I’m a huge proponent for anyone should have access to whatever tools they need to do whatever they want to their body etc but ngl it makes me sad seeing the number of AFAB transes who speak of taking testosterone as this almost like, unfortunate thing you gotta endure to get a set list of Desired Changes, or this sorta like, thing you gotta compromise on, with this whole list of negative effects that you gotta risk if you want the positives or whatever, and just constant posts that are functionally like “how long do I have to be on T until I can stop?” or “I want XYZ changes from T but I don’t want ABC changes,” and like it just frustrates me because to be frank I love testosterone. I love everything about being on it and I consider it a miracle that modern medicine has made it possible to access this hormone exogenously if we can’t produce enough of it ourselves. I feel like fundamentally my lack of proper T levels had a negative impact on me until it was corrected and I don’t feel like I was truly myself until I began HRT. Literally the only negative thing about it at all is the frustration that I’m dependent on an outside source for the rest of my life rather than able to just make it myself but there’s no doubt in my mind that I want to be on it for the rest of my life. While maybe a bit pedantic I don’t view T as having side effects, I don’t even necessarily view it as a medication in the traditional sense, it’s just an artificial way for me to correct my body to the state it already should’ve been in. I was overcome by relief after taking my very first dose when I was seeing 0 changes and even as the initial excitement has naturally died down over the years that relief is something I never take for granted. If I could keep every change T has given me and stop taking it I still wouldn’t because beneath all the desire for the changes there is an innate desire to just be on testosterone. I just idk dude I wish that HRT at least within the FTM / transmasc community was viewed with more reverence and the perspectives of those who view it as genuinely a life saving and necessary resource were given a little more voice. I think the entire idea of hormonal dysphoria and the need to alleviate it by correcting one’s hormone production separate from the laundry list of the possible more visible changes and side effects and what’s desired or not or what’s permanent or not etc etc of HRT is seen as weirdly archaic in lots of mainstream FTM spaces and it’s a bit frustrating and isolating.
33 notes
·
View notes
im gonna be so fr: tiktok girls that got popular bc they're pretty who are like "i cant do anything, im just a girl" they're just untalented and boring as hell.
most women i know are incredible and amazing and don't let tiktok or whatever brainwash you about the whole "trad wife coquette cutesy stay at home listen to whatever men say and not knowing anything" thing.
like these are young women and actual children who aren't working, whose income comes from a phone app. they're not really the people i think should be speaking about the "feminine experience" as if its a monolith. most of them don't even go outside. most of them have probably never really travelled, or have friends from different ages, different life experiences.
anyway. just saying. I'm tired of trends around feminity and quotes about feminity coming from random women most of us have very little in common with.
22 notes
·
View notes
I honestly get a little annoyed that people will act like Penelope wouldn't be in the Fields of Punishment alongside Odysseus :P
Because she'd either go with him or literally be there because of her own things. I mean...She's not that nice either. They're literally "likeminded", all the war crimes he would tell her, she'd be thinking "Oh!!! Good thinking!!!" The only thing is, she just didn't GET to do those war crimes because she wasn't in the war. She would scold him for the stupid things he did acting like she's never done the same or wouldn't do the same.
Also as if she wouldn't also tell Polyphemus her name? Maybe not exactly, but she'd do something JUST as prideful/dumb eventually. BECAUSE THEY'RE SIMILAR. SAME MIND!!!
13 notes
·
View notes
It's just so genuinely frustrating to me that almost every single other female character always gets pushed aside in this discourse. Doesn't matter what you think of or how you treat any of the other women, some of whose morals could be discussed just as extensively, the only opinion that matters to judge you is Ed3lgard and Ed3lgard only.
You really just gotta look at how they treat Rhea to see how shallow their care for misogyny is.
Rhea is someone who went through unimaginable suffering and due to that suffering did things that were indeed morally questionable, but (other than Fhirdiad) never cruel. She did everything she did because she wanted to make sure that everyone in Fodlan was safe, and mostly left the humans to their own devices (save for when either the Church was directly threatened or they asked for her assistance). She is someone who puts her own life and safety on the line to protect her people, up to sacrificing her own life to do so.
She gets called an abuser. A tyrant. Crazy. Because when her trauma is not simply left untreated but actively attacked and she reacts poorly to that, that is when her "true" character comes out to Edelstans. Everything she ever does, ever, in any context, gets deliberately misrepresented into being villainous.
Edelgard is someone who went through unimaginable suffering and due to that suffering did things that were not just morally questionable, but undeniably cruel. She did everything she did because she wanted power and wanted Fodlan to go back to how it once was (completely under Imperial control), up to attacking people who went out of their way to stay out of her way (the Alliance). She is someone who won't just endanger the lives of her citizens, but will outright have them killed if it means she can gain more power, by her own admission and as shown in her actions.
She gets called a liberator. A hero - the hero. A victim of a world who hates progress. Because when Edelgard says that she's doing it for "the weak" (ignore that she will sacrifice them as soon as it would help her), because she says that she wants to get rid of the importance of Crests (ignore that Plain Jane inheritance-based systems, which are arguably even more unfair, are still around in her endings), she must be telling the truth! Because Edelgard would never lie!
Even if we were to do a No No and fight in their pit wrt Rhea's characterization, the way that they portray Edelgard is literally no better than how they portray Rhea. She also sacrifices people "for the greater good," she also lies to keep up a certain image to her people, she also colludes with murderers because it suits her wants, and she also rules Fodlan tyrannically - everything that they accuse Rhea of doing, they portray Edelgard as doing, only with hoards and hoards of excuses and Fine Print and Um Ackchually's tagged on.
And that's their main like, way to say that they totes fr fr care about misogyny; villainizing Rhea as a devil while uplifting Edelgard as a pinnacle of morality and heroism, and "debunking" any defense of Rhea/criticism of Edelgard. It's not out of a genuine care about sexism against women, but just a tried-n'-true Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card to pull out for their fave.
So it's like, I'm sorry, but at this point unless a non-bot, non-troll, actual person comes out and vomits shit about Edelgard needing to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen or some garbage, whenever anyone says that they found a misogynist talking about Edelgard? I'm just gonna assume that the "misogynist" said something like "oh they must have said that genocide is bad," because that is how wrung out and insincere they're made their usage of the term out to be. Especially when they can't be bothered to treat actual breathing women with any kind of decency the second we say something Mean About Edelgard, which is its own conversation by itself
61 notes
·
View notes
Men can have vaginas. Women can have penises. Being a lesbian is not about "only liking pussy". Being gay is not about "only liking dick". Those are transphobic and intersex exclusive statements.
The "sex" in "sexuality" is not referring to assigned sex at birth or the most common presentations of assigned sex genitalia. It refers to sexual attraction. Queer sexual attraction is gender and/or shared queer experience based. Gender is not the same as assigned sex at birth or genitalia. If your personal sexual attraction is based on assigned sex at birth and specific genitalia and you use a queer sexuality label you are appropriating that label and participating not only in transphobia and intersex exclusion from queer communities but also in homophobia.
Stop appropriating queer sexualities and then trying to kick out people who actually belong under that label because you want to make a little exclusion based bigot club for yourselves.
21 notes
·
View notes