#we are the multigender of relationships

[genderkoolaid]

I feel like you would get this, seeing this comment section kinda hurt. The OP they are responding to is a non-binary trans man who was talking about feeling uncomfortable because they still feel attraction to lesbians and have felt very excluded. He’s wary around certain lesbians because they center their ideology around hating men regardless of gender identity and has faced a lot of anti-transmasculinity and transmisogyny. While most lesbians are wonderful amazing people there’s no denying that some do hold an innate hatred for men, not saying they need to like men. I fully understand lesbians and predatory cis men but there’s definitely lesbians who would date trans men. It can be scary for a trans man to come out or start transitioning because at what point do they become too masculine or too much of a man for their friends. There were even people in the comments saying the same anti-man statements who identify as a he/him nonbinary lesbian. This topic is very hard to hear for me as a closeted genderfluid person because my best friend is a man hating lesbian and I dread the day I can actually begin transitioning and she turns her back on me like these people. Queer spaces in general can be hard to occupy as a multi gendered person because of those people as well as mlm/nblm spaces that say ‘fem aligned dni’. In general I don’t think we should police labels and everyone has their own interpretation and I think labels are just a suggestion anyway but I suppose that makes sense for a genderfluid bisexual person.

These people just straight up do not understand the gender diversity that has always existed in lesbian spaces (by which I mean spaces built & catering to queer women & those seen as women).

There have always been trans men in lesbian spaces. You aren't obligated to fuck them, but they have always been there. There are pages and pages of writing out there not only by trans male dykes, but by the lesbian cis women who love them and still identify as lesbians while in relationships with them. There are trans guys at dyke bars right now as we speak having a great time.

Its not surprising to me that there are he/him NB lesbians supporting this. There are a lot of people out there who, because they don't identify As Men, mentally distance themselves from those who do despite any similarities. It's okay for THEM to be lesbians, and it's transphobic to erase THEIR lesbianism because they are Non-Men™! but once you cross that line you become the enemy. It's very "no you gyns I'm TOTALLY different than those gross tbros i promise im not a man at all and i will never want to be one so im allowed in the club!" The same people also throw multigender people under the bus. Trying to figure out your nonbinary in this environment is hellish (I speak from experience) because people pretend like they are super accepting of nonbinary people, until you realize that if you ever think of yourself as even slightly male people will start seeing you as a predatory invader trying to Force Lesbians To Date Men! Very "complex gender for me but not for thee"

Anyways. Twitter is not a good place. Anon, I hope you find better friends. Not every queer space is this hostile to us, I promise. There are people out there who genuinely work to make our community better and I hope you find them.

[saffigon]

I'm a trans man and I'm having a hard time understanding one of your posts.

How can trans Men be lesbian? The definition of lesbian is non-man loving non-man.

I understand he/him lesbians, because pronouns don't equal gender.

But to me calling a trans man a lesbian for liking women seems... against the whole point. Wouldn't that be against their gender identity, since lesbian is non men loving non men?

I am genuinely trying to understand this and don't mean to come off as rude. I am also in the lgbtq community, I'm bisexual and transgender. I try to get your points.

Also if I understood the entire post wrong, MB. I'm just trying to make sure i can accept everyone.

Trans men have had a connection to the lesbian community for decades. The line between butch and transmasc "non-man" lesbian and male lesbian is blurry sometimes. If you want historical evidence, Alison Bechdel has some comic strips from the 1980s and 1990s where male lesbians are present. Trans men who like women often identify as lesbians before they realize they're trans, and so they have an established connection to the lesbian community and continue to identify with it as they transition. Some also feel that their attraction to women is inherently queer and don't really feel like their attraction is "straight". Not all straight men identify as lesbians or lesboys, obviously, but it's an option for those who feel like it applies to them.

Also, "non-man" and "non-woman" just create a new binary that's exorsexist and based in racist ideology if applied generally. Not everyone fits neatly into the "non-man" or "non-woman" categories. Multigender people, for example, may be both man and woman, and don't fit into "non-man" or "non-woman" neatly. To say a multigender person who is both man and woman is "non-man" or "non-woman" erases at least half of their identity. Or demigender people who identify with a binary gender can be both not that binary gender and that binary gender. So saying a demiman is "non-man" is to erase their identity as a man and to say they're exclusively "non-man" is to erase their identity as nonbinary. This is also true for genderfluid and genderflux people who are sometimes completely binary men. To say they're exclusively "non-man" is to erase their identity as a man and to say they're exclusively "man" is to erase their identity as nonbinary.

Post by @this-is-exorsexism and @our-lesboy-experience found here

I'm white so I'm mostly going to point to this post by @moonshinedyke to explain the racism surrounding "nonman" and "nonwoman" as terms. Historically, "nonman" and "nonwoman" have been used to degender Black people and the term also degenders Two-Spirit people. As he points out in the post, it's fine to use the definitions for your own attraction, but using them to define the label as a whole is antiblack.

This isn't to like shame you or anything, just to give explanations and resources as to some things. I would recommend checking out the @/our-lesboy-experience blog to learn more about lesboys in general. This Carrd also has a good amount of information.

As for my own experiences, lesbian was the first queer identity I had. I started identifying as a lesbian since I was about 12. I realized I was trans when I was about 15. I've strayed away from the lesbian label because I felt it was "too gendered" both in definition and in the association. As I've gotten older, I've started to connect with the lesbian community again and feel comfortable identifying as a butch lesbian alongside being a trans man. My girlfriend identifies as a bi lesbian, and we consider our relationship both to be a lesbian one and to be a straight one. My attraction to women is both lesbian and straight and it fluctuates between what it is from day to day. I also identify as bigender and have some connection to lesbian identity because of my gender identity being a little funky.

A better definition of lesbian would be queer attraction to women. It includes people of all gender identities and is generally a good faith way to understand lesbianism.

[transmascissues]

building off of this post, people love to say that “trans men want to keep going into in women’s spaces after they transition because they just want to have the best of both worlds!” but in my experience, there are four main reasons that a trans man might use a “women’s space” after they transition:

it’s an important resource that’s being arbitrarily gendered and we need to use it regardless of which gender is “supposed to” be using it.

it’s a public facility where we’d be significantly less safe in the men’s version and we have to choose our safety over our desire to not be misgendered.

it’s a social space that we’ve been in since before we transitioned and we don’t want to suddenly be cut off from our friends and support system.

the trans man in question is multigender and is also a woman, or maintains some other kind of connection to womanhood alongside their manhood.

do any of those sound like “evil men rubbing our dirty little hands together making plans for how we’re going to get male privilege without losing access to women’s spaces” to you? they sure don’t to me!

i think it’s pretty reasonable that we want to transition without losing the ability to access the resources we need, keep ourselves safe, keep up the relationships we’ve built, and express all facets of who we are. all of those are really, like, pretty basic parts of having good life and we shouldn’t be expected to give them up when we transition.

and honestly, if you claim to care about trans people, you should not be so attached to the gendering of these spaces that you’re willing to deny trans men those things for the sake of upholding gender restrictions. anyone who prioritizes the sanctity of gender segregated spaces over the safety, health, and well-being of trans men is a fucking transphobe. (yes, even if you’re trans yourself.)

and that’s what really gets me about all of this — the vehemence with which people are willing to defend those spaces being entirely and inflexibly gendered, despite how enforcement of gendered spaces has hurt trans people time and time again. gendered spaces have literally always been set up in ways that force trans people to break the rules; some trans men might break those rules in ways that don’t make sense to you, but that doesn’t mean it’s wrong for us to do so! it just means you might feel weird about it and that’s okay, discomfort won’t kill you.

“but using women’s spaces after transitioning to male defeats the purpose of transitioning! the whole point of transitioning is to be able to live as a man!”

and who are you to tell trans men what the point of our transitions should be? what if the purpose of us transitioning is just to live the happiest and most fulfilled life possible, and forcing ourselves into unsafe spaces or denying ourselves access to important resources or cutting ourselves off from important people in our lives or pushing down the more complex parts of our genders would “defeat the purpose of transitioning” for us? what if being able to go where cis men go is just one part of a much bigger journey, not the end goal?

if you really want to talk about “defeating the purpose,” let’s talk about how policing which gendered spaces trans men can access defeats the purpose of trying to stop cis people from policing which gendered spaces trans people can access, because it allows the policing of trans people in gendered spaces to continue in some form instead of eliminating it altogether. let’s talk about how using “evil men invading women’s spaces” rhetoric against trans men defeats the purpose of trying to stop cis people from using it against trans women, because it allows the rhetoric to continue in some form instead of eliminating it altogether.

the point of saying “let people decide which gendered space is right for them” isn’t to make sure everyone uses the one aligned with their “true gender,” it’s to let people do what’s best for them without punishing them for their choice. sometimes the best choice is one that seems wrong from the outside, and you need to learn to live with that.

i just think we as a community need to be more hostile toward people who think upholding the sanctity of a gendered space is more important than giving trans people the freedom to move through the world without being punished for existing in those gendered spaces. that kind of thinking is fucking dangerous and it’s weird as hell that some of y’all are so comfortable with it being directed at us.

moral of the story: stop giving so much of a shit about where a trans man decides to piss or see a doctor or hang out or whatever else. even if you think he doesn’t belong there, he probably has a good reason to be there anyway, and that reason is frankly none of your damn business.

[haunteddollgender]

Let’s hear some noise for femme lesbians who are kind of guys

For those of us who have short hair, facial hair, body hair, who use he/him pronouns, who want to be handsome more than beautiful, who are overtly gnc, pls affirm our masculinity too.

Just as some butches find their femininity in their masculinity, some femmes find our masculinity in our femininity. And we desire it.

Like I’m a femme dyke who often dates butch dykes. And I’m also a transmasc person who often dates other transmasc ppl, those being the butch dykes. The amount of lesbians who are just kind of gay boys is rly insane. Go to a lesbian bar and i promise you a bunch of those women are twinks and bears.

And don’t make assumptions about that either, because in basically all my past relationships, I’ve been the bear

Celebrating lesbian visibility week means acknowledging transmasc/multigendered lesbians. Even if we don’t fit your idea of what a transmasc/multigendered person looks like

[gay-otlc]

Trans men might identify as lesbian because...

They are multigender and therefore wlw or nblw

They are closeted in most contexts and refer to themself as a lesbian rather than a straight man so they don't out themself as trans

They don't pass and are generally assumed to be a lesbian/in a lesbian relationship, so they use this label to describe their experience with that

They spent a long time (often decades) identifying as a lesbian before discovering they were trans, and they don't want to leave the lesbian community that in some cases has become their family

They identify as female but use masculine terms such as man and/or he/him pronouns as a way of expressing gender nonconformity or butchness

It's their identity and they can describe it however they like

Trans men don't identify as lesbian because...

They want to make cis lesbians feel unsafe

They want to force cis lesbians to date or sleep with men

They think trans men aren't really men

They think all trans men who like women are lesbians and want to misgender straight trans men

They think trans women can't be lesbians

They hate lesbians

So like. The sooner yall can recognize that our identity is simply us trying to live our lives in the way that feels most accurate for us, and not a personal attack on you, the happier everyone will be and then we can focus on problems that actually matter.

[multiplicity-positivity]

Here’s some positivity for systems and headmates with conflicting and/or contradictory queer labels!

System life and queer identity can both be confusing, messy, and complicated. Often, headmates in a system may have unique or uncommon experiences and ways of relating to their body, headmates, the world around them, and even themselves - but this in no way invalidates the ways they identify! This post is for all the systems and headmates whose queer labels seem conflicting and/or contradictory!

🏳️‍🌈 Shoutout to systems and headmates who are mspec gays and lesbians!

🏳️‍⚧️ Shoutout to headmates who are AMAB transmasc, AFAB transfem, transfemmasc, or transfemneumasc!

🏳️‍🌈 Shoutout to systems and headmates who are sex-favorable asexuals, or who tolerate, engage in, or enjoy sex while still being asexual!

🏳️‍⚧️ Shoutout to systems and headmates who are aromantic while still having and loving their romantic partners and relationships!

🏳️‍🌈 Shoutout to systems and headmates who are bigender, trigender, boygirls, girlboys, or who are multigender in some other way!

🏳️‍⚧️ Shoutout to systems and headmates who are aplatonic while still having friends, wanting friends, or who wish they wanted friends!

🏳️‍🌈 Shoutout to systems whose plurality complicates their understanding of gender, sexuality, romantic attraction, and queer identity!

🏳️‍⚧️ Shoutout to systems and headmates who choose not to label their queer identity due to its complex nature!

🏳️‍🌈 Shoutout to systems and headmates with conflicting or contradictory xenogenders, or who use conflicting or contradictory neopronouns!

🏳️‍⚧️ Shoutout to those who have been fakeclaimed, bullied, or told they are harmful because of their conflicting/contradictory labels - you did not deserve that mistreatment and you are wonderful as you are!

🏳️‍🌈 Shoutout to systems and headmates who use conflicting or contradictory labels as they are still questioning or unsure about their queer identity!

🏳️‍⚧️ Shoutout to systems and headmates who are both boys/men and lesbians, or both girls/women and gay!

There is no one right or wrong way to be queer or plural. It’s okay to have labels and identify in ways that may seem or are conflicting or contradictory! Identifying in this way does not invalidate you as a system, headmate, or member of the queer community. You belong here and you make both plural and queer spaces more beautiful simply by existing in them!

We hope that you and your system can come to accept and embrace your queer labels and identities, even and especially if they are conflicting or contradictory. Know that you aren’t harming anyone by identifying in the ways that you do, and in fact, you are spreading warmth, joy, and hope by becoming your authentic self! Regardless of your queer identities or what labels you use, we love you and we want to support and uplift you however we can. Thank you so much for reading, and have a great day!

[spacelazarwolf]

"whats queer about a cishet man seeking women. quickly"

gee idk maybe hes aro spec? or maybe hes ace spec? or maybe hes multigender?

also like ppl dont have to be queer to be in a queer platonic relationship?

also how do we know for sure these people are a cishet man and woman?

these people are exhausting and stupid 😮‍💨

yeah! also why should someone have to be queer to have a straightforward conversation abt relationship parameters and boundaries, or to have a non normative type of relationship? if two cishet allo ppl want to have an exclusive fwb situation, who cares?

[oceancoins]

EVERIQUE (Updated Flag + Carrd)

Original Post Here [link] | Term Carrd Here [link]

NOTE: The Carrd site is not mobile friendly at this time. I plan on updating it soon to be more accessible for mobile platforms.

Everique is a term to describe when one views their entire identity as queer, and thus views all of their attractions as such. It can be used as a modifier alongside other labels or as a term on its own. There could be a multitude of explanations for this, some of which are (but are not limited to):

Being trans and having a complicated relationship/history with your sexuality because of that.

Being multigender and/or genderfluid and therefore experiencing queer attraction regardless of who you're attracted to.

Being non-binary and not fitting binary definitions of queer vs. not queer.

Being m-spec and feeling as though all of your attractions are queer because you are m-spec.

Being a system/collective where the line between individual identities is blurred.

Being angled a-spec and experiencing "straight" attraction through a queer lens due to being a-spec.

Simply being queer and resonating with the term's meaning.

Many, many more.

This term is meant to encompass everyone in the community. If you feel this applies to you, use it. There are no limits to this term. This term is inclusive of m-spec lesbians and gays, lesboys and turigirls, romeogirls/darcygirls and julietboys/bennetboys, multigender and genderfluid individuals, gaybians/velaurians, loveless individuals, non-traumagenic systems, etc.

The new flag is very reminiscent of the original, but with a few alterations and added meaning to the design.

The descending rainbow for each of the bigger stripes are supposed to resemble the whole of the queer community and how everyone is included under the label Everique.

The white is supposed to resemble the 'everyone inbetween'. The identities that are often left out of discussions and pride, the identities that are often forgotten, dismissed or attacked even by members of their own community.

The purple in the middle is to resemble unity and togetherness for all queer people, meant to be a nod to the chevron queer flag.

Everique has a new symbol, that being a rose. It symbolizes love, happiness, positivity and (again) unity. Each petal of a rose is still connected to the same bud of the flower, much like how all queer identities are still connected under the shared experience of being queer, regardless of their differences from each other.

Here are some transparent images of the term's symbol, but any rose can be used to symbolize Everique.

The love this term has gotten has meant the world to us, but it was our first term ever. The original flag, while cute and charming, was made with very little flag-making knowledge. None of the colors held significant meaning.

You are still more than welcome to use the original flag if you feel it fits you best, but this is the one that has resonated with us the most and we feel encompasses what Everique is.

[faggy--butch]

Really confused by your "lesbian trans men" post. The way I think of "lesbian", it's not a term of identity signification, it's a term for a specific type of sexual orientation and relationship.

It doesn't make sense that someone can be a "lesbian trans man" to me, because they are a trans man first, that is their identity. And because of that identity of being male, they are disqualified from being in a lesbian relationship, because a lesbian relationship is specifically female/female.

I'm not a terf, fuck terfs. A trans woman and a cis woman in a relationship are still lesbians. I'm just confused how a trans man can be a lesbian if he's not a woman. If the trans man is attracted to women, wouldn't that make him heterosexual, therefore straight? I'd understand if he was genderfluid, then he would swap back and forth from straight to lesbian depending on which gender he/she is.

The way I look at it, there are two "categories" of being queer. Identity and orientation. Identity comes first, it's what you are. Orientation comes second, it's what you're into. Identity is stuff like being cis, trans, genderfluid, etc. Orientation is stuff like being straight, gay, bi, ace, etc. And in my mind those two categories are completely separate, except where the orientation category depends on the larger identity category, such as "lesbian" being an orientation applicable to women into women, not applicable to men, trans or otherwise.

Please, educate me if I'm completely wrong in thinking about queerness this way, and why.

Well, I think your first mistake was trying to categorize queerness. Queerness by definition defies the boxes that get put on gender and sexuality. That's part of why a lot of people like calling themselves and the community queer, it's all encompassing. I also take issue with sexuality 'only' being an orientation. I certain identify as a lesbian, my sexual identity is just as important to me as my gender identity. I don't just "like girls" which what orientation is. I'm a lesbian, a dyke, it's a part of who i am. it's the way i define myself along with being butch, and to some people their sexual identity can be even more important than their gender one. To some people their gender identity is in fact lesbian.

You have to get it out of your mind that if something doesn't make sense, that it's wrong. It's not for anyone to tell a person what they can or can't identify as, or if they're misgendering themselves or whatever. I mean go to the HER app and you'll figure out quick that there are trans men in lesbian spaces, identifying as lesbians, there always have been.

Trying to fit trans people into the cishetro view of the world is not only never going to work, but it also actively hurts us. It's saying that we HAVE to be like them, we have to emulate our experiences off of the "real" genders and sexualities of white cishet people. that we have to match or we're doing it wrong, that it's not real until we're like them. As a non binary person i reject that entirely. I don't want people to tell me what they think I am, and I'm not going to do it to anyone else. I think everyone would benefit from learning about multigender, multisexual, and the split attraction model, and like talking to intersex people.

[genderqueerdykes]

how can someone be a lesbian and a man at the same time? and a traswonan and transman too

hello! thanks for your question!

while people broadly interpret the term lesbian to mean 'woman who loves women', there is a far broader nuance to the identity and label that goes beyond a simple description.

lesbians have a nuanced and complicated experience with gender. butches and femmes both have unique experiences with gender and presentation. nobody likes to talk about us, but some butches *do* identify as men. there are a lot of trans men who start out in lesbian spaces because they are safer, and don't want to leave the community and live as lesbian men. drag kings also are often lesbians. genderfluid lesbians, polygender lesbians, multigender lesbians, genderqueer lesbians, all types of trans lesbians are lesbians regardless of whether or not they are men all the time, or part of the time

lesbians also have a complicated relationship with nonbinary identities and a lot of us find that we fit somewhere under that umbrella. many lesbians find that pushing the boundaries of gender and expression are necessary for survival. i would recommend reading stone butch blues by leslie feinberg to gain a better understanding of lesbians who live this way, or, you are free to visit my lesbian and dyke tags!

as for your second question, i am an intersex person, meaning i was not born with a body that fits into the strict "male" or "female" binary. after i hit puberty i was routinely told i wasn't a "real girl" by someone then told i wasn't a "real boy" by someone else. i was completely stripped of the ability to be gendered correctly by anyone because my body has such a strong mixture of both "masculine" and 'feminine' traits like growing a full beard, having broad shoulders, buff chest, flat breasts, big arms, etc. and an hourglass waist and long shapely legs, high pitched voice, etc.

i am trans "both" or sometimes trans 'everything' as i call myself. my ability to identify as a boy or a girl was completely taken away from me and i am resisting that actively every day. i am a boy and a girl! i'm some type of nonbinary creature, sure, but i am in fact a woman and a man at the same time, but i've had to fight and claw tooth and nail to be seen correctly due to things that weren't under my control.

HRT was kinda my big power move. after i get top surgery and find a good quality packer, i think people will finally understand me and how i identify, but basically, the answer is intersex people, and some other folks can live experiences that make it so they can be both transmasculine and transfeminine at the same time for a multitude of reasons. my experience is just one of many, but it is possible, and we exist!

hope that answers your question! if you need more help, feel free to ask again! take care, stay safe!

[genderkoolaid]

Hi!

I (24 nb) am having a serious issue with girls my age being quite misandric and using radfem rhetoric in their speech.

The issue is I understand their fear and mistrust of men in patriarchy and with many of them having horror stories to share about bad heterosexual relationships. But i am deeply uncomfortable with misandry and i don't know how to effectively point out that no it's not good feminism to hate on men.

Do you have any resources you could recommend me to build a good argument? I want to be prepared for this kind of discussion because it keeps happening more and more frequently.

I know it's not the main topic you cover on your blog but as it is closely related to transandrophobia I was hoping you (or your followers) could still give me some advice.

I wish you a wonderful day

My advice would be to start with talking about the negative impact of misandry on women first (although don't use the word misandry, at least at first). Starting off with "it hurts men" in any regard will likely not go over well, but if you first bring up the issue in relation to a group they already really care about, they'll be more likely to listen. Also, I would reaffirm that having trauma or bad associations with men isn't the problem, they aren't obligated to associate with men in ways that make them uncomfortable or exhausted, and that they have a right to feel their emotions, be angry, be annoyed, etc. Affirm that your concern is with how their actions and attitudes could be causing real harm to others, and that anger being valid does not mean you don't need to take responsibility for how you choose to act.

Some potential talking points:

When women are perceived as manly or masculine, they tend to get viewed with the worst traits of masculinity: butches and trans women are seen as aggressive, violent predators who prey on sweet, feminine straight/cis women. The patriarchy doesn't just hurt women through their femininity, but through their (real or perceived masculinity as well.

Even inside queer spaces, butches are expected to fulfill toxic masculinity: they are expected to be sexually dominant tops, not be emotionally or physically "weak," not do feminine things, etc. Butches can get ridiculed by others, even partners, for not fulfilling these things. Things like balding and small penises, that are traditionally seen as failures of masculinity in the patriarchy, are also made fun of in queer spaces; it seems like queer spaces have issues with how they deal with (real or perceived) masculinity.

When spaces make jokes about hating men, put a lot of emphasis on gatekeeping men, etc., it makes it a lot harder for trans women and nonbinary people assigned male feel safe. Some trans women & genderqueers might not realize their gender because they are kept out of spaces that could've helped them realize because of how queer & feminist spaces act regarding men. Butch trans women and genderqueers often face heightened scrutiny because of their masculinity, from both inside and outside their communities. (Also, send them this article.)

^ As a result of all of that, maybe we need to be more careful with how we think and talk about masculinity. It seems like we are reusing a lot of negative patriarchal stereotypes about men & masculinity in ways which hurt marginalized people the most.

From there, you can bring up marginalized men: you can talk about how trans men, multigender/nonbinary men, men of color, Jewish men, fat men, disabled men, etc. are negatively affected by negative patriarchal stereotypes about men & masculinity- I emphasis that because its how I would go about referring to "misandry" or "antimasculism" without actually using a word. Since misandry (and anything that sounds similar) is such a trigger word for many, its important to set the foundation that there is a big difference between the MRA concept of misandry, and the transunitist concept of misandry. Transunitist misandry focuses on how sexism & genderism* is used to target marginalized groups (specifically trans* people). Transunitist misandry does not say that misogyny doesn't exist, or that men are oppressed in the exact same way women are; its saying that the patriarchy (as a part of kyriarchy) uses gender and sex to harm not just marginalized women, but marginalized men too.

My goal with this would be to introduce and try to convince them of the idea that Misandry Is Harmful Maybe, and then once they realize how its harmful, bring up the idea that this kind of stuff needs to be named. Once they generally agree with these ideas, I think it will be much easier to help them understand why misandry is bad even beyond marginalized men: because the patriarchy relies on harmful ideas and expectations for men, even as (dominant/non-marginalized) men have a different place and more rewards; because liberationist feminism must be concerned with universal liberation, and that means it must be concerned with everyone's wellbeing and liberation; because we cannot disnantle the master's house with the master's tools, and letting any patriarchal thinking in poisons the well of your feminist praxis; because it just makes you a meaner and shittier person. In my experience people who think in the ways you described are resistant (not necessarily for bad reasons) to any kind of criticism towards sexism/genderism towards men, so my tactic would be starting with areas (like women) that they are concerned with not hurting and show how misandry hurts that group. Connecting the harm of this way of thinking to something they care about is going to make them more open to seeing it as an issue in general.

*I use "sexism" to describe the system of oppression based on physical sex, and "genderism" to describe the system of oppression based on gender identity/presentation/roles.

[2pen2wildfire]

ALRIGHT, just in case it needs to be made clear

On this blog we support:

-Ace-specs (including heteroromantic aces)

-Aro-specs (including heterosexual aros)

-People with "contradictory" labels (lesboys and turigirls, mspec lesbians and gays, transfemmascs and transmascfems, etc)

-All mspec labels (bisexual, pansexual, omnisexual, polysexual, etc)

-People who use xenogenders and neopronouns

-Kink at pride

-Transneutrals, abinary people, maveriques, any and all genders that exist outside of the male/female binary

-Multigender people and by extension the concept that "man" and "woman" are not distinct opposites with no overlap

-Nonbinary people who use words like "lesbian" "gay" and "bi" for themselves

-Nonbinary people who use words like "trixic" "toric" and "diamoric" for themselves

-"Straight-passing" queers of any kind

-All forms of ethical non-monogamous relationships

-Relationships that challenge amatonormativity

Remember that this blog is run by a bi trans man who's also a genderqueer butch dyke and uses neopronouns. And is also a therian. Like we get weird with it here folks so if you don't support even one of the above bullet points you should probably take a big step away from my blog and reevaluate your life choices, thanks.

[thedandelionresistance]

So, something that has still been bothering me about misanthropy in nonhuman spaces, as a pankin fae endel is that... not all humans have access to human privilege and hegemony. Not all humans have power over nonhumans or benefit from our society being human-centric. The fact that even alterhuman spaces can still be centered around humanity even, doesn't always benefit all humans in those spaces.

The easiest example: We have human headmates in our system. They are, for all intents and purposes, otherkin in a way that those of us who are fae AREN'T. While we are all perceived as human, they are essentially humankin, humans in a physically nonhuman (or magically modified to pass for human) body. Their internal identity is fundamentally altered by our plurid and bodily identity.

In fact, the experience of being a changeling has also fundamentally altered our faeness as well. Culturally, having been raised human, we have some connection to human culture as well as to the fae culture we long for but haven't gotten to know. It's similar to our experience having been adopted into a blended family, where we have a complex relationship with both our Mexican and white american heritage, especially with the fact that what our body and our cultural heritage are, are different.

We feel fundamentally somewhere in between fae and human while still being fully fae, or more accurately we are still fully fae while having become a bit human on top of that. Our faeness+humanity aren't two fractions equalling a whole, but something greater than a whole. The faeness itself, while influenced and changed by the humanity, isn't itself any less fae.

Here are some other examples of marginalized humans, most of which we have personal experience with:

1. A werewolf who is both human and wolf.

Not all werewolves consider themselves to be human due to their lycanthropy, but some do. Lycanthropes face extreme oppression which is often sanist in nature, and is certainly anti-nonhuman. For those that identify as human, them being BOTH human and wolf is a fundamental part of the oppression they face. In the same way, multigender people who are men and women are oppressed for being both, while monogender trans women and trans men are oppressed for being noncis. Nonhumans and marginalized humans/humans who are also nonhumans can both be oppressed. This also applies to other weres and those who are nonhuman AND human.

We should mention here that some of us are weres, though our main shifter identity is tied to our fae identity. We do have were identities separate from it though. I would also say that some objectkin identities might be essentially the same as this, particularly dollkin where the doll itself is a doll version of a human? At least, some of my dollkin identity does seem to fit this in the same way, where it's explicitly related to humanity or both human and nonhuman.

2. People who are fictkin or factkin of a specific human character/person, even when that character or person presents as or is human-standard in appearance and abilities.

They have their otherkin identities refused and denied, despite it being a human identity. They are marginalized for an identity which is directly human, and have also faced exclusion and hate from otherkin communities during our history for those same identities.

3. Human members of nonhuman (especially physically nonhuman) systems.

This is itself more because of pluralmisia, but human members of nonhuman systems are often oppressed because they are seen as the same person as the nonhuman headmate and therefore as nonhuman themselves.

Much in the same way that a butch cis woman being attacked by transmisogynists is still that butch cis woman being affected by transmisogyny, so too are human headmates being marginalized by anti-nonhumanity. The target of a form of bigotry or oppression is the person who that bigotry/oppression was being used to hurt, regardless of whether or not they actually are that identity.

Moreover, because pluralmisia is widespread and constant, human headmates in nonhuman systems (and even sometimes just who have nonhuman headmates) are near-universally and near-constantly seen as nonhuman, not just occasionally. The only times they are not is when the system tries to pass for human, and passing privilege does not exist. That is to say, the only time they are not seen as nonhuman is when every nonhuman member closets themselves for safety and typically also when they pretend on top of that to be a singlet.

Conditional privilege that relies on not being out and open as every part of your identity/identities - of hiding part of your attraction as a bi or pan person, of hiding part of your gender as a multigender person, of hiding your plurality as a system, of hiding your transness as a trans man or woman - that's not privilege, it's a hostage situation. There's nuance to this, but fundamentally, if you can entirely lose any privilege and power you do have just by being open about your/your system's identities - often facing even more violence from people who feel they were "tricked" into treating you well only because they thought you weren't the identity they were bigoted about - because of coming out or being outed, it's not privilege as we understand it in the context of oppression.

4. A human with superpowers, mutant abilities, or otherwise not human-standard appearance or abilities, especially one with exomemories of having been considered nonhuman in their universe/past or parallel life.

Many of them faced oppression if not outright attempts at genocide for being human differently, only to come here and face oppression for being that person internally in a body which doesn't reflect it.

To have other people marginalized by humans then turn around and say that they're actually privileged just for the human identity they were denied and may have risked their lives for in their original universe, simply because here they are human in a way the humans in power don't actually allow to exist and continue to oppress them over... it's just cruel. It's like how trans men don't actually have male privilege, because they are trans (and they are trans because they are men and men because they are trans, inextricably). While patriarchal manhood is privileged, trans manhood isn't part of that. Even a stealth passing trans man who is outed can face extreme violence if his manhood is revealed to be trans, and any even conditional privilege gained from hiding a core part of his identity will be stripped from him.

Doing humanity "wrong" is similarly marginalized. Being a mutant, a human from another world, a magic user, or in any way internally having abilities that humans here don't have, results in oppression from normative humans and having your status (and therefore privilege and power) as human stripped from you, often permanently!

Alterhuman humanity is itself marginalized - their actual identities are denied in the same way nonhumans' identities are. They are denied in the way that genderfluid people being called cis women and cis men face. Acknowledging only part of someone's actual identity but mislabeling even that as something it's not is part of oppression. Moreover, facing violence over refusing to conform to the narrow expectations of your identity enforced by those in power is especially oppression.

Being locked up in psych wards for human identities that significantly diverge from anthronormative humanity, facing actual literal physical violence and abuse for atypical human identities, having zero legal protection for alterhuman human identities - these are all forms of oppression. These all affect marginalized humans.

Hell, anti-nonhuman and anti-alterhuman oppression even sometimes affect nonmarginalized humans. While there's a large overlap between furry and nonhuman (especially therian) communities, human furries face anti-nonhuman AND anti-alterhuman sentiment just for doing humanity wrong by dressing up as anthropomorphic animals.

Very few of the furries that use the anti-nonhuman "they believe they're actually animals" actually believe that about human furries (or even nonhumans, since part of our oppression is them not believing us) but they still use it to harm those human furries even to the point of trying to get them fired from their jobs.

They believe it's wrong for people they fully believe to be humans to even want to appear in any way animalistic - which affects human alterhumans with animalistic characteristics as much as nonhumans with the same. What's being attacked is as much non-normative humanity as perceived adjacency to nonhumanity, and affects both marginalized humans and nonhumans.

.....

Anthrocentrism and anthronormativity are structures of power used to maintain human hegemony. They are used to maintain the relationship of humanity as an oppressor class and anyone those in power consider not sufficiently or correctly human as an oppressed class.

Not all humans have power over nonhumans. Some humans are themselves marginalized by their very human identity itself, because it is considered human in "the wrong way".

So why is this all important?

Attacking someone's actual identity never actually hurts the people who have power over you, but CAN hurt other marginalized people of that same identity.

As an example, "kill all men" hurts trans, nonbinary, and otherwise noncis men, as well as those who don't have access to patriarchal privilege because of other marginalizations not directly related to their manhood such as nonwhite and intersex men. Patriarchy as a system is as much transphobic, colonialist, white supremacist, and intersexist as it is sexist.

Human hegemony is as much sanist, enforces consensus reality, against past and parallel lives and exomemories, anti-soulbond and against those from other universes, and fundamentally anti-alterhuman as it is anti-nonhuman. These are built inextricably into the very foundation of human hegemony. They are neither incidental to it nor an unintended side effect of anti-nonhumanity; rather, anti-nonhumanity is one (extremely major) part of the enforcement of the larger structure of human hegemony.

This is without even getting into intersectional nuances of privilege and power involving identities that aren't directly human. A white nonhuman still has white privilege over a human person of color, even if that person of color has managed to access human privilege (something that, because of how deeply white supremacy is baked into society, it could be argued that they don't - especially given how much white supremacy literally relies on dehumanization). Moreover, in our society the white nonhuman will often have power over the human person of color.

Privilege and power are complex, nuanced, and not clear cut, especially when you get into intersections of actually privileged and actually marginalized identities. They are more so when you get into where otherwise typically privileged identities themselves are marginalized.

Nonhumans and alterhumans are both oppressed by the majority of humans. Lateral aggression can in fact hurt alterhumans, and isn't "punching up".

One example that we've specifically been hurt by is access to community and resources. We're fully nonhuman, yet barred from many nonhuman spaces and resources for also being human/having human members. Where do you draw the line? Is being nonhuman at all enough? Are only system members who are zero percent human allowed to participate in these spaces and receive support? Are lycanthropes too human for you, in some cases even if they don't consider themselves human at all? Are "humanoid" - elves, dwarves, fae - too close to humanity?

These are all actual reasons I've been excluded from nonhuman spaces. You may be horrified by some of them, but still think that there should be spaces "for nonhumans only".

I agree that there should be spaces that center nonhumanity, that are FOR nonhumans. The problem is, you can't have a space for only nonhumans by excluding humans, because people who are both exist.

The way you draw the line is by selective inclusion. It means letting people who are humans into the space because they are nonhumans. It means letting us talk about the nuances of oppression we face for the intersection of our human and nonhuman identities in nonhuman spaces, because it's directly related to our nonhumanity even when also related to our humanity.

It means when in wider alterhuman/nonhuman community spaces, acknowledging marginalized humanity. It means, even when expressing justified negative feelings towards humans as a class, remembering that there are humans that are oppressed by that same class who don't oppress you.

It means not acting like expressing your blatant hatred of all human identity is always harmless just because of the oppression we face, that I have directly faced myself as a result of being fully nonhuman. It means not hurting other nonhumans and marginalized humans over your very real and valid anger at how humans have hurt all of us.

It also means recognizing that while emotions are morally neutral and it's necessary to have safe spaces to process them, it doesn't mean that they can't hurt other people or that said hurt is always justified. It means that just because something isn't morally wrong, doesn't make it morally right or a form of justice or resistance against oppression.

It means recognizing that you are capable of hurting people and doing real harm to other marginalized people as a marginalized person yourself. It means recognizing that you can even hurt nonmarginalized individuals, and that while a good ally will be an ally even if you do, repeatedly attacking a friend over an aspect of their identity they have no control over can do lasting damage and is just shitty and wrong. It means "I don't know how to tell you that you have to care* about other people" and that just because you have the right to be cruel about someone's identity, doesn't mean that you're IN the right for doing so.

*care as an action, not a feeling. We have ASPD among other things. Idgaf how you feel internally as long as you are not hurting the individual PEOPLE in your life, especially over things they can't control

It means that treating a whole identity as horrible and worthless will only hurt the most vulnerable people of that identity. It will only hurt those that experience a marginalized form of that identity or are otherwise significantly marginalized. A man who commits suicide over everyone in his life constantly attacking manhood instead of patriarchy is still dead, and somehow I don't think my friend Brian who is a staunch feminist and all-around decent person dying advances the cause of dismantling the patriarchy, for example.

(I also don't find the argument that "well if they're not that kind of [identity], they should know it's not about them" if you are the one making it about the identity itself rather than the behavior AS a person of that identity in the first place. Talking about how someone's identity gives them privilege and power and therefore makes certain actions more harmful to marginalized people is very different than treating the identity itself as inherently harmful, and therefore everyone of that identity as both deserving to be harmed for it and incapable of being harmed about it.)

I do think there's a time and place to express and process those feelings, just like there's a time and place to express very real patriarchal trauma that directly centers around men as a class. I also think that while emotions themselves are morally neutral, that expressing hatred of someone's inherent identity can absolutely be harmful. When people start acting on their hatred, even simply by acting as if it is morally right (let alone praxis) to hate all people of a specific identity and express that hate, it can be harmful.

Demonizing any part of someone's identity, identity essentialism (treating an identity as if it is inherently harmful or makes you evil), and especially denying that people of a given identity can be marginalized on that axis; these are the tools of the enemy. We do not use them.

It's also simply ineffective and inaccurate to attack an identity, rather than the systemic power structures that benefit the majority of people of a particular identity. So often, even so-called "trans inclusive" rad/ical femini/sm which treats manhood as inherently corrupt and privileged not only harms trans men, but also reinforces patriarchal masculinity itself.

Misanthropy - or hate and vitriol towards human identity - doesn't actually do anything to deconstruct or challenge human hegemony. This is because it's not the identity itself that's the problem, but the class inequality and oppression.

Humans are not born oppressors. If they were, nonhuman liberation would very likely be impossible, because even if we gained significant number and powers, they would continue to try to oppress us forever. No human would ever be capable of being an ally to nonhumans.

Now, don't misconstrue me - humans are largely born into privilege (with the exception of human alterhumans) - because of the system of nonhuman and alterhuman oppression we currently exist in. It is their humanity which grants them privilege and power over us, because that system makes it so.

The existence of marginalized humans only proves this. The point is NOT that the majority of humans don't oppress nonhumans and alterhumans. The point is that they do, but that humanity itself as an identity isn't inherently oppressive and harmful.

Honestly, this is such a complex subject that I've only scratched the surface here. I could go into the way I define harm as largely hierarchical - as in, being based in having power over another person - but also how lateral harm where you don't have power over another can still happen, specifically as a result of leveraging people and systems that do have power over them to hurt them.

(A trans person calling the cops on another trans person would be a good example of this. Even if both trans people are the same in every other way - every marginalized and privileged identity, even the same exact gender - the first trans person who called the cops has USED people who have power over both of them to harm the other.)

I could go into how humanity and nonhumanity aren't actually opposites and how the creation of this false binary most hurts those who are both. I could go into how this is basically oppositional sexism but for nonhumanity/alterhumanity - oppositional anthroism? 😅

I could go into more detail about the need for spaces to safely process negative feelings towards identities that consist mainly of nonmarginalized people, without harming marginalized people of that identity. I could go into the complexity of spaces like tumblr, where a lot of personal blogs are essentially virtual extensions of your private bodymind on a public site, and how that means balancing autonomy and simply curating your own experience with wider interactions as members of a community and what conversations we even choose to have entirely publicly to begin with.

I could even go into how different systems of oppression function differently, and how I would not apply the vast majority of what I've said to racial justice and white supremacist systems simply because people of color know better than me whether or not this applies to a system I unequivocally have privilege and power in. I could talk about how the majority of stuff that I HAVE seen DOES focus on whiteness in relation to how it grants privilege and power within the system, but that because my whiteness isn't marginalized in any way, that I've never myself felt hurt by venting about whiteness-as-identity. I could talk about how white supremacy functions differently from just about any other oppressive system (including ones like patriarchy which rely on it) in that white people ARE the closest to inherently categorically oppressors, while I would argue under systems like patriarchy, even a good majority of cis men are oppressed explicitly by patriarchal masculinity, precisely because patriarchal masculinity is white, het, christian, abled, and so on. I could talk about how the reason whiteness itself can't be marginalized is because it is conditional and a social construct, which is often revoked societally over ethnic identities such as jewishness and irish travellers.

I could talk about how dehumanization is a frequent tool of systems of oppression such as racism and ableism, and how that's rooted in anti-nonhuman sentiment. I could talk about how significant enough dehumanization as a result of disability stripped me of access to human hegemony long before I was ever openly nonhuman, precisely because systems of oppression rely on one another to remain in power.

I could talk about how it's not nearly as clear-cut as "human=oppressor, nonhuman=oppressed" and especially that equating oppression with harmlessness itself is used to harm other marginalized people and avoid accountability for it, especially by painting other marginalized people as actually privileged over you. I could talk about how reductive it is to take a single identity, nonintersectionally, and treat it as eternal victimhood, and how deeply antithetical that is to the very concept of intersectionality.

I could even get into how identity doesn't guarantee safety, and that the only way you can judge if someone is a safe person is by their actual actions.

But my main point here is this: when I say I've been hurt and harmed by misanthropy in nonhuman spaces, as someone who has experienced significant oppression for being nonhuman, because I am also partially human and our system experiences marginalized humanity, and get my actual experiences with marginalized humanity denied, picked apart, asked for "proof" (this is a complicated one, but it was about my own personal experiences that I was explicitly sharing), had the goalposts moved and was ignored when aside from community I couldn't at the time effectively communicate what nonhuman resources that I'd been barred from due to already being extremely badly triggered, I just want people to take the fact that misanthropy can be harmful seriously.

For the record, community itself is a resource - actually multiple. It is support - emotional primarily, but also sometimes financial, legal, or other structural forms of support. It is often access to other resources that aren't fully public - guides on managing dysphoria and living as your kintype or theriotype, on safety, on where to get species-affirming gear and even medical procedures, sometimes on exclusive discounts and community-run grants for the same. It is to some extent safety, depending on how the community is run - safety in numbers, essentially, if they are willing to stand by you in a storm. It is understanding and acceptance.

There are not a lot of public nonhuman resources outside of our communities, and that's a problem itself, but even of the material resources that are publicly visible, they often explicitly exclude even part-humans, human nonhumans, and marginalized humans who still would otherwise benefit from or have need of those resources. I have been told that it's not actually exclusion just to explicitly say that something is not for someone who needs it, because they can't technically stop you from using it anyway.

This was said by a person who just recently had been venting with me about people who will say bigoted shit like "endos f/uck of/f" on trauma recovery and general plural resources (both ones they created and ones created by inclusive people), who otherwise recognizes attempts at emotional manipulation and verbal gatekeeping as such, so it was very clearly just a double standard for marginalized humans and nonhuman humans.

My point is that we are hurting other marginalized people when we deny their experiences with oppression on the axis of humanity/nonhumanity for their non-normative human identities. My point is that I as a nonhuman have BEEN hurt by this. My point is that misanthropy is neither harmless nor all that useful in nonhuman and alterhuman liberation. My point is that nonhuman separatism is just as unhelpful and ultimately antithetical to liberation as any other separatism movement.

My point is that when even other nonhumans are telling you "hey, misanthropy hurts ME too", you should believe them. You shouldn't erase or ignore their nonhuman identity, you shouldn't deny that it's possible for you to laterally hurt or use oppresove systems to harm other nonhumans and marginalized humans, and you certainly shouldn't act as if hurting marginalized humans is actually morally justified.

My point is that you don't have to participate in it, but alterhumans and nonhumans ARE part of a wider marginalized community together, and that misanthropy will affect people in that community before it ever actually affects anyone in power (which it never will). My point is that our marginalized human siblings/cousins in this community are not our enemy, and we shouldn't be hurting them, let alone acting like it's morally justified to do so because of their identity which is actually marginalized even if you personally deny that it is.

My point is that hate is not praxis, humanity is not inherently bad or privileged, and that hurting and harming people who are not oppressing us is still wrong.

I know a lot of people in nonhuman and alterhuman communities already agree with me about misanthropy, but I've seen enough of an uptick in it lately to say something.

Misanthropy is not "fighting back". It's not always harmless. It's not always "punching up".

The way we achieve liberation may require violence - as a last resort, but still. Attacking other marginalized people, allies, and an identity itself isn't how we get there. Organizing, demanding recognition, acceptance, and rights, with support from our allies and other marginalized groups, is. We can't mistake revenge fantasies and lashing out for action and progress.

Again, there are and should be spaces for processing misanthropy. It's just bog standard bigotry, however, to be cruel toward other marginalized people on the basis of that very same marginalized identity. Denial of that marginalization is part of that bigotry (and can be used by our oppressors to further oppress them, no less. Don't be a pick-me or a token for them).

True misanthropy - hate directed at human identity itself - shouldn't be prevalent in nonhuman spaces outside of those spaces for processing it. It's not worth the harm it does, and it's not even helpful in the end. Misanthropy should not be tolerated, because it is most intolerant to other nonhumans and marginalized humans, and just cruel and unhelpful to boot.

[dhddmods]

Multiellic!

Multiellic: The exclusive attraction to multigender people. This could be people with any number of genders, or a specific number. If it is a specific number, -ellic or -llic can be added at the end of it (for example, biellic, triellic, quadellic, quintellic, hexallic, septallic, octallic, enneallic, decallic, panellic, omniellic, fluidellic, etc.)

Bigeninic and paninic can be considered alternative names for biellic and panellic.

We (Weniviere & Angel) decided to recoin the orientation "multigenic" and its flag, which we made years ago, because that terminology is used for systems with multiple origins, which we didn't know at the time, and it has bothered us ever since we found out. The -ellic theme is inspired by other tria- microlabels (lunaric, solaric, saturnic, apstellic, neustellic, oustellic, stellaric, and spacialic.)

On the flag, the black represents genderlessness, demigenders, and multiellic people that are aro-spec. Magenta represents feminine genders and sexual attraction. The purplish-pink represents a combination of romantic and sexual attraction. The purple represents androgynous genders and multiellic people that are ace-spec. Brown represents cultural genders and BIPOC people. Orange represents outherine genders and alterous attraction. Yellow represents xenic genders and queerplatonic attraction. Blue represents masculine genders. Green represents neutral genders. White represents fluid/flux genders, attraction, or relationships.

[bonefall]

Gray Wing's got me thinking for the longest time: how are pronouns, specifically neopronouns, translated and spoken in Clanmew? Do Clan cats, when invoking/talking about xem, use xeir pronouns correctly or default to he/him or something more "normal"?

On a more general matter, how common is it for modern Clan cats to use neopronouns? Do you think it's something they picked up from a kittypet in Chelford and they were like "whaaaat lmao that's kinda neat" lol bc I kinda like that idea. Sorry I'm rambling I'm just really really happy abt the neopronoun rep :'3

Oh Clanmew doesn't have gendered pronouns at all! There are eight pronouns, entirely based on threat level. There aren't any neopronouns in Clanmew because the use of these pronouns is constantly reaffirming the relationship between two cats, or signalling some sort of meaningful shift based on context.

Format: THEY/YOU/INCLUSIVE WE/EXCLUSIVE WE

Wi/Wees/Weep/Wik (Babies, prey, things that pose absolutely no threat to you)

Nya/Nyams/Nyap/Nyamsk (Family; Things you do not harm by choice.)

Pyrr/Pyrrs/Pyrrp/Pyrrsk (Honorably less dangerous; a Cleric, an exhausted warrior, helpful objects)

Urr/Urrs/Urrp/Urrsk (Equal footing of a Clanmate, things on your level. Briarlight refers to her mobility device with this pronoun as an extension of herself. ONLY USED FOR THE SAME CLAN.)

Ar/Ars/Arp/Arsk (Cat who is above you in the same Clan; person who outranks you significantly. Your mentor while you're training, the deputy, your own leader. Has a sarcastic air of "your highness" when used on those of similar rank.)

Rarr/Rarrs/Rarrp/Rarrsk (Honorable outsider; Clan cats of other Clans. Used to correct overfriendliness, friends of other Clans will sometimes find excuses to use other pronouns, though it can be frowned upon. Used for mildly dangerous prey like some ducks and gray squirrels. NEVER used on Clanmates without insult.)

Mwrr/Mwrrs/Mwrrp/Mwrrsk (Rogues, very dangerous animals. Actively aggressive and acts without honor; a MASSIVE insult used on any Clan cat.)

Ssar/Ssars/Ssarp/Ssarsk (NATURAL DISASTERS AND STARCLAN. Unpredictable, dangerous, unstoppable. For the leaders of other Clans or used as a very high compliment to another Clan's deputy or high-ranking warrior, but if overused could be seen as cowardly.)

So to use a neopronoun in Clanmew would be seen as very 'evasive' at best and rude at worst. You'd be bypassing a big part of their language and culture by not making your relationship and feelings towards that person clear to your conversation partner. It's very different from English where pronouns are just about gender!

"pi woomoerpbum Hrra'aborrl nyanomna" Heathertail: Breezepelt my beloved is eating a tunnelbun.

"pi woomoerpbum Hrra'aborrl rarrnomna" Heathertail: THAT BASTARD BREEZEPELT IS EATING A TUNNELBUN

There are three accepted genders in Clan Culture, Molly, Tom, and Gib. Gibs I refer to with xe/canon pronouns; canon just when it's less confusing. Blackstar for example is actually a gib in BB, so he's He/They/Xey.

(Queer cats still exist though, Dustpelt is an example of a GNC cat, Twigbranch is agender, Finleap is multigender, but Clan cats have a trinary gender system)

When the character has no canon gender though it's instant Gib and they're They/xe. Billowcloud is an example of that.

Gray Wing gets Xe pretty exclusively in my writing though for a few reasons, 1. Xe is the "archetype" of the roles associated with being a Gib and I want to emphasize this as the Patron of Wisdom, 2. The singular nonbinary pronoun is super super helpful with the fact Gray Wing has a ton of "talking to a group/on behalf of a group" scenes, it helps distinguish Xem from Them.

[multiplicity-positivity]

Here’s some positivity for systems and headmates who are fathers!

Plural folks can develop all sorts of relationships with other people outside, and other headmates within their own systems! Quite often, systems can have their own familial dynamics, which can add even more complexity to having a family or support system outside! Sometimes system members have to be the support for others - and here’s to all the system dads out there!

💙 Shoutout to systems who are new to fatherhood or expecting!

🏈 Shoutout to introjects whose sources are fathers!

🎣 Shoutout to headmates who are fathers to other headmates within their system!

⚽️ Shoutout to headmates who are not fathers, but are referred to by their system as “the system dad!”

⚧ Shoutout to system fathers who are transmasc, bigender, multigender, demiboy, or gender-nonconforming!

☀️ Shoutout to system fathers who embrace fatherhood without identifying with manhood!

💚 Shoutout to systems who became fathers unexpectedly, and to those who became fathers after years of yearning for fatherhood!

✨ Shoutout to system fathers who had been abused by their parents, and are working hard to break that cycle in their own family!

🐶 Shoutout to system fathers whose fatherhood is complicated by being marginalized by disability, sexuality, race, or religion!

⚓️ Shoutout to system fathers who love being dads, papas, babas, daddies, das, pops, or have other terms their children use for them!

🎶 Shoutout to system fathers who break stereotypes, reject patriarchy, and blaze their own trail in fatherhood!

Fathers often share unique bonds with their children and families, and plural fathers are no different! Whether you’re a dad to others outside your system or to other members on the inside, please know that your presence is cherished and needed, both in your family and in the plural community.

We hope that fatherhood will bring you joy, comfort, and fulfillment! We know that your kindness and compassion shines through in all that you do, and we hope that you will continue to show yourselves that same kindness! Stay safe, take care, and have a wonderful day!

(Image ID:) A pale orange userbox with a cluster of multicolored flowers for the userbox image. The border and text are both dark orange, and the text reads “all plurals can interact with this post!” (End ID.)