#but i really don't like when ppl act like their experience is the norm and make you feel bad or ashamed for not doing as well as them

[broodwolf221]

cole—spirit or human? 

this, like all my meta, is just my personal feelings or interpretation: I am not trying to claim any kind of objective correctness, or to dismiss those who feel otherwise. I remember conversations about cole being somewhat strained so I'm hoping ppl aren't going to be super weird on this post. 

so—cole. I've played both routes and I actually enjoy both of them, but I'm strongly inclined towards making him more of a spirit, and my reasoning comes down to three primary aspects: 1) respecting cole’s autonomy and his choices up to this point, 2) acceptance of an “other” way of being as equally valid to a “human” way of being, and 3) making him more human feels weirdly to me like asking him to replace the real cole in full rather than be himself

1—respecting his autonomy.

cole states early on that he became more of who he was and less human, and that it lets him help. that's a choice he made. on a personal level, even though he's just pixels, I find it deeply uncomfortable to unmake the choice he made about his nature. I understand that he's shown as happy and fulfilled regardless of which path you choose, which is part of why I like both, but this is why I prefer the spirit path: making him more human feels, to me, like the inky is making him more… palatable. or like the game is giving a “comfortable to the player” option. I felt this way when I first played dai when it was new, and I continue to feel this way now

he is happy in both and that's nice, and i like that there's no strong delineation of a right v. wrong choice. at the same time, i've always gotten the sense that cole wants to be more spirit—maybe not because it brings him joy or satisfies him, it could well be that he just believes he will be more useful/functional as a spirit, but even making "bad" decisions (which i don't think this one is, but for the sake of argument) is an individual's right and part of their autonomy

2—acceptance of an “other” way of being as equally valid to a “human” one

in a watsonian, in-text view (which does tend to be my approach), I think it's very important to accept the personhood of spirits, even when they're so fundamentally different. spirit!cole forgets things, can erase negative experiences, etc.—there's a lack of what we'd see as typical growth and maturity going on there, but I'd argue that we can't really effectively apply human (or “mortal” ig, bc elves, dwarves, qunari…) norms to a spirit. 

cole as a spirit of compassion is the way a spirit is supposed to be. the way a spirit is supposed to be is not the way a mortal is supposed to be. and to me, it does feel like his preference throughout the game is to act as a spirit. he stays "pure" and "clean," and that allows him to help without becoming corrupted or changed. it's tempting—and not wrong—to view this through a human lens and to find it unhealthy for him, but i tend to defer to solas' explanations of how spirits are in this case. they can easily be corrupted because they are a Single Thing. that is their nature. wisdom is wisdom; changed by perception, expectation, memory, or pain, it becomes something fundamentally different. spirits are malleable in a way mortals are not

3—replacing the “real” cole 

tbf, this one isn't really supported by anything in game, just a personal discomfort. but he “became” cole after the young man's death. honestly, I find that a little uncomfortable, but I can understand it: the textual “simplicity”/purity of spirits makes sense of that kind of reaction to compassion’s “failure,” its inability to help the real cole (according to its own standards where help=fix: it did help the real cole by being there) 

so, to me, it reads a little like you're confirming that direction when you have cole become more human. ik it's not presented that way, but yeah, personally just makes me uncomfortable bc it feels like I'm encouraging cole to view himself as a replacement of the real cole 

spirits can come back, but they are the sentiment that gave rise to it in the first place, not the individual being itself. compassion taking on cole's name in the first place feels like that to me, but becoming more human feels like it's taking it a step too far. bc then cole becomes a young man who's taken on the face and name of a dead man and it's… it's a lot. for him to grapple with down the line, for the people around him, for everyone. but as a spirit, that kind of behavior feels more like a way of recognizing and respecting the being that came before 

and of course, cole isn't 100% either—he's more human or more spirit. so it's fair to say that it'd still be a sign of respect and acknowledgement of the real cole even if he becomes more human, it doesn't turn automatically into a Bad Thing, and the complexity can honestly be fascinating to explore, bc i imagine as more-human he will develop some complex feelings about all of it

[entropy-sea-system]

OK OK impromptu rant but I need to get this out there as I still feel somewhat connected to the aro community-

I have been watching the tags, I've been talking the people in my local a-spec community and I think it amazes me just how incredible the relationships put forth by aro and aces are, while the communities just don't reflect any of it.

I've stopped identifying with the aroallo label because there was no sense of community associated with it. The a-spec spaces are made for aces only and the ace stuff in them is abhorrent. I am tired of people passing it off as repulsion, while still seeing people saying "hookers" are disgusting in a-spec tags. I'm tired of people saying PDA is bad. I'm tired of people acting like aros and aces can only be clueless cinnamon rolls. I'm tired of people being so so so stuck in their own perspective of the world they act like people in romantic relationships can't be happy. So on and so forth.

The concepts we have are passionating. They're the coolest ones I've been exposed to in queer communities. However, nobody thinks about them. Nobody speak about them. All we have is endless messages about how the world is so so confusing or hatred directed at sex and romance. I get that but I wish we went even a tiny bit past that really. It's a community filled with adults that feels so immature and I honestly think there is some sort of self infantilization going on. I don't like that I don't have symbols that aren't associated with uwu smol bean dragon lover stuff. It makes me sick and is why I don't identify with it anymore but it's genuinely sad to see because technically that's still the people who will relate to me the most.

It feels like people are always desperate to understand how the norm works and how they can best align with it instead of fully experiencing their identity. And that's an understandable thing to do but the community is just that with sex and romance negativity sprinkled on top of it.

I wish they were angrier. I wish they were more introspective. I wish they thought about breaking the norms more instead of headcannoning every female character without a love interest as aroace and talking about how gross sex is. I wish I felt like I can connect with the people who are supposed to be at least partly like me.

Anyway you're cool and I hope you're doing well! Sorry to drop all of this onto you but yeah I trust you with my ranty feels about the community.

We didn't really expect this ask but thank you for sending it!!

There are a lot of issues with the aspec community, especially online, (we have no experience with irl ones yet). And what you described here explains the issues with it quite well.

I feel like most of the aspec community ends up catering to mainly aces, and to a lesser extent aros, and slightly to apls, while other atertiary is hardly discussed (and agender ppl often just lump w gender stuff instead even though its aspec). I think the community is also rather divided, personally.

We're in some discord servers w mostly other apls and aros/run by other apl aros (often also romo aro) and they tend to overall be normal about aspec identities without being negative about attractions or actions or gatekeeping aspec labels. Currently we logged off discord a bit but we have in the past been in aro spaces that had many of the issues you mention , and still come across people being that way on tumblr.

I think there is a problem where some aros think that calling romance inherently toxic is somehow "activism" and deny that romance negativity exists, then claim that they "don't have to consider every culture ever" when people state that some cultures are romance negative and do harm people for engaging in romance.

They seem to think its "punching up" and some alloaros in particular try to justify it by acting like the united states is the only country that matters and citing sex negativity as a reason for romance negativity "not existing". When aces do this about sex its harmful, but thats not supposed to be a reason to deny that being romance negative is toxic and harmful to others even if their country doesn't persecute people for engaging in romance.

I also personally see a some aros hesitant to id with ace or acespec terms that technically fit them because of how bad the ace community has been about sex and anyone who isn't ace, as well as aces and aros generally forgetting about atertiary ppl. Some of them prefer terms like lightspec or such or allospec partly because of that.

It's understandable that some people feel a disconnect from labels like aro and ace as a result of how the communities tend to be tbh. I've had moments when I didn't want to id as aro because of this, and I consider myself both aro and alloro due to my arospec orientation.

Also being tertiary repulsed and being repulsed by sex repulsion (it just happens to repulse me a lot to read about even if not stated in a sex negative way), makes it a bit hard to be around other aspecs. I feel really disgusted and triggered when other aros talk about squishes and qprs and friendships, even if I think they should be able to talk about that. Which makes it hard to be around some other aros.

I also get what you mean about people trying to align with the existing norm. I'm seeing a rise in people maligning labels they don't understand and this attitude of "the only kind of weird thats fine is the kind of weird I am", which the aspec community has certainly not been immune to either.

I feel like for some reason most aspecs I see online, especially aros, are minors? Maybe because the aromantic label only really caught on after 2005 iirc so older people less likely to have heard of it? Im not a huge fan of how aspec tends to be infantilised either. I find issues with how some of the aro symbols are very derivative of ace symbols because we are not some extension of ace we're our own community. I can also see how ppl may find it too infantilising to have symbols like frogs and griffons etc.

Also yeah what is with people doing that about characters who are women or girls and express that they don't want to get married??? Or even just don't have a love interest. I understand if aroaces want more headcanoned rep or non-aspecs I guess idk want to fill some headcanon diversity quota without actually supporting aspecs but.

Not wanting marriage or not having a love interest is not inherently equal to not wanting romance and/or sex. I feel especially that people like to assume not wanting to have children means not wanting sex (which I find pretty reductive in that its acting like thats the only reason ppl have sex, especially as a sex favorable person who doesn't want kids). And all aspecs deserve more canon rep to begin with. I think I have a gripe with ppls aspec headcanons almost always being alloace or aroace. It's like they forget other aspecs like apls, alloaros, neu aros, non sam aros, atertiary, etc. even exist!

Additionally I think its partly because romance is emphasized more for female characters that even fans decide to make their interpretations about romance/a lack there of as if its the character's only personality trait. In my opinion its just as obsessive about romance if someone thinks all there is to a character is not engaging in it. I also see people act like they're solely worried a woman/girl character is going to fall for a man/boy character they hc as aro but not often the opposite like. Just say you see romance as gendered/feminine in some way and go I guess lol.

I also feel like mainly allistic non-aspecs do this but when ppl hc an autistic character as ace or aroace it feels infantilising if theres literally no other rationale behind their headcanon. I feel desexualised at times as an autistic and thats mostly bc ppl pick up on some kind of nd thing and they assumed I'm too "innocent" to like romance or sex, or because they view us as "unable to consent"(which can be true of some people if their neurodivergence affects their ability to consent to things even as an adult, but isn't universally true.) . I think some of this perception is also rooted in eugenics (due to people equating sex with having kids and viewing disability and/or neurodivergence as a tragedy and thinking its 'bad' for disabled and/or nd ppl to have kids).

So I don't really appreciate implications that someone is ace just by virtue of being autistic. I think its also unfair to autistic aros and aces because our neurodivergence can influence our orientation, but being autistic does not mean that makes someone inherently ace and/or aro.

My physical disability is relatively mild and less talked about (chronic pain and fatigue), and I don't reveal it to most ppl(ppl who dont live with me won't know I get exhausted from non-taxing to abled ppl activities, and chronic pain is not visible at all and we can't get mobility aids due to not being independent yet) so Im not fully aware how people view my apl and aro identities in that regard.

And there is definitely an issue with aspecs trying to enforce NEW norms. They cry about how people are forced into performing romance and sex to fit in but then turn around and tell people they need to love or have friends or family or pets in order to be a good person. It's also very harmful to aspecs bc some of us are loveless or atertiary etc. in ways that aros and aces apparently hate lol. A lot of aros in particular are very platonormative.

The aro community is also rather hostile to romo aros. There are still people who exclude romo aros from the aro label or act like we have to bend over backwards and acknowledge that we are "amatonormative oppressors" for liking romance or feeling some connection to it.

I think also the meme about putting a box away on a tall shelf away from a child is relevant here. The word amatonormative is constantly misused by a lot of aros. I've seen aros call alloromantic apls "amatonormative" and act like "amatonormative" means 'person who engages in romance'.

Its not a term abt engaging in romance or liking it. It's also not an excuse to pressure people to have or like friends either. I think aros should have actual discussions about amatonormativity that aren't just US-centric and about romance(wow do aros love to ignore that monogamy, non-queer, cis, etc. are social categories deemed more valuable under amatonormative societal norms), instead of using it to describe anyone they deem as interested in romance .

On that note, a lot of them use some examples of toxic relationships as reasons to call romance toxic and almost advocate for romance to never exist(which is especially disgusting to see for me, as in my country a lot romance negative conservative rhetoric is literally worded the same way). These people almost never acknowledge that other relationships like friendship can be toxic too.

I think some of these people believe in 'morality of repugnance' in that they think if its something they personally find repulsive in some way, that means its inherently immoral, which is not conducive to having unbiased views of the world, or critical thinking. I think a lot of ppl my age and younger are especially trying to do this because Ive lost count of how many I've seen be like "ewww thats gross/weird and so its wrong/immoral", and literally spouting conservative rhetoric while thinking they're politically liberal/leftists, perhaps with different wording but yeah. (I think that one tumblr post abt ppl in that age range being 'conservative on accident', especially in the united states- though that is concerning given the way ppl from other countries tend to absorb american opinions and such too much, describes this phenomenon)

I think some aros are also still so caught up in how much of a tragedy they think their aromanticism is, and I feel bad for them but thats not all there is to being aro and its a bit weird when ppl act like it is.

I think one of the best things about being aspec for me is feeling more like I can engage in and not engage in relationships (Im only favorable to sexual partnerships w no label other than 'sexual partner', and romance only w two partners as of now, and completely averse to all tertiary/nonrose. before I fully realised my aspec identities i pressured myself to have friends and felt like I'd be obligated to be favorable to nonsexual romance if someone wanted that with me, to 'be an ally to aces', even though it repulsed me. I also felt obligated to want qprs especially after realising Im aro. Realising Im atertiary helped me stop forcing myself to want nonrose relationships.)

Anyways that was a lot of rambling but probably most of my opinions on the aro and some extent aspec community.

[anghraine]

stripedroseandsketchpads replied to this post:

1) I’m very sorry to hear about the fandom sexists (god are they everywhere—“nasty woman” much? They sound like Andrew Tate, jfc!)

Thanks! Certain parts of Austen fandom are fairly conservative and very gender-normative and that's definitely come up in response to that particular fic before. First Impressions was my most popular Austen fic on AO3 for years, but other parts of fandom struggled more with the idea of a f!Darcy who does pretty much everything that canon Darcy does being desirable to a man, or appealing to anyone at all.

(In fairness to them, some of those spaces ended up actually having conversations about why Catherine registered as colder and more unpleasant than Darcy even when doing exactly the same things, interrogating their own double standards, etc.)

This isn't the only reason to dislike the fic or Catherine, of course—I made my other post late last night when I was tired and forgot to clarify that! It's from 2010 and definitely has flaws. It's just that there was (and apparently still is) a very glaring divide between the responses from the more progressive and queerer side of fandom and the more conservative and heteronormative side, wrt Catherine in that fic specifically (even though it's a het fic!).

2) Your fic concepts are impeccable, I followed you for genderbend blogging and I really need to spend sone time trawling your AO3

Thanks! I have written a ton of fic over the years, so some are definitely weaker than others, but I have fun with them.

Also, my experience is that most people are very much not here for genderbending, so that's really nice to hear!

Also tbh as a lesbian often writing lesbians… “step on me” any time a woman is the tiniest bit not-nice or does anything perceived as “mannish” (including being the tiniest bit not-nice) doesn’t feel much better…

it feels like ppl think femdom is “taking the most toxic possible iteration of misogyny in D/s dynamics w a male dom & female sub (bc obv male dom/female sub can be perfectly fine!) and flipping it so the man is in the ‘girl role’ and the woman is in the ‘male role’” and. Heavy sigh. A lot of AO3 comments give off the vibes of “She’s totally a bitch but I can say that bc I like it and think it’s hot. Feminism!” RIP.

Hmm. It really depends on context for me. My experience with it has come pretty overwhelmingly from other queer people, primarily queer women—that may reflect my social circle!—and that feels very different to me than an environment overwhelmingly dominated by straight women being like "ew, a woman acting like Darcy is so awful."

Like, sometimes it does definitely give a "me finding anything between slight assertiveness and mass murder in a woman hot is totally praxis" vibe that's annoying. But annoying in a very different way!

I will also say, in fairness to the AO3 First Impressions commentariat, that they did not literally say "step on me, Catherine," lol. I was just quickly characterizing the sort of vibe there—it was more like "I'm gay for Catherine" "you managed a female Darcy without making it feel like she's being punished, awesome" "Miss Darcy is a gem" "one of my favorite versions of Darcy" "I have a crush on Miss Darcy" "fem!Darcy 4ever and ever amen" etc. So the contrast with the "I don't get what Henry sees in her???" "I guess he wants to be dominated because he's weak" "Darcy could never be a woman" etc is just very sharp.

[sophieinwonderland]

hi o/ jus wana start by saying dis is jus semi incoherent rambling of a sleeby oupy who didnt get to eat 5 borgars for dinner.

i find the anti endo point of “just doing it for attention” so weird

for one its really disconected from real life, like, attention is a basic need fir our body, its why solutary confinment is such good tourture. its like saying “theyre just doing it to get food” :l dumb argument, evyone needs and withholding food because someones starving is an evil thing to do, an so is ignoring someone who’s in need of social interaction.

and two, its blatantly wrong. like, we’ve told 0 people irl about being a system, we’ve only told like, 3 online friends, and we never talk about system stuff with them still cuz we’re scared of loosing those friends for being too weird. we pretty much never post about it on our blog an besides the blog description no one wud probably ever know. the one time someone guessed we’re a system in a discord servr i had a full anxiety attack an avoided any interaction for 2 weeks even tho they were accepting, an then when we finaly went back to talking there i made sure we had any trace of system stuff wiped from the servr profile an deleted the messages that made them ask and only just showed that all again after 2 months of keeping everything hidden. we’re terrified of people we know knowing we’re a system or getting attention cuz of tgat.

tho we’re definitly on the extreme end for that (mostly me tbh… the social isolation and abandonment issues exo-memories and the body’s trauma from similar irl stuff deff made me super scared about this) but its a pretty similar experience for a lot of systems from wut ive seen where telling ppl is pretty much an act of compleat trust an usualy very anxiety inducing.

besides, if someone really wus just after attention, they could just post a incorrect fact online or a really dumb take. thats much easier an will get a lot more attention than faking being a system ever could. like, saying something like “reading is bourgeoisie” on a semi popular post will be a thousand times better at getting u attention than being a system ever could.

theres so much more i wana say about this, like the ableism inherent to that argument point, or the way its linked to child abuse, but phone keyboard is stupid and terrible and im too hungy to think well enough to write out those points properly an do them justice.

anyways, i hope u have a great day/night depending on when u read this.

Right! And if they're claiming people are wanting positive attention, I don't see that as being that hard either.

Like, if someone wants to talk to people on the internet about stuff, there are spaces out there for literally anything and anyone. You're not going to get more attention for being a system than you would for being outspoken in a fandom or a religion or any other social group you're a part of.

People who want attention... don't need to pretend to have people in their head to get it. And the attention you would get for that is often going to be negative because a lot of people are sanist and pluralphobic. But as you mention, it's not even the best way to get negative attention when there are so many actual troll-y things you can do.

You can find hundreds of communities online with people who will support you and give you attention for your takes on various topics! Or you can find hundreds more who will hate you if you push the right buttons!

There's just... no logical reason to fake being plural for attention.

And isn't this, again, the very same claims that have always been made against the LGBTQ community?

It's actually kind of funny how that happens, isn't it?

The people who are getting attention are generally the ones who most conform to society. It's not plural or trans people. It's the ones who do their best to fit in and be like everyone else in their group. Meanwhile, people who have identities that diverge from the norm are often left outcasts and shunned by peers.

And yet it's the latter group that's accused of attention seeking?

It makes no sense. 🤷‍♀️

[mejomonster]

I started Koisenu Futari and I wish alloromantic people could see like the first 10 minutes alone. So much of our main characters discomfort at being assumed to be flirting, being pressured to pick up on signs and be putting out signs, social norms and expectations, how people sometimes actively conflict with your behavior if you simply live your life without thinking in romantic terms/acting flirtatious/assuming, is what all kinds of aromantic people deal with. And the show does a good immediate job of showing how disruptive to a person's daily life that can be - just being your normal self, and people getting mad at you for not reading something they never said out loud, or assuming things of you, assuming a future for you and being annoyed you're not fulfilling it, society acting like your current life and life path isn't normal, etc.

Personal reaction below cut o3o:

On a different note just my personal reaction now lol. I'm demiromantic and god the opening to this drama REALLY hammers home why I hate a majority of fluff romance shows. A lot of them are "love at first sight" and rely on SO many situations that also happen in the beginning of this drama, but in this drama the main character acts like me: she's just being her normal self and this stuff is all pushed upon her and she just rejects it and step out of the sudden assumptions people make kindly and tries to move on. In so many "fluff romance love at first sight" things the main person is bafflingly smitten or overwhelmed and I get it cause it's a trope we are taught to understand after seeing so many times, but I don't relate to it and I've never experienced it and I'm never going to lol. This main characters experience is way more representative of how id react if unfortunately I ran into such situations. It's fucking refreshing.

Also I deeply love how much she enjoys her life, is happy with her friend, wants to move out with her friend. I felt just like her as I transitioned that part of life, and it's nice to just see it. In my social circle it's normal for people to move in with friends, prioritize friends like family (not just lovers), so her moving is what I did and makes sense to me. But I'm also very aware of the assumption friends may move out when they get a partner, will prioritize that more, and that society is generally expecting that so even when you're not doing it there's outsiders insisting it's not reliable or it's an odd living arrangement (like her family was). I like that she enjoys the life she's built.

It hurts my heart, but I relate and understand, to when she meets the man at the supermarket who says he believes there's people who don't fall in love. It's that moment when you realize you may not be alone, what you feel may be normal and actually have WORDS and concepts to describe it and a community of people like you! And suddenly you feel more like wow yeah I exist, my feelings are genuine, I am not alone and weird I am one of many people many tons who have felt like this and do and will and it's just like. That's why aces belong in lgbtq spaces (among many reasons). There is no space for people who feel aromatic or asexual and on that spectrum, in the majority of mainstream straight spaces. In the sense it still takes a person living into her adult life to even HEAR that how she feels is something ANOTHER PERSON also feels. It can take people decades to find out how they experience attraction or don't has a label, has a community, has people who can relate to them. And before even that just... simply can be a thing. I didn't know I was demi when I was a teen I just assumed all people felt like me, was confused when a lot of people seemed Not To experience stuff the same, and settled on maybe I was just a bit odd. Then one day I found a word for it and realized goddamn people Do feel this besides me, I'm not the only one who can't relate. It was the same experience being bi, not knowing ppl could like multiple genders until I found the bi community, and feeling "wrong" for liking multiple when adults and schoolmates would say "just pick" for ages. Or being trans, thinking oh whatever it was just my particular thing to cry about my gender and pray to be different, cause no one said to me that my gender could be different than what people call me as. So I just felt broken and confused until I learned there were words for my feeling, for who I was, and that I wasn't broken I was just something I had no words for before. Just like... people should be able to access community and information and feel less alone and more understood and accepted for being themselves.

The main girl in this feeling alone and not great every time people pressure her about romance and bring up how she doesn't act like them, I feel it in my heart. And I hope for whoever needs to see it, they see her isolation and want her and people who go through what she does to feel less of it. To feel more understood, to understand themselves more and have an easier time knowing how they feel is okay and its the fucked up pressures not understanding them that's frustrating.

Anyway I'm not even done with ep 1 just. Wow I feel like a lot of ppl could benefit a little just from seeing that first part.

[rebellum]

Just saw a post saying tma/tme isn't a binary and while the post did have some stuff I'd want to discuss about it (which is why no reblog, I just woke up) I do find it an interesting perspective

Op was arguing that tma/tme is about broad relationships to transmisogyny, and that people don't have to be tma OR tme

Which isn't how anyone else uses it so I'm not sure of its uh.. word hard. Silly to use words to mean one thing if everyone means another and you act like you're having the same conversation. Like I suspect if most ppl who are rly into tme/tma being used heard someone say "tme people regularly experience transmisogyny while remaining tme" they might act like it's a statement that doesn't make sense.

But it IS interesting to me the concept of to use those words to mean other things. Like to respond "no" to the question "are you tma/tme". Or like how I could respond "sometimes" or "depends".

This got super long, rest under cut. Discussions of racism, transmisogyny, misogynoir, transmisogynoir, intersex-phobia.

I think it WOULD be useful if they were talked about as broad relationships and not black and white applicable or as binaries. But that's not how ppl are using it.

Like to use it that way would be to make a category called tme that is "individuals who don't regularly and frequently experience targetted transmisogyny" and to make "tma" mean people who are. Which could be useful if everyone used it that way, sure. Like tma wouldn't mean "trans fem" or "trans fem and certain gnc people who were amab and are perceived as feminine" like it does now, it would actually include all trans fems, gnc cis men, cis men/boys who eg are bullied or assaulted for being "sissies" etc, people regardless of agab/asab who are perceived as gnc and violating gender norms, most if not all intersex ppl, and more who I'm forgetting. Which could be useful in talking about insivisual experiences of transmisogyny as well as society-wide.

If used in that way, could also inspire more discussion about how transphobia is baked into misogynoir bc of how transphobia is baked into misogyny. Like to discuss the relationship and how cis intersex women of colour esp darker skinned woc often black women, experience transmisogyny daily but also prominently in sports. Like how ppl are like "this person is actually a man and is bad and tricking people" when it's an intersex woman who is a poc who is then forced to be hormone-tested and then banned from sports unless they modify their natural body. To discuss how transmisogynoir isn't some ultra-specific form of oppression only experienced by trans black women, but is PART of daily misogyny and white supremacy and transphobia and patriarchy.

Could bring forward discussions and acknowledgement that when eg a feminine-presenting cishet perisex black woman is seen as unsafe bc she's "manly" and she is shunned for maybe being trans, and assaulted in the bathroom so people can see her genitals, how that IS transmisogynoir and isn't, like, a random incident, or a misfire of transmisogyny, or collateral damage, that that is how all these systems under patriarchy and white supremacy are SUPPOSED to work to hurt many different kinds of people, including cis het perisex woc. Like the systems all overlap to become transmisogynoir, like a bunch of vines on a monster coming together into one vegetational spear to lunge at people and hurt them and keep them in place and punish those who aren't white gender conforming cis het perisex men. The relationship between racism and transphobia and misogyny is tangled and cannot be separated.

But while an alternative view of tma/tme could be useful in those ways, it isn't really, because that's not how the terms are used. They're usually used to mean a binary of [people who were assigned male at birth and assumed to be perisex and who are feminine presenting or perceived as such] vs [everyone else who somehow never experiences intersectional of misogyny + transphobia]

I think part of where that idea comes from is from ppl not understanding that transphobia, misogyny, homophobia, intersex-hate, white supremacy, aren't separate systems, but are all part of the same system. The way this was usually discusses during my degree is as everything is misogyny, but I feel like that isn't the best overarching phrase. They're all part of the main patriarchal system of control. Which is intertwined with white supremacy and colonial systems of control.

Like, it's easier to talk about love than hate, so I'll use that metaphor. I love ice-cream. I love the sugar, the cream, the coldness, the added in bits like chunks of caramel or whatever. It's all ice cream. But to talk about specific parts of ice cream, we invented words. We say "flavour" and we say "texture" and we say "salinity" and "sweetness", but it's ALL ice cream.

Societal systems of control and oppression are icecream. Transphobia isn't some extra part, it's not the cone, it's the icecream itself (eg salinity.). Homophobia isn't some separate part, it's not sprinkles, it IS icecream (eg cream). We use these words to talk about specific aspects, but they're the same thing.

When an intersex child is forced thru unnecessary surgery, they aren't just experiencing intersex-phobia. They're experiencing homophobia and amatonormativity, because it's assumed they need ""correct"" genitals to have heterosexual sex which is necessary for happy adult life. They're experiencing misogyny and the inheritance of misogyny in western medicine tradition (by late medieval era, confirmed that science then thought as men/penis as The Correct One, and women/vagina as deformed penis. Flash forward to nowadays, if baby genitals don't fit perfectly into sex binary, it's usually chosen [well ok I don't know about post 2020 intersex procedures. So 1900 - 2016ish] that they will be female. Snip snip the penis/clitoris. Widen that little canal and make it into a vagina now. Unless only difference is micropenis, it's not usually left.). They're experiencing transphobia - transphobia and intersex phobia inseparable! Need both words tho bc otherwise intersex ppl get forgotten about, and need that specific word to describe eg forced child medicine. But both part of sex binary and gender binary. You can't separate.

If lil black boy bullied for being a "sissy" by non-black kids, he is experiencing misogyny (told he is a failed boy, so must be a girl, and being a girl is bad.), homophobia (failed boy - must like boys like a girl does, boy + femininity = faggot), racism (black men degendered, black women also degendered), transmisogynoir (bc of how those things are all inseparable).

Earlier example of cis het perisex feminine presenting black women. Misogyny (women can only be certain way, if you are a failed woman you are basically also a failed man); homophobia (failed woman - you must like other women because a failed woman is like a man); transphobia and intersexphobia (violate the sex binary and gender binary, your face is masculine and your body is masculine); racism (black women degendered, part of degendering for women is to be masculinized. Black women = failed women (not white little prim thing. Not proper dainty feminine nose, not proper long luscious feminine smooth hair, not pretty light skin) = more masculine); transmisogynoir (you are masculine and black failed-women, failed-man, woman-man thing bc not dainty white woman).

In order to have discussions of systems of oppression that actually reflect lived reality, in order to theorise why/how things happen, it's imperative to understand that they're all the same thing. Homophobia and transphobia are misogyny. Misogyny is part of white supremacy.

[ugly-anarchist]

I know you're probably going to respond really immaturely to this so my expectations are low but.

I just want to say that people ARE in fact killed over romance. Some countries like Pakistan and India have strict social norms surrounding romance (and yes they frown upon even the most typical non-interfaith cishet romantic couple you can think of). They prioritise arranged marriage and while the situation is changing a bit, lots of people have and still do face violence such as honor killings, being forced into marriage, being married as literal children, etc.

Due to the fear and hatred around romance these societies have created in order to control people. Im south asian myself and my country does this about romance. Its not always so easy for people everywhere to engage in romance without facing abuse or violence. In talking about the things you do on this blog, please don't ignore the reality of people other than yourself. Just because where YOU live people only face that over sex, doesn't mean that its the same everywhere in every single culture.

And by the way, Im aromantic as well and I have to say that treating something neutral (that can be harmful or beneficial or neutral depending on how someones romance is) as inherently harmful is a dick move even if no society in the whole entire world held these views.

You are allowed to hate romance and not want anything to do with it. I think that experience is great and should always be supported. I hope romance repulsed people are able to avoid romance and have ppl respect their boundaries. The only problem comes when anyone, because I really don't think ONLY romance repulsed people do this from my experience, decides to act like romance is *inherently* immoral and harmful.

That ideology can and will harm people. Just like how being sex negative wouldn't suddenly become ok if the world happened to be completely sex positive and never sex negative in any way.

"I know you're going to respond immaturely" is a really great way to start an ask and definitely paints you as the more "mature" and "reasonable" one anon /s

It's almost like... I never actually said that romance was inherently bad and that actually what I said was that how romance is depicted in most English speaking countries there's an underlying implication of ownership that's really toxic

It's almost like I never said what you're claiming I said and you're putting words in my mouth in order to completely ignore my original point

Yes of course anon my justified anger and sass make me immature because you're clearly just trying to show me how wrong I am for saying *checks notes* things I literally never said. Round of applause because clearly you're the sole beacon of hope in this otherwise bleak world that I've created by saying "acting like you own your romantic partner is bad"

But please, keep ignoring my original point because it clearly makes you very uncomfortable that people criticize the way romance is expected to be performed in society. Whatever makes you feel better. Don't unpack that clearly deep-seated internalized amatonormativity that keeps steering you away from critical thought, I'm the bad guy for, again, things I never said.

[skrunksthatwunk]

i think it's so so so funny that my main transmasc hc character literally Is The Way He Is bc he's amab. like hiei's one of approx 3 characters ever whose asab is actually relevant and having it otherwise is impossible in the text. ridiculous.

is what i thought, but it's actually wayy way more complicated than i previously gave it credit for!! plus there's a LOT more queercoding than i first thought. lemme explain:

[tw: eugenics, fascism, queerphobia, self harm, suicide mentions]

[yu yu hakusho spoilers/meant for ppl who've seen yyh but probably understandable to ppl who haven't]

[ft too many uses of the word queercoded and my mushy feelings about hiei's arc and the queer experience]

hiei is literally thrown out of his home as a baby for being born male and that's just INCREDIBLY queercoded on its own, but specifically a lot of this is presented with the fact that he's a fire demon. this could just be a trait he got from his father, or it could be tied to the ice maiden species. i think it's a stretch to say gender/sex present the same across all demonkind, much less that it resembles our own. frankly, binary sexual classification doesn't really work for a lot of species (and it really doesn't work for humans anyway, because intersex people exist). his maleness is associated with it, and this creates a potential sexual dichotomy that, in this species, females present with ice powers and males present with fire powers. (i understand this has a very goofy "girls are cats boy are dogs" energy to it but let's roll with it for now). so hiei could have been born with what humans would consider female sex characteristics, but the ice maidens would look at him and go "oh he's on fire get this little man outta here". (this could also be where the idea that he'll destroy them comes from, if all males are, y'know, melty).

some of my initial thought process on this came about because i figured "oh if they reproduce asexually they've probably got all xx chromosomes, and that's how they only have xy kids when the parent has sex with someone outside the village", but even if that's the case (assuming chromosomes work the same for demons), there's still a ~50/50 chance hiei ended up with xx chromosomes anyway. perhaps fire is considered the primary sex characteristic that determines one's asab in the same way genitalia is for humans. so, to a human audience, we'd see his traits and go "oh he's trans", which i think counts for biological coding.

the ice maiden society is also incredibly restrictive in terms of gender and sexuality. they consist entirely of (ambiguously determined, as discussed above) women who reproduce asexually. one is not allowed to leave the bounds of this society, nor perform sexual taboos, such as sleeping with outsiders. hiei was only born because hina acted outside of the strict sexual norms of this society. people's queerness is sometimes chocked up to "poor parenting" (often based in sexual/gender/religious/otherwise traditional nonconformity) of parents. and even though hina loved her son and didn't want to see him, y'know, thrown off a floating island, the society as a whole still deemed him an outsider and a problem to be eliminated and left him for dead for the greater purity/"protection" of the culture. it's serving fascist eugenics tbh. (and hiei doesn't destroy their culture like they and he had expected, subverting their expectations of him and his "kind", though the idea that that subversion matters more than preventing further harm is one I'd disagree with. the choice to cut them out of his life entirely to me is somewhat more justifiable to me given a familial view over a community/cultural one, but i digress). regardless, this is reminiscent of societal marginalization in general, but especially categories that can show up in isolation in families (i.e. queerness, neurodivergency, disability, etc) in a way that other things (i.e. race, religious affiliation, etc) generally don't, and can thus be painted as rooting out abnormalities or defects in individual, bloodless, mundane cases (as opposed to the broader elimination that we associate with genocide)

there's also yukina, who left to find hiei, and who hates the ice maidens (presumably at least partially because she knows what happened to him). think of this as them trying to find each other after familial fallout.

this is all to say that if we view maleness/fire demonness as an equivalent to genderqueerness in the ice maiden society, hiei's story maps onto queer experiences incredibly well. so he's got that cultural/queer experience coding too.

we also see hiei topless all the time (he's actually incapable of keeping his chest covered. when he doesn't take it off it burns off or whatever like he can't fight covered up. can't even make it through the intro with it covered. whore behavior <3). "but he's got male presenting pecs, so he's amab," you might say. but he is (key to his character and returning home) well acquainted with a plastic surgeon. he literally has a body modification done as part of his backstory (specifically one he had to tell this story to to receive treatment!!!). transcoded asf. and frankly him being topless all the time is very reminiscent of lots of transmasc ppl who've just gotten top surgery. like they paid too much not to show it off. (this was actually the first thing that made me go "omg,, he's trans lmao. that surgeon guy totally gave him a 2 for 1 deal" and then it just. kept piling up. he's also quite short (4'10") and has a relatively high voice (definitely masc, but in a very in-the-throat way that a lot of afab ppl use), but neither of those are that compelling).

he also has a somewhat more flexible view of his body than the others, getting drastic invasive surgery, beating his arm when it disobeyed him(????? ok babe), and willingly sacrificing parts of it to learn fighting techniques (specifically a fire technique, so more gender stuff). this could be tied to genderqueer people's greater willingness/need to change their bodies, or potentially harmful practices (such as improper binding) to alleviate dysphoria.

queerness is featured a few times in the series and implied in others. we encounter a canon transfem demon named miyuki during the yukina rescue arc. karasu and itsuki are both distinctly mlm demons. hiei even acknowledges this in the eng dub, calling itsuki "lover boy" when he's doing his whole "omg sensui,, i want him to be evil so bad he's so hot" speech. the derision in this case seems to come more from hiei's dislike of him/the situation than disgust at itsuki's queerness (or else he could have just called him disgusting or perverse or whatever). kurama also makes a joke near the end of the series implying hiei is interested in him, which hiei refutes by clarifying his intentions, rather than saying smth like "ew nasty I don't swing that way", which is more standard in anime. I'm gonna gesture wildly to mukuro but we'll skip her for now. all this is to say that the only characters we see exhibiting signs of queerness are demons (other than the people we see atsuko hang with for a single shot). this is almost certainly a case of villainous queercoding (a detriment to the series that does rustle my feathers a good bit. the treatment of miyuki in particular makes my blood boil), but we could also read this as demonkind having different understandings of gender and sexuality in general. perhaps the reason we see this queerness in demons is more because the way their bodies work, the ways they present, and the ways they're attracted to others, to us, look queer.

hiei, throughout his backstory, is consistently demonized by the people around him (some of which is deserved bc he keeps killing people, but some isn't, like the thrown-as-an-infant-off-a-cliff thing). and while his arc throughout the show is about him becoming more able to let people into his life, there's always a distance there. he almost always pushes them away. he's always been treated like a monster, so that's all he tries to be, and it's part of his justification for further distance (i.e. using his criminal status as a reason not to "burden" yukina with the knowledge that they're related). for a lot of queer people (especially before the internet and in places without queer spaces like gay bars), you have no way of meeting people you can trust won't hate you for being queer (even queer spaces have transphobes or nb-exclusionists, etc), so you harden yourself and let very few people in. his trauma reads like a lot of queer ones, especially older american ones. this arc culminates with his relationship with mukuro, and his decision to stay with her indefinitely.

firstly, mukuro's referred to as a king and with he/him pronouns by the cast for a while, before it's revealed that she was hiding her true identity as a woman, and the characters' references to her switch to feminine ones. already tripping wires there. and the first time we learn this about her is when mukuro sees hiei's (queercoded) past and goes "you're just like me" and sheds her clothes (mukuro's backstory doesn't feel that queer to me, but she did have to run away from abuse and dehumanization, potentially for her body/the way she was born as well, so it's not insignificant). hiei's unconscious in one of those green anime healing tubes, but their shared nudity (and thus vulnerability) has a very intimate vibe to it. these fundamentally tightly guarded characters are letting each other in a bit in this way, and that backstory/vulnerability being connected with their bodies/genders, especially when you consider all the other queercoding surrounding them, feels very much like queer solidarity. meeting strangers who have been disowned for birth circumstances and immediately sharing your deepest secrets with each other because you feel some deep similarity to them and bonding over that experience (especially when it relates to asab/agab roles) in a way outsiders can't breach is very queer. (note that hiei didn't want mukuro to know his backstory, but was effectively outed, and she came out in kind). and eventually hiei helps her work through that trauma, and she gives him purpose and a home. a found family with a better fit, something more suited to him, than the main cast (as much as I want them to mesh perfectly).

i think part of why hiei is suicidal in the beginning of three kings is because of that distance and isolation. he'd fulfilled his mission of meeting yukina, but resolved not to tell her of their relation. he feels he can't tell her this big secret of his that might change how she views him, or views her home. it's just before the fight where he tries to die that his surgeon's condition that he could never tell her is revealed. the only thing allowing them to meet is keeping that secret, and the bodily change is what causes it. and he says he wouldn't want to tell her anyway. so he has nowhere to go. he doesn't want to destroy humanity anymore (as evidenced by his assistance in the previous arc and destruction of the chapter black tape), he can't get closer to his home or his sister, and there's still that distance between him and everyone else. (in case it needs to be said, all of this is crazy bonkers queercoded). but in the end, after he and mukuro grow together and bond, he tells kurama to tell yukina her brother's dead, to give up hope, to cut himself off permanently. kurama says he won't, because he believes that hiei will return and tell her they're related someday. and hiei begrudgingly agrees. someday he will tell her. when he's ready, and when he feels safe enough to. and from that change in the beginning and end of the arc, we know he's found that safety in mukuro, and may finally begin to really pursue his own happiness and authenticity. because he met someone like him, he now has hope. he can be loved and he can be enough, and he can look forward to it.

so, to sum up, hiei:

1. was disowned as a child for being the wrong/unexpected gender/sex in an incredibly homogenous society (in which it is ambiguous how they classify sex/gender)

2. has a medical and unusually personal history with a magical plastic surgeon and is topless all the time

3. reacts neutrally/without notice to other characters' queerness (when he is rude, it's for other reasons)

4. is a demon, the only group shown to exhibit canon queerness

5. forms a very deep bond with someone over their shared isolating (queercoded) experiences (with persistent body imagery and a social transition on mukuro's part)

basically, he's transcoded <3

[soul-kiitchen]

i hate when other women talk about how annoying men are for not knowing their friends birthdays or having a hard time getting close to people or opening up about their emotions and they act like all those things and having close personal relationships are a quintessential and common aspect of femininity that every woman experiences and it makes me sad and feel like i'm not enough of a woman because i do feel like i relate more strongly to the experiences and social ties of men.

Like I dont have any close friends, i go months without speaking to them at a time, I dont feel comfortable cuddling with or sharing my deep emotions to them, I don't know ANY of their birthdays just the month theyre born in. A lot of it has to do with me being autistic and being socialized by solely men since my mother and sister were away a lot and also having really bad brain damage that causes memory loss.

But idk i just feel like theres this modern concept that in order to really be a feminist you need to be going out of your way to be friends with and relate to and uplift other women, but what about us women who don't fit in with standard femininity? Everybody acts like the only right way to have friends is to be frolicking butt naked in a field with them and if you don't have people in your life that support you and spend time with you you're somehow some freak who clearly is just a bad person that needs to work on connecting to people.

I dont know, i just feel like I love women so much and I feel so empowered by femininity but I fall short of the societal norms that are expected of me as a woman so i just get shunned from most female circles. I also feel like thats truly why I've been friends with more trans and nonbinary women/femmes than cis ppl bc i relate so much more to their experiences than those of a cisgender woman

[blue-sketches]

how does life come so easily to some people???

like what do you mean you can just do all these things at the same time (or at all) and make all these friends and blah blah

and then the same ppl are like "wdym? it's not even that hard. it's basically impossible to not be able to do those things" but like YEAH IT IS??? LIKE I'M LIVING PROOF OF THAT???

[tousakamis]

i think one of my main issues w #that st ship (in a romantic context anyway) is just how much it reminds me of my own experiences with romance.

im an aroace person and i, too, dated people who i was close with, who Everyone said "oh, you must like them romantically bc you're close, right?". a lot of people bring up heteronormative pressure but i don't think enough people consider the amatonormative pressure as well.

like... the way i personally see mike, i think he mixed up platonic attraction with romantic attraction, because Everybody was telling him it had to be that way. so at first he maybe really did think he liked her romantically - then, as things shifted and he began to face more internal issues, it became more of a desperation to force himself. like "oh, we're in a romantic relationship. she likes me romantically. i HAVE to like her romantically too." and when you consider his undeniable queer coding.... romantic and hetero norms are so deeply intertwined, you're expected to like people romantically. it's the way a boy and a girl will be friends and the instant assumption is romantic chemistry - it's that undeniable overlap that makes a lot of queer youth feel almost obligated to date (esp someone of the opposite gender), often before they discover themselves.

like! i really think they would be so much better as best friends. you can Love somebody, you can wholeheartedly adore them... that doesn't mean romantic love. i don't deny that they really love each other - but sometimes, when you love somebody, you almost feel forced to be in love with them, especially if they're of the opposite gender. it gets to the point that expressing that love, because of the romantic nature, can feel really unnerving; mike is fine being affectionate with her when it's not romantic, such as sharing the bike, but when they're doing it in a romantic context, he looks... baffled, almost disgusted. like i get you, boy!! no matter how much you love/care about someone, knowing the affection comes from a romantic nature when you Don't feel that way is so uncomfortable (especially as he may be not attracted to girls at all - double whammy of societal norms!).

i hate how some people act like these character's only have worth if they're romantically bound to another.

like, yes, i do have my own ships w these characters. ultimately my main want for these two is for people to recognise they exist beyond their current romantic relationship.

for mike? he becomes more of his own person in wills company, their platonic bond is so unbelievably strong and it's one of my absolute favourite dynamics ive ever seen. in fact, it made me really sad watching mike sideline his bond with will, though i know that's somewhat due to his internalised homophobia. but mike and will bring out the best in each other - they're best friends who just so happen to be in love with each other. they're already each others happy endings, regardless of whether it's platonic or romantic. in fact im Rooting for their romantic happy ending bc to me, that would be the biggest "fuck you" to amatonormativity and heteronormativity in one fell swoop!

as for el? she's already moving towards individuality, she's already trying to define her worth beyond her romantic affairs. this is why her bond with max is so so beautiful - max actively tells her "there's more to life than stupid boys" in S3, reminding her that she's more than a romantic relationship, and max encourages her to find herself. id say max is one of the best things to happen to el and they truly love eachother, which is further proven by her desperation to save max in S4. imo, el has begun to prioritize platonic and familial relationships As well as herself. idk why ppl think her romantic relationship falling apart is gonna ruin and destroy her. she's more than mikes gf 💔

but yeah. TL;DR #that ship in a romantic context feels Very amatonormative to me and some fan responses further this. i love the dynamic in a platonic sense more than ANYTHING (like. genuinely please feel free to talk to me about it) so please don't think i don't recognize their love for each other. but, as per the dictionary definition - loving somebody ≠ romantic love!!

(i do apologize if none of this makes sense btw 😭 but i hope at least some people get what i mean, please feel free to add things or correct me on some things)

[myjunkisyuzuruhanyu]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there some nasty fs rivalries like a decade ago and that had been the norm? And Yuzu was one of the reasons (either intentionally or unintentionally) it changed to how everyone is so respectful and friendly now so it's a much more pleasant atmosphere? So basically, by trying to promote a make believe nasty rivalry between Yuzu and Shoma/Nathan, they're disrespecting the work Yuzu has done to stop that?

I follow figure skating for some time and actually my overall view was that since I follow it, the rivalry narrative has been mostly created by media and some fans. I follow skating roughly since 2009. I think the most drama is always created by fans not the skaters themselves.

Though ofc there are those old scandals ppl know about like the Tonya Harding story in the 90s or how Plushenko and Yagudin both openly stated that they hate each other while they were competitors. Also how Plushenko didn't respect him finishing behind Lysacek in 2010 and how he stepped on first place first before getting to his position. Yeah there definitely were also other times.

I think though that those extremes were rare and not the norm, but as I didn't follow skating closely then I cannot really tell. I mean even nowadays it's not about how everyone is friends and everyone gets along with everyone, that would be a lie. It's not true. And ofc there are rivalries in training groups and at competitions, but my overall impression is that it's seldomly nasty. I think in the end skaters all are much aware of the sacrifices that everyone has to go through and everyone knows how hard this sport is and how politics influence competitions etc. So with sharing those experiences you can see a bond. It's told by many skaters that the skating community is like a family. And though it's through a social media lense you can see how they often support each other, how they post pictures with one another. I don't think that's fake.

Yuzu is special in many ways. I think how Yuz treats his fellow competitors is mainly rooted in his own experience with haters and ofc his own personality. Yuzu had his own share of bad experience with fans in 2012 Nationals when he beated Daisuke Takahashi, the most popular Japanese skater at that time, and they booed Yuzu for winning. (though ofc there are fans who dement that this has ever been the case, there is video evidence though) I think Yuzu at that point decided that he didn't want anyone get through the same thing and this is why he has always been very supportive of his juniors and also always has been very respectful to the other skaters, especially the winners. I think especially shown his attitude in Nationals 2019 with his own disappointment but still he had only positive words to say about Shoma and even said he was happy for him. A moment I will cherish forever as a fan of Yuzu and Shoma. ❤️

I do think you are right that Yuzu helped create an environment of respect for other skaters. And yes if toxic fans would actually respect Yuzu and listen to his words, they would not act like that. I am not sure if you can really say Yuzu is the reason it became friendlier off-ice, but surely Yuzu was the one to make sure the rivalries he was involved were friendly and respectful and this definitely had an impact on the new generation of skaters. Yuzu does have quite an influence even inside the skating community so I am sure his way helped.

I think a major problem is that the skaters are very much aware of the hatred by fans. Even already back in October 2017 it was reported by newspapers about the fanwars between Yuzu and Shoma fans and Yuzu was quoted saying, that he doesn't like to talk about Shoma much because he wants to protect him from the haters. At another point Yuzu also said he doesn't like to say much about Shoma because his words get twisted to hurt Shoma. Shoma also said at one point "hate me all you want". So it's sad to see that though Yuzu even said things like that it doesn't get respected by his own fans.

Imo toxic fans aren't real fans. Those ppl are attention seekers and trouble makers. I think they are miserable with their own life and cannot tolerate other ppl being happy about things they don't like as they think their opinion is the only one valid. I think a lot of toxic Fanyus are actually only Fanyus because Yuzu has the most fans atm, because he won a lot of titles and because he is unproblematic because he does not share his personal life or opinions on it at all. It's easy to make someone a saint and godlike figure because obviously he doesn't have any flaws according to them. So everyone else in comparison ofc cannot stand against their god. They completely neglect Yuzuru Hanyu the human being who obviously also has flaws, who isn't always perfect, who won't always win, who makes mistakes. I don't deny that they may like his skating too, but I think being this loud and toxic is just for attention and not because they care about Yuzu the human. If they would care they would respect his work, his words about other skaters, accept his flaws and defeat (when he can accept that he lost, why can't they?) and respect his friends and rivals. But they care only for themselves.

The problem with toxic fans on Twitter is that they are not a minority anymore, which is changing the perception of the fandom. Twitter has a general problem with cancel culture in many different fandoms. The more attention those toxic fans get, the more it becomes the norm of how Yuzu fans act, because apparently if a lot of ppl do it, it's ok. (though obviously it's not.) There are accounts that actively create a picture of Yuzu being the victim of everyone and everything and everyone new asking will only get their version. The problem with the "Fanyu cult" is that they actively go after accounts not buying their narratives, they bullied some ppl into deleting their accounts, sometimes even among their own (like Iron_Klaus for example).

I am not sure if the fandom really got more toxic or if I am just more aware of what is going on in the fandom. Fanwars were always a thing I fear. I think the one I first experienced was the Mao Asada vs Yuna Kim aera. I always liked them both equally so when I got more into the fandom I was quite shocked to see the vicious attacks on both sides of fans. There was also some very nasty time when Evgenia Medvedeva rose in the ranks and beated Yuna Kim's records. And also before her when Adelina Sotnikova won against Yuna Kim in Sochi 2014 (imo it should not have happened and this may be my biggest grudge ever, but there is no reason to send death threats to Sotnikova).

Though generally I fear any fandom always has their share of really bad fans who aren't interested in creating a friendly environment but are only keen on getting their own points across, no matter how disrespectful or hateful their opinion is. It sadly is human nature that there are a lot of bad unhappy ppl in the world and some ppl only find attention in fandom.

Just for clarification I don't think Yuzu is at fault for what his toxic fans do. And actually I don't even think it would help if Yuzu would say something about it. It's not in his control. I think it's very sad that fans are turned off from the fandom or Yuzu as a skater because of what his toxic fans do. And imo as skaters can see the hate and use the sns themselves and google their own name even, it also isolates Yuzu within the skating community, I fear that skaters cannot be with Yuzu freely without fearing being attacked (just look at what happened to Boyang Jin and Misha Ge when they shared pictures with Yuzu they got harassed as attention seekers. Or how Andrei Mozalev allegedly got death threats because he apparently was at fault for the hole in the ice that caused Yuzu to pop his 4S.) (Edit: it was brought to my attention that there is no actual proof of fans sending death threats, so maybe it is exaggerated, but Mozalev definetly got his share of bad comments and direct messages sended to him on Istagram, so make up your own mind if true or not)

I am sorry if this reply is a bit messy, but there are a lot of thoughts on this topic and those fanwars are time consuming and annoying and drain the fun sometimes to the point of thinking if it is worth it. 😔

[menalez]

i don't think biphobia is a "systemic" thing but it exists interpersonally. since heterosexuality is considered the norm, anything outside of that is hated. when ppl say biphobia they don't mean ppl being a little rude to them about opposite sex attraction or something but they use it to talk about discrimination they face specifically for being bi, like idk what to tell you if you don't think there are people out there who hate bisexuals specifically. different marginalized groups are marginalized in different ways, this is true for everything, so why is it hard to accept in this case? whether or not you think it's "real" doesn't stop negative attitudes towards bisexuals from being prevalent, it doesn't stop people getting dumped or fired or ridiculed for being bisexual. biphobia certainly doesn't imply gay people are somehow privileged over us, (i disagree with some of the other reply) but it does show that we experience the marginalization differently. which is true. homophobia obviously still exists. i will not stop using 'biphobia' nor will other bisexuals because it illustrates our experiences and brings us community over the shared struggle. it is a tool and i sincerely don't get why you're upset at how another non heterosexual group talks about their experiences. why say "people who hate bisexuals" "people who think negatively of bisexuals" when we can just say biphobes? you bring up the 'biphobic lesbians' thing but i would say that biphobia from straight people is a lot more prevalent and a lot of the accusations thrown at lesbians for being biphobic are from the gendie crowd. there is a lot of 'homophobic bisexuals' talk too so it really can go in both directions. yes, some of these tend to be more severe but they're both issues to be solved in my opinion. you say bisexuals are only discriminated against on the basis of same-sex attraction but our sexuality can't be split into two. it's not some oppressed gay half vs the privileged straight half, we are just fully bisexual. our ssa and osa cannot just be neatly confined and separated from each other. it is an entirely separate category from heterosexual and from homosexual, so the way people treat us and the way people view our sexuality is unique to us. i do think some bisexuals certainly are advantaged in life over homosexuals, but this does not mean biphobia is a completely made up nonsensical thing that no one ever suffers from.

idk what to tell u. i very explicitly spoke against the argument that biphobia is a form of oppression and a systematic thing. i did not say anywhere that bi people do not face discrimination or prejudice on an individual level, nor do i think has anyone else i agreed with. biphobia is often used to refer to a systematic oppression and argue that gay & het people unite under the axis of 'monosexuality' to oppress bisexuals so i also dont know why ur acting like gay ppl are insane for saying gay ppl don't oppress bisexuals. this is only a statement being made bc this is something that has been repeatedly argued

[sundeity4]

I've recently become aware of npd and it's symptoms and it didn't occur to me that it could overlap with aspd or things like that

ive been managing my whole life based on rules I've made up for myself after seeing what was being labeled "bad" or "immoral" because clearly Those ppl have a hard time and that's not what I wanted for myself. and so they help me manage I how I treat and interact with ppl, too. It's all intellectualized, ya know?

and it's occuring to me now as an adult that outside these rules and socially acceptable facades I'm not sure who I am/how I'd behave. I've been laughing at stuff I don't find funny for so long idk what my actual sense of humor is anymore cuz the fake laugh is so reflexive. things like that.

tbh I attributed it to Heavy dissociation, I feel so numb daily unless something really catches my attention. And Im a lot™ when I'm upset tho and honestly, the rules I have are also to help keep myself in check when I Am upset or overwhelmed. I don't Get a lot of myself. and No diagnosis seem to fit cuz I have no idea what's Me and what's... whatever is wrong with me. so it's hard to determine what is a symptom or what it isn't which makes the experience doubly hard to describe.

but some tests I took online did have me score high for things like npd and aspd. So idk. I guess my question is how did you know it was those 2 dx? I guess, instead of something else?

actually anon, i have bpd not aspd or npd :") so im not so sure how helpful i'll be here, since i cant give you any personal anecdotal information.

but, when diagnosing a personality disorder, its good to keep in mind that the symptoms are present at all times, not in episodes, the symptoms are present since adolescence, and the symptoms impact your daily life. and always go by the DSM 5 criteria (if you're in america). heres the dsm 5 criteria for aspd:

Section I Must check TWO or more of the following:

I maintain my self-esteem (and often define myself) from personal gain, power, or pleasure.

My goals are often self-oriented, and I have difficulty considering how the consequences affect others.

I have difficulty understanding or relating to the ideas, feelings, or behaviors of others. (low empathy)

I have difficulty maintaining close relationships unless I am in a dominant position.

__ / 4

Section II Must check TWO or more of the following:

I have cognition problems and difficulty perceiving myself, other people, and events.

I have affectivity problems and difficulty controlling the range and intensity of my emotional responses.

I have problems with interpersonal functioning and being aware of my own actions and feelings.

I have difficulty controlling my impulses.

__ / 4

Section III Must check SIX or more of the following:

I often try to make myself more influential over people and situations. I like to be in control.

I am often unable to understand how my actions or words can harm others.

I find I can be a dishonest person, either in how I present myself to others, or I’ll twist the truth of stories I tell.

I experience persistent or frequent feelings of anger or irritability.

I often find myself in dangerous, risky, and potentially self-damaging activities without regard for the consequences.

I am impulsive and often act on things without thinking or planning.

I often fail to take care of responsibilities and keep promises.

__ / 7

Section IV Must check THREE or more of the following:

I fail to conform to social norms and rarely do what is expected of me.

I compulsively lie when it benefits me.

I find it difficult to make plans for the future.

I have difficulty maintaining feelings of anger or irritability.

I am rarely concerned for my own safety or well-being.

I am often unable to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations.

I don’t often feel regret, and I am often unable to feel remorse when I have wronged someone.

__ / 7

Section V Must check ALL of the following:

My symptoms impair my personality and social functioning

My symptoms are consistent across a broad range of personal and social situations.

My symptoms have lasted a while and started in early adolescence, and some traits have been persistent since childhood.

My symptoms are not caused by medication, drug use, or another medical condition.

My symptoms are persistent and not triggering by a symptom from another mental disorder.

At this point, if you have checked the minimum, you may qualify for a diagnosis of anti-social personality disorder. The next section is a compiled list of symptoms, behaviors, thought patterns, etc. often found in ASPD patients.

If you did NOT meet the minimum but relate to many of the symptoms listed, check out conduct disorders. If you feel you related to some of the symptoms, but feel many of your symptoms weren’t listed, try anxiety disorders, neurodevelopmental disorders, and depressive disorders. If you cleared Sections II and V but still did not meet the minimum, look into other personality disorders.

Section VI Common symptoms and behaviors associated (not required for diagnosis):

I often don’t feel anxious, even in situations where I should feel anxious.

Some of my behaviors are a means of self-preservation.

I have gotten in trouble with the law on a few occasions.

I have difficulty reading social cues.

I find I am often unable to finish tasks.

I often view people in the style of a hierarchy.

I believe everyone is only really out for themselves.

I am incredibly opinionated.

I experience dysphoria, in which I feel my body is not my own.

I often feel very tense and restless.

I am unable to tolerate boredom.

I am very often depressed.

I define myself by my accomplishments and gains.

I have considered or attempted suicide.

I find I rarely get stressed out, even in incredibly stressful situations.

__ / 15 and heres the dsm 5 criteria for npd: Section I Must check TWO or more of the following:

I have identity issues, and I depend on others in order to define myself. My self-esteem depends on others as well. How others view me influences how I view myself, which is why I try to present myself as important or powerful.

I have difficulty settings goals for myself, and how I set them really depends on the praise I receive from others. I tend to set goals unrealistically high in order to see myself as exceptional, or contrarily too low so I can feel more powerful when the task is easy.

I struggle to identify with the feelings and needs of others, and I tend to underestimate the effect I have on others.

I have unstable relationships. I can become so focused on my own anxieties and problems I forget the needs of my partner.

__ / 4

Section II Must check TWO or more of the following:

I have cognition problems and difficulty perceiving myself, other people, and events.

I have affectivity problems and difficulty controlling the range and intensity of my emotional responses.

I have problems with interpersonal functioning and being aware of my own actions and feelings.

I have difficulty controlling my impulses.

__ / 4

Section III Must check BOTH of the following:

I can be self-centered, and I feel entitled to good treatment from others, as I am dependent on it.

I like to be the center of attention, and I seek admiration from others.

Section IV Must check FIVE or more of the following:

I tend to exaggerate my achievements and talents and like to be praised for them.

I am often preoccupied with fantasies of my own success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love life.

In a way, I believe I am “special” and unique, and I like to surround myself with other people who are “special” and unique.

I require excessive admiration.

I set unreasonable expectations for both myself and the people around me.

I tend to take advantage of situations and am opportunistic.

I struggle with empathy and have a difficult time relating to others.

I am often envious, and I covet what other people have.

I can have an arrogant or haughty attitude.

__ / 9

Section V Must check ALL of the following:

My symptoms impair my personality and social functioning

My symptoms are consistent across a broad range of personal and social situations.

My symptoms have lasted a while and started in early adulthood or earlier.

My symptoms are not caused by medication, drug use, or another medical condition.

Section VI Common symptoms and behaviors (not required for diagnosis):

I can have either low or high self-esteem. I find it depends on the people I’m with and how they’re treating me at the time.

I tend to overestimate myself, which can often lead to disappointing myself.

I can become anxious and spiral into a depression if I don’t receive praise or admiration.

I hate being alone for too long.

I find I compare myself with others often, having no other means of defining myself unless I can use someone else as sort of a “measuring tape.”

I often feel incredibly misunderstood by others.

I find I like to have the Best of everything. The newest electronic, the most expensive brand of something, etc.

I like to constantly be moving up and making progress and can become obsessive with it.

When talking myself, I tend to ramble.

I think a lot of people are jealous of me.

I am incredibly sensitive to criticism. I don’t usually show it outwardly, but being criticized can leave me feeling humiliated, degraded, and empty.

When upset, I tend to withdraw from others.

I find being competitive is very difficult for me because there is a chance of losing.

I am often depressed and/or anxious.

I try to read people’s weaknesses while hiding my own.

__ / 15

If you did not meet the minimum criteria for this checklist, you may want to look into anxiety disorders and depressive disorders. If you experience the symptoms above but only in episodes and not persistently, you may want to look into Bipolar Disorder. (Narcissistic traits could be a side effect of a manic or hypomanic episode.) If you met the criteria for Sections II and V but not the others, you may want to look into other personality disorders. both DSM 5 lists taken from Shit Borderlines Do

i hope this helps!

[werevulvi]

What's the difference(s?) between being GNC vs trans NB in your opinion??? I used to think they were very diff until i read about "you don't need dysphoria to be trans" discourse and also stories from dysphoric GNC ppl so is it like a matter of ideology?

There is a lot that goes into this, so this will be a very long reply... but yes, ideology is deeply soaked into it, although it's not only because of that, I think. So like, okay, first off, you probably know I come from a radfem perspective, but then I also take into consideration things that radfem in general may disagree with if I find it to be logical or making sense enough. So my opinions are more so rooted in what I personally think is logical and makes sense, as well as facts, which just so happens to mostly align with radfem, rather than being truly rooted in radfem.

That said, however, this particular topic is not so much based on scientific facts (as there's just not much established science to go on here) but more so on anecdotal evidence and my own logical conclusions of that.

Not sure where to start, but there are several different "ways" to "validate" the existence of nonbinary, if you feel ever so inclined. One is by understanding that a nonbinary person who's dysphoric has the same legitimacy to identify outside of the sex they were born as, as "binary" trans people, and if their dysphoria is atypical enough, that it also makes sense for them to not wanna identify as the opposite sex either.

That is probably the simplest way to view nonbinary as different from being gnc, by simply applying the same logic to them as you would to differentiate butch/masc women from trans men, or feminine men from trans women: their sex dysphoria is the defining factor, not how they dress/act.

And how to then differentiate nonbinary from "binary" trans, is that the nonbinary dysphoria is often atypical in nature. That generally means the person may be dysphoric about only some of their sex characteristics, but not all (for example a dysphoric nb may have discomfort towards their chest and voice, but not their genitals or their curves/lack of curves) - but it can also mean that the dysphoria is towards all of their sex characteristics but the desire is to look "sex neutral" instead of as the opposite sex. It can also be a combination of those. A third distinction is that their dysphoria may be fluctuating a lot. Like maybe they feel really uncomfortable with their sex for a certain amount of time, then love their bio sex, then again dysphoric. Basically any sex dysphoria that makes the person not feel like they "should" appear as the opposite sex entirely could be called atypical.

This is also NOT to say that "binary" trans people who opt out of for example genital surgery are nonbinary. It has to do with the intent/desire, what one's body would be ideally and how one interprets that ideal - not necessarily what they actually change with hormones/surgery in practice. Like for example there IS a difference between being okay with one's vagina and not wanting any surgery on it because neo-penis doesn't live up to one's desires, but still wishing they had an actual penis - and actually genuinely LOVING one's vagina and feeling strongly protective of keeping it as is, with no desire to have an actual penis, while still being dysphoric about other sexed aspects of one's body. However, that's also not saying trans men have to be dysphoric about their vaginas to count as "binary" - it has more to do with the individual's own interpretation of what their dysphoria means to them, and what being a man/woman/nonbinary means to them.

But there is more to it than that, which is what you call into question: the "you don't need dysphoria to be trans." This is where it gets tricky, anecdotal and a little whimsical.

Many are sceptical of that notion, however most nonbinary people are not. Ideology does absolutely go into this. The sceptical ones tend to be (or lean) transmedicalist/truscum, or in rarer cases radfem, while those who don't think you need dysphoria to be trans tend to be (or lean) tucute/sjw/libfem. And I too am more than just fairly sceptical of this... However, I have found one argument which I'm considering... plausible, for considering non-dysphoric trans to be a possibility.

That argument is: gender incongruence without marked distress.

This is where shit gets complicated, so I'll try to explain it as well as I can, and then you can make your own opinion on if there's any legitimacy to it, or look into it further if you wish. I'm not here to attempt to change your opinion in any way. I'm only sharing what made me reconsider the notion that dysphoria is necessary to be trans. What you do with that info, is entirely up to you, and I honestly don't even care about holding it against you, or anyone else, for that matter. I just wanted to clarify that, in case this comes off as me trying to shove a weird ass argument down your throat, as that is absolutely not my intention by any means. You're absolutely free to call bullshit on this.

Alright, before I dig into it, I first have to raise the question "what is gender/sex dysphoria?" and answer it: My understanding of what this type of dysphoria is, is that it's not only wishing your body looked different and to be read as the opposite sex (or both/neither sex) but it's categorised as marked distress/strong discomfort towards your body's sex. This is important, so try to remember that.

I used to think that's all there is to feeling like you're not capable/willing to live with your body/gender* as it is naturally. However, I then started talking to a few transsexual MtF's and FtM's who happily medically transitioned... without dysphoria, and their stories puzzled me, but they also intrigued me. Thus, I listened with an open mind.

(*I should probably explain my view on what gender is, but very briefly: I consider it a personal interpretation of one's experiences with anything gendered and/or sexed. So it's a subjective perception and personal conclusion, more so than a feeling, similar to how "feeling cold" regardless of actual temperature is perception and a conclusion of how your mind and body responds to the temperature, and not an actual feeling like happiness or anger, nor is it objective fact. "Gender" can also simply be "I wish I was male but in fact I'm female. Thus I intepret my gender as man" without even including gender norms at all, but literally only focusing on sex. I personally conclude my own gender by my bio sex and my sex characteristics (including transitioned/desired ones) only, but I also accept the former definition for others just fine.)

Then I started also analysing my own dysphoria and noticed that it's not really a one big solid thing happening, but different aspects that together make me come to the conclusion that "I'm not comfortable looking/being clearly female, I feel a deep internal desire to look/be partially male, thus transitioning is alluring to me."

Split apart it's more like this: 1.) The first aspect is a strong discomfort with certain aspects of being physically female (I mean in the past before I transitioned, to clarify.) 2.) The second aspect is a strong desire for those aspects of my body to instead be male (again, only applicable in the past tense, as those aspects of my body now are appearing male.) 3.) The third aspect is what is the social result of what my sexed body appears like, meaning people read me as a man or woman based on what sex my body looks like, which is a direct reminder of what I look like (negative pre-transition, positive post-transition.)

The third aspect is generally what's considered "social dysphoria" and generally is considered a result of physical/sex dysphoria, than a stand alone thing. Some disagree with this, however. Many trans people split their experience of dysphoria into "social" and "sex/physical" as it's very common to experience both. However, both the first and second (as listed above, to clarify) aspects are together what most people only recognise as simply "sex/physical dysphoria" without really paying attention to that there are TWO aspects of it. One which pushes you away from your actual sex, and the other which pulls you towards the opposite sex (or both/neither.)

And here's where shit gets interesting... What if a person only has one of those two aspects of physical/sex dysphoria?

Meaning, they either feel discomfort about their physical sex, but lack the desire to instead appear more like the opposite, or both/neither sex (just discomfort, no desire) - or they have the desire to appear like the opposite, both or neither sex, but lack the discomfort towards their actual physical sex (just desire, no discomfort.)

The former point, feeling discomfort without desire, arguably is not "really" gender dysphoria, but something more along the lines of body dysmorphia/poor body image. That, however, is only my personal, unprofessional opinion. As most shit I say is, lol.

That latter point, however: Having the desire to appear like the opposite, both or neither sex, but lacking the discomfort towards one's actual physical sex - is basically what is considered experiencing gender incongruence, but without actual dysphoria.

So then what is gender incongruence? Typically it's part of gender dysphoria as a whole: it being sex dysphoria, gender incongruence, social dysphoria, and if/when alleviated: gender euphoria. If you have all those aspects then it's not really important to consider the incongruence aspect separately. However, what gender incongruence is, is basically just feeling like you should be of the other sex (or both/neither.) So, it's basically just the "desire" aspect of what's generally considered the concept of "gender dysphoria" as a whole. Except, without distress... dysphoria is not dysphoria.

Whether it's actually possible to have gender incongruence without dysphoria, I think is very difficult to say. However, what I struggle to de-legitimise is: if someone is transitioned (especially medically) and happy with the result, but what drove them to transition in the first place was a desire without distress. So what I actually consider to be "trans" is not necessarily "dysphoric person" but rather anyone who is happily transitioned, or know they would be happier transitioned, regardless of what drives/drove them to transition in the first place - as well as dysphoric people who don't wish to transition and/or detransitioned.

One thing I find compelling about this "incongruence without dysphoria" argument is that this is not actually a new thing.

I spoke to an older trans man (in his 50's) who transitioned back in the 90's and said outright that he never experienced dysphoria, yet he's (by his own words) satisfied with his transition. He's a fairly known and I guess "famous" trans activist in Sweden, and also hangs out in the same fb group as me, apparently. So I exchanged a few words with him on the topic of dysphoria. Although he didn't call his experience "gender incongruence" that's kinda what he seemed to imply. I've also talked to an older trans woman who also transitioned decades ago and also firmly stated and explained she never experienced dysphoria, yet is happily transitioned. Then I've also heard the same sentiment from a few younger trans people.

But in total, I've heard about it from less than 5 trans people, and all I have is that anecdotal info.

But then the thing is that they were all medically transitioned. They "prove" to me that they're trans by simply being satisfied with their transitions. So whether they had dysphoria or not is not actually important in hindsight. What matters is that they're satisfied with how they changed their bodies. Because when it comes to most "non-dysphoric" nonbinary people out there, they don't even wish to transition medically at all. And that is different. Are all of them legitimate cases just like the "non-dysphoric" yet happily transitioned trans men and women I've talked to? No, probably not. I mean, let's be honest.

Nonbinary is (no matter how much a legit thing for some, also) a hype/trend and very many do absolutely try to identify out of misogyny, sexist gender norms, sexual trauma, etc, by picking up the nonbinary label. Some of them experience body discomfort vaguely related to their sex traits, but it's not actually gender dysphoria, or whatever it is, transitioning would probably not be the best solution for them. I think it's important to keep in mind that the culture around nonbinary identities is to not ever question their identities and that any kind of "invalidating" is considered a horrible hate crime, to them.

That attitude is a recipe for validating people who are not actually trans, but suffer from gender in other ways. And I don't think we should forget or dismiss that. I don't think there's much harm in them simply carrying a nonbinary label and some odd set of pronouns - but letting every single nonbinary identified person jump on hormones and surgery would be a very terrible idea, and when it comes to that identity specifically, I'd be VERY, very careful, as they seem more likely to disregard the possibly negative outcomes of medical transition and then end up devastated, as many of them disregard dysphoria, and often logic and reason altogether... where as "binary" trans people, although not at all without doubt and detrans rates, tend to be at least a little bit more careful and educated.

That said, however... I have heard from ONE nonbinary person who very nicely explained their experience of basically gender incongruence without dysphoria, and they were also happily medically transitioning. They were also older and seemed mature and emotionally stable. So, I'm at least open to the possibility that some nonbinary people can be satisfied with transition without gender dysphoria, and thus, I'd personally count them as trans. It's a youtuber so I could probably link that video in which they explained it, if I can find it from my huge playlist of "favourites" to which I'm pretty sure I added it. I found that video through Blaire White making a rant video about how the nb person was only transitioning for attention. Valid concern, but erh, I think she made an incorrect assertion, in that particular case.

Anyhow, I do worry that this whole argument of "incongruence without dysphoria" very easily becomes a slippery slope of... basically people transitioning for shits and giggles, or because they have a bad self image and just really badly hope the grass will be greener on the other side, which is why I'm still very hesitant to give it credit, and at this point I'm still only considering it plausible.

One thing worth noting is that some transmeds actually think that having incongruence without dysphoria counts as a form of dysphoria, but that is in fact not the medically established definition of gender dysphoria. "Dysphoria" in and of itself literally means "abnormal depression and discontent" so taking the distress aspect out of gender dysphoria is going against its very definition. So that's quite some intellectual dishonesty, that some transmeds are willing to admit that some trans people don't have dysphoria, but without actually admitting it, because that would go against their ideology.

I also think that it's foolish to say that every trans person who is happily transitioned "must" have been dysphoric, because we can't actually know that. We have not actually heard every single trans person's reason for why they transitioned. We can only assume that it was probably because of dysphoria, because that is the (most, or only) logical reason for wanting to transition in the first place, and for being satisfied with one's transition in the long run. That is not enough to make the claim that ALL happily transitioned trans people MUST have experienced dysphoria, which means there is and always has been a possibility that you may not actually need dysphoria to be trans, even if it's the most common reason.

I think it's important to at least be open to listen to especially happily transitioned people's experiences when they don't align with our beliefs on what makes someone trans. They might be wrong about what their inner experiences with gender actually mean (as in they might have had dysphoria but were unaware that's what their experience was, or they might not actually be all that happy with having transitioned) - and we might be wrong about that gender dysphoria being the only thing that could make a person satisfied with transition.

So like... keep using those critical thinking skills, even after you think you know the truth ;)

Have I really answered your question, though? I'm not sure, but basically: trans nb generally means that your self-interpretation of your gendered experience as a whole (meaning how you RELATE to being male/female, feminine/masculine, considered a man/woman, etc, not if you are gnc per se) does not match your own interpretation of what it means to be either "fully" a man or "fully" a woman. Which is what gets watered down to the chanted phrase "nb means not identifying as either fully male or female."

So, how is that different from just being gnc? In some cases, it actually isn't. Some really do think that rejecting gender norms is what makes them nb, and in those cases, I won't personally consider them trans or truly nonbinary. But what matters (I think) is that there are also nb people who base it on sex dysphoria, and/or gender incongruence as thoroughly explained above, and I think there is at least some legitimacy to those reasons.

Then how gnc gets in the picture for those latter two reasons is pretty simple: For the same reason most trans men are masculine: to more easily blend in among men in society, as masculinity can in some cases help with passuing as male when you're female (and vice versa for femininity and passing as female for males.) That is sadly due to the reinforcement of masculinity as being "intended for men" and femininity as being "intended for women" which causes many people to subconsciously connect femininity with femaleness and masculinity with maleness, and many also confuse those things.

Ever heard a woman say that her having breasts is a "feminine" trait, for example? Yeah, no, it's not. That's her confusing femininity for what's actually a female trait. However, having large breasts can be considered "more feminine" than having small or no breasts, due to how society views gender, but that does not mean that large-breasted females are inherently "more feminine" than small-breasted ones, or those who don't have breasts, because that's really just a natural variation of femaleness.

That's an example of how femaleness easily gets blurred with femininity, and vice versa masculinity gets equally blurred with maleness, with for example beards and deep voices. Because the feminine and masculine archetypes do also include certain female and male body types. This is why I view my transitioned features from testosterone as male features rather than as masculine ones, because I can more easily differentiate what is SEXED from what's GENDERED, than probably most people, mostly due to my rather unusual upbringing. Thus, "binary" trans people can take advantage of that societal confusion and blur the lines between being perceived as masculine vs male (or feminine vs female for MtF) because the gender norms are so ingrained. Of course it doesn't always work in favour for trans people (hence non-passing trans men being seen as butches, and trans women seen as drag queens) but it CAN fool the eye to some extent.

Then, as for nonbinary people and androgynous gender expression: androgyny has often, historically been confused with... well, I may fail to put this delicately, but yeah basically having certain intersex conditions, which have been poorly understood throughout history as "hermaphrodites" and other harmful shit. Androgyny, meaning a combination of feminine and masculine, can thus be used to a nonbinary person's advantage (at least in theory) to attempt to confuse others to see them as either a combination of male and female (similar to false representations of certain intersex conditions, which I want for everyone to know that I absolutely abhor) or as sexless, basically.

(Just a sidenote for clarification of gnc: being "gnc" is in and of itself a form of androgyny, in either the combination of "feminine + masculine" or "feminine + male" or "masculine + female" but when it comes to binary vs nonbinary types of gender expression, I think it's important to differentiate the degree of gender non-conformity being expressed. I vaguely differentiate "androgynous" from "fem male" and "masc female" here and I hope you know what I mean. It's not to make more unnecessary boxes, but just for the sake of argument. Kinda like a gnc lesbian is not necessarily a butch, but a butch is definitely a gnc lesbian, if that makes sense.)

Does androgyny have that same "confusion effect" as masculinity and femininity, though? Not really, in practice. Fewer are fooled by it, largely because "androgynous agender/bigender" (neither gender/both genders) is not an established social gender category like "feminine woman" and "masculine man" are, but is more like a fantasy concept. Also most people will automatically want to figure out if someone is male or female, which makes it extra hard for nb people to actually be viewed as... not that. So "androgyny as expression for sexlessness/both sexes at once" mostly only works in theory, but that is (or can be) the intent behind a nonbinary person's androgynous style, as it can still offer some mental relief even if the outcome is sadly not aligned with the intent.

(Metaphor time: You know, like sometimes I wanna bake a nice looking cake, but it turns out looking like sad poop, but that's okay, because it still tastes good. Meaning, the outcome didn't match my intent, but the outcome was still good enough to enjoy.)

So basically: trans nb people may not be nb because they're gnc, but be gnc because they're nb. Just like many trans men tend to be masc because they're ftm, not ftm because they're masc. So the difference between gnc and nb is in the intent. I think that's the best way I can explain that distinction.

(Also last sidenote: anyone reading this transitioning because you're masc/fem/gnc... PLEASE reconsider that, I urge you!)

[adorable-elsanna]

I don't mean to be rude, and I apologize in advance if I am!! But why do you ship this nd WHY does this ship exist? Aren't Elsa and Anna sisters? And blood related at that. I don't want to hate on ships, you can ship washer you want as long as you aren't hurting anybody!! It's just that ships like these with incest startle me a bit. Maybe I'm just confused since I really shipped Kistof and Anna so I'm missing out on this? Ahhh sorry if this is annoying!! -confused anon

 Hi Confused Anon ( aren’t we all? ;) ),

Thanks for your polite ask, lol finally I get to dust off this blog’s ask box! :)) I’d love to respond with a whole essay xDD but I don’t really have time :’( so maybe I’ll just give a quick rundown for now. 

I might not be the most representative person to pose this question to lol because I am an outlier in general, meaning due to my life experiences, my development, my major in college, my deep meditation practice, and more, I do not abide by normative, dominant, hegemonic social structures and social constructs (nor do I actively resist them per se), so I am unfazed by anything. 

I started shipping this after I watched the first movie when it came out in Nov. 2013. One of my first posts on this blog, 7 years ago, was me explaining how I came to ship this (I had made the post private, but now you can read it here. Also this other post, but I wrote it when I was a college student, so it’s a little too analytical for my tastes now. Those were my views at the time). 7 years is a long time, so my mindsets and reasonings have changed, but all the reasons I had for shipping them from before are still with me today. 

I didn’t go into the movie with the intention to ship them, but while watching it, I picked up on a lot of chemistry between them because their interactions and even storyline were infused with strong popular romantic tropes, tropes that were used in other classic Disney movies themselves. I used to watch a lot of romantic comedies so I was very familiar with common romantic tropes. Of course, having came away from the movie having noticed all these romantic notes between them, I was a little confused and thought maybe it was just me. But when I went online to search a bit to see if others saw/felt what I saw, I found out it wasn’t just me! 

So one of the reasons why this ship exists is because people picked up on the romantic tropes that colored some of Elsa and Anna’s interactions, tropes that have usually only appeared between romantic couples, in films and in real life. Even if the creators didn’t intend to and didn’t actively put the tropes there, they are there. 

If we apply the principles of Buddhism (not the religion. Many ppl mistakenly practice things as devotional worship or for superstitious reasons. But if ppl really want to know everything about the mind, how the world works, the universe, who they are, about themselves and “other” people and why people do what they do, the meaning of life, true happiness, the end of suffering and stress and conflict, and consciousness, then forget psychology [not saying it’s not useful though]. Buddhism, or rather Buddhadharma, is the true science of mind, or at least the much more effective tool), it says that there is the law of cause and effect, the universal law. Everything that is created in the universe and each phenomenon that happens is the result of the momentary coming together of causes and conditions that make that thing happen. There are many many causes and conditions and intricacies and things are interconnected and interdependent, no one person can control something to happen (certain conditions have to be there for something to happen). Something can not come from nothing. If something happens, then certain causes and conditions have been created to bring that result. A seed was planted. If we plant an apple seed, what comes out will be an apple tree (provided the right conditions were met, like water, soil, sunlight, etc.). It will never come out as a banana tree. And so we can understand the underlying principle behind how each situation and phenomenon arises, about existence itself, why each thing exists. 

Now WHY did I go off on that tangent??? LOL All of this is to say that certain causes and conditions have been created to result in the effect of many people shipping Elsa and Anna together and there being a fandom for them. (These principles and explanations might seem very simple and like kindergarten stuff, but despite that, many people can’t accept it. ESPECIALLY when it applies to heavy stuff in their regular everyday life. Or even trivial things tbh lol) The last I checked, there were people from at least 26 different countries shipping Elsa and Anna together. 

Everyone thinks they see reality exactly as it is and takes it for granted, and thus attach strongly to the notion that they’re right. But if that’s the case, then why are there so many fights over who is right? So who is actually right? Even if someone were to follow the majority consensus or some popular, ingrained, long-standing ideas / societal rules, it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re right. There are many cases of the blind leading the blind. People used to follow the geocentric model of the universe before they discovered heliocentrism. Ideas are always in flux and keeps changing and transforming, sometimes faster, sometimes slower, sometimes imperceptibly and sometimes conspicuously. If you ask 100 different people why they ship Elsa and Anna, you will get 100 different answers (with a lot of overlap of course) with unique spins on their reasons. Because in the world, each person sees reality through their own color-tinted glasses and filters and adherence to labels, concepts, beliefs, upbringing, etc. And then the person seeing “reality” through red-tinted glasses gets mad at the person seeing with blue-tinted glasses for not seeing the world how they see it (and gets frustrated not understanding why), and vice versa. In this scenario, what is actually best? To realize you’re seeing “reality” through color-tinted glasses, and so you should take them off and truly see reality without any filtered lenses. (This is a little off-topic, but I had to bring some Buddhism into this because first of all, dharma applies to everything lol, and secondly, Buddhism is all about dispelling confusion. There is definitely a way to see reality exactly as it is, it typically involves meditation.) 

Yes, Elsa and Anna are sisters. But I’ve never seen any pair of sisters act like them before (if there are, then that’s great!). I have a sibling myself, and we are very close, but we don’t act like how Elsa and Anna act with each other. With most siblings, I would say there’s a lot more joking around, teasing each other, sarcasm, pranks, and casual relaxed communication than the intense intimacy, deep eye-contact, and soul-bonding that Elsa and Anna share. Disney has portrayed many other sibling relationships before, but it seems like they tried something a little different with Elsa and Anna’s relationship that made it pretty easy for many people to ship them together. 

I ship Elsa and Anna together because their pure true love for each other transcends all labels, concepts, preconceived notions, and time and space. They are completely selfless when it comes to one another and that’s what true love means. They make each other better people and it empowers them to extend this selflessness toward other people. Their sacrificing themselves for each other and selflessness in action is true love exemplified. No one deserves Elsa more than Anna, and no one deserves Anna more than Elsa (speaking from my shipper heart xD). Confining and defining their love as just sisterly seems limiting and not allowing the full potential of their true, expansive, infinite love to manifest. (A sibling relationship is really beautiful, but it still has to be shaped and look a certain way, it has to fit into a particular mold and box and abide by certain conditions. Otherwise, as we have incontrovertibly seen, people will scream bloody murder and be squicked out and all hell will break loose.)  

We can even go one step further to say that the same similarly applies to people’s definitions, notions, concepts, ideas, and beliefs about love. They say this love is like this and that love is like that, this is what love should look like, this person can love this person but only if it’s like this and not like that, this is what it means to love and to be loved, etc. Again, it’s limiting, and placing restrictions on something whose essence is boundless. In Buddhism, with the realization of Enlightenment, one realizes that true love is selfless, unconditional, boundless, free, all-encompassing, nondual, timeless, compassionate, wise, nondiscriminating, infinite, universal, endlessly flowing, non-judgmental, creative, indescribable, and inconceivable. So THIS is the love that I see and ship between Elsa and Anna. I love their relationship as sisters, but their love is so grand that it cannot be contained inside that label, so it transcends and goes beyond any attempts to neatly define and characterize it.

It’s okay if incest ships startle you. Uncomfortable feelings come up whenever the ego experiences anything that challenges its worldview and everything it’s ever known and held to be true, and that prompts it to question and reconsider its mind-constructs. We have a knee-jerk reaction to grasp, hold, and attach to what we like, and to avoid, reject, and push away what we don’t like and what makes us feel uncomfortable. For what it’s worth, Buddhism tells about the cycle of life, death, and rebirth from beginningless time, so we have all lived infinite past lives and been each other’s lovers, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, friends, enemies, grandparents, etc. at one point or another. (Deep, but intriguing!, topics for another time.)  

If you really like to ship Krist0ff and Anna, then go ahead and ship happily. First rule of Buddhist meditation: Whatever you do, ONLY DO IT, 100%. ;) And if you don’t do something, then don’t do it, 100%. And then move on to the next moment. Be in the present moment. And remember that everything is changing moment by moment. Mind is changing moment by moment. Don’t need to anticipate the next moment. Who knows where our shipper hearts will take us. 

I like to ship people based on their chemistry and characterization. Elsa and Anna have a great true love story that is theirs and theirs alone. I don’t like to ship relationships that seem contrived, thrown in there for the sake of it, not fleshed out, lacking in substance, trite, and with characters who are underwhelming or underdeveloped. 

Lol no worries, this is not annoying, I’m sorry this is so long and that I took 7 days to get back to you. I wish I could give specific examples from the movies with beautiful gifs to explain why I ship them (I’ve probably written such posts in the past. Maybe I’ll come back to edit this reply one day), but I’ve gotta skedaddle! I’d like to hear your thoughts about my reply if you actually read this, so please send me a message in the ask box again if you can. 

Also I’m a girl if that makes any difference, but yeah anyway, skedaddle time, love you all! 

Oooooh I never finished replying to someone else’s ask box message asking me why I shipped them, it’s from years ago :’(, I started typing my reasons and saved it in my drafts, but it’s incomplete. But here’s what I wrote at the time!

1. I just love everything that Elsa and Anna feel and do for each other. Elsa isolates herself from Anna to keep her safe, and Anna persists in trying to get Elsa to open up to her and goes to find her when she runs away. They’re always thinking of each other and worrying about each other. They act selflessly for one another and their unconditional love is expressed so genuinely. This kind of devotion in any relationship is rare.

2. There was a lot of chemistry between them in the movie. At the coronation ball scene, I get that the creators were trying to depict awkwardness between them since they haven’t spoken in a long time, and Anna wanted reassurance that Elsa didn’t hate her so she was nervous about getting Elsa’s attention and approval, but the scene came off as Elsa being kind of suave and flirty and Anna being flustered because her crush just complimented her. Then Anna gave Elsa a playful smile when she was dipped upside-down as if she only had eyes for Elsa.

When Anna stares admiringly at Elsa as she stands atop the staircase, it was like a scene straight out of A Cinderella Story or Enchanted where the prince stares at his true love like she took his breath away.