#not to say that being a trans man is easy or necessarily easy to pass as a guy

[sspiderj]

i'm sorry but Unhappy Campers just makes me think about how it's easier for trans men to pass than it is for trans women

[neomale-tboy]

in my opinion, Fumble/Morven Loh fumbled their/her talk of trans men. to preface: i don't know anything about Fumble aside from it's in the uk.

the reason for the article, the title of the article, and a majority of the first paragraph begins by saying that as queer gender and sexuality takes more of a forefront in the social zeitgeist, trans men are scarcely talked about and she wants to talk about it.

my first problem comes from the last sentence of the first paragraph and the second paragraph. i've seen people talking about transandrophobia say that they're tired of having to disclaim that they don't hate or mean to detract from trans women's struggles. i especially don't like that this disclaimer comes from a cis woman trying to discuss trans men's erasure.

in that same paragraph, she links to another article she wrote. a fine article for what it is (a cis person talking about transphobia). but she cites it as a source in a paragraph about how trans women face worse transphobia as a result of hypervisibility...in an article about trans men's erasure. and the linked article highlights trans women's role within the terf movement and the bathroom debate, making it relevant to the paragraph about trans women in the trans men's article. the bathroom debate, i can get. all i've seen of that is people getting mad at trans women for wanting to use the correct bathroom. i just wish loh talked more about how terfs treat trans people as a whole in thr terf section instead of dedicating it to trans women. this is an article linked in a post about trans men's erasure.

loh then states that she's seen or heard of trans men's erasure in both the queer and mainstream society before saying trans men are men, giving a short paragraph about how the patriarchy makes being trans in general complicated.

she, a cis woman, the gives a paragraph about how fucking easy it is for trans men to pass. how it "just" takes a few years on testosterone and strangers percieve you as a cis man now. she says men are neutral/the default, so people won't question a trans man (who's been on t for a few year)'s gender. then the cis woman adds that trans women are in a constant battle to be seen as women regardless of transition stage...in an article about trans men's erasure.

loh then backtracks, "of course it isn't that easy"...for trans men pre- and 'during' transition, we get confused for butch lesbians and teenage boys. "this is both tedious and painful because many people don't even consider that trans men exist." once more, the cis woman diminishes trans men's issues. our passing is only barely a problem to her because it's just "tedious and painful". she doesn't consider that, similar to the violence she mentions that trans women experience in the article about trans men's erasure, trans men will also recieve repercussions for being trans. to her, it seems, trans men simply have to tell people we're men, and everything is rainbows and trans flags.

she starts off the next section, titled male privilege, by saying that trans men transitioning for the gain of male privilege is a "massive misconception". she asserts that trans men are men who simply happened to be born with female associated genitalia. best thing i think she says: "male privilege works against trans men, not for them...".

in the next paragraph she says "trans men are men" again while advocating that trans men can be of any orientation, not necessarily straight. this is fine, really. she says that we can have attraction to cis gay men, whereas i'd've preferred to hear it the other way around: that cis gay men can be attracted to us. cis validation gives more validity to trans gay men's position as gay men unfortunately. this is an article on trans men's erasure, one in which she acknowledged that that erasure extends to queer communities. but this complaint's a little nit-picky of me.

the article wraps up in a paragraph about general transgender discrimination, where she states that trans people face the highest suicide and homicide rates. considering this is an article about trans men's erasure where she say that trans women face the most discrimination and abuse, i think she really should've highlighted where trans men are the most targeted. because as i've seen in discussions of transandrophobia, there are plently of spots to highlight. she didn't need to give numbers, seen as she didn't for anyone else, but she should've conceptualized our discrimination as more than getting mistaken for a butch lesbian or a teenage boy.

finally, loh gives a list of tips on how to be a trans ally, the first of which being to educate one's self on trans issues, something i view as tone deaf due to my opinion stated in the paragraph above.

in an article precidated on the question "why people arent talking more about trans men?", loh fails to answer her own question. she says that trans men are men, and that cis people/society is accepting of this and our presentations. she never talks about how transphobia affects trans men. hell, she barely, if at all, talks about trans men's erasure! she just reports on what she, a cis woman, thinks trans men are.

i think it's irresponsible how cis people get to speak about trans people like this. how they read up a little on trans issues, and then decide they're qualified to write such an objectively shitty article where once more we are erased and put on the back burner. at the beginning of the article, loh says that times are "(hopefully)" changing. i just don't think she and a lot of other cis people are yet qualified to speak on this change as it affects trans people, especially when it comes to the erasure that they, as cis people, perpetuate.

idk how to tie this off neatly. hope you enjoyed my little analysis i spent over an hour on.

[baeddelations]

I think this part of my loathing of seeing this article passed around "i am tw, iam staying in the closet" bc it is a diary entry that was explicitly not supposed to be advice or a rubric. She origanilly aays its just 1 narrative to take in then when it gets past around she says hey this was me venting i didnt intend for anyone to read this.

I think this is the major interest in this piece. A view into the interiority of a tw whos been closeted for 20 yrs and her personal xp growin up then being a closeted tw in a University WGS dept. Some ppl might call this a fetishistic interest in the interiority of this tw, oh how they love poking around in the frankenstein monsters guts, poking his brain to see what horrid mismatched limb will jump.

I think the main reason @autolenaphilia interacted with this is bc this article was passed around by a bunch of transmisogynist who are adpting and pulling together the transmisogyny of jeniffer and her recounting of cismanhating that exists in primarily cisfeminist spaces and by extension radical and queer spaces. Jennifer does not bring up cafab transness or transmasculinity once in this article yet it is cited as inspiration for truther framework.

I do think the way that jennifer talks about not wanting to acquiesce is kinda built on a faulty conjecture which is that if she transitioned she would be able to talk about femininity in these spaces... at one point she says this probably wouldnt be true(mb just for her) but then goes back to the original argumentation on many occasions. This argumentation taken to conlusion posits that it is easier to discourse or even exist in those spaces as a tw than as a cis man that u will be more include and less ridiculed. At the time of this article she had never actually tried out this proposition, so she never got to see how this prop is at least in all the copius amounts of personal and anecdotal xp i have false. But this prop is useful for ppl who want push tw have it easier and that men are reviled for being men. Enter prager xcuse me truthers.

I also hate internalized oppression framework, imo it is an idpol tool used to shift blame from the brainwashed oppressed to som aspirational that oppressive ideology comes naturally to. Is she promoting transmisogynistic ideas? Yah, shes not bad for this but it is why its useful to truthers, and part of why it hurts to read as a tw.

@autogyne-redacted i do think its hard to see point 1, 2, and 5 of y shes not trnsn nd say these arent related to passibility. Repercussion are often contingent with passablity. Movin towards phys transn being dysphoria inducing is connected with what expectations of feminity u hav and how u line up with them(i also xp this). And the gap thing is imo her wishing she could be passable w ease and recognizing she cant so settling and saying its not worth it to try.

I think lena is apply a broader scope of trans xp to jennifers xp i dnt think this is even necessarily harmful and i dnt think shes even saying jen is wrong for it shes saying her words are easy to coopt that they are capering to these tmras which they are however unitentionally. U could also take things ive said in the past and warp them into tmra shit. I fortunately didnt write these things in a medium article. She is handling in other ways and this is wut conv therapy wants... thats what it seems they go for a lot again doesnt mean jen is bad nd lena doest say shes wrong for this. The only thing lena says is she doesnt want this for herself thats not restricting jens autonomy. And that the article and responses made her sick. They made me feel bad too. This isnt necessarily a moral judgement. It could be but idk.

All this is a dissection. I hate it. I wish her vent diary post wasnt being aired, analyzed, and discoursed. Im doing it right now ffs! It makes me want to leave the internet. I hope ppl stop talkn bout it...but they wont bc the corpse of this diary can be a useful weapon against tw so itll keep gettn used.

[akkpipitphattana]

tell me about he/she ayan

i was hoping someone that had actually finished the show would ask me 🙄 but if you're the only one who will, i'mma take what i'm given

so aye talks about how when he was first realizing he was gay, it was hard for him too, and it's easy to assume that the reason dika took him to the cafe for all the first time was after aye first came out to him, but despite that aye kind of gives the energy of someone that has just always knew they were gay, which i feel like doesn't necessarily contradict what canon tells us. i feel like he's always had an inkling, especially because he's always had dika, but because he always had dika, there had to be a time when he realized that being gay wasn't widely accepted, especially in thailand, so i kind of feel like that's what he meant when he talked about it being hard for him. and then when he did come to terms with that and understand it, that's when he came out to dika and dika took him to cafe for all etc etc

anyways, despite that, i feel like aye never looked too closely at her gender. like we all know aye is a very pretty man, so i'm sure she was told her whole life that kind of thing and while most men would take offense, she always liked it and just never questioned why. that is until she goes to cafe for all and meets p'golf

because p'golf is played by the director, who is trans non-binary, it's easy to assume the in-universe p'golf is also trans non-binary, so going to cafe for all and meeting them allowed aye to start to understand there were other options beyond being cis or even binary trans

however, he didn't exactly have a chance to think about it a whole lot because dika died and then he put his whole focus into finding out what happened to him. so, he put the gender crisis on the back burner (we've all been there)

so, i think when she really started to think about it was post-canon, probably even post os2 eps bc i think those only happen a few weeks after the end of the show, so after they officially lay dika to rest.

now in thai, it doesn't seem like they have gendered pronouns in the same way that we do, but they DO have pronouns based on your gender when speaking to someone else apparently? don't quote me on this i did some very minor googling, and i do know they have other gendered words like hia/je, etc etc. but basically whatever the thai equivalent of using he/she pronouns in english is, i think she'd consider experimenting with before eventually realizing she's genderfluid

she'd bring it up with akk first, and while i'd love to say akk would be 100% loving and supportive and i'm not saying he WOULDN'T be, i also think he'd be confused tbh JDHJDF like he's only been to cafe for all a handful of times and while he knows p'golf and that they’re non-binary, i feel like he still doesn't know enough about the whole gender spectrum to understand fully. i also feel like he'd get a little tripped up on the she part because it took akk so long to be comfortable with the idea of being gay and aye is definitely his soulmate, but aye? wants to be referred to like a girl? does that make him NOT gay? but basically it'd be a conversation, and by the end of it once akk understands better and knows that aye being genderfluid doesn't effect his sexuality at all, he'd be fully on board and supportive and refer to aye however she wants to be referred to

the others are also a little confused at first, but they catch on pretty quickly. especially when aye starts experimenting with presentation, starting to wear makeup and occasionally dresses or skirts. akk nearly passes out the first time he sees her in a mini skirt that exposes her thigh tattoo and aye saves that in the back of her mind for later

[echo-stimmingrose]

Slight rant/ted talk

Trans People are People Too

So this person on tik tok responded to one of my comments, saying "they/them pronouns wtf y'all are still on that?"

One thing to note: I did not mention my pronouns in my comment nor are they in my name. This person had to have gone onto my profile, saw my pronouns and then decided that they needed to make a comment about it.

A ton of people responded to their comment defending me and other gender non-conforming people.

This person then went on to make a comment about what gentiles I have. 1, they have no way of knowing. 2, that's super fucking creepy especially considering i am a minor.

Many people called them creepy and they said, "it's not creepy, every woman has one" which is just incredibly false. Also how tf would they know what genitalia I have?

They continued to respond to other people under my comment while actively ignoring all of my comments, especially the one where I stated that I was a minor and it doesn't really matter whats in my pants.

The worst part of this though was their most recent comments. They said that "people like her make all the gays look bad"

They then revealed that they are gay/a member of the LGBTQ+ community.

To be honest I wasn't upset at first. I'm used to cis het people being ignorant bigots towards minorities. Especially when they have the cover of the internet to shield them. But a member of my own community? Not gonna lie that hurt a little bit.

I know it's just a stranger on the internet but if our own community can't stick together what hope do we have?

I live in the US and frankly it's scary right now. All of these bills and people in power who would rather focus on getting rid of the gays then helping the kids being shot I'm schools. It's so sad.

And to all the people telling people like me who aren't happy with our country "just move then" it is not as easy as you are making it sound. People can't just up and move across seas or across the continent.

I know they would like that though. If everyone who dares to be different would just leave and stop complaining about our rights being stripped from us.

I'm being told by my grandfather that it's not actually that bad. Maybe not for him, he's a cis het white man who only watches Fox News. I commented on one of his bigoted transphobic posts on Facebook and he blocked me and refused to respond to any of my messages. He then called my mom a bitch when she got pissed at him.

We're back on good terms now thankfully. He still has some effed up opinions on LGBTQ+ people, which is hard not just for me but my little sibling as well.

This is the same man who used to tell me to stand up for my country and the things that I believe in. I guess that only applies to things he agrees with.

Our community is being told to stop being so loud about our rights and maybe people would like us more. Imagine if we talked to women in the 1920s and informed them that we are still fighting for equal rights even 100 years later.

I don't care if things are "better now." Better doesn't mean good or safe. People are still being killed for this. We are moving backwards instead of forward. Don't they know history is doomed to repeat itself? Especially if they refuse to make changes.

I informed my uncle of the new bill in Florida about how trans kids are being ripped away from their families just because their families support them. He said "yeah that'll get fought. It won't stay for long."

But he also said that this bill would never get passed. I love my uncle and he means we'll but he still has a lot more faith in our country than I do. Which is not necessarily a bad thing. But it's also leaving him ignorant to a lot of the things that are going on.

Even if that bill doesn't stay "for long" as he says it's still a problem now. People are fleeing Florida and parents have already lost kids to this fucked up system. That's going to cause irreversible trauma on not just the parents but kids as well.

My uncle also says the biggest problem with our country right now is our economy. When I informed him I frankly didn't care about the economy as much as other problems, he laughed. "You're gonna care when you can't pay for anything to live"

The way things are going, by the time I am paying on my own to live I won't have the rights to do so.

Since before I came out I have always wanted to attend a pride parade as I've never been to one. Several months ago my mom and I talked about attending one during pride month. But now I don't want to, the thought honestly scares me.

I live in a small town in a red state. I hate going out in public because of the people in this town. I ate the way they look at me and my friends as if we don't belong.

My heart goes out to my LGBTQ+ siblings. Things are fucking scary right now. Please don't discriminate against your own community or else we don't have any hope of going anywhere.

Happy Pride Month I Guess

[spinningbuster98]

1 (Megaman), 3 (Metroid), 8 (Sonic), 12 (Berserk), 24 (Castlevania) :)

the character everyone gets wrong

Y'know I'm not sure. From my experience the Mega Man fandom isn't as polluted with widespread character misconceptions as Sonic's.

The closest I guess is the take that Zero series Zero is boring and unemotional. I don't necessarily think that fans who think this are wrong per se, seeing as it is a different direction for the character (though not TOO different seeing as Zero is pretty stoic in the X series too), and in Zero 1 he's borderline mute, but I think that his more silent attitude helps give more pathos to those moments where he expresses genuine concern or sympathy for others. Plus it fits the idea that he's an amnesiac who's suddenly woken up in a post apocalyptic world and whose best friend is dead.

I mean at least he had X in the X series, and the situation wasn't nearly as dour

screenshot or description of the worst take you've seen on tumblr

Look if you want to headcanon Samus as being trans good on you but:

1)consider how the only "official" source of this was a half harted joke by a developer, with said joke consisting of a slur

2) It's 100% canon that Samus was a 3 year old girl when K2-L was attacked, so unless you wanna tell me that her parents made basically a toddler transition, with all that would entail, then I don't think it's even possible for her to be trans. At least headcanoning her to be lesbian or other stuff about her sexuality (I personally see her as Ace) makes more sense since to my knowledge there's nothing in canon that would contradict this

common fandom opinion that everyone is wrong about

That Sonic Adventure 1 was a good game

the unpopular character that you actually like and why more people should like them

Nina

Oh don't get me wrong she's very hateable, but that's the point, she's meant to be a representation of the average miserable person in that situation.

In general I think fandoms make the mistake of thinking that a character is only good if they're likeable. No a character is good if they're written well, and considering what Nina's character is supposed to be about then I'd say she passes with good grades (though she got off way too easy at the end, seriously Joachim should NOT have apologized to her, it feels accidentally like victim blaming on the writing's part, one of the few genuinely off moments in Berserk from a writing standpoint to me)

topic that brings up the most rancid discourse

"Guys guuuuys! Lenore didn't ACTUALLY rape Hector!!!"

[vindictiveking]

:: HEADCANON // gender identity.

     Dimitri is a TRANS MAN. He was assigned female at birth, but has never felt that he quite fit into the category of “GIRL.” To dig into this a bit more I’ll first say I like to think, in general, that MOST people of Faerghus couldn’t care less how you present— as long as you can HUNT and FISH and FIGHT, you’re good in their book. So when Dimitri tells his family that he is a BOY, not a girl, at around the age of 10, it’s a SOMEWHAT smooth change.

     Because of his crest, it is VERY easy for Dimitri to build muscle mass— this helps him to feel more MASCULINE and therefore comfortable in his own skin. It's part of why he starts doing strength training daily on top of what he’s already made to do by Gilbert & co. He also happens to grow rather TALL, which is helpful. He’s blessed with a smaller chest that's easy enough for him to bind— though if given the option, he would get top surgery. He does not really experience bottom dysphoria, but his hips make him feel insecure. Feminine clothing doesn’t necessarily make him dysphoric, but if it accentuates the features that he doesn’t like ( chest & hips ), he won’t wear it. He tends to go BACK AND FORTH between being okay with and hating long hair.

     One problem with being the HEIR TO THE THRONE is that EVERYBODY from Dominic to Gautier knows about his transition. Because of this, he is HYPER AWARE that he cannot truly pass as a guy-- or at least, that’s what his DYSPHORIA tells him when he looks in the mirror. The way his family handles the change isn’t the BEST-- they simply go from calling him Princess Phoebe to Prince Dimitri and wait for everyone else to catch up. While he is grateful that they don't make a big deal of it, Dimitri is often fearful that he will have to EXPLAIN himself to people he hasn’t met before who perhaps have not yet gotten the memo, as it has happened a few times.

     The first time he feels the need to cut his hair is probably after Catherine calls him a YOUNG MAIDEN when he’s around 11, as mentioned in their C support. He lets it grow out again for a couple years until the Tragedy takes place. Some of his hair is BURNT OFF in the incident, and he ends up cutting it short again with or without the help of Dedue. When he is depressed, he tends to IGNORE his hair, and when he has a crisis, he cuts it. A couple days before he heads off to join the Academy, he looks in the mirror and decides he looks TOO FEMININE to be around a bunch of new people and so he cuts it again with one of his daggers.

     All in all, Dimitri passes easily enough as a guy, but it does little to help his gender dysphoria.

[detransexual]

Uh-oh gyns, i opened pandoras box yesterday and put on makeup (other than the usual beard-shadow coverup that doesnt actually change how my face looks) and ah fuck i really hate how much i liked it. Nooo dont start using makeup ur already self conscious ahah...

Like i thought id fully accepted being ugly, because i do have a weird face and it usually doesnt bother me, i know i look like hot garbage most of the time but i actually felt like attractive hot garbage?? I dont know how to feel about this tbh. I dont want to start doing something that makes me feel worse about myself if i dont, and every time i do start dabbling in makeup and start wearing it outside it does make me want to keep doing it, but i genuinely dont know how to feel about this tbh?

I think the worst part of it is that i feel more like "myself" actually, in the sense that i look more like i did before i started trying to pass for male. Theres no real point to this post im just rambling.

I feel like i dont necessarily care about my face that much anymore, its just the face i have and its a bit weird looking and oddly proportioned but i can see several of my relatives in my own face. Unfortunately its mostly my male relatives tho lmao.

I really wonder if that has anything to do with my trans identity tbh, why i felt like i WAS male? Because i have always been pretty androgynous both in my face and body composition, and for a long time i was obsessed with plastic surgery generally. I tried really hard for a large part of my adolescence to be really feminine, make myself smaller and cuter and try to fit in with my peers atleast aesthetically when i couldnt fit in behaviourally.

I really remember the feeling of realising females could be transexuals too and suddenly feeling a promise of freedom, feeling like it explained why i pretended to be a boy as a child, why i didnt fit in with my female peers, why i felt the way i did about my female friends (hint: it was autism, and not understanding why i was limited by female socialisation and heteronormayivity) and how hesitantly hopeful i was that that was the explanation, and eventually i became convinced that it explained everything from my weird periods and my deeper than average voice to why i didnt fit in socially and behaviourally - there was something wrong with me on a biological level, something that was easy to believe when you've spent your whole life with a sense that there is something deeply and inherently wrong and different about you.

I dont know, i just wish id have been able to grow up as a girl and realise that that didnt dictate anything about how i should look or act or who i could fall in love with. I wish id have felt able to shed femininity without needing an "excuse" in the form of a male identity. I wish someone had looked at me in all my social problems and self destructive behaviours and realised that this is a kid who cannot ask for help and cannot articulate whats wrong. I wish someone had recognised that something was wrong and that i needed help rather than being told that i was really mature and independent, because i shouldnt have had to be.

And to bring it back to beauty ideals, i certainly shouldnt have been shamed and made to "fix" features that my brother was praised for having, i shouldnt have been told my face and body was unacceptable and unpresentable.

Idk man. Dont wanna care about how i look i dont want it to matter.

I guess a healthier outlook would be to say "huh im not ugly everyone else is just cheating" (jokes!! Is just jonkes!1!!) but then again i am kinda ugly and i just wish i didnt prefer looking better aesthetically because like, whats the point lol its not like thats gonna do anything for me

[layercake]

Why Naoto is Heavily Trans Coded, and How The Discussion Surrounding Him Needs to Change

Hello, I’ve never written or posted anything like this before LOL so this is a bit daunting. But this subject is something that’s been bothering me for a long time, and I wanted to get it out somewhere. So let’s talk about how Naoto Shirogane is heavily trans coded, and how the fandom has a problematic culture surrounding the issue that really needs to change.

Tw // discussion of misogyny , transphobia , and mentions of harassment

Initial Shadow Confrontation 

Since the discussion is most often about what’s “canon” and what’s not, let’s first take a look at what the game actually does give us about Naoto’s character. During the confrontation with Naoto’s shadow, we learn that Naoto idolized detectives as a kid, and wanted to be one himself when he was older.

However, this posed a problem for him in multiple ways. One, he was (is) still a child, and the people in his field don’t take him seriously because of it. He tries desperately to escape this fact, to try and act as mature as possible, but ultimately he can’t change how others will perceive him at his age.

This is what the shadow confrontation focuses on most heavily. But then it switches to discussing the other part of the issue-- the fact that Naoto’s ideal image of a detective is a man, and he “isn’t.” 

At the end, Yukiko says “You must know already that what you yearn for isn’t to become an adult or to become a boy,” and Naoto accepts it. This is what most people point to when saying that Naoto can’t be trans, because he agrees that it wasn’t what he wished for. So, easy, right? If you take this as him telling the truth, then it looks like an open and shut case-- he isn’t trans. But Naoto’s actions don’t really fit what he says here. 

The issue starts with these next lines (below) in particular. To me, Naoto’s tone in the first line is regretful, and doesn’t strike me as a sentiment someone who is cisgender would necessarily hold. Why would he want to “change into a man?” To fit his ideal image of a detective? As he says here, yes.

(Real quick before I continue, it’s not clear in the dialogue screenshot but it’s important to note that Naoto does say “yes” to Yukiko’s question about him not liking being a girl. He nods his head)

The narrative that the game tries to go with after this is that the “ideal image” Naoto wanted to live up to, including the male aspect of it, was unattainable and formed primarily because he felt that was the only way he could be a detective. 

But, is this really that much of a problem? We all look up to certain types of people, people that we want to be like-- and for many, this can factor into gender identity as well. If Naoto really just wanted to be a cool, male detective, that doesn’t at all negate that being trans would be a part of that for him. 

Naoto’s other words and actions, as well as the framing of this scene as a whole, make the scenario feel a lot less believable to me for multiple reasons. Naoto never initiates the conversation that him wanting to be a boy is incorrect-- Yukiko does. Naoto isn’t even the one to trigger his shadow-- Kanji does that. Naoto had a lot less agency in a lot of these decisions than the other characters did with their shadows. 

Naoto’s Continued Actions

The fragility of the narrative Atlus put together for Naoto continues to grow throughout the rest of the game, due to the way he behaves after the initial shadow confrontation.

For starters, it’s implied that Naoto is not his birth name, something that i think a lot of people either miss or forget about-- and yet he continues to go by it throughout the course of the game. We never find out his deadname and he never expresses a desire to share it with anybody.

The day after the “reveal,” Naoto doesn’t change anything about his appearance, mannerisms, or how he presents himself. He honestly seems uncomfortable with the fact that everyone has found out, in a way that felt much like being outed to the whole school, as opposed to finally being seen and accepted for who you “really” are.

I understand that such a drastic shift in people’s perception of you would be overwhelming to anybody, no matter if you were cis or not. But if Atlus really wanted to hone in on the idea that Naoto was happy about this change, they could’ve at least made him…. Well, happy about it. Even if it was just a small smile, just a tiny indication of relief even despite how hard it will be to adjust, it would’ve made it at least a little more believable that this is what he really wanted.

But that’s not the case. Instead, he’s uncomfortable, he still binds, he still wears the school’s male uniform, and he still goes by Naoto. The only time any of this actually changes is if you as the protagonist push him to, which… is a whole other mess.

The fact that Naoto has even gotten to this point, though, speaks more volumes to me than anything else. Passing is not easy. Coming out is not easy. Naoto would have had to go through difficult lengths in order to get not only his school, but the country and media to see him as a man.  He’s a well-known "detective prince".. someone was bound to look up his records and find out about it. That's a huge risk to take.

In addition to this, he binds. He goes by masculine pronouns and a masculine name. He very audibly changes his voice to be more masculine. I don’t know how to tell you this, but this is just…. not something cis people do? At least not comfortably. 

In fact, doing all of this would have been incredibly uncomfortable for Naoto if he was cis. As someone who experiences dysphoria, looking like and being seen as a gender you are not can be really, really painful. If transitioning was something he really didn’t want, why would he put himself through all of that? Was it really to escape misogyny? Me asking this isn’t minimizing the issue at all, because I understand that it’s incredibly serious and hard for countless women. But I would generally think someone’s first reaction to facing misogyny isn’t to… completely change their identity and present as a different gender.

On top of being probably the hardest option of escaping misogyny available to him, and one of the most uncomfortable, presenting as a man doesn’t necessarily get rid of any prejudices Naoto may face. In fact, I would argue that it’s considerably more dangerous. Especially in a rural town like Inaba, where people seem to not really understand or approve of being LGBT. Naoto is smart, he would have thought of all of this. So why?

Inherent Transphobia of Naoto’s Arc 

There is something to be said about how much misogyny is present in Japan’s workforce, especially in fields like Naoto’s, and the importance there is in discussing that. The base idea behind his struggles and message isn’t inherently a bad one, but the way the game went about it was problematic because it put down transgender identities in the process.

The first time I watched Naoto’s shadow confrontation, it was really distressing to me. The game continuously repeats the idea that you can’t “cross the barrier of the sexes,” that Naoto “can never really be a man,” and  that “you can change your name, but you can never change who you “really” are.” I hope I don’t need to explain why this is a problem.

Naoto’s wish to be a man, regardless of what was driving it, is depicted as something temporary and childish. Something that Naoto “didn’t really want,”  something that was just an excuse to run away from the misogyny he was facing. Even if it was unintentional, this message is incredibly harmful to transgender people.

It would have been a better and much more coherent message about misogyny if the writers had steered clear of trans themes entirely. In fact, I think they did so well with Sae’s character in Persona 5-- she’s in the same field of work, facing very similar struggles, but she doesn’t react in the same way as Naoto at all. 

Kanji and Homophobia 

It’s even worse that Naoto’s “reveal,” on top of being problematic by itself, is used as a method to bury Kanji’s exploration of his own sexuality. The problems with Kanji’s own shadow are bad enough to warrant their own long rant, but the reveal that Naoto was “really a girl” this whole time allows the story to completely wave off his gayness for good.

This isn’t something unique to this game-- the trope of “two boys fall in love, but one of them turns out to be a girl so it’s fine” has been used numerous times in other media to explore the topic half-assedly. It plays with the “exoticness” or “drama” of a gay romance, but backs off at the end in order to uphold societal norms and prevent backlash. 

This doesn’t really give any kind of good commentary on gay relationships, nor does it depict them in a positive or helpful manner. It isn’t something that these games should be getting kudos for doing. 

Misogyny?

I think there’s also something to be said about how poignantly bad Atlus is at really tackling the problem of misogyny. It tries, especially with characters like Ann and Sae, and in certain aspects it can succeed. But then they have scenes like the pageant and Every Beach Scene Ever, where the women are forced to wear swimsuits or revealing clothing against their will, or their bodies are talked about without their consent. There is consistently a character in each persona game who is forced to do the whole misogynistic dipshit gimmick that’s supposed to be funny-- Junpei, Yosuke, Teddie, Morgana, Ryuji-- and while this is obviously not a Persona specific problem by a longshot, it’s still indicative of how unsuccessful these games often are in delivering the message that society’s systemic misogyny is an issue.

This is something I think about a lot when people try and argue that Naoto’s story can’t be about him being trans because it’s “an important message about misogyny.” Atlus often doesn’t deliver on such stories already, and they certainly didn’t with Naoto. As soon as Naoto returns to “living as a woman” he’s subjected to the same misogyny that the other girls are. His chest is commented on, he’s forced to be in the beauty pageant, he’s made uncomfortable in the bath scenes-- really, all Atlus did after the reveal was make the problem worse for him. 

On top of this, his story never actually meaningfully tackles the problem of misogyny in the detective force. It’s not a major part of his social link or the general plot of the game-- honestly, it’s barely even touched on at all after the initial confrontation. Thus, the idea that “Naoto can’t be trans because it erases a story about misogyny” is just plain untrue. There never was a coherent one in the first place.

Problems Within the Fandom

Despite all of this, there is such an intense backlash from the majority of the fandom if anybody dares to bring up these issues with Naoto’s story. Naoto being trans is generally seen as something ridiculous and stupid, or something to insult and mock people for.

I understand that there's always going to be people who say provocative stuff like this, no matter what anyone does, and that it’s not something exclusive to this particular fandom or character. But the problem is that this rhetoric isn't just from them anymore--the consensus among so much of the fandom seems to be either that Naoto absolutely cannot be trans, or that speaking about it at all is "annoying discourse" and taboo. Even from fans that are LGBT or allies themselves. 

This in and of itself is such a telling thing to me. if you find yourself getting angry about the subject, really ask yourself why. Is it such a problem for people to reclaim a transphobic story? Is it such a problem for a character to be trans in the first place?  There is room for discussion and nuance regarding this situation, but we have to make it for ourselves. We can accept that Atlus’s base game will never actually give us a coherent story about either misogyny nor being transgender with Naoto’s story. But petty arguments and insults thrown at people who bring up this topic isn’t any of that-- it’s just poorly masked transphobia. 

So at the end of the day, no, Naoto being is trans is not “canon.” Of course Naoto would not actually be allowed to be trans, he is a main character in a game series where the only explicitly LGBT characters have been consistently buried, stereotyped, or demonized with only a few rare exceptions.

Yes, you’re allowed to headcanon whatever you want about him. I can’t stop you from wanting a story about misogyny, or from seeing Naoto’s gender as something more fluid than I do. But you can’t ignore the fact that his story, as written in canon, is laden with transphobia despite its intentions. It’s not a ridiculous or harmful thing for trans people to want to reclaim that.

There are still a lot more issues with how Naoto is treated in the game-- especially in his romance route-- but that’s a whole other can of worms I’m not ready to unpack today lol

Hopefully all of this made sense though, and feel free to bring up anything else I may have missed or point out any issues you might have with it :-) Thanks for reading!

[nevermindirah]

I am but a sad little trans man who absolutely wants to know your thoughts on immortals capabilities to transition because I have thoughts and they make my depressed little trans heart hurt because how in the world could they transition if their bodies heal everything?

Hi! Sending you hugs because I've been struggling with the exact same thoughts! I wrote this lil meta last month but I don't like it and my brain keeps interrupting things like my job and trips to the grocery store to get me working on this puzzle.

From what we see in the movie, our elderly friends have regular-human healing, just faster and MORE, plus magic. We have canon evidence of how this works with wounds/injuries and can infer from there about how their immortality would handle infections, genetic/physiological/autoimmune/etc disorders, malnutrition/dehydration/etc, mental illnesses, and dental stuff, as well as things that bodies do that aren't necessarily bad but often need medical care — like pregnancy and gender transition. (I’m not a medical professional, just a nerd who loves a good Wikipedia rabbithole.)

Let's start with an easy one. Nile's hand healing after she stuck it in the fire is just a lickety-split version of what would happen to a regular human with a small skin wound: clotting, inflammation, rebuilding, healed.

When Nile yeets herself and pharma bro out the window of the topmost tower, we see the same thing happen again but bigger, plus we see several of her bones pop themselves back into place, and presumably any blood vessels that got torn up magically correct themselves under her skin. Humans have been surviving injuries like major bone fractures for a very long time but a bone that heals without medical intervention to realign the fractured pieces might heal at a new angle, meaning it doesn't work as well anymore, and it might cause damage to surrounding organs/tissues and leave a lot of scar tissue or a chronic wound. But Nile only needs Booker and Nicky keeping her upright for barely a minute and then she's walking around on her own just fine.

A large wound that breaks deeply through the skin, like Nile's sliced throat or Booker's exploded abdomen, can be survivable for a regular human if it doesn't irreparably damage critical organs and if you can get medical attention before you bleed out, but even with modern medical intervention the results are rough. Jay and Dizzy aren't wrong for being deeply weirded out by Nile's flawless neck: even with the best plastic surgeons in the world on the case, closing up a wound like that will leave scar tissue that affects both appearance and function.

So, we've got immortality magic moving bones back into place, restarting stopped hearts and lungs and brains, rebuilding major structures like arteries and intestines, healing up wounds without scar tissue, pushing out bullets, and otherwise handwaving the big stuff. But it's not a magic wand, it’s a process, and bigger wounds take longer. It's like these people's mitochondria have little gnomes in there with schematics to rebuild their bodies to factory default.

From how these bodies handle wounds we can infer that they'd handle pathogens / infectious diseases the same way: inflammation, white blood cells attack, byebye plague see you never. And if these bodies are resetting bones and rebuilding organs, they're probably also correcting genetic disorders and shifting around physiological problems like bone spurs. So let's keep on inferring.

What if, instead of every death erasing hormone replacement therapy and gender-affirming surgery and leaving a trans immortal detransitioned over and fucking over again, what if the magic that governs immortality considers dysphoria-causing body parts just like any other wound to heal?

What if Booker is a trans man, and he's got that sweet muscle mass and that height and that beard that comes all the way up his cheeks because he's been on the wonder drug that is testosterone for over 200 years? What if immortality was all "we see you've been hung from the neck until dead, and your eyes have been pecked out, and also you have all these hormones that turn your body into a shape that makes you miserable — we're gonna fix all that" and then regenerated his pecked-out eyeballs and unsnapped his neck and undid the results of months of insufficient food AND ALSO started pumping him with the fantasy version of HRT so his chest started to reduce and his fat redistributed itself and his beard started coming in?

Who's to say that's not how it works?

All my dysphoria is social — I'm fine with my body for the most part and I CANNOT STAND when people assume things about my gender, because of my body or for any other reason. We see pretty clearly with Booker that mental illness isn't magically healed the way physical injuries are, and I think that's because the causes of mental illness are a combination of physiology/chemistry stuff and things like our beliefs about ourselves and the world, our experiences of trauma, and our experiences of getting our needs met or not. If I were immortal I could maybe break up with my SSRI, but it wouldn't stop me from getting misgendered — I'd still have to find a way to cope with the ongoing trauma of that. Having to navigate hundreds of cultures' ideas about gender when my gender is "uhhhhh" sounds like absolute hell for me, no thank you, do not want.

But for my fellow trans people whose dysphoria is primarily body-related, and for my social-dysphoria pals whose gender is something nearly every human being would recognize and all they need is to pass, how about let's make an executive decision that immortality includes HRT for anybody who needs it, with no psych eval or begging your insurance company or poking yourself with needles, and just like with wound healing it's like regular HRT but faster and more. HRT so powerful and so magical that it gives you the best possible version of the results you want and none of the results you don't. If I had the option to go on HRT for just like one or two changes but not the whole battery of things I would fucking do that, and if I were to join our elderly friends, maybe I could.

This might be easier on transmasc immortals than transfeminine ones, because testosterone's effects are basically impossible to reverse. But also you can't just keep waking back up after repeatedly drowning for 500 years, so fuck it. We're making an executive decision here.

Estrogen that grows your breasts and softens your dick but doesn't lessen your ability to orgasm. Immortality magic that makes your beard go away and maybe shrinks your height an inch or two or six. Maybe Quynh is trans and one time a few thousand years ago she got injured in battle worse than Booker's grenaded belly and she woke up an hour later with a vulva and a uterus and now her body is just like that. Factory reset.

I subscribe to the "God made wheat and grapes but not bread and wine so humans could share in the act of creation" model of transness and I personally feel very weird about the idea of immortality magically giving a trans immortal cisnormative genitals the same way it resets bones. There's no one right way to have a pussy or a dick, you know? Maybe Quynh woke up from a catastrophic gut wound in like 800 BCE with a constructed vagina rivaling the best our modern money can buy, without a uterus but with a clit that's just as magical as anybody else's.

I've been thinking about writing a Book of Nile fic with trans man Booker, which is why the two of them are most of my examples here. It would include porn, because apparently I can't write more than 1500 words about them without writing porn, so I need to think more about what's going to feel good for me and other trans people who might read it and won't accidentally facilitate cis people objectifying us. Like, I've thought in a lot of detail about what a clit enlarged by that many centuries of testosterone might look and feel like, and that specific experience is not mine so I'm treading carefully.

Cis people are welcome to reblog this! Fellow trans folks are welcome to join me in the act of creation on this post ;)

[thelesbiancitizen]

hello, u seem like u have good opinions just in general, so like i have extreme body dysphoria and have been "out" to my best friend as transmasculine and straight for a year or so. the thing is, i came out to my other friends as a lesbian a few weeks ago, cause i found it easier to explain than heing transmasc (ik that sounds strange/annoying, so yea) but lately i've been feeling more comfortable identifying as a lesbian rather than a trans man, but my body dysphoria has gone up extremely. this isnt me saying that i made the wrong decision to id as trans, because i do want to pass as male. also, have never felt any shame in being a 'girl' or a lesbian, i just felt it wasnt right for me, but now i'm feeling doubts again, cause most of my trans male friends are completely happy with like, who they are, u know?

(pls dont feel obligated to answer this, i just needed to rant, thank u <3)

Hi anon! Nothing about that sounds strange to me. It sounds like you're feeling pretty confused at the moment. Sometimes, worrying about labels can make things more confusing -- labels are meant to help us categorize and make sense of things, but they can trip us up, too, because it's easy to get caught up in trying to shape and mold ourselves to fit into labels, instead of just letting ourselves be. I understand that, because I was really worried about labels for a long time. I think it was because I was so out of touch with my feelings; I was really, really concerned with what others thought of me. I didn't think I was at the time, but in hindsight, it was all I thought about; how I might be appearing to others, what they might be thinking of me. I was so worried about what each label 'said' about me -- not realizing that the labels themselves... don't really mean much. People tend to imbue words with a lot of meaning that isn't necessarily there for anyone else but us, because we are emotional creatures. That isn't necessarily bad. But it can be confusing, too. What helped me the most to 'figure myself out' was realizing that it didn't really matter what words I used to describe myself, or words that other people used to describe me, because no matter what I call myself, it doesn't change who I am on the inside. How you feel about particular words and labels isn't as important as how you feel about yourself. Comparing yourself to other people is only going to get you so far, because you don't know what sort of internal battles they may be fighting, you can't understand what it is like to be them. You only understand what it is like to be you. Let your gut feelings and your intuition guide you toward what feels right, and don't worry about labeling anything. Often when we are feeling strong emotions we tell ourselves stories to try to explain the feelings away, rather than being honest with ourselves and letting our feelings "speak for themselves". Sometimes feelings are ugly and frightening and painful, but they can't hurt you; it's alright to sit with them and explore them. Write about your feelings and get to know them. They give you the most important information about your life. If you've been feeling more comfortable identifying as a lesbian lately, that might be your intuition speaking. Keep listening and learning about yourself. Give yourself permission and space to explore your feelings and, in time, you'll be able to make more sense of yourself and your experience.

[nemesis-is-my-middle-name]

ok this ties into that thing i just reblogged but i didn’t wanna derail it and also i was thinking about it before but like. i need yall to understand that the reason we say “listen to people of x marginalized group about their issues” is not bc having a specific identity – of any kind! – gives you some kind of Magic Card that makes you valid to talk about that group. it’s because the people with the most experience on specific kinds of oppression are the ones who, well, have experienced it. 

this is especially pertinent when talking about queer people, because queer identity isn’t like race or disability etc. because it’s fluid and harder to pin down. people misidentify and use labels that aren’t “right” all the time, sometimes for years before they figure things out.

so for example being a lesbian does not automatically make someone a walking reference book on What All Lesbians Think About Their Rights Ever. likewise, someone who identified as a lesbian for years and now id’s as a trans man still has useful insight on lesbian experiences. and, in fact, may have insight that current lesbians don’t on community issues like how they responded en masse to that person coming out, etc.

just. y’know. having an identity in your bio doesn’t give you a free pass to say whatever the hell you want, and someone shouldn’t necessarily be shut down just because they don’t have that specific identity in an easy-to-access carrd (additionally bc that is not information they are required to provide for anyone and everyone!)

[nothorses]

Uh I don't really know where else to go for this and I know you answer asks like this a lot and you be always got something good to say so maybe you can help me? I'm trying to sort through lots of feelings on my own since I can't get a gender therapist (my mother actually recommend medicalized conversion therapy instead when I tried to come out to her so, so much for her loving her kids no matter what, right? I hope she comes around but I'm not in a position to apply force to our relationship right now)

And although I'm not like 100% male and I'm more close to enby (but with he/him pronouns) it's still an odd concept to know that people will view me one way based on exactly how I present and I'm not allowed to talk about it without it being "whining" or nonsense complaining... Because if I'm a man, or closely enough one to be precieved as one, then what right do I have to complain? I'm sure you've seen the type of conversations

I can do a lot of things now that I can't do if I'm precieved as male? Like for example women can go to the park and eat lunch and nobody bats an eye but if I a guy does it it's weird because there's kids around, ya know? It's this weird double edge sword that if I decide to go on T I'm both gaining and losing privilege and people won't take that into consideration, because people are still hung up on viewing oppression like Pokemon stats

Also I don't necessarily hate men or think men are evil or anything, but I know other people do that and other people are scared of men- and like I get it if I see some weird dude loitering around I'm locking the car too, but I don't want to be the reason a woman has to cross the street? Or the reason someone has to worry about going home late?

And don't get me wrong, I know I'm a good person, but I know as well other people don't know that... I know what checking over your shoulder on a walk is like, and I don't want to have to be the reason someone does that?

So it leaves me feeling like not only is there so much to learn, but also people are just going to hate me for who I am going to become if I go through medical transition? Like I get it, not everyone is going to like me, but I don't want people to be afraid of me?

But also if I do go on T I have absolutely 0 basis for what I might look like or how it will change me and that's a scary aspect as well, because I can think of a lot of guys I'd be happy to look like or whatever but I can think of a lot more I would be unhappy to look like and you can't pick and choose genetic reactions.. And I know the idea is all about becoming more "you" rather than the perfect version of yourself you wish you could be, but it's still the point... Is it better to live with the familiar hurt of this body and my dislikes? Or should I try essentially a new one and run the risk of hating it more in some ways?

There's like 2 central ideas here, and the one idea has a lot of little ideas coming off of it, but I know at least the first issue I presented you'll understand... The second one is a little more up in the air since appearance is such a personal thing, but I think it's not an unheard of concept... So hopefully all of that makes sense and maybe you've got some decent advice or can just help me make a little more sense to myself?

Oh boy, you’re so valid. A lot of this is very familiar, and I know you’re not alone in it at all.

I’m gonna try to organize some points here, cause I think you brought up a lot of things.

“I don’t know if I want to be perceived as a man, cause enby”

You’re right that folks are likely going to see you as a man after a certain point. It’s hard to find a middle ground where you ping as neither to the average cis person, and it’s hard to control that enough for it to be consistent.

My advice, honestly, is to make choices more based on your comfort than the highly subjective and ever-shifting concept of “passing”. I know it sucks to be perceived as something you aren’t, but your wants are probably the best starting point in the decision-making process.

“I’m afraid I won’t be able to do the things I can do now if I’m perceived as a man”

This is true of transitioning in general, tbh! You will also likely be able to do things you couldn’t do before; I know folks have talked about feeling safer walking around at night, and being listened to more often by other men, once they begin to pass as men.

I also struggle with this, as a future teacher; the treatment of men in childcare is very, very different, and very stigmatized compared to female counterparts. But that, to me, is worth it. I’m willing to deal with the problems other people place on me, if it means I get to finally feel at home in my own body.

“I’m afraid of causing women distress by existing near them as a man”

Look, this is frankly just not your responsibility. Looking like a man is not an act of misogyny. Looking like a man does not make you “the reason” women do or feel anything. Those reactions are their own, and you are not responsible for mitigating them- particularly if that mitigation involves you, a trans person, forgoing transition for other people’s comfort.

You are responsible for trying to be a good person, making good decisions, and for not being misogynistic. Not the assumptions women make about you based on your appearance.

“I’m afraid I might not like how I look after I transition”

I know I agonized a lot over this, certain that I would ultimately dislike how I looked if it wasn’t up to a certain standard. I imagined my post-transition self as a stranger; someone I’d have to meet and grow to accept as myself. Even scarier was that I couldn’t opt out if I didn’t like the stranger- I’d be stuck with him forever after I made that one big decision.

But... it’s not really like that, in practice. I’m me, every single step of the way, and I have only ever felt more and more like myself as I go through this process. I feel like pre-transition me was the stranger, and the person I’m becoming now is more familiar to me than anyone I’ve ever been before.

I know that’s not an easy thing to understand or relate to from a pre-transition standpoint, but what I want you to understand is this: if you’re making this decision for the right reasons, you’re gonna be okay. If you’re pursuing your own happiness, comfort in your body, the person you want to be and the life you want to live, you’re gonna be okay.

And if you realize it was a mistake, at some point, you can undo that decision again. It’s fluid; you’re not gonna be trapped in one body forever. Transition is about agency. Trust yourself now to know what you want, and trust your future self to keep knowing what you want.

[akari-hope]

So I’ve heard differing arguments relating to it, ranging from “Well, if we shun content created by this person and/or everyone who’s done anything problematic, that’s a slippery slope that’ll lead to us being unable to enjoy anything” to “It doesn’t matter if you can separate the author from their creation to an extent, there’s ultimately other content to be consumed, & shunning the work of the problematic author in order to deny them or their progeny traffic is more important than salvaging

2/4 said author’s work.” Pablo Neruda, Yukio Mishima, & JK Rowling are authors that come to mind in these discussions. (For example, I’ve seen several SPOP edits ft. Pablo Neruda’s love poetry, & when his problematic history was explained to one creator, they cited death of the author.) Another argument against the concept, or rather, against how the concept is often applied, that I see is that people cite it in order to uncritically consume whatever they want.

3/4 Yet others say that people who say this often take the concept too far, to the point where no one can enjoy anything, ever, unless they’re obsessively analyzing every last detail of something for potential problematic tropes or other problematic content. I just don’t know where I fall, because I both agree and disagree with various parts of these stances, but see how all could be taken too far and used poorly, if that’s a sensible way of wording it. But I don’t know what dictates “too

4/4 far”, so I’ve never voiced a definitive opinion on the matter. I hope this makes sense, it’s a bit more jumbled than I had intended.

total sense!

death of the author is such an interesting concept, purely bc how it was MEANT to be used and how it has come to be used are so different. for transparency, death of the author is a lens of examining a piece of work which states that the author’s original intent does not matter, that the metatextual elements of a work do not have any bearing on what is actually present in the text.

to use an example, fans of spop will likely know that adora and catra are at least somewhat inspired by noelle stevenson’s own relationship. since we know this, we can see this in the text. the more you know about noelle and molly, the more you can see what parts of their relationship influenced those characters. we don’t have to guess that catradora is meant to be viewed in a positive light - we’re told by the showrunner itself it should be. if we were to apply death of the author, though, we would ignore this. it is not written explicitly in the text, and is therefore metatextual. we can still come to the same conclusion based on information within the show itself, but we would not use that “word of god” type of information.

and you can do this with basically anything. an artist said their song is about romantic love, but you see it as platonic love? claim death of the author! once it’s out in the world, it’s up to the audience to decide what a piece means.

now, here’s where it gets tricky: you can’t just ignore bigotry in a piece, even if you are applying death of the author. let’s look at hp lovecraft for this one. anyone with even passing knowledge of lovecraftian horror will know that the main element of it is fear of the unknown. sure, there’s many ways you can interpret that within the text! but fact of the matter is that lovecraft was a horrible xenophobic racist. and knowing that, it becomes very hard to separate the “fear of the unknown” in lovecraft’s work from real world xenophobia. you can still claim that within the text you interpret it differently, sure. but you can’t go so far as to pretend the intent isn’t there. the author’s interpretation doesn’t have to be yours, but it’s impossible to separate the author’s worldview from the text - it’s baked in.

okay, so, interpret however you want, but acknowledge prejudice. easy enough. until we get to the elephant in the room, joanne rowling herself. now, we know she has horrible ideas baked into her text. but that doesn’t necessarily mean we throw it all away, right? after all, people still love lovecraft’s work, and he was horrible. there’s an entire horror genre coined after the man. if we don’t throw lovecraft away, why throw joanne away? and the big difference there is that...joanne is alive. and wealthy. with friends in high places. and a large public following. even when he was alive, lovecraft didn’t exactly have millions of followers on twitter. pablo neruda and yukio mishima were not good people, but again, also dead and not with the same level of power. meanwhile joanne is actively using her wealth and following to influence british lawmakers.

and here’s where people lose death of the author. bc yes, you can still examine harry potter however you want. you can still say the books were an influence or that they meant something to you. but you cannot use “death of the author” to substitute an answer to a moral dilemma. and the moral dilemma is simply that supporting joanne, be it by word of mouth or monetarily, is supporting her ability to spread transphobia. this is why we see a more active push than usual to stop consuming hp and related rowling works. the driving force is not just “thing bad”, but the active harm joanne is causing to trans people in the uk.

so, what does that all mean? basically, use death of the author responsibly. you don’t have to toss out every single problematic work ever penned. if we did that, we wouldn’t have much left, and the foundations upon which modern media were built would be gone. but, you also can’t say that you don’t have to acknowledge biases and prejudice in media. bc you still do. there’s not a filmmaker in hollywood who can claim they’re not using some amount of technique pioneered by alfred hitchcock, but we also can’t pretend like “psycho” didn’t have transphobic undertones. it’s possible to both appreciate “psycho” for its importance to film history AND acknowledge those problematic elements without beating them to death.

basically, if you’re thinking of applying death of the author, you need to ask yourself two questions:

-am i using this to analyze the work, or am i trying to make myself feel better? -is my consumption of this work allowing the creator to cause harm?

if you’re trying to make yourself feel better, you don’t need death of the author; being aware of the problems within the work is sufficient. and if your answer to the second question is “yes”, that’s when you need to wonder if your consumption of said work is really more important than the harm you may be inadvertently causing.

bc it feels wrong to not include them, lindsay ellis has two wonderful videos on death of the author, which i will link to below (as well as a video on transphobia in pop culture, which i sort of touched on here, that helps give a better sense of how you can consume and even admire problematic media while acknowledging its flaws)

Death of the Author

Death of the Author 2: Rowling Boogaloo

Tracing the Roots of Pop Culture Transphobia

tldr: death of the author is a great tool to analyze media, but all too often gets used as an answer to a moral dilemma when that was never its intended purpose. you can invoke death of the author without ignoring problematic elements of a work, you don’t have to self-flagellate over said problematic elements, but be aware of if your consumption of a work causes active harm to people.

[ineffablebuddies]

Thoughts on how the Star Trek remakes should approach the characters , in a way that I think would be realistic for 2021 and our current climate:

Romantic relationships:

Sulu/Chekhov - We know they spend a lot of time together on a one to one basis, especially in the films, and they are very endeared to each other. It also wouldn’t change their dynamic or the dynamic on the bridge, and could slip into any future films or shows without change to character. (unlike Spock and Uhura, which I don’t hate, but required adjusting Spock’s character in order to enable a pre-existing relationship.) Like, all you’d need is one throwaway line to make it canon and you could keep the rest exactly the same. And there is obvious value in representing an interracial same sex relationship.

Uhura/Scotty - this would work as a slow burn, because Scotty is a bit of a hopeless romantic whilst he is younger, and is easily misled by his heart and can be a bit overprotective in a very 60s style which is a character flaw integral to his character (and is the plot of a few episodes). Which is why a slow burn is nice for him, because he needs to learn to come from a place of genuine respect and deep affection. And whilst I do like that Uhura stays relatively unattached as one of the few prominent female characters in tos, I do think that as a black woman it is important to allow her to have a romantic relationship due to current representation issues. Which is why I think the slow burn is also nice for her, because you can’t change her character, or make her the object of affection, but showing a deep love and affection developing on the job is nice. We also only start getting the scotty/Uhura romantic dynamic coming in the films when they’re much older. And again I think this is one you can show without having to change anything integral to them. Same with checkov/sulu that it shouldn’t be a plot point, but a character thing that happens without needing to be focused on. Neither of them seek it, but it happens naturally.

Amanda/Sarek - obviously this is already canon, but I think it should be explored in a little more detail. I also think we can do away with the whole “Vulcan is incredibly sexist and treat women as property” thing, which doesn’t actually make sense considering the female Vulcans we do meet, so doesn’t really add to the world building anyway.

Ambiguous Relationships:

Kirk/Spock/Bones - now I know this is controversial, but I don’t think they should necessarily make them canon in the remakes, except possibly at the very end of the shows/last film. To focus on the romantic relationship between Kirk/Spock too early on will potentially reduce the time for Bones to be included as a very necessary part of the main three, and the fact of the matter, the three of them are presented as having a deep bond, not just Kirk/Spock. And there’s a certain level of yearning and unspoken love that really defines their relationships. They should always end up together in some manner, with no other romantic attachments. Part of me would love to make it a ployamarous relationship, but I don’t think it’s likely to happen anytime soon.

I do think however that they should make Spock gay, and I think they should keep the relationship with the Romulan commander but make it a man, because that was actually very well written and acted, but the fact that Spock is able to use that romantic affection to his advantage against a woman is a little sexist considering it’s like the only time we see a female romulan commander, but as a man we wouldn’t have those same issues. And I think that’s the only other relationship we should see Spock have outside of Kirk/bones, because it’s marked by the fact that he can’t act on it the way he would like to, and none of the other relationships in tos really work IMO because it just seems ooc for him. But I think it’s important to allow him to be confirmed as gay considering he is queercoded.

I don’t think it’ll be as easy to confirm a queer identity for Kirk, but I think that for the women he has flings with, he should never be the one to initiate it, but have the same flaw of scotty as being a bit of a hopeless romantic who can be misled by his heart, and again that would give more value to the slow burn he has with Spock. I think you can very much allow him to refer to Spock with love, and I think you can confirm a relationship with Spock at the very end, but I think it should be non-sexual. Vulcan kisses are the way to go, and should allow you to give confirmation of romantic love whilst also having plausible deniability for the people who would riot against it.

I think it’d be fucking amazing if we could cast a trans guy as Kirk. I don’t think you’d get away with saying the character is trans, but having a trans actor and just never mentioning it in show may just be enough to get away with it. Especially if this is a relatively unknown actor who passes completely so casual watchers can’t even get fussed about it (I know this wording has some issues, but I’m thinking more about getting around execs and producers, than on what would be best for rep.)

I’m torn on how far you could get away with including Bones in their relationship. The bones/Spock dynamic is interesting because it is like enemies to lovers, they definitely develop that care for each other, whilst Kirk/bones are old friends. I think Bones shouldn’t have romantic relationships on screen, and should maybe be quite unromantic as a result of his divorce. I don’t think we should ever meet his daughter, though I’m also quite interested in the idea of his ex wife having remarried for a number of years and then having a brief affair with Bones, before breaking it off, but then gives birth to his child but it remains a secret. Because it’s definitely part of his character that he has no attachments to his home, and it makes more sense of his attachment - his love for a daughter that never knew him - if it’s one he can’t do anything about. And would understandably make him more bitter towards his ex, which can make him more unromantic. But I don’t think it needs to be a major plot point.

Like I said, Spock/bones/Kirk should always end up together in some way. And I think it’s in their character to never define why they end up together, but to acknowledge that they can’t live without each other. And I think you could get away with including that as ambiguous to how far their love for each other goes. There’ll be too much backlash to make it completely canon for it, but you could get away with the Good Omens approach. Perhaps you could include Bones in a Vulcan kiss subtly enough to get away with it.

Characters who should be important:

Christine Chapel - she should definitely be in it and made a more significant character, because otherwise Uhura is really the only woman in the show. But it’d be very nice to have a woman who doesn’t need to have a relationship, and there’s no need for her romantic desire for Spock to exist in any remakes. It would also be nice to just make her a doctor from the get-go. Her friendship with Uhura was present in tos, but can now be focused on more, as well as her supportive role to Bones throughout. She wouldn’t be part of the main group, but she should be a big part of their lives.

Doctor m’benga - he was an interesting character, and it’d be nice to have a fixed medical team that work closely together. There’s also a potential for an interesting concept of him being an expert on Vulcans, Bones being an expert on Humans, and thus they’ve both been hired on the ship to work together for the sake of Spock. Also, having another established doctor on board could give an actual explanation for why it’s okay that their only doctor keeps beaming down to dangerous missions and going up to the bridge for no reason lol. Plus there is a lot to be said for casting a dark skinned black man in the role of knowledgable caregiver, especially if they can make him more of a scientist of alien biology too. There may be value if it naturally develops of him having a relationship with chapel, because whilst I like allowing women to exist without relationships, it might be balanced out with the positive representation of an interracial relationship.

Lieutenant Rahda - remember her? She was like In one episode but was great, and she should definitely be introduced as part of the bridge team again. Though her exact culture or religion is not disclosed, she is seen to wear a bindi, and i think it’s always a great time to add more diversity. It makes sense to have more people in the bridge crew too, even if they aren’t part of the main team dynamic. Considering the current political climate, it’d also be a great idea to add another bridge crew team who is visibly a Muslim woman who wears a headscarf, seeing as various countries are still trying to ban that.

Walking Bear - he was only in the TAS for one episode, but again I think he would prove a valuable addition, especially considering star trek’s representation of native people has never been the best, so it’s time they started to make up for that a bit. In most episodes there’s always usually others in the bridge that are helping the main team, and it’d make sense to have a fixed cast of who these people are and flesh them out a bit more.

Saavik - she shouldn’t be in it until much later, at least not as part of the enterprise crew, but there is something very interesting about her character and the dynamic with Spock (which is why I think they should meet later on, because he takes on a role of mentor which is a dynamic shift, and thus should probably happen later. Multiple Vulcans on board is also a dynamic shift that I think should be addressed more.) I do wonder whether it might be nice to move her to being a scientist rather than bridge crew, as that would afford her more interaction with Bones as well, who I think we should get to see interact with other Vulcans more, to establish that he is not xenophobic despite his conflict on Vulcan philosophy with Spock. (Or at least if he does start xenophobic, to start showing his development away from this.) She also should not have a relationship, especially not with Spock oh my god. I think a nice way for her to be introduced would be if she was staffed on a Vulcan only ship that the enterprise for whatever reason has to work alongside, because I think we need to see Spock interact more with other Vulcans and see that Vulcans, despite claims to the contrary, can have the same xenophobic failings as humans. I think her being one who is sympathetic to the enterprise and to Spock is a nice set up to them then meeting later and working together (and also why she might change careers and move away from the Vulcan only ships, as we do get the sense it is unusual for Vulcans to serve on board a starship.) Whilst I do think that a romulan/Vulcan offspring could provide an interesting story, I think she should be fully Vulcan in order to make her acceptance of Spock more poignant.

Kevin Riley - I just think he’s neat. Also maybe we can return to the Tarsus 5 colony story point?!?!?!?

I’d also think it’d be cool to establish some engineers that work beneath Scotty, and a mix of genders of course.

But yeah, I think there’s a lot of ways that any remakes could stay true to the original, whilst still pushing for progressiveness in the same spirit as tos, whilst managing to manoeuvre around execs and producers and negative media. Star Trek should always be progressive for its day, and it’s a new day now, so we need to keep moving onwards.

[werevulvi]

I am gender critical, detransitioning and I do have a bone to pick with the trans community, but I still can't entirely let go of... trans thinking. For lack of better wording. At this point I'm basically trying to hold two different perspectives at once, and they might seem paradoxal, but I don't think they necessarily have to be.

I call those two perspective "sex-based" and "gender-based" and it should be fairly clear what I mean by that, but just in case it isn't: Sex-based refers to categorising men and women and sexual orientations after biological sex, and gender-based refers to categorising men and women and their sexual orientations after each individual's own feelings of gender identity and sexual identity.

I'm gender critical in the sense that I think biology is what determines what we are and it's my understanding that sexual orientation is based on sex. I also think that laws should be based on sex and not gender. However, I do still think there is some sense in that people can still have subjective ideas of gender identity as any other human emotions, which makes me view gender identity as subjective reality. It is real within the minds of those who believe it. It is merely their own interpretations of themselves. Such a thing can never be wrong, in a sense. It can never be proved, but also never be disproved.

I think of gender like that. I believe trans people's genders are true for them, because that's just how they perceive themselves. But then how do I perceive myself?

I perceive myself in both ways. I see that my body is biologically female, and since I no longer have strong feelings of dysphoria about that, I can easily and proudly admit that my biology makes me a woman. As simple as that. But on the other hand, I do have a mind that resides in that female body, and that mind is clearly only half on the same page as my body's original intentions. There is more to me than my biology. The mind, the soul, the consciousness, whatever you wanna call it. That, appears to be what I could describe as androgynous. My androgyny is not just wearing suits and makeup, knitting and playing video games, or whatever arbitrary things we decided to call masculine or feminine... it goes much deeper than that, which should be plain for all to see. My androgyny gave me dysphoria, and is easied with transition.

My detransition is NOT me opting out of transitioning. It is not me saying transition as a whole was a mistake, because it wasn't. What I'm doing is only correcting the mistakes that I did make and then cherish the rest. It was me realising I'm not a man, nor will I ever be male. It is possible I may wanna go back on T one day, at least I'd consider going on a low dose if my hairs start to thin out, to prevent that outcome. I will get a breast reconstruction to "reverse" my top surgery as that was indeed a mistake, and I will get my legal gender marker changed back to female again because I am not male as it states on my ID card, and I don't want to hold onto that lie. You can call it a partial detransition if you will, because I'm still happily transitioned with testosterone and I refuse to "correct" myself after what type of body I'm supposed to have as a woman. Call me an incorrect female, if you will, as I am proudly hairy and deep-voiced.

I'm male-passing. Every day of my life. Because I refuse to "correct" myself and be a typical woman. That is a choice I made and will (most likely) continue to make. It's a difficult choice, but in a sense I also really like it. I like that it allows me to look gnc by adding femininity to my style, instead of masculinity. Because I feel a million times more liberated and expressive now when wearing makeup with my beard, than I ever did before wearing no makeup and growing no beard. I like that I look gnc male because of my femininity, when in fact I'm a gnc female because of my masculinity.

I feel like I need to embody aspects of both femaleness and maleness. My T-spiked femaleness. Facial hair, deep voice, vulva, breasts and hairy curves. Being like that gives me positive feelings. That I'm just right, perfect, beautiful, in harmony with myself. Feelings that I could call a gender, because that's how simple it is. THAT is what gender is. Gender... is whatever you want it to be. And I choose to make it something highly personal, something that is just mine but also not imposed onto anyone else. No specific pronouns or labels required, no special treatment... although more gender neutral bathrooms and locker rooms available would be nice, because I look like a circus.

And yes, I'm aware most people probably either don't feel that gender-feeling, or they just have a different interpretation of their such feelings, and they don't call it a gender. They're simply women because they are female, or men because they're male, or just going about their lives not over-thinking what they are. That is fine. It makes total sense and I don't ever want to infringe upon that. Gender can absolutely be harmful and I agree that society has taken it too far. Way, way too fucking far and we need to back the fuck up. Make gender-segregated spaces sex-segregated again. Make women's rights sex-based again. No males in women's spaces, no dehumanising of women because of their biology, no pretending we don't get socialised based on our sexes, no erasing of sex-based medical and political needs. I am still gender critical, but no, I do not denounce gender as a concept. I'm too much of a hobby philosopher to do anything such, because gender is a highly philosophical thing. I think there is some merit to gender as such, but there needs to be a limit in society. I believe there can be two different definitions of "woman" as long as we know which definition is to be applied to laws, rules and regulations.

And regardless of what I'd choose to call my gender, I'm still a lesbian. Because my homosexuality is based on that my sex is female and that I'm only attracted to other females. That cannot change, and I am proud to be a lesbian.

Thanks to radfem, to my past decade in the trans community, and to still keeping one foot in each camp, I can see it from both sides of the fence now. Because I hold both perspectives at once. And I think that is good, although I'm aware that both camps may hate me for that. Then camp me out, I don't care. I'm a free-thinker, I don't like hivemind thinking. I always need to maintain some kinda balance, even if it takes me long to find it.

It's been my thinking in these past couple of days, that perhaps what I need to do is to embrace both. To honour and embrace both my female sex and my androgynous mind. I am both a woman and I am nonbinary. I've been fighting for a year between those two labels, torn between my sex and my gender. I cannot keep doing that anymore. There is no reason that I should have to scrap one for the other, no matter how much gender critical people tell me I should scrap gender and the trans community tells me I should scrap my sex. No. I won't do either. So that's how I came up with the idea that maybe I wanna call myself a "nonbinary woman" as to label both my gender and my sex in the same breath. "Gender critical nonbinary woman" may seem like a paradox, or a joke, but I'm serious, and I mean it. I'm still considering it, but I needed to ventilate my thoughts on that a bit.

Also, if I again get some nasty message from someone about that I should stay out of the nonbinary tag... please calm down and tell the rest your over-sensitive community to do the same, because I'm one of you now, so it is my tag to use as well. Maybe I want for other nonbinary people to read this. Maybe I want for them too to know that not all nb people are the same fucking cringey monolith. I'm sick of your hivemind too. I'm both a "terf" and nb, so I will be in both communities, whether you like it or not. I believe I have made myself clear, but if there are any questions from either audience, I'll gladly answer them as best as I can.

If you've never heard of a gender critical nonbinary woman before... well, I might just be the first, or there might be others before me, but I hope one day I can light the way for more of us to follow. All I wish is to speak the truth, even if that truth is merely subjective.