#this includes straight cis women and men in general | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

tactfullyinappropriate · 27 days

Text

Ohhh boy, I'm gonna get a lot of flak for this one but... masc lesbian =/= butch. You can be the most masculine presenting person the world has ever known and that does not automatically make you butch.

Butch is an identity and you kinda need to fit that identity, not make the identity fit you. E.g. "lesbians" who are attracted to cishet men. Sorry, hun, you're just not a lesbian. Find your own identity that fits. You are allowed to be your own kind of bisexual or pansexual but what you are not, is a lesbian.

Sure, there is a lot of room for being your own person within an identity. I am not the same kind of lesbian as the next dyke. But if I did not fit (or if I no longer fit) the definition of the lesbian identity, I wouldn't call myself one and insist that lesbians expand the definition to include me.

'Butch' as an identity exists within a certain context. It *is not* a synonym to man, and it's also not a synonym to 'a masculine presenting lesbian'. If you don't vibe with the whole 'chivalry' concept and the specific ways in with butch/femme courtship (as an example) happens, maybe consider if this is the right label for you before insisting that we expand or rather completely rewrite the definition to exclude those things from it.

Some of the discourse around 'we should redefine butch!' reminds me of the discourse around redefining manhood. "It's not fair that men are expected to have masculine hobbies," they say. "It's not fair that men cannot wear glitter and makeup and retain their manhood. It's not fair that men are expected to open doors, and carry heavy things, and to-to---" Yes. You are exactly right. But butches are not men.

'Butch' is an opt-in identity, not something that society at large expects and requires from you. In other words: if you think femmes gushing about being courted by their butches in what to you appears to be a 1960s play-pretend of patriarchy, is silly, objectifying or demeaning toward one of the parties... consider that maybe 'butch' is not the identity for you. That maybe you are a masculine person with their own unique take on masculinity.

But insisting that we redefine butch is like me insisting that we redefine 'yoga' because I vibe with the gymnastics but I don't like the spiritual aspect of it. I can just go to Pilates instead. Or do yoga and accept that other people in the practice experience it differently.

What I am endlessly tired of, as a femme, is being lectured on what I *should* and *should not* find attractive. I am not somehow betraying feminism, objectifying people and degrading myself by daydreaming of a butch who opens the car door for me or - the absolute horror - brings me flowers on a date. I recognize that other people have the right to their own attraction and that masculine lesbians deserve the freedom to explore masculinity on their own terms and be treated with dignity and respect regardless of where that exploration takes them and regardless of who does or does not find them attractive.

That being said, the whole narrative of 'if you find chivalry hot, then you are objectifying butches and you are, in fact, an entitled selfish person' is tiresome. Not all femmes are women but in being chastised for our turn-ons and romantic daydreams (unless we're the Cool Girl who doesn't like flowers and rolls her eyes at romance) I see a lot of the admonishment directed toward cis straight women who dare to swoon when they read romance where the male lead is courteous and generous.

Except, again, butch/femme *is not* man/woman. It's a particular subculture within the lesbian identity and no one is pressuring anyone into conforming to it.

#butch #dyke #butch lesbian #dykeposting #stone butch #lesbiansafe #butch4femme #femme4butch #femme lesbian #femme #sapphic #lesbian #wlw

686 notes · View notes

pillarsalt · 11 months

Note

You made a post that says theres no wrong way to be a woman (I agree!) but you tagged it gender critical which says to me you are not including trans women and other gender expansive forms of womanhood, which is at odds with the first statement. I want you to understand that trans women (and you know exactly who I mean by this, do not twist it to mean trans men) experience the same violence that cis women do. Harassment, domestic violence, murder, medical neglect, reproductive harm. Trans womens struggle and cis womens struggle are inexorably linked. If you want to be transphobic and ignore this, so be it. But don’t call yourself a feminist or claim that theres no wrong way to be a woman. It’s slimy and dishonest.

Hmmmm actually I think what's slimy and dishonest is a bunch of straight white dudes using stats from violence that impoverished transwomen of colour (majority of them gay) who are prostituted and trafficked experience to paint themselves as the most victimest victims. In reality, it is generally safer to be a transwoman than any other demographic.

"Trans womens struggle and cis womens struggle are inexorably linked" how? why? because they say so? Transwomen know as much about womanhood as any other man. I stand by my statement that there is no wrong way to be a woman -- they're not being women at all. All it takes to be a woman is to be an adult female human being. There are no "gender expansive forms of womanhood", there's just womanhood, it simply doesn't include men no matter how much they want in.

#ask #radfem safe #radical feminism #radfems please touch #gender critical

601 notes · View notes

caniscathexis · 4 days

Text

In the recently published Cass Review (2024), there is consistent mention of the prevalence of autism in the ‘trans and gender-diverse’ population, which is ‘three to six times higher’ than in the cis population ‘according to some studies’, such as Warrier et al., 2020 (Cass 5.41). The report cites concern in de Vries et al. (2011b) about whether autistic trans adolescents are experiencing “a general feeling of being just “different”” or a ““core” cross-gender identity”. A parent is quoted saying that their child, formerly bullied due to ‘ASD’, became a ‘celebrity’ and received ‘social kudos’ upon coming out (Cass p. 160); autistic children, including underdiagnosed “teenage girls”, are noted to have trouble “fitt[ing] in” (Cass 5.43) and “express[ing] how they are feeling about […] their gender identity” (Cass 5.44). There is also a note that a higher % of adolescents who discontinued puberty suppression were autistic (Cass 14.23). (I cannot examine the relevant commissioned study yet, but would note that the raw number here is likely to be very low.)

The obvious subtext here is that autistic trans children are less trustworthy about their articulation of transness than neurotypical trans children, and should therefore face more gatekeeping and vetting. In the report, it is noted that children, who know about this preconception, are routinely refusing to disclose neurodiversity to clinicians for fear of discreditation (Cass 11.11); the report’s response to this is to advocate for mandatory clinical screening for “neurodevelopmental conditions, including autism spectrum disorder” at point of entry for adolescent patients (Recommendation 2). I’m not going to get into the full scope of problems with this; there is no evidence that autistic people are impaired in identifying their own gender, or that the higher incidence of transness/gender diversity in the autistic population is symptomatic of misidentification. But I am going to talk about one study cited in Cass:

“In contrast [to the patients in the original Dutch study of puberty blockers], in a detailed study of young people with ASD and gender dysphoria (de Vries et al., 2010), it was noted that “‘while almost all adolescents with GID [gender identity dysphoria] are sexually attracted to individuals of their birth sex, the majority of the gender dysphoric adolescents with ASD were sexually attracted to partners of the other sex” (Cass 8.29). [highlights my own]

Anyone who is familiar with Blanchardian typology will recognise what is going on here: baseline expected attraction to individuals of one’s ‘birth sex’ (i.e. trans straight attraction) is contrasted with a suspect population who experience attraction to ‘other sex’ individuals (i.e. trans gay attraction). ‘Other sex’ attraction is used to devalue claims to transness in all trans populations, especially trans women, as it marks them both as desirably recuperable to cisheterosexuality and as unable to perform either legible homosexual gender variance or sufficiently authentic — i.e. straight — future transness, rendering them an ideal plausibly deniable target of gendered abuse. Transphobic fantasy fixates on the trans woman who pursues/‘predates on’ women, and trans men who pursue men are also a disproportionate target of anti-effeminate mockery. (This model also obviously erases bisexuality, which Cass itself notes is a high incidence sexuality among all trans groups (Cass 8.3), and uses bioessentialist sex terminology — it appears that if I exclusively dated a trans woman I would be classified here as ‘attracted to males’).

It shouldn’t matter regardless; autism and sexual orientation both shouldn’t impede someone’s right to medical autonomy. However, given this claim is clearly being used to delegitimise autistic trans people — including in the original study, where they claim that ‘adult transsexuals not sexually attracted to their natal sex show in some studies less satisfactory postoperative functioning compared with birth-sex attracted transsexuals’ — it is notable that the claim is false. It is obviously false the second you look at their data. They have a sample of nine adolescents (which would prove nothing even if the majority were ‘non-birth-sex attracted’) and the claim is still wrong about their own data.

De Vries et al (2010) is a nightmare of a study. It’s an analysis of 16 children with ASD who attended a Dutch gender clinic between 2004 and 2007 — specifically 7 children (ages 7–10) and 9 adolescents (ages 12–18). All the patients are misgendered throughout. There are also deeply disturbing comments about the sexual arousal and genital discomfort of children as young as 7, suggesting that the children seen at the clinic were asked deeply inappropriate and traumatising questions from admission. Various aspects of the under-11s’ profiles are immediately provoking, such as what the ‘behavioral program’ that reduced an 8-year-old’s ‘dressing up’ consisted of, or why certain children were referred to the clinic at all (some seem to have presented primarily with cross-gender behaviour rather than cross-gender identification). In any case, the sexual orientation of the under-11s clearly isn’t known, and the Cass Review’s claim is specific to adolescents anyway.

Of the adolescents, all of whom have a stated sexual orientation, we have:

AFAB 12-year-old, attracted to boys

AFAB 16-year-old, attracted to girls

AFAB 18-year-old, attracted to girls

AMAB 13-year-old, attracted to ‘neither boys nor girls’

AMAB 14-year-old, attracted to boys

AMAB 15-year-old, attracted to both girls and boys

AMAB 16-year-old, attracted to boys (specifically ‘homosexual’ boys)

AMAB 16-year-old, attracted to girls

AMAB 17-year-old, attracted to girls

By my count, to use their terminology that’s 3 adolescents with solely ‘other sex’ attraction (and I would note that one of those is 12 years old), 4 with ‘birth sex’, 1 bisexual and 1 with no stated attraction. THAT IS NOT A MAJORITY. EVEN IF YOU INCLUDE THE BISEXUAL IT’S NOT A MAJORITY.

There’s a more salient aspect of this whole thing, though: the outcomes of the adolescents. The only adolescents approved for ‘SR’ — sexual reassignment, i.e. surgery — at this gender clinic were the ones who are ‘birth sex attracted’. The AFAB kid attracted to boys was ‘not eligible for SR’ and ‘happy being a ‘tomboy’ after counselling’; the bisexual AMAB kid was rendered ineligible and ‘referred for cognitive behavioral therapy around disturbing sexual arousal’; of the two AMAB kids attracted solely to girls, one was rendered ineligible but still had a ‘strong wish for SR’ at followup, while the other dropped out of the clinic, was ‘unwilling to assent to a treatment plan’, and got surgery abroad (good for her). ‘Non-birth-sex attracted’ trans adolescents here are obviously systematically gatekept from surgical interventions, and there are murky suggestions of conversion therapy, while most of the ‘birth-sex-attracted’ trans adolescents were awaiting surgery or hormones at followup.

But wait, there’s more. The study itself argues for lower ‘postoperative functioning’ of ‘non-birth-attracted transsexuals’, citing Smith et al. (2005) on ‘Transsexual subtypes: Clinical and theoretical significance’. (This study is straight up Blanchardian; it literally says that trans women attracted to men have a ‘more convincing cross-gender appearance.’) What does ‘postoperative functioning’ mean? It means that gay and bisexual trans people have ‘significantly more psychological problems’ than straight trans people — which would seem evidently explainable by a) less understood etiology of transness in non-homosexual-presenting trans youth, which means later treatment & more gatekept treatment, and b) worse cultural treatment of gay trans people.

So, the Cass Review took a study full of glaring markers of sexual misconduct & conversion therapy being enacted on trans children, quoted a statement about the data that is obviously incorrect if you look at the data for five seconds, used it to make a point intended to discredit autistic youth / paint them as delusional heterosexuals, and ignored blatant evidence of a long and documented history of gay and bi trans people being blocked from necessary healthcare interventions.

#cass review

65 notes · View notes

tocomplainfriend · 1 month

Text

It feels less like you want to address a real life problem to characters, but more like you want to have another of your characters you constantly baby and want others to fangirl over.

TW: Rape, SA, Racism, Stereotyping, Homophobia, Acephobia, Arophobia.

The representations of topics in media DOES affect real people.

Fiction can affect reality.

Let's start easy, Jaws. This goes back to Hazbin I promise.

"Since the release of Jaws in 1975, the world has witnessed a staggering decline of 71% in shark and ray populations, and around 100 million sharks are killed each year." (including multiple practices of mass hunting sharks in competition)

Both Steven Spielberg and the original writer Peter Benchley regret the movie and book. It's a big reason of the shark treatment, when it started by old fishermen worrying about shark biting people in the beaches they made money of.

Even if you aren't a shark killer yourself, a lot of things you believe of sharks are untrue myths that come from making sharks "evil" human killer animals. Sharks cannot smell blood from miles away, that's not even how water works, the particles of blood need to enter their nostrils. Sharks are not man eaters, they attack other prey animals before human. Shark attacks are extremely rare, even if they happen they are not justifiable to kill all sharks.

Sharks actually have personalities they can fit in, they are smart and recognize people and boats- and form positive relationships with people. They can even like getting pet by people.

youtube

Other level to represent other thing sin media that affects reality we can address Queer, representation as a topic.

I hope it is not a surprise for you... possible non-straight, non-cis person reading this. That the constant representation of gay man as kid predator is a problem. They used old commercial (PSA) to spread negative views of gay man. Media is used to spread messages and affect its viewer. This is, there are cartoons created by Jehovah witness (or similar religions) to spread their beliefs and teach to their children in an easy, digestible way.

Same with the amount of straight woman that went off to read shitty yaoi manga and fetishy gay wattpad stories, and went to sexualize and diminish queer men. Constantly making gay man's personality into bottom or top (uke and seme shit). I witness this irl, others have too.

Same with shitty men that view Lesbians as a porn machine for men, cause "monkey brain like woman, lesbian = two women". Which happens in general and adult media. All of these are EASY examples.

Another one which turns out many people don't think about. Having your representation of an AroAce character (on purpose or not) be the psychopath with no feelings. Associating the not being romantically or sexually to means you have no heart, to be abnormal, by then a psychopath. An abuse or serial killer.

Fiction does affect reality-

A racist film, 'Birth of the nation' Revived the KKK and let to all the discrimination, and the homicide of black people of centuries ahead.

youtube

Coming back around, how you treat the topic of SA, and r-pe- affects the real world. You would think someone who wrote that, had in mind on how that affects people in real life. Didn't you want to represent victims of SA/R-pe that are sex workers and male?

Reducing the r-pist, pimp, trafficker character to an air head to treat as silly is crazy to do. Specially as... oh idk... the creator? Both this and the tweet of the voice actor calling Val "Bubbles Coded" is so crazy. The character is also not deep enough by itself, it's pretty much Stupid and a R-pist sex trafficker. The tweet below Viv's fucking kills me too.

The fact Val is shown to be air head stupid doesn't delete he backed Angel (and by being a sex trafficker and a pimp, and him licking charlie that means he has multiple victims) into a corner and under his control. Too then abuse of him in many different ways. Manipulations are not only done by Super mastermind people, and representing it in such way diminished, affects people who have being manipulated and actually try to question if they have being or not. Manipulators can be normal, average people, they usually are not obvious. Even if Val is openly a shitty person that's really obvious, it doesn't detract from him being manipulative to people. The scene where Val threatens him in chains that is manipulation, his text messages are manipulation (even if you think it is too obvious to be successful).

How you represent SA/R-PE, and its perpetrators, do affect real life.

Going around and having your "serious R-pe episode", to then go in other episodes or the other series you are writing to make r-pe/sa jokes is terrible. For the person that directed the whole scene of poison to NOT be r-pe/sa victim (said by themselves) with a r-pe fetish with this character's in specific, to directed in the most graphic way possible is awful. To go around babying your r-pist character is crazy.

youtube

Hope you understand that this doesn't mean not treating any topic at all. Creators should be awere on how they treat topics and the scenarios they create with them, too. People and viewers need to also put their brain to understand the media they consume. But you can't always put all blame only on the viewers of a series, if media is messy is a fault of the media. You can criticize both.

You need to acknowledge Valentino is indeed a terrible person, You don't need to delete his actions or the weight of them.

I also just know that a lot of Val fans just like him to draw him in r-pe art and get their fetishized gay ship. Cause that's what they are into. You won't even do that with a woman, because you are into your fucked up fetishized gay porn from wattpad you never left behind.

If you like him, FUCK IT, just please take his abuse seriously. Don't default your entire usage, and view of the character to be 'uwufied' fandom stuff, please.

I hate how the topic has being treated, in and out of the show. I'm a victim, and I'm hurt by how these things are treated and knowing how it affects others. Even in things I haven't watched! Don't make the argument don't like it? Just don't watch it. The movies from the video of SA of men being a joke, many I haven't watch- that still affects over all. It's still a problem and it's disheartening.

Also have this:

#hazbin critical #hazbin hotel criticism #hazbin hotel critical #hazbin hotel critique #vivziepop critical #vivziepop criticism #vivziepop critique #tw sa #tw rape #tw homophobia #tw racsim #tw acephobia #tw arophobia

117 notes · View notes

percheduphere · 4 months

Text

I check in on Reddit once in a while to gauge where the "general audience" is at with certain things, including shipping. Unsurprisingly, the majority of subredditors don't see Lokius as having any validity.

I mulled over why this is, and I've come to the conclusion that, as a society, we are very bad at understanding that the human experience is a fluid continuum. We get so bogged down with labels and separating things by those labels that we don't consider the fact that those labels are in and of themselves social constructs.

This may be why so many people have trouble wrapping their minds around being trans, gender fluidity, romantic friendships, gray asexuality--essentially anything that can be in flux. Ironic, since our lives are always in flux.

To tie this back to Lokius and shipping in general, heteronormative media relies on oblique cues for romance: falling onto a mattress, facing one another across a low-lit table and speaking in hushed voices, sharing a blanket, a kiss.

But the queer experience has been oppressed for so long that a heteronormative audience doesn't know how to look for queer romantic cues that are not overt (physically or verbally), and they don't know how to look for those cues precisely because they've never had to be hidden. They never lived that experience.

And this bias inevitably leads to the logical fallacy that heterosexual friends can absolutely fall in love, but two men who started out as friends shouldn't (read: "can't") fall in love because "friends and lovers are two different things".

Really? So by that definition, my lover can't also my friend? What?

"Why can't they just be friends?" That question signals the fear of men being mistaken as gay when showing another man affection. This fear doesn't really happen between women. At least, not often. I have yet to meet a woman who was offended for being mistaken as their best friend's lover.

This means that our media needs a queer male character who has BOTH a male romantic partner AND cis-straight male friends to show both can (and does) happen concurrently.

Gah, the rigidness of social constructs is worse than duct tape.

#loki #mobius #lokius #lgbtqai #lgbt representation #lgbtqia representation #thoughts

138 notes · View notes

queenofthecats · 5 months

Text

Just wanted to say, I think I’m on the wrong side of tumblr. Why do some of y’all act like lesbians are drooling but forcing themselves not to sleep with men and male aligned people?

Lesbians are not into men, we are into: cis-women, trans-women, non-binary people, gender-fluid people, and labels similar

We are not into: men (trans and cis)

(Some lesbians have crushes on fictional men, but not real men. I’m not talking about them)

Guys, y’all don’t have to use labels, it’s ok not to. It’s ok to not know, or to feel like a label doesn’t exactly describe you. You can go by queer, but please stop using the term lesbian. You can create new terms and everything, but this was originally made for non-men to describe their attraction to non-men.

Some people feel comfortable with labels, not everybody wants to be outside of the label. I respect you guys who don’t go by labels, so please just respect people who do.

It’s completely okay to not have a label, or to create a new one. You can go by queer, and that’s okay.

I like having a box for me to relate to other people, you don’t have to if you don’t want to. Just please respect lesbians space.

It feels lesphobic to identify as a man and still call yourself a lesbian, or to date men in the present and do it? Not everybody is attracted to men, this is the label that represents that. Please respect us. Maybe a different term would fit for you, or again, you don’t have to use a term. Can y’all please just stop trying to include men in lesbianism? This is the whole point of being a lesbian. You’re not a lesbian if you’re not a non-man liking non-men. You’re either a straight guy or bi/pan or just generally queer.

#anti lesboy #anti mspec #alt lesbian #fat lesbian #queer feminism #lgbt #labels?#i personally love it #some people don’t though #and thats okay #just please respect people who use them #I think a lot of y’all forget that not everybody is the same #some of us feel comfortable with it #it’s okay if you don’t #it’s okay if your attraction isn’t something you can describe #just please leave lesbians alone #I don’t like men #lesbian #not trying to argue

90 notes · View notes

dukeofankh · 4 months

Text

The idea that men having unrealistic beauty standards for women comes from them watching pornography has always struck me as like, laughably and obviously wrong. That's...where I honestly saw the most representation and celebration of "unconventional" beauty? And not in a "everyone is beautiful" positivity post way, with raw, unfiltered, honest hunger for things men are assumed to find repulsive. When I met women with saggy breasts irl I wasn't like "oh no! What's wrong with them? They're not supposed to be affected by gravity..." I was like, "Oh dope, these are some of my favourite kinds of tits".

Some people can get into bubbles, sure. But it's not a porn issue. You honestly don't have to look that far. There is a media industry built entirely off of dangerously dishonest representations of women's bodies... it's just the regular fucking film industry.

Let's say I wanna see a legit, actual fat woman being the centre of attention, and being portrayed as devastatingly attractive. Please, by all means, what Hollywood films should I watch? You might come up with a few examples, maybe. But I listen when my fat friends talk, I know how shit rep is for fat women. Can I go to the theatre and be more confident than a coin flip's chance that the movie I see will even acknowledge or portray the existence of fat women? Because I can find thousands of examples of that in porn in seconds. It's an entire fucking genre. The dudes that you presume have a monolithic and universal hatred of rolls of fat have a pretty sizeable wing that will honestly get fucking apoplectic in the comments if someone is described as fat who's merely chubby.

Can you honestly, with a straight fucking face, tell me that I can go to the theatre right now, pick a random movie, and be at all likely to see a movie with a woman with even one (1) hair on her body below her eyebrows? There is plenty of porn with totally hairless women, some of which is super fuckin gross about it, sure. But like, doesn't matter how "gritty and realistic" a movie is, I'm more likely to see a corpse than an armpit hair in a movie theatre. By comparison, there are legit mainstream porn performers who do regular, mainstream scenes with a bush, hairy armpits, all of it. It's not uncommon. It's not hard to find. And it's...the point? It's hot? It's not just fine, it's not there to demonstrate how artistic the movie is being, it's hot.

There is definitely tons of porn built around showing the most conventionally attractive women possible, but proportionally, compared to mainstream films, porn has way more varied body representation. You take two guys, lock them in a room, and show one nothing but Hollywood movies and the other nothing but porn, one of those guys would react with surprise/horror when presented with an average naked woman, and it's not the one who's been watching porn. Like, porn is about wanting to fuck people. Wanting to fuck all sorts of people. In order to do that, you kinda have to...show all sorts of people? If you want to make porn about, "Hey, what if you could have sex with that fat mom" or "what if your sisters chubby goth friend wanted to sit her totally untrimmed bush right on your face," a porn studio is just gonna...get someone who fits that body type. They're not gonna rewrite her as someone thin or put her in a fatsuit. And there's sizeable genres built entirely around body types that are basically banned from existing as anything more than a joke or a tragedy in mainstream film.

Where does that leave us? Do you have to love porn now? Include it in your next moodboard about positive representation? No. I understand why that level of sexualization and fetishization isn't actually comfortable for plenty of people. I'm not trying to convince you that it's good.

I'm trying to tell you that even if you have really negative feelings about gross dudes or the porn industry in general, our fucked up beauty standards for women have so much more to do with mainstream cinema than they ever have, or ever will have, to do with porn.

#me writing stuff

84 notes · View notes

musings-from-mars · 1 month

Text

For so long there has been this constant radfem fearmongering about “the male gaze” and “fetishizing” and whatnot about literally anything that’s meant to be sexy and titillating, and that’s led to way too many people, especially queer people and especially trans people, to be ashamed of experiencing any kind of attraction and desire or just plain horniness that goes outside an arbitrary pure innocent submissive boundary. And this attitude has spread to so many other communities that it’s inescapable. Can’t be attracted to trans people because that’s “fetishizing.” Can’t be attracted to disabled people cause that’s “fetishizing.” Can’t be attracted to people who are fat or muscular or petite or any other specific body trait or type cause that’s “fetishizing.” 🙄

To me it all stems from this overblown disgust with what cishet men are supposedly into and making a sweeping generalization from that, that anything that a hypothetical cishet dude might find sexy is bad and “male gazey.” We deviated too far from the actual concerns about the needless sexualization in general cisheteronormative society and instead decided to start policing actual adult content that is specifically meant to be sexualized.

Hot take perhaps (sarcastic) but cis straight guys being horny is not an inherently bad thing, and the things they like aren’t inherently bad either. Yeah even the fetishy stuff is fine, really. Unwanted objectification is the real issue, and that’s not what I’m talking about here. So same with how any cishet guys reading this should not feel guilt or shame for being horny about stuff, so shouldn’t anyone else feel guilt or shame for being horny about similar things.

Being sexually attracted to women or having the desire to top or be dominant doesn’t mean you’re “no better than some gross straight dude.” It’s not an indictment of your character, nor “proof” that you aren’t who you really are. Whether you’re cis or trans or whatever gender, kill the radfem pearlclutching homophobe in your brain and be free. You’re doing no one any good, especially not yourself, by curtailing your true desires. There is beauty in your sexuality. Don’t let anyone, including yourself, convince you otherwise.

#ok to reblog #not tagging this otherwise tho lol

50 notes · View notes

ventbloglite · 12 days

Text

Some of you really need to step back a little bit and acknowledge how ignorant you are towards how misogyny affects trans mascs and how you yourself may be perpetrating said misogyny when speaking ill of trans mascs.

Which is not something you should be doing at all, fyi. You can talk about individual shitty trans mascs and certain community issues you dislike which involve or are perpetrated by trans mascs without just being transphobic towards trans mascs in general.

So many times I've seen the sentient of 'AFAB's have it really easy, everyone accepts AFAB's as trans, everyone loves AFAB trans people, the world caters to you, there is basically no problems for you if you're AFAB unlike AMAB folk' shown in a variety of ways from a variety of people including just outright saying it. Not to mention the belitting of trans masc experiences with transphobia and misogyny + the way those interact because they identify as men even though transphobes still consider them to be women and don't give a shit about their actual gender.

A main crux of transphobia (though many other factors which result in hating us come into play, too many to go into now) is that trans people are seen as and treated as their AGAB and punished for not identifying as it or portraying it 'correctly' by society. So tell me why so many seem to 'forget' about how misogyny impacts trans masculine people. Could it be because you believe that advocating for trans women and trans femmes and fighting transmisogyny somehow must involve being transphobic towards trans men due to that radfem influence you've absorbed? The world will never reach gender equality of any kind if everything is 'men versus women' so can we just fucking not bring that into trans spaces please.

Examples!

I saw recently a post which perfectly pointed out the potential risks associated with someone considered 'male' growing out her hair but OP clearly knew absolutely nothing about the same risks associated with someone deemed 'female' cutting his hair. Instead of not making that post or doing some research, OP thus assumed there weren't really any risks likely due to already believing that AFAB trans people have it easy.

The ignorance! Misogyny heavily impacts the way hair is treated on those perceived as women (including body hair) and women/those perceived as women have no end of people policing what they can and can't do with their bodies often taking things to the absolute extreme to do so. Short hair on woman may seem 'more accepted' but AFAB people of any gender could quickly tell you multiple situations where it's not and results in the same violence, abuse, homo(lesbo/butch)phobia and yes possibly even death depending on the situation even if you still identify as a woman. Pretending this doesn't happen is straight up misogyny btw.

'AFAB's pass easily by doing basically nothing' is another frequent one which makes me laugh. 'Passing' for most trans people is so situational and so dependent on what you do or don't do to strictly conform to gender stereotypes if you're even able to do that at all. To suggest that the world ignores feminine gender markers the moment someone's hair is short and their chest appears mostly flat ignores both the complexity of how humans perceive gender and how misogyny comes into play whenever a woman/perceived woman shows any masculinity let alone maleness. Considering the same misogyny comes into play frequently against trans women you'd think it'd be easy to remember.

This general sentiment of 'Being born with a vagina means your life is easy and everything you do will be loved and supported because society adores you. You don't and will never have any real problems, not like anyone born with a penis.' isn't magically okay and absolutely super different to when misogynists say it about cis women because you're using AGAB language and cite 'because you're men and blah blah patriarchy' as the actual reason you're saying it. It's very clearly same shit different coat of paint. The pool is there, your toes are in, stop preparing to dive for Gods sake.

#transandrophobia #anti transmasculinity #transgender

29 notes · View notes

cazort · 7 months

Text

So I support people's right to choose who they do and don't want to be with, but if I'm honest with myself, I'm more than a bit uncomfortable with the whole "t4t" thing and especially uncomfortable with how it often plays out in terms of this idea that people with the same identities as you necessarily understand you best.

I've dated cis people and dated one other nonbinary person, and the nonbinary person and I did not necessarily mesh better than I did with the cis people I dated. My partner now is a cis bi woman, and she seems to understand, validate, and support me in my experience of gender more than anyone else has in the past.

More broadly than just dating, among friends, I don't always think that nonbinary people, other transfem people, or anyone who shares any specific identities with me, "gets" me more than people of different identities. It's always an individual thing, there are trans people who get me and trans people who don't, cis people who get me and cis people who don't, and same for nonbinary people.

I also have seen a lot of people online post about how they were lulled into a false sense of security by rhetoric that said that t4t relationships were "safer" and how they ended up really hurt when they were dating another trans person who ended up acting abusive towards them.

There is also a degree to which the t4t thing feels really fetishizing to me, especially the way I often see it on Tumblr these days. Like the last time I went on a dating site, I was inundated with messages from older men whose profiles listed them as "straight" and were writing things to me like: "I want to suck cock" and "I love men who dress like women" and stuff like that. I hated it.

And like when I see some of the things some transfem people here on Tumblr are posting in some of the tags I browse, honestly it's a lot of the same crap. A lot of people are really into degradation/humiliation kinks, and push sexually-explicit fantasies involving these sorts of kinks into broad, general tags that I browse when I am not looking for sexual content, and of course they don't use the community labels, so I'm looking for content related to trans and nonbinary people, and transfem people specifically, and instead of finding supportive content, I find all this content fetishizing us. I hate it. It's disrespectful to put that sort of content in a place where people will see it without us consenting to it. If you have a kink involving being fetishized and/or fetishizing other trans people, great, I will respect that and defend you against anyone who tries to kinkshame you. But I don't want you to put your sexually-explicit, degrading, fetishizing content somewhere where it will be seen out-of-context by people who did not consent to participate in it.

So like if you're posting in tags like #t4t nsft then that's great, that's kinda what that tag is for, especially if you also use the community labels and/or also tag stuff with tags like degradation when your post includes it so people who don't want to see it can use an extension to block or filter the tag. But don't thrust explicit content, like raw sexual fantasies about your degradation kink and fetishization of transfem people into general tags like #transfem without using community labels, especially if you don't tag it in any way that makes it easy to avoid without blocking all transfem content.

So yeah, I think this about sums up my discomfort with the whole t4t trend:

(1) bad behavior depends on the behavior itself, not your identity

(2) t4t relationships are not necessarily "safer" than relationships with cis people, and pushing the idea that they are can leave trans people vulnerable to hurt

(3) if you are a trans person who fetishizes other trans people and/or wants to be fetishized, then great and i support you in your kink and will defend you against kinkshaming. but keep your fantasies and explicit content involving that fetish in relevant places, either in private DM's, or if you post it publicly, use the appropriate tags and do not put it in out of broader, general tags without using community labels, so that we trans people who may have trauma about fetishization aren't forced to wade through tons of it to use a tag that we've been using for years for support and positivity.

#t4t #trans #transfem #nonbinary #fetishization

44 notes · View notes

genderkoolaid · 1 year

Text

It's a benefit of being in a dominant group that your identity label is invisible. White culture is just "culture". Straight relationships are just "relationships". Cis gender is just "gender". Not only does it present the dominant group to be the standard, and everything else an aberration, but it allows the impact of dominance on these categories to go unnoticed, unquestioned and uncriticized.

This is why it is not helpful to be reductive when talking about men, maleness, masculinity, etc. Many times, we end up making cis, straight, monogender, white maleness the definition of maleness, with marginalized men being pushed to the aside as a variant of the Real Men. This goes hand-in-hand with gender/sex essentialism, as the issue of demonizing a whole caste of people based on something they cannot control which includes marginalized men is brushed aside, since the Real Men are the most powerful ones (sound familiar?).

And many times (thought not always), this happens both without actually examining the ways in which all of those identities combine to create the problems being talked about, and without providing marginalized men any space to provide their own critique of dominant manhood and the ways they have been affected by it. Trans men of color frequently have extremely interesting and important things to say on hegemonic masculinity and the ways in which race, genderqueerness, etc. are involved. But instead of being treated as people with valuable things to say on men, as well as people with the most direct experience, they have the diversity of their experience erased by (very frequently) cis white women, who then defend this erasure by saying

"Well I'm oppressed by men, so its my right to be essentialist! Asking me to reflect on the ways I cope when they are hurting other people is bad, actually.", or

"Well obviously I didn't mean you. In fact, its so obvious I never need to say it, or imply it, or address it, or reflect on why I use "men" as a general term even when I insist I know its not accurate."

#m.

335 notes · View notes

ezgee-badally · 6 months

Text

-PINNED POST- (This entire Post is OOC)

-PLEASE READ WHOLE POST BEFORE INTERACTING-

18+ NSFW

MINORS GTFO

Actual Real-Life Homophobes, Transphobes, Racists, Rapists and Misogynists Fuck off and die! This is fantasy only. I’ll find out who you are and block you.

Asks are welcome from anyone. If you’re a curious Dom looking for tips or a Sub who wants to have some kinky interactions but want to stay anon, anyone with pussy is welcome for kink interactions too regardless of gender. Read more about my boundaries and limits below before submitting any questions or you may be ignored.

28 Cis Male, Canadian, Dom

GENERAL TRIGGER WARNINGS: I regularly include in my stories kinky and MADE UP/NOT REAL/ FANTASY depictions of Sexual Assault, Misogyny, Homophobia, Verbal abuse and Physical abuse. I add specific trigger warnings to my individual stories. If you feel triggered by something you read and I forgot to put in a warning please DM me and let me know.

I call myself straight but My sexuality is that I like pussy and I’m not really picky about whether the person who has it is a man or a woman. I do like Tits but also don’t care if you’re flat. Really, I have no set “Type” I like both femme and masc presenting people. Tomboys are just as hot to me as girls in cute dresses or tight outfits as an example.

My Boundaries are firm with strangers, I understand if you make mistakes or misread the pinned post but you get 1 warning before I block. Friends and Mutuals I’m a bit more forgiving with. But will still block if they push too far.

This blog just gives me a place to get shit out of my system. I volunteer a lot of my free time to support 2SLQBTQIA+ spaces and programs, but there’s been some internalized misogyny that has come up that I’m trying to deal with in a healthy way so it doesn’t get in the way of my volunteer work. Part dealing with that includes this blog.

I don’t have a crazy sexual history it’s just very diverse and I’ve experienced a variety of things. I’ve played out some Dykebreaking scenes a few times with consenting adults IRL it’s intense and takes planning and it is very draining but intensely hot and rewarding. I’m into more than just into Orientation play but that’s mostly what this blog will be.

I like writing, and I sext a lot. So this kink blog thing was just a natural extension of that.

NOW FOR THE IMPORTANT SHIT!

✅Into Roleplay, CNC, Orientation Play (Dykebreaking, Misgendering, and occasional Acebreaking), Humiliation, Cuckolding other men and/or Cuckquean, Abduction, Anon kink, Public Sex, Drugged/Intoxicated, sometimes Hypno is fun, Breath Play, light Impact play (No tools), Light Bondage and occasionally Anal. Very hot when women/girls call me “Daddy” but I’m not seeking out a DD/LG dynamic or into age-play. I’m sure there’s more, will edit as things change.

⚠️Soft Limits (Things I’m not actively Into but will explore with a TRUSTED partner or TRUSTED mutual.) are… Somno, Foot Stuff, Heavy Impact Play (w/tools such as whips or paddles) Complex Rope Play (Needs practice), Object Insertion, Lactation, Kigurumi, Impregnation

🛑Hard Limits:

Forced Feeding, Scat, Piss Play, Snuff, permanent Injury/disfigurement, Infantilism, Haematomania, Knife Play (I’ll use a knife or scissors to cut off your clothes if you want just don’t ask me to cut you.)Furry Play, Necrophilia, Beastiality, and Age Play.

When I begin a post or DM with “OOC:”it means I’m talking “Out Of Character” as a human being outside of the fantasy.

When I begin a post with “IC” it means I’m talking “In Character” almost all my posts are In Character, you will only see me specify this if It is a post where I switch back and forth between OOC and IC and have to clarify.

Example:

OOC: Be safe, Practice Rack. Fuck homophobes.

IC: Dumb dyke whore. How does it feel cumming on your rapists cock?

I will only share Private messages/DM’s on my blog if it has been previously agreed between me and the person on the other end of the DM’s.

If you don’t tell me a specific safe-word when we start interacting we use the stoplight system by default. If you have a preferred safe word then tell me.

GREEN = Yes keep doing that

YELLOW = Take it easy or be careful.

RED = IM SAFEWORDING STOP RIGHT NOW

LAST OF ALL! BE SAFE!

Safety Tips:

- Subs, Learn boundaries from more experienced Sub’s so you can learn the difference between abuse and kink.

- New Subs should read “The New Bottoming Book”

- New Doms should read “The New Topping Book”

- Don’t doxx yourself for any reason.

- Stay anonymous online

- Be aware of the risks of sending pics and giving out your name.

- Practice RACK (Risk Aware Consensual Kink)

- If you are going to do something potentially dangerous then be aware of the potential dangers and put safeguards in place to minimize them.

#lgetsd #dykebreaking #orientation play #dyke correction #fucked str8 #break me #rough cnc #good girls make more good girls #corruption kink #choke play #pinned post #boundaries #hard limits #consent #fakeboy correction

35 notes · View notes