#(also like of a trans person is literally saying this... how is that wrong? i don't blame them at all for those feelings)

[shopcat]

there is, Obviously, fundamentally a difference between headcanon and an analytical reading of text, and treating the two as exactly the same is not only wrong but devalues both, but funnily, i've found people tend to forget that both of these things are the product of referencing our real life experiences and applying them where we see fit to make a more interesting way to interact with media. and you can't just like, forget that it's not JUST about headcanons and meta analysis and whatever, because people in real life also still matter. and in real life, there are different stakes and EXPERIENCES, and those experiences lead to thinking the way we do because that's how you Be a goddamn person, which is why it's ironic is all 😭

like, saying zuko atla has to be cis in order to be "properly" gay in order to be Truly Compelling narratively is fucking ridiculous. textually, zuko is not actually gay. he never was intended to be, he never will be intended to be, he was never even subtextually. the assumption otherwise is already rooted in fantasy, and the tongue in cheek assertion that it isn't, which means it has more credence, is ... dumb? childish? admitting to at least yourself that the things you talk about wrt character analysis aren't the intention of the creator is literally half the point of doing said analysis – you're MEANT to throw away the intended interpretation in order to give it a new life through different keyholes without entirely divorcing itself from the text. (in the same breath, insisting the creator truly meant One Thing when they absolutely would not have/don't care at all, and ignoring that the people who made the piece are going to put their own biases and experiences and background into the media itself and actually MUST be taken into account for things like this is just ... well. Stop That.)

i've personally never been someone to ever claim that The Writers All Along INTENDED to do something that they obviously didn't, like make a character from a 2005 cartoon lgbt+. this doesn't mean that reading doesn't have any substance or cannot possibly hold any meaning, or that it's wrong. if you can't be objective about your own readings what's the damn point... leaning into it being fiction, which changes just by being observed by a different person, is why it's fun or interesting to do in the first place. and yeah there are some basic cookie cutter headcanons people like to fling around, and there can be criticism for that otherwise, but claiming headcanons themselves AREN'T an offshoot of this way of thinking is fucking stupid. like it's plain wrong.

our own thoughts on why a character acts, what they do, what their presentation is, why their personality is what it is up to and including their sexuality, gender identity, religion, JOB, whatever, are made to fill the gaps the text can't or won't provide, and in the case of lgbt ones as long as it's not actively harmful (as in like insisting a lesbian character is bi or something) it is literally harmless seeing as it is fairly solidly a "won't", along with a whole bunch of other hc material that usually don't see the light of day on-screen nonstereotypically. people seeing themselves in characters isn't new but more than that, saying that you know this but then pushing it aside because The Analysis Means More when it's Realistic And Plausible is fucking dumb. and rude. bc the entire point of drawing the line of connections this way is how WE see them. being all like "oh well, your own personal identity is still valid otherwise, don't get your feelings hurt bc it doesn't matter," is moot if you've already asserted there's only One real way to be... plausible 🤨. which is to be NORMAL ! duh.

like, the read that zuko IS gay (and cis) relies on extracting parts through the lens of our own gay perceptions and is why cishet fans don't pick up on it, but you can ask pretty much any other lgbt fan and they'll agree. zuko's narrative arc IS compelling with the read that he is gay, from the way he is ostracised by his family, neglected and abused, the "punishment" he receives and then continues to become his own warden of, the order of his death and the banishment itself, sozin criminalising homosexuality, his inability to connect with others especially his own age, his inability to seamlessly interact with girls, his literal externalised viewing of seeing himself as someone with Two Sides, them being good vs evil, realising he can change the damn world through love and acceptance, striving for peace, being the face of change for his nation, relearning what it means to be who he is once he is free from his past, the shame and humiliation rituals, the claim of his father that he is worthless as a prince and person, AND MORE... and i cannot express enough here how fucking little it matters if he's specifically gay or WHAT THE HELL EVER 😭.

to claim in no small way that it's impossible for a trans person, or a bisexual person, or anyone else lgbt, could ever line up his narrative with their own personal one is so beyond ridiculous it gives me a headache. no, "plausibly", i don't think zuko is like, transmasc. yes, plausibly, he could be gay. plausibly, he could be amab nonbinary but no one seems to actually give a fuck about that for some reason (i wonder!). nothing would change in both cases, because he's not actually either, so i really don't see the point in making fun of or being frustrated by one to lift up the other because you want cisgender boot soles to brush the back of your throat THAT badly. the implausibility of thinking any way about a fictional character should be taken into account to an extent, sure, but at the end of the day neither of us are doing anything truly worthwhile, and no one is claiming that it's the intent from the beginning to say otherwise, so what's the point here. why are we doing this. let's go skip in a meadow together before i kill someone with this rock.

[uncanny-tranny]

I don't see the whole "born in the wrong body" as much more than a simpler way of trying to encapsulate the feeling of body horror that can come with being gender dysphoric. It's a metaphor for trans pain, we aren't always literally saying what you're hearing.

I think it can be important to make this known because so many people are misinterpreting trans pain. Gender dysphoria is a very complex and nuanced issue, and it's a state of being that's case-by-case. The "born in the wrong body" statement is a simple way of communicating the angst of being gender dysphoric, and I really wish people focused on alleviating that angst rather than going, "well you weren't born in the wrong body, that's impossible! Stop feeling that way!"

[prehistoric-rat]

in finland our biggest pride event canceled their partnership with our biggest political party because the party hadn't voted in agreement about our new trans law (to allow self-ID and remove requirement of being sterile (yeah really)) (the party had ruled it a “matter of conscience” and abt 1/3 voted against), and now our news are full of the members of that party being pissed abt it and our likely next prime minister commenting how this is “sad and offends many people”, and ppl are flocking to lament and mock how pride is so intolerable and how u have to have 100% correct opinions in order to participate and i'm

[genderqueerdykes]

there really is a cultural pressure for transmascs & men to detransition, and it comes from all sides. it comes from the queer community too, not just terfs and cishet transphobes.

it took me a while to realize why transphobic people and transandrophobic queers utterly despise trans guys & mascs who are over the age of like 25- it's because it pisses them right off that we've resisted their attempts to make us detransition. it makes them so angry to see they were unable to groom that person into a life of self-shame and repression. it really seems like MOST people believe that trans men will just detransition eventually in life? people NEVER think about older trans men, only teenage trans boys and trans men in their very early twenties.

when i was involved with my local punk scene i was addressed with condescension, almost everyone around me didn't accept transmasculinity as a legitimate identity and thought that we would've transitioned by now in life. i encountered folks who would talk about transmasculinity with subtle disgust that made me feel like i was doing something wrong, and people who expressed overt disgust, saying in plain english that they were disgusted by breasts and vaginas because they were gay men. all along the way i was literally mocked for not having a penis, and one of my roommates started treating me differently once they found out i didn't have one (because they were attracted to me)

i've been on T for 9 years, and been out as a trans man for a bit longer than that, and i noticed as i've aged i've also attracted a lot of folks who have tried to deter me from identifying as a trans man, either through directly telling me that trans men are inherently dangerous, or by implying that women or another gender are safer, quieter, calmer, "less traumatizing to be around," etc. one of my exes told me they were terrified to date me (despite literally going out of their way to do so for over half a year) because they were scared i would be transphobic to them because i'm a transmasculine lesbian.

i received pressure from online friends to either detransition and become an intersex butch woman, or to something feminine adjacent or nonbinary. for years i dealt with a few friends who kept subtly hinting that i should stop identifying as a trans man or trans masc because of how awful transmascs are- going as far as to sending me screenshots of transmascs speaking, complaining about them and calling them whiny, annoying. talking about how all transmascs are entitled, how all transmascs take things too personally, how we complain too much, and so on.

people make no effort to make space for transmascs and men. i met 0 transmascs in my local punk community that i was able to stay in contact with. none. i met a few in passing but none that actually were introduced to me in a capacity where i could actually try to befriend them. it really felt like other punks in the scene were desperately trying to keep the transmascs apart at times. excuses were made as to why i couldn't hang out with other transmascs i liked, but i was constantly being forced to befriend transphobic cis gay men and transandrophobic transfemmes who outwardly expressed hatred and disgust of us. it really felt like it was on purpose... almost as if other members of this community wanted our attention, but never wanted us to give each other attention or a sense of community. like we were objects, not people to be included in the community for real. satellite friends, if you will.

i'll be honest with you. i was at my lowest at this point. i realized i wasn't just a trans man and that i'm a genderqueer person who experiences multiple genders, including womanhood and an "other" gender, which was great. however now i was being forced to completely stuff down being a man for the sake of other people. instead of folks telling me they'd rather not hang out with transmascs, folks rather just attempted to guilt me for identifying as such in the hopes i'd stop identifying that way. i was being told daily that trans men and mascs are inherently violent and terrible to be around. i was in discord servers where transmascs were being kicked constantly for getting even slightly upset about transandrophobia, or being unfairly targeted by staff.

it's violence, but nobody wants to call it that. i pulled myself out of there and am now able to contact other transmascs and trans men who are proud of who they are and have elevated me back into a headspace where it's okay to truly be myself. just keep in mind that if you feel like you're in that situation, you're not alone. people who attempt to groom others are often very subtle it's not always up front. they will start slipping in hateful sentiments very slowly and make you feel like maybe they're the ones who are actually right.

it feels good to be an almost 32 year old trans guy. there's nothing to be ashamed about there. people project their feelings on to my gender and that has nothing to do with me. it has nothing to do with you, either. people will just project on to you for whatever reason- hatred is usually the motivator there. if you encounter folks who keep trying to badger you out of identifying as your gender, no matter who you are, transmasc, transfemme, transneutral, trans anything- they are not good for you. they are not your friends. they do not accept you as you are and you deserve so much better.

[riddlerosehearts]

ever since vil's luxe couture groovy was first revealed i have not been able to stop thinking about how much i love him and the way his relationship with gender is written and treated by the narrative. the way that he's a gnc man who refuses to be seen without makeup on, who uses an extremely feminine personal pronoun in japanese ("atashi") and it isn't treated like an unusual thing or a joke. the way he admires the fairest queen, wants to be beautiful like she was and has such an immense amount of pride and confidence in his physical beauty. and then literally not one person in the whole story calls vil's masculinity into question except for epel, who gets told by vil that his views on gender roles and of men doing "feminine" things are backwards and archaic, and ends up having a whole arc where he learns that he was wrong and comes to see his own naturally cute and feminine appearance as a strength!

and then the fact that the narrative doesn't just treat vil normally as a gnc man but also actively celebrates him by having him be such a massive, world-famous celebrity who's so respected and loved?? he's a movie star, he's a model with a record number of runway appearances, he's an influencer who has 5 million magicam followers, if he advertises a product it flies off the shelves. in his dorm uniform vignette an international fashion magazine--which is specifically known for being the first to feature vil on its cover--is coming to interview the pomefiore students for an article on their pursuit of beauty, and the interviewer tells vil that he looks like the fairest queen reborn! and that's how he wants to be seen and is an entirely positive thing!! and with vil being so famous throughout twisted wonderland there will be kids and teens, most certainly including gnc and trans kids, who will look up to him and hear him publicly say things like how there's no such thing as something being just "for girls" or "for boys" and that men shouldn't be ashamed of doing feminine dance moves or wearing certain kinds of clothing. kids who will feel empowered because the vil schoenheit said they could be both beautiful and strong.

idk, it's just, in a lot of other stories i'd expect vil to struggle more because of the way he presents himself and to be treated in a more comedic way because of it. but instead he's a very important and well-developed character who's incredibly successful and confident, who isn't the slightest bit a joke or comic relief character and in fact is one of the most responsible and mature in the whole cast, whose struggles are mostly unrelated to his gender presentation but who gets to defend his right to be happy just the way he is when someone does look down on him for it, and who at least in my opinion gets some of the prettiest cards in the whole game. he is such a cool and unique character and i love him so much and find this aspect of how he's written to be so empowering and refreshing.

[mr-ribbit]

this isn't meant to soften or reduce the objective transmisogyny + additional hate action going into this, but since the people running these harassment campaigns are acting like they're literal baby children who need their hands held to understand anything, maybe this needs to be said:

what you're doing and how you treat trans women on this website is fucking MEAN. if you want to sit there and honestly convince yourself that you're *not* a transmisogynist or a transphobe or a misogynist or any other type of bigot - like if you genuinely believe that and are confused why people are calling you these things - then maybe we need to start from little primary colored building blocks and tell you that you're being fucking mean and rude and actively harmful to real people who read the things you say. im not sure why we need to start off with "trans women have feelings" - just kidding I know exactly why we need to - but maybe you don't.

no matter who you're talking to, do you honestly think accusing someone you do not know of being a pedophile, en masse, behind their back /and/ in a public forum, is a reasonable way to treat someone for making a tumblr post about video games or political opinions? even if you strongly disagree with the post, you think someone deserves to be treated like that by people they don't know? take a second please and sincerely imagine how that would feel. wouldn't it be scary? wouldn't you wonder who the people were who thought this about you - if they're people you know - if they're just a few people that will continue saying mean things to you forever or if there are thousands of people who choose to dedicate their time and energy specifically to making you feel bad? if you accidentally write a post in the wrong tone or unknowingly interact with a shitty person, that there are uncountable people that will keep track of that just to hurt you later? that's fucking horrifying

and to zone in on what's specifically happening here: do you think randomly accusing people of being pedophiles or sexual abusers has no effect on them? like a lot of you tend to excuse yourself in these discussions by saying "I didn't actually see the context of what they were saying" or "I didn't see that they apologized already" or "I didn't actually understand the post was a joke" or whatever other kneejerk response to make sure *you* aren't seen as a bad person. do you realize that makes you look even meaner? you didn't bother to actually follow up on a thought you had about someone before sending them hateful messages or making public accusations about them? those actions are harmful whether or not you like the victim at the end of the day.

believe it or not some people you send this shit to are survivors of abuse themselves, or have their own historical personal reasons to be weighing in on a touchy subject. when you baselessly decide it's ok to call someone an abuser of any type, that person is probably *also* disgusted by whatever horrible shit you're accusing them of. as someone that hates these things as much as you do in order to attack someone for them: what do you think it's like to have complete strangers think that about you? how many eggshells would you walk on if random people thought so little of you that they were ok doing this?

it's mean. it's heinous, cruel bullying, and if you genuinely think you are not doing it from a place of transmisogyny or hatefuk bias over the victims' identity, then you need to understand that that's not an excuse. "i didn't even know she was trans" ok, it was still mean to call her a pedophile with 200 of your closest friends in public. "im trans so it can't be transphobia" ok it was still mean to assume someone was endorsing abuse when they were talking about being accused of abuse. "i didn't see the post where she said it was a joke" ok it was still mean to actively harass someone without bothering to look into the full context.

at the end of the day, yes, obviously I still think you're all transmisogynist assholes who are clearly willing to gang up on a woman who has nothing to do with your problems simply because she dared to speak on them. i think you're bigoted and unwilling to examine that if it means giving up your vitriol against someone who doesn't like your favorite video game or whatever excuse of the week. but like even if you were just doing it for love of the hate game, it's fucking weird heinous shit and i hope you're happy having that be a central part of your life

to be clear: im not transfemme and if I'm overstepping or talking over anyone please let me know. im not speaking for anyone's actual experiences except my own, which is the experience of being angry at how much literal bullying and harassment I see excused on this so-called progressive queer blogging website

[shopcat]

just thinking thoughts trying to articulate them but re: trans names and even "stereotypical" trans names i just think it's like. luckily it's died down for now at least on here or maybe i just follow people who aren't assholes but seriously what was with that whole era where people just made fun of people's names or tongue in cheek poked fun at each other with a little too much cruelty let alone done by CIS people... like that's so weird. like i do have what i'd call a Stereotypical Trans Name in that it's unusual and "weird" to other people and it's not even actually like, the most out there or individualistic thing ever it's just kind of an old timey name that isn't as popular anymore but i chose it specifically bc it was a "proper" name. and i STILL get shit for it like all the time. and it's just like. why do people CARE...

like. i know you can't make grand sweeping generalisations for a group of people as varied as every trans person on earth but for a lot of us i'd go ahead and say your name as a trans person and even just AS A PERSON... A HUMAN BEING is an important part of who you are and ties into your identity to a degree that differs from person to person. and for a trans person specifically can be one of the only things you have for... yourself, along with pronouns, especially in online spaces/if you're not out/if you are out but struggle for whatever reason to even be given the dignity of being called YOUR OWN NAME, etc. i'm not gonna harp on about that aspect forever bc i think we all know but it's just like, in the face of that annoying tiktok cunts making a list of "every transfem is called [blank] and every transmasc is called [blank]" and there being 6k comments talking about how stupid and unserious it all is is just NASTY. like man shut the fuck up 😭

i don't find it funny like 95% of the time i think it's just like mean ... i also know people could probably read this and be like shut up you're being annoying it's not that deep but like whatever man. i think it's basic decency to not make fun of people for something that's a part of who they are especially if that identity puts them at risk which to be real can affect pretty much everyone other than white cishet christians etc at FAR worse severity/cost and i think instilling the idea that "people's names are fair game" outside of actual tongue in cheek intercommunity good faith joking around is actually Bad. not that i'm actually comparing these things bc it's not 1:1 and has different levels but still i think it comes from the same like... source. the amount of times i've had people use my own name as if it's a gotcha in anon hate is actually astronomical and half of them don't even realise they're BEING literally transphobic is crazy. i mean i've joked about it and i don't take it that seriously but it's still like, transphobic and i hate these people it just also doesn't bother me because i'm a normal person who isn't actually insecure about it and who literally cares what someone's name is. and xfiles girls love me unintentional side effect.

[pokemon-radical-red]

I got this comment on a post that I made about being a trans man and noticing how we’re perceived by others. This person is blocked now because I don’t want some transphobe on my blog, but I want to talk a little bit about this.

I like how this person’s trying to convince me that I’m wrong while saying that the only people who would be attracted to us are lesbians who are into butch women. But they can’t use those exact words or else we’ll all KNOW that they’re misgendering us. It’s interesting. Let’s play a game! TERF or transandrophobe. (I’m not scrolling through their blog long enough to find out.)

Okay. Let’s pretend that we live in their world, where trans men are not also a porn category (as someone pointed out in a response comment), and get to the deep cuts!

Now maybe this person defines oversexualization in a different way, and frequently commenting on our bodies—especially our chests—is totally cool and normal to them, because I literally have a post talking about the Tik Tok trend of “oh trans man wants me to respect his pronouns but he has HUGE BOOBS!!! haha this is so funny, guys!” You may notice that in this example here, she claims to feel bad, but then immediately turns around and makes a joke about it. Is describing transmascs essentially as our chests not sexualization? Not to mention dehumanizing considering they refer to this person as “a he/they,” instead of a transmasc or a nonbinary person or anything else.

But if that’s not enough sexualization for you, or you think that it isn’t valid to be upset over that, you can look under the cuts for the disgusting descriptions of our bodies from some transphobes. From some of those “ladies who just like butch,” since they’re innocent and aren’t oversexualizing us because “nobody oversexualizes ftm trans folks,” as the person in the screenshot said confidently.

I wanna say trigger warning for disgusting oversexualization of trans men (including trans men who are in their teens!) under the cut, but huh… the commenter said that nobody oversexualizes trans men, so this can’t be right. (On a serious note, please do heed the trigger warning before deciding to open the rest of the post.)

[sapphsorrows]

"people only pick on trans people because they're easy targets" yeah no shit they're easy targets just like flat earthers and antivaxxers. what they believe is absolutely fucking insane when you think about it for more than 2 seconds.

the idea of trans is no different from the idea of predestination.

predestination says only those who have been chosen by god will be saved and will go to heaven. how do you know you're predestined? there is literally no way to tell externally. there is no test you take to make sure you're predestined. you just have to put your faith in jesus and know, internally, in your heart, or whatever. funny how literally everyone who believes this also happens to be one of the ~chosen ones~.

the idea of being trans is that some people are born in the wrong body. how do you know you're born in the wrong body? there is literally no external way to tell, aside from maybe a few "am I trans?" quizlets (which as we all know are 100% accurate always and only made by professionals and not 12 year old furries). you just look inside, or whatever, and somehow "know" or you decide for yourself. then, based on your own self-reporting, which you have no way to externally verify, you expect people to bend to your will and you expect society to give you special privileges that no one else gets. no other man gets to pee in the ladies' or compete in women's sports but once you self-id as trans? well, right this way "ma'am", pay no mind to the women cowering in fear of you. their rights don't matter nearly as much as your feelings. funny how damn near everyone who believes in this also happens to be trans themselves, will a few outliers.

even "gender critical" transes like mr. blaire white and ms. buck angel will talk in hours upon hours of videos about the importance of gatekeeping and protecting women's spaces, yet /they/ demand the exact same privileges as every other "fake" (in their words) trans person on tiktok. do you seriously think "fake" trans people are going to listen to you and suddenly not go into the women's? No! are you fucking kidding me? it's so much easier to tell a buck or a blaire to fuck off than it is to a delusional fetishist who will 100% either hurt you or make a scene. there is no "true trans" because EVERYONE claims to be truly trans, everyone from bruce jenner to the "IT IS MA'AM" gamestop dude.

it fucking baffles me how youtube skeptics - people i used to admire, people who taught me how to think critically about shit - will spend all damn day dunking on flat earthers and creationists but will turn a blind eye to the trans cray and will even go as far as to support them. they think they're so above it all and they can't be fooled, but they have been, and I keep waiting for them to snap out of it - just like I waited for my own family to snap out of christianity - but they haven't.

if you seriously think a dress and some hormones and plastic surgery will make a man into a woman, you're insane, and you're no more crazy than a youtuber who thinks antarctica is an ice wall or a pastor who still prays to his "sky daddy". you have no right to make fun of these people for the insane shit they believe when you believe in this nonsense. you are quite literally the pot calling the kettle black.

and if you're one of those people who's like "oh well i know they're not actually women i just call them that to avoid hurting their feelings" im sorry but you're still in this cult, you're physically in but mentally out and the only way to really get out is to call a spade a spade, admit the emperor has no clothes, admit you were fooled just like me - just like all of us - and speak out against it.

[genderkoolaid]

I'm sorry but you people have demeaned the word lesbian so badly... the LITERAL definition of a lesbian is a NON-MAN who likes NON-MEN. How is that so fucking hard to understand? Not you specifically, but people like you have made it into something it's not; the whole "bi lesbian" and "straight lesbian" shit, saying trans men can date lesbians (which is literally just transphobic), straight up just saying lesbians can date men???? MEN???? DO YOU NOT HEAR YOURSELVES?

And now the whole butch discourse lmao. Sure, maybe in days long past it was a broader term, but today when someone hears the word butch, I can guarantee their minds will jump to a butch lesbian. If y'all want it to be the GBT community so bad then just say so

Also I can guarantee that you were one of the mfs laughing at lesbians who used he/him or he/they pronouns back in 2020 lmao performative ass bitch

Definitions of words do not descend from Heaven straight from the lips of God. We make them up! So I simply disagree with your definition of lesbian, as do many others. Personally, I enjoy the definition of "queer love/desire for women." For one, it centers lesbianism around women, instead of centering it around the exclusion of men. And two, "non-men loving non-men" is a definition which utterly erases nonbinary people. If an agender person is dating a neutrois person, they are not lesbians- or gay men- simply because y'all cannot get your head out of your binary asses for five seconds. "Non-men loving non-men" is a definition that attempts to be nonbinary-inclusive but only succeeds in making nonbinary & genderqueer identities palatable for radical feminism and political lesbianism. Honestly, I would prefer someone who defines lesbian as "woman loving woman" but understands that many people have complex relationships with womanhood while still feeling attached to the label of lesbian, than someone who uses this "NB-inclusive" definition and goes absolutely feral over genderqueers who are Doing It Wrong.

Anyways, speaking of radical feminism: acknowledging male lesbians and mspec lesbians is not "making lesbianism something its not." It is just recognizing the beautiful complexity that has always existed within lesbianism.

The lesbian community- which I'm using to refer to all kinds of communities organized around queer relationships to women & womanhood- has always been a haven for a lot more people than cis women exclusively into other cis women. The idea of sexuality-as-identity is very recent, and the idea of drawing a hard line between people who only like people of the same gender and people who like the same gender and more is also extremely recent. Beyond that, trans men and nonbinary people have always taken shelter under lesbianism. "Butch" in the context of lesbianism has always been a trans* identity, a way for people with a queer gender to find community and safety.

The reason why we have this idea of lesbianism as a strict category with hard borders is..... you guessed it..... radical feminism! And specifically "political lesbianism," which essentially placed woman-only relationships as the only true feminist relationship you could have. "Lesbian" became a political identity because of its focus on woman-woman relationships. But that meant that, for political lesbianism to be acceptable to radical feminism, it needed to conform to radical feminist beliefs about what makes a good feminist. Which meant:

No trans women or fems (because they are too male and probably predators)

No trans men or mascs (because they are too male and also traitors)

No bisexuals (because they are too male by association and are also traitors)

No penetrative sex, or at least no strap ons (because it imitates men)

No kinky sex (see above but with bonus "kink is evil" flavoring)

No butch/femme roles (because they imitate heterosexuality; everyone has to be neutrally androgynous).

I believe that much of modern lesbian discourse comes from trying to marry lingering radfem beliefs with modern attempts at trans-inclusivity. So you adapt the blatant transphobia: now, trans women are allowed in (as long as they are palatable to cis women), because they're women! And nonbinary people can also be allowed in- at first they were woman-aligned, and then later as long as they weren't man-aligned. Being butch/femme is Back In Style, but we have to soothe the gender anxiety that butches cause by assuring everyone that only True Lesbians can be butch, and butches are always women, even if they kind of aren't, but regardless they're definitely not men, because butch has always been a lesbian term (except it hasn't.) The discourse is haunted by the ideas that lesbianism is constantly under attack, more than anyone else, and that lesbian culture is unique and special and must be guarded from (male/-aligned) invaders who are probably also sexual predators.

To say that this is all just "days long pasts" ignores both that, in physical queer spaces there very much still are male lesbians and bi lesbians who are accepted parts of their local communities, and that you only see those days as "long past" because of the impact of radical feminism on lesbianism. The only reason you see these changes as a good thing is because you've swallowed radical feminist ideas without realizing it.

Also, "if you say butch most people will think of butch lesbians" is an extremely silly argument. Literally who fucking cares. If you say "man" there are still a lot of people who will immediately think of exclusively cis men (see: every feminist who says shit like "if men could get pregnant). Does that mean that trans men should just give up their identities because other people don't understand them? You dork?

Anyways. The funniest part of this ask is how damn confident you are that I was apparently hating on he/him lesbians three years ago. Idk how to tell you this but I'm a boygirl gaylesbianbisexual and have identified this way for years. I have been personally terrorized by shitty lesbian identity politics, the same ones you are repeating now, which told me that if I was even 1% male then identifying as a lesbian made me a disgusting predator. Which caused me years of suffering because no matter how hard I tried, I could not ignore my multigenderedness and how that affected my sexuality. Sowwy but you look silly as hell and your argument is bad and you should feel bad </3

[darklinaforever]

So ! I need to say that !

Hades & Persephone's relationship is canonically a loving and quite healthy relationship in the context of Greek mythology which represents a form of balance for the world through the cycle of the seasons. Persephone is not a victim of Hades either... Anyone who has studied Greek mythology can actually explain it to you.

That's a bad vision of the original myth due to a too modern interpretation. It's not the modern era that romanticizes this basic relationship. This was already the case in Greek times...

It even seems to me that Hades and Persephone were often represented on the vases given to newlyweds (pretty crazy, since Hera was literally the goddess of marriage) because they were always described as having a loving, supportive and harmonious marriage.

And if you're looking for a real culprit in the union of Hades & Persephone, there's literally Zeus, who authorized the marriage between the two after Hades came to ask him. Hades didn't kidnap Persephone as soon as he saw her. He first asked to his father, Zeus, for her hand in marriage, as in the Greek traditions of the time.

In some versions of the myth, it even seems to me that Aphrodite is the one who provoked Hades' love for Persephone by sending Eros to plant an arrow in her after being upset by a refusal. But for now, I'm not sure of Aphrodite's real involvement.

But regardless, in the original myth, the one blamed is actually very clearly Zeus. He is the one, once again, having authorized the kidnapping of Persephone, which in Greek traditions translates into an engagement, and who has caused the whole messy situation with poor Demeter.

As for the grenade episode, it doesn't seem to me that we can know the original version. So the whole "Hades forced Persephone to eat the pomegranate" thing is also bullshit.

There doesn't even seem to me to be any indication of Persephone having been mistreated in any way by Hades in the myth. It's again bullshit.

I'm making this post because I've had yet another person explain to me that Persephone is a victim of Hades and that our modern age romanticizes the relationship between the two.

"Yes. Like Persephone gets bastardised. Persephone was Hades's assault victim. People try to "modernize" her by making her want Hades (all while making Demeter to be in the wrong). Mina was Dracula's assault victim. People try to "modernize" her by making her cheat on Jonathan for Dracula."

Except no. Persephone is not a victim of Hades in the context of Greek myth. That's a stinking modern vision. Kind of ironic, when you argue that it's the modern view that stands in for the real version of Persephone being a victim of Hades when... well no. It's the modern era that makes Persephone a victim of abuse at the hands of Hades, (this all reminds me of how people make Rhaenyra a victim of grooming in her relationship with Daemon) while that is not the case in the context of the original myth. As I explained above, this interpretation is modern bullshit. And it is very important to transcribe the myths in their ancient context to understand their various messages, otherwise you will miss the point.

But I won't elaborate further because @cthonisprincess has already explained it very well. I invite you to go and see these reblogs below which detail the whole affair of Hades and Persephone in much more detail :

I even recommend this video :

My god, I can't believe that in 2024, people are still at the stage of demonizing Hades, even though he is one of the rare decents gods, and still claiming that Persephone is an assault victim of Hades... This is a shameful distortion of the original myth and a real bastardization of the goddess Persephone.

Also... we're literally talking about a myth. The goal of a myth is to be reinvented according to the times. So what does it matter that there are adaptations of the myth that differ from the said myth, or rather from the biased vision that some have of making Persephone a poor victim of the evil Hades ?!

@aleksanderscult

[sexy-sapphic-sorcerer]

1: Magic is a Metaphor < 2: Morgana is a Lesbian < 3: Merlin is Gay < 4: Arthur is Bi

Do you remember when you were bullied in middle school? Because if you're reading this, I think it's fair to assume that you were. And your parents would say to you, 'that boy is just being mean to you because he likes you'. That's what this is.

Arthur is just so repressed. He has really bad daddy issues, and he doesn't know how to express his emotions, and he's really uncomfortable with physical intimacy, especially with other men, especially with Merlin. And this isn't me trying to psychoanalyse away his heterosexuality. It is a very evident part of his character.

And another big part of his character is that he has inherited all of these bigoted ideas about magic from his father that he has to work to overcome. Because, of course, Arthur himself is born of magic, but his dad is so ashamed of it that he hides the true circumstances of his birth from Arthur. Honestly, I don't know exactly how that would fit into this whole metaphor. I do have a half-formed theory that it could be interpreted as an allegory for intersex identity, I know that a lot of people headcanon Arthur as trans, so idk there could be something there. But regardless, it is only through his relationship with Merlin that he is able to overcome this magicphobia, because he realises: how could it be wrong when everything about Merlin is so right. And I just feel like there's a metaphor in there somewhere.

Of course, I have to mention this iconic quote from the audio commentary of the final episode: when the executive producer refers to Arthur taking off his royal seal to give back to Guinevere as passing over "the last vestige of his heterosexu- oh sorry, I mean his marriage." So, they knew exactly what they were doing.

I also thought I would just draw your attention to the fact that at one point Arthur says, "I only care about my men, they're more than friends, more than brothers." Now, I think we can all agree that out of context, that is a very gay thing to say, and yet somehow the context is even gayer, because Arthur is pretending to be talking about the Knights of the Round Table, but he's actually talking about Merlin, how Merlin is the only person he cares about, more than a friend. And then Merlin responds, "I understand. I wish I didn't, but I do." It's barely subtext at that point. This of course, brings me to my final argument:

Arthur risked his life to save Merlin at least eight times. It could be more than that, I genuinely lost count. And you have to keep in mind that Arthur is the King of Camelot and he doesn't have any heirs. It is quite important that he stays alive. And yet anytime that Merlin is in the slightest bit of danger, he will just drop everything to protect him.

And it's really only in those moments where he's faced with the thought of losing Merlin that he shows him genuine emotion. Such as in this scene (which was cut out of 4x02 purely because it was too gay) where Arthur is planning to sacrifice himself to protect Merlin, again, and he gives Merlin his mother's sigil, the only thing he has left of his dead mum and he wants Merlin to have it as something to remember him by. Also, apparently in medieval times giving someone your family crest was basically a marriage proposal, so that's pretty gay.

You know what else is pretty gay? Telepathically communicating with Merlin and then immediately leaving Gwen in the middle of an active war. This is literally the last time that Arthur and Gwen ever see each other. Poor Gwen.

In conclusion, Merlin is the story of gay sorcerers and bisexual knights getting into love triangles. Everyone in this show is queer and you cannot tell me otherwise.

[pawberri]

thank you for all the posts you've made, your takes are always so refreshing to hear.

I want to know your thoughts (if it's okay with you, you can also totally ignore this) about all the "men hate" I see online. like I (poc transmasc non-passing) get it, there are genuine societal gender problems. transmisogyny does exist-women face more challenges than men do. but it genuinely hurts when women, especially trans women, think it's funny/quirky to call men trash or say they want all men dead or whatever. idk I just am hoping someone else understands, you know?

There's a lot of nuances to this question. First, I just want to caution against focusing too much on trans girls as the perpetrators of this. A lot of the asks I get from trans men seem to really fixate on trans women as the perpetrators of hard line gender essentialism. I really think trans girls are not the main people we should be focusing on here. If a trans woman is saying this stuff, take the time to analyze her ideology outside of that pithy comment and consider how much trauma and how little power she has in the world. That said, trans women are affected by this kind of ideology just like us, and they rarely have the power to wield it against others in the way cis people can. I know it hurts to feel isolated by your own community, but that kinda gets into my second point.

Part of dealing with this is learning an impulse progressive cishet dude have had to get used to over the decade. Sometimes, "men are trash" or even "kill all men" are not literal phrases. They are things women say when they're in the throes of trauma to vent their frustration. "Men are trash" in particular is generally pretty lighthearted and used to complain when you have a bad date or something. You have to get used to analyzing what someone actually means and airing on the side of empathy. You, as a man, are the one with some amount of systemic power over that woman, so you are the one who needs to prove you are dedicated to not being a misogynist. The same thing happens when my friends say they hate white people. I have to assume they don't hate me given that I'm their friend, but that I still have some of the negative traits of whiteness. I need to care enough to be a good friend by being anti-racist and checking myself on my behavior. I need to be willing to prioritize their comfort over mine. That includes not becoming this meme:

Now that that's established, there ARE times when "all men are evil and should die" is an actual ideology. It's an ideology that hurts tons of minority groups before it hurts the most powerful, but it's also not really great if we assume it only hurts cishet white guys. Following it to its logical conclusion, it just proposes a reversal of oppression dynamics. This gender essentialism is a key part of radical feminism, trans exclusionary or not, but it leaks out of that community to general feminism all the time.

As a young person on Tumblr and Twitter, this deeply affected me. I internalized the idea that you can "just be a girl." It was repeated by some trans girls, but also a LOT of TME people. It was framed as trans inclusive, but it's trans inclusive in the way "political lesbianism" is lesbian positive. It posits gender as a moral choice that is completely up to the individual and unrelated to biology. It's the lazy version of "gender is a social construct." I felt sick and disgusting for wanting to be a boy because tons of well-meaning friends of mine had made it clear that "being a boy" was a choice, and it was the wrong one. "Boy" was a social category that could and should eventually be eradicated. Trans women were conditionally supported because they, in theory, made this future possible. This didn't amount to actual support, of course. It was an ideology mostly spread by afab queer people that mostly benefited afab queer people. There were a few trans girls who spread it, maybe some due to genuinely believing in the ideology and some due to social pressure, but there were also a lot of people straight-up grifting as trans girls who used this thinking to feel powerful in a niche community of teens. Remember fucking Yandere Bitch Club???

At a certain point, I genuinely thought of being a man as an unambiguous moral failing, and I lashed out at out trans men because of it. I wanted to feel powerful, and here was a type of man in my community I could shame and exclude. I still feel bad for making a bunch of ~girls only~ stuff in HS that excluded the one out trans dude at our school, my friend, because he was just a ~binary man~ and leaving him with no friends and no community. I treated transphobia like it wasn't a real oppression on its own and, in doing so, perpetuated transphobia. It happens a lot.

I wasn't really able to accept that there was nuance to the concept of manhood until I read this article while struggling to accept my own gender:

This is a pretty seminal piece of writing. It has its flaws, of course, but the empathy and intersectionality it highlights was life-changing. It also shows that this kind of thinking is largely perpetuated by TME people and hurts trans women greatly.

Gender essentialism is a bad ideology, it's a transphobic, transmisogynist, racist, etc etc ideology. It's literally essential to patriarchy. But it's also very easy to repackage into leftism and easy to dogwhistle. As a result, it's natural to be hesitant when you see someone saying they hate all men, but you have to tread extremely lightly and actually care what they're attempting to express. Because, yeah, men as a social class still hold power over women. They still have reason to fear and hate men.

I'm writing a comic about this stuff, actually, so look out for it in the future..........

[transmascissues]

I know that saying T turning twinks into otters and bears is supposed to be positivity, but it feels excluding of those of us that didn't get those effects from T. Trans men can look all kinds of ways and I keep seeing posts that almost belittle the idea of trans men remaining like that after T, but some of us do. Lift up the ones who do turn into otters and bears and those that don't. It's already a point of dysphoria for a lot of people

it is not humanly possible for me to include every single possible transmasc experience in one post, nor is it my responsibility to try to. positivity for one experience does not equal negativity toward other experiences. if you want a positivity post for people who don’t get those effects from t, by all means make one and i’ll fully support you in that, but don’t treat other kinds of positivity as wrong just because they’re not for you.

i am a trans man who went from a twink to an otter on t, and i put that line in because that’s an aspect of my transition that i’m incredibly proud of. i’m allowed to do that, and i’m not required to fulfill some sort of quota of positivity for other people to make that okay. me showing pride in my body and bodies like mine isn’t belittling other kinds of bodies, and i would challenge you to really ask yourself why you interpreted positivity for other people as automatically negative toward you. sometimes some things just aren’t for you and that’s okay. i’m sure there are other parts of that post that did apply to you, as well as plenty of other positivity posts that do. and if not? make some! send them to me, i’d love to reblog them! every positivity post you see is just a trans person making the posts they want to see more of, and you can do the same.

not to mention, hair growth and weight gain on t are incredibly stigmatized. people constantly talk about how bad they think all the hair looks or how gross they think it is when we don’t shave, and gaining weight is something that’s pretty much always framed as a negative side effect instead of a desirable and euphoric change. people literally try to convince us not to go on t by saying “you’re not going to stay an androgynous twink, you’re going to be hairy and all your fat will move to your stomach and you’ll just look like your dad.” that’s a horror story to a lot of people; that’s the thing that they think will disgust us enough to decide we don’t want to go on t.

so if you see a lot of posts hyping up trans otters and bears, it’s not us saying other kinds of bodies aren’t as good, it’s just us pushing back against those narratives and saying “no, our bodies are good too, actually, and i’m glad t made me look this way.” that’s not to say there isn’t also a lot of negativity toward trans men who are smaller and less hairy; no matter how we look, people will find a reason to hate our bodies because they hate us. but you really can’t put the blame on trans otters and bears who just want to send a message that our bodies aren’t bad.

if seeing positivity for trans bodies that aren’t like yours makes you dysphoric, please understand that that’s a personal thing you need to learn how to deal with and not the fault of the people who just want to feel good about their bodies as much as you do. it’s okay to want positivity for your kind of trans body and i promise you those posts are out there, but you can’t expect every single one to cater to your specific experiences.

[shippofuri]

Thoughts on Lycion's identity, species, gender. (CW: mentions of internalized transphobia)

as someone who is trans and has species dysphoria (and whose transness is intrinsically linked to species dysphoria, the human female form being too exaggeratedly human to feel comfortable in) it feels a bit odd when people exclusively discuss Lycion's body dysmorphia as exclusively a trans allegory (which is a perfectly reasonable read! but it can be more than that...) seemingly without much awareness that people who are like him, and especially trans people who are like him in a more literal sense exist... So I figure, as one of those people, I might give some observations on Lycion, along with some anecdotes of my own experience and how it parallels it, how his characterization reflects real-world struggles- both literally and as a trans narrative, and why I appreciate characters like him so much.

What is fascinating (but also so relatable!) to me, both when viewed in a literal sense and as a trans allegory, is that Lycion does not actually have a particular affinity to another species, but rather feels a visceral discomfort with his own elven body.

We even see in his raceswap portraits, Lycion is visibly happier as anything but an elf. Unlike Laios, who wants to become a monster, Lycion doesn't want to become anything in particular, he simply wants to stop being an elf.

Most depictions of transgender characters in media are focused on the idea of wanting to become something. Feeling in your heart you were always meant to be a boy or a girl or perhaps some secret third thing. Having a specific goal. What is less often depicted is the experience of I don't want to be what i was born as, I'd rather be anything else but this. anything is better than this. And, in both my struggles with gender and with my own humanity, this has been my experience!

Of course, there are a great many creatures I look at and think "I would be much happier if i were one of them", but those feelings are broader and less pressing than the overwhelming discomfort with my own body, and the desire to be less human. I aspired to masculinity and ultimately pursued transition not out of a particular affinity with any idea of maleness, but because masculine human features, to me, appear more animalistic, less of a strange naked thing that sticks out like a sore thumb in the grand scheme of things. And so too did Lycion pursue becoming a beastman, not because he felt a particular affinity with being a wolf, but because it would make him less of an elf.

And after pursuing it, even though he still has to spend much of his time as an elf, Lycion is far more comfortable, no longer nihilistic and self-destructive. He's confident, prideful even! He has a body that doesn't feel wrong, even if he can only wear it sometimes.

And, myself having been on HRT for nearly four years now, i have to say my experience has been much the same! Even though, of course, I'm still human, my dysphoria has essentially been eliminated, I feel comfortable in my body, and I genuinely like the way I look. I admire my reflection and find joy even in the changes that i was merely indifferent to the possibility of when beginning my treatment, and it even eased some issues completely unrelated to gender...!

Finally, Laios' dismissal of Lycion's identity here feels very reminiscent of people casting doubt on a trans (most often nonbinary) individual's identity due to transitioning for what they view as "the wrong reason", even at times arguing that only people who meet their personal standard for transness should be allowed access to transition. And like with Laios, who himself wishes to become a monster, these arguments are often coming from within, from others in the trans community.

Is someone who identifies as male because they don't want to be female less justified in their desire to pursue transition than someone who doesn't want to be female because they identify as male...? Should people be denied the right to feel comfortable in their own skin because they are seeking to escape something, rather than reaching for something specific...? Of course, you know what my answer is, but I digress.

[transmascpetewentz]

i meant wrapped not trapped, I do not blame you for misunderstanding me, thats entirely my fault

I think you seem to believe that my issue with transandrophobia as a label is the idea that trans men face oppression (which they do), when instead its the idea that the oppression transmasculine people face is something completely unique to them, instead of being the underlying current of tranphobia

I literally spent the first paragraph explaining my issues with the *concept* of it before segawaying into my issue with it as a conterpart to transmisogyny due to them not sharing an underlying ideological framework

And to touch on some of doberbutts points, trans women are also correctively raped and have suicide rates, and the issue of access to abortion is for every person with a vagina, not just trans men

A frustrating thing that he does there is that instead of giving a counterargument to one of my points (what i personally believe to be a misnomer about the purpose of the label of transmisogyny, were you (nonspecific) view it as a threat to the validity of the trauma we face, and not as a way to describe their own, and what others believe to be just attention seeking) is to bring up severe (often sexual) trauma as a way to put a landmine on that specific point, because any attempt to explain why they are wrong becomes a personal attack on the traumatized parties

this got quite long, so response under the cut. @doberbutts this is the same anon you responded to (by reblogging my post) earlier.

ok

no form of violence experienced under an oppressive system is truly "unique" in that i don't think there are any experiences of violence or oppression that apply to only one specific group, but the motivations behind the violence can differ depending on the demographic it's being done to. i do not think that any specific example of transandrophobia is something that no one who isn't transmasc has experienced, but transandrophobia is the oppression specifically targeting transmascs. i and doberbutts have already pointed out how this works, so i don't feel the need to reiterate that.

you do not understand the concept of transandrophobia, and you regularly demonstrate that your understanding is surface-level and comes from people who have an interest in making it seem less credible. instead of asking people who theorize about anti-transmasculinity (including me and doberbutts!!!) you immediately become hostile and make many incorrect assumptions about our beliefs. i find this highly disrespectful and encourage you to stop getting all of your information about transandrophobia from people who misrepresent it to argue against the concept of anti-transmasculinity.

yes, abortion access is something that everyone who can get pregnant has to deal with, but trans men face unique discrimination wrt abortion access and access to reproductive healthcare that trans women do not. this is because there is a fundamental misogyny component to anti-transmasculinity that you and others who deny it because "it's transmisogynistic!!!" seem to have a failure to grasp. transandrophobia is transphobia, misogyny, homophobia, and the specific modifier of maleness on this oppression all at once. i wish there was a better word for how maleness adds to and modifies oppression in an intersectional way that wasn't associated with mras, but alas there is none that i am aware of. also: anti-transmasculinity never says or implies that trans women don't face some of the issues that trans men do! you are treating this like a pissing contest for who has it worse and that is an attitude i'll need you to drop.

denying transandrophobia is a sentiment that is directly hostile to transmasc survivors of sexual assault, abuse, hate crimes and other things that arise from living under a patriarchy that systemically excludes you from both the male and female classes. the reason why we use this rhetoric is because these types of things arise from the specific intersection that trans men face, and how that can further intersect with sexuality. you are simply making up what we believe on the spot and not actually listening. if you want to come off anon and have a conversation in dms, i'd be willing.

talking to people like you is frustrating because you make these claims about what transandrophobia theory is as if we're a monolith or a homogenous group instead of hundreds of trans men on tumblr dot com all contributing to a larger conversation. no matter how much you claim to be in good faith, you continue to disregard actual transandrophobia theory in favor of some bastardized version you got from someone with "white tme/tma" in their bio. i hope you take this criticism and reflect on how you may be wrong.