#we live in a heterosexual society i need my gays that are actually in a well written show

[schyzotypalmind]

Double standards regarding Hannigram and Clannibal.

I need to take this out of my chest because I thing is a HUGE problem within the fandom of Thomas Harris´ Hannibal universe.

I´m a die hard fan of both the movies and the books. I kinda liked the TV Show but was never my cup of tea, specially with the mischaracterization of Hannibal.

Ignoring the fact the Hannibal is a misandrist in the books, like, he really hates men and the only good personal experiences that he ever had came from his mother, sister, step-aunt and Clarice.

I didn´t really care that they made him pansexual/bi/whatever in the tv series, but the whole point of Hannibal in the books/movies is that he doesn´t psychological or physical abuse those he loves or those who he finds interesting/not rude, like Barney.

I found extremely disturbing Hannibal killing women like stepping on flies. He doesn´t kill ANY women in the books or movies, maximum he did was bitting off the cheek of a nurse and we don´t know if she was rude to him before, treated him bad or whatever. Not justifying the attack but the fact that he never killed any women in the original books.

Also... killing Abigail in front of Will was the cherry on top. He would NEVER kill a sister figure to him or someone that he is taking care off or deeply loves.

What Hannibal did to Will in the series is what domestic abusers to do to women, killing their kids to get revenge on them and to mentally hurt them for life. It was completely fucked up and out of character. And people say is "beautiful" because they are "murder husbands"??? like are we been serious?

And then other fans and the media saying that the end of the book of Hannibal could never work on TV or movies because is not "feminist" that Clarice chose to run away with the only man in the world appart from her own father who didn´t mentally abuse, objectify or mistreat her.

Like... what??? Hannibal NEVER hurt Clarice physically nor mentally. He tried to brainwash her to get Mischa back... but was not to hurt Clarice in the process. He didn´t want to cause any harm to her on purpose, yeah, what he did was wrong too but hopefully Clarice was tougher that he expected and she end up offering herself to him as a lover.

Like... you guys hate the ending of the book because at the end she willingly ends up with him and live a happy life together in Argentina... but love the ending where after years of physical and mental abuse towards Will, they both jump together and throw themselves off a cliff... ?????

Like, if Hannibal didn´t tortured Will and did the same he did to Clarice, I would have actually loved the series, but this aweful toxic and abusive gay represetation really needs to stop. You are romantizicing abuse and are deeply DEEPLY misogynistic.

Is the same shit over again that happened with Killing Stalking, where even the author had to come up and say that IT WAS NOT a dark romance webtoon but a thriller.

Like be for fucking real... Hannibal murdering women left and right, torturing Will, trying to kill him, imprisoned him, killed his sister/daughter substitute of Mischa and that´s better that him genuinely trying to help Clarice with her trauma, healing and stitching her wound, giving her a luxurious life in Argentina??? Come on...

So a murder and toxic gay representation can work on media but not a fucked up heterosexual couple running away from a society that really failed them...

The tv series would have worked better if they did the same in the books but with Will (they didn´t have Clarice rights anyway), both running away together to Argentina without Hannibal destroying him physical and mentally.

[justthoughts1310]

Boruto is a Gay Manga! Is that so hard to admit???

So, today I emailed one of the most prominent YouTube Naruto/Boruto commentators an email with the subject line: "Boruto is Gay Manga! Is that so hard to admit?" Now, I admitted in my email that my subject line is clickbait, and I didn't go into intensive well-supported detail. However, I did say, "Why do you keep ignoring Mitsuki's (queer) feelings for Boruto?" The interesting thing about this content creator, and many other individuals, is that he wants Boruto x Sarada to be endgame. However, he doesn't want this because he likes the pairing. He wants this because he actually wanted Naruto x Sasuke to happen, and this is the next closet thing.

Which is crazy right? It's crazy that so many people wanted Naruto x Sasuke to be together. However, I'm sure Kishimoto knows that these same men would swear off Naruto forever, if the main character was revealed to be queer.

So, then you end up with Boruto x Sarada, where Sarada is not Boruto's equal. No, in a patriarchal society she is not Boruto's equal, she is instead the BALL for which men choose to play with and measure their own masculinity. Don't believe me? Sarada is the last Uchiha, and in the first chapter, she (an Uchiha) had to be rescued by a no name male ninja that we literally never hear about again.

Sarada's anime design looks like this pre-time skip:

And this post-time skip:

I want to take the time to remind all of you that this is a character design of a 12 year old girl and a 16 year old girl. Both of which are under age, any sexualization of the two is pedaphillic in nature.

Men's sexualization of children goes into their rampant and obsessive need for control at all costs, but I digress.

You know who thinks this character design is awesome and doesn't question anything about it, despite the fact that both outfits are completely impractical for an active duty shinobi? Men.

You know who thinks this character design is disgusting and a complete miss? Women.

Someone who should have been positioned as an equal to the main character in Boruto has become nothing more than an object of men's perverted fantasies both heteronormatively and homoerotically. What do I mean by homoerotically? Remember, the real reason that people want Boruto and Sarada to be end game is not because they think these two have a ton of chemistry. Sarada is a level 10,000 nag that could bring her mother to shame, and men hate being nagged.

The real reason men want Boruto x Sarada to happen is because their pairing is the realization of Naruto x Sasuke.

I, also, need you to realize that a large part of Sarada's character development is the fact that she has a crush on Boruto. In contrast, as far as we know so far, Boruto has a crush on nobody.

Which highlights this underlying ideal that many women have realized for a long time. Men DON'T like women. I don't care where you go in the world. An overwhelming number of men don't like women. I'm not even convinced that many men enjoy having sex with women, because let me tell you something... Having sex with the only goal being to climax is the least enjoyable sex that anyone can experience. Orgasming becomes boring after a while. Try to enjoy the ride.

Yet, climaxing is often the sole frame through which men see sex and sexual completion, while completing discarding the pleasure of women. How do I know, because only 50-70% of women have orgasmed from heterosexual encounters. I imagine that number is 100% for men who have orgasmed while having sex with a woman at some point (probably most points) in their lives.

Men are taught from a very early age and are socially conditioned to NOT like women. Even within the Naruto series this is evident. I mean think about it, the woman that Naruto had the most chemistry with (and probably should have ended up with) was a flat-chested nag who didn't appreciate Naruto until he became strong. It's giving incel, red-pill mindset.

Now, who was that woman? Sakura.

Who was she based on? Kishimoto's wife.

Shocking right? Many of you may have had no idea that Sakura is based on Kishimoto's wife. Now, do I think Kishimoto secretly hates his wife? No, but that's irrelevant.

Yes, Sakura is based on Kishimoto's wife, and Kishimoto wrote a female character that men HATE!!! Sakura is undeniably the most hated character in all of Naruto (male or female). I wouldn't be surprised if she is the most hated female character in all of anime.

Sakura is, also, the strongest woman in the entire show (next to Kaguya) and yet, she always needs to be saved. She is stopped and under minded constantly by the most miniscule thing, and then she needs to be saved by Naruto, Sasuke or Kakashi like clock work. Why, because they need their hero moment, and women are but an object. Women are the ball, and the enemy is the opposing team.

Here's the thing: You all need to understand that according to the light novels, under Naruto and Sasuke, Sakura is the most powerful shinobi (male or female) in the entire Naruto Universe (pre-Boruto). However, you wouldn't know that from watching the anime or reading the manga.

Then who is the most beloved female character in Naruto, the one that Naruto ends up marrying and having two super powerful children with? The woman who has large breasts, always cheers for Naruto despite him not knowing she exists, always needs to be saved, and largely keeps her mouth shut: Hinata.

When you really think about it, the entire Naruto series is about Naruto (a loser) chasing after Sasuke who hates him, but what does Sasuke represent? Sasuke represents the pinnacle of athleticism, skill, sexiness, cleverness, fame, and aloofness that a man could ever dream of having. When Naruto chases after Sasuke, he's chasing the idea of masculinity itself. In Naruto's adulthood, he has a more emotionally intimate relationship with Sasuke then he does with any woman: Hinata or Sakura. Naruto surrounds himself with men. He's always around men: Shikamaru, Konohamaru, Sai, and Kakashi. He solely asks for the opinions of men when it comes to major decisions that effect the fact of the entire Leaf Village and World.

The whole Naruto series is a celebration of men at the expense of women. These men have hard-ons for each other.

Now, some might say that it's not sexual, but it is! How do we know that, because Kishimoto created Boruto x Sarada to be endgame. He is approaching the fulfillment of a homoerotic relationship in a societally correct way, when the truth is that he (and all men) want to skip the middle man and have Naruto and Sasuke be together. Yet, at the same time, none of these men want to be gay and be giant fans of something that is gay. Why, because being a fan of something gay makes straight men feel gay, and a man is not supposed to be gay in a patriarchal society.

I watched a whole video where a straight man talked about watching a gay male anime, and it made him wonder for a second if he was gay, simply because he thought it was a good show. Once again, I digress. In a patriarchal society, a man is supposed to gain the respect and admiration of other men all while subjecting, conquering and controlling women. Once again, to reiterate, women are the ball. Women have no thoughts, feelings, autonomy, or rights? Women are not human. After all, why would a ball represent anything other than being a tool of the sport used for the purpose of scoring points?

The Naruto series is a mirror reflection of society, and how men value men, men want men, men desire men, and (straight) men don't give a damn about women. Of course, some do, but many men don't. Women are nothing more than trophies to be shown off and touted around.

All that matters is the male gaze. We see this all the time. Do you know who likes 6 ft tall men, with 6 pack abs, 6 pairs of shoes, who make 6 figures? The giga-Chads if you will. I'm going to give you a hint: It's not women.

Men lust over this stuff, men get hard over this stuff, they salivate over this stuff, and obsessive over creating the perfect male body either for themselves, someone else, or a fictional character. I need you all to realize that ALL of those Marvel action shots of Chris Evan's and Robert Downey Jr's bulging muscles, and Chris Hemsworth's nakedness are shots written for men by men.

Have you ever stopped to think what kind of men women drop their panties over?

They are men like Pete Davidson, Dylan O'Brien, Timothee Chalamet, Tom Holland, and Harry Styles (sorry that I only listed white men). This men stand in direct contrast to everything men say that women want.

Look, this post is going long, so I will say summarize with these two points:

Naruto has always been gay, so of course Boruto is going to be gay. Even if Boruto ends up with Sarada, it will still probably be a gay series. The series idolizing, romanticizes and sexualizes the idea of all things masculine from the male perspective.

I think it would actually be the most beautiful ending if Boruto x Mitsuki becomes romantic endgame, because at least Kishimoto will be honest with himself about what his motivations really are. He wants to live in a world in which he can be in an emotionally intimate, vulnerable, and transparent relationship with a man that he admires who admires him in exchange. I think that's what most men actually want (whether that involves sex or not), but men don't ask for that because, well: No Homo. So, instead, we have a male loneliness and despair epidemic.

Now, you make ask justhoughts1310, is it wrong for men to like each other?

Of course not! I am a woman who loves women, values women, admires women, and thinks women are so amazing and beautiful. I am blown away by all that women are.

A large part of the Barbie movie, was the admiration of the amazingness of women despite all odds and obstacles. What I have a problem with is men denying their true desires and motivations, and in turn treating women as a prop in the games that they play to win over the approval of other men. Basically, men. If you want to have a dick measuring contest, leave all of us women and the rest of the world out of it.

[fox-steward]

hi, your blog is incredibly interesting- i genuinely didn't realise there was a not conservative side of the gender critical sphere. i've been on testosterone for about 7 months now, so far this has been making me feel more like myself. personally I am not thinking about 'gender' but rather what i want to look and sound like- this has been working better than the whole 'gender is a feeling' thing..which is definitely a theory! If its okay to ask, what are your thoughts on medical transition?

i think medical transition is, broadly, very harmful.

it harms the individual: disrupts natural hormone cycles, negatively impacts cardiovascular health, negatively impacts reproductive functioning, creates an artifice which the individual comes to rely on to "feel like themself," thereby severing that person from true authenticity, necessitating the person remain a lifelong medical patient to keep all effects of hormones, subjecting the person to unnecessary risk of surgery, including death. it costs a lot of money and time that you don't actually have to spend. there is no evidence it correlates with mental health improvement, and it is my opinion that by focusing on transition, people do not attend to the areas of their lives that actually need and would benefit from attention and intervention.

it harms the group: gays and lesbians are disproportionately impacted by medical transition; gender non-conformity (which homosexuality is a form of) has become pathologized; now young lesbians and gays are not only growing up in a culture dominated by heterosexuality and rife with homophobia, they also have to navigate the pervasive message that they might benefit from transition. when i was a kid i was told by adults that i was "trying to be a man," that real women are not lesbians, and eventually i agreed with them. that gender non-conformity is seen as a precursor to "trans identification" only makes this worse--it's like, you get the "what, are you trying to be a man >:( ??!!" but also, "what, are you trying to be a man <=D ??!!" messaging. and what chance do we stand against attacks from all sides?

it is harmful to all women: look around at misogyny--devaluing women's opinions as vapid or lesser, assuming women are weak and fickle, dismissing women's perspectives and ideas, preying on women and girls sexually, seeing women as one-dimensional vessels for the transformation of the men around them--of COURSE girls don't "feel like a woman" these days, who would? instead of looking at the way society treats women and the disidentification it is producing among youth as the blazing alarm that it is, trans culture has wedged itself between women and liberation with the suggestion that "maybe you're not a woman if you don't feel like one?" never minding that "feeling like one" generally means liking being objectified, belittled, seen as weak, ignored, simultaneously not being taken seriously but being blamed for things. not only does this derail the actually important conversation about misogyny, but it leaves women and girls vulnerable to the predation of medical transition, which as i mentioned above, is harmful physically, emotionally, socially, and financially.

also, i would argue there are actually no conservative "gender critical" people. conservatives tend to reject gender non-conformity and embrace traditional gender roles; ain't no way to be critical of gender while holding central traditional gender roles. conservatives may be "trans critical," but they're not actually "gender critical." trans ideology has a lot in common with conservatives when it comes to gender, actually. both reinforce traditional gender stereotypes; how different is "i'm masculine and fit in more with boys than girls, so i must really be a man" from "i'm not a man, so i can't act masculinely, i must act femininely" really? they are threads of the same rope and that rope holds us prisoner, it doesn't free us. true gender non-conformity is being female but realizing that your masculine nature doesn't change anything about you (trans ideology), nor does it need to change itself (conservative ideology).

i know you didn't ask for this part, but you're here in my inbox, so here you go: doesn't it strike you as strange that it's taking synthetic medical intervention to make you "feel like yourself?" is the route to authenticity really via the path of cosmetic surgery and synthetic hormones?

it's either intellectually dishonest or intellectually lazy to stop at you're just "thinking about...how you want to look and sound." WHY do you want to look masculinized and have a deeper voice? there is a zero-percent chance the answer to that question is entirely separate from how those traits get you treated in society. and that's the impact of misogyny. and please don't misunderstand this as me suggesting you should not be masculine--i just don't think you have to subject yourself to the harms of medical transition in order to BE masculine.

and i say this as someone who took these steps, who masculinized with a mastectomy and many years of testosterone. i get that there are certain advantages to appearing as a man in society despite being a woman, but largely these are individual advantages for ME that come at the expense of WOMEN. thinking i'm a man, men take me more seriously; this impacts women by reinforcing the idea that men deserve consideration when women's voices don't, and it means that i don't have to advocate for women to be taken seriously because I don't personally need it; it runs the risk of making me complacent to this phenomenon, convincing me that surely women are exaggerating when they share their experiences because i don't have such a hard time of things, all the men are nice to me. see how pernicious it is?

because i'm 5'10", skinny, and with a flat chest, many people think i'm a man when i'm running. this means i can run at night, with headphones in, in new places--all basically without fear. the stories other women tell me make it clear this isn't the case for them. some women i know don't run outside anymore at all because of how men treat them, sexualize them, harass them, prey on them. so i get that it is a clear advantage to appear as a man sometimes; this is one thing i'm actually really grateful for. but it is not worth the damage i did to my body, it isn't worth the sense of alienation i sometimes feel from women, a sense i also felt with men, even when i was pretending to be "one of them," it isn't worth the money and time and effort i spent trying to convincingly imitate men that i could have spent on things that would actually nurture me and my life.

"gender is a feeling" certainly is a theory, but so is "transition makes me more myself," and one is about as good as the other.

we are not alive to simply take our thoughts and feelings at face value! interrogate your feelings and your ideas! we live in a culture and none of us are immune to that. something something unexamined life.

best of luck, i'm rooting for you.

[pineapplerightsideupcake]

how do you as a bisexual come to terms with the fact that the trans community has literally made homophobia much worse. ppl are proudly being openly homophobic and when you dig deeper it’s actually the “queers” and transgenders who think kids can transition who they have a problem with (not all of course but a good chunk) I believe ppl who wouldn’t otherwise be homophobic are being homophobic bc of the trans community. I use to really struggle w internalized homophobia, and still do, it was only this past year where I came to terms w it and told my sister/close friends. I wish it could be just a normal thing to be gay and you’d be left alone, I believe we were on a trajectory for that. But now things have gotten worse, and thanks to the gender nonsense, openly bigoted ppl (especially religious) are being praised and promoted. All this bc of trans activism. I don’t even care anymore about what they do to themselves, but the damage they’ve done to actual gay ppl is insane and we’re already facing the backlash. I’m not sure if we’ll ever live in a world where being lgb isn’t a big deal.

Honestly? I think the benefit of pushing 40 is that I have a wider lens through which to view activism. And I feel the same way about LGB rights as I do about women’s rights.

Which is to say, every time a big gain is won, there is backlash. There are parts of society that get worse as the culture tries desperately to adjust around the new changes.

Men today are more porn sick and sexually aggressive than 20 years ago. In some ways. People are polling less positively about the LGTBQI+ but how much of that backlash is really directed at the LGB? Are polling groups even bothering to distinguish between LGB and “queer” people?

Let me tell you what life was like as a bisexual teen in 2003. Let’s go back 20 years and I can tell you the world has changed so much for the better. 20 years ago gay rights activists started really making headway towards civil rights guarantees. Suddenly middle Americans had to confront that gay people were among them and not just haunting bars and bathhouses. I don’t think I’ve ever seen such rigid gender norm adherence as I did back then. Men couldn’t wear pastels or purple or pink. Guys got called gay for having a messenger bag. There is an entire episode of “Friends” about it. Sussing out the Gays Among Us became obsessive. Emo culture was a direct response to how frantic straight people were to appear duly heterosexual. TV shows still depicted us as degenerate freaks if they depicted us at all. A few HBO shows that were soft core porn more than anything and Will and Grace was all anybody had. Shows like Xena and Buffy got away with lesbians because men said out loud that hot women kissing was fine. These were the early days of straight men having open lesbian fetishizes. We couldn’t get married. We could get fired for being gay.

For women there was no movement to normalize our natural bodies. I’d spend hours shaving myself smooth. Not wearing makeup was unheard of. Cellulite wasn’t even a word I knew let alone knew was normal. There weren’t a million online resources teaching women that vaginal discharge is normal and I grew up thinking (as did many others) that it was a private shame.

And as far as MeToo stuff? It’s easy to feel defeated in the moment but nobody was using the word ‘consent’ in my day. Men getting women drunk was a joke. Men pushing for sex was a joke. Men calling a woman that had one too many dates or boyfriends a slut was normal. Three of my male friends pinned me down on several occasions and took turns rubbing their dicks on me to completion.

The therapist I told said I “needed to work on my boundaries”. The word rape never even entered my mind. Rape was something a stranger with a knife did. It wasn’t something your best friends did to you and then laughed about. It isn’t something you submitted to because fawn and freeze are real fear responses. No one told me my friend forcing my hand down his pants was abuse because I continued to go over his house, didn’t I? No one told me about red flags or cycles of abuse.

And the older women you told rolled their eyes. What I endured was so mild compared to many other women. Men forcing themselves onto women was just normal.

I can’t tell you what it means to me to see so many young women calling it out. Refusing to stay in a bad situation. Refusing to date entirely sometimes. Women sharing red flags and advice to stay not just safe but thriving.

Don’t get me wrong- the current gender movement is regressive and dangerous. I’m not saying it’ll all work itself out. Activism is constant work but things ARE getting better. They really are, even if sometimes it doesn’t feel like it. 💜

[all-chickens-are-trans]

what if i rewrote much ado with beatrice and benedick both being transmasc. you couldn't stop me. no one could. i am right. they were girl best friends and there was definitely a spark and then one night, they were both like. hey i am actually a boy I think, and benedick was like, let's go run away to the army together and be boy bestfriends but beatrice stayed home and in the closet while benedick went and joined the army as a guy and made new boy bestfriends like don pedro and claudio, and beatrice was jealous and envied him and when benedick came back, it was strange between them but they covered it up with jokes and banter, and when the cis ppl of messina were all like "let's play a prank on them and tell them they're in love haha wouldn't that be funny" they didn't realize that they were doing these two a huge favour and now they're t4t and gay and because beatrice is still not out to anyone but benedick, they can both go ":) look at us, a normal heterosexual couple, totally acceptable to the society we live in :)" they are gay t4t transmascs i know it in my heart i knowww

(this post was sponsored by me beta reading @rovermcfly 's brilliant benedick x beatrice t4t essay that will hopefully drop soon because god i need everyone to read it and weep with me)

[hillaryisaboss]

“If it is your personal belief, based on whatever, that there is no legitimate basis for abortion — even if you're in the hospital and you're bleeding out, even if you're told that you have cancer and chemotherapy is necessary and therefore an abortion is necessary — no matter what, you get to make that decision. I might not agree with it, but you get to make that decision.

But you, and those who support your particular point-of-view, cannot dictate that decision to every other woman.

In a pluralistic democracy like ours, the court in Roe v. Wade said the government is not going to make this decision.

If these Supreme Court justices and the very extreme Republicans who support them really cared about children, why don't they support health care for every pregnant woman in our country? Why do they let a big state like Texas deny health care, because they won't expand Medicaid, to mothers who want to have their children? And they therefore have the highest rate of maternal mortality in America.

Why don't they support child care, so that, if a mother is going to be forced to give birth to a child, that mother will be able to support herself and her child because she will be able to go out and work. And the list goes on.

This is not, at the end of the analysis, about anything other than controlling women with some kind of patriarchal view of society that they want to impose on the rest of us.

Democrats need to be willing to point out the extremism that has captured the Republican Party and to make it clear this is not about special interest groups. This is not about one group of Americans vs. another. This is about the rise of authoritarianism within our own country.

This is a direct attack on our democracy.

Americans took for granted that, despite opposition to reproductive choice, it would not go away.

There was a complacency, an acceptance.

During the 2016 campaign, I gave speeches about this. I talked about the dangers that would be posed to this right and other rights if my opponent were elected, because of the promises he'd made to the extreme factions within the Republican Party.

And, honestly, people didn't believe me.

Their attitude was, oh, that sounds really farfetched. That will never happen.

Oftentimes, in politics, the entrenched status-quo position is not as vigorously defended as the opposition position. And so those who wanted to overturn Roe, those who wanted to turn the clock back, were very motivated. And those who said, oh, well, that's settled law, including people sitting on the court, when asked in their confirmation hearings, gave every reason to reassure the American public — telling us they follow past precedent.

Either they have had some kind of brain change, or they were deliberately misleading the American people.

So, yes, the energy was on the side to overturn. Now I hope that energy will shift to the side of those of us who want to protect the progress we have made.

This is a direct assault on the dignity, rights, and even lives of American women.

It is heartbreaking to see this court dominated by extremists who do not represent the majority of Americans, men and women, who believe that this is a right that women should have — doing all they can to set the clock back.

This is the first time, perhaps, that I'm aware of, that a right will actually be taken away.

So, what can be done?

There has to be a recognition that, as horrible assault as this is on women's rights, it is perhaps only the beginning of this court trying to undo so much of the progress of the last 50 years.

Now saying there is no right to privacy — that Roe was decided wrongly.

Roe followed a case called Griswold, which struck down a law prohibiting married heterosexual couples from having access to contraception.

It served as the basis of decriminalizing consenting sexual behavior between gay people who were adults and able to express their own feelings toward one another. It certainly underpins gay marriage. So, this is a real threat to our democracy, not just to the rights of women.

I don't care what political party or religion you are — the question is, who decides?

Is the government going to be in your bedroom?

Is the government going to be making these decisions?

We're only at the beginning of this terrible travesty that this court has inflicted on us.

The ultimate goal of the decision is truly to erase the progress that women have made from the last 150 years.

There are so many things about it that are deeply distressing, but women are going to die.

Women will die.

These justices were selected for this very purpose.

You’ve got to give the other side lots points for their relentlessness, their total commitment to getting what they want done, regardless of who is hurt by it and regardless of who is stripped of rights.

Everybody now understands that this is not necessarily the only effort that we're going to see this court undertake to turn back the clock on civil rights and gay rights and women's rights beyond abortion.”

—Hillary Clinton

[sweetmariihs2]

What's Eddie Munson's canon sexuality and why it makes so much noise inside the fandom?

[This post opens a very serious discussion about a subject that is so debated in the fandom, so I need everyone to understand that this is just a conversation about the subject and not a fight to see which side is right or not.]

I don't want to be disrespectful or homophobic in any way, because I'm also part of the lgbt community, but apparently you can also be homophobic if you're from the community (believe it or not) and really those people exist, but it's not my case. My opinion is based only on the facts of the show, and I also have written about gay and lesbian couples (not here on tumblr yet) so it's not related to any kind of disrespect to anyone in the community. I hope no one feels offended by the post.

I also don't want to disrespect anyone's headcanons or shipps, because everyone believes in what they want and has their own interests, and that won't change your view about the character or not. Anyone who believes he is something specific will believe it whether they read this or not, but I just want to open a dialogue on the subject, as I have already saw a lot of people bringing this type of conversation about his personality, his attitude, etc.

—

I've seen in several places for months (since season 4 actually came out) the amount of debate about Eddie's sexuality, and after hearing a lot of people talking about it, I decided to say what I think and why I think that, you know?

He is a very popular character and has caught the attention of many people, mainly the alternative community (because he is part of the alternative community, that is, who do not dress or like the same interests as most people), and unlike the alternative community of that time, ours currently has much greater freedom of expression, and with that we are also able to express our sexuality, something that was not possible in the past, at the time when Eddie is portrayed.

Most "standard" people are heterosexual, while lgbt people are very much against this standard of something that is more accepted by the society, which leads to alternative people, who are also different and are marginalized by their lifestyle as well as the lgbt community.

So it's very common for us to link the subject of an lternative person with an lgbt person, and there are also many alternative people who are lgbt (like me for example), and in the 80's there was a lot of prejudice with those two social groups.

But these days the alternative community and the lgbt community can finally expose their sexualities, and as alternatives are often part of fandoms and internet communities in general, they found Eddie Munson and welcomed him for being part of this alternative group. When you like a character a lot and understand them, it is normal to attribute characteristics of yourself to them, for example your beliefs (if you belong to a party or not, a religion or not, are you a feminist or not and etc.), or their sexuality. So many people who are part of the alternative and lgbt community like to believe that he is like them too, for example him being a gay person who couldn't talk freely about his sexuality during the 80's.

Changing the subject for a better understanding of the conclusion of the blog,

Eddie is, canonically, part of one of those groups. The other is still a debate. So he is very marginalized, excluded, cursed, and people always hate him wherever he goes. Because in addition to being a metalhead, his father is apparently a criminal, he has no parents and lives with his uncle, in the trailer park in a small town, that is, he is very poor too. And he's "dumb" (to people) because he flunked out twice. And he sells drugs too, that is, his life is already a disgrace

In addition to the satanic panic of the 80's, then the metalheads were already being persecuted and being accused of murder and doing satanic rituals, they arrested a lot of people for nothing, so Eddie was the biggest terror in the school apparently.

Everyone hates this man, but he doesn't let it get him down. He's very playful, immature, idiotic, and that's partf of his personality. Eddie got used to the bullying and it made him more skittish, he replies back, at this point his reputation is so destroyed that he doesn't even care about destroying it anymore, for example we have that wonderful scene that became a mark for him inside the show:

So he doesn't care if he looks weirder, besides the fact that in metal culture in the 80's people were a little crazy, they made faces on stage, made fun of each other, flicked their hair, "sex, drugs and rock n roll", and that's what Eddie believes in and it's what he's used to do. Being more "crazy" and carefree, Eddie doesn't care about a lot of things related to posture and a lot of masculinity, despite being clear that he is a cis man and has masculine mannerisms made very clear, he doesn't care about, for example, """looking gay """ (using a more blunt term). In other words he doesn't have fragile masculinity, but he does have his own masculinity.

That doesn't change the fact that he can be interested in other men, after all, gay men are still men. However, many people connect his carefree behavior and his rebellion against society with the fact that in addition to being a metalhead, he is also a gay character.

We often see Eddie jumping up and down, talking close to other male characters' faces, and generally embracing with everything he can the fact that he's a different person and he loves being that way, and it's very obvious. But that still doesn't make clear the answer to the question: is he gay or not?

And now we come to my personal belief, based on what Stranger Things showed us: I don't think so.

Many people are already tired of this discussion, and answer that Eddie is bi or pan, simply to end this doubt once and for all. But it doesn't make sense, since within the series he has never shown even the slightest interest in any male, not even in Steve. (please don't kill me)

Is Eddie interested in men?

I know this divides many opinions, and everyone believes what they want as I said, but it is very clear that inside the canon he had no interest in Steve.

All interactions between him and Steve were marked by the simple fact that the two belong to very different social groups. Steve is the bully, and Eddie is bullied. He's been the "King Steve" for years and Eddie was a student at Hawkins High when he was named that, and maybe he and his friends from the time of season one called Eddie a weirdo, they judged him, because as everyone remembers they were idiots.

Eddie says this, literally in the forest scene, which is so often used to defend the fact that he had an interest in Steve. I don't remember exactly what it was, but it was something like, "I didn't want to admit that 'King Steve' was actually a nice guy. Rich parents, popular, ain't that douchebag? No way, that goes against all laws of the universe". The looks they're exchanging are awkward looks, Eddie more like "Seriously you're not going to bully me? I don't trust you. But yeah I can try to be your friend" And Steve is more like "he's such a weird guy (but I don't treat him badly, he just wouldn't be part of my conversation group)" because he does have that social construction that Eddie is weird because he's alternative, and Eddie don't help much either, he's staggering around, stumbling around, generally a little flustered and saying some unrelated things, so Steve thinks it's weird even if he doesn't hate him for it. Do you remember how uncomfortable the silence was when Eddie said "Ozzy? Ozzy Osborne? He took the head off the bat on stage" and Steve thought it was weird as hell, but he didn't say anything.

Steve and Eddie are the perfect embodiment of that meme "mom: son, go play with the neighbor's son // the neighbor's son: *insert something weird as hell here*

People say that Eddie was freaking out about Steve with his shirt off but really he was giving him a dirty look, he was looking at him and judging like "look at how he likes to show off 🙄". And then when Steve and Nancy were having a moment he throws the jacket at Steve and tells him to get dressed, but not because he was jealous of the two of them, but because they were almost climbing on top of each other and Steve was all bragging walking up and down shirtless, no one deserves to be watching live flirting, and he said enough for the two to be quiet for a bit.

The famous "don't ya, big boy?" was because he was teasing Steve, and the scene where he was pointing a broken bottle at Steve, for god's sake, I've seen people freaking out saying they were crazy to kiss each other in that scene.

There's a lot of talk about the black hanky code on his back pocket, that wearing it in the 80's meant he was gay and had bdsm preferences, but the black bandana is also part of metal culture, countless band members have already used this bandana in their back pocket, like James Hetfield (vocalist of Metallica) and Slash from Guns n' Roses. In addition, gays did not use this code in open places because it was very dangerous to be victims of some kind of violence if people found out about their sexuality, so they only used this code in establishments and safe places where there were only gay people and they were not at risk. Eddie uses it everywhere, and I didn't notice, but from what I've heard around, he doesn't keep that bandana in a specific pocket, he changes it at some point in the series, I just don't know which one. And let's face it, the designers only put it there for him to use in his hair during volume 2.

Is Eddie interested in women?

Eddie doesn't have the slightest indication of having any interest in men, but for women he has many. Not an insane amount because his personality doesn't revolve around it (like Billy), but it's still made very clear.

The first one is when he's giving his speech in the cafeteria in the first scene, and he makes way for the cheerleaders to pass with the biggest smile in the world and proceeds to look at them head to the feet when they walk past, even though he's pissed inside and lecturing the kids just now, but yeah, poor boy needs to grab every chance

The second clue is how into Chrissy he was in the forest scene, he is always respectful and at first he was really interested in selling and leaving, but after they started talking he showed interest and started doing things to try to make her laugh, invited her to watch him play, was very charming, even said he had tattoos and even though he had several showing on his arm, he made sure of pulling down the collar of his shirt to show the one he had on his chest. Joseph himself said that he was trying to make it look like Eddie was flirting with her, and he believes he was interested in Chrissy. The Duffers said they had a chemistry that could have been developed but couldn't because Chrissy's death scene was already filmed, also implying that Eddie was interested in her, so it's somewhat clear that he has an interest in her. women.

Maybe, just a thought that i had without any confirmation from anyone, maybe he was hoping that something might develop at his house when he went to get Chrissy the drugs, and who knows, maybe they even used it there and ended up doing something, I don't know. Of course he was always respectful to her and never harassed Chrissy or anything like that, and he wasn't trying to take advantage of her either, but things develop, and he was bringing a girl who was flirting into his house at night where they were completely alone, Eddie you don't even try to be discrete

I wasn't the only one who thought this, because I saw a meme that went like this: "Jason if Chrissy hadn't been attacked by Vecna ​​when she was at Eddie's house: *insert here several pictures of oxen and men with horns*" (this doesn't prove anything, I just thought it was funny to comment)

Other than that, which is what we see in the series, there are other things on the set that imply his sexuality and I decided to comment because they are veryyyy interesting information.

This part here is a little explicit so I would mark it as more +18 information, because it talks about something more personal about him

In a video inside the recording set where Eddie's room is shown in detail, and shows things that were outside the camera in the show, it is possible to see a Heavy Metal magazine (that's the name of the magazine) with a 1986 edition of Druuna.

Druuna is basically a series of erotic comics set in a post-apocalyptic future/sci-fi universe, whose protagonist has sex with men in exchange for a cure for a illness. All, literally all the takes of the comics in which she appears are in compromising positions, wearing very short and tight clothes, and in the comics all the time there are nude scenes and explicit sex scenes, with private parts exposed (basically is a hentai comic). It is even heavily criticized for having a constant objectification of women and some romanticized rape scenes, but let's not talk about this right now...

If that isn't proof enough, this magazine is at the foot of his bed, in front of the bedside table, and on top of that table there are a bunch of little things scattered all over the place. One of these things is a pack of condoms, and this, in addition to indicating that he is a sexually active person or at least cautious and thinks about it, there is also another observation: the two are at his bedside, and within his reach. If it's there he put it on recently, and I'm sure that if it's at the foot of the bed it doesn't belong there and he was reading when he left it lying there. You know what that means.

And yes, we both know that he uses these things. But have you ever thought that maybe he uses them... ate the same time? 💀

Okay I think that's enough for this post. Thank you for reading 😭

Edit:

This kind of blog makes me think "girl, where?? 😭😭😭

wtf that's literally sexual assault

do you REALLY think that Eddie Munson could sexually assault someone?

then with Steve he's probably a monster since you said that he do those things and that they are dating

do you support a ship that one of the guys can sexually assault someone? 😀 (in their logic of course)

"and chrissy is a minor" (she's not, but that's their argument)

ok then you support a ship that one of the guys can be a pedo* and you're okay with that??

it literally makes no sense, they're trying to prove their point but at the end they say that Eddie is a bad person 😭 then why are you trying to put him in a shipp IF YOU SAY THAT HE'S A PED

the REAL representation doesn't really matter for y'all right (and I say this as an LGBTQI+ person).

[sneezemonster15]

Okay but like WHY would SNS think Kishimoto is homophobic? Some fans do and I wanna ask them Why???

What's wrong with you?

Writing the trials and tribulations of gay people in a conservative homophobic society, portraying a closeted homosexual person in a conservative heteronormative society (Naruto is, whose own homophobia so obviously stems from his closetedness, which is a very logical and realistic portrayal of homosexuality, like please watch other gay media for fuck's sake), and writing a careful, respectful, and freaking Shakespearan gay love story in a shounen fucking manga while consciously deviating from the highly problematic tropes that so many of his contemporaries use where they treat homosexuality as offensive or a joke, DOES NOT make Kishimoto homophobic.

It actually makes him empathetic to homosexuality. He actually understands homosexuality and the struggles of a gay person living in a traditional heteronormative society. He treats the subject with sensitivity and a deep sense of pathos. It couldn't be clearer that this man knows what he is writing about.

A hell lot of creators who create homosexual media, especially in mainstream media, end up cheaply fetishizing or exploiting homosexuality the same way heterosexual media has been treated, by writing insincere, common tropey cookie cutter bullshit because it sells. Because a majority of the audience doesn't care about or even begin to understand complex narrative or visual nuances. But if you have seen enough gay media, you can easily tell who is being sincere about storytelling and characters and who is just after making some easy dough.

Stories about homosexuality in mainstream cinema were very rare and scattered earlier. During the eighties and especially nineties, most creators who wrote homosexual characters and narratives used to make it offensive or to facilitate cheap comedy. We have all seen Friends, haven't we? The sitcom.

Enter Wong Kar Wai. When his film 'Happy Together' was released in 1997, so many fans in the gay community were immensely grateful to him. It was like a milestone in Asian gay media. Because finally gay community had a realistic, respectful and honest to God portrayal of a gay couple in cinema. There was no unnecessary exploitation of the subject, just a straightforward story about love. Between two people. Only in this case, they happened to be men. This was the kind of representation the Asian gay community at the time was looking for but didn't get it because the heteronormative film industries didn't cater to their interests.

My gay film maker friend was in his early twenties when he saw this film in a special screening in the city. And he was transported. And so overwhelmed. It was like a spiritual experience for him. Because he had never seen such a sincere portrayal of homosexuality and gay love in media ever. He still remembers everything in such detail, he couldn't help but cry and he wasn't the only one crying in that hall. He felt seen for the very first time in media. He could relate. And his resolve of making sincere and honest films got even stronger. He has won a lot of accolades and awards since.

That's the power of storytelling and meaningful representation.

And I can say the same thing about Kishi. He broke the mould. He wrote a realistic gay love story with a gay protagonist in love with a gay anti hero and made them kiss, never been done in the history of shounen before.

His hands were tied so he couldn't write it all that explicitly but seriously, he didn't need to. It actually ended up making this story even more nuanced and heartbreakingly beautiful.

So how does that make him homophobic? Do you even understand what homophobia means?

By your logic, Spielberg making a movie about Nazi atrocities makes him a Nazi? Or Spike Lee making films about the struggles of black people in America makes him racist? Wtf?? What's even your logic?

You admit Sasuke and Naruto, the two mainest characters, the hero and the anti hero, are gay and in love with each other and you ship them because their story is so heart touching and splendidly beautiful. But the person who wrote them that way with such immense effort in his Magnum opus is a homophobe?? Do you not see how contradictory that is?

Seriously, please think for ONE second before you say things. You are accusing an amazing writer of something grave, that he is the opposite of.

Yes, I have heard and read worse things in this fandom. But seriously, I don't want to expect something like this out of the SNS fandom. Use your head, it's not just for show.

[nightswithkookmin]

okay but did bts say they are gay?? no. normalise being straight. you talk about being gay. no one said i was faints it. i’m against you acting like they are gay when they have not said so. don’t presume their sexuality. they could be gay but that doesn’t eliminate the fact that they also could be straight. girls are always kissing their friends and they are straight and ppl say ‘it’s just a little bit of fun’ but ‘oh look this male is being touchy with his male friend, i guess he is gay then’. the double standards are crazy. stop acting like you know them as well. acting like you personally know they are gay is toxic behaviour. in korea, they are more touchy. males are more comfortable with their male friends compared to the western society. they can hug, slap each other’s butts whatever, it means they are comfortable with each other. it doesn’t mean that they are showcasing what they do to each other behind the scenes. just because your views are different doesn’t mean your views are the same as theirs. it’s about societal construct. your society is different to theirs. have you slapped your female friend’s ass before? or kissed each other? does that make you gay? it’s all about intention. we don’t know them. we don’t know their intentions. that is why i say normalise platonic touch. they haven’t told us they are gay or that they are dating (whether it is each other or someone else) so it is safer to assume they are friends. people like you are the reason straight people are always questioned. you can be straight and support gay rights. but why can gay people never support straight ppl? always making everything about sexuality - it’s ridiculous. no one cares as much as they do except for the ppl they should be targeting. people like you probably go up to straight people and tell them that they cannot be 100% straight because you want your beliefs to be shelved in everyone’s lives. just stop. everyone should be comfortable in their sexuality without hurting one another. but clearly because of toxic fans, the boys can’t do that.

GIRLS ARE ALWAYS KISSING THEIR FRIENDS AND THEY ARE STRAIGHT- this is good my girlfriend needs to hear this🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

This you?

I'm starting to wonder what you think gay is🤣🤣🤣🤣

You've been so inundated with performative bisexuality and queer baiting for the male gaze for years you are actually desensitized to gayness I see.

If same sex kissing is straight, then I'm the straightest person on earth and James Charles is straight too. Lil Nas X you did. You finally straight 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

And people wonder why merely holding hands in public or coming out is such a big deal to some of us.

You sound very ignorant to me.

I will tell you as a queer woman- no. I don't find kissing my female friends platonic at all. THE ACTUAL FUCK!

My girlfriend certainly don't find that platonic either💀 But sure, I'll kiss a straight man for laughs and gaslight him afterwards telling him it's just a friendly platonic kiss cos I'm gay😚

You sound stupid to me. Straight men keep arguing they can't be friends with women and yet you expect gay people to find nothing wrong with kissing each other and touching each other's bum.

Gay intimacy is a social construct? sure. Gay is all an illusion. It's not real. It's all in our heads sure Freud.

Have I slapped my female friend's bum before? Or kissed a girl??? Did that make me gay?

Geez, I dunno🥴

But the thought of it does make my pussy wet tho. In a straight way of course😏

Can't be gay. This pussy straight as an arrow🤣

"That is why I say normalize platonic touch."

I know you think you helping, you not sis.

Just really think deep about what you are saying for as long as possible- but go do it on your own blog in your own space somewhere else just not here.

There is a clear distinction between heterosexual relationships and homosexual relationships and the fact straight people like yourself think that line is blurred is telling of just how much gay culture is appropriated and normalized as part of heterosexual behaviors especially in mainstream media cos that shit don't fly in real life.

The fact you think gay behaviors corrupt straight relationships or the perception of straight relationships is telling of everything that is wrong with straight men and straight women.

Don't conflate online culture with real life culture because those two are in conflict with each other. The performances people put up online in the media for commercial gains does not reflect their values or the complexities of the social structures they live within.

They are so any celebrities who come online and do gay shit and pretend they are down with the gays but go home and live a very homophobic life- you know who I'm talking about. No. Normal straight girls in real life are not walking around kissing eachother. They only do that when the cameras are rolling and for clicks. So about you not normalize that behavior with rhetorics like the ones you spew in here unintelligently and unwelcomed.

It's not our fault that straight men compartmentalize their feelings and can feel emotionally attracted to other men but reserve their sexual attraction only for women, treating women as sexual objects they cannot befriend while reserving their love and admiration and respect only for their male counterparts under the disguise of bromance and friendship. The jig is up. Pack it up.

That sort of compartmentalization is what a real construct is. All men are gay in that regard and straight is the societal construct. Deal.

Love is love. It's just measured by degrees and intensity but it's the SAME LOVE. I can have platonic feelings for a friend and still fuck her if I'm horny. I don't even need to be attracted physically to her. You know friends with benefit exist in our vocabulary for a reason right?

Platonic love is just romantic love in a seed form. It may never mature into blossoming romance but the love is the same.

And gay people can have platonic feelings as well. Gay people can have platonic friendships too. So calling your bias's relationship to another man as platonic is not a conclusive statement on his sexuality. Where did you get this idea that platonic means straight???? Don't answer that.

That's like saying gay people cannot have degrees of love and emotional attraction and attachments. And the only love we feel is sexual love. Can you at least drop the ignorance? Your homophobia here is enough.

And what makes you think your interpretation and description of someone's relationship as platonic overrides my interpretation and description of their relationship as romantic?? What makes your opinion superior to mine? We are both opining aren't we?

Your opinion is not more valid than my opinion. just because my opinion makes you uncomfortable don't mean it's wrong or that I am not entitled to it. You are so full of yourself.

We don't know them, you are right. If they are straight there's nothing wrong with that- IF THEY ARE GAY THEY IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT EITHER.

STOP ASSUMING THEY ARE STRAIGHT. ASSUMING THEY ARE STRAIGHT IS EQUALLY ASSUMING THEIR SEXUALITY DUMBASS.

Oh- You mean because of toxic fans they can't queer bait in peace? 🤔

GOOD. WE GON PUT OUR FOOT ON THEIR NECKS TILL THEY STOP GAY FISHING IF THEY ARE NOT GAY. IF YOU ARE NOT GAY DON'T ACT GAY. ITS AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

I think you are all over the place and don't know what you are about with this one- if you hate shippers, you do know not everyone who ships them ships them romantically right? And you do know we shipping them romantically NOT because of shit like this-

And I love how actual gay people within their culture and industry have said time and time again they are attacked for holding hands down the street, kissing or displaying the least public affection on a daily but somehow bimbos like you still want to call this homoeroticism "their culture" as if gay people don't exist in South Korea. Don't you ever get tired of acting the fool?

And you are gonna sit here and tell me straight men are uncomfortable with being shipped while pointing out simultaneously, in the same breath how skinship is a normal part of Korean culture. Cool.

Know what else is a normal part of korean kpop culture? SHIPPING. SHIPPING IS A NORMAL PART OF KPOP. THEY INVENTED THE DAMN THING SO LEAVE US THE FUCK ALONE AND LET US SHIP OUT SHIP IN PEACE.

THEY CAN'T BE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH US SHIPPING THEM IF THEY THEMSELVES CURATE, PROMOTE AND PARTICIPATE IN THEIR OWN SHIP AND SHIPPING CULTURE ESPECIALLY FOR COMMERCIAL GAINS. FREE US.

If you are worried we can't tell platonic relationships, skinship culture etc from romantic relationships rest assured we can. Drop the sanctimonious bull crap.It's why we ship all ships but only support one. You can rest now.

THAT SAID, SUPPORT JIKOOK. THEY REAL🤭

GOLDY

[ghosttwinkdigifag]

musings on the nature of gender, the language of transition and the nature of self.

several lengthy paragraphs of stream of consciousness Gender Theory under the cut.

can i riff?

im struggling to word what i want to say. i have literally done years and years of research on this subject because i exist in the world as a trans person and my opinions on the matter have only become more firm over time. please forgive me if this is extremely long-winded and a bit difficult to follow, but i am trying to explain every step of this thought process as clearly as i can.

socially-speaking, it's true that gender roles are constructed. if binary womanhood and manhood as they're ascribed in a euroamerican society were inherent truths then all people would be heterosexual, and we know that isn't the case. this is a truth that is obvious enough for most people to be at least passively aware of. (though, there are still some who question the existence of gay people. i digress).

it's more difficult to prove to a large number of people the ways in which some part of gender must be inherent, outside our widely accepted ideas of biological sex, especially without implying falsely that all parts of it are. LGB+ trans people are an important part of this conversation - if every part of manhood and womanhood is purely rooted in social expectation, or if the state of being trans is intentional and related entirely to social conformity, it should not be true that someone in a westernized society can be transgender and not also heterosexual. there are some mental gymnastics you could do to try and justify why such a large number of genuinely heterosexual, cisgender people would choose to give up both of these social privileges, but i have yet to hear any that are convincing. it must be true that a sense of gender is inherent and not social, otherwise the existence of LGB+ trans people would have no reasonable social explanation. (the idea that trans lesbians have an easier time in society than cis lesbians is provably false and rooted in ignorance on the part of those who believe the experience is analogous with living as a straight man). this isn't the only matter at hand, but i think it's an important sidenote to cover. my main point is that in asking any trans person how they know, their answer will boil down to "this fits better". you're sure it's true because it feels undeniably correct, even in the face of explicit denial. it's hard for people to grasp this unless they feel it for themselves, but it's similar to how you can innately identify what kind of food you are craving at a given time. even if it takes you a moment to specifically pinpoint, people can generally just tell what kind of food they want. even if, say, you make food and realise you don't actually want it, you still realise that you don't want it. i think this is a particularly good analogy, but i am autistic, so maybe it is not. to me, asking how someone knows they are trans is a bit like asking a pregnant person how they knew they wanted to eat peanut butter and pickles on rye bread specifically. your body is generally good at nudging you forward when it needs something. this is all well and good, but where does it leave us in terms of separating the inherent and social aspects of gender? the more you break the two things down, the more they feel like disparate elements, like totally different things. i think a lot of this cognitive dissonance comes from a struggle to pinpoint the right language.

because, if your internal identity as being a man or a woman is something that is part of you inseperably, a true facet of your sense of Self (which, again, i believe it is,) then how is it not biological? if it originated from you and exists physically within your mind, how is it not biological? we have no specific, hard evidence on whether it is physiological or neurological, but true mental processes only exist within biological beings. instinct is a biological phenomenon that inanimate beings do not possess. they may have set training or programmed parameters, but not true instinct in the way that a jellyfish or flower possesses - the ability to act based on innate knowledge in order to "think" without even having a brain or mind. everything that lives possesses some sense of instinct, and every human possesses an innate sense of self regardless of how it specifically manifests. scientific research on the sense of self is fascinating because we've found plenty of evidence to suggest that it is a tangible thing, one that manifests physically inside the brain (though we haven't decoded exactly how). parts of the brain associated with a sense of self are closely linked to areas associated with emotional regulation, physical sensation, and how you interpret the world around you. it's been suggested that humans have both an embodied and disembodied sense of self, which would mean we are capable of having 2 separate concepts of self relating to the body and the mind, both of which are considered to be partially static and partially fluid. the fluid aspects (the collective self) are said to be impacted by things like memory and social perception. the static aspects (the individual self) are the things that are just true about you. both of these factors impact how you feel and operate on a day to day basis. this is possibly evidenced by body dysmorphia, and may be an explanation for the nature of gender dysphoria as sometimes intensifying over time without treatment, while still existing absent outside influence. this is true for things like your taste in music; you can listen to a song 100 times and eventually learn to appreciate it, but you can also listen 100 times and still dislike it. while one opinion may be based on longterm experience, both are positions you are predisposed to holding based on nothing more than who you are as a person and how you operate. again, i am aware that fMRI technology to determine brain activity is a theoretical science, and i'm not interested in determining exactly how people become trans because that type of thing never leads to good outcomes. but the theories that are available align fairly well with my personal experiences in life, and also seem to apply to general concepts outside ideas of gender. these concepts, to me, are applicable to things from gender identity to your sleep schedule to whether or not you experience depression. the logical explanation would be that this aspect of self develops in the same ways that other aspects of self do, based partially on life experience but mainly related to predisposition and brain chemistry.

so, again, i ask; how is this not biological? regardless of how or why these things occur, all the evidence we currently have available to us says that they do occur. without knowing the exact details, we can say firmly that biological sex is made up of a number of factors which are not always neatly aligned in a predictable way, and that the self in general is observable and must include some static elements to account for differences between people, even those with extremely similar life experiences. twins often have different tastes in clothes, food, and activity despite spending their formative years in the same situations. they are verh capable of developing differently despite developing in the same womb from the same egg. why is it then such a leap to treat gender this way? why is it such a leap to say that an internal sense of gender is likely, in fact, an aspect of biological sex which is capable of differing from the rest at some point during development like any other? if gender identity were learned then gender conversion therapy would be effective. (take it from me; it is not). even the fact that some small portion people detransition citing a change of heart is proof that even those people do have an innate internal sense of gender, which they are not capable of altering through outside influence even if they are determined to do so.

calling this concept a sense of gender is the easiest language that we have, but it also ties it to social gender roles in a way that leads to confusion, argument and in-fighting. calling it something like mental sex is technically correct, but conjures images of misogynistic pseudoscience that states that women are inherently mentally inferior due to negligible differences in brain matter composition that are likely specifically related to this "sense of gender" and not skill-related traits. (the idea of the slight differences in brain composition between cis men and women being related to gender identity is supported by studies of trans people's brains showing distinct composition that is not entirely aligned to either binary cis gender. this is not exactly relevant but something i find very neat).

so. like, seriously - what do we do here? the word transgender feels needlessly confusing, if it is necessary to separate social notions of gender from biological concepts of sex as described above. but the word transsexual seems to imply that a person has changed sex, rather than having merely aligned their physical sex characteristics to their sex as it relates to their innate sense of self. i think i personally still prefer transsexual, since it does technically feel more accurate, but i wonder whether or not we might eventually start using a different word entirely to describe these things.

[timemachineyeah]

Huh…that’s a good rlly point! Each group really has something for everyone,and Hasunosora really is for the people who straight up wanted a more blatant Love Live yuri cndjdj I’ve seen those cards / scenes spread around some and it’s a little surprising how they seem to be GOING for it more than usual (also like I said it still wouldn’t be surprising if they just have two of the girls kiss or say that they’re dating at this point bc CMON)

Oh yeah, they’re making marketing decisions every time, but I think the results have largely worked (with maybe Liella being the closest to an exception- I get the feeling they’d really love for it to break into a younger more Disney channel type audience and it’s doing fine with core fans but not breaking into new audiences as much as they hoped. This is PURE speculation on my part. Just a vibe I get.)

I would be surprised if characters actually kissed or admitted to dating, but pleasantly so.

I feel like Hasunosora is tapping into that very uniquely Japanese history of yuri rep that is like…

It’s like how no one ever says it directly in a Victorian romance? Like there’s all kinds of mannered society stuff at play so everything needs to be allusion only. I mentioned from the very first whiff of Hasunosora that it gave me Maria-sama ga Miteru vibes just based on the pairing of upperclassmen with younger students and taking place in a girls boarding school

But now they’ve confirmed that Hasunosora also has a long-standing mentor/mentee tradition (though far less codified than in MariMite, it seems) and I’m absolutely certain that this is one of their big influences. In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if that was basically the prompt they gave the writer (who is a writer of yuri light novels), “Do a Love Live story that’s been passed through a filter of MariMite.”

(I mean the series was hugely influential to yuri for years, a huge evolution point for the genre, so it makes sense).

But while it feels wrong to say the relationships in MariMite were only ever implied, because the romance between girls is the whole story, it is also true that the tradition and codification and “purity” and other themes served to keep them from ever using the words. This feels less like queerbaiting in the modern sense and more like… a genre choice? With its own rules and appeal? Especially given the era.

Like they weren’t hinting characters are gay without canonizing it. They were saying, “these characters are gay even if they never say so and you’re not imagining it (here let us put more lilies everywhere, the Japanese manga equivalent of flying a lesbian flag in the background every time the characters talk).”

On the surface for the era it just provides plausible deniability to the audience who want to be able to be seen in public reading it - no one looking over your shoulder is ever going to be scandalized no matter how homophobic they are. Queer coding that is so explicit that it’s not so much code as plain representation, but still just subtle enough that you wouldn’t be sure at a glance.

But like I said, I also feel like it plays into really classic old school romance. Romance that is 100% about romantic tension and not so much sexual tension. Lots of het romances also aren’t explicitly stated, but we still accept that they are romances, because what else would it be for these two people to be like this around each other? It’s not like het characters have to stand up and say “I am heterosexual! And this is my boyfriend! Let us kiss on screen!” before we accept the veracity of their relationships.

And yuri has a strong history of taking that kind of storyline and the strictures of gender or aristocratic social mores and replacing them with similar quiet rules that keep our characters talking around the subject and engaging in unlabeled intimacy. Religiosity, tradition, etc.

That being said if you wanna have a discussion about about the difference between making that choice in an original manga in the late 1990s versus making that choice as a massive money printing franchise in the 2020s - I think pointing out the difference in circumstances is warranted. Is it homage or is it a cop out? Is it queerbaiting or leaving things open ended?

After all, what Love Live! sells, above all else, what it has always sold, is the characters. They are supposed to belong to you. They’re dolls for your brain to play with. You have always been meant to get attached, to have the option but not the obligation to insert yourself. Relationships are left open ended because that’s up to you. They only want to give you a prompt, not a script. Love Live on its premise sets up a series of cozy compelling ideas and leaves them a little unfinished. The fun is very much designed to be in filling in those blanks yourself.

And you are supposed to love them. After all, it’s only a parasocial relationship if the person on the other end is real. Otherwise that’s an imaginary friend or a brain toy. Love Live! have made a very well oiled Singing Blorbo factory.

This isn’t a criticism by the way, it’s impressive as hell. Like yes capitalism bad etc etc but boy do they have a system and know what they’re doing.

But because of that I don’t expect the Hasunosora girls are gonna officially date. A kiss of some kind is slightly more likely imo, but I wouldn’t hold my breath for that either. I do fully expect art that looks like they’re just about to.

I do hope they get an anime in either case though because I love the character designs and art style

And the Hasunosora music is my favorite to come from the franchise in a while

[sapphos-darlings]

i feel like ssa-focused and especially gnc and dysphoric bisexuals need to start banding together more and making our own little community. it feels like there's so little of us around and it's so isolating being in bisexual and lgbt spaces in general. i feel like we have a very specific experience that most other lgbt people don't have and it gets so lonely when you're the only one who's "like this". we lack bi-specific spaces in general, but for people like us we're even more invisible.

Sade here, and yes, a thousand times yes. It'd be amazing to have a bisexual community for those of us who are living the rainbow side in life, not because those who are in heterosexual relationships are less important, but because our experience is different to theirs. My life, as a person in a same-sex relationship (with another bi person!) is fundamentally so different from the lives of the other bi people around me who are straight-partnered, in straight-passing relationships. We all share the connection to the LGBT community with one another, but that's a cultural connection, it's not an everyday fact of life. It's great connecting with other bisexuals over theoretical attraction, and discussion of life as a bisexual in general, but only same-sex partnered bisexuals have the experience of being a bisexual in a same-sex relationship. And it makes a world of difference when it comes to the actual reality of your life.

Bisexuality can be so theoretical when you're not partnered or you're opposite-sex partnered. It's a thing that people need the freedom to express, but when you're exclusive, when you're a woman with a man, you're palatable to the mainstream society. When you're a woman partnered with a woman, the whole everyday reality changes, but your bisexuality doesn't. The way you experience attraction doesn't. And while homosexuality is a taboo in straight spaces, heterosexuality is near equally unwelcome in gay spaces. You're viewed as invasive. So those of us inbetween just have no place else to go but our own, if we're not willing to compromise on how we express ourselves, how we speak of attraction, experiences. And unlike people in straight relationships, those of us in same-sex ones have a very strong need for community and peer support, because we are obviously oppressed as people in homosexual relationships, but also pushed to hide and ignore our unique experience as bisexuals, to fit in with our "side" in this black and white setting.

I'm very glad to have a lot of other bi people around me, so I feel strongly supported, welcomed and embraced as a bisexual person no matter how I express my orientation. But when it comes to larger society, I really don't feel like I have a "home", so to speak, with nearly everyone having a different experience of their orientation than I do, even within the bisexual community.

Edit to add about the gnc/dysphoric part - I don’t even have a name for myself. If I was lesbian, it’d be very, very obvious what to call the type of a woman I am, but as a bisexual person, I don’t have that. I’m just a weird, mannish woman with no label to take pride and seek community in.

[wearequeer-andwearehere]

I think I’m a lesbian and it’s been hard for me to because I used to think that I was going to marry a man when I was a little kid and I’m scared to come out to family and friends

Alright it’s like 10:08 pm and I have like, two tests tomorrow and am half asleep and probably should answer this when I am more awake and calmer but this ask really. Touched me bc I know how this feels.

I’m not a lesbian. I’m a bi trans dude, I spent a good part of my tween/teen years IDing as a sapphic bisexual girl/nonbinary person.

Anon, I don’t know you, but I’m gonna talk to you like a friend for a bit.

Discovering you’re gay is. A whole lot of things. It’s a whole lot of emotions. 

First, it’s fucking scary to find this out. Like, sometimes, you’re like, who am I? Who is this new part of myself? And suddenly you realise that you haven’t only been repressing you’re gay, you’ve been repressing, like, everything about yourself, everything about who you are.

And you’re scared you’re a new person but. You gotta take it slow. You gotta take it as it comes. Importantly, you gotta be safe, hide shit around people who will hurt you. But be yourself quietly. Sometimes the flood will break and like not to mix metaphors but you gotta let yourself bloom, okay, kiddo? You gotta let yourself bloom like a flower in spring and let everything unfold quietly in your heart. 

And like, you’ve got this perception of yoursrlf, right? Like when you were a kid, you knew you had to marry a man, and you built up this future, this one single path, and you fixed all your focus on it and now the paths crumbling before your eyes and like. It shakes you. It makes you feel like your world’s falling apart.

But that’s. That’s not true. There was a path that was determined for you by straight people, to marry a guy.

But here’s the thing. The secret to life. You, yes, you, can do whatever the fuck you want. And it’s figuring this out that changes your perspective and makes you infinitely happier.

Kiddo you can be yourself. You do not have to marry a man. There are a million other paths for you, yknow that? Just look away from the one determined for you for a moment and *see the fuckin world,* see these infinite possibilities, these infinite lives to live!!! Isn’t that fucking beautiful? Your whole life lays before you!!!!!

You don’t have to marry a man. You can marry a woman, or a nonbinary person! You don’t have to get married, you don’t have to be in a relationship if you don’t want to! 

I know the emphasis society places on female heterosexuality being the norm but like. I need you to understand, and this is crucial, that this is bullshit.

You do not need to date, have sex with, be attracted to, love, or marry men. Ever. At all. You don’t have to to even talk to them that much. 

Sometimes you just gotta look at society’s bullshit and say “no, fuck you actually,” and that’s how you gotta keep going.

And ohh God I know that fear kiddo. It’s really painful, isn’t it? It’s like there’s a bullet hole in your heart and it won’t ever stop bleeding

And I gotta tell you that no matter what happens with ya family and friends there will always, always, always be so so many people who will lvoe and support you. You’ve got a whole fuckin community here for you kid, you’ve got a history of people like you, you’ve got the lesbian community and the lgbtq+ community all over the world and we’re fighting for our, for your rights, for our and your safety and happiness and we fuckin love you, kid. 

First off, there is no need to come out if you don’t wanna. Take your time. No pressure. 

Second, be safe, alright? Find out their attitude towards gay people first, test the waters by mentioning gay celebrities. And also, if you’re a minor and financially dependent on your parents, if they’re homophobic DO NOT COME OUT. It can be mentally shit but your physical safety is important.

And last of all, I love you kiddo. Being a lesbian is, honestly, cool as fuck. You have any idea what an amazing community lies in wait for you? I’m not a lesbian, but I have a lot of lesbian friends, they are some of the most resilient comforting strong wonderful amazing people I have ever met. Lesbianism is so beautiful and sapphic relationships,,,the amount of love yall have for each other is so special and beautiful.

Anyways, you are strong and you are loved. I hope I could help kid. Love you.

[str8m82b8]

Triggered! I've Actually Been in This Situation Before.

A Pansexual On Dating and Relationships :

Happy Holiday's, but don't do this!

Gay men, yes I understand that I am calm, confident, assertive, and attractive and that your insecurities can be debilitating. Yes I know you need reassurance and attention. Yes I know a lot of gay men writhe in anxiety like 13 year old girls. Yes, I am aware that I don't seem very compassionate, but I am done with all that on this issue. No more telling me I can't game, no more demanding we go out to gay clubs I hate, no more one-sided sex with bottoms who just lie there. Most gay men just want to date their twin. A sublime exercise in narcissism, which also more than suggests that the "G" in LGBTQ+ is not really a group of men who are as inclusive as they claim to be. Especially considering gay and trans POC made their lives possible. Jeffery Dahmer's victims were failed not only by the police, but also by the gay community. Too many white gay men use the word "preference" when in actuality, it is a prejudice. Gay men tend to have the egos of straight men and the emotional instability or insecurities of a lot of straight women. The result is often an insufferable, over-achieving, emotionally juvenile man with both mommy and daddy issues who wants to find an exact replica of himself down to the clothing to then marry and cheat on until death do they part.

And no, I'm not self-loathing nor homophobic. I just don't like attention seeking, overly dramatic, effeminate for attention, gay men OR women for the purpose of romantic relationships. Friendship is fine, but if you get annoying, know that imma head out. Be yourself, but if yourself is annoying, I will be somewhere else with other people. We have our limits, and we choose who to stretch those for.

Don't get me wrong straight people, you all aren't without a multitude of dubious, toxic and ridiculous behaviors in today's society. As a pansexual who has dated everything but an actual pan, I can say these things, but there's plenty of data to go over should you need references I will provide in the comments. For starters, straight men tend to be emotionally and platonically attracted to other men. Straight women tend to be emotionally and platonically attracted to other women. If it were not for sex, most straight people of opposite gender would want nothing to do with one another! You have nothing in common! And when you do, it's something trivial, toxic, or tasteless that is the the straight male's interest, such as watching sports. This is one of many reasons why heterosexual relationships not only fail more often than they work, but also fail more often than those in the LGBTQ+ community. I remain friends with, or at least friendly with all my exes. Straight people turn their lovers into enemies for life. Straight women have friend bases consisting almost entirely of other women and men's of other men. Although the men are more likely to have people they call female friends who are in reality either people they fuck, have fucked, or want to fuck. Lacking lasting, honest, strictly platonic friendships with the opposite gender is a life-altering, growth stunting mistake that has become the norm in society for straight people.

Sexuality is a spectrum. You choose the label that seems to be the closest to how you feel or behave, or at least the one everyone seems comfortable with. But, too many of you choose this prematurely and then follow it too rigidly despite feelings or behaviors to the contrary. When you are attractive, people tell you "no" less often. Including and perhaps especially when it comes to sexual experiences. I've made super macho masculine heterosexual men blush with a compliment. The type of men you would expect to want to fight another cis male for doing just that. I'm confident and not afraid to slug a dude in front of his boys if necessary. People can sense that. I've also had more sexual experiences with heterosexual men than gay men or women. And I don't mean closeted gay men either. I'm talking actual straight men who have no sexual attraction to me what-so-ever. But when you are attractive in general, very good at oral sex, and tell a straight guy you'd like to bob on his knob the number of men who will oblige might surprise you. After all, heterosexual men and women are generally awful at oral sex, if not sex in general. Straight women do all this shit: Makeup, lighting, candles, toys, lingerie, inviting a third (almost always another women) etc. for sex that lasts for a mere 10 minutes if she is lucky, and she often does not even orgasm! How sad that people go their entire lives never having had truly mind-blowing sex, unusual sex, or sexual experiences etc. They just be making babies missionary from the comfort of their orthopedic mattresses. No thank you.

You can be mindful, chill, and still be yourself. If you think you must always be the center of attention, you'll find that unless actually worthy of it, your audience will shrink. Don't marry the first asshole that makes you wet. Instead, actually become friends with people so that you can learn what you do and do not want in a partner. If ever there should come a time in which you feel the need to knock something gaming related from my hands, know that it will never happen again. You can go hit the club tomorrow and find your twin and the two of you can spread monkey pox and Covid-19 all pandemic long and beyond.

As for me, I am happily awaiting my first child with my amazing boyfriend, who is transgender. Two of my exes sent baby shower gifts. There are no hang ups as to whose job it is to do what concerning our home or child. No toxic gender norms to force our children to adhere to, just genuine love and acceptance from both people who had a hand in their creation. We aren't married, but we very well are considering it for the legal more than anything. It doesn't stand as a religious symbol of our love as it does for others. We make our own rules and will raise our children our way. If we want to invite someone into our bed or hearts, we aren't as hung up on monogamy and jealousy as you "heteros" either. As far as raising children, we will of course ask for advice, but overbearing relatives or friends will know the decisions are ours to make. Want to know what is more important than what you have in common with your partner? What you don't! Don't look for a twin, look for someone who picks up where you fall short and vice versa. Look for someone who challenges you, someone you grow with. My partner and I actually love each other, enjoy each other, share our feelings, have joys, pains, and much more in common, plus we have the right things not in common and we communicate. Catch up.

Sources/References (just a few to be polite)

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/men-and-women-cant-be-just-friends/

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/out-the-ooze/202204/why-male-and-female-friendships-are-so-different

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7135e2.htm

https://time.com/4978727/bromance-male-friendships/

[redheadbigshoes]

Back when I used to identify as bisexual and was still clearly uneducated about LGBT+ studies, I used to have this misconception people were feeding me saying "how can you be a lesbian when you dated or crush on boys, you're clearly bisexual and always will be" even though, me being bisexual never sat right with me and I never figured out why it didn't when I don't give a fuck about men and liked the attention given, but I don't want any actual commitment from one...when I found out about compulsory heterosexuality, that changed my life forever and how the gold star lesbian is a hurtful and harmful stereotype. I thought I was gonna have to remain bisexual forever, but I'm glad to have learned about comphet before it was all too late and I'm speaking this from MY personal experience, not invalidating anyone else'a. Not everyone women have the privilege to date women. Not all of us grew up in a very loving, open minded home because some of us were raised to think about queer people badly for no reasons or come up with invalid random excuses why when they just...exist to live!

I feel like a lot of people who’re invalidating gays and lesbians by calling them bi or anything like that because they had experiences with someone of the opposite gender before figuring out their identity are struggling with internalized homophobia (like you seemed to have struggled with) and know deep down that they might be homo-oriented but just don’t want to accept that.

People need to be more open to listen to others experiences and to be willing to understand them. Some of us are so brainwashed by this homophobic and misogynistic society we mistake feelings like anxiety and nervousness with liking someone of the opposite gender, or we think not feeling anything at all is attraction, or maybe we even think feeling negative can also count as attraction. Some of us don’t have the liberty to explore our sexuality, or maybe some of us were forced to be in a relationship with someone of the opposite gender.

We never know what’s going on with other people. Simplifying someone’s sexuality by who they date or don’t date is just so ridiculous and don’t take into account the society we live in. Not only that but by having the mindset that sexuality is about who you date, you’re invalidating a lot of other people.

A bisexual who’s never dated anyone is still bi, or if they’ve only dated someone of the opposite gender or of the same gender, they’re still bi. A lesbian who’s dated men in the past is still a lesbian. A gay person who’s dated women in the past is still gay. A strictly aroace person who’s dated in the past is still aroace.

[sins-of-the-sea]

☏: What is the most challenging aspect of playing these muses?

Nosy Munday Meme

//Maintaining the historical aspect of them. Even when I write them as Modern AU, I try to keep the actual time period ambiguous as to when something is happening.

It's not just the fact I am living in what is their future in the canon story, it's also having to keep them completely relatable and timeless. There are many elements to the Seven that would seem alien and downright cringey and stupid because of the circumstances of their period--such as not knowing what a moose is, Giovanni's mental illness being attributed to the moon, Abena never showing any leg, etc. But it also shows how society isn't all too different and we still have a long way to go. Guy still struggles as a gay man in the Modern AU, Abena will still struggle as a black woman, and so on and so forth. It just looks different in 1721.

It's the tiny nuances and details pertaining to history that is exceptionally challenging when it comes to the Seven's struggles. For instance:

I have to remember that people of the 1500s-1700s don't know what "depression" is, let alone schizophrenia and PTSD--the mental illnesses we recognize today are understood differently then.

I have to remember that the attitudes of bisexuality, pansexuality, and asexuality are not recognized back then as we do today, so Rashid (pansexual) can be seen as heterosexual or homosexual depending on who he's with at the time.

Not to mention that sodomy laws included certain acts men would do to women, so Josep doing the dirty with Abena that isn't babymaking can be considered "gay" or just outright inappropriate, period. Even though they're a married male (presenting)-female couple. And let's not get into race....

I have to remember Giovanni would not identify as "Italian" or Josep as "Spanish". They would have to identify as Venetian and Catalan respectively (and Josep would have faced discrimination as a Catalan in the greater whole of Spain).

I have to remember that Abena would have to speak Spanish first and not French due to the timeline she was taken to what is Haiti today.

I have to remember most Chinese martial arts we recognize today would be anachronistic by Ruixiong's time, so certain attitudes of discipline, even if backed by ancient Taoist beliefs, may not be applicable for Rui during the late Ming Dynasty.

And so on and so forth.

Not to mention I am a modern day American, so whenever I do any cultural research, I also have to check the timeline of when something is published or researched. And then I have to make sure my region is correct. Saudi Arabia today is not what it was during the Ottoman Empire, and Rashid is specifically Hejazi, so he'd be culturally different from the rest of the Arabian peninsula. It took me hours to make sure the term "grandfather" (sidoo) is regionally correct.

One character is hard enough, I have seven to double-check and cross reference my sources every time they so much as breathe lmao. And THEN I have to write/translate them in a way that they won't seem alien to modern readers, which is why I don't bother to write period-appropriate language besides avoiding modern day slang and conventions.

But I am not dropping this need to constantly research. It's fun. It's enlightening. Knowing where people come from helps me becomes a kinder, more considerate person when it comes to the struggles of people today. I just learned what 'blaverism' is a couple days ago and now I am completely sympathetic to the struggles of Catalonia despite not coming from Spain. I have a greater appreciation and recognition of women in the Middle East as they fight for their rights knowing how women had their rights taken away throughout history. I can remove the tunnel vision I have on marginalization towards Filipinos when I can see what Spain did to the rest of the world. And so on and so forth. So I'm not stopping. I'm going to keep on doing it. I love what I do. It's just hard lmao.