#also i think what this question doesn't really encompass is that being tied to the group name is good

[blackautmedia]

So I found your post on ToTK insightful, but one thing I didn’t see you cover is how according to the narrative, when Zelda went back 10,000 years she went to her distant relatives. It was still her kingdom, just very early. What do you think of how this ties in to the themes you were talking about?

Sure thing! Hope I can address this well.

For those not in the know, this is the post we're discussing--the Orientalism of the Mummy in Dehydrated Ganon.

I also want to qualify this with two things:

I'm not Native. I'm a Black person speaking as someone who also has a heritage closely related to colonial violence and white supremacy, but not someone who can speak for Native people. I can only go by what more experienced people have said and books and readings from them.

I'm using the word "Native" which itself encompasses several different people. I don't use this to imply they are the same or interchangeable with the cultural practices and ideas the Zelda franchise is drawing from.

To your question, I feel it doesn't really change much thematically because neither Zelda nor any of the Hylians in the present day have any cultural features, practices, or attitudes that codify her as a Native person except as a costume or set of resources and knowledge associated with her.

It's not portrayed as if it's her heritage she's been disconnected with, but is effectively portrayed as a white person being introduced to an entirely new culture in how exoticized it is.

With the Zonai, their coded status comes in the form of their way of dressing, the Geoglyphs being Nazca lines, the designs of the shrines, the Zonaite outfit Link has, etc. It also narratively shows up in how it's framed as "archaic" in-game as referenced by the naming of the armor related to the Zonai versus the white rule the land has in the present day and how they're portrayed and characterized around extinction.

It's almost point for point the exact narratives and ideas about Native people colonizers use in real life. Native people imagined as a people who no longer exist but still had worthwhile resources better suited in civilized (white) hands.

A big part of why the myth of Native extinction gets pushed so hard in real life (and in turn is repeated and propagandized in media about Native or Native-coded characters) is because it reframes how we talk about recompense for them.

If you imagine a world and buy into the repeat narrative of Native people all being extinct, there's nobody left to do right by. It helps shape the conversations around policies and decisions by people in power.

Things like environmental justice, land back initiatives, reparations, healthcare access, and many other things Native people advocate for are pushed aside by erasing the people fighting for it. It's a form of colonial erasure meant to justify inaction.

So while Zelda technically is a descendant of the Zonai, the story doesn't really do anything with that to challenge the way it's recreating a colonial narrative about Native people. We've historically seen her as a pure white woman, one whose purity is contrasted with the toxicity and dangerous wickedness of Ganon.

The few times we do get characters with features or a heritage that deviate from eurocentrism (ex. Nabooru, Urbosa, Demise, Princess Hilda, Tetra, Midna, Ganon, Sonia, Telma, etc.) they're either the villain, sympathetic only in how they directly align and submit to Hyrule's power as one of the "good ones" or they're just murdered or erased from the story entirely.

The Gerudo are out looking for boyfriends, but we overwhelmingly see this in relation to white men in-game despite there being numerous dark-skinned Zelda characters in their partners and even in who is spying on them or trying to sneak into Gerudo town as a bunch of creeps.

Zelda as a franchise is very dedicated to positioning whiteness as inherently superior and more desirable.

The (white) Hylians have a god-given right to control and rule, and all of the non-white races of people are better off for it. While Zelda is technically a descendant of a Zonai, we still see her effectively as an innocent and almost holy white woman.

The franchise operates on the idea that some people are born with magic abilities and are essentially destined to rule over others and that any challenge to that superiority is inherently evil. The characters who ever challenge that are either villains or are antagonized and cut down for it.

[rivangel]

Also another fun thiught:

How much did Erwin truly know? Because Erwin says a lot of stuff that ends up happening ( the main one I can think of is him asking Eren if it is actually him who is the enemy). Makes one wonder if he knew a lot or is just extremely lucky.

There is also this theory that my friend and I have that Erwin is a time traveller, but there's no real evidence for that, but it makes me giggle so...

that's a VERY interesting take /gen. but i think erwin's knowledge is the same as everyone else. he's not lucky either. he's just that smart.

i think he asked eren that question for 2 reasons.

1: to gauge if eren really doesn't have a clue of what's going on and why (and he didn't).

at this point in the story, erwin knew eren was the key to the truth, but he didn't trust him completely because of eren's memory loss surrounding how he became a titan and such + he can transform into a titan at all.

this was erwin's train of thought (probably) after hange's titans were killed, which damaged their research efforts. in erwin's mind that would mean there's someone or someones who don't want the scouts to succeed, but also had access to odm gear. therefore it's a solider, but not a scout.

but why has this happened all the sudden? if it was garrison or military police, they wouldn't go near a titan even if it's tied down. so it has to be a cadet.

but what cadet would take such drastic action in their hands? yeah some were put off or scared of eren's transformation, but it was a risky move, and the equivalent of hitting the scout regiment with rocks (joke not intended).

this person must be a cadet who doesn't plan to join the scouts, but if that's the case, there has to be at least two if they have it out for eren. a coordinated effort.

therefore in erwin's mind he already suspected there were multiple imposters who were titan shifters, or at least knew more than all of them.

reason 2: the question is just an aside. he was asking eren, but MAINLY asking himself a question.

erwin knew eren was a monster already because levi knew from the moment he and eren met (which he says later during the 57th expedition) that eren was a monster, not because of his power, but because no matter what cage anyone could trap him in, he'd be unstoppable. levi almost certainly told erwin that at some point.

so now erwin is asking himself.

are you the enemy because you can transform into a monster, or can you fight for humanity even though you can transform into a monster?

levi again ended up saying something similar later.

(how stupidly complex)

(now that i think about it though, this encompasses one of the most major aspects of eren's character. he set out to destroy the world because he was stupid and had too much power like he said in the finale. but he also ended up protecting paradis in the process - on top of his intentions in the early seasons really being to fight for humanity duh.)

[yourtoradorasextendedwarranty]

I followed you to see what other bullshit you would post. Why do you act like you are a victim in this? The only people that get this type of special treatment from me are the ones who are blatantly wrong, call other people stupid, and seem to be able to formulate a coherent answer. A compliment really. All i've been doing is asking you to expand on your bold statement about fascism and your christian fundamentalist misinformation reblog, why do you feel so threatened? Just whack me around the ears w/ some facts. Like those 87.000 IRS agents. Got a source for that other than the Heritage Foundation? Is your car taxed as unrealized capital gains? Really? Sources, sources. Beat me up w/ truthiness! Remember, you were the onewho started calling people stupid, not me. You even made youtube videos that got 6 views were you go on about what a "hellsite" tumblr is. Come on tumblrina, come out of your bubble.

First and foremost I'm not even Christian so you can get that out of your mind. Secondly yes I can put coherent thoughts together but I'm not spreading lies you are being bad faith there is a fundamental difference in that precedent.

Next unrealized gains covers everything you own on a fundamental level that is how it works. Because otherwise the laws that they would announce would specify things that are specific like stocks. Except here is a larger issue. Even if you put unrealized gains on stocks you are charging a person money they have not collected on. Which means that you would have to probably sell stocks and get taxed twice once for unrealized gains and once for the money you collected. Because anytime you take money out of a stock, you are pulling money out of that stock which means you have to sell it or relinquish it. And if I'm under the right assumptions about how that works if you relinquish it you don't actually collect any money on it. Which means that when you sell a stock you are taxed on the amount that you earn from that.

Unrealized the games tax is a broad term that is all encompassing. They are allowed to limit it but do you actually think they will? The answer to that question is no they won't. They'll make claims that they will and then they just won't. Also Republican or otherwise this is a link to the fact that 87,000 agents were in fact hired or were booked to be hired.

But here's the thing you can't resend funding to something that either doesn't exist or is not planned to be put into existence. And you could have found this out on your own but instead you opted to make me go through and Hunt through fake media outlets like CNN the New York times and other places that have a inherently left-leaning and democrat-leaning bias. Many of whom donate to Democrat candidates. As for the idea of fascism being collectivist is because it is. Fascism is a collectivist ideology it always has been one of the first people to talk about what he considered to be fascism was Mussolini. And on a very fundamental level it is collectivist. So it is either a centrist ideological policy or it is leftist because leftism functions off of the sole principle of collectivism. Which is why Marxism falls under the umbrella of leftism.

However my frustration from you comes from the fact that you make claims that I'm wrong when I'm not. Communists have said for years that the point in calling everyone a fascist is specifically to link the right and capitalism to fascism in order to dissolve capitalism and right-wing thought. Because if you dig into the underlying founding and principles of fascism you would find that it has more close ties to socialism than otherwise. And no matter how many sources I could share with you you would not care because you, like everyone else who does this b*******, do not care what sources I share because unless they're authorities that you like then it is a pointless endeavor.

Like with Dinesh D'Souza who literally went to jail over absolute BS. You have made an obsessive point to s*** on Dinesh. Despite the fact that his talking points are not much different than Thomas Sowel. And others in general. But I could point out others if I start digging back into my old research, and you would find any way to disprove or discredit them because in your mind it is already a cemented fact that fascism is a far right idea. Except on a political compass Hitler is literally two rungs right of the middle. So if fascism is so far right why does the political compass have authoritarianism and fascism effectively listed as the same thing?

As to how you're dishonest it's the way you talk. You explicitly followed me saying that you're trying to call out me being wrong despite the fact that I have often cited things in regards to the stuff I talk about. Mind you when I cite things about the coalescing of socialism and fascism the reason that I get such a kickback is because people on the left can't afford to have most of the violent angry and authoritarian concepts be associated with their side.

This is why I call you a communist. Because the only other thing that I would assume is that you're a far left anarchist. Neither of which in my mind have an ethical difference. Because in my mind there is no difference between anarchotherony and communism. Because both of them are utopian dreams created by morons who either want the government to have absolute power because they think they'll be part of the government, or they think that they'll be able to be left alone on their farm to do anything and everything they could conceivably want to do, without other countries coming to take us over or without warlords becoming a consistent thing until they form States due to the power vacuum.

But, since you want me to post links I will post this because regardless of what it says or aims to say it admits the fundamental truth.

And you can find many other things like this. With a simple Google search. And I will post this you will start digging and you will look for any way to discredit this. You will look at the person who posted it and attempt to link them to some Far Right group or otherwise and that's why I never post things. Because people like you only care about stuff that leftists and Democrats say is fact and you swallow that crap wholesale and believe it to be true even if it is a bald-faced lie.

So if you want to continue to comment on my stuff feel free but understand that does not make you correct. I look into the things I post about. There are rare instances in which I don't but oftentimes it's normally me just sharing something with no comment.

So I have proved that the 87,000 or 85,000 or whatever the number was it was over 80k, IRS agents are a thing. We know that the government made it so they can look into $600 transactions on cash app which means that they are definitely targeting the middle and low class not the rich they claimed to. I have posted a link between fascism and socialism that you seem to so vehemently deny. And as a final point of telling you that you are functionally wrong I am not a christian. I was raised christian. And the United States lives under judeo-christian values on a fundamental level as it is the baseboard of what our country was founded on. As such I do share some of those values despite being just left of center libertarian. Everything you post comes off as an attempted gotcha which is why I call you dishonest.

Frankly speaking this will probably be the last post I make a dressing you so you can continue to comment on my stuff if you feel like it but I will not be responding anymore. Because generally people like you are not worth responding to. Google is free Snopes is not a fact-based organization. Because they have been proven wrong dozens of times if not hundreds of times and had to make a lot of retractions, CNN same thing, MSNBC same thing, the New York times the same thing, NBC same thing, the Atlantic same thing, the list goes on. The hundreds of retractions over the past 10 years due to, intentional sometimes, errors. Or just outright lying and changing articles and headlines after the fact because they know the bulk of people saw the original headline which is what they want.

Which is actually clever. Lie about everything so that the world sees it then once most of it passes change it after the fact so you can try not to get sued. A leftism tactic as all this time. Which is why companies funded by act blue like Snopes or other DNC operatives, because it doesn't really matter, lied about the Trump very fine people hoax for 7 years and only corrected it right before the Trump Biden debate. The DNC has been nothing but Democrat propaganda over and over spreading lies about things that the former president has said. Like the "inject bleach" lie.

Good day.

[genshinconfessions]

About the patterns in vision holders: Hydro could also be some "doesn't really want to do what they're doing, if given a choice, but they don't have a choice"

Kokomi doesn't like being the head priestess, Xingqiu doesn't wanna be a part of the commerce guild, Candace has expressed she'd travel the world if she wasn't tied to Aaru Village, Ayato has expressed he wishes he had more time for Ayaka and Thoma but has to look out for other people first, Mona doesn't like just giving out readings because she doesn't like when people get disappointed or mad over their fate.

I'm not sure about Barbara, Yelan, Childe and Nilou tbh.

Despite this "theory" being made way before Fontaine, Furina was stuck for 500 years acting as the archon. Lucky for her, she did get the chance to be more what she wanted!

Not sure if Neuvilette fits this either.

Please do tell me about the remaining Hydros I couldn't fit in!

spoilers for various character stories

hmmmm this is quite interesting!!

i think out of everyone else, childe probably fits your theory best. he was originally quite a shy and careful kid, but after falling into the abyss, he completely changed personalities. in a way, you can say that everything he's done since has been against his (original) will!

i'm not sure about the others, but let's see:

barbara: possibly only works so hard because she wants to become/surpass jean in some way or another; in other words, she may not want to be the 'shining idol' that she actually is

yelan: her character stories mention that she's actually quite a frail and delicate person (due to inherited illnesses) and doesn't like to take life super seriously, yet her job is highly dangerous and she necessarily has to take every mission seriously

nilou: i genuinely couldn't find anything that points to her doing anything against her will :( her parents allowed her to do whatever she was happy doing, she's happy doing what she's doing, and everyone likes her

neuvi: it can be argued that he didn't actually want to be the iudex but felt obligated to do so because of focalors' invitation; also, he's made it very clear that he thinks some of his judgments are objectively cruel--fair, but cruel--which means that he made those decisions against his will

honestly, my previous theory about the hydro vision holders 'hiding a darker side to them' doesn't really hold for nilou, either.

if i were to answer that question now (with more thought), i might say that hydro vision users are people who take their professions/what they do very seriously and are able to detach work from life. it fits into what we've both said in that they have a different side to them professionally and casually, but it just encompasses a bit more either way.

[sanstropfremir]

do u think that twice will fall under the same curse of bts where the members are so tied to the group name, it’ll be hard for them to branch out?

not really. there already are some twice members that are well known on the variety circuit and one of them did literally just launch a very successful solo, so they're already ahead of that and they have been for a while. but also the other members that are less popular are probably not going to be able to branch out at all, but that's just the reality of the industry. tbh it's not really a comparable situation because the contexts are too different. bts is tied to their group identity because they made that their brand intentionally and heavily courted an intl audience without paying the dues back home, so to speak. twice has a massive domestic audience and are likely just to age like any other popular gg, with some members that will be more popular in different fields than others. some will have successful solo careers and some won't, them's the breaks.

[pynkhues]

With Connor being an adult with the golden trio were kids, did he know about Logan hitting them (or at least Roman)? Thought about Connor being a good big bro because he took the boys camping then remembered the physical abuse that occurred when he was old enough to at least try to intervene and couldn't decide what I thought. I get that he was also a victim so it just made me all round sad

I suspect he would have known, anon, yes, especially given the fact Shiv brought it up so casually in 2.01 in front of everyone and nobody at the table so much as blinked.

It's a really complicated situation generally, because the show's made pretty clear that Connor isn't disentangled from Logan's abuse himself, even as a 55 year old man. Yes, he has agency and can make his own choices, but he's still financially dependent on his father, and Logan having such enormous social and political power gives him this sort of crushing weight that no one, least of all his children, can ever entirely escape.

It feels pretty believable to me that Connor wouldn't step in, especially given Logan's emotional abuse is insidious, encompassing and, most importantly, normalised, while the physical abuse is signalled to have been infrequent (and both Brian and Kieran have said so in interviews too), and Connor wouldn't always have been around to see the ins and outs of it between college and adult life, and you've got an environment where intervening isn't necessarily a clear path. I mean, gosh, even adding to that, I think Connor's depicted as the most conflict adverse of the Roy's and even as a bit of a peacekeeper, which further complicates how he'd likely respond in a situation that turned violent.

In a lot of ways, your ask has made me think a lot about how during Kendall's intervention in 3.09, Connor's direct request of Kendall wasn't that he get help like Shiv's and Roman's was (although I do think that's what he wanted too, of course), it was that Kendall stop going after their father. A part of that's obviously tied to wanting Logan in a surer place so that he can try and use him as political leverage, but I think it also indicates the way Connor thinks when it comes to the family and how to avoid their father's abuse.

I think in Connor's mind, standing up to their father causes more pain, more distress, more trouble and more pathways to abuse, whereas disarming, rolling over, letting Logan have his way is what keeps everything secure and safe and 'loving'. If you fall in line, Dad takes care of you, and you don't get hurt, and the more I've thought about it, the more I've thought that Connor making that direct request of Kendall was likely the way Connor thought the situation - including Kendall's issues - would resolve.

If Kendall stopped trying to kill Dad, Dad would inevitably forgive him and bring him back into the fold, and then things would be better. After all, to Connor, Kendall at his most vulnerable has always been after these attempted coups when their father shut him out - the failed vote of no confidence and Kendall's relapse in 1.07, the failed bearhug and the scene at Shiv's wedding reception in 1.10, and then the press conference and - - well, the whole of s3.

I think there's probably a part of Connor that associates Kendall's issues as stemming from being kicked out of the nest and not able to survive the fall, and that he thinks telling his brother to stop - to stay in the nest - is the way everything gets better and the way Kendall stays safe.

In that sense, I think stepping in probably doesn't even occur to Connor (after all, it's likely no one did it for him), and that he focused when they were kids on picking up the pieces and telling them to stop and to behave. To listen to Dad and be good and not question him or talk back, and that that, to him, was his own way of trying to protect them, his own way of trying to teach them a type of survivalism that's kept him going. He wanted to keep them safe, and I doubt he was even aware that it was in a way that ultimately made him complicit in their abuse.

[300iqprower]

Hello, me again! This ask is perhaps a bit more...confrontational, for lack of a better word, but not really out of genuine aggression, more curiosity. I remember at some point - a couple months back by now probably - you mentioned in a post that the Riastrad was "infinitely more important aspect of Cú's legend than Gae Bolg" and I'm curious as to how you came to that conclusion. More distinctive? Oh definetly, no other hero really comes as jam-packed with as much body horror as he does. But more important...that's another story entirely, imo.

The Warp Spasm appears in two major episodes off of the top of my head - The Boyhood Deeds, where we get a teaser of what it's like before Conchobar gets Cú Chulainn to chill out, and The Sixfold Slaughter, the apperence of the Riastrad everyone knows (avenging the Boy Troop). That's only equal to the two instances Gae Bolg is most frequently brought up with regards to (the killings of Connla and Ferdiad) and Gae Bolg was additionally used to kill Loch during an encounter that's overshadowed by the fact that it's when Cú Chulainn was dealing with The Morrigan and it also ties back to his time in Dun Scaith.

Not only does Gae Bolg just...show up more, it's got more representation across what most people consider the important beats of his story, really only missing out on taking part in His Birth (which the Riastrad also misses out on), Boyhood Deeds (which the Riastrad does show up in), and his death (which the Riastrad is also absent from if my memory serves me correctly).

Equally so given that I don't think the Riastrad doesn't serve a symbolic purpose as well as Gae Bolg either. It's an ability Cú Chulainn is practically ashamed of in-myth, with an entire segment in the Tain being given to Cú dressing up all fancy so people forget about last night's body horror. And there's plenty of symbolic opportunity in that, but it just doesn't feel like it fills the role as well as Gae Bolg does. The Riastrad only encompasses the violence. The Gae Bolg, being a weapon that he actively chooses to use in spite of the fact that it seemingly on brings tragedy whenever he uses it, carries a lot more symbolic weight in relation to his own story - embodying both the violence and his choice to continue on this road.

The Riastrad is an incredibly distinctive ability, I'm not trying to argue against that, and I do think that it's odd we've never gotten a true Berserker alt of Cú, but saying it's a more *important* aspect of the legends than Gae Bolg feels a little bit like a stretch to me (you could argue its even bumped down to 3rd place, with "dying on the rock" being placed above due to how frequently its depicted and the meaning often instilled in it/how its associated with him, but it'd feel disingenuous to count that since this question is mainly focused around "Noble Phantasmable" aspects, more or less).

Thank you for putting up with this ask that is far, far too long for its own good, I hope I didn't sound too rude, and I hope you have a great day.

Honestly yeah you got it out the gate. Misspeak I suppose, what I meant by "important" is basically the same way you use distinctive here. Gae Bolg is unquestionably more present but to me the Riastrad is more...what's the word- inseparable, that's it. There's tons of magic spears and "sure-kill" weapons in myths but the Riastrad is something vastly more unique and identifiable by comparison - that's what I meant by "important" to the myth of Cu Chulainn.

I also certainly can't speak as well on the overarching deeper themes of the story as you clearly can, so yes TLDR you're right "more important" was the wrong choice of words there and the rest I unchallengingly agree with.

[kae-karo]

hi! me again! i understand that bi/pan people with a preference would never be considered lesbians but i had it presented to me as being like bisexual homoromantic which would be as valid as being ace and homoromantic right? and i don't understand how A's id could affect or imply anything about B's id? like the acknowledgment of demigirls doesn't affects girls being fully girls? as far as pronouns isn't the whole point that they ARE gendered, otherwise we would all just be they/them? (1/2)

non queer people very much understand pronouns to indicate gender. so why is language malleable when it comes to redefining gender and pronouns but not when it comes to using orientation labels differently? also i read that carrd and want to clarify i would never make the argument that trans people aren't "really" the gender they id as. also, i'm sorry for asking so much but i'm just trying to understand.

--

hi dear! for context (x) and please don’t apologize for asking questions! there are so many people who would rather shut down and not try to understand, i will always greatly appreciate people who are actively trying to learn

also sorry this got wAY too long lmao i have a lot of thoughts, apparently...

as for the way the term bi/pan lesbian was presented to you, that’s totally understandable! and again, per my lil caveat, the idea of expressing a difference in romantic and sexual attraction with a single term (like being bi/pansexual but lesbian in terms of romantic attraction) is totally chill but i think the part that starts to come into question is the large movement of people who were using bi/pan lesbian in the way i described in my other post (ie as a way to express that they are “lesbian but with some attraction to men, still”)

in terms of how person A identifies and how that affects person B, the point is less about an individual interaction - no, how a stranger chooses to identify themself does not directly affect my identity. to your notion of demigirls and the fact that they don’t negate the identity of women, that’s totally true! it’s not so much that a person’s identity negates another’s, more that the words a person uses to identify themself can affect others, because we tie certain terms with certain experiences. by a group of people commandeering terminology that already has an experience tied to it, the people who already use that terminology (because they have that experience) can start to feel as though their experience and identity are being called into question

okay, so if bi/pan lesbians become a standard terminology to describe ppl who would id as lesbians if not for some attraction to men, that could start to bring into question whether all or any lesbians could be attracted to men (as the person in the tweet mentioned). now (certain) men may start to believe that any person who ids as a lesbian might still be attracted to men, so these certain men may think that they have a chance with that lesbian even though the man ids as a man! this could lead to harassment, or the lesbian in question may already be prone to some internalized homophobia. now they’re starting to wonder if their attraction should include men because they id as a lesbian (and apparently, lesbian could include attraction to men), or if they’ve just been ‘confused’, as people may have told them before, and they start to doubt their own identity and whether ‘lesbian’ is the right reflection of their experiences (which it is, except that the term has been hijacked and presented as including experiences that actually belong in the bi/pan community)

and, once again, the way the terminology is structured (a ‘bi/pan lesbian’) seems to imply that the person in question doesn’t want to be attracted to men. if they did, why not use an umbrella term like bi or pan as their identity? the only distinguishing feature here is that one is inclusive while the other says ‘i’m attracted to women primarily and would like to identify as a lesbian, except for that pesky bit of me that’s attracted to men too...’ again, this is a harmful ideology to let grow, not only for those already identifying as bi/pan but for baby queers who may not fully understand their own identities yet! or for people outside the community who are trying to understand to the best of their abilities as allies!

to that end, it also propagates that harmful rhetoric of ‘oof, doesn’t it suck to be attracted to men lmao’ like MAN that’s really hurtful to guys??? and that rhetoric already exists. notions like this (where a wonderful umbrella term is turned into something that seeks to minimize attraction to men/male-aligned genders) can be so harmful not only to cis men and transmasc/trans men who are a part of the community but men outside the community as well

okay with regards to pronouns: i think this is where we start to get into the deconstruction of gender as a social construct. i feel like the most apt analogy here is the one i provided in the other post: names. names have, throughout history, been gendered (for the most part). sally was a girl, timmy was a boy. but we’ve started to deconstruct that as we’ve started to recognize that there are more than 2 genders (as a societal whole, i’m aware that this hasn’t been news in a while for people in the queer community). you have names like alex, sam, riley, names that you can’t look at and go ‘ah, they are [certain] gender!’ which is awesome for everyone! esp for people who are sensitive about their gender identity and for whom it is bothersome, upsetting, or even triggering to be misgendered!

pronouns are grammatically just a substitute for a noun, they take the place of the noun for the sake of ease of speech/writing. so the first question here is why, if we’ve extrapolated and separated the idea of someone’s name from their gender and acknowledged that the thing that we refer to them by is just...a noise they like, then why is it necessary for pronouns (another thing that is just a noise the person likes) to be inherently tied to a gender? a gender is a representation of an experience, but people who use the same pronouns may have nothing in common in terms of their gender experience!

now, you could argue that people who use they/them pronouns may be able to rally around a shared experience/frustration with getting others to use and accept those pronouns, but they likely aren’t all going to share a gender - maybe some are fem-aligned, or masc-aligned, or genderfluid or agender or any other gender on the massive spectrum of possible gender identities. but the way that they ask others to refer to themselves purely as an individual does not help give any insight into their experiences or community! 

you stated that ‘as far as pronouns isn't the whole point that they ARE gendered?’, so my question here is what purpose do pronouns actually serve? they allow you to refer to a person without using their name, right? so if we’re talking outside the world of grammar, i would argue that a person’s pronouns are an extension of their name: the purpose of a name and/or pronouns is to ensure that they make the user of said name/pronouns comfortable in their identity when being referred to. they are whatever gender they are (if any at all) - they may choose a name and pronouns to help them feel more comfortable in who they are. in fact, they may choose a name and pronouns that they didn’t use from birth simply because they do not feel comfortable with them for non-gender-related reasons, too!

and i can hear you thinking ‘okay, so why can’t we do that with labels like sexuality and just let people use whatever feels okay?’ and this is sort of the way i think about it: there are certain words we have defined with clarity in order to help us as a community understand ourselves and each other. we all agree that cis = you are the gender you were assigned at birth, trans = you are not the gender you were assigned at birth. lesbian means attraction to women/fem-aligned genders, ace means feeling no sexual attraction, bi and pan are siblings of each other that define attraction to all genders (which may or may not include preferences). male and female as genders have clear enough meanings that we use them in our other definitions, and nonbinary is a lovely catch-all umbrella that can encompass anything outside ‘male’ and ‘female’, even though there are also more specific identities that fall under that umbrella

(quick aside - fwiw i don’t think gender definitions are necessarily malleable in the same way pronoun ‘definitions’ are, i think there are gender experiences that we have not yet given formal terms to and that people may switch around between existing gender identifying terms as they look for ones that get close to their own and i think there’s still a question of what it even means to be a certain gender without reference to other genders, but as it stands, people who identify with certain gender terms do so because of a set of shared experiences that fall underneath that gender term)

what we have not done is defined an individual’s right to their experiences. if someone feels attraction to all genders with a preference for men, there’s a word to express that! if a person feels like they might shift between a variety of genders on a regular basis, there’s a word for that! if a person does not feel romantic attraction, there’s a word for that! and the reason we use these words with pre-defined definitions is so that we can identify people who share our experiences - if someone identifies as a lesbian, they can seek out other lesbians and know that they are among a group that understands what they have been through or are going through. if someone experiences attraction to all genders with a female/fem-aligned preference, they are likely not going to find a community that understands their experiences if they look for people who identify as lesbian

but if a person decides that hey, i feel most myself when people call me ‘emma’ even though that wasn’t my assigned birth name, that is when we step back and say ‘yes, that’s awesome! you do you!’ because there is no pre-defined definition of that name - yes, there’s a societal gender often associated with it, but it doesn’t provide anyone any benefit to assign a definition of an experience to that name. nobody is out there going ‘where are all the ‘emmas’, the ‘emmas’ understand my experience and i want to find them so that i can feel as though i’m part of the ‘emma’ community’

now, idk about you, but if i hear that someone uses she/her pronouns, that means....almost nothing to me, except that i know that they prefer those pronouns! in the same way that someone saying ‘oh, my name is emma’ means nothing to me except that their name is emma! whereas if someone says to me, ‘i’m asexual’, i know from their choice of identifier that they fall under the ace umbrella and awesome, this person might understand how i feel about certain subjects! (obviously ace is a huge spectrum in itself, but you get the idea)

in summary:

an orientation or a gender relates to an individual’s experiences, and the general definitions we have assigned to certain orientations and genders should remain somewhat clearly-defined in order to provide a sense of community for those that fall under the orientation/gender in question. that is not to say that new orientations/gender terms can’t arise to describe new experiences that do not already have a definition. the irritation with the ‘bi/pan lesbian’ discourse is that the experience described (attraction to all genders with fem-aligned preference) already has a defined term (bi or pan) that is contradictory to the term ‘lesbian’

the reason pronouns don’t need to fall under a clear definition is that they are not a signal to indicate a uniting experience - their purpose and function is equivalent to that of a name: it’s a way to refer to a person that makes that person feel comfortable, and it’s perfectly fine not to have a rigid definition for pronouns in the same way that you wouldn’t assign a name to have a rigid experience or definition associated with it

i know it’s a long read, but i hope that helps clarify my thoughts on the matter!

[spreadplaylist]

SPREAD CH.2 ARTIST SPOTLIGHT - Taylor Jamison

Hi SPREAD listeners! I hope everyone has been having a meaningful Pride month while enjoying the PRIDE playlist! The featured artist off SPREAD CH. 2 is dear friend of mine and a force to be reckoned with. Get a glimpse below of Taylor Jamison's life as an unapologetic songwriter and artist. HERE WE GO!

-----------------------------------------------------------

Taylor: Hey hey, my name is Taylor Jamison and I’m a songwriter/singer right here in most-of-the-time-sunny Los Angeles! I’m originally from Boulder, CO, but have been living here in LA for a second now, writing for some amazing new artists, and creating some cool tunes under my name as well!

Dan: Hi Taylor! Welcome! I am so glad that u are PRIDE's featured artist. You are a songwriting beast who is constantly on the grind. I'm excited for people to hear about ur career and your thoughts about the industry, so let's get started.

Describe a typical day in the life of a songwriter. What do u enjoy the most about it?

Taylor: I’d say a typical day in the studio with me, at least, is catching up on life with whoever I’m working with, joking around, sharing funny moments of the week, usually someone has a good hook up/sex story as well. My favorite part is that, from these shared moments, a story unfolds itself. I see myself as a “Storyteller for the Ears,” so whether it’s myself singing the song or another artist, I love being able to share a moment/feeling in time through music and watching how people react to it.

Dan: I would say that u just perfectly summed up the reason songwriters do what they do! It's all about the story and the connection. In finding this connection for yourself, describe the place that makes you feel the most inspired creatively.

Taylor: I absolutely LOVE the beach because it’s so many things to me. Gentle, but powerful. Beautiful, with a dark side. Tranquil, yet full of energy. It makes me nostalgic for days passed, while making me think forward into the future. I love going out and laying by myself with a notebook, letting the sound wash over me until the words start falling out of my head onto the paper.

Dan: LA beaches are definitely hard to beat, too! I could use a beach day myself. It's a great way to reset and get those creative juices flowing. After running through all of those emotions we then get to the actual songwriting process. Now you have countless songs to ur name. Out of those, what song of yours are u most proud of? Why?

Taylor: Ooooooo, this is a hard one. I’m gonna have to have a tie on this between, “Down”, and, “The Last Time”. When putting together the production and sound scape of, “Down”, I really wanted to create a sense of longing because that’s essentially what that song is: it’s the complete taking-down of your walls for somebody because you want to fall completely into them, letting yourself be vulnerable so they know just how much you want them. For, “The Last Time”, I decided to keep that song with just piano and vocals because adding production was going to end up making it sound cheesy, and this song has such a powerful sense of nostalgia that I wanted it to almost seem completely empty, just like how you feel sometimes when you think back on someone from your past. Plus, that key change is life (have to toot my own horn on that one lolz), I want more artists to do key changes again!!!

Dan: Girl, key changes are UNDERRATED. When done just right, they can completely change a song for me. The key change in "The Last Time" makes me scream every single time. I think we could see them make a comeback.

Now, just like anyone on this journey, there are numerous high and low points. Tell us about when the music industry has maybe made you feel inadequate. How did u overcome this?

Taylor: Ummmm, the industry can make you feel inadequate on almost a daily basis if you let it, honestly. I’d be lying if I were to say that every day is a walk in the park, cause it’s not: you feel like you're constantly trying to prove to the world that you’re talented, yet it falls on deaf ears. However, I think the cure for those feelings of inadequacy is surrounding yourself with amazing people who are just as creative, driven and positive as you are, but always making sure to be humble. Nobody likes a cocky bitch, ever, lolz.

Dan: You are speaking TRUTH in this interview, girl. Surrounding yourself with positivity is almost the only way to get through those moments of feeling inadequate. And you're right, nobody enjoys being around cockiness, even though there can be a lot of that in this industry.

As you surround yourself with driven and encouraging people, I know that also includes artists u look to for inspiration. Tell us about an artist/songwriter who inspires u. What about their artistry/ability would you like to emulate in your own?

Taylor: To kick it a bit old school, I’m gonna say Elton John because I think he was so groundbreaking and just what was needed in the world to move forward progressively. He was completely unafraid to be flamboyant and unapologetically homosexual in a time that it was still not acceptable in public overall. Plus, with Bernie Taupin on the lyrics and Elton on the melodies, they made some prettyyyyyyyy amazing music that still stands the test of time, if I don’t say so myself.

Dan: Elton is a legend and an icon, especially for what he did for queer visibility in the mainstream. I had to include him as a part of the PRIDE playlist. It would have been a crime not to, honestly.

I have mentioned earlier that u are pretty much on the go all the time, whether it's working on ur own stuff or writing for other artists. In the midst of everything u have going on, how do u manage a busy schedule and stress? How do you recharge when u need to?

Taylor: I actually work WAY better on a busy schedule, so I’m a fan of back to back sessions, all week long! But, when I do need a little break, I love getting out of LA for a sec and visiting places like San Diego, Palm Springs, Santa Barbra and more. I also love having parties with my friends, dancing around, being gay, playing beer pong. Oh, and Tequila. Tequila is always an answer to stress and busy schedules (Silver Tequila only though).

Dan: I think that LA is such an encompassing city that sometimes the only solution to getting a break is getting out. I do the same thing. Also, I did not know u liked playing beer pong! I sense a duel between you and me coming soon...

Looking past u only liking silver tequila (sorry I had to throw some shade), what do u think is the biggest misconception people have about working in this industry?

Taylor: Oh lordy, probably that you can just show up in town and become a super star. Sorry to say it, but being a cocky bitch doesn’t get you very far hahah. The only way you’re becoming an overnight pop star is if mommy and daddy are loaded, or a family member is tied into a label somehow. Gotta put in the work to really earn respect from people, at least in my book.

Dan: There are many, many people that agree with u! This industry easily and quickly exposes true talent and true intention. I love how honest and open u are.

Touching on your openness, how has ur identity influenced or affected your journey as a songwriter and artist?

Taylor: I think being gay totally influences my journey as both a songwriter and as an artist because it’s not, “normal”, per say. It doesn’t fit the cookie cutter mold of what a male pop artist has been for the past 5+ decades, so it’s sometimes difficult for people to want to get behind something still so new and not fully understood. But, even though it sometimes makes the journey harder, I wouldn’t change it for the world because I feel like it brings such a unique and interesting view to songs that straight men, and even women can’t entirely relate to.

Dan: I am holding onto hope that as time continues, more queer artists will be accepted as major label and mainstream like their straight counterparts. I think that progress in this aspect will really be made by people just like u, who are unapologetically themselves. What advice would you give to up and coming LGBTQ+ songwriters and artists?

Taylor: I would emphasize not trying to hide who you are, letting it all fall out, even if it’s hard to do. We’re in a time where LGBTQ kids need role models, people that they can say they want to grow up to be like. Unlike straight men and women, LGBTQ kids have had to feel the need to hide who they are from such a young age so as to “fit in” with normal, American society; now is the time for us to live our lives to the fullest so we can keep paving the road towards the future. (I felt like a motivational speaker there on a soap box lolz.)

Dan: U are dead on. The more LGBTQ artists and musicians that are in the spotlight, the more LGBTQ kids and youth will see that it really is okay to be themselves. We have to watch out for our LGBTQ youth as much as possible because our government doesn't seem to look out for them enough...

I am sure thinking through these questions has made u, in a way, look back on your own journey as an artist and songwriter. So what would you has been the biggest highlight of your career as an artist/songwriter so far?

Taylor: I think one of the coolest moments so far was opening for Bonnie McKee at OC Pride in 2014. Even though I now look back on my outfit and shake my damn head, it was so amazing to meet her in person, definitely one of my songwriting idols!

Dan: Hahaha, that's incredible. How cool that u were able to open for her at a Pride event! She is a songwriting queen. Definitely an idol of mine, too! (For those of you that don't know Bonnie, u can thank her for hits like 'Teenage Dream,' 'California Gurls,' 'Dynamite,' and 'Hold It Against Me.')

Taylor, it's time for my signature question. What artist/album/song have u had on repeat lately?

Taylor: Ok, album for SURE would be Kehlani’s, “Sweet Savage Sexy”: that shit is AMAZING. I’m also digging The 1975, Jon Bellion, Blackbear and Julia Michaels. “Issues”-Julia Michaels, “Do-Re-Mi”-Blackbear, “Escape”-Kehlani, “Bad Liar”-Selena Gomez and “Death Wish”-Terror Jr are definitely the go-to songs on repeat currently!!!

Dan: This list is SO solid. U know Kehlani has a soft spot in my heart. I was so excited to include her on SPREAD CH.2 as well!

Now that we are sadly wrapping up this Artist Spotlight, how can we check out ur music and stay up to date with ur releases/posts? Anything we should especially be on the lookout for?

Taylor: My Insta/Twitter handle is @TaylorJamison77, and you can listen to my shit on Spotify, Apple Music, iHeart Radio and more under Taylor Jamison! Also, you can check out Matthew John’s EP, “Chain Reaction” on all streaming sites as well (I wrote the title track, “Chain Reaction”!). In the next few months I’ll be having some new music come out, as well as some more releases with other artists (follow me on Insta for the most up to date info, as I share mostly on there. Plus, my InstaStory’s are usually pretty fun, from what I’ve heard!)

Dan: I can attest that Taylor is very fun to follow on social media! Everyone PLEASE go check his pages and his music out, and then go give his song '(Never Gonna) Change For You' another listen on PRIDE! Thank u so much for being so real with us, girl. I cannot wait to see ur name in lights one day.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Thank u for tuning into the second SPREAD Artist Spotlight! Big thanks to Taylor Jamison for serving some tea today and giving us a closer look at his career as a gay singer/songwriter.

I hope u all enjoy the last few days of PRIDE month! I can't believe it's almost over. In just a couple of days a new playlist will be gracing the SPREAD website, and this one is about to be veryyy refreshing... ;)

Cover e v e r y inch!

[an-idiot-but-a-bit-more-refined]

I was laying in bed thinking of something and this made me laugh  for like a split second, then I got mad and then I started crying a little because, I imagined that I was a lecturer and I had to teach a group of Baby Swen about why their new fandom home was the way it was.

Me: Hello Babies, Mommy's back!

Student in the back: Sweet! Evil Queen references.. Umm, professor, I have a question.

Me: Yes?

Student: Why are our fandom grandmothers, mothers and aunts against Eddie and Adam writing Swan Queen?

Me, sighing gently: Darling, we're not against them writing it, but we have our reservations on the way they ARE writing it and most likely would attempt to write it.

Student in the back seems confused. Pauses slightly before nodding. I write down a topic that blankets the class discussion. "Swan Queen". BABY SWENS WHISPER AND SNICKER WITH EXCITEMENT, but I sigh once again. Someone notices

Student: Professor?

Me: Yes?

Student: What's the matter?

Me, slightly conflicted to do said discussion, but I feel it is needed.

Me: The issue the fandom is facing my dear younglings has to do with an ever running war on Tropes, Tokenism, Sexism and just all around 'fandom fuckery' as we've coined it. Some of you- rather, most of you may be familiar with how savagely Swen are dogged for wanting something that represents this current day and age. Be it a fairy tale that's never been told, or simple recognition in a way that does not make us feel as though we've been given a half-assed story that's tossed after it's done what writers and show runners believe it's supposed to...no-no, Your home- THIS home is a home that has to fight for the equality so that the younger generation may reap the benefits of the fight. Now, this may sound tragic- or seem catty, but I assure you, Swen are not known to be such. We like to leave that to...what was that other group's name, again?

Student with all the smart ass comments whom I adore: Crap tainted Swan!

Me: Yes, them.

I begin to write down a few categories and immediately hands go up.

Student: Professor, what exactly do you mean when you say- they will fuck it up?

Me: Precisely what I wrote. The Swan Queen fandom is not fond of being lied to, deceived or played for fools my young one. We know as well as anyone that 'pushing' is a thing for two overly hetero-normative men who run to Captain Swan with open arms and away from Swan Queen with eyes shut and ears deafened, will somehow manage to mess up a perfectly good story to tell.

Student somewhere in the corner: And when you say they'll make it more difficult- what does that mean?

Me: It means that Our ladies are difficult apart- NOT together and yet the writers seem to bring that as some valid way to deter the pairing. They believe by forcing these characters to appear as though they'd be difficult together would make it hard for them to have a lasting relationship. Trying to deter someone by creating this aura that they simply can't be around one another long enough before they become snarky and catty for all the wrong reasons is absolute bull. If anything- we have proof of countless times they have preferred to be with one another simply because it was obvious of the safety they felt. The care and concern they felt.

Student: Oh, so you mean like- Regina's stubborn and sassy and sarcastic when she and Emma are apart and when they work together, she's still sassy and sarcastic it's just in reference to everyone else and not Emma... it's like they're trying to make you think that Regina can't stand being around Emma when the only time we see the real Regina is when she's with Emma-or Henry-

Me, highly impressed: -exactly!

Another student in the front raises their hand: So, that ties into your next point of it being predictable doesn't it?

Me: It does. Have you all seen the consistent template that's written for a queer character?

They all nod and someone with a good bit of brains stands up to go on a miniature rant.

Student: Yeah, I have and it sucks. There's always the one gay character- (he manages to say with an eye roll.) But then there's all these other 'templates' that are stereotypical. Like if they do marry Emma off to Hook and she magically realizes she doesn't love him or that she's gay, they use Regina and it becomes that thing where the lesbian or in Regina's case- the bisexual, quote on quote 'turns' the straight housewife and she realizes she never needed a man; just some good love.. Or one of them dies- or in their case, both of them apparently.. isn't that what was happening in season six?

Someone whispers, Lexa deserved better and puts up a fist. Other students nod at the other baby Swen and agree.

Student who laughs sarcastically all the time: Or how about this one, She realizes she's not gay either after a bunch of passionate nights with Regina and then she goes back to.. the one handed wonder.. God, don't let her get pregnant-

Other Student yells in pain: -DEAR GOD, PLEASE DON'T GIVE ME IMAGES OF ANOTHER WHINY VERSION OF HOOK! But let's not forget the ones who argue all the time and can't keep a stable relationship and are secretive and all that other junk the L Word made beyond obvious.And if that's not bad enough, they both get beards and are tortured for seasons with men they have no chemistry with and these are women who have chemistry with brick walls and can't even make that shit work-

Me: -Alright.. alright, focus. Yes, these are the templates I'm referring to. But let us not forget the ones that gay male characters also go through.

Someone snorts because they only have one template for gay males.

Student: You mean they're difficult and mysterious and cute little twinks who get thrown with other cute twinks or big buff guys with daddy issues and bam- magical ending?

Me: Correct..moving on.. The third points says-

I'm interrupted as they all say it together

Students: Tokenism!

Me: This is just the TV way of saying affirmative action.. Fanciful in meaning isn't it?

Student: It's trash!

Me: Yes, I do suppose it is... however, would someone like to express why the word tokenism still would apply to Swan Queen?

Hands immediately go up.

Student: Well, if we're being honest here, We already got it once before and we don't even know what the deal is with that story anymore...Swen fears that tokenism can still be a thing for Swan Queen because Eddie and Adam only attempt Swan Mills episodes when their ratings drop and as that becomes a case, so does the question of will they just do Swan Queen to stay on the air and never explore it the way they should... We've been hearing of season seven being the final season and our worry is no longer that they will fuck it up. Quite frankly we don't even want them to write it anymore, we'll take it off their hands and make our own show out of it. The problem arises when they create the asinine plan to use it as a last minute crutch to 'go out with a bang' or something. Like, What if this season completely tanks it and season seven is in fact the last season,right? They get the plan, Hmm maybe we should do Swan Queen in the last episode and that'll justify all of the crap we've put these people through, just to say they did something some grande and amazing thing for us, when in reality, they were trying to save their shitty revenue.

Student directly adjacent: Can I add on to that?

Other student nods.

Student: It really is sad though when we were willing to settle for anything- any sort of thing, just to know we were being heard no matter how much we fought- no matter how much our fandom grandmothers have fought. I think deep down, a lot of us know they just won't do it, like they really won't and even if they do, the luxury of it has just faded. The luxury of it would have faded and they'll try to force it to be overly gooey and 'loving' or cutesy when that's not what we asked for. We asked for a story that was true to life and very much so a proper representation for us all. We asked for a story that proved that strong women can work together and fall in love with one another. That they go through ups and downs and doubts and sticking things out and believing in one another and all of the other good things we've seen.... If we get it, if we are blessed enough to have Swan Queen- We'll be happy, but we'll be tired. We'll be exhausted and still disappointed that it had to come to this for us to be heard... I don't think we'll ever be as happy as we were the first day in season one when they met, if only because of the pain and heartbreak and the amount of horrible things that have been said to us just seems to, hit too many nails in our coffins. The fight will never be over, and we have accepted that, but I think everyone's getting tired of having to fight for something that shouldn't even be in question... and it's not to say we've lost our drive or we're losing hope. We're just done with trying to tell men who clearly don't understand that this is a revolution that needs to happen. This is a change that needs to be seen.. we're done trying to prove something we have too much evidence for to still be called delusional and reaching and all those other things. Everyone's tired of watching some forced 'chemistry' dictate how women should be treated and seen in this world. We're tired of seeing people be criminalized and denied a second chance at a love that won't leave or die on them i.e Regina.. We're done and we are tired of feeling like what we watch is what it will always be- nothing but a dream, an illusion... A fucking fairytale.

Silence encompasses the room and everyone thinks on it. (I legit cried when I thought about this part, so I'm sorry)

Me: We are tired, young ones.. we are, but we fight for us and we fight for you until it's over. We march for us and we march for you until we die and you are right, we have not lost hope.. we've just lost that many damns to give on speaking to a group of people who choose not to understand.... And maybe it is true, maybe we truly won't be fulfilled even if they do give us what we asked for.. what we've pleaded for.. and maybe it will make it all seem like it was in vain and maybe we will feel like we've accomplished nothing because we had to force hand for them to cave or pressure them... your grandmothers, mothers and aunts for this fandom realized many things.. we will not force anyone to give us anything. We will peacefully protest the injustice, but if we are not given what we rightly deserve.... we move on from trying with them and you know what we do? We make a world of our own. Eddie and Adam didn't give Swan Queen life... we did, and you did. They didn't see what we saw. They didn't understand it and they clearly didn't want any part of it, but the dream lives on. The reality lives on- the world keep spinning and life goes on and guess what, so will the memory of Swan Queen....Now I need you all to say this last point with me..together we will do this..

Even if nothing happens. Even if your words fall on deaf ears to some, remember the many that you have made hear you. Remember the many who sat with you and held your hands and kept you together...when things fall away and the glamour goes goodbye, remember your reality, your worth and yourself in all of this- Remember YOUR fight.. Through all things, every hard moment and every distressing situation.. for every negative message- comes ten thousand positive soldiers. Fight on and keep hope..

When you open your mouth and words come out and you say "May I have your attention please?" Remember that those who listen are those who wish to hear.... Remember that your fight is a plea to be heard and someone will listen.. remember that actions and words are one and you fuel them. Remember that when the world around you dies- you are to flourish and bring light back to it... remember that you fight for you just as you fight for me and I do the same... remember from now until the end of time that you've done your part in this world and if it never happens... still, keep hope, because maybe, just maybe...one day it will

With Love, Megan

[emperorjade-blog1]

Just a thought but I was always of the opinion that Akito could be read as trans but not in the way most people would think. Could it be possible that she is, in fact a type of transwoman? Does being transgendered always have to mean your gender identity being incongruent with your biological sex? Doesn't it just mean being ASSIGNED a wrong gender? We see that Akito was forcibly assigned male and that this causes her dysphoria and at the end its shown she's actually very feminine.

tricky question, to be honest - it is something i have spent a while thinking about on more than one occasion, and to be honest, i don’t think there’s a clear-cut answer. the definition of what it is to be trans varies from person to person - i’m gonna put this under a cut cuz it might get long. like, really long. 

i mean, i think bottom line, no, she wouldn’t ‘count’ as a trans woman, in the wider, societally-recognised way. reason being, if your biological features align with your gender identity, you will be recognised as cis, therefore benefit from all the privileges thus. so post-canon, if we are going with the statement that akito does and always has identified as a woman, no, she would be cis. 

BUT it gets complicated, because as i said, transness and the definition of it varies from person to person. there are so many studies on unique situations like this one, but because they’re read through a cisnormative lens - as most modern psychology and science is - it’s impossible to say whether they’re biased or not. 

example: we have the case study of david reimer. bottom line, david reimer was born male, but due to an accident during circumcision, he lost his penis. his parents were distraught, and naturally decided the best, most reasonable  option was to raise him as female, under the supervision of a sexologist named dr money who was conducting research/debates regarding transsexualism. david was therefore forced to grow up as a girl, and had various surgeries, including construction of a vagina. as time went by, he developed severe dysphoria, and eventually managed to escape his family’s influence and begin living as a man again. however, he still struggled with the trauma, and eventually, tragically committed suicide. 

that’s the only case study i can think comparable to akito’s situation, minus the surgeries. the difference is akito is still fully female, where david reimer’s was mutilated, thus blurring the lines between cis and trans identity. so if akito were to begin living as a woman again, i think that would thus make her cis. 

that alone is complex, and i don’t think there’s a concrete answer. BUT, i think it’s all tied to a bigger problem regarding trans characters in anime/manga.

example: kyubey (i think that was his name) from gintama - very clearly read as a trans man to me. but the narrative portrayed him as deluded, and as his story progressed, they began his ‘’’positive’’’ character development with him beginning to dress and identify as female. i completely and utterly deny that canon, because no matter how you look at it, his initial narrative was about a trans man. while there are trans people who’s identity will change over time - myself being one of them - and i’m not denying their identity, trans characters are so few and far to begin with that to me that writing doesn’t seem trans-friendly, it seems like one that views being trans as a character flaw or deviance.

then we also have ritsu sohma, from fruits basket, who while never believes himself a woman, cross-dresses through the story and eventually ‘accepts’ himself and begins dressing as a man to the conclusion of the story. the details of the gender identity are different, but the basic principle is the same. these are the two examples off the top of my head but there are literally shitloads of anime/manga characters like this who ‘become’ cis as the story goes on, and it’s read as a good thing. 

that last argument goes more towards the idea of akito being a trans man than a trans woman - the trans woman thing i honestly don’t feel comfortable answering. gender isn’t concrete and objectively, i don’t think there’s a right or wrong answer. however, the concept of being transgender only exists within society as it is now, within a gender binary, and all the oppressions that come with - so the concept doesn’t exist in a bubble, and you can’t separate labels from connotations. 

to me, a trans woman is a person assigned male at birth who identifies as female, just as a trans man is the opposite. that’s not an all-encompassing definition, because it doesn’t take in intersex people (and all the varying degrees of being intersex, from visible physical attributes to minor things like hormone imbalances - and the criteria for being intersex are already a hotly debated matter anyway), nonbinary people, non-dysphoric trans people, and people who’s gender changes/is fluid. there could be a trans woman (in my definition of the sense) who disagrees with me and thinks that despite akito being biologically female, due to being raised as a man, her narrative could be one of a trans woman.

honestly it’s confusing and i’m tiring myself out thinking abt this tbh with you