#they know exactly what women are and that this matter affects them specifically

[hestiasroom]

India: 80% Organ Donors Women; 80% Organ Recipients Men | Vantage with Palki Sharma

Transcript:

Now let's talk about something that's seldom discussed: organ donation in India. One person is added to the organ donation waitlist every 10 minutes - one person every 10 minutes. It tells you how grave the situation is.

Turns out it also has a gender problem and this is according to the latest data that has come out. Four out of five organ donors in India are women. What about those who receive organs? Four out of five recipients in India are men; in other words 80% of the donors are women but 80% of the recipients are men. So why are these numbers so skewed? Our next report tells you.

Last December Indian politician Lalu Prasad Yadav underwent a kidney transplant. Sounds like a normal procedure a simple transplant surgery but it made headlines everywhere. Why? Because the donor was his daughter Rohini Achara. It was shown as a story of sacrifice; a daughter doing what she could to save her father.

The optics were great but data suggests this is the reality of India's organ donation. It's all about sacrifice and usually it's about sacrifice by women. A recent study analyzed organ donations from 1995 to 2021. 36,640 transplantations were carried out in India; 29,000 of them were for men only. 6,945 were for women. If you put those numbers into perspective basically men were 80% of the total recipients for organ donations but when it comes to donations it's a completely opposite scenario.

Women make up for 80% of the organ donors and who are these women? They are usually wives or mothers when their son or husband needs an organ they are the first to volunteer which makes them living organ donors. You see, organ donation is easier between family members this means they are genetically easier this lessens the risks of rejections but what explains this disparity?

Well the answer is socioeconomic pressure in our society. Men are seen as Breadwinners; women on the other hand are seen as caregivers. More often than not they feel pressurized to donate their organs. On the other hand men think twice in a situation like this; they hesitate to go into surgery which means most men donors in India are cadaver donors. That means they donate their organs only when they're dead.

These are stories that make for great headlines: a mother giving a kidney to her son, a wife giving her liver to her husband. They are shown as the Messiah of sacrifice and it's society that is to blame for this. Organ donation shouldn't happen under any sort of pressure it should be a choice that one should take freely.

That said the whole picture isn't too great also India's organ donation rate is quite bleak. It stands at 0.52 per million people. Every 10 minutes one person is added to the waitlist. In 2022 over 2 lakh patients needed a kidney transplant. Guess how many got it? It was only 7,500 people. That's just 3.4% so you get the gist the numbers are bad which is why more people need to step up not just women but more people should be open to donating organs. It's an act that saves lives.

[doberbutts]

(Some other guy entirely here) I do think there's not much of a reason to be so against the terms tma/tme though, and I don't really understand why some people are? Like, in the same way we want a word to describe our experiences so do transfems, and while I do believe that all trans people are affected by transphobia and misogyny, it's obviously also true that we're affected by it differently depending on how we present, cause otherwise we'd all be satisfied with just the term transphobia (not saying anything new here so far)

So, since it just so happened that the term transmisogyny was coined to mean specifically the oppression transfems face (regardless of what anyone might feel on the matter, that is what it means in practice), what's really so wrong with having terminology to specify whether you're affected by it or not in online discussions of specifically transmisogyny? I'd think that would be relevant enough information, and you're not obligated to share it unless you want to.

I think what's really bothering a lot of people is that these terms exist for half of our community but there's no acceptable equivalent for the other half, and there's constant backlash against attempts to fill that void in the language. But that's not the fault of anyone who advocates for the use of tme/tma, or rather, they are separate issues that I don't believe should be conflated even if the proponents of tme/tma are the same people who are against specific terms for transmasc oppression.

When we do this, from the pov of trans women we are the ones rejecting their terminology and trying to silence them when they talk about their discrimination, and since we know exactly how that feels, I think we as a community should take a step back on the matter and just let it be.

Just because we feel dismissed when it comes to a similar matter doesn't mean we should dismiss in turn.

Not that anyone needs my permission or anything for this but:

I don't really have any problem with the words transmisogyny or trans-misogyny, as I think they are valuable labels to discuss a specific intersection of transphobia and misogyny.

I am not sure I necessarily have a problem with the terms TMA or TME themselves, outside of that I think it is not possible to be exempt from oppression because it will apply to you even if the label itself is wrong. This is also how hate crime and discrimination law works in this country- it is both your label and what the offender thinks of you, not just one or the other.

In other words, the guy who screamed at me about how I'm a Mexican is incorrect because I'm not Mexican, but it is still considered to be discrimination against Mexicans because it was his hatred of Mexicans that fueled the attack. It doesn't mean that actual Mexicans aren't the actual targets or this, but it does mean that it's not possible for me to be exempt from anti-Mexican sentiment. It doesn't mean that hatred of Mexicans doesn't exist, it does mean that if I want to stop getting screamed at for saying non-English words while visibly brown (I said pate, which is FRENCH and not Spanish, in reference to a can of dog food he was buying), then I need to ally myself with Mexicans and see what I can do to help decrease this hatred of Mexicans within my country.

What I do have a problem with is how these words are used and applied.

Caster Semenya is a "TME" intersex woman who was caught by transmisogynist Olympic rulings intended to hurt trans women, and to this day is still not recognized as a woman. How is this exempt from transmisogyny? She is literally being affected by transmisogyny- and interphobia, and misogynoir, and lesbophobia. And there are more examples than that, but this will already be a long enough post.

Moreover, I'm finding a lot of hypocrisy in the theory itself, labeling certain instances of oppression as things only TMA people experience and then refusing to listen when TME people say that they experience it too. I don't really care what or how people talk about their own experiences, but I do think it's a little ridiculous to be told that someone else who is not me can tell me what I experience better than I can. And then refuse to listen when I say that I have felt the hurts they're saying don't apply to me.

If TMA/TME had stayed within the limits you've set, being about descriptors of your own personal experience rather than trying to apply theory to entire demographics in a way that very little other theorycrafting does, I wouldn't have cared. Unfortunately that's not how it's being used and I don't like that.

[transmascissues]

hey i know your post about your mom was mostly just a personal vent, but i have to say, do you realize that also happens with trans girls and their fathers? literally happened to one of my friends. i’m not trying to downplay your experience or something but i found it strange that you seem to think this is something that only affects transmascs

i have one question for you: so fucking what?

i don’t doubt that trans girls have experienced similar things and yeah, that’s bad too, but what the fuck does that have to do with me and the specific things i’m facing as a result of being a trans man? i never said “look at this thing that happens to ONLY trans men and NO ONE ELSE,” i just said “hey, isn’t this thing that happens to a lot of trans men, including myself, fucked up?”

i would also like to point out that what you’re talking about is in fact a different (albeit similar) thing. the way cis people treat trans people can differ dramatically based on the cis person’s gender because their commitment to gender roles is, like, a major part of problem. the specific way a cis mother reacts to her trans son’s transition is often going to be very distinct, while a cis father will likely respond to his trans daughter in a different but equally distinct way.

what i’m talking about is a very specific kind of ownership and control and self-victimization and total lack of boundaries masquerading as love and care and maternal concern that cis women (i would argue white cis women in particular) project onto their transmasc kids when we do literally anything to our bodies. i’m talking about a phenomenon which is closely related to the way moms often pass eating disorders onto their daughters (or children they view as daughters) because they see a body that looks something like theirs and project all of their insecurities and ideals onto it. i’m talking about a form of parental transphobia and projection that’s specific to the dynamic of a cis mother and her child who was “supposed to” be her daughter.

if you’ve never felt that, you’re not even remotely qualified to tell me shit about how i should be talking about that experience, and if you couldn’t recognize that experience when you read my post, i’m guessing you probably haven’t experienced it because the replies to that post made it very clear to me that anyone who has experienced it firsthand immediately knew exactly what i meant.

like, yeah, cis dads also project onto their trans daughters, but are they likely to have a reaction like running away with actual tears streaming down their face? do you expect them to passive aggressively make comments about how sad their kid’s transition makes them, how it’s such a difficult emotional time, how it’s so tragic because their kid’s body was so beautiful before? do you think their go-to transphobic reaction will be weaponizing their emotions? i’m sure there are some dads out there who are like that, but i think we can agree they’re in the minority because that’s not how cis men are taught to react and parents like this tend to be pretty damn committed to following the gender roles they were taught.

and even if i’m wrong and our experiences are exactly the same, let me reiterate that i never said this was an experience exclusive to trans men. all i said is that it happens to us. that’s just a statement of objective fact.

this started in my life when i got my hair cut short for the first time almost a decade ago and it has not stopped since. i’ve watched my mom cry over me changing my name and respond to being asked if my happiness matters more to her than my name by saying “i care about both”, i’ve watched her melt down in a mall over me getting a suit for prom and give me the silent treatment for days after, i’ve heard her plead with me to stop t because it “looks unnatural” and she’s just so “concerned for my health”, i’ve watched her stare at me post-op and say “my poor baby” over and over like she’s looking at my corpse in a casket. i’ve watched her turn herself into the victim of every single aspect of my transition. i’ve had to live with this for 9 years and spent the early years of the pandemic literally locked in a house with it. this has been my entire adolescent and adult life, and the question of if i’ll have to cut her off someday (and maybe never see my cat or my little cousins who i love more than anything in the world ever again as a result) haunts me every single day.

who the fuck are you to tell me how to talk about that?

[abybweisse]

Why I think Undertaker has to be Cedric, revisited

At this point in the series, I'm a bit surprised how many in the fandom not just don't see him as Cedric K. Ros-- but actually rail against the idea.

So, here's a long, somewhat thorough overview of the situational and physical clues that he's Cedric, the father of Vincent and Francis/Frances.

Situational hints

How he cries over the details of Vincent's death. Not just that he died but what became of his remains. I'd cry over my dead son, too, especially if I had the ability to reanimate corpses but his body was destroyed by fire so that I couldn't do that. Let alone the fact his cinematic records were destroyed, so I not only couldn't make a bizarre doll of him, but I couldn't even review his memories to see what happened right before he died. This ties in with what he later says about not wanting to lose any more Phantomhives. But it strongly suggests that whoever set the fire did so specifically to thwart the efforts of a grim reaper. Whoever did that either knew Undertaker was a reaper or was at least following the instructions of someone who knew.

The whole not wanting to lose more Phantomhives thing. Claudia/Cloudia is gone, and so is Vincent. Reanimating real Ciel is the best he can do to not let the older twin go. He tried to destroy Sebastian to release our earl "Ciel" from their demon contract and might try again. Makes you wonder just how many Phantomhives he's really lost already. As well as where others might still be alive. What exactly was his business in France? 🤔

Even his odd comment to our earl (before the attack) that he wasn't sure which twin this was... but that it didn't matter because they were both Phantomhives. Instead of seeing an heir and a spare, he saw them equally. At least he did then. I suspect he now sees our earl as a spare soul... or conversely sees real Ciel as a spare body. I guess both could be true, making them still essentially equal in his eyes. Again, this could be another attempt to save our earl from Sebastian. By putting our earl's soul into the unmarked body of real Ciel, that might void the contract... unless the seal on our earl's eye also somehow affected his soul. 🤔 Anyway. I digress, since that gets into a separate theory discussion.

Standing in to help young Mr. Pitt take a photo of the twins. That's right after telling our earl it doesn't matter which twin he is. Then the other twin and Mr. Pitt arrive, the latter holding a new camera. It's odd that Mr. Pitt would ask a non-relative of the kids (besides a nanny) to help stage the photo, though Pitt is perhaps the non-traditionalist anyway. Undertaker seems like he's shocked to be asked, but he also seems amused. Mr. Pitt likely doesn't even suspect Undertaker is the twins' paternal grandfather, otherwise he might have seen it as a scoop, á la "LOWLY UNDERTAKER IS SIRE TO PROMINENT NOBLE FAMILY" or something equally scandalous. Because undertakers were considered low class citizens. So, Undertaker acts shocked but complies with giddy delight. By asking Undertaker to help stage the photo, he has likely, unwittingly asked a relative of the boys, which would be considered completely appropriate for the time period.

How he treats the Midfords. He recognizes Lizzie's talents and skill with a sword, otherwise he wouldn't have wanted her at Sphere Music Hall as a protector of the lords of the stars, while he kept them and Blavat hidden away. So he probably had Blavat bring her into the cult. Undertaker might see some of himself in Lizzie, but he definitely sees it in Frances/Francis, and I don't just mean physically. Both women fight in a similar manner as he does: highly skillful and graceful. Idk what he thinks of Edward, but I know he got a great laugh from watching the Phantom Five (including Edward) perform onstage. He doesn't interact much, if at all, with Alexis, who isn't a Phantomhive.

What he says to Francis/Frances, as well as how she responds. Again, he hardly acknowledges Alexis' existence, but Undertaker speaks directly with "Lady Phantomhive". That's really important because she's married into the Midford family and hasn't gone by her maiden name in many years. As long as Edward is old plus at least a bit longer, since she strikes me as too proper for a shotgun wedding, even if she weren't a noble. So, he sets her apart from her husband because she was born a Phantomhive. He doesn't want to lose her, either, because she is her mother's daughter. Then, when she nervously states he hasn't changed in roughly four years, he pokes fun at the fact he hasn't changed in a much longer time frame. He says her birth, over 30 years ago, seems like just yesterday. She's sweating bullets, and it's not just his creepy vibes. She knows he means it -- that 30-some-odd years is nothing to him... and that he very specifically recalls her birth. I'm pretty sure she knows he's her father, and she's horribly embarrassed by the fact. Alexis doesn't have a clue about it, and she'd rather keep it that way. But what he says strongly implies that he was present at her birth. Maybe down the hall, like Vincent was when his sons were born, but there... and just as anxious and excited and proud.

How the years for Cedric's birth and death dates are hidden by a speech bubble. Cloudia/Claudia's dates are fully shown because she's a regular human being. Well... a human, anyway. But if Undertaker is Cedric, then the birth and death dates for him would be from when he was a human, before he committed suicide and was sentenced to serve out his punishment as a reaper. That death date could be decades or even centuries before Cloudia/Claudia was even born. Remember that this family tree isn't one prepared by humans; it's part of the dossier that the German reapers have for our earl. The focus is purely biological ancestry, not marriages. Cloudia/Claudia and Cedric don't have to be married to be on this family tree; he is biologically the father of both Vincent and Francis/Frances.

Physical hints

He looks a lot like Francis/Frances and Edward. And Yana-san tweeted years ago that Francis and Edward look like Cedric. Here's a comparison between Edward and Undertaker. Here's one between Francis/Frances and Undertaker.

The place on his right where his hair has a long braid seems to match up with Lizzie's and Francis/Frances' right side locks that tend to stick out. He's got it tucked behind his right ear, but the braid might originate from the same spot. If Lizzie and her mother pushed those locks back, behind their right ears, the placement would be the same as Undertaker's braid.

He has the exact same baby hairs at the nape of his neck as Lizzie and Francis/Frances. They might be a bit shorter, but they are definitely there. Here's an old post about it. Edward possibly does, too, and we could tell if his hair was grown out and pulled up, but his hair is short and a bit shaggy on the nape of his neck, so we can't be sure.

[kangamommynow]

Marriage advice from an old happily married lady.

Long post with some huge generalizations but I still have been thinking about it so I'm writing it anyway. It should be noted that I'm referring to male-female relationships, but the dynamic can also come up in other forms. It's the dynamic that matters, not the gender.

I was randomly scrolling videos yesterday and one made me stop and think. It was a woman posting that she used to look forward to when her husband came home from work, but now she dreads hearing him arrive. Not because she's abused, but because she's more lonely when he's there than when it's just her and the kids. The comments were ... Alarming. One woman after another saying the same thing. Either they were ready to leave and waiting for a specific time, usually having to do with the kids, or saying they were checked out of the marriage but couldn't leave, usually for financial reasons.

This isn't new. It's not surprising. And I also know a shit ton of people in exactly the same position.

She feels lonely, disconnected, unheard, unloved. When she's asked for help, repeatedly, specifically, in the past, her needs have been dismissed. She's asked her partner to step up as a co-manager of the household, as a co-parent of the kids, as a co-partner in the relationship, she's been accused of nagging, and her responses have been called emotional. She's stopped asking for help and has lost respect for the person she married. When he comes home, it's not a relief, it's another demand on her time, attention, and mental load. Another person she's responsible for taking care of. Her desire for connection has been met by requests, or demands, for sex and she feels he only wants to use her body, not the intimacy she craves. Every time she reached out for affection it's turned into another task to fulfill someone else's needs rather than honor her own. So she stopped seeking it and pulls away when he offers it, and her refusal to use sex to try to get what she needs is met with hostility, coldness, and greater distance. She's stopped asking for anything from him. She's stopped expecting anything. They are, at best, roommates with kids and some shared expenses.

AND

I have had conversations with a lot of men, on Tumblr and elsewhere, where I've heard the other side of the story.

He's feeling lonely and disconnected and unloved. The woman he married who was fun and sexy and made him feel good is gone. Now when he comes home, stressed from work and wanting to relax, it's to coldness and more demands. Nothing seems to be enough and he doesn't know what to do. When he tries to connect she pulls away. He can't make her laugh anymore. She used to put effort into looking nice, doing things that brought comfort to him and now she doesn't. He spends more time seeking enjoyment from his hobbies or interests because there isn't the connection he craves in the marriage. Sex is non-existent or he feels like he has to beg for it, and sex is one of the ways he feels most connected to her. Maybe he's filling that craving in affairs, or porn, or flirting online, because he certainly doesn't feel desirable to her anymore. Resentment is growing.

YEAH.

Every relationship is different, of course, and I'm excluding any abusive and deliberately manipulative behavior here - that's a separate issue. I'm talking about relationships that started with best intentions, with affection. In my opinion, the issue comes down to communication and the difficulty we often have with expressing our needs and desires with compassion and a desire to connect, listening with a desire to understand and avoiding a response that is defensive. Most people I know need a lot of practice and often some professional help to do it. Our society generally still convinces men they aren't supposed to have needs other than sex, much less talk about them. And women are still considered, like it or not, as unnecessarily emotional, irrational and petty. Often we fall into those communication traps and suffer for it.

What I'm hearing is some big red flags.

- does one person in the partnership do all the managing? That person is responsible for remembering birthdays, doctor's appointments, grocery shopping, school communication, making sure dinner is made and the toilet is cleaned? Is the other person expecting a list of delegated tasks? If only one partner knows where the scissors are and when parent teacher conferences are and who the kid’s teachers are, Then it's not an equal partnership in parenting and household management. It's a marriage killer, unless you have both explicitly arranged things this way and you come back to discuss that agreement regularly. 🚩

- almost everyone craves affection, intimacy, connection. What that looks like to each person is unique and unless you are explicitly expressing what makes you feel loved and asking what makes your partner feel loved, you are in trouble. For many women, sexual desire is responsive. Intimacy comes first, then desire. If she doesn't receive non-sexual affection and emotional intimacy, then sexual intimacy will start to feel like another task to be completed. For many men, sex is a primary way of achieving intimate connection. It's a recipe for disaster unless you are communicating about it. 🚩

- Stress is a desire killer for many people (men and women). For others sexual connection is a stress reducer, so they seek it when stressed. Again, miscommunication is very bad, incredibly common, and a couple's sexual connection can quickly go wrong, leaving both parties feeling unfulfilled, disconnected, lonely. 🚩

I admit it’s hard for me to communicate, too. I’m incredibly happily married to someone who has difficulty communicating as well. But we try! Compassion for those struggles and love each other the way we need love, a desire to serve each other and make our partner feel comforted and adored helps even when we have trouble putting our needs into words.

[cartoonscientist]

this has probably been touched on before but so much of fionna and cake ties into the theme of self-value and self care by making references to (what is traditionally viewed as female-centered) fan culture and specifically the debate around whether fanfiction should have “some basic level of quality” or whether it should be considered an unbridled form of self expression closer to art therapy than writing a professional novel (it obviously comes down on the side of the latter)

the theme of Simon not wanting to discuss his “old stuff” that he finds embarrassing and painful because he wrote it in a very bad place mentally, what he sees as mediocre, emotionally masturbatory wish fulfillment that says way too much about his psyche, although it’s shown that other people get a lot out of the Fionna and Cake series, suggesting that it’s a versatile work of fiction which readers can interpret to fit their own emotional needs even if it’s not exactly “high art”

or Scarab’s ultimately self-destructive obsession with wiping out what he considers a “mediocre” “abomination”, even though everyone around him is telling him to chill and let it go and focus on more important things because it doesn't really matter. for years, and even today, fandom has been plagued with (usually cishet male these days, but women used to make up a far larger portion of the snark/anti-fan community) fans who don't only dislike shipping and original characters, they actively seek out creators who do enjoy these things to harass them. or, I'm sure you've seen those people on twitter who get really mad about the fact that leaving long critical notes on ao3 fics (when not prompted or specifically requested not to) is widely considered Pretty Fucking Mean

both Simon and Scarab are basically being told by the narrative to take it easy, to not care so hard about like, the ontological definitions of "art" and "quality". Simon learns to value Fionna and her world, realizing that they have a life beyond the circumstances he believed he created them under. (but when he again tries to assume control, to sacrifice his own well-being for people he feels are more deserving of love than him, his space god girlfriend basically slaps him and says "you are so special and amazing on your own simon, you don't need to hurt yourself, you don't need to try to handle everything by yourself, and actually sacrificing yourself when you don't need to is kind of a dick move, and yes I know from experience because I'm omniscient now" [which ties into what's kind of the thesis statement of the show, Simon and Fionna both feeling like they're not special and don't deserve to exist or receive care and affection because they aren't exceptional, ie don't have magical abilities/live in an adventurous fantasy world; basically, you don't NEED to be super talented and amazing and saintlike to deserve to be happy, you just need to BE, and do your best as a human])

FOOTNOTE: when Scarab told Fionna that what she did wrong was exist, it was painfully reminiscent of transphobic (and anti-ND) harassment (and ultimately added another layer of satisfaction and validation to his defeat) and tbh it's hard for me to believe the writers didn't intend that at least subconsciously

[eruverse]

Another (unpopular) Russia sexuality headcanon

- Not gay

- Prefers to be around women than men because he just finds them more appealing. Not exactly for sexual reasons tho, and more often than not he seeks women out for platonic companionship. Women’s touches are just much more comfortable for him, women’s softer aesthetics more up his alley. Women >>>>>>>

- HOWEVER, much of his meaningful relationships have been with men. Can’t be helped since he is mostly surrounded by male nations, from Asia to Europe. Not that he’s had any kind of relationship (either sexual or romantic or both) with absolutely ALL of them, because he has deep trust issues/also hedgehog’s dilemma plus a myriad of other stuffs and is therefore pretty picky. It can’t just be Anyone or else he’ll want to die. He has a lot of troubles letting people in and romantic/sexual relationships inherently require you to be vulnerable. However he does look like someone who gets it on with everyone supposedly close, because he is physically touchy with almost everyone and can be very overbearing and possessive.

- The overbearing and possessive attitudes are from deep paranoia and distrust of anything ‘outside’, of anything he has no control over. But he also has fascination with all those things, and just like all isolationists, always want to be included (these are two things that exist in him simultaneously, always fighting each other).

- Ultimately tho what he wants most is familial relationships and affection. He wants someone (or more than one person) who will always be there for him. He is not exactly desiring for romance nor sex in the sense that it’s just not his utmost priority. While he has pretty healthy libido he’s okay taking care of it himself and for the most part he really does. I hc him as honestly one of the least sexual people in the big USSR house because I want to explore different alternatives than Vanya just exerting sexual power over his colonies, it’s boring, he can still bully his colonies without resorting to assault yanno. One-on-one connection matters less for him than familial-communal, that kind of thing.

- But also, no one among his colonies is OBVIOUSLY quite in his league enough to pursue serious partnership with. I rather think he’ll be quite conscious of this fact in a way? One reason he becomes interested in America, China, and some European countries is because they’re powerful/aligning more with his own league (or that’s what he hoped/s) and Ivan is attracted to power (as are all nations, and esp more powerful nations). I hc that his colonies got on with each other in the big USSR house and not with him, sans rare and very specific occasions, even tho everyone for ex Alfred thought it’s just one big Russia’s harem.

- Yes, usually the women he has had any semblance of relationship with are human, simply because there is no female nations around him (tho I do ship him with some nyos), and living around where he himself lives. Many of them are when he was much younger tho; dude tumbled a lot with young maidens in the hay. He was rather popular.

- His type in relationships: someone who provides comfortable, stable and safe space for him and isn’t the type who likes to argue or fights a lot with him. Someone he can at least trust (but no one so far has his whole trust). Someone who does boring stuff with him, like lazying around in the bed and tending to the garden. Someone who understands and accepts him, and is gentle to him. Basically, his desires out of any semblance of relationship are really boring and domestic.

- The women he likes are the ‘soft but assertive’ type tho. He likes women who can ‘take the wheel’ mentally because man is so tired he wishes to sleep for 637353 years. Has a thing for mentally more mature women who can mommy him.

- The men he likes are those who can respect him, and are chill. Those who can see him an equal, or would defer to him in some respects and not trigger his sensibilities too much. Ivan knows that he can be abusive to partners who are too weak against him, or to anyone ever, for sure. He actually rather respects those who can speak up against him, just that please don’t get loud and annoying about it lol

- Kinda is the type who wishes nice perfect people will fall from the sky and hug him to sleep be always there for him kind of thing. Doesn’t get that.

Expanding on some of the relationships he’s had and what type it is:

- With Golden Horde, it was purely platonic because he’d been a child and he… grew up really slow and was a particular late bloomer.

(No, no r*pe, since I also have an established Golden Horde OC and he developed into this person who is some kind of people hater and didn’t perceive any kind of sexuality up until he met this person who wasn’t Ivan, not even with one being used as a tool to assert power. Besides, Vanya was so weak hearted he would cry just from being trolled just a little bit. Basically Golden Horde had 3782739493832772638282 ways to traumatize little Vanya without using r*pe)

- With France, it was easily sexual because France himself also desired Ivan sexually. Their relationship developed fast because of this. These days Ivan still likes him, but it’s not sexually.

- Germany/Prussia: Ivan has never done anything with Ludwig, but likes him (platonically) a lot. Sometimes gets in on with Gilbert in modern era, but their coupling is pretty few and far in between. Gil likes him, tho he doesn’t want to admit.

- England: hate-admiration relationship and neither actually tries to get on with the other.

- Netherlands: Ned would fuck anyone so probably yes. All in the past tho.

- America: Ivan was not impressed with him when they first met, but tolerated him better than many others. Gradually getting more interested in him up until CW, where it developed into some kind of tense crush (not strictly sexual, BUT imbued by sexuality) but I’m on fence on whether they had gone around to actually do it. Maybe once, though. The 90s onward tanked his respect and affection to America and in modern time it’s like. Zero point five. Ivan has goosebumps thinking of the time he could ever like America like EW. America isn’t actually his type of partner BY FAR, so the fact that he could actually like America is betrayal to his own principles and sense of self and it’s super disorientating. When he was flirting with America, there was just too many chaotic moments and rollercoaster of emotions that while at the time was exhilarating now he truly realizes aren’t for him. There’s also one thing tho: Alfred was the only one who could handle his abuses while staying mostly intact, so you could say that this made Ivan soar.

- China: Yao isn’t a woman, but his aesthetics are really up Ivan’s alley (that balance on soft and hard, soft outside but firm inside). Definitely sexual though Ivan also seeks Yao quite a lot just for platonic companionship. If Ivan’s relationship with America is getting worse the more time passes, with China it’s just getting better.

- Mongolia: surprisingly chill if they don’t come to each other for serious things, occasionally sexual, Mongolia is daddy tho not quite with Ivan in that respect (nyo!Mongolia, however…)

- Central Asia: with Kazakhstan it’s mostly friendly (caveat: has to be some healthy distance between them for best possible friendliness, but ‘healthy distance’ is difficult for them for obvious reasons), sometimes they fight and break bones, ever-present low-riding tension Kazakhstan tries to keep at minimum for his own sake (there’re only so many sleepless nights he can handle), and generally complicated feelings. Uzbekistan hates Ivan even though is good at masking it.

- Turkey: obvious distrust between each other, fucked sometimes (less often than otherwise assumed) in the past. There’s certain side of you you can show to people you distrust, and that’s quite the howling mawing clawing animal side.

- Belarus: his sweet sister, idk which one is older and in the end doesn’t matter to me? Both of them are honestly unhinged tho, so I guess it’s not that Ivan is afraid of Natasha per se, it’s that he can see their, his, fucked-upness in her and he doesn’t really know how to deal with that, since he doesn’t need to see it if he’s living it himself but he HAS to see it if it’s reflected in another. It’s not that he’s afraid of her, perhaps it’s that he’s afraid of himself. But perhaps no one understands him more than she does.

[musical-chick-13]

Thoughts on toxic yuri?

One of my very favorite storytelling concepts, I love it when women make each other worse. <3

I do think it's important, for me anyway, to note the difference between a dynamic that's toxic in one direction versus something that is mutually toxic. The first one doesn't really interest me a whole lot, usually because it means one character suffers constantly without being allowed to do anything else--at the very least, it will come across as the more ""normal"" character not really being that into the relationship in question. I need BOTH parties to be unhinged.

The important thing for any fictional relationship (though we're specifying toxic yuri here, obviously) is that it's interesting. If there is no limit to what the women can do within a dynamic, then there are an infinite number of ways for that dynamic to go. And while you can learn a lot about a character through examining their values and positive qualities, you can learn just as much (if not more) by considering their flaws. And those flaws really come out in the case of toxic yuri; characters get to show the uglier parts of themselves in this context, which I am always a fan of. A fraught, complex relationship, when written well, can be a really great way to psychologically explore the characters: what inspires them to act this way? why do they think this behavior is acceptable? if they don't think it's acceptable, why do they keep doing it? what do they think about the concept of love as a whole? how far would they go for intimacy or to be understood? how do they view other people in general? and probably most importantly, what led to them developing the beliefs underlying their actions in the first place?

From a more "psychologically, why do people enjoy this" standpoint, mutual toxicity often goes hand in hand with extreme obsession, extreme jealousy, and a willingness to forgive a whole lot of horrible shit. Which, yeah, in real life you don't want to be in a relationship like that. But I think there's a lot of emotional resonance in exploring those feelings. The idea that someone will never leave you. That they think so intensely about you specifically that they'll break anything and anyone to stay with you. That even if you're the worst version of yourself, someone will still want you because that's still you. Someone knows exactly how to fuck you up because they genuinely understand you. Things in fiction that we would never want in real life can be incredibly interesting or even cathartic to witness from a distance. I think we all feel things that scare us sometimes (or even simply feel an innocuous emotion so intensely that it scares us), and looking at unpleasant feelings within fiction can help identify, parse out, process, and successfully cope with those feelings. And I think, at the end of it all, a lot of people want to matter to someone, in some way. It makes sense that some creators would take that concept-of meaning a great deal to another person, of affecting them deeply-to its absolute extreme through writing.

(And also, consider. That I am very gay. And that horrible women are very attractive.)

[salted-caramel-tea]

Have you seen the reddit now talking about misogyny when they can conveniently blame it on george and his stans? Why is there now an outcry against misogyny because false’s stans made drama out of george punching her in a mini game when she explicitly said not to, but not an outcry when the community devalued jojo’s skill for months? when scott enables misogyny by continuously using women as nerfs? when people bullied nikki out of the event for being upset?

Really giving “I don’t care about people belittling and harassing women but I draw the line at george’s fans finding his mcc trolling funny”

it’s bc mcc fans don’t like the dteam .

there is something to be said about misogyny in mcc and ik this bc i wrote a whole essay on it but although a female player was at the other end of george’s trolling there’s nothing to say it’s an act of misogyny. bc as a george viewer we know he just trolls anyone . it was a matter of who was behind him, which happened to be false and at one point elaina, there was no micro aggression towards women that made geirge target then specifically . they were just the ones behind him . false recognises that George was just being a menace and that it would not have affected her placement either way so she asked people not to harass george it his viewers because number one why would she WANT her viewers to harass anyone but also she knows it’s ultimately not that big of a deal in the long run and that she’s a valuable player who can and will make up for any losses even though the result would have been the same either way .

i talked about this last week regarding sapnap but there is a trend of trying to make the worst of a situation . ie last week people were saying sapnap was abusive bc he was loud and competitive and eret ms stream didn’t exactly help matters . this might be a result of me talking about misogyny in the subreddit tbh . but the element of critical thinking has been taken away from it . when i asked ppl to think about misogyny i asked them to think about what they were saying and why . george was hitting false -> hes targeting female players or george was hitting false -> she was the unlucky person behind him .

people saw george display a trait they didn’t like - not taking the event seriously enough - and took a similar route as to how they treat sapnap in that they blow it up to be a way bigger event than it actually was . it’s simply because they don’t like the dteam and are trying to find evidence that fits their narrative of them as morally wrong . hence sapnap taking the event too seriously makes him an abuser and george taking the even not seriously enough makes him a raging misogynist when in fact if you look at the context of their streams it creates an entirely new situation . ie George just being a menace to whoever was behind him without a motive of targeting female players.

you can argue that female players have it hard enough in mcc and that’s why what George did was misogyny but i don’t think that holds up . female players already have it so hard so to label every instance of not so beneficial player interactions as musogynistic it’s taking away the attention from the actual misogyny that’s prevalent in the fanbase and sometimes in the event . bc if we say geirge trolling was misogyny we could also say that anyone who kills a woman in pvp games is targeting female players as weak . women who agree to be a sandkeeper instead of a runner are being belittled for their skill . women who are shit off platforms in rsr are being targeted . women who are tagged first in parkour tag are being targeted . game mechanics aren’t always fair and sometimes a woman is the unfortunate victim of griefing or pvp . not all of those instances will be a result of misogyny . otherwise the option to make sure nobody does anything negative to female players leaves them in a situation where they are essentially infantilised bc we are ‘protecting’ them from the mechanics of the game . is it annoying what george did ?? i’m sure it was for false and elaina during the game . is it worth the hullabaloo??? no . bc nobody care if it was soemone like ranboo doing it i guarantee

[scottguy]

I am sick to death of right-wingers taking the asshole position on literally every major concern facing Americans or the world.

1. The left: People are being slaughtered by military grade weapons on American streets.

The right: We don't care how many schoolchildren are slaughtered! We wanna own big guns just because it's ... fun!

2. The left: The wealthy and corporate monopolies are driving up prices of food, housing, medical care, medicine, education and everything necessary to survive. We need to tax the rich and regulate capitalism better.

The right: Immigrants are the one and only cause of ALL our problems! Socialism is bad and you are a 'radical leftist' for wanting reasonable prices for food, housing, and medication! Commie! Libtard!

3. The left: Global Warming is such an established fact that military experts in the Pentagon are actively planning for wars that may occur over arable land. Rising temperatures will cause worse hurricanes, floods, droughts, fires, flooding of costal cities, as well as mass deaths from killer heat-waves that will affect your children, your grandchildren, and their children. The price of damage to economies and cities will ultimately be in the hundreds of trillions of dollars, a fraction of which could be spent prior to that damage occurring to invest in preventing that damage and stopping further destruction by switching to green energy as rapidly as possible without destabilizing the economy.

The right: Climate change is a hoax and thousands of independent climate scientist around the world world are risking their careers by lying! Years now of consecutive record world temperatures are a fluke! Besides it's "too expensive" to save our irreplaceable planet. Green energy is woke! Drill baby, drill! Only woke libtards listen to scientists. That's why we all skipped vaccines and refused to wear masks during Covid, because what the hell do doctors know? (Well, besides the fact that we go to them when we're really in sick because c'mon, they're doctors!) But, just because they have medical educations, they think they are "better" than us by giving us medical advice to wear masks and take vaccines. (The nerve!) My medical ignorance is just as good as your fancy education and expertise... doctor! You elitist! How dare you know more than me! I can search the Internet too and do research! It's easy to find exactly what you want to hear! One guy on Youtube tells me that decades of peer-reviewed research on the safety of vaccines are all wrong. He's saying that's because it's true and NOT because he gets paid per view and knows how to say what I want to hear. His utter lack of qualifications do not concern me if it agrees with my opinion.

4. The left: Women are dying in emergency rooms because of new abortion restrictions since Roe versus Wade was reversed, often despite the mother having an unviable or deceased fetus.

The right: It's God's will, he wants adult women to die, even if their lives or crucial organs are savable! My preacher said so and he tells me what to think! We don't care that if we allow a women to die or become infertile despite a fetus that is already dead or missing its brain because we really never cared about life, just fetuses, even if that, too will inevitably die. "Pro-life!" Right? Women need to follow OUR religious beliefs! It's about CONTROL! You, lady, need to die because you are hurting my "freedom of religion" otherwise. Your religion? Who cares? MINE is the ONLY ONE THAT MATTERS... just bleed out already....

5. The left: The men who wrote our US Constitution specifically excluded religion from having anything to do with American government because they well understood the senseless violence that religious wars had caused over the past 2000 years and even recently in the 1700s. Our founders knew that "beliefs" and "what God wants" are too arbitrary, subjective, and unknowable by men to serve as a rational foundation of government. There are many quotes in the Federalist Papers (essays written in 1787 and 1788 by the writers of the Constitution themselves, to explain the thinking behind the structure and purpose of the US Constitution) specifically stating why our constitution avoided establishing a state religion.

The right: The Founders wanted a Christian Nation! They didn't care about Jews, Muslims, atheists, or the people of hundreds of different other faiths that exist. To hell with them! Christianity should be the ONLY religion for everyone because we will base ALL OUR LAWS on it, whether others like it or not. Why? Because it's MY religion so screw you and yours. My religion is the only "right" one, so YOU have to follow MY religion's rules regardless of your own. I'm willing to fight over it because I "believe" so strongly! Simply holding a completely unprovable idea in my head gives me 'faith' and automatically makes me a righteous person no matter who gets hurt because of it!

6. The left: Trump is a rapist, a multiple count felon, a traitor, and a man who already literally attempted to overthrow a democratic American election by force to stay president and is thus is unqualified for office ever again. He also has adopted Project 2025 which is a plan designed to destroy our democracy from within by firing regulatory agency workers and replacing them with MAGA loyalists. He will then steal every freedom we take for granted and replace them with a Nazi-like dictatorship by declaring some arbitrary "emergency" and invoking an existing law called 'the Insurrection Act' (valid during 'emergencies) to violently (like he did during BLM protests) to suppress free speech and to destroy any public opposition to the loss of Americans' freedoms by locking up the protestors that weren't shot dead. Trump stands against EVERY SINGLE value that Americans have held dear for 250 years now.

The right: Trump is a hero who will save America! He's such a great guy! America was "better" under him because we could be openly racist and drive around in big trucks with Trump flags because we were SO PROUD that we had a fellow white supremacist in office! It was awesome! Trump taught us that we can simply make death threats to innocent school board members and other officials if they don't agree with our positions and our arguments based on false information from online and Fox. To hell with civility! Get your way or threaten to (or try to) hurt people! It works for Trump! We want America to turn into a big free-for-all where only the loudest and most violent get their way! THAT is the kind of society we want our children to grow up in! Being a bully is good! Peace, love, and kindness are for "libtards" and the "woke!"

7. The left: Republicans have already vowed (and voted) in favor of cutting Americans' Social Security payments and for privatize Medicare so it will belong entirely to for-profit companies with incentives to deny care and deny costly medication. (All medications will become expensive when the few existing price controls are repealed.)

The right: Republicans can do no wrong because the left is "woke!" It's better to be asleep than "woke!" We can't really define "woke" but we know that wanting to help others who are unusual to us is bad! I really don't care how badly I get screwed financially as long as the people I hate get screwed worse! Besides, Republicans are our friends on guns and religion so.. take our money as long as we get guns and christofascisim! Republicans wouldn't do something they have openly promised to do. They wouldn't screw the middle class just to to get more federal tax cuts just like they already did in 2017 passing a TAX CHANGE that RAISED taxes on people making UNDER $70,000 and which now still gives away billions in cuts to the rich and corporations at our expense. They wouldn't be that greedy, like they already were. Right? Oh look, an immigrant!

Honestly right-wingers. Don't you get sick of constantly being assholes.. about everything?

Worse, you act like self-righteous assholes despite doing the bidding of the objectively wicked Trump who has been blatantly lying every time he speaks since 2016. Nearly TEN YEARS LATER, you're absolutely blind to his lies because of the mindless adoration that cult members always feel for their leader, even if that leader abuses them by say, raising their taxes. Trump is the guy who promised Covid would just "go away" despite knowing it was airborne and would get worse.

Right-wingers, you expect us to respect your opinions which are based on well-documented lies by Trump, Fox and other news organizations who lie and tell you thing things they know you want to hear instead of what is actually true. You aren't just UNDER informed. You are actively misinformed, lied to, by right-wing media. You like it! You feel superior despite everything you THINK is TRUE being as false as the tens of thousands of DOCUMENTED LIES by Donald Trump.

You could change the channel but you're too afraid to shatter the artificial reality you've created and lived for ten years, where Trump, despite his crimes, his lies, his racism, his encouragement of violence is GOOD, DECENT, PERFECT and 'ON YOUR SIDE'.

BUT, we LIBERALS, who just want everyone including MAGA people, to have better lives by being able to AFFORD THINGS and get HEALTHCARE and not be cheated by our bosses or corporations that do awful things in the name of ever-increasing-profit, we, the left are somehow.... the bad guys in all this.

I don't hear any right-wingers saying openly they want better lives for ALL Americans. I don't hear any of you ASKING what can be done to fix outrageous prices for housing, food and medicine. All you've been told to do is blame Biden for everything. Every problem, if not caused by an immigrant, is caused by the evil and wicked Biden.

We're bringing manufacturing back to America but you hate the president who made those jobs one of the key priorities of his current administration. Even when Biden policies have improved your life by lowering the cost of insulin or asthma medication you still say, Biden is bad! If you recently have rural high speed Internet, that came courtesy of Biden's infrastructure bill. Infrastructure improvements have created jobs that rural Americans need.

Infrastructure programs are helping rural areas so much that Republicans, who voted against those things, are trying to take credit for them!

But, if it was up to Republicans... you would NEVER had gotten improved roads or bridges or rural high-speed Internet. No... Republicans need to save THAT MONEY for more TAX CUTS for the rich.

You, on the right, have been so blinded to both EVIL and DECENCY. You don't see the evil of Trump and you don't see the decency of Biden. It's just "us versus them" now. Trump and the media drove us apart.

It'd be sad if it weren't so SCARY right now, living on the edge of fascism with so called "patriots" on the right, actively rooting for a guy promising, literally promising, to run things like Hitler. He openly vowed to be a dictator on "Day One." (see link below from the Associated Press if you don't believe me)

I'm writing this to point out that, despite a long history of the right having some really hard-to-respect opinions noted above, we DO have common interests if we can just stop hating each other.

But, all you on the right can talk about are immigrants and how the left is "woke" as if those are the ONLY problems in your lives. It's simple and mindless. No thought is required at all. The people who fed this to you made sure of it.

What about the future lives of your children and grandchildren?

They could be slaughtered in the street or school by AR-15s. It happens.. a lot, why do you think your loved one is somehow safe?

It could be your wife or girlfriend dying in that hospital because of the chance misfortune of an ectopic pregnancy with the doctor threatened with jail for saving her life or her fertility.

It could be YOU starving and homeless because Social Security was cut SO far.

It could be YOU dying of cancer because privatized Medicare denied both your operation and the skyrocketing cost of your cancer medication.

It could be your spouse or child or parent locked up in a Nazi-like camp simply for being liberal and posting online, like this.

It could be your Southern state being bombed in retaliation when Trump decides to invade Mexico.

It could be all our lives and and much of the life on Earth anihilated for centuries when some MAGA flunky (completely ignorant of radiation drift and the built-in retaliatory launch systems & treaties of other countries) gets told to launch the nuclear bombs and is just "follows orders" thus causing worldwide nuclear Armageddon...

...all because Trump was having a bad day. I wouldn't put it past him, so selfish, so bitter, if he gets too old, to do just one last super-powerful selfish act just to boost his ego, you know, like mass shooters do when they've gotten too angry.

What scares us all on the left and in the middle, is that you, on the right, don't seem to CARE about anything ... except immigrants!

If we could stop all human migration on Earth, the rich will continue to make our lives miserable because the rich do not CARE about any of us! The wealthy have just been using voters for decades now by playing to tribalism, racism, and fear of the unknown.

We, left and right, should be UNITED against the wealthy who have spent billions by now buying our politicians (both left and right) and flooding our media with propaganda labeled "news" to get their way. The rich are experts at playing to your passions (guns, religion) and your fears (immigration, gays, tans people.) in order to manipulate you and slowly drain the middle class until there are just the super rich and the ultra poor left in America.

If the wealthy do get their way and we lose democracy, sooner rather than later, you will not like it. Eventually, like Hitler's Germany, everyone will eventually see their huge mistake.

Do you think Hitler had many supporters remaining after his actions reduced Germany to rubble? After the nation was complicit in the murder of six million completely innocent people? Germans still have to live with that knowledge.

Don't for a moment think that the USA is so damn special that, "It can't happen here!"

Hitler is what happens when you let a guy with zero ethics run a country! Trump has zero ethics!

Who will stop him? Not Congress or the Supreme Court. They've already proven that by their actions.

The wealthy are literally on the verge of stealing every American freedom that you hold dear with Trump's Project 2025 just to get richer and to force a particular religion on everyone because they have the money, the power, and just the right candidate running, to do it.

Care about that ... losing your freedoms... because it WILL matter to YOU also.

Below is the Wikipedia entry on Project 2025. This is no conspiracy theory. It is very very real and terrifying to any American who values freedom. Below that is the quote I promised on Trump's vow to be a dictator, on "day one."

This post probably won't change a single mind and will only be read by people who already agree, but man, it felt good (albeit frustrating to list right-wing intransigence so thoroughly) to write.

Remember blogging (like above) changes just about nothing. Vote, volunteer to phone bank when the election comes (you can do it at home), donate money to progressive media and liberal races if you can afford it. I write stuff like this because it feels good to get the understandable anger out of my system. I seriously doubt I will change a single mind.

Really the ONE crucial thing that could utterly change America towards the BETTER is if ALL the registered Democrats just SHOW UP and VOTE BLUE this November.

If even just THAT is ALL you do... it will be enough and so much better than the fool who doesn't vote and says lazily, "Oh nothing ever changes. Why bother?"

Yeah, then they took away Roe versus Wade and womens' constitutional rights to an abortion. The Supreme Court got packed and ruled the president can murder people be a king!

Like HELL, "Nothing ever changes!"

Look around you! Just because the sun rises every day and your PERSONAL LIFE doesn't feel impacted. (Have your rents gone up lately? Can you even afford health insurance?) People who say that are so used to being screwed that they've given up! How can anything ever be fixed if you give up? Not voting ... is surrender. You're saying, "You can't be beat." I post about this a lot so I'm not putting in my usual political cartoon of 2/3 of eligible voters saying "My vote won't change anything!" when, obviously due to the sheer numbers of them alone, they are wrong!

Things DO change depending on leadership.

All you can do is point which direction we go,

more to the left

or

RADICALLY more to the right! Dangerously more. Loss of democracy more.

If you DON'T choose, some MAGA or fool "independent" ("both parties are the same!" or "Biden's is old, corporate media run by the wealthy never covered any of his accomplishments and I didn't bother to find out about any, but the news did follow all of Biden's gaffes and almost none of Trump's or Trump's violent rhetoric or ever actually say Trump is a threat to democracy, not on the front page anyway.") So, let's vote for the guy who already tried to overthrow American democracy! He's a few years younger. Both parties are the same!

Seriously? I don't recall the Democrat party ever violently attempting to overturn an election. We concede even CLOSE elections for the good of democracy. Trump got destroyed and lost in court 60 times because he had utterly no proof of fraud, and STILL didn't concede!

Yeah, both parties are "the same!"

What the hell does that even mean right now?

Right now, the Republican party is rooting for a fucking wanna-be dictator!

So, vote, vote blue... or THOSE people will chose America's direction for you ... and then your vote may never count ever again.

[behold-a-dark-horse]

The Impostor Syndrome...

I think it's pretty clear that Tommy struggled with a form of impostor syndrome, but one thing I've just recently come to observe is how that manifests in his relationships with women.

No matter how much money he made or or power he acquired, he never felt like he fit in with people who had become his peers and even though he rants about how those "bastards" will never accept him or his family because of their humble beginnings, you can clearly see that he feels the same way and I think that bothers him far more than their opinions.

Tommy never has any problem lording himself and his power over people in any kind of relationship, whether it's allies, enemies, the Peaky Blinders or even his own family, that's where he's comfortable. Except with May and Grace. With both of them, his mannerisms change completely. He's gentle, soft and attentive, all about catering to their needs. It’s not about character or personality given just how different May and Grace are (even though there's not a whole lot to go on). It's like he's always trying to prove his worth, but what matters most to him, they've already got and all it could earn him in that situation is a bit of validation. And it's not validating him as a person because he gives so little of himself in their interactions.

Like when Tommy and Grace meet in season, for having supposedly missed and craved her so much, he doesn't want to spend the time alone, he wants to go out into a public and crowded place that allows very little relaxation or intimacy. He starts off with some fake hostility then flips the switch to "look at me! look what I can do!" Yes, it’s cool that she got to meet this super famous movie star and anybody would've appreciated a night out like that, but again (and maybe it's just me reading too much into it), it looked like it was less about Grace getting to meet Chaplin and more about Tommy being able to get her there. She was certainly no stranger to high class crowds like that, but it was just the fact that this time, he was able to get her in. If it had been something special that we knew was specific to Grace and not just the most famous man in the world, it would've been a different story. But we never get to see that, based on what we do see, Tommy probably never asked that.

With Tatiana, you can see that although he does find her class and her power appealing, knowing that her family has lost much of their wealth and status does seem to affect his treatment and perception of her. She could see his impostor syndrome herself, when Tommy thought she was saying that his weakness was women/sex and he told her that he could get a fuck whenever he wanted and she responds to him saying "Yes. But I am a duchess under you like a horse" and talks about how he walks around his house like a boy who'd broken in through the window. And I absolutely love how boldly she confronted him with it.

He does it with his own family. Maybe it's a stretch, but I noticed it in how he reacts to Esme vs Linda challenging his authority even though Linda had far more influence over Arthur than Esme ever had or tried to have over John. [And not exactly the same situation, but worth mentioning here is when Charlie was taken and he thought the painter might've been involved, he basically told Polly she was foolish to believe that (even with all the success they'd had by then) a man like him could've ever been interested in a low born woman like her, and this is all while he involves himself with rich women who are always less likely to date/ marry down than their male counterparts. So, what's the truth there? Does he really think he's special or does he realize and just choose to ignore how shallow his relationships are?]

Tommy and Lizzie’s relationship is far too complex to dive into on this post, but the major difference between her and the other women is that he shows more of himself to Lizzie than he ever does to them. He’s more vulnerable, he shows more of his flaws, because he’s confident that he can trust her and that she won’t leave. And they spend time together not fucking. It’s clear he cares otherwise he could’ve easily left her working the alleys in Small Heath and he definitely wouldn't have opened up to her like he does, but she doesn't have the status that gives him validation or inspires his worship like May and Grace.

Also, it's not just a class thing because he's the opposite with men. I don't wanna get into that too on this long ass post but you can see the difference there.

It's super late and I know this is a rambling mess probably full of typos, but I've just been thinking about the ways some of his issues were presented. There's so much that is said through Tommy's relationships with women, but this is one I just noticed and thought was interesting.

[twisted-wonderland-memories]

Yume Hitsuji’s Story

Understanding You (Part 1)

???: So you wanted to use my power? You do realize that the consequences of your own actions will affect you one day?

Yumi: It won't matter in the end, after all everything will just repeat like nothing happen.

You never make any sense.

???: What....

Yumi: You may not understand me, I can tell.

Tell me what...?

Yumi: Everything repeats like an era has ended, and yet no one knows what will happen next.

???: ...

Yumi: We are all in a cycle, and yet you seem to hold the key I am looking for.

???: Be specific with this, what exactly you are aiming at?

Yumi: Join forces with me.

???: ?!

Out of everyone, you are the most confusing prey I had ever seen. You never care about what would happen to yourself, and yet you went through all the mile to explain everything to me.

I can easily call you a fool, an utterly fool.

Understanding You (Part 2)

Yumi: From now on, I will call you Yume and you will call me Yumi.

Yume: ...

Yumi: I am you.

Yume: ...And you....are me.

Yumi and Yume: We are two sides of the same coin.

Yumi: That is our own catchphrase, please remember it well brother.

Yume: ....

When we once join forces once I don't know where do I begin, I took the form of your older twin brother and yet I resemble as him even tho we had join forces by letting me take you.

I could have sworn that I had meet you before, and yet I was ignorant.

How could I know you of all places take your place by being a simple kind but weak person who was newly enrolled in Night Raven College, you never told me that I had to witness everything yet it is hard to understand what you mean by cycles.

Yume: You are honestly weird Yumi.

Yumi: ?

Yume: When you told me that everything has a different purpose of the cycle, I had to admit one thing. How do you actually remember all of them?

Yumi: ....I.... I can't seem to find the right answer to it.

Little did I not realize sooner.... That I grown to care for you.

Understanding You (Part 3)

Ace: Say Perfect, I had to ask you a question.

Yume: Hm?

Ace: Is it just me or is it that I saw a women from your reflection?

Yume: Ah that?

Yume turns around but he saw his own reflection even if he did see Yumi.

Yume: I don't get what you are talking about.

Soon I learn that I had to lose my memory in order to follow the script, I clearly had no idea why. Yumi told me that she tried to at least change the script at least more than once but it repeats like it was not the correct answer.

It would be weird to understand it, and yet.... I do get chills from time to time.

I am not your real brother.

You know that well.

But you view me as one.

Words cannot express how much that I pity you for you running away from the truth, tho I would remain silent about it... after all. It would not be worth it to judge things swiftly before understanding both sides of the story.

But Yumi.... I had one question.

Who is....'Rue?'

[redheadbigshoes]

🌻 here, why is that one anon commenting on an anon'd ask that doesn't even say what people or posts its talking about lol

Yeah it's messed up no matter what to fetishize black folk, do we even see the post? know who is being talked about? have any evidence of anything at all? they seem pretty eager to jump on a trans woman mentioned tangentially through an anon ask...

Anyway I wanted to weigh in on the gender segregated sports with adding that we hear so often from conservatives that big strong scary trans women will win all the womens sports but people don't know I guess that hormone therapy for transfems literally atrophies our muscles lol.

I used to play american football in jr high and high school and I worked out regularly in college and I've lost pretty much all of that strength over the last 5-6 years of taking t-blockers and estrogen. I lose arm wrestling matches with my butch lesbian cousin lol. Trans women on hormones have absolutely no difference to our body capabilities than a cis women. Which doesn't mean they'd be weaker than any given man or anything, given that anybody can still work out enough to build strength to compete in a sport, but my point is we hear about trans women having 'biological' advantages in sports so much cis people forget what the reality is for trans women who compete.

I honestly think it is sexist to segregate sports by gender, given that women can absolutely beat men in anything in the world, I know a cis women that is 2 feet taller than me who could be a basketball star over any man if she wanted to, but that brings up the fact that sports aren't totally fair even within gender segregation, since sports inherently favor people with specific body types. So if you wanted to be truly egalitarian you would segregate sports by weight classes, or something like that.

But you are right that in any co-ed sports in our current society there will always be misogyny, its the reason why we have a seperate chess league is because one of the sports with no body favoritism which anyone can pick up and learn and practice and plenty of women become amazing at chess, they are still systemically repressed from being able to compete and practice like their men peers do. They face increased scrutiny and barriers that men dont, which is why trans women competing in women's sports is important for us in this current setting. Women can compete in any sport that men can, but misogyny is prevalent in every sports space, as well as transmisogyny, so a trans woman barred from women's leagues has basically no fair and safe space to compete and enjoy a sport.

-🌻

It’s complicated whenever minorities are involved because the other anon (the one who made that comment about the first anon’s ask) didn’t have the context about the situation nor the specific post the person was talking about, so it really seems that they got defensive about it because it’s probably a sensitive topic for them.

Meanwhile, like you said, they were eager to jump on a trans woman without even knowing exactly what they were talking about.

About the gender segregation: people don’t even take 2 seconds to look up how there’s a general rule that trans women who compete in the women category (when it comes to sports) need to be on hormone blocks (idk if that’s the right term) for at least a year before competing from what I know.

Yeah like I said on the reblog: what’s most stopping from segregating everything into gender categories (not only sports) is misogyny. I think if we want to stop dividing things into gender categories the first thing to do is to think how it will be able to do that without women being negatively affected.

[transamorousnetwork]

How I EASILY Met My Perfect Transgender Girlfriend

I usually write posts about extraordinary results my Transamorous Network clients get. Today, I’m writing about my results. They’re pretty freaking cool. And they show how easy it is to meet our matches, whether we’re trans or trans-attracted.

That’s right, much like Hair Club For Men founder Sy Sperling, I’m not only the founder of The Transamorous Network, I’m also a client. In other words, I practice what I preach. The same things I tell clients to do in their lives, I do in mine.

Sometimes someone will ask me “if your approach works so well, how come you’re not in a relationship?”

The answer is complicated.

I’m in the process of my own self-discovery. That’s my priority. I am exploring my own gender expression among other things. A lot of “me” is under construction therefore. Yes, I’m 100 percent exclusive about being with a transgender woman. But I wasn’t clear what specifics I wanted in a partner yet. Because I’m not clear about me.

But then, Muriel happened (I’ve changed her name and some details to protect her privacy). That’s right. She came into my life unexpectedly. And, over time, I’ve developed a fascinating attraction to her. More on that later.

What’s important now is how this happened. I didn’t do ANY of the things others do to find their partner. I didn’t go to bars. Nor did I join a dating site. She literally came to me. That’s exactly how I promise my clients their partners will show up: with no effort on their part. I just kept telling positive stories. And then Muriel showed up. 

She wasn’t the only one

I wasn’t out looking for transgender girlfriend. Still, I would regularly come across them in town. Every so often, transgender women would hit on me too. That’s because I’m open and authentic about who I am. I embrace all of me, especially my transamory. Which is why the Universe brings me trans women all the time. That tells me I have my stories right.

Over the years, several transgender women have been so bold as to call my cell. Out of the blue, I’d get a call. I love it when transgender women are bold like that. I know when they are like that, there must be something about them that resonates with who I’m being. So when that has happened, I’ve reveled in the rendezvous no matter what happens after that call.

Not every transgender woman who reaches out is my type. But instead of focusing on that, I always reveled in those who were matches. So it isn’t a surprise to me that I eventually came across someone like Muriel. Someone who is, for the moment, a perfect match to my constantly refining desire.

Chasing is the hard way guys and gals

How many of you men have tried to get a trans girl’s attention, in a bar or online, and been ignored or ghosted? I know you’ve had that experience. I’ve had it too, when I was doing what some of you do. That experience sucks. Especially when some transgender women hold preconceived notions that all of us are fetishizers out for lustful satisfaction only.

When you’re out in a bar or online somewhere, it’s not easy to weed out those kinds of transgender women from the ones you want. You want trans women who want to be with you because they appreciate who you are. That’s why I tell my clients stop doing what every other guy (or trans girl) does. Instead, do something different: let the Universe bring the girl/guy to you!

Many guys think that’s crazy talk. They think it won’t work. Even some trans girls think that way. Maybe you think that way. Not my clients though. It takes convincing at first. But in time, life shows them how easy finding love can be.

Think I’m bullshitting? How do you explain these high quality girls, both of whom reached out to me recently. Both did so on their own initiative, with me not having any idea they were out there:

^^A high quality transgender woman expressing her affection…

^^And here’s another!

These are just two of the many transgender women who have reached out to me recently. Since starting The Transamorous Network, I’ve been approached my many more, through my blog and in person. But enough of that. Now, I want to lavish thoughts about Muriel, the girl I find myself fascinatingly attracted to.

An wonderful connection

She responded to a blog post I wrote earlier this year. Muriel and I see the world similarly. So I appreciated her perspective. I sent her an admiring reply. She replied with thanks. I don’t think either one of us had romantic intentions. 

But the more I read some of her posts, including those on Facebook, the more I realized Muriel was really, really smart. I don’t remember who initiated, but we became Facebook friends. From there, getting to know one another accelerated.

Now, besides being super, wicked smart, Muriel also looks great. At least I think so. I especially like that she proudly owns being a “woman with a dick”, as she puts it, which I think is the epitome of what it means to be trans. She doesn’t try to be a cis-woman. She’s proud that she’s trans. And I love that about her. I also like that she’s close to my age. And that she recognizes me as a staunch ally of transgender women, which I am, of course!

When Muriel first sent me racy pictures, I was surprised. I didn’t ask for them, but I did welcome them. Muriel responded with more, increasingly revealing photos. Along with them, we had wonderfully intimate and revealing conversations around sexuality, gender expression, what we like to do in bed and more. I love her self-assuredness. And I’m happy she trusts me.

Muriel also is married and has a child. Her relationship is open, though, which is perfect for me because at the moment, I prefer focusing on my self development. Still, I look forward to seeing Muriel in person. In the meantime, I love who she is. And I enjoy time with her.

The Transamorous Network approach works

My life shows me in so many ways that what I show my clients works. I’m producing the same results they get on the subject of relationship. But that’s not all. I also see other parts of my life proving this stuff I share works.

I’ve said this before: The best place to meet our match is in our daily life. Not at a bar. Not online. It’s more fun too. I always ask my clients this question early on: If you had your choice, which would you prefer: Meeting your ideal match spontaneously – doing what you love – or through an online dating site or in a bar?

Every client, transgender or trans-attracted gives the same answer: it’s just more fun meeting your match in that lovely, spontaneous way. The same way the Universe will give us everything else we want. But to have those experiences, we gotta tell the right stories so we become matches to what we want.

Then we won’t have to go out looking for our partner. She (or he, or they) will come to us. In the same way my clients experience it. And now, in the same way I have.

Want your perfect match to come to you? I’m here, ready to help.

[piracytheorist]

what exactly is a girlboss and how does it relate to mia winters? saw someone in the tags say it. this ask coming from me having actually googled the term and still not entirely clear on any of it

Another example of Alan being ignored. the picture of Mia, Alan, Evie (all dressed in dark clothing which is why they stood out to me) and Miranda and the other (currently un- named) researchers found in Mirandas lab in Village somehow means to some that Mia was promoted to researcher?

You know, I don't have a very clear meaning of the word "girlboss" in my mind either. I'm kinda thinking that it's meant to describe a female character who kicks ass and takes no shit. Like the Strong Female CharacterTM some media try to make by making their women badasses without caring too much for character depth. But when using "girlboss" I feel we refer to a female character who kicks ass and honestly we don't care if she's morally wrong or right. She just looks sexy doing it and that's all that matters. Not that some girlbosses don't have character depth or motivation, just that the existence or lack of those don't affect a character's status as "girlboss". I don't know if I made that clear lol.

When it comes to Mia, well, she's not the conventional definition of BadassTM, but she knows how to use a gun and has an entire portion of re7 of herself going into a shipwreck to save her husband, killing mold monsters along the way. Then in re8, she has a metal pole at the ready against a machine gun. She's brave, she's dedicated, she doesn't hesitate to get her hands dirty. For me that makes her a girlboss, regardless of whether you're willing to understand her character motivations or not.

What you say about Alan I think it's the result of people depending too much on the wiki. I haven't checked it in a while, but last time I did it said something along the lines of "Mia made a deal with the BSAA to not tell Ethan anything about her previous life" which is only an assumption based on that line from the Baker Incident Report:

Maybe it's just me not caring about hating Mia, but I don't see how this proves Mia made a deal with them to not tell Ethan. It's not like Ethan didn't suspect anything, like, it's ridiculous, do they think he spent three years with Mia, continuously asking her about her past, her not telling him, and him still staying with her and having a kid with her?? That's just stupid.

But, the wiki does imply she did, so with a lot of people who don't care about spending time looking through all the sources (and like, I don't blame them, they're not obligated to) and depend on the wiki to learn about the story, they get the wrong idea. The wiki is what also says that Mia was a researcher for the Connections, and that was taken from a guide-kind of book about re7 that was published in Japanese only so we're depending on fan translations for that, and those carry a high risk of inaccuracies. Now since we don't have any more details about that - like, what kind of research did she do? Was it about Eveline in specific? Cause the files in re7 only call her Eveline's handler, and that's way different than being a researcher actively doing experiments on her - it's a bit of a wonky situation in general. The game says other stuff, the guide book says other.

And frankly, I don't know how the hell it would make sense for her to be a researcher. In the photo she wears plain clothes and jeans (like Alan), while the others are in lab coats. Why would she not wear a lab coat if she was taking part in the whole "research"? Also, a shit ton of people just ignore the fact that the Connections just left Mia to rot in the Baker house and chose Lucas of all people to monitor the situation through. If she was a high-position researcher that was full-on sold on bioterrorism and knew every little significant detail about the Eveline project... y'all think they would have left her there??? If she was significant to the organization, you think they wouldn't care to rescue her? And if she had too much info as a high-up, you think they would have risked her surviving, getting away and ratting them out?? Bitch come on. It's fine if you don't like her but don't try to justify that with poor research on the topic. (That's not aimed at you, anon, that's aimed at all those people who scream bloody murder the moment you try and explain that Mia is not Evil incarnated upon Earth)

[tellthemeerkatsitsfine]

I’ve just finished Josie Long’s recently released short story collection, Because I Don’t Know What You Mean and What You Don’t, and holy hell, was it ever good. I mean, I expected it to be good, because it’s Josie Long. But I don’t really know exactly what I expected it to be, as I have not read a lot of short story collections in my life. I just knew she was going to deliver something that would be worth the time, and she really, really did.

Short stories aren’t a big draw for me mainly because I tend to like longer things; you can get across a short plot and a basic iteration of a theme and/or message in a short story, but it’s not generally enough to really get to know a character. And if I’m going to get into a bit of fiction, I like to do that. The big thing Josie Long managed to do with these stories was make the writing so immediate that it felt like we did know all the characters, even in the limited time and space.

Every story was written in incredibly close first-person – aside from one, I guess, which was sort of second-person, in that it used this dialogue-only trick that I thought was amazingly effective. They all read like a stream of consciousness. Like they weren’t just a description of something that happened – they were a transcription of the inner monologue that someone had while they experienced something, and we can work out what they experienced based on that monologue. This meant that sometimes I had to scramble a bit to keep up and work out the narrative, but I think that was the point. Doing that kept me even more engaged in the stories. The settings and circumstances and even the identify of the viewpoint character unfold a little at a time.

It’s fairly wide-ranging in topics, but keeps coming back to the same themes, which is what I’d expect from Josie Long, and I loved all of it. Hope and anxiety and uncertainty and longing, and I realize those words are broad enough so they could describe the themes of just about all fiction, but she really gets into them, from so many different angles. And then more specific things, like the way causes and ideals get transformed across years and generations, the way individual feelings and relationships still matter in existential struggles, justice versus compassion, people trying to understand each other across experience gaps. And capitalist alienation and class analysis, obviously. Obviously Josie Long brings it all back to class-based struggles.

Here's one really specific thing: she has a couple of stories – one in particular, but also a few more – that touch on unrequited love in a really intense and detailed way, and I realized I haven’t heard that all that often from a female perspective. Which says more about me than about the world, I think, as there definitely are lots of stories out there about unrequited love from a female perspective. But it does happen that probably too high a proportion of my music and stand-up comedy collections are by men, and that’s where I get most of my stories, and most of the time the gender of the artist doesn’t make much of a difference anyway, but romantic love does tend to be a gender-subject. And sometimes I find myself relating more to stories like that from straight men than from straight women, as my stories were more about being into girls who didn’t like me than boys, but still, I didn’t realize until I heard this tell it from the female perspective, how much I appreciated getting that side.

I thought the title drop was brilliant. Really hard-hitting moment, and the right call to name the whole book after that.

Having said that, I did read a few things other people said about the book, and saw several comments on it being a female-driven book overall, and I have what I think is an irrational level of annoyance toward that view. I mean, the fact that it’s written by a woman obviously affects the perspective. And a lot of the stories are told by female protagonists. But some of the stories have male protagonists, and almost all of them are universal.

I don’t think it’s always bad to characterize a book as being “female-driven”. The last book I heard before this one was Fern Brady’s Strong Female Character, and I’d understand saying it about that one. That one talked a lot about how Fern Brady’s life has been affected by misogyny, and other female-specific experiences (hence the title). And that’s not a bad thing at all, it’s good to have books about that! I just don’t think Josie Long’s book really is one of those things, and that is also fine. This book does touch on sexism and gendered oppression, and you don’t come out of it doubting whether the author’s a feminist, and it covers some stuff that does feel female-specific. But it takes so many different perspectives on so many different issues, it covers such a broad range of ways to look at things. It’s nitpicky to complain about this, as I see why people would call it a book about female issues and that’s not completely wrong, but also, Daniel Kitson can write one poignant play about a woman who’s pining for her ex-boyfriend and a man who plays guitar on the street and a man who calls a TV station when he’s lonely and a couple who go to clubs, and no one says he writes about men’s loneliness, you know? It’s recognized as universal. Josie Long's book has some stuff that I think happens to women in a way it doesn’t happen to men, and from my own female perspective I like reading that stuff, but also, so much of the book feels universal. There’s just so much going on, so many different things in each story, it’s so much bigger than any one thing.

Even with all the range, you can feel how much of herself Josie Long put into the book. I recognize a few little parts of a few of the stories from her autobiographical stand-up, though I believe the vast majority of the actual characters and events in the book are entirely fictional. But more than that, her perspective is in there. The simultaneous pessimism and hope. The way she can be dark but not bleak, find something that matters in the worst situations. The way she finds the stories worth telling in the apocalypse. There is an apocalypse, by the way. I got fairly near the end and was surprised that none of the stories had featured a dystopian, post-climate/fascist apocalypse society, but it’s okay, she did get to that in the last couple of stories. But even in the stories that don’t involve an all-out apocalypse, all the stories are applying some kind of socialist lens to everyone’s problems.

A few of the stories remind me a bit of The Perimeter, the one-off thing she did with Liam Williams a few years ago. In fact, that one almost could have been one of the stories in this book. Some also had shades of Super November. I’d say I think she drew from those previous things she’d done while writing in a few of these stories, except that I’m pretty sure those themes just make it into everything she does.

A few of the stories are based around some really creative, original ideas. And lots of them are based around common, well-trodden ground, but her perspective is so individual that it feels fresh no matter what she talks about. It’s engrossing and thought provoking and emotionally effective and complicated.

Also, I’m pretty sure she can write. I’m not exactly an expert on this, but I do know a few little things about the “artform” of properly good writing, given that I work as an editor (which I realize you would not know from my Tumblr posts, I realize that more every time I reread one and catch all kinds of typos, but I am actually all right it when someone’s paying me to edit stuff), and I’m pretty sure this is good. I’ve read a bunch of books written by comedians, and for many of them, I can tell the technical writing level isn’t quite what you’d expect from someone who’s an author first and foremost, but I don’t mind that, since I want to hear what the comedian has to say whether they’re a technically proficient writer or not. There have been a few exceptions to that, comedians who wrote books that feels really technically well written. The main ones I can think of right now being Alan Davies, Sandi Toksvig, and now Josie Long.

It's just really good. I listened to the audiobook, and in my experience with comedians’ books, I have found that what they (well, some of them, not all) lack in technical writing proficiency, they often make up for in being really good at reading their own writing for the audiobook. Which makes sense, as they have lots of practice with that skill from stand-up. Hearing the inflection in Josie Long’s voice on the audiobook adds a lot to the stories, I think. But I’m still planning to at some point get the physical book, too, and I’m looking forward to that.