violate gender roles. He doesn't know what to do with that and instead of trying to understand it, he just hurts them and hurts others.

Towards the end he gets some modicum of self-awareness, he says he realizes his childhood abuse isn't a reason to be homophobic, but he acts on his emotions first and talks later and that is a bad thing in the world of Blue Flag. I'd argue he isn't 'right' and he isn't supposed to be 'right,' the reason he's written sympathetically is to show that his inability to think first ends up hurting people he cares about badly, that he's not malicious and that he does harm anyway--that your intentions aren't an excuse.

What is interesting is that Kensuke, who chased Mami down for a terrible and insincere apology a few days/weeks earlier, actually hunts down and apologizes to both Taichi and Touma. It's possible that overhearing Mami's description of him changes his perspective enough to fix his behaviour towards her as well, but it's not directly addressed. The only time in the series he actually shows compassion and consideration, it's towards Touma.

Another thing that changed my mind was looking at how Touma treats the matter. He doesn't hesitate to lay the punishment on Kensuke, but afterward he doesn't seem to hold a grudge or even be upset about it. He just says something along the lines of "oh he'll come around, he's pretty simple." This is 100% just guessing, but this makes it seem like Touma and Kensuke's fight wasn't Kensuke trying to gaybash Touma or Touma assuming he would, but Touma recognizing that he'd been outed by Kensuke and choosing to send a message that he wasn't going to be an easy target. But I have no idea!! Pls send in your opinions if you have any

Shingo

Like Kensuke, totally different character depending on if you read Kensuke vs Touma as Kensuke hatecriming Touma (unlikely, given that Touma punched first and given what both characters say about it after) or as Touma sending a message in the simplest way possible. First interpretation, he's a sleazy faux liberal who won't be overtly homophobic but will kick a guy when he's down. Second, he is Just A Dude.

Up until The Confrontation, Shingo seems to be an easygoing flake who is a good friend to Mami but otherwise unremarkable. Shingo only gets involved in the fight when Touma hurts Mami, apologizes to Touma soon after, and apologizes to Taichi as well for hurting Touma during the course of the fight.

What pissed me off about his character was his straight-out-of-Fox-News "both sides" speech at Shouko. First time, it just read like him justifying Kensuke's homophobia. Second time, less so. The reason Shouko and Saya are involved is that Shingo and Kensuke want to talk to Taichi, but they can't go to school. They're not supposed to be there for the conversation, they just stick around because they want to get their say in and they disapprove (rightfully) of Kensuke screwing over Touma as well as Mami.

Again, this is just me interpreting an ambiguous scene! But on reflection, it reads as if Shingo is just trying to get them to shut up or leave so that the three boys can talk privately, before Kensuke has to talk about his abuse...which he does anyway because he's socially inept and doesn't know how to navigate any situation gracefully. Rather than him saying 'Kensuke was justified in attacking Touma, you guys just don't understand', it comes across as him saying 'Kensuke is trying to communicate and apologize properly for the first time in his life, and you guys aren't getting it'

So, Shingo is a bit of a jerk but he treats both Touma and Taichi fairly and he doesn't seem to be homophobic.

but anyway what do you think Anon??? One interpretation is as good as the next!