#i refuse to make people who are both straight and cis

[honeybyte]

also wanna point out: everyone in axe + cleaver is trans. like make no mistake Everyone in there is lgbt

[nateconnolly]

“I have tried to show you what I am,” says Barb, the protagonist of one of the most controversial short stories ever written. “I have tried to do it without judgment. That I leave to you.”

Barb comes from I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter by Isabel Fall, a science fiction story about gender and imperialism. It was Fall’s first published story. There was no backlog of stories to analyze, and her author’s bio was sparse. Readers weren’t given any information about Fall’s gender identity, but that didn’t stop activists from speculating. “… this reads as if it was written by a straight white dude who doesn’t really get gender theory or transition,” complained Arinn Dembo, President of the science fiction writers’ collective SF Canada. The author Phoebe Barton even compared the story to a weapon against trans people: “Think of it as a gun,” she tweeted. “A gun has only one use: for hurting.” N.K. Jemison joined in, tweeting, “Artists should strive to do no (more of this) harm.” But Dembo and the hundreds of thousands of others were mistaken about Fall’s supposed cis identity. The publisher responded to the backlash by taking the story down and posting a statement about the author’s identity. Isabel Fall was a transgender woman, and self-identified activists for trans rights bullied her so mercilessly that she attempted suicide. Dembo later adjusted her criticism, saying “a lot of people might have been spared a lot of mental anguish” if Fall had made a statement about her gender identity. Meaning, Fall had a moral obligation to out herself as a trans woman. Both of Dembo’s comments reveal a preoccupation with the author that distracts from the text. The recent obsession with author identities is one of the great failures of contemporary liberal movements. In order to win liberation for any given group, liberal activists must focus less on who speaks and more on what is spoken. 

Roland Barthes’ 1967 essay The Death of the Author argued that an author’s intentions and life experiences do not make the “ultimate meaning” of their text. The author might as well “die” once the text is in the reader’s hands. The text is “a multi-dimensional space” that one cannot simply flatten with biographical details about the author. Barthes has largely been vindicated among literary critics and theorists, but his idea has not been well-received among liberal activists. It is easy to refuse to acknowledge multiple dimensions of a text. Moralistic groups like liberation movements might even be tempted to sort texts into a simple dichotomy—“good” or “bad,” without any gray areas—on the sole basis of the author’s identity. That is exactly what Dembo tried to do: she suggested that Attack Helicopter was bad simply because of the author’s (supposed) gender. 

I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter is not a transphobic story. Although an in-depth analysis would be beyond the scope of this essay, I can confidently say that Fall critiqued American imperialism, not transgender people. I think that would be clear to anyone who reads the story. But apparently, reading a story is no longer a necessary step in the process of interpreting it. Barton—who suggested her fellow trans woman was a “gun”-wielding transphobe—had not actually read the story. Jemison also admitted she had not read the story before tweeting that it was harmful. We now have a complete reversal of Barthes’ idea: this method of moralistic interpretation is nothing less than the death of the text.

Fall is far from the only queer storyteller to face backlash for allegedly not being queer. Becky Albertalli, Kit Connor (who was still a teenager), and Jameela Jamil all came out of the closet because they were harassed for telling queer stories as “straight” and “cis” people. It is a common talking point in activist circles that the government should not compile lists of queer people or forcibly out them. Why, then, do activists engage in the same behavior? It simply is not always safe to admit that you are gay, or trans, or autistic, or epileptic, or that you have had an abortion. The reason that we need liberation movements for these groups is the same reason that people might not want to publicly claim these identities.

You can read the rest on Substack

[silviakundera]

Ok, upon request my thoughts on Bad Buddy, a good queer romance drama that doesn't get much if any international exposure outside the circle of Thai BL fans. Full spoilers.

after consuming literally dozens of BB videos, the best trailer to the drama imo is actually the talented samyvids' "Just My Type" songvid. Perfectly captures the setup.

* the hook: 2 boys raised by their feuding families to be rivals end up attending a university that has a childish Jets vs Sharksesque historic rivalry between the science/engineering vs artistic/architecture majors. Despite these 2 barriers, the boys stumble into a secret bromance and then into love. Secondary couple here is f/f, though it's basically just soft girls meet cute then getting together (no conflict).

* Comedic and light-hearted drama that doesn't take itself too seriously, while also swerving into the appropriate amount of angst for its set up.

* This '20-something bros in love' dynamic reminds me vividly of what a lot of SPN J2 RPF and Hockey RPF has tried to capture. The 2 leads feel like your prototypical good natured university bros and falling in love never changes that. Friends AND Lovers is a challenging dynamic to capture imo but Bad Buddy succeeds

* It helps the Bros In Love vibes that the actors look less primped & polished than many other asian BL productions. They seem like guys you could have actually had in your classes in uni.

* If you welcome the drama's tone and just vibe with it, I think it successfully executes 4 popular romance tropes:

- rivals to friends to lovers

- forbidden (hidden) love

- fall first vs fall harder

- golden retriever bounding around paw cleaning cat

* If you are going to sell me on a modern day romeo & juliet esque queer rom-com, without the bloodshed, then you BETTER put your money where you mouth is and make their love actually forbidden.

* Thankfully, Bad Buddy understood the assignment. It's not just a misunderstanding. Their parents truly do have a feud and they truly are forbidden to even be friends, forget a romantic relationship. 2 kids obligated to be enemies since birth, bound by this twisted shared experience that no one else understands.

* Pran falling first, with enough time to comprehend how cruelly impossible they are. Pat falling late, fast, and hard - too impulsive to consider the consequences and wearing his heart on his sleeve.

* Both characters won me over quickly:  cautious & restrained Pran who likes order, chaotic Pat who craves his attention

* Love that the dramatic tension & hiding in all the early episodes isn't revealed to be pointless. If there was no consequence, then it removes the poignancy of its classic rooftop kiss scene. Prans' fears must be justified in order for the angst to stand up in a rewatch. Pran's friends DO reject him at first. Their parents DO refuse to accept the relationship, including his mom considering this a personal betrayal.

* Prans' fears are painfully rational and everything he is scared of does have to be confronted. But that also gives romantic weight to his decision to give in to the feelings and accept the consequences.

* In the way that scifi authors will try to explore sociopolitical topics through allusions & metaphor, and that Hunger Games author keeps writing dystopian YA whenever she gets heated about politics, Bad Buddy does a good job imo of using the feuding families setup to address the reality of existing in a homophobic and transphobic society while being queer -- demonstrating it in a way that straight cis people can relate to. And approaching from this angle allows the production to tell that story with a certain emotional distance for queer viewers who have experienced such struggles.

* The bittersweet ending sells me completely on this drama. Closeted but not. Open but not entirely. Accepting that you can't change the world and make all your family & friends & coworkers accept your truth... but refusing to abandon them OR your truth. It's a decision so many queer people have made over the years, in different countries and decades. And it's tinged with hope.

* Let's acknowledge that indeed there is tons of product placement in this series. Sometimes to hilarious ends. But frankly, without this sponsorship the series would not exist. So I'm very grateful to suffer through the marketing that helped fund it.

* Available streaming in multiple places, including YouTube.

[mariamakeslemons]

Canon CoD Characters as 70s Slasher Characters

Just like with the TF141, I'm going to be putting these characters into the stereotypes that I think they'd be in a 70s slasher. Once again, none of them can be the killer.

I've also done this post with Non-Canon CoD characters as well!

Alex would be a background character. Perhaps he has a few interactions with the final girl, perhaps he's just a background character. Either way, he's not super fleshed out in the slasher, which makes him either fodder or someone who gets away. He'd definitely be one of the characters that fans of the movie would beg to know more about, probably has a great fight before dying, or he helps others escape from the killer. If he's used to pad the body count, he's going down kicking ass.

Farah is either the smart girl stereotype or the legend person. She'd realize pretty damn quickly that she's in a horror movie and then it would depend on her role. As the smart girl, she'd be working with the final girl to make traps for defense against the killer. However, if she's just there to tell the legend of the killer, she's dipping so fast. Listen, if it was a human, she'd be in your corner. But the killer you're facing with her as Ms. Exposition is supernatural. She would, rightfully, not fuck with that. Probably helps Alex evacuate people still and tells the final girl how to kill the killer if such information is available. If she does face the killer, she's going down swinging dammit!

Kate is Ms. Exposition. If the killer has any information on them, she'll get it to the final girl. One of the characters that immediately realizes that she's in a horror movie. Is probably not with the rest of the cast physically, so she's the most likely to survive (outside of one person, but we'll get to them). Not quite team mom, but gets protective of the final girl should she help out. If she does end up facing the killer, you can bet that she's going down fighting.

Alejandro is the lovable jock. He forms the classic pair of nerdy-and-jock-friends with Rudy (who we will get to next). He's smarter than the usual archetype, but he's self deprecating, insisting he's only good for his muscles. However, due to being this archetype, he also suffers from the Worf effect, usually being one of the first killed to show how strong the killer is. He does go down swinging, though, sometimes leaving a wound that the final girl can use to defeat the killer.

Rudy is the cute nerd, as the other half of the nerd-and-jock-friends with Alejandro. He helps the survivors realize they're in a horror movie, usually upon finding Alejandro's corpse. He'll come up with traps and ways to corner the killer, but he's more likely to go straight after the killer for revenge. He's definitely going down with a fight, if he doesn't stay with the final girl. Usually dedicates the kill in honor of their fallen friends.

Valeria is the drug dealer. Because it 's a 70s slasher, with the Hays Code still being a heavy guideline for movies, she's going to die because of moral reasons. There might be implications that she crosses the border as well, because we all know those old slasher movies are just a look at cis, white, conservative men's fear. Because of both of these reasons, despite how badass she is in CoD, she'd be killed without a fight, in a painfully drawn out way. (If it was a newer slasher, she'd probably escape, honestly.)

Graves is the Asshole© of the group. He drinks and smokes, similar to Soap, but he also refuses to take no for an answer unless someone else forces him to accept it. When the kills start piling up, he tries to leave, not in the terror way but like 'fuck y'all, I ain't dying for dick'. This does not save him as he's guaranteed to die now, once again because 70s slashers tend to be morality tales. Abandoning people is a no-go, and Graves dies for his crime of betrayal, usually by surprise, meaning no fighting back.

Makarov is the "human" antagonist. He's not the killer, but he may have helped make the killer into, well, the killer. Or he's the asshole who wants to get something from the group. Because of this, however, he'll usually disappear in the 2nd half of the movie. Is he dead, did he escape scot-free? Who knows, not the audience. He can be interchangeable with Graves' character, as to not make too many unlikable characters on screen. Once again, the morality of 70s slashers makes him die, if he dies, anticlimactically.

Nikolai is the driver of the vehicle that drops off the final girl. You remember me mentioning someone surviving with Kate? Yeah, this is him. He drops off his passenger and fucks right off. He might not even know that a killer is loose, but he's not staying. He's got other shit to do. If he does get caught by the killer, he's fighting, with a high chance at taking the killer down with him.

[doberbutts]

I really wish people like that anon understood that it's kinda strange to compare oppression? Like comparing white supremacy and patriarchy feels kinda reductive to me. They're different systems with different histories and the main reason I see people bringing up men in discussions about the patriarchy is bc when (usually cis and white) women make generalizations about men and their power within the system, the man they're imagining is the most privileged man that could exist (white, straight, cis, neurotypical, able-bodied, etc). But men as a category is so much broader than that, and marginalized men do not benefit in the same ways. And if you have to make that many qualifications when making a statement maybe the argument is kinda weak. Are all men safe to walk the streets at night or is your default a white cis straight able-bodied neurotypical traditionally masculine man

That's where intersectionality needs to come in and that's why it's been so frustrating in my experience to have these conversations, bc so many people absolutely refuse to acknowledge it as not only a factor but one of the biggest/most impactful

It's "learn intersectionality" until they're actually challenged to apply it to more than just their own demographic, and then it's "how dare you imply that other people also have problems".

Anyway honestly my biggest gripe with comparing racial oppression to gender/sex oppression is very simple. You can trans your gender but you cannot trans your race. Someone who is transgender has lived, many times, as more than one gender. This does not happen to race outside of very specific circumstances with adoptees, blended families, and interracial families (which is also why it's really only these folks who use terms like 'transracial' properly) and therefore that should illustrate the difference between both of these systems.

What's even more annoying is that this is feminist and black racial theory that I'm talking about. These aren't right wing or MRA talking points. And yet they're met with defensiveness and derision because I'm not willing to say that I think people within these groups experience zero problems as a result of their demographic, even if their demographic is "on top". You cannot narrow a person down to only a single demographic, that's literally the entire point of intersectionality is that we are all made up of many pieces and focusing on a single piece misses the bigger picture.

I'm not saying there's no such thing as the patriarchy (there is). I'm not saying there's no such thing as male privilege (there is). I'm not saying there's no such thing as white supremacy (there is). I'm not saying that these aren't systemic problems (they are). I'm not saying these aren't problems that individuals continue to further because it's convenient for them to not change (they do). You'd think I was, with these types of reactions.

[henrioo]

CIS PEOPLE CANNOT DECIDE THE PARAMETERS FOR SOMEONE TO BE TRANS OR NOT

I'M FUCKING TIRED OF A CIS COMING TO ME AND SAYING I'M NOT A MAN BECAUSE I HAVE LONG HAIR, BECAUSE I LIKE DRESSES OR HIGH HEELS

THIS IS MY FUCKING LIFE AND I WILL CHOOSE HOW TO LIVE IT, I WILL CHOOSE HOW I WANT TO BE IDENTIFIED, I HAVE CONTROL OVER MY LIFE, NOT YOU

After this scream I'm going to vent a little because even though I'm a hard rock to break, it doesn't mean that things don't affect me

If they don't hurt me anymore, it will be very difficult for you to hurt me, you know, especially about my trans experience. It's hard enough to offend me, so getting hurt is even harder

But it doesn't mean it doesn't affect me, and it affects and affects me, frustrating me, making me mad at a level where I often question how someone is so stupid

There's this woman (cis straight) and we were from a common group and we became friends, everything was fine, we had similar tastes, etc

But she did something that really irritated me, which was writing Mpreg, if you don't know why this is transphobic, etc. I genuinely don't feel like explaining now, but feel free to send me a message and I'll explain it better later and no, it's not necessarily forbidden to write Mpreg because of this, ok? It's more complicated than it looks

But I ignored it and like I said, mpreg is transphobic but being a writer or artist who uses it doesn't make you one, it's different, you know

But I started to notice the signs, one of the first was how she REFUSED to write trans men when it came to mpreg, she said she simply didn't like it and felt it wasn't her style, She also said that she would much rather have men giving birth through the ass than using a natural biological process that is men giving birth through a vagina

You may not see transphobia in this but it's fucking weird

And then I also started to realize that she was strangely obsessed with gay ships, to the level of just liking them and refusing to imagine them with women or accept other couples

It was also very strange that she EXCLUSIVELY liked gay couples, seriously, both the extreme of only liking LGBT couples and only liking straight couples is problematic, ok?

And now I found out that she also came up with this talk about Yamato being a woman, and I just started to get pissed off because it wasn't just like, oh that's my opinion, She spoke in a way that was like, this is a fucking truth and if you don't believe it, you're seeing something that isn't there

AND HOLY SHIT, WHAT IS THE FUCKING PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE WANTING TO DICTATE WHAT MAKES SOMEONE BE TRANS OR NOT???

WHY DO YOU THINK YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY THAT A CHARACTER IS NOT TRANS WHEN YOU ARE A FUCKING CIS??? YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT IT MEANS TO BE TRANS

And all her arguments were bullshit about Yamato only being inspired by Oden, what a holy shit it already happened, right, use a real argument, holy shit

I'm just fucking tired of people like this

People who aren't even trans thinking they know what it's like to be trans, who know how trans people manifest themselves and expose themselves

No, no, Yamato took showers with men because he likes Luffy, ahem, of course that was it

No, no, Yamato continued using male pronouns even after saying he no longer wanted to be Oden due to Oda's mistake, of course

No, no, Yamato being called son by Kaido himself which only shows that his father knew and supported, besides showing the rest of the world calling him daughter is not a parallel for trans people who are in the closet and can only come out to their parents and sometimes not even that, Of course not, Oda would never think of that pfft

I'm tired, tired of seeing stupid people, because seriously, a person is not stupid because they don't know something, a person is stupid because they refuse to learn something

And transphobes and homophobes are the stupidest people on the face of the earth because they will always refuse to learn

And besides being funny, it's kind of sad, because they never keep it to themselves, they always need to attack others to prove it

Well I never think anyone reads my huge posts but I like to vent on them because I like tumblr

So my dear trans colleague, don't be discouraged, don't be afraid, don't give up

Because you are a star that will still shine brightly in this sky and these idiots will be far below you, millions of light years away, seeing only an illusion of your light, because you will be so badass and so brilliant, that they won't be able to come close to admire your true light

[dukeofankh]

Like, I'm both a broadly cis dude, and someone whose feminism is very much sex, porn, and kink-positive, so obviously the undercurrent of Radical Feminism that suffuses a lot of modern discussions about sex and gender has always been like, naturally repellent to me. But like...I'd only ever really ran across the memeified internet version of that ideology? Like, fourteen year olds calling girls who read romance novels "Porn Addicts" type shit.

But as a result of Contrapoints' "Twilight", I've actually now started reading some of the actual texts of Radical Feminism, and like...holy sweet christ. She was correct when she said that it was impossible to describe some of the statements without sounding like intentional caricature.

I can only really read them in short bursts, because, hilarious or not, obviously reading stuff that unironically describes men as analogous to Nazis seriously and with a straight face is...somewhat emotionally stressful for a man with RSD. But like, sweet Jesus. It's honestly astonishing to read stuff that is so hateful and absurd.

I read the Political Lesbianism essay, and now I'm slogging my way through "Refusing to Be a Man" and at some point it's like...honestly baffling to consider that there are people who think this way that are ostensibly part of the same movement as me. Does it make sense as a response to the sexism of the late 20th century? It's definitely understandable, yeah. But holy fuck. We are in "hateful screed" territory.

[antiyourwokehomophobia2]

How did you go about challenging your friend group's ideas on the trans movement? I'd love to be brave enough to do the same with mine (one is a TIM and another is married to one [immigration marriage, not a romantic one] so it's a pretty daunting task).

You see, the thing about me is that I lose all cowardice when I'm well and truly pissed off. You have to understand I was willing to lose all of my friends that day. I legit pulled my car over into a 7/11 so I could confront them. If you are not willing to do this, I don't recommend starting that discussion because not only will you back down, but you'll have created tension for no reason. You have to stand firm. It's not that I didn't/don't love them, but at some point you have to realize that surrounding yourself with people who only love you because they don't know your views is an awful way to live your life.

You also have to understand that all of my closest friends are straight and cis and normie so that makes my situation drastically different from yours.

I don't mean to be discouraging, but I've gotta tell you the truth: based on what you just said, I don't think your experience would go anything like mine.

But I can tell you how it went, nonetheless.

One night, enough was enough and they said something I absolutely could not let slide. They were all in agreement about "super straight" being an idiotic thing and they agreed that it was a hateful movement against trans people. This, on its own, was not enough for me to challenge them. However, one of them was like "refusing to date trans people is you refusing to see them as the men and women that they are"

And

I

Snapped.

So fucking bad. I wrote a long paragraph being like "that doesn't make sense. That's homophobic." and I specifically used them to prove my point. I was like "[name], you're heterosexual, aren't you? Do you consider yourself bigoted for not liking dick? Do you consider me a bad person for only liking pussy? Do you think your gf is a bad person for only wanting to date males? We can agree that being attracted to both sets of genitals is bisexuality, right?" and that seemed to work wonders.

Calling out specific traits within them is a good tactic. Bring up their sexuality. Bring up their friend's sexuality. Ask them if they think that they're bad people for their exclusive sexuality. Ask them if their FRIENDS are bad people for their exclusive sexuality. Ask them if they think their mom or dad would ever date someone of the same sex. Ask them if they think their mom and dad are bad people because of that.

If they make an argument, counter it the best you can. These are not internet trolls or people looking to get a rise out of you. These are your friends. Talk to them. Give them good arguments.

If they decide to leave you then you know that your friendship was in the wrong hands.

That's what worked for me.

[cnjosephs]

Writing/Publishing Resources

I've had a few people lately ask for the writing/publishing resources and knowledge I've collected over the past ~2 years of working on getting published, so I thought I'd just collect them all in a post that I can link people. Here we go:

What are your options for publishing a book?

The main options you'll find discussed are traditional publishing and self publishing.

Traditional Publishing: Publishing a book through a publishing house, like Simon & Schuster or Macmillan. The majority of books you see in bookstores will be traditionally published. When you traditionally publish a book, you sell the rights for it to a publisher, who then takes care of the actual publishing process for you. There are a wide variety of publishers out there, some very large and some very small.

Pros: Traditional publishing generally (though not always) gets you a bigger paycheck and gets your book in front of more people. The publisher will also pay for editing, cover design, etc—with traditional publishing, you shouldn't be expected to pay for any publishing expenses.

Cons: You often have less control over the book. It can also be very hard to get a book traditionally published—there are a lot of authors trying to publish their books and a much smaller number of books actually getting published every year. Additionally, a lot of marginalized authors struggle to get their books traditionally published, because publishers will either refuse to consider them outright or will try to say "We'll only publish you if you make your main characters straight/cis/white/monogamous/able-bodied/etc".

Self Publishing: Publishing a book yourself. While some people claim that self published books never make it into bookstores, there are actually bookstores (mostly independent ones) that carry self-published books that meet certain requirements. With self publishing, you keep all of your rights and handle the publishing process yourself. Many people just self-publish ebooks, but it is also possible to self-publish hard copies.

Pros: You retain full creative control of the book. You can publish absolutely whatever you want without needing to convince a publisher to do it. This also means that you have full freedom to publish sequels, prequels, etc, which can be hard to get a traditional publisher to agree to unless your book sold unusually well.

Cons: You have to either handle all aspects of publishing yourself or pay people to do it for you. This includes editing, cover design, managing social media, managing pre-order campaigns, laying out the book file, and of course, actually publishing it. If you're doing it all yourself, it's a lot of work, and it may not all be work you enjoy or are skilled at. If you're paying people to do it, the costs add up fast, and can easily total in the thousands by the time you're done. It can also be harder to make money and to get readers, though there are self-published authors who have done a great job at that.

While some traditionally published authors look down on self-published authors, I'm of the opinion that neither way is inherently better or worse than the other. They're both perfectly valid options for publishing a book, and it really just comes down to what works better for you, personally.

I haven't researched self publishing or nonfiction trad publishing as much, so this is going to focus on fiction trad publishing. If anyone wants to reblog with self publishing or nonfiction trad publishing resources, please do!

One last thing I want to note: many (maybe most, though I'm not 100% sure) publishers won't consider publishing a book that's been previously self-published. Others may consider it, but only under very special circumstances. If you're considering self publishing a book and then later trying to get it trad published, just keep in mind that self publishing it first could make it significantly harder (though not impossible) to get it trad published later.

How do you traditionally publish a book?

A lot of people are under the impression that to publish a book, you just mail your manuscript off to a publisher and hope they respond. These days, the process is actually a bit different. The steps to traditionally publishing a book are, generally speaking:

Write a full book (called a manuscript, sometimes abbreviated MS) and edit it to make sure it's as good as it can possibly be. Ideally, you'll also get feedback from other people on your manuscript before you send it out to make sure it's super solid

Submit your story to literary agents. The exact process for this differs by agent: some agents have you submit via a form on their website, others through a form on a website called Query Manager, and others through email. Exactly what you send will also vary by agent, but basically every agent will ask for a query letter, which you can think of as being sort of like a cover letter for your book. If an agent asks that you submit any part of your manuscript, it will generally just be a small part (e.g. first chapter, first 20 pages) rather than the entire manuscript

If any agents are interested in seeing more of your manuscript, they'll get back to you and request either a full manuscript (you send them the whole thing) or a partial manuscript (you send them part of it)

If an agent who requested to see more of your manuscript thinks that your story has publishing potential and they're interested in helping you publish it, they'll offer to represent your manuscript. Generally, you have a phone call with them at this point to go over all of the details, then wait 1-2 weeks to give them a response so you can reach out to any other agents you have active queries with and say "Hey, I just got an offer of representation, if you're interested in making your own offer, please respond by X date"

Once you have your agent, your agent may help you edit your book further or they may think it's fine as is. Once you're both happy with the book, you'll go on submission, meaning that the agent is going to reach out to editors at different publishing houses and say "Hey, I've got this book, do you wanna publish it?"

Ideally, at least one editor will make an offer, and if you agree with the terms they're offering, that's it—you're gonna be published! However, it is possible that no editors will make an offer, at which point you'll have to discuss with your agent if you want to keep trying with this book, try again with another book, or stop entirely

I will caution you now that it's very hard to get a book traditionally published. Recent surveys I've seen have put average rates of agents requesting fulls around 3-7%, depending on age range and genre. And that's not even rates for offering representation—that's just for saying "I want to read the full manuscript", which may or may not lead to an offer of rep (when I was querying SISTER OF THE SUN, three agents requested fulls, and none of them ended up offering rep).

It is also possible that you'll get an agent and get an offer to publish the book, but the offer will be conditional on terms that you don't want to agree with—I've known authors of color who got told "We'll only publish your book if you make the main character white", queer authors who got told "We'll only publish your book if you make the main character straight and cis", etc. They may also have terms that aren't necessarily bigoted but that you still don't want to agree to, like "We'll only publish your book if you remove the heist subplot" or "We'll only publish your book if you can cut 20,000 words from the manuscript".

None of this is intended to be discouraging or to say "nobody should try to get traditionally published"—I'm trying to get traditionally published right now!—but just to set expectations. Getting trad published is hard, and it takes most people a few tries before they can get a book published. Not being able to publish the first (or second, or third, or) book that you write doesn't necessarily mean you're a horrible writer who should just give up. Sometimes it takes a few tries.

I also want to be clear that, despite the warning I gave two paragraphs ago, there are marginalized authors who have successfully trad published a book without making those sacrifices. While it can be hard, it is possible, especially if you have an agent who will really champion your book.

Age Ranges

At some point before you attempt to publish your novel, you'll need to decide what age range is it. Many agents only represent certain age ranges, and will reject you immediately if you query a book in an age range they don't represent (e.g. if they only represent adult books and you try to query a middle grade novel, they'll probably auto reject you). The common age ranges are:

Board Book: A short book made of thick, durable cardboard; examples include Goodnight Moon and Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What Do You See?; typical reader age range is around 0-3

Picture Books: Slightly longer than board books and often printed on regular paper, but still contain illustrations on all or most pages; examples include Pete the Cat and Dr. Seuss’ books; typical reader age range is around 3-6

Chapter Books: Books that are longer than picture books and sorted into chapters, but still short and intended for young readers; examples include Junie B. Jones and Magic Tree House; typical reader age range is around 6-9

Middle Grade: Longer and more complex books intended for pre-teens; examples include Percy Jackson and Coraline; typical reader age range is around 9-13

Young Adult: Books intended for teenagers, fairly similar to adult but generally have a teenage protagonist and less mature themes; examples include The Hunger Games and To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before; typical reader age range is around 13-16

Adult: Books intended for adults; examples include This is How You Lose the Time War and The Song of Achilles; typical reader age range is around 16+

There’s also a proposed category called New Adult (NA), intended for readers around the 18-24 age range and focusing on characters around the same age. Unfortunately, the publishing industry has largely not responded to attempts to get this to be widespread, and it’s still a pretty niche concept. That isn’t to say that stories don’t get published that do, arguably, fit the definition of New Adult (personally, I think that both The Locked Tomb series and The Magicians could be viewed as NA), but the authors generally have to bill them as either YA or adult. If you’re writing a book that fits the bill for NA, you’ll probably have better luck querying it if you can reasonably describe it as either YA or adult.

Final note: you may see some discussion of kidlit. This is short for "children's literature" and refers to all of the categories except adult (an author who writes exclusively YA and an author who writes exclusively picture books are both considered kidlit writers).

Publishing Resources

Finally, here are a bunch of publishing resources I've accrued over the past two years!

Writing

On Writing Emotion

Capturing Voice!

How Long Should a Book Be? (Note: Please read this; it may seem like an inconsequential thing, but having a book that's significantly longer or shorter than genre standards can actually tank your chances of getting published)

Editing & Polishing

Tightening Prose

When Should I Spell Out Numbers? | Grammarly

Final Editing Checklist

Querying

Querying (1): Step by Step Query Process

Perfect Pitch

Query Letter Length: How Long Should Your Query Letter Be?

Advice for querying authors (Twitter thread)

questions to ask an agent on The Call

The Query Simplified

Pitch Wars: The Synopsis … simplified

How to Write a Synopsis without Stressing (Video)

Jumping Back Into the Trenches (or, querying again after splitting from your agent)

Nudging Agents with an Offer of Representation

Publishing & Marketing

Book Graphics Recs

So, you got an edit letter

Book Launch Survival Guide

Resource Collections

(Other collections of links to various resources around the web)

Be Your Own Mentor

Kidlit resources (Twitter thread)

Writing Resources (collected by Rebecca F. Kuang, author of The Poppy War)

Resources for writers that everyone assumes you already know (Twitter thread)

Resources & Diverse Recs

[bookishfeylin]

I read something you said and you put into words what I've been struggling to verbalize for a while. I'm a bi brown woman, and always happy for representation. But it bothered me that Fandom insists black and brown women are always gay to push them out of the way for a white ship, or white authors (in this case SJM), lazily slapping on queer on a woc (Emerie) for brownie points. I'm not saying men loving us validates us, or that we need them to, but it is weird that a lot of media refuses to put woc into loving relationships with men. You saying that it says "woc aren't deserving of love from men" was finally what I was looking for to describe it. So thank you.

Hi nonny! I think you're talking about either this or this post? But either way, you're very welcome, though before I fully answer this ask, I want to add the disclaimer here that I'm straight and cis, though I've also seen many LGBTQ+ POC complain about this phenomenon too, like @positively--speculative.

Firstly: Of course LGBTQ+ POC need representation, and deserve it. I don't want anyone who reads this to think otherwise. Representation matters. But this is a nuanced conversation that needs to happen.

The problem is that many white authors and their fandoms want to seem "woke" and "diverse" without actually caring about their diverse characters. So they'll make the POC the token gay and sideline them so they can focus on the white (usually cishet) ship. They won't develop the character or give them a personality beyond their race and sexuality, half of the time don't even bother to give them a love interest or even a relevant love story with screen time***, and mainly use them as little more than a background prop for the story of the white ship. @positively--speculative has discussed how white fandom did this with Valkyrie after Thor Ragnarok came out: white fandom claimed Thorkyrie couldn't be shipped because it "ruined" Val's bisexuality. Never mind that there's no other woman in Thor Ragnarok that Valkyrie can be reasonably shipped with, apparently we just don't deserve to see Val in love at all! (I recommend checking out all her posts tagged Thorkyrie if you want more of her--a Black bisexual woman's--perspective, on the matter). And Sarah J Maas is a big offender for doing the same to her WOC.

As you and I both said, a large part of it is people being uncomfortable with WOC being the romantic interest of men (this is especially true of ships that involve Black women. A lot of the time fandom considers the Black woman to be an "independent lesbian" who doesn't need romantic love from a man, so her male love interest should be with [insert popular white character here]). What it ultimately boils down to is racism, and us not being seen as viable love interests worthy of romance (from men).

But many people simply don't want to admit that, and merely switch to the 'this woc is a lesbian' game. And it sucks, doing a disservice to all the marginalized people involved.

***or they're fetishized.

[marinerainbow]

Alright, LGBTQ month is upon us. Time for

My OC's LGBTQ Identities.

Betty Locera: Cis/Het Supporter

I was planning on making Betty bisexual, but after a while, I changed her to being straight. Though some of her siblings are LGBTQ.

Since this is the 1930's, the chances of the average person knowing Betty is a supporter, let alone know some non-hetero people, is low; Betty knows her siblings don't want the drama, so she isn't open about who they are unless she knows she can trust that person. But if she sees anybody on the street being homophobic, she will not hold back. Especially if it's her family being hurt/disrespected. She doesn't tolerate any of that hate.

Detective Sketch: Non-Binary, Asexual Aromantic (partially out)

I do have a ship with Sketch that I love (Dice x Sketch. I'm a sucker for rivals to lovers). But in their own canon timeline, I can't see Sketch being interested in relationships or sex.

It doesn't happen often, but they have had people try to coerce them into going out for a night of fun. Whether it be because they genuinely thought Sketch was attractive, or they thought they could get away without paying them for their services. Sketch has turned them all down, and refuses to share why if they ask. As such, they've gained a small reputation of either being 'very picky', or being a 'romantic who only wants their true love'. Both of these titles make them cringe.

Sketch isn't really an open person, so them being partially out is kind of because they simply don't want to talk about it with strangers. But their family do know, and they're forever grateful for being accepted as who they are.

They didn't really have anyone to accept them before, when it was just them. They didn't even open up with the care takers at the orphanage. So they didn't really know what it felt like to be accepted like this until they had their family.

Prism: Demigirl, Demisexual Demiromantic (out)

Prism may use she/her pronouns, but all dream entities are on the non-binary spectrum in some way. Prism, in particular, is feminine leaning. And when it comes to romantic and sexual relations, she can't imagine anything like that with anyone she doesn't know. Prism doesn't get how some people can have these 'one-night stands' or go on a date the first thing. But whatever floats their boat.

The night dimension does not hold the same prejudice against sexual and gender orientation the same way some humans do. So, to Prism, being out and open about her identity is just the norm. When she first encountered a visitor who was closeted, it was a shock and a half for her. Especially when she found out why these visitors stay quiet about themselves for however long. What's the point of hating somebody for who they are?

Prism wishes she could understand. But she'll offer a safe space for any visitor no matter who they are, and will try to offer as much help and advice as possible.

Poppy: Cisgendered Bisexual (closeted)

Poppy had no idea she was bisexual. At least until she saw Disney's Snow White for the first time (Queen Grimhilde was her awakening). After that, she was left very confused. She had noticed women before, but she assumed that she was just appreciating their beauty, similar to appreciating a work of art, rather than... You know, wanting to kiss them.

Regardless of where she came from, whether she was drawn from paper or she came from her two strict and stuffy parents, Poppy wouldn't really be...Entirely sure of herself for a while. Especially since she's never been with a woman before. She isn't a homophobe at all, she'll support you no matter what you do behind closed doors. But for herself, she always assumed she was straight and that sexuality was simple. So this caught her way off guard.

Even when she fully realized and accepted who she was, Poppy has a hard time telling other people. Because this is the early 1900's, she knows that her sexuality would be a problem to some people, and she doesn't want any trouble. Even with her loved ones, she's scared of not only making them hate her, but also finding out that her loved one is that kind of person. It wouldn't be until she fully trusts someone before she tells them she's bisexual, and it wouldn't be until the modern era until she becomes more open about it, too.

Any questions anybody has, I'll be more than happy to answer ^^

[monstershearts]

Doctor Jack “Invisible Man” Griffin

Nationality: Australian (with an American work visa, depending on the verse)

Gender: Cis Male

Sexuality: Straight

Age: 27 (verse dependent)

Appearance: Piercing blue eyes, strong square jaw, handsome face, short blond hair, muscular build, 5'10", usually goes for a classy semi-casual look when he isn’t at work. Button-up shirts worn open at the collar, black or blue jeans, black cowboy boots.

FC: Dacre Montgomery

Personality: Eccentric, charming, quick to anger, volatile, violent, arrogant, ambitious. He fully believes that he is a scientific genius, and while he isn’t entirely wrong, he often forgets that he is not always the smartest person in the room. Money is also highly important to him.

Goals: To prove himself in the scientific community, to come up with an invisibility formula that the U.S. military will pay him a fortune for.

Strengths/Powers: Highly intelligent, silver tongue, decent physical strength, an experienced brawler, quick thinker and problem solver, determination, can become invisible after injecting himself with the serum he invented.

Weaknesses: His own ego, his short fuse and reckless attitude, the fact that he has to remove any clothing that isn’t skintight in order to be completely invisible, the fact that his serum makes his temper and mental state even more volatile than they already are, his workaholic nature, the fact that he is totally blind to his own mortality.

Likes: Rum, tequila, women, power, classic muscle cars, AC/DC, being away from his father, his fiancee Flora(verse/thread dependent)

Dislikes: His father, car thieves, mobsters, bigots, people who underestimate him, being told that he can’t do something/that he has limitations.

Languages: English, rudimentary German

Background: Jacobi Edmund Griffin was born in the fall of 1995 to a deadbeat thief and hardworking woman who left by the time he was five. Jack’s father was in and out of jobs, mostly relying on petty crimes to keep a roof over their heads, food on their table, and gas in their car. Jack focused intensely on his academic career, showing signs of genius level intellect at a very early age. He graduated high school at 15 with honors, and was offered a full ride scholarship to the University of Queensland, where he got his doctorate in biomedical science. While he was in his late teens, his father informed him that they would no longer have to worry about money troubles. They were rich! Everything was finally coming up roses for the Griffins, and his father proved it by buying him his dream car, a midnight blue 1979 Chevrolet Camaro, as a belated graduation present. Jack was ecstatic, of course, but something in the back of his keen yet cynical mind told him that it was too good to be true. After about a month of mulling it over, he finally decided to ask his father where exactly he’d gotten the money from. That turned out to be one of the worst days of his life. His father deflected, at first, demanding to know why it was so important, but Jack kept pushing and pushing until his father confessed that he’d made the money by selling stolen cars for parts. It was his last job. He promised! But that wasn’t good enough for Jack, who had grown up loathing his father’s criminal activity and wanted desperately to believe that he’d finally gone straight. The two got into a massive fight, throwing punches, shoving each other around, destroying furniture, with Jack’s father calling him an ungrateful brat and throwing him up against a wall. It should have ended there, but Jack refused to go down, leading his father to come at him with a knife. There was a scuffle, a lot of blood, and even more chaos. By the end of it, both men were injured really badly, but Jack was the one who was able to call for an ambulance. Both were taken to the nearest hospital. Jack survived. His father did not. The teen was not charged, as all the evidence clearly pointed to him having to defend himself, but there was a grueling investigation that eventually led to his father’s house and both cars being seized by the state, and Jack being sent to live with his estranged mother since he was 17 and still technically a minor. As soon as he was physically able, he threw himself into his studies at the university harder than he ever had before, leading his mother to admire his intellect and work ethic and regret leaving him with his father. In Jack’s eyes, that was too little too late, but he was never outwardly hostile toward her about it. Over the next few years, he completed his PhD, becoming the youngest graduate in his class and immediately looking for work both near home and abroad. He landed several decent jobs in and around Brisbane, working in state of the art labs with many accredited scientists, but none of them would take him seriously, despite his outstanding achievements, due to his age. Fed up with the politics and discrimination, Jack turned his efforts to finding opportunities outside of Australia. It wasn’t long before he was hired on by an American company that was handling a few military contracts, applied for a work visa, and flown out to Boston to begin his new career. Things were finally taking off for him, it seemed. His coworkers saw his talent and intelligence and treated him as an equal, which made him even more eager to prove himself. At 26, he was put in charge of one of the most top secret projects the military had entrusted to Wells Biotechnologies: a serum that would allow operatives to become totally invisible for a short time. Needless to say, Jack was thrilled beyond belief, and got to work on it right away. At first, he did some research into various biological methods of camouflage, but quickly realized that the genetic modifications necessary to make that possible in humans would be far too invasive and risky. He then turned his attention to something called a refraction index, which he found could be changed with the right amount and method of chemical convincing. His research eventually led him to experiment with various anesthetics in combination with other chemicals, trying drug after drug, combo after combo, and getting little to no results. The military wasn’t happy with the lack of progress. After only a year, they pulled Jack’s funding, but he still refused to give up. When he wasn’t working on the projects that were still approved or dodging hushed underhanded comments, he was sequestered away in his lab, continuing his experiments off the books. Fueled by spite, very little sleep, and what few meals he remembered to consume, the young scientist worked tirelessly to find his perfect formula. Monocaine, he finally discovered one particularly grueling night, was the key. It was a particularly strong local anesthetic that worked remarkably well with the refraction-altering chemicals in such a way that made them compatible with human cells, even affecting fabric worn tight to the skin. Not wanting to risk asking for permission to start human testing and getting rejected, Jack tested the serum on himself. It worked beautifully…aside from the fact that he felt a bit less in control of himself than normal. It was almost like being high, or what he guessed being high might have felt like, having never tried recreational drugs before. It was bizarre, and he noted that he felt strangely numb all over. All of his findings were written down in his journal, including the fact that it wore off after about two hours. The after effects were much less pleasant. He’d been hungover maybe a couple of times in his life, and this was at least twice as bad. Nausea, a splitting headache that nearly made him want to cry, light and sound sensitivity, aching muscles, and insurmountable fatigue pretty much summed up his symptoms, and he wisely determined that sleeping in his office would be a much better idea than trying to make it back to his apartment. The next morning, he was much better off, though his head still hurt. Another couple weeks of nightly testing followed before he finally worked up the courage to tell his superiors. He did his best to make his case, but they refused to hear him out, no matter how much proof he showed them of his success. He had used company resources without permission and stayed on the clock for far longer than he was supposed to; he was lucky they didn’t suspended. Angry and heartbroken, Jack jumped to his last resort, taking out a syringe of the serum that he had gradually become addicted to and injecting himself with it. They were stunned to see him becoming invisible right before their eyes, and when they recovered enough from their shock to try and catch him, he ran, evading them almost effortlessly and taunting them as he went. It became a sort of game for him. He loved watching them squirm, loved seeing their alarm at being proven wrong by a man twenty or thirty years their junior. It was electrifying. The possibilities of what all he could do with serum also began to turn over in his brain. He wouldn’t have to wait for a payout from the military if he was able to just grab the money for himself without anyone being able to see him. He could also try going into private detective work, chasing after details that no visible person would be able to get near. The world was his oyster!

[nonegenderleftpain]

genuine question, how being both pan gay and pan lesbian works? I'm queer myself (bi, demiromantic and nonbinary) but I'm little bit of confused. no need to answer tho.

It's kind of complicated - I consider myself bigender in a really complex way, and my identity is constantly shifting as I transition and as I find myself. I love women in a gay way, and as a butch, I refuse to give up the label of lesbian despite being in a relationship with one nonbinary trans guy and one cis guy. I also love men in a gay way. My attraction to my cishet partner is gay attraction, despite us meeting when I was still a girl. I didn't know what I was feeling was gay attraction - that the way that I love men was very much not the same as my straight peers - until I realized I was trans as an adult and things began to make sense. I see our relationship as a gay one, even though he's straight, because we are visibly gay and navigate the world as a gay male couple because of it, no matter the complexities that are there privately. When my paperwork goes through, I will be legally a man, even though personally I only tangentially am one, and our relationship will be beholden to laws regarding gay marriage despite transphobes still considering me a woman.

I love men, and I also love women. I am pansexual and panromantic, but my reasons for holding tight to the lesbian identity and community that raised me are very similar to the reasons I call myself a gay man. People will always interpret me through their lens. To transphobes, I'm either a man in a dress or a woman who mutilated herself. To lesbophobes with no understanding of butch histories and relationships to gender, I am a man invading lesbian spaces or a misogynistic gender traitor. To the mlm community, I'm either a femme or a sissy. None of these things are right, but none of them are entirely wrong either. And just as others can't find a box to put me in consistently or easily, I use the words I use as a political statement to say that if they try, they will not succeed. I am a lesbian. I am a gay man. I am bisexual. I am transgender. I am transsexual. I am pansexual. I am a relationship anarchist and a radical inclusionist and a cripplepunk visionary who wants to live in a world post-labels (or post-need for labels). I refuse to give up my past for the sake of my future, just because it makes others uncomfortable. Others' confusion is not my problem.

[manie-sans-delire-x]

i agree with you every time you speak about how its so incredibly important to acknowledge female oppression based on sex, but why is it so hard to not call trans men "women"? like i don't get why so many people refuse to do that. both trans men and women have uteruses and vaginas, so why do they insist that it erases female oppression or harms women? it doesnt? the same thing happens with trans women. i think it really isnt that hard to speak about certain types of oppression while at the same time acknowledging that they very often overlap each other. like trans women and cis women both suffer misogyny, theyre both targets of sexual harassment and assault, and they both are the main victims of prostitution. trans men and women both suffer from sex-based oppression, obstetric and medical violence. trans men who are cis-passing dont suffer sexual harassment though, and they can navigate society with a considerable amount of male privilege (and so many radical feminists forget this, there ARE trans men who pass completely, most trans men who have used testosterone for a long time do, and they dont have to suffer misogyny in their daily life. it feels almost a bit insulting to hear people speak about them like they suffer the exact same oppression cis women do) trans women usually can't do this. people are diverse, and i dont get why its so difficult to speak about these things without excluding certain groups of people or just being fucking rude or disrespectful to them, many times on purpose. (sorry if i didnt explain myself well btw, english is not my first language)

Hi anon, your English is fine! Its super good actually. And thank you for acknowledging that female oppression is based off sex. But you should have stopped at "I agree with you every time you speak" lol! Jokes aside...

Transwomen (I think thats who you meant when you said transmen) are able to get surgery to have a sort of vagina, but no, they do not have uteruses... Not sure where you got that misinformation. Even if they had a uterus surgically transplanted, it would be nonfunctional and ultimately pointless to everyone. As they do not have eggs, they would be unable to have periods or get pregnant. I suspect there would be serious health risks involved too. In the same way, a transman would never be able to produce sperm even if they had a dick or balls surgically transplanted.

Girls, women, and boys are the main victims of prostitution and sex trafficking, simply because most of the "clients" are straight males. A smaller percentage of them are also sexually attracted to males, but as many of them are pedophiles, they prefer boys over grown men. So passing/not passing/extent of transition also has a lot to do with it. Traffickers of course do not care if someone is trans or not. If someone looks like a young female, they are a potential target. If they are not "passing" and look like an adult male, traffickers are likely uninterested because they are not sexually attracted, the clients are not interested, and a male is harder to physically fight and control. Or if they are smaller and young, they will happily traffic boys too- whether or not they identify as a girl. I guess what Im saying is that they do not purposefully look for transwomen, they look for girls, young women, and boys (and sometimes young men that are small/look way younger than they are). Basically anyone who looks young and vulnerable. Aside from sex, age is the next largest indicator of risk. It may even be number 1. Its not gender presentation. A female could identify as and present as a male but it would not matter to them if they can tell that they're female.

Transwomen are definitely victimized as well, but it is on incomparable scales, partly due to the vast difference in population size (1% to 50%), and usually for different reasons- transphobia, (which may or may not be mixed with misogyny). To say they are "both the main victims" makes it seem like its an equal amount, which is very much is not, luckily for transwomen.

All populations- including boys and men- experience sexual harassment and assault, but obviously that does not mean we might as well put them all in the same sex category because sex is not defined by level of oppression. Its not like, "oh you've experienced x amount of oppression in your lifetime, you may as well sit with the ladies" lol.

Transwomen are not oppressed under laws that only apply to females. Women are denied equal legal and social rights for being female, and as transwomen are biologically male, they are given equal rights from birth. As long as their birth certificate says "male", they will always be given these rights by the government.

I definitely agree that transmen who are cis-passing dont suffer sexual harassment (as much) and that they can navigate society with male privilege. But they can still be denied legal rights for being biologically female though, or be discriminated against anytime it says "female" on academic, professional, or legal paperwork. (And then transphobia can mix in with the misogyny when they see a male passing person). I also agree that they dont suffer the exact same oppression as cis women and that transwomen are not given this same luxury, because unfortunately as transwomen come to learn, misogyny is real and its a monster.

Why do you find it insulting to hear people say that passing transmen suffer the same oppression cis women do (because you know its not completely true), but you dont think its insulting to say that passing transwomen do NOT suffer the same oppression cis women do?

I think your whole argument boils down to "transwomen are oppressed just as much as ciswomen so should be considered women". Not only is that clearly not true when you look at laws, but again, sex is not defined by levels of oppression or life experience.

[kaijuconfessions]

Ah yeah so I have like severe issues with my dad. Not like "daddy issues" i.e. why doesn't daddy love me I need men to love me cuz daddy didn't (I repeat trauma patterns but who inflicted it does not have bearing on it) but like sincere issues with my dad like he stole money from me and traumatized me and was horrible so now he's cut out of my life and it was the best decision ever and I will never go back. But sometimes I have stress dreams about him and sometimes they're SEXUAL and it makes me so mad because I refuse to believe it's some Freudian bs and I won't even tell my therapist I find it so icky and repulsing. I hate my father so much and I genuinely wish he was dead and I can't wait till he is so I can set a bag of shit on fire over his grave.

Furthermore, I kind of secretly think like 80% of fathers are abusive and almost all my female friends would be better off cutting off their own fathers like I did mine and when people have positive relationships with their fathers, especially women, my brain literally cannot compute like it seems fake to me. I gave up on love from my father when I was 10 and I don't understand how other women don't come to that conclusion and move on with their lives. I tried explaining this to my ex once and he reacted like I was crazy and fucked up for feeling that way but I don't think I'm wrong about the older generations of straight cis men having so much internalized misogyny that it's not possible for most of them to be non abusive towards their daughters and wives and sons.

Yeah dads generally suck with the whole parenting thing. My bf and I both have trauma from our fathers being sacks of shit in the past but I’m happy that my dad is at least trying to rebuild that relationship with me and it makes me emotional sometimes thinking about how he’s genuinely putting in the effort to be a better person because so many kids don’t

[mathsbian]

I don't know who you or your partner are but I've been seeing your posts in the exorsexism tag and I just want to say that I am going to fight all the anons you're getting. People in queer and trans spaces are so fucking weird about AMAB+AFAB trans people (ESPECIALLY towards non-binary people who aren't transmasc or transfem) in relationships. They show their bioessentialist exorsexist/transphobic asses so god damn quickly it's like it's an Olympic sport to see how quickly they can fall into the most basic of transphobic rethoric. Sounding like a conservative talk show host as opposed to other queer people. You know who also says this shit? TERFs, like straight up TERFs I've seen complain about AMAB+AFAB trans people in relationships actually just being cishet (and they'll complain about some other stupid shit like how they're PiV critical or think that AMAB people are dumb predatory rocks and AFAB people are helpless damsels with zero autonomy or thinking skills). You all like parroting TERFs and conservatives? Is that what they all really want to do, do they have zero self awareness?

Your relationship isn't less queer because of your AGABs and it's so shitty that this rethoric seems to infest queer and t4t spaces like a plague that people refuse to acknowledge.

Also, anons sending this garbage would probably shit themselves at the thought of a trans man dating a cis woman / a trans woman dating a cis man and both relationships being considered straight.

Yep. Trans people can be straight, but are certainly not heteronormative.

And yeah these anons are like. Going fully rabid over the idea that my partner and I are queer, regardless of the genitalia we have.

It’s bullshit. My partner isn’t a man just because they don’t care that they have a dick and like having a beard. They’re as femme presenting as Jonathan Van Ness and everyone loves him! But because I dare to call myself a bi LESBIAN while dating someone who looks like that I’m deserving of some Peak Transphobia. What if my partner was a butch lesbian on a small amount of T to grow a beard and used they/them pronouns? If that would be okay, it’s literally just the presence of a dick that makes my partner not good enough for me to be a lesbian! Which does seriously imply that these anons don’t see pre-op trans women as real women!!

They’re all just blinded by rad//fem rhetoric and can’t see it. I’d be more sad for them if they weren’t being so vile about it.