#i am a cis woman so i might be wrong somewhere | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

purlturtle · 1 year

Text

Why "You're not HSP, you're autistic!" isn't helpful but actually counterproductive

So first, let me explain my background on this:

I'm a social worker. Communication is my daily tool, especially with people in crisis

I identify as HSP but not as autistic. I have reasons for that.

I'm also a lesbian, and have been active in the queer community for literal decades. This includes discussion about labels, self-identification, labels based in discriminatory thinking, etc.

lastly, I'm acutely aware of intersectionality, internalized biases, and where they can lead us

Next, let me outline who this post is for:

anyone who is convinced of the above sentence (and wants to convince others too)

anyone who is uncertain which label applies to them, but feels like it might be one of the two

anyone who knows they are one or both of the above labels and wants to communicate with others.

I'll put my arguments under the Readmore, so as not to clutter up people's dashes; this is gonna get long. In essence, they boil down to:

You-messages like the above very rarely work.

telling someone their own identity typically doesn't work.

a researcher's ableism doesn't necessarily mean their whole entire body of work needs to be thrown out.

HSP and autism have several overlapping criteria, however that does not mean that HSP equals autism.

Lastly, let me tell you why it's important:

we all, no matter how we label ourselves, seek for tools (self help, therapy, apps, etc.) that will improve our lives. Some of the tools from the Autism Toolbox will work for me, some from the ADHD Toolbox too - but not all of them.

currently, there is another toolbox labeled HSP, and the tools in there are perfect for me. I only found them because I found the label HSP; I did not find them in the Autism or ADHD Toolbox. Maybe one day these toolboxes will be integrated into one, maybe under the autism label, who knows. But RIGHT NOW they are not. Right now, they are labeled HSP or SPS, and those are the terms I needed to search for to find them - no matter that the terms might be badly chose

"you're not HSP, you're autistic" denies that this HSP Toolbox even exists, and so people will not find all the tools that can make their life better.

Okay, here's the long form of my arguments.

You-messages like the above very rarely work.

Most people's gut reaction to being told "You are not X, you're actually Y!" is "who are you to tell me what I am?" or "who are you to tell me that my conclusion is wrong?" Such a reaction is, as stated, not helpful, and usually counterproductive. It puts the person being told "You're Y" on the defensive, and people don't change their mind when they feel defensive.

If you are truly convinced that this person is autistic, it is far more helpful to put this in an I-message, and temper it with a potentiality: "I think/it seems to me, from what you describe, that you could be autistic." And then to follow this up with, for example, a question like "have you ever considered that?" so that they can explain if, perhaps, they have already looked into that, or tell you that no, they haven't, what's your reasoning?

They might still react defensively due to their own ableism against being potentially autistic. But they can tell themselves "okay, that was just this person's opinion, I don't have to listen to them," which is actually a much less conflict-ridden outcome.

telling someone their own identity typically doesn't work.

Let's look at another way of telling someone their own identity: "You're not a gender non-conforming cis woman, you're actually trans!" - how do you, an internet stranger, know? All you have is a few sentences that someone posted somewhere; they, meanwhile, know their own lived reality 24/7 of however many years they've lived with it. Again, this kind of communication leads to defensiveness.

Even if it's true - and that's an important thing to keep in mind.

This person might be trans. That person might be autistic. But unless and until they are ready to hear that, to think about that as a possibility, to test apply that label to themselves and see if it fits? You telling them will do jack shit. Especially in a confrontative You-message. It might even lead to them taking longer to embrace that part of their own identity; out of spite ("just because some random internet stranger said I was doesn't mean I am"), out of fear ("I don't want people to know this about me; am I that easy to clock?"), of out internalized bias against the identity ("I can't possibly be this!").

a researcher's ableism doesn't necessarily mean their whole entire body of work needs to be thrown out.

I see the ableism in Aron's work. And in that of other researchers. Bias against autism is unfortunately still rampant, even in psychology, even in neurosciences. And I understand the pain of seeing that, of being belittled, dismissed, being made invisible. And I further understand the gut reaction to not want to have anything to do with a person who is like that, who does that.

That is not, however, how science works. Science needs to take an objective look at what is presented, check it for biases (among other things), and if found, check whether those biases truly invalidate the entire body of work, or parts of it, and then throw those out and also check if sense can be made of the data/findings without those biases.

That is what further research and peer review is all about, and that is being done right now. This has been the case throughout medical history, as well as all other sciences. Heck, for the longest time (including even today), one form of autism was named after a fucking Nazi ramp doctor.

Again, I know the pain that bias in science can cause. I've been at the receiving end, I know plenty of people who have been on the receiving end, I see your pain. I understand wanting to be seen, not dismissed. I understand wanting to lash out.

However, when you do so by telling people "you're not HSP, you're actually autistic", the only people that you hurt are the ones who are seeking help, who are vulnerable and in pain themselves. It wasn't all that long ago that especially girls and women (or people perceived as such by parents, teachers, doctors) were told "You're not autistic; girls can't be autistic." It hurt them. It denied them access to help that they sorely needed. Don't perpetuate that, please - even if you are truly convinced that this person is, in fact, autistic: please refer to the above two bullet points to understand why telling them in that way won't help.

HSP and autism have several overlapping criteria

and it is possible to be both, it is possible to identify first as one, then the other, and it is possibly to mistakingly think you're one when you're actually the other. However that does not mean that HSP equals autism in every single case - not according to current psychological and neurological knowledge.

I score well below the threshold for every single autism test. Like, it's not even close. Even the ones that test for typically-overlooked autism criteria, even the ones that test for how autism presents in women, all of them. The experiences that autistic people describe, of studying social interactions until they can mimic them perfectly, know what to say and how to react because they've seen other people do so and can replicate that - none of that is me. By all criteria known to current science, I am not autistic.

I have, however, undeniably a high sensitivity to external input, sensory processing sensitivity, funnel not filter, high-wired brain, however you want to name it. I don't care what it's called; all I care about is that I understand how I work, how my brain works, so that I can finally get the bottom back under my feet. That is why I was trying to see if I'm autistic: because that would have helped me make sense of what is going on, of how I feel wrong all the time; and it would have enabled me to seek out therapy that was actually helpful. I would not have minded an autism diagnosis; I would have welcomed it, precisely because of that.

And it was never the right fit. And god, how that frustrated me. And I know you know that feeling, of looking at this box and that label and this study and that doctor, and they all tell you "no, this isn't you, not precisely." And you know that you don't fit in with society, that you're different than other people, who seem to fit in so easily, who go through life so blithely when you simply can't, and you just wanna know why that is and how to change it, how to make things so that you can go through life blithely too.

The overlap between HSP and autism is large.

And maybe, further down the line and the years, science will come up with a concept that combines autism and HSP or SPS or whatever they call it currently. And when that time comes, I'll embrace that concept just like I'm embracing HSP as a concept right now, just like I would have embraced an autism diagnosis. But until that happens, we need to keep both of these labels, diagnoses, whatever you want to call them, open and available for people.

Because while the overlap is large (just like autism and ADHD have some overlap), it isn't a circle; it's a Venn diagram with some communal and some separate aspects. And I fall into the pool that isn't overlapping with autism. Others don't. Squares and rhombuses can coexist, and so can autistic people and highly sensitive people; I'm 100% convinced that plenty of accommodations, tools, helpful tricks work for us both.

But some of them are not fully the right fit, and that is important. In the end, that is what this is about, and why we need both terms, both concepts, and why conflating them isn't helpful: the people who fall under any of these diagnoses need to find the correct help, the correct tools for living their lives in the best way possible. The way I need to arrange my life, the strategies I need to develop and the accommodations I need to implement, have lots in common with what an autistic person might need - lots, but not everything. Just like different autistic people will need different things. And people with ADHD need different things (and also some of the same things). But when you point me only to the Autism Toolbox, I will not find everything I need, just like an ADHD person won't. And that makes my life harder than it needs to be.

Currently, I find the tools that I need in a box labeled HSP. I don't care if they stay in there, if the box gets relabeled, if it gets integrated into the autism toolbox. All I care about is that I have access to them, that other people who need the same tools have access to them. I have started to work with an HSP coach, who I found because I found the label HSP, and when I tell you that my life has massively improved since then, I want you to hear that.

When you say "you're not HSP, you're actually autistic," one of the things you're doing is you deny people access to the tools they need.

And I won't stand for that.

#hsp #highly sensitive #highly sensitive person #autism #overlap between autism and hsp #ableism in hsp

92 notes · View notes

nothorses · 2 years

Note

Hi, I'm an MTF in their late 20s. I've had a fairly difficult time accessing and sustaining medical transition over the past decade since I've realised and I don't feel comfortable even using she/her for myself anymore.

I really appreciated the Baeddel posts you've made and I wasn't aware of them at the time. However I fell quite heavily into Tumblr SJW and then irl radical queer activism in my late teens to mid-20s. In those environments I ultimately developed a genuine paranoia about being found out as a 'bad person', losing all of my friends, being ostracised from my limited support network etc.

I ultimately experienced sexual assault by several cis women while I was presenting as a man. I found myself feeling completely isolated and bereft of comfort. I didn't feel able to reach out for help without having to prove my social justice bona fides (outing myself as trans) and reinterpreting it through the lens of it being transphobia (which it could not have been).

In the end I fell out of social justice spaces, towards dirtbag leftist type environments. However, ultimately I've found myself attracted to moderate anti-SJW, edgelordy sort of anti-idpol leftism. In the end I've disconnected from everything, because whatever merits I might perceive in any specific argument or cause, I'm more concerned about my pattern of being drawn to extremist ideologies and activism.

Basically I've reached a crisis point in my transition, finally being able to access HRT in non-DIY fashion. It's thrown me for a loop, as someone living in the male-mode* for so long. I feel the need to reach out for support but also fear of doing so.

The trans support groups and spaces I know don't want to relate to me as someone who has experienced trauma as a male. Who is living with the dual burden of the problems of being a trans woman with the social isolation and coping skills of a cis man. I am also autistic, and I've found there's a fairly narrow range of acceptable autism'ss in those spaces. Autism of the species that makes you meek or cute is more welcome. That which makes you pedantic or firm in our beliefs not so much. Which makes us think or behave differently or worst of all commit faux-pas or missteps whole socialising. There is seemingly little tolerance for that (in the end, tolerating a slightly difficult person, admittedly).

Anyway, I'm grateful for what you've written on the topic of men's problems and the tendency of feminist and 'queer'** activism to ignore that suffering. I appreciate it as a possible trans woman, intensely dysphoric person who also had to suffer the isolation, emotional brutality and self-denial that comes with growing up a boy in a tough environment.

*a withered, grey version of living as a cisgender man, covering my body, avoiding intimacy, avoiding making new social contacts out guilt for the deception, of sleepwalking through life.

**after my irl experience of radical queer activism, I run away from the term.

Hey, I really appreciate you reaching out. It sounds like you've been through a lot, and I'm so sorry you haven't been given the understanding, acceptance, and community you need and deserve.

I think everyone has stuff in them that draws them toward extremist ideology; that's why it is what it is, and why it works. It's not that there's something wrong with you as a person- it is, in all likelihood, just that you're isolated and in desperate need of community. That's the target demographic for extremist recruiting, because those are the qualities that make someone recruitable. The solution to that is to find healthy support and community somewhere else.

The fact that you're aware of this pattern & acting on it- and even more than that, have managed to get away from multiple extremist groups- that shows a lot of awareness and strength, and a lot of hope for you. You're gonna be okay.

There are people- lots of people- who have had similar experiences, and felt similar ways, and who need similar support and understanding. There are even more people who, despite not experiencing those things firsthand, are open-minded, understanding, and accepting; and who will listen to you & gladly welcome you into their lives and communities. I know it's scary to open yourself up and put effort into finding and connecting with them, but they are out there. You'll find them if you keep trying.

I really recommend checking out this article by someone who, it sounds like, was in a similar situation to the one you're in now.

You're always welcome here, and I hope you can find the support and community you deserve.

Good luck! 💙

64 notes · View notes

cipheramnesia · 2 years

Note

Genuine question; how did you know you're a trans woman? I've been trying to figure out my gender for years now and i think i might be trans-fem but it's so hard to figure out and it's kinda scary

Everyone does it a bit differently so don't worry too much. Probably the biggest concerns are if you have somewhere safe to play around with gender, and someone supportive of you. It's something that's easier to figure out if you practice a bit, and also one of the reasons why trans people having better support networks has been so important.

I like to mention therapy up front, because that is a person whose job is theoretically supposed to be helping you figure your shit out, helping you figure out what you need, and coming up with some ways to at least work towards those needs. Theoretically, because the range of quality between therapists can also be wide. Not all therapists are experienced with trans people, and gender has enough diversity of range that not all therapists with trans experience would necessarily be aware of trans existing beyond a gender binary. So, finding a therapist is a bit of a process - it's a time and cost investment and for some people is the right solution, but be aware that you need to make sure your therapist has a good knowledge of what it's like with being trans. OK, so that's the whole mechanical thing done.

Two reasons I mention therapy up front is that when I was young that was just the done thing, and also I didn't transition with any kind of therapy aspect, so I feel compelled to note it based on my lack of experience. It wasn't for me - maybe for someone else?

For me, I had a pretty supportive friend group and a safe environment. I was able to spend a little time experimenting with gender and kind of living with the idea of myself as this or that. I think all told it was about a year of seeing myself as cis but just wearing "girl clothes" or some form of nonbinary, but for me specifically I only felt right as a woman. And there was a lot of agonizing and worries I worked through, like being sure I was never ever going to be trans, then being sure there was no possible way to go on HRT, talking it over with my wife, coming to terms with the possibility I'd be a bald lady. I was struggling with the potential of having to spend years living full time out before even having access to any medical transition (a former and current prerequisite in many countries), you know. For me, my mind was trying to come up with any reason NOT to be a trans woman.

Now I'm gonna pause here because it could all be different for someone else. Maybe someone is just a guy who like girl clothes (like the youtube girl month guy). Maybe someone explores messing with gender and discovers they like some or all or none and goes with agender or nonbinary or genderpunk or so forth. For me, these were ideas I explored but were not ones which, at those times or currently, fit who I am. For the future, who knows? Gender may be subject to change, terms and conditions apply.

OK so back to me. How I knew is like, I anguished my way through all these different ideas, and at a certain point I concluded, after examining and re-examining my own mind, I was a trans woman, just generally that what fit on me was woman, and I started working to undertake a medical transition, because I concluded that's what I wanted. And it was a relief. It was terrifying, because I made the decision to go for at the end of 2016, and started my transition in early 2017, and you can imagine how being trans felt at that time.

But for me, I think, what stands out among all the personal worries and political turmoil is that a certain point things just fit, and me being trans is one of the few things I never felt was a mistake. Which, admittedly there's like one percent of trans people that genuinely feel it was wrong and de-transition (maybe less tbh), but the majority of us are pretty happy with being trans, and I also think that's one of the signs that it's the right direction. It makes you happy when you get to experience being you, and the more you get to be yourself, the better you feel. Even if trans femme ends up not you, you're on the right track if something about moving away from being cis makes you feel more correct about yourself.

I like to call it "feeling correct" because everything else makes it seem like I was mistaken about being cis or unhappy about being cis or somehow me before transition was this trial and tribulation, which was not the case. In retrospect, absolutely I wish I'd know to start down the gender exploration road sooner, but the feeling that really cemented transitioning in my mind was seeing myself as a woman and everything about it feeling correct. It was just accurate, it was the shape in the world I felt like I fit.

The future, I don't know, maybe I'll keep changing. I doubt it right now, but I spent 35+ years pretty confident about being a cisgender guy. I was fairly lucky in my transition, it helped a lot. My hairloss worries ended up being inconsequential, HRT did a lot of impressive renovating to my shape, I got what I wanted out of transition by and large. I went with informed consent for HRT, only did therapy after starting and it was mostly "I know more about this than you."

However, if that all is pushed aside, I went forward with all this fully conscious that nothing I wanted to happen might happen, that if nothing but the bare minimum of transition happened for me, it was what felt like me regardless. I don't think it needs to be that certain either. Sometimes gender is like a feeling of overpowering need, but sometimes it's just like picking a soda flavor you now? It could be "I need this to live" or it could be "Hm, that looks nice." With me it was something that felt obvious as could be, and that's about how it stayed.

#transition

36 notes · View notes

uter-us · 7 months

Note

Hello! I am the anon from before who sent in my thoughts, and I wanted to respond to some of the questions that you asked.

do you think it's fair to say that considering we live in a patriarchal world, some women might not want to be perceived as women as a (subconscious) response to misogyny? do you think this could affect their gender identity? additionally, do you think some women might find they are "doing" womanhood wrong in the eyes of the patriarchy (ie not be feminine, or be a lesbian, etc), and in turn internalize the idea that that must mean they aren't women? do you think this could influence some people's gender identity?

I definitely think that there are people who might not want to be percieved as women due to misogyny, and I do think that could affect their experience with gender, or even their gender identity. I've seen a couple of people on Tumblr talking about how part of why they consider themselves non-binary or genderqueer has to do with feeling like they've "failed" at womanhood, or feeling like they'll never be able to meet the sexist standards a lot of societies have for women. So I definitely think that the way someone is treated based on their gender can influence their experience with gender or their gender identity later in life. I think this sort of relates to what I was saying about kinship; if someone who was assigned female at birth feels no kinship with women, they're less likely to consider themself a woman.

However, I don't think it's fair to say that most trans men and AFAB nonbinary people are women who, consciously or subconsciously, are trying to escape misogyny. Or that misogyny is the main reason AFAB people are trans. I've seen a lot of radfems/gender criticals/TERFs say this, and I'm kind of curious about your opinion/experience?

if im working w the understanding that kinship means a strong (family-like) relationship, is that really enough to warrant a role in defining who is a woman/man? like there are people who fit both of these rules (increased+significant comfortability w perception plus feeling they have a kinship w said group), and we can still recognize they don't belong in that group.

I think that's a really good point, that you can identify with something without actually identifying as that. And there definitely are some people that fit both of those rules, but don't belong in the group because they don't consider themself to be part of that group. But I think the big difference between identifying with something and identifying as something really comes down to whether they view themselves as being inside or outside of that group.

For example: Imagine two people: a cis woman and a trans man. Both are more comfortable being seen as a man, and both feel a sense of kinship with men. The big difference between these two people is that the woman sees herself as being outside of (but in proximity to) manhood. Whereas the trans man sees himself as falling somewhere within manhood.

I also looked at some other questions you posed on different posts, and there were some that I thought were interesting and I wanted to give my perspective on.

I'm curious on what you think in these examples of what constitutes "true" gender identity rather than maybe confusion or trauma or any number of influences.

Honestly, I think that someone's "true" gender identity can be influenced by confusion and trauma. I would define gender identity as someone's internal understanding and experience with gender (which I'm sorry if that's kind of vague or confusing, I'm really not sure how to word it). But I think because gender identity consists of your experiences with gender, it can be affected and influenced by trauma. The way I see it, if someone finds it distressing to be considered a woman, then they shouldn't have to be considered a woman, regardless of why it's distressing.

Finally:

seeing people accidentally feed into gender roles and stereotypes heavily influenced the perspective I have now!

I'm kind of curious what you mean by this, would it be possible for you to kind of elaborate on that?

I'm sorry for this being so long again. I think this is an important conversation to have and in my opinion it's one that doesn't happen enough. I'm still going to stay anonymous for now but if you have any other questions about it then I'll try to respond since I'm actually quite enjoying this conversation.

-🌻

heyy!! i appreciate seeing you back w answers yay (anyone reading, heres the first post)

heres my thoughts:

I definitely think that there are people who might not want to be perceived as women due to misogyny, and I do think that could affect their experience with gender, or even their gender identity.

i completely agree! i think this itself is a huge limitation to gender ideology, yk? do you think this is a limitation? and if so, how do you think you would go about handing this? (and i don't even mean fixing it as a whole since that is a huge task obviously lol, but just maybe one thing we could do to help?)

additionally (and this will probably affect your answers above), do you think the people who don't want to be perceived as women due to misogyny are nonbinary, or do you think they are just women reacting to misogyny, or something else?

I've seen a couple of people on Tumblr talking about how part of why they consider themselves non-binary or genderqueer has to do with feeling like they've "failed" at womanhood, or feeling like they'll never be able to meet the sexist standards a lot of societies have for women. So I definitely think that the way someone is treated based on their gender can influence their experience with gender or their gender identity later in life. I think this sort of relates to what I was saying about kinship; if someone who was assigned female at birth feels no kinship with women, they're less likely to consider themself a woman.

i've seen this too and its so sad to see. its sad to see people think they've "failed" to fit into a sexist stereotype, and also think/know that in some settings it feels just easier to not consider yourself a woman. its almost like an attempt to opt out of misogyny, yk? what do you think abt that?

also specifically referring to your, "if someone who was assigned female at birth feels no kinship with women, they're less likely to consider themself a woman," i'd say that (under my definition), a lot of those people assigned female at birth actually do feel kinship w women, but not women who identify that way. i think afab people seeing themselves represented among nonbinary afab people, and in turn finding kinship w them, is still a form of kinship w women-- although i expect push-back on this! i'd love to hear your thoughts!

what do you think about this and its affect of "othering" gnc people? like how do we know we are not just "othering" gnc women or men? how do we know we are not just telling gnc women they aren't women? (aka reinforcing gender stereotypes)

I think it's definitely more than people may realize. the more i talk to especially afab nonbinary people, the more i see clear themes of internalized misogyny, and i say this without judgement too because everyone responds differently to distress.

i dont know if i would would say misogyny is THE reason afab people are trans ? i think it depends. because like for some people that misogyny is stereotypes, and for some its mvawg, and for some its lesbophobia, so like it j really varies. but i do think misogyny, at minimum, plays a critical role in how these people view women, and who a woman is, and what a woman feels (or thinks or is like).

you're right; let me rephrase what i said before to include people who identify as and not just with:

"if im working w the understanding that kinship means a strong (family-like) relationship, is that really enough to warrant a role in defining who is a woman/man? like there are people who fit these rules (increased+significant comfortability w perception plus feeling they have a kinship w said group, and identifying as said group), and we can still recognize they don't belong in that group."

what definition of manhood are you working with? (you might have to use the word "man" in the definition and im totally okay w that, but if you do can you provide some examples?)

can you give an example of an experience w gender?

the last sentence here just ugh breaakkss my heart. like this sounds so emotional and dramatic but im literally having trouble writing this. i think its having somewhat been on this spectrum of distress w being considered a woman, but also seeing sooo many people feel this way. im thinking specifically about one friend right now (and i'd use kathleen stock's phrasing of "immersing myself in a fiction," cuz ik its super controversial among radfems but i do use he/him pronouns for him even though he is a human female / girl, even when he's not around, and maybe that'll change one day but for complicated reasons i j cant do that as of rn), and like im just thinking of him when you say this because the idea that just because someone doesnt want something, that makes it okay ?-- and worse: that that shouldnt be questioned? i dont know. he's been victimized in uniquely misogynistic ways, and abused and dehumanized on the basis of being female, and erasing his womanhood is a coping skill 100636438%. distancing yourself from what made you uniquely vulnerable to abuse is a COMPLETELY understandable reaction, which is why its so horrible that its taboo, or even considered hate, to bring this up.

also, "considered a woman" is interesting phrasing, because through the eyes of misogynists? he is a woman. he will be oppressed despite his gender identity. it reminds me of that one quote (if anyone reading this knows it, please share!) thats like, "the patriarchy doesn't have to ask pronouns to know who to oppress." something along those lines ? thats why i think it's so important for women to recognize that about themselves because its so crucial for forming female class consciousness and solidarity.

so ultimately: "The way I see it, if someone finds it distressing to be considered a woman, then they shouldn't have to be considered a woman, regardless of why it's distressing," is something i can find some agreement in but as a whole disagree w. i think some "uber exposure therapy" approach would not be effective, but like at the same time i also can NOT ethically not count my friend-- who considers himself a boy/man-- into my feminism. like he is a HUGE part of every feminist discussion i ever have even though though i've mentioned him like thrice ever (first time online), and my feminist motive is exclusively for the purpose of liberating women and girls.

okay and finally:

you quoted me saying "seeing people accidentally feed into gender roles and stereotypes heavily influenced the perspective I have now!"

I'm kind of curious what you mean by this, would it be possible for you to kind of elaborate on that?

yes! so what you're quoting was right under this screenshot:

his view of a female brain vs a male brain's behavior is very sexist! he said "i've had to put on a mask as strong , disciplined, grounded But deep down i've always been a woman inside , warmth, nurturing, loving. my body is [male] but my brain is very female." none of these traits are exclusive to either sex, and by claiming he must be a woman because of this behavior only reinforces the stereotypes and roles.

in a different post i say this:

"the writer was very explicit and clear on how a "female brain" behaves. he said he had kids and wife, and I cant help but worry abt the affects that these stereotypes must have onto his relationships with women, and how he must project them onto his family. if this is what he thinks women are, then that is what he will expect. this is a limitation."

this is not a one off stance of stereotyping as evidence of trans-ness. seeing this happen time and time again has heavily influenced my gender critical views. does that make sense? like did i elaborate thoroughly or do i need to rephrase/add?

no need to apologize !! my messages are equally as long (if not longer hahaha), so also dont stress if you need time to respond cuz im super patient :)) and i completely agree that these conversations dont happen enough!! i def sympathize w either side though cuz some people have little patience (which i dont mean in a judgemental way! cuz if yk you arent in a state where you can effectively communicate then there shouldnt be any pressure to have these types of conversations)!! and im so enjoying this convo too :) i like the flower you signed off w too

take sm care and be so safe! (lemme know if i missed anything in your message)

#not j a reblog tag #radfem #read conversations tag

6 notes · View notes

evergreenwitch · 5 months

Text

I think I should make a 'State of the Gender' post - because I bet its going to be interesting to look back on in a couple of years hahaha

Or it might be completely unchanged and this sort of boring - but I kind of doubt it, my gender identity as of right now feels kind of liminal in many ways.

Ok for context - I've more or less always identified as a cis woman. I was a ~quirky girl~ as a kid; occasionally attempt to lean in to the tom boy thing, but that was definitely more of a 'not like other girls' thing then a 'pro masculinity' thing, and also I was bad at it hahaha - catch 10 year old me saying things like 'im a tom boy but I love dresses and makeup' sort of big ann of green gables vibes (ie it was the ADHD/autism weirdness not really gender weirdness)

Cut forward to.... Idk I guess in high school I realized I was bisexual and didn't really come out so much as stopped telling people I was straight (not that I had done that much prior)... I did spend a bit of time considering my gender but settled on 'no issues, carry on'

By the end of college I think was when I settled on 'Woman For Political Reasons' - or that is to say Agender cis woman: I realized I just don't get gender? It's not a significant factor for me in like any way - I started IDing more as pansexual then bisexual, etc. Being a woman was still sort of significant to me but for purely social reasons - volunteering with Girl Scouts was important to me, I was getting a degree in a heavily male dominated field.... It felt important that I continue to be an unambiguous example of 'woman-hood', but I was beginning to realize I don't really grok gender. I also started firmly IDing as autistic at this point lol

It's been roughly a decade since then and nothing too significant has changed wrt my interior gender, externally a lot has changed! - I've gotten married, I've learned a lot more about trans perspectives on gender and ace perspectives on sexuality, I started playing roller derby......

I currently identify as somewhere on the aro/ace spectrum (specific labels TBD for like 8 years now I'm not in a hurry to pin that down haha) somewhere in the bi/pan/omni sort of sexuality cloud of labels (again I don't really give a fuck about the specifics) and still in that cisish female, Agender woman, demigirl** sort of gender space - firmly She/They pronouns.

Derby has really made me think a lot about it - I definitely am not a woman the same way people who definitely are women are women.... But I feel like I *do* belong in spaces that are exclusively for women... Yea Agender woman continues to be the most accurate term, but I'm not really satisfied with it, you know?

** I have issues with demi girl mostly because while I sort of feel a lukewarm acceptance/begrudging fondness for 'woman'/'lady' I feel a deep fundemental sense of wrongness about being considered a 'girl'. Various compound phrases are fine - 'girlfriend' doesn't really bother me, 'adjective Girl' is.... Probably more or less fine (tech girl, derby girl).... But being called just generically a 'girl' is bothersome...... Might be part of why I was so insistent on 'tomboy' as a kid now that I think about it....

0 notes

calicocreepy · 2 years

Note

no need to respond if this is too prying but i feel like i might be going thru what you did and wanted to ask, what made you so sure you were a gay man and not a lesbian?

This is a really complicated question, but I know how confusing it is to be in that place of questioning, so I’ll do my best to explain. I wish you the best in navigating your identity, and my inbox is open if you need to talk.

- I knew I wasn’t cis since I was 13, but I identified as nonbinary for almost a decade because it felt safer than admitting I was a man ( Our societal conception of men and masculinity is not kind to those who are questioning if they might be a man)

- The label “nonbinary butch” felt like a safe way to explore my masculinity and gender variance without crossing that line and admitting to myself that I was male. I love and thank the lesbian community for being so accepting and kind to me. The butch and transmasculine communities are not inherently the same, but share a lot of overlapping history. The book Stone Butch Blues was such an important piece of me accepting who I am. I really recommend reading it (there are versions with tws for the SA scenes if that is helpful).

- I thought I was not attracted to men, but what I eventually realized was it was actually gender dysphoria. I was repulsed by the idea of men being attracted to me as a woman. Once I imagined being perceived as male, I suddenly realized I was very attracted to men. I was thinking about straight men and being in a straight relationship and having zero desire to participate; turns out it’s because I’m a gay man attracted to other gay men.

- honestly I might be on the bi spectrum somewhere, but I don’t put too much stress into pinning down my exact label and sexual identity because I’m in a happily monogamous relationship with another trans man, and feel comfortable just calling myself gay out of simplicity. I cannot recommend T4T relationships enough for helping foster self love and confidence.

- Lastly, I think seeing other trans guys go though this radical identity shift of “oh shit I thought I was gay in this direction, but turns out it was dysphoria and I’m actually gay in the opposite direction” made it feel safe to admit I was wrong and come out again as something different. This is actually pretty common, you are definitely not alone in your identity crisis

I hope this helped somewhat. If you want to stay anon and ask for any further clarification go ahead

#ask tag

1 note · View note

maybeshesnaped · 4 years

Note

I don't support jk rowling, I don't think she made a good deal to speak publicly in that way. But. I don't think she "attack" anyone. I'm nonbinary and I don't feel attacked by her, other queer and trans don't feel attacked by her too. Then, ALL you stated about the "proves" in her books that she is the awfullest being on earth is internet trash exaggerated by haters.. And bit racist too. Bankers are goblins, so racism, because all Jews are bankers...??? I would feel offended that people assume I am a banker because I'm Jew... Chang is a common chinese surname, Cho maybe not a good choice for a forename (I checked with some Chinese friends), Rawling is not Chinese, and publishers didn't correct it. They have their responsibility too on this type of mistakes. HIV IS A SERIOUS ILLNESS that caused the death of thousands of people, especially in the late 80s / 90s when HP was written, it changes the life of someone for the rest of their existence, personal and work relationship, etc. Negate that is denial. Then I don't think licantropy is as much a metaphor for that, but still, I don't see a bad representation in Remus Lupin. He is one of the most positive character in HP.

At last. Yes. I will unfollow you. But I gave you my opinion. And I add an advice. Being so hateful to jk Rowling brings absolutely nothing. It's a huge lie that the WHOLE trans community is against her, and this war to her is another (yes, another cause she has being hated from a while before this transphobia thing) rumble by haters. And online there's a lot of people who have to find something to be hateful, a reason for their hate to spread.

Again, I don't support her, she didnt make her mind clear before those statements. Her fears do not involve trans people, but criminal CIS MEN. And no, she never addressed trans as criminals, but she gave the impression to do that, which was the mistake. Everybody has fears, phobias, she was abused, has a trauma, pretty understandable she fears men. But her personal fears should not have carried her to write those comments publicly. Then if you feel angry for some reason jogging in the park is much more healthy than rumbling on the internet.

whew, there’s a lot to unpack here

while i do agree that not all trans/queer people took offense at jkr’s stance, that doesn’t take away the fact that the majority did. in addition, what i disagree with in your post, is that jkr’s harmful opinion is solely focused on criminal cis men.

jkr is a person who wrote a whole ass book about a man who dressed as a woman and killed women. she really and shamelessly went into such great lengths to vilify trans women.

“One wonders what critics of Rowling’s stance on trans issues will make of a book whose moral seems to be: never trust a man in a dress,” Jake Kerridge writes in his review.

she is also the kind of person who praised a woman who compared being transgender to doing blackface as i showed in this post

she is also the kind of person who promoted an anti-trans shop that sells disgusting anti trans items. a shop that sells pins saying “trans women are men” and “notorious transphobe”.

Other items they sell include pins that say “Woman is not a costume” and “Transmen are my sisters” and “Sorry about your dick bro” and “XX (female)” and “F*ck your pronouns” and “Transactivism is Misogyny,” some of which even display the trans flag just in case their hateful rhetoric wasn’t clear enough

it’s pretty clear that she doesn’t only target criminal cis men, yes???

and don’t tell me that she might not have known and all that naive bullshit. she knows what she’s doing.

the few men who take advantage of trans people’s struggles should NOT be the talking point on whether they, as a group, deserve rights, love, and acceptance. PERIOD.

the fact that you can’t see that she targets the entire trans community and that you say you don’t support her only because she voiced her opinion publicly, tells me that you do in fact support her, if only she kept her views to herself. so i’m glad you unfollowed me.

as far as her use of stereotypes in HP are concerned, again, you are mistaken. you “don’t think lycanthropy is a metaphor for that” you say, but jkr herself says it is. comparing an illness like HIV/AIDS to being a monster who actively harms others is not okay, despite the author’s intentions. it’s simply a very poor-thought out metaphor.

lastly, jkr may not even have realized that she uses anti-semitic tropes in her work. but that doesn’t mean it’s not there.

Connor Goldsmith, a literary agent says: “Rowling’s goblins are nakedly anti-Semitic caricatures — a race of gnarled, hook-nosed misers obsessed with gold, who believe they own everything they’ve ever produced and wizards who purchase things only ‘rent’ from them. They appear to run the entire wizarding economy, and trust no one but their own kind. It’s suggested that secret cabals of goblins work to undermine the wizard government. The fact that these creatures appear in a book series which is ostensibly an allegory for the Holocaust is as distressing as it is bizarre; one hopes Rowling didn’t intend to create such a caricature, because it really undermines her project, but intent isn’t really what matters at the end of the day.”

i and many others agree that she did use anti-semitic stereotypes. and there’s plenty of arguments to support our position. do with that what you will. sadly, you seem to make a lot of incoherent excuses about all the unfortunate elements she used in her books.

i’m not by any means saying we should cancel the books and reject them because of all these problematic features. i am saying however that they need to be recognized and discussed, just like jkr’s militant and very evident transphobia.

i am angry, and we all should, because her views are dangerous and harmful. gaslighting us and saying “go for a jog” simply because we express our very legitimate anger and dissapointment regarding a beloved author who shaped many childrens’ lives and ended up invalidating their very existence, only makes you look like a jerk, not someone with an argument to be taken into account.

#this is my opinion #i am a cis woman so i might be wrong somewhere #if so i am open to discussion in the dms #anti jk rowling #ask

15 notes · View notes

androgynousblackbox · 2 years

Note

What did vaush do this time?

Oh, boy. Okay, so this the timeline of events as far I could gather: 1. Vaush made a tweet in which he said that Joane Karen could have stayed quiet and she would have been revered for years to come. That is true. Then he added "women should apoligize and stay quiet more challenge." If that were all nobody would have cared that much. 2. Joanne Karen, making honor of her second name, screenshot his tweet though, doing the usual "see, see?? this is what pro-trans activists are all like! They all just hate women! And I am the most suffered victim of all! Woa is me!" bullshit everytime she gets a papercut. 3. The whole online left was then divided on people who said Vaush did nothing wrong and people who, very correctly, pointed out that weaponizing misogyny against a very powerful TERF is only going to hurt trans people and especially trans women on the long run, directly feeding into the victim narratives that they use to explain why trans woman can't use the bathroom. 4. Enters Kat Blaque and Contrapoints, both trans women. Contrapoints didn't liked the joke and I think that was literally all she did? I think some patreon post too but I didn't saw much of that so meh. Kat Blaque took another screenshot of the original tweet of Vaush, censored his identity and asked other trans women if they agree with people using misogyny against transphobes. 5. Vaush, in a incredible display of manchild behaviour that I frankly didn't expect from him, decides to then DM Kat and "debate" with her about how he was actually right and she is wrong, using a weird ass hypothetical about a black rapper using misogyny on his lyrics and then being criticizing by Shapiro? Kat answered essentially "no, I wouldn't defend misogyny from him but also it's not the same? you are not a trans person on this situation" and Vaush kept ignoring that to keep demanding a yes or not answer. When she keeps saying that she didn't care about his content that much in the first place and just wanted to have a conversation with other trans women, Vaush insists that he is better to advocate for the trans community than she is, that he is "concerned" for Kat and other dismissive misogynistic bullshit that I am honestly amazed that she could tolerate as well as she did. 6. After this conversation, Vaush did what I think was a 7 hour stream about the whole issue and somewhere on it he talked about how Kat "yell at white men but in private fetishize them" and how obssesed she was with him. 7. Following this, Kat released sexting messages (no pics, though) that she and Vaush exchanged years ago where Vaush approached her first. Somewhere she tweets again that she will settle for white dick sometimes but find it overall "underwhelming." 8. Because of this, a fucking legion of people are now calling what Kat did the same as sexual assault/abuse/rvenge porn and how Vaush, again, "might" have done something wrong, "maybe", but really it was Kat and Contra the true villains for not agreeing with Vaush because, what, do you want to defend a terf??? 9. For the record, Kat admits and recognizes that she shouldn't have said that or released those messages. I agree that she shouldn't have said that either. Does anyone of the Vaush defenders cares? No. The worst I have seen people say about Vaush comments on Kat fetishizing white men is that they were "spicy" and nothing else. Vaush now uses a old tweet where Kat was admitidly awful to a trans suicidal kid as for reason as to why she isn't good for the trans community, unlike him, the cis guy, which is fucking priceless coming from the guy who is constantly clipped out of context and has every awful accusation flown his way. Kat apoligized for that old tweet, again admits it was an awful mistake on her part, but Vaush doesn't care because she didn't played his debate game. So now people keep making videos about how Vaush did nothing wrong, Kat is a monster, Contra is a hypocrite and I just want to scream.

#sa mention #abuse mention #suicide mention

22 notes · View notes

sixth-light · 3 years

Note

Hi! I admit I went lurking in your lgbtqia tag, and somewhere in the tags you said that while you are a cis woman you know this because you consciously thought it through, and I would like to ask about it if you don't mind (feel free to ignore this if you do). So, how did you go about it? If I start to think about it I always end up thinking that if you strip away all stereotypes and physical attributes there's nothing left, and I could best describe my experience with gender as (1/3)

„society said I’m a girl and I don’t care enough to say otherwise”, like I don’t have any reason to think I’m not cis but when I think about what makes me a woman I can’t come up with anything other than „they said so”. I didn't want to ask a trans person about it, because when I put it like this it seems really dismissive of what they go through, and on top of that I really don’t want to be *that person* by seeming like I’m demanding that they validate their identity to me when I just (2/3)

get stuck not even halfway through my thought process about this, and I’ve had like multiple crises over this, so I’d like to get this over with if I can. This seemed like my best chance to get an answer without possibly hurting someone, so I will be very grateful if you can answer me, but don’t stress about it if you can’t or don’t want to. (And thank you for reading through this novel-length ask in the first place, really, and sorry for loading all of this on you. Crises, as I said…) (3/3)

(cut because this is gonna get a bit rambly)

First up: I think if you’re having multiple crises about gender it’s ok - in fact imperative - to ask questions about it, you’re not dismissing anybody else’s experience. I hope this answer helps you in some way.

The tl;dr is that, as trans people have taught us, the primary symptom of being [gender] is wanting to be [gender]. The long answer is...longer.

I totally get where you’re coming from on “if you strip away all stereotypes and physical attributes there's nothing left”, but I don’t quite think it’s true - at least not in the way I interact with gender - and I’ll try and break down why.

The thing is, gender is more or less fake. And when I say it’s fake I mean that it’s a very broad-brush system of grouping people which is made up in order to explain, very generally, who people are when you don’t know much else about them. And as a tool that is used to group people on an extremely broad level, it is inextricably intertwined with and born of whatever society you and your gender are operating in. So to start with, you can’t really consider gender outside of society. For me, it doesn’t mean anything when you take it out of the context of interacting with other people. Having (or not having) a gender matters because it’s a way of telling people something about who you are.

In terms of figuring out what things about you say what your gender is - I think of it like...there’s a big bucket of all the attributes people can have that are used to assign them a gender, or for them to pick that gender. Two people from the same society/cultural background will broadly agree on what goes in which bucket, and what the buckets are called. The more different your society and cultural background is, the more different the contents of your buckets are. Some stuff that’s in one bucket for your culture might be in a different bucket for another culture (like colours). What the buckets are and what’s in them changes over time. And, to make it even more confusing, no one person’s gender is made up of all the same attributes from that gender’s bucket, even comparing them to someone of the same gender who agrees with them totally on what the buckets are called and what can be in them. And lots of attributes are in multiple buckets! They can make someone feel lots of different genders depending on the person doing the feeling.

So, ultimately, gender for me is both incredibly, incredibly personal and totally inseparable from my cultural background. And that means that yeah, some of the bits that feel to me like they make me a woman are about my body or ‘stereotypical’ things - and that’s totally fine as long as I don’t make the mistake of thinking that this means someone for whom a DIFFERENT set of attributes makes them female is ‘wrong’ about that. Or the mistake of thinking that the things that make *me* feel like a woman are automatically female attributes for someone of a different gender.

For example, for me I feel the ability/possibility of bearing children is pretty strongly tied to my gender - but I know nonbinary people and men who’ve borne kids, and they’re not women. And I know lots of women who don’t want to or can’t bear kids, and they’re definitely women. So as a marker of femininity, it’s not much use to generalise with. I can only say it’s in my particular gender bucket.

So, having worked through that - and because, like you, I started at ‘well I was assigned female at birth and I don’t disagree’ - I gave up on trying to think about gender as a question of specific attributes. I think of it as: does it make me feel good to be assigned as a woman, in this society I live in, and would it make me feel bad to be assigned as a different gender?

And the answer to both is yes. I like being perceived as female! I feel happy and affirmed in myself when I tick “F” on a survey. I feel more secure in female-dominated spaces. I want to be a woman, it makes me happy to be one, ergo I am one.

Moreover, I don’t want to be perceived as another gender - I point out that I’m a woman if someone’s ever unsure. This was really brought home to me, don’t laugh, when I did a playthrough of Stardew Valley and accidentally made my character male (I get the little symbol confused shush they’re very similar) and spent the entire run through being upset whenever my character was addressed in-game as “Mr Anne”. I wasn’t a Mr! I didn’t want to be! It did not feel good! I have been misgendered occasionally IRL but only for momentary interactions, not persistently - I didn’t realise just how much I wouldn’t like it even in this very harmless context.

But, here’s the thing: I’m not totally sure that I would be a woman or be so confident about being perceived as one if I lived in a society that had very different gender buckets, or put different things in them. I’m a cis woman because I align with the category of ‘woman’ as determined by 21st-century Aotearoa New Zealand. Would I be a woman in, IDK, second-century Scotland? Fucked if I know. And that’s fine, because like I said: for me gender is specifically a way of telling the society you live in something about who you are. I want to tell people I’m a woman, it makes me happy to do so, so I am one; and I was raised as a girl, so I’m a cis woman. It’s as simple and complicated as that.

#lgbtqia #gender #be glad I spared you all the Venn diagrams #Anonymous

147 notes · View notes

hellomynameisbisexual · 3 years

Text

Here's a shortlist of those who realized that I — a cis woman who'd identified as heterosexual for decades of life — was in fact actually bi, long before I realized it myself recently: my sister, all my friends, my boyfriend, and the TikTok algorithm.

On TikTok, the relationship between user and algorithm is uniquely (even sometimes uncannily) intimate. An app which seemingly contains as many multitudes of life experiences and niche communities as there are people in the world, we all start in the lowest common denominator of TikTok. Straight TikTok (as it's popularly dubbed) initially bombards your For You Page with the silly pet videos and viral teen dances that folks who don't use TikTok like to condescendingly reduce it to.

Quickly, though, TikTok begins reading your soul like some sort of divine digital oracle, prying open layers of your being never before known to your own conscious mind. The more you use it, the more tailored its content becomes to your deepest specificities, to the point where you get stuff that's so relatable that it can feel like a personal attack (in the best way) or (more dangerously) even a harmful trigger from lifelong traumas.

For example: I don't know what dark magic (read: privacy violations) immediately clued TikTok into the fact that I was half-Brazilian, but within days of first using it, Straight TikTok gave way to at first Portuguese-speaking then broader Latin TikTok. Feeling oddly seen (being white-passing and mostly American-raised, my Brazilian identity isn't often validated), I was liberal with the likes, knowing that engagement was the surefire way to go deeper down this identity-affirming corner of the social app.

TikTok made lots of assumptions from there, throwing me right down the boundless, beautiful, and oddest multiplicities of Alt TikTok, a counter to Straight TikTok's milquetoast mainstreamness.

Home to a wide spectrum of marginalized groups, I was giving out likes on my FYP like Oprah, smashing that heart button on every type of video: from TikTokers with disabilities, Black and Indigenous creators, political activists, body-stigma-busting fat women, and every glittering shade of the LGBTQ cornucopia. The faves were genuine, but also a way to support and help offset what I knew about the discriminatory biases in TikTok's algorithm.

My diverse range of likes started to get more specific by the minute, though. I wasn't just on general Black TikTok anymore, but Alt Cottagecore Middle-Class Black Girl TikTok (an actual label one creator gave her page's vibes). Then it was Queer Latina Roller Skating Girl TikTok, Women With Non-Hyperactive ADHD TikTok, and then a double whammy of Women Loving Women (WLW) TikTok alternating between beautiful lesbian couples and baby bisexuals.

Looking back at my history of likes, the transition from queer “ally” to “salivating simp” is almost imperceptible.

There was no one precise "aha" moment. I started getting "put a finger down" challenges that wouldn't reveal what you were putting a finger down for until the end. Then, 9-fingers deep (winkwink), I'd be congratulated for being 100% bisexual. Somewhere along the path of getting served multiple WLW Disney cosplays in a single day and even dom lesbian KinkTok roleplay — or whatever the fuck Bisexual Pirate TikTok is — deductive reasoning kind of spoke for itself.

But I will never forget the one video that was such a heat-seeking missile of a targeted attack that I was moved to finally text it to my group chat of WLW friends with a, "Wait, am I bi?" To which the overwhelming consensus was, "Magic 8 Ball says, 'Highly Likely.'"

Serendipitously posted during Pride Month, the video shows a girl shaking her head at the caption above her head, calling out confused and/or closeted queers who say shit like, "I think everyone is a LITTLE bisexual," to the tune of "Closer" by The Chainsmokers. When the lyrics land on the word "you," she points straight at the screen — at me — her finger and inquisitive look piercing my hopelessly bisexual soul like Cupid's goddamn arrow.

Oh no, the voice inside my head said, I have just been mercilessly perceived.

As someone who had, in fact, done feminist studies at a tiny liberal arts college with a gender gap of about 70 percent women, I'd of course dabbled. I've always been quick to bring up the Kinsey scale, to champion a true spectrum of sexuality, and to even declare (on multiple occasions) that I was, "straight, but would totally fuck that girl!"

Oh no, the voice inside my head returned, I've literally just been using extra words to say I was bi.

After consulting the expertise of my WLW friend group (whose mere existence, in retrospect, also should've clued me in on the flashing neon pink, purple, and blue flag of my raging bisexuality), I ran to my boyfriend to inform him of the "news."

"Yeah, baby, I know. We all know," he said kindly.

"How?!" I demanded.

Well for one, he pointed out, every time we came across a video of a hot girl while scrolling TikTok together, I'd without fail watch the whole way through, often more than once, regardless of content. (Apparently, straight girls do not tend to do this?) For another, I always breathlessly pointed out when we'd pass by a woman I found beautiful, often finding a way to send a compliment her way. ("I'm just a flirt!" I used to rationalize with a hand wave, "Obvs, I'm not actually sexually attracted to them!") Then, I guess, there were the TED Talk-like rants I'd subject him to about the thinly veiled queer relationship in Adventure Time between Princess Bubblegum and Marcelyne the Vampire Queen — which the cowards at Cartoon Network forced creators to keep as subtext!

And, well, when you lay it all out like that...

But my TikTok-fueled bisexual awakening might actually speak less to the omnipotence of the app's algorithm, and more to how heteronormativity is truly one helluva drug.

Sure, TikTok bombarded me with the thirst traps of my exact type of domineering masc lady queers, who reduced me to a puddle of drool I could no longer deny. But I also recalled a pivotal moment in college when I briefly questioned my heterosexuality, only to have a lesbian friend roll her eyes and chastise me for being one of those straight girls who leads Actual Queer Women on. I figured she must know better. So I never pursued any of my lady crushes in college, which meant I never experimented much sexually, which made me conclude that I couldn't call myself bisexual if I'd never had actual sex with a woman. I also didn't really enjoy lesbian porn much, though the fact that I'd often find myself fixating on the woman during heterosexual porn should've clued me into that probably coming more from how mainstream lesbian porn is designed for straight men.

The ubiquity of heterormativity, even when unwittingly perpetrated by members of the queer community, is such an effective self-sustaining cycle. Aside from being met with queer-gating (something I've since learned bi folks often experience), I had a hard time identifying my attraction to women as genuine attraction, simply because it felt different to how I was attracted to men.

Heteronormativity is truly one helluva drug.

So much of women's sexuality — of my sexuality — can feel defined by that carnivorous kind of validation you get from men. I met no societal resistance in fully embodying and exploring my desire for men, either (which, to be clear, was and is insatiable slut levels of wanting that peen.) But in retrospect, I wonder how many men I slept with not because I was truly attracted to them, but because I got off on how much they wanted me.

My attraction to women comes with a different texture of eroticism. With women (and bare with a baby bi, here), the attraction feels more shared, more mutual, more tender rather than possessive. It's no less raw or hot or all-consuming, don't get me wrong. But for me at least, it comes more from a place of equality rather than just power play. I love the way women seem to see right through me, to know me, without us really needing to say a word.

I am still, as it turns out, a sexual submissive through-and-through, regardless of what gender my would-be partner is. But, ignorantly and unknowingly, I'd been limiting my concept of who could embody dominant sexual personas to cis men. But when TikTok sent me down that glorious rabbit hole of masc women (who know exactly what they're doing, btw), I realized my attraction was not to men, but a certain type of masculinity. It didn't matter which body or genitalia that presentation came with.

There is something about TikTok that feels particularly suited to these journeys of sexual self-discovery and, in the case of women loving women, I don't think it's just the prescient algorithm. The short-form video format lends itself to lightning bolt-like jolts of soul-bearing nakedness, with the POV camera angles bucking conventions of the male gaze, which entrenches the language of film and TV in heterosexual male desire.

In fairness to me, I'm far from the only one who missed their inner gay for a long time — only to have her pop out like a queer jack-in-the-box throughout a near year-long quarantine that led many of us to join TikTok. There was the baby bi mom, and scores of others who no longer had to publicly perform their heterosexuality during lockdown — only to realize that, hey, maybe I'm not heterosexual at all?

Flooded with video after video affirming my suspicions, reflecting my exact experiences as they happened to others, the change in my sexual identity was so normalized on TikTok that I didn't even feel like I needed to formally "come out." I thought this safe home I'd found to foster my baby bisexuality online would extend into the real world.

But I was in for a rude awakening.

Testing out my bisexuality on other platforms, casually referring to it on Twitter, posting pictures of myself decked out in a rainbow skate outfit (which I bought before realizing I was queer), I received nothing but unquestioning support and validation. Eventually, I realized I should probably let some members of my family know before they learned through one of these posts, though.

Daunted by the idea of trying to tell my Latina Catholic mother and Swiss Army veteran father (who's had a crass running joke about me being a "lesbian" ever since I first declared myself a feminist at age 12), I chose the sibling closest to me. Seeing as how gender studies was one of her majors in college too, I thought it was a shoo-in. I sent an off-handed, joke-y but serious, "btw I'm bi now!" text, believing that's all that would be needed to receive the same nonchalant acceptance I found online.

It was not.

I didn't receive a response for two days. Hurt and panicked by what was potentially my first mild experience of homophobia, I called them out. They responded by insisting we need to have a phone call for such "serious" conversations. As I calmly tried to express my hurt on said call, I was told my text had been enough to make this sibling worry about my mental wellbeing. They said I should be more understanding of why it'd be hard for them to (and I'm paraphrasing) "think you were one way for twenty-eight years" before having to contend with me deciding I was now "something else."

But I wasn't "something else," I tried to explain, voice shaking. I hadn't knowingly been deceiving or hiding this part of me. I'd simply discovered a more appropriate label. But it was like we were speaking different languages. Other family members were more accepting, thankfully. There are many ways I'm exceptionally lucky, my IRL environment as supportive as Baby Bi TikTok. Namely, I'm in a loving relationship with a man who never once mistook any of it as a threat, instead giving me all the space in the world to understand this new facet of my sexuality.

I don't have it all figured out yet. But at least when someone asks if I listen to Girl in Red on social media, I know to answer with a resounding, "Yes," even though I've never listened to a single one of her songs. And for now, that's enough.

76 notes · View notes

baeddel · 3 years

Text

@androfem has made a number of good posts about transmisogyny, addressed to a milieu I’m very glad not to be part of anymore. I wanted to run off of something they wrote in this one...

[2.5k words. transmisogyny, racism tw. epistemic status: Hawkeye Gough]

while hedging an argument in the second paragraph, they write “i’m by no means someone who can definitively say what tme/tma mean” (thus preparing us to hear a definition but to treat it as nondefinitive), but that they see the acronym ‘tme’ (’tranmisogyny exempt’) as “the most palatable attempt trans women and transfem nb people have made towards identifying whether other trans people are one of them or not, and other trans people communicating that as well voluntarily.” By palatable they mean to other people in their milieu, who they spend the rest of the post attacking over the reasons they found all the other terminology (casab etc.) unpalatable. Their criticisms are all quite good.

But - am I crazy, or, aren’t they wrong in this quote? The way I remember it, trans women did not come up with the term ‘tme’. This was something that tme people came up with themselves. The use of tme would eventually become imbricated with the disuse of casab, under the argument that casab requires you to ‘out’ yourself, and so on, which was its own controversy. But originally it wasn’t related to this reservation or at least I never experienced the two as connected. tme was something that, to us, came out of nowhere; it was something like an alien bacteria penetrating the atmosphere from the belly of an asteroid; it woke us up to a whole neighbouring discourse that we were unaware of. That neighbourhood was made up of cis women, trans men, and nonbinary cafabs who were beginning to grapple with the ‘transmisogyny question’. At the time, most people did not take the concept of ‘transmisogyny’ seriously; many people still believed that trans women had male privilege and so on. It was a huge surprise to us to find a whole emerging discourse of non-trans women who believed transmisogyny was real and took it seriously enough to invent their own terminology for describing it.

It’s possible you can trace the coinage to some trans woman somewhere. But at least, at the time that we encountered it, we understood it to be the self-description of non-trans women. A lot of trans women at the time reacted very negatively to this. One of the main criticisms was that tme was not a ‘coherent category’ - could we say that it tries to be too definitive, ie. a definition that overapplies? The anxiety was that it would collect the experience of subjects which cannot rightly be put together; trans men, cis women, cafabs, whoever else, do not all experience patriarhcy(!) in the same way. They all have different proximities to misogyny, emotional labour (when you were still allowed to say that), access to community, sexual access & availability, and so on. Later or earlier, I don’t remember, this same discursive device would be used by trans women against casab; we were derided for “treating casab like a coherent class.”

Androfem may be surprised to learn that this criticism orginates with trans women, if they weren’t there for this. The gesture returns, later on in their post, when they chastise others in their milieu for reading trans women’s arguments in bad faith. They caution that “the assumption shouldn’t be made that [a transfem is] completely unaware of or in denial about” all of the various nuances of proximity whenever she says “definitively” (emphasis mine) that “tme people aren’t affected by transmisogyny”. At this point, the taboo on definitions reaches a delerious extreme - Androfem’s peers take issue even with this tautology! And the solution Androfem proposes is not to take the claim seriously, but to secretly insert something that disrupts it, imagine some inapplicable cases, and so on, and, further, to assume that she is also doing it behind the scenes. Androfem identifies this obsurantism with transmisogyny; their peers cannot bear to take a trans woman seriously, so they will always send her work back and demand a new more palatable analysis. And we trust they are right to make this diagnosis; but this trans woman experiences it as the terrible return of her own native discourse. What we sowed in 2012 they now reap in 2021.

Why has this discourse progressed to such an epistemologically vicious place, where no statements about gender are possible? Baudrillard would enjoy watching our transsexuality become transpolitical. For whatever unconscious reason, whenever we are presented with a master signifier capable of rendering the transcendental field, we are immediately compelled to castrate it. Our destiny is to constantly throw discourses into indifference. Maybe. But the more direct lesson is that something went wrong with the method of analysis we employed to explicate transmisogyny in 2012. What went wrong?

Maybe we can begin with some statements in Androfem’s post and work backwards. They write that “tme people benefit ... from transmisogyny”, although they insert in parenthesis “(some more than others)”. This was an analysis we would have subscribed to in 2012. In 2021, we now want to ask: who benefits and in what way? Who benefits more, who less, and why?

It’s true that transmisogyny brings some profit. Growing up as trans girls we are often deployed as women are deployed; we become the older sister, surrogate mother, and secret girlfriend. Whenever our peers see us in the correct light and notice our softness (to borrow a Saxon term), they exploit it. For boys the profit derives primarily from our socially acceptable proximity in the enforced homosociality that children in our culture endure. The trans girl is a girl who you can have sleepovers with, who you can have in the boys locker room, and so on, and therefore have early sexual and emotional access to. Girls generally exploit it a little later on, when heterosexual relations are expected. The trans girl can be a special kind of boy, like a ‘gay best friend’, but who is sexually available. Both boy and girl cast their brief teenage becomings on their own special gendered Other who is capable of facilitating it by her difference. Contra Balzac, it is precisely her castration that allows her to function as a superavailable Other, not (yet) as an overproximate Same that makes us recoil.

This relation of the tme to trans women dominates in the Bay Area of California, where trans women have resumed some of our traditional roles as temple functionaries. You probably have some homeless or recently homeless or about-to-be homeless trans woman (lets say she is ‘having to be homeless’) in your overcrowded apartment who will always be there to help you process your gender feelings and is probably down to fuck if you can get over yourself and make a move on her.

But these wages of transmisogyny are transitory and marginal. While most trans women will have encountered some of these kinds of exploitative gendered relations, it is by no means a universal experience of tme people. And, whats more, it is possible to have these relations, with the same benefits, which are not exploitative. I have known many cis girl-trans girl couples who got together under the bonds of enforced heterosexuality because of the profit each had for the other - the trans girl is not threatening, better about her boundaries, and so on, perhaps because of her own experiences of sexual exploitation; the cis girl, for equally contingent reasons, just ‘gets it’, and doesn’t try and make a man out of the trans girl - and when the trans girl realizes she is trans and comes out to her partner, the two track an escape route from heterosexuality together. There is no reason to expect it to always go one way, exploitative, or always the other, emancipatory. Is the cis girl ‘benefitting from transmisogyny’ in this scenario? Is she perhaps benefitting less than others, or more than others? I think that we cannot easily analyze every relation between person and person in terms of cost and benefit; even when we are bound by structures of domination, we cannot already anticipate the outcome. At the same time, if such experiences are rare, we aren’t surprised, because we know that the desiring-situations are staged in a certain way that makes discovering these kinds of escape routes difficult.

But simaultaneous with these occasional benefits, 1. transmisogyny is usually damaging to a trans woman without bringing any profit to her persecutor, and 2. transmisogyny is usually damaging to a tme person as well. Don’t you think so? Superficially, it acts as a limit on your presentation; all cis men growing up experience limits on their behaviour, backed by punishments, to prevent or destroy whatever might seem transsexual in them. Maybe it plays a similar role in the upbringing of cis women, trans men, cafabs, etc., in ways that are waiting to be articulated? On a deeper level, transmisogyny - as the hygeine of gendered categories, the social governance of presentation, etc. - plays a crucial role in the overall desiring-situation of oppressive heterosexuality; it creates a series of taboos, anxieties, myths and harsh realities which, in some indirect way, help to maintain heterosexuality’s renewal in each successive generation.

I think some harm was done by a too-ready application of frameworks developed to analyze white supremacy to the question of gender. The progressive leitkultur in those days was still the ‘invisible napsack’. While for transmisogyny the benefits are merely occasional, there are universally accessible wages of whiteness. White people enjoy a distorted labour market; the deterritorialization of black neighbourhoods creates (barely) affordable apartments for (eg.) white students [the scenario with the Oakland enaree we described implicitly takes place in one of these apartments]; and, most generally, there are habits of prosociality between white people which are difficult to break that continually renew the same distribution of wealth, status, care and intimacy [Eldridge Cleaver referenced Harry Golden’s gag about ‘vertical integration, horizontal segregation’ (pg 67) as a good description of race relations in Folsom; we find it to be a good description of race relations in the trans community as well].

When we tried to apply these readymade frameworks to transmisogyny, we found it difficult to construct relevant categories. Transmisogyny could not be domesticated to a form of exploitation metaphorized in economic terms. Therefore, every further demand for a ‘materialism’ that could clearly enumerate the relationships of exploitation would be frustrated, finding only edge cases and anecdotes. There was no underlying machinery that always produced this or that outcome. Therefore, each category was “incoherent”, too definitive, unable to capture what we took for an underlying system that was just out of reach. But the problem was only a misplace of focus. Transmisogyny is not really a system of exploitation; it’s the nightmare of a patrilineality that cannot enforce its borders. It is necessary therefore to move beyond categories like oppression and privilege, bigot and victim, exploited and exploiter, and deal with the domination that captures both ‘tme’ and ‘tma’ in its ruses. Now we can answer some of the old warhorses; CASAB is not a class which we can say anything about, nor is tme or even tma; it is rather the residue of a paternal subjugation, a ‘weight of dead generations’ that everyone confronts moments upon their exit from the womb; a universal coercive sexuation which we cannot help but encounter, combat or obey, enforce on others and despair in our private moments. Everyone, everywhere, is aware of the problem; and the exit is waiting, somewhere, as yet undiscovered, for anyone to seize.

So much for the riddle of 2012. In 2021 the situation is not really the same. Androfem’s milieu were not socialized by anti-revisionist parties and do not metaphorize their experiences in economic terms. Their platform is a sort of legalism. They enter into a discourse which has been a continuous bloodbath for twelve years (the relevant year for them is not 2012 but 2009, and the website not tumblr but wordpress); every discussion has already been had; what is necessary now is only to enforce the common law precedent. They are obliged to accept the existence of transmisogyny because it was already accepted before they got there; they don’t really understand why and are not curious about it. They are not gender abolitionists, but inclusionists. If they had lived thirty years ago they would probably have been exclusionists and thirty years before that, inclusionists again. Every conversation begins with some pious disavowal, ‘I can’t believe we’re having this conversation again...’ Everything has already been tabulated in their stare decisis; asexuals are not lgbt, queer is a slur, cottagecore is colonialist, and so on. What motivates them is primarily some irrelevant triviality like whether this or that fanfiction is normalizing abuse or whatever. It is thus easy to see why Androfem argues that the old taboo on being definitive is transmisogyny; in their milieu it is a strategy for rendering the anti-transmisogyny laws unenforcable. If the law is ever invoked there is a loophole; look here, you missed this nuance...

Much of that milieu - from my own experience with it - is dominated by TERF cults that essentially run friend groups as front organizations; they start off siccing teenages on each other over shipping drama and soon encourage mobbing trans women undesirables. These networks were active on wordpress in 2009, they were on tumblr when I joined in 2012 (where they were able to leverage irl connections to intimidate members of my friend group who were organizing), and they are running discord servers and stalking tumblrs here in 2021. [If anyone from that scene is reading this far and this sounds at all familiar to them: I’m sorry but, yeah, you’re in a cult. You’re better than this! The fandom drama commentariat is not really worth trying to reform. Sauve qui peut!]

These are normally crypto-TERFs who are ‘officially’ inclusive of trans women and, in fact, their friend-group cults are usually full of trans women. Trans women, we have to say, make the most ruthless transmisogynists. To this extent we must disagree with Androfem when they say that “the smallest demographic in [TERF] communities are transfems”; in my experience transfems have sometimes been the most numerous, and it is precisely because TERFs are organized around transmisogyny. The reasoning behind this paradoxical outcome is understandable only in terms of dianetics and thetan space operas.

Anyway. I have sometimes felt that transmascs need some kind of Prince of their own; someone who is able to articulate his own transsexual line of critique in the face of trans women’s well-known and well-settled one, but with the minimum amount of ressentiment; who can hold his own against transfeminine parochialsm and not cave to cheap attacks, but also not make them, and not become parochial himself. I think that ‘tme’ is at its most valuable as an organizational principle when only someone like Androfem can “definitively” articulate it. It has to be a space for tracking the escape from my own desiring-situation on my own terms, in my own style, by my own design; bathed in my own light... But to be capable of accomplishing this it needs to become a break with all previous discourses. One that is open, flexible, and forward-looking; a dangerous gambit which is definitive and unprecedented...

89 notes · View notes

needlepcint · 3 years

Photo

INTRODUCING...

HALLE BAILEY, CIS WOMAN, 20, SHE / HER ⟨ ✽ ⟩ hey, you haven’t bumped into nia williams lately, have you ? they have been living here for the past two years ( during the school semester ) and during that time, locals have gotten to know them as quirky & charming. a little birdie told me they can be quite vain & devious though. explains why they’re an architecture major at whitby university. they really remind me of field time at six am and still making your eight am looking flawless, spandex shorts under short skirts paired with high heels you can run in, && impeccably manicured hands handling any power tool with ease. if you’re ever looking for them, i bet you can find them around the retro room.

HIGHLIGHTS...

the daughter raised by a single father, a former nhler, though also with the help of his teammates’ wives and girlfriends — a unique situation that shaped her life ; a lover of beauty, no matter what it may be, but a little obsessed with it when it comes to herself ; tiny but with a nose for scoring, speed, and elusiveness on the field that’s made her a two time women’s soccer mvp and she’s only a junior ; sometimes comes across as a little ditzy and airheaded, but though she has the look of a girly-girl, looks can be deceiving and certainly don’t underestimate her ; has an incredible knack for turning old things into new and desired items, mostly with regards to furniture and knicknacks.

THE STORY...

— cole harbour, nova scotia, the birthplace of sidney crosby the next one, eight years later — nathan mackinnon, and six years after that : nia williams. her birth was unplanned, however ; her mother only twenty and working towards med school. her father a halifax mooseheads player just having fun at her conception, now twenty-two and playing out his dreams in the nhl with the montreal canadians.

— things always work out in the end, though, and at twenty-two her father became her sole guardian and growing up quite a bit in the process, her mother vanishing from her life at that point and never re-entering.

— she was technically raised by a single father, but she was also perhaps raised by the veterans on the team and most importantly, the wives and girlfriends of her father’s teammates whose care she was left in the care of during games. it was them that taught her the things that her father couldn’t, and nia never wanted for her mother, that space happily and willingly filled by almost two dozen women who were older sisters, mothers, aunts... they were family.

— but even with all the make up and fashion advice, nia was very much her father’s daughter as well : crawling around the outdoors, going one-on-one on the ice, swimming in the ocean and still looking flawless while doing it. michael williams was a good father in the end, and grew into the role.

— she play hockey and soccer growing up, seeming to have a nose for offense, as elusive on skates as in cleats. nia could’ve been great at both sports, was great at both sports, but in the middle of high school she made the switch to focus on soccer full time. her passion for the ice remained, but the opportunities in soccer were stronger — and she loved the outdoors, loved the field in the early hours of morning.

— it was in the summer after grade 11 that she was offered a scholarship from whitby university to play women’s soccer ( amongst others ), but whitby fit the bill for what she wanted, and port briar reminded her a lot of home in cole harbour with the chilly sea. so after graduation, she was off to whitby to play soccer.

— on the college scene, it became obvious that nia simply put, was a star. a small but ever elusive forward who had speed that didn’t seem possible with her stature and an ability to score like no one else. the campus loved her, the team loved her, and opposing teams loved to hate her on the field. she was named mvp of the team as a freshman, a feat she would repeat her sophomore year as well. she’s currently gunning for her third.

MISC...

— architecture feels like an odd choice for those who don’t know nia well. she tends to come across as a little bit of an airhead, ditzy, not always the greatest with common sense. but she is actually quite book smart and sometimes, the ditziness is just a bit of an act. she had fostered a bit of FASCINATION with arenas having been in so many growing up, she began to harbor a desire to design one ( and to do it better ). sketching had been something that held her attention when she needed to be seated and still, and that fit in perfectly. after entering whitby undeclared, nia found herself drawn to the architecture department and program, officially declaring at the end of her freshman year.

— nia is hardly ever still : tapping fingers, jumping knees, sitting and then standing. she was diagnosed with adhd when she was seven. she is medicated for it now, but it also still manifests in attention deficient for her, leaving a wake of unfinished projects in her wake. sports had been one of the few things that held her attention, kept her occupied, and one of the few things she worked to hone her skills in.

— because of her tendency to jump from one thing to another, it’s no surprise she had a litany of hobbies that she’s tried : you name it, she’s likely tried it once. everything from yoga, to sewing, to painting, to rock climbing. in some ways it’s made her a bit of a jack of all trades, though she always comes back to soccer in the end.

— however, one of thing did stick, kinda. in high school she took a woodworking class and from that spawned a hobby of furniture upcycling. her father had always been good with his hands and she knew her way around power tools, still does. she takes great pride in being able to fix things to be usable again, and loves to shop around the retro room or drive around port briar looking for things left at the curb. it can’t be a huge project though, like anything, if it’s not done in one go, chances are she may never return to finish the project.

— she lives in an off-campus apartment this year after spending the first two in dorms. she’s looking forward to having her own space and kitchen ( even with roommates ).

— rigid schedules help her to keep organized when her natural tendency is to fall back into messiness and chaos. living with a neat roommate has helped her in some ways, because though messiness is her tendency, she finds that neatness helps her to keep focused and on track. being reminded to clean every week has been good for her.

— her favorite color is red and she has a penchant for red nails and red lipstick.

— her father is now an assistant hockey coach in the ncaa, but not at whitby. she sees him when that school in in town though she’s always rooting for whitby. her summers are spent back in cole harbour and she is still in touch with some of the wives and girlfriends who she’d been so close to.

— she’s an early bird, as odd as it is. she’s always loved sunrises over the atlantic ocean. you can find her either on the field or out for a run in the early hours, and then when the snow flies, likely doing yoga.

PERSONALITY...

— on the surface nia is very much a pretty girl. always looking flawless, a little ditzy, a little shallow. her smile is her weapon and she uses it to get people on her side. she likes people to like her, though one might hesitate to truly classify her as a nice girl or a mean girl. she ends up falling somewhere in the middle as most people do, never mean without cause but not friends with anyone. her enemies aren’t always obvious, something kept under wraps with petty glares and muttered comments. she doesn’t go looking for trouble, but if it crosses her path she meets it head on. her soccer star status has endeared her with some and made her just as many enemies, especially on their rival teams. she’s generally sweet to everyone she meets, but wrong her and she’ll be the first to be shit talking behind your back.

— men and women alike find her charming, something that suits her tastes. she’s been in a fair number of flings, though nothing that she ever saw as longterm. nia in general doesn’t look at the big picture, which has frustrated some who saw something more with her. but people still love her all the same. it’s a power she pretends to not know she has, but she’s more devious than her lipsticked smiles portray her to be.

— she has a thing for looks, rarely looking less than pristine herself, even in the middle of practice on a hot pre-season day. beauty, she’s been told, starts on the inside, and she does believe that, but helping along the outside never hurts either. she likes to feel good about herself, and comfort doesn’t always take precedence.

— nia always has a schedule, but at the same time, she’s almost always late. time management is a thing she’s still working on, and the only advice is to tell her anything is fifteen minutes earlier than it is.

— she’s a pretty girl, but has never felt like she had to stick to that box. instead, she has a way of just looking flawless no matter what that does. people judge her from her appearance and she knows that, but she also relishes in being able to prove people wrong. she knows her way around a math class and almost every power tool there is, she’s not afraid to get dirty --- just looking bad, so she’ll find a way to make mud look flawless. she’s obsessed with beauty, just not always the most conventional forms of it.

APPEARANCE...

— 5′0″, built lithe and fast.

— style : cute and cottagecore on the daily, but isn’t afraid to toe the line into edgy for nights out. a bit of “hardness” can make its way into her outfit in blacks and faux leathers matched with flowy silks and puff sleeves. she can make the switch from “good girl” to “bad girl” as quickly as she wants, depending on how she’s feeling that day.

— jewelry : an absolute sucker for jewelry. often is on esty too often despite her already extensive collection of bracelets, necklaces, and rings. her style is often dainty jewelry, though she doesn’t discriminate.

— tattoos : a small butterfly on the back of her left shoulder

— scars : several small nicks and almost invisible ones

OOC...

hiiii. it’s ollie again ✌️😎... and bc i normally play hockey bois... here’s my self-indulgent tie to hockey via nia whoops.

#briar.intro #( that pic of halle truly just... wow )

7 notes · View notes

eventual-ghoste · 3 years

Text

TOG rambling

Hello! This post has to do with Andy and some revelations at the end of Force Multiplied. Spoilers I give aren’t super specific but they’re there, and I can’t promise they won’t bite.

This is also in response to a TOG discord question I couldn’t stop thinking about, regarding Andy’s history as compared to Nicky’s, as posited by Em | salzundhonig:

But Nicky's past as a crusader and his growth from his past was well received, surely that'll be the same with Andy right?

I apologize if these ramblings sound like a rant but I swear my intentions are in the spirit of debate/discourse, and they are not an attack on any individuals.

The TL;DR is: Andy has work to do. Hopefully Hollywood and Rucka don’t fuck that up.

Feel free to check/correct/call me out if I’ve misspoke anywhere here (I realize I still have a lot to learn) but IMHO, I don’t think a semblance of Andy’s growth will be well received. Or, at least, I’m not so certain it should be because, in the comics, I genuinely don’t think Andy has grown. At the end of Force Multiplied, she still defends her actions with the “this is how I grew up” argument, and says it was “a long time ago,” and as much as I love love LOVE Andromache the Scythian for her badassery and how she’s a vision of female empowerment, I can’t help but think about how I hear those words all the time from people defending themselves against racist and/or sexist comments from so-called bygone eras.

Wanna know a sad difference between those people and our beloved Andy? They apologize for what they’ve done, or who they were. As hollow as the words will sound, however unforgivable their actions, however self-serving the apology will be— Those Asshats apologize. Comic!Andy never does, not even when confronted by Nile, an African American woman who likely descends from slaves, and has undoubtedly experienced racism and discrimination on a regular basis. It’s been thousands of years and Andy doesn’t even know how to say sorry (if she ever does, kudos to whoever finds a timestamp/panel, and let me know!). Instead, Andy buries the truth of her actions with a load of justifications to the point that she becomes self-deprecating, calling herself “vermin,” concluding she’s no better than the apathetic, selfish, evil POS they hunt. She may have spent the past millennia with TOG, trying to make things right but then—

But then she gives up. She’s tired. She resigns because she doesn’t have it in her anymore to fight the injustice she once willingly and self-servingly participated in. So, on top of being incapable of apology, Andy also doesn’t vow to do better. She doesn’t accede to change.

If there is one reason for why “The Old Guard” is a fucking absolutely shitty title, is that it refers to people who refuse to accept new ideas and progress. We are in a fandom that has four canonically queer characters, three people of color, and two female leads! Maybe the irony is intentional but damn, why is it that Andy, PROTAGONIST #1, hasn’t completely caught up with the program?

And that brings me to why I think Andy’s reckoning will not be on the same level as Nicky’s. Because as popular as Kaysanova is, neither Nicky or Joe are the main protagonists of TOG.

We don’t follow Nicky or Joe (or Booker) into scenes. The men are strictly back-at-the-ranch, supporting characters. We follow Andy or Nile (who also have the most screen time, I believe, but fact-check me). Filmically speaking, we ought to value them with a measure of precedence. Their words and actions matter the most, especially Andy’s by nature of how everyone looks to her for guidance.

So, with all that in mind: How does one reconcile a beloved protagonist with a despicable past in slavery, of all things? In the wake of an international racial reckoning, how is a celebrated, white South African actress going to fulfill that role? How is production going to balance fantasy with reality? How are Rucka and other involved writers (Theron, Prince-Bythewood?) going to alter the original IP, while retaining the nuance of this moral quandry?

Forgive me for the overkill but: How is it going to happen?

I’m well aware that my thoughts are going down a rabbit hole, and I am definitely overthinking this, but as somebody who’s genuinely curious about whether Victoria Mahoney and the rest of the TOG crew will have the guts to confront the issue head-on, or if they’ll take the easy way out. Excise the bits that no one wants to talk about, much less watch in a feel-good film that TOG has become for many fans.

Whatever production ends up doing, I hope that 2O2G doesn’t end on a cliffhanging “pity Andromache” note because, damn, I’m gonna feel real uncomfortable scrolling through fandom posts, reading people defending slavery and giving the same “the past is a foreign country; they do things differently there” spiel, in order to protect a fictional character played by a conventionally-attractive cis heterosexual white woman.

(Also: If the past is so different from the present, why are there still calls for social justice? Why do ALL industries still lack diverse and equitable representation?)

Now, this is where I’ll go back to the original question and say: While I think Nicky functions well as an example for change/growth/redemption, I don’t think his change serves as a good comparison to Andy’s. I say this, even while I’m aware of double standards in gender, and even between the reception of gay characters vs lesbian characters vs etc. (re: I’m open to critique).

My line of thought stems from the fact that, canonically, Nicky always had Joe. The two have seemingly been inseparable from the moment they first killed each other. It’s likely that Joe would check Nicky whenever he said or did something wrong and offensive, and perhaps this symbiosis was mutual.

(I also have a feeling that many people easily disregarded the Christian/Muslim conflict because A) lack of knowledge in BOTH religions and B) the onscreen couple appear very much in love, especially when one is giving a beautiful monologue on the nature of their relationship. When we meet Joe and Nicky, we meet them at their best. Shout-out to interfaith couples who know more about this than my single (and secular) ass does, and might have more to say about this.)

On the other hand: Andy never had someone who was like how Joe was for Nicky. No one ever calls out Andy because A) she’s the oldest, B) she’s the lead, and C) her business card says ANDROMACHE OF SCYTHIA, WAR GOD. Yeah, she had Quynh/Noriko but— at the risk of yelling at Rucka for vilifying a queer woman of color (or praising him for not leaning on the stereotype of Asian passivity? idk, anyone got thoughts on this?)— Noriko is clearly not encouraging good behavior. Neither will Quynh if Netflix lets 2O2G be as faithful to the comics as TOG1 was.

Which means the Law 282 conversation might be…unavoidable? Somewhere along the line, we still end up in the hotel room with Andy, on the floor, pleading for her crew to not abandon her, even though she is the one who abandoned their cause.

This sets up a circumstance in which Fade Away might be spent trying to redeem Andy/Charlize Theron, bring her back to the “good side,” teaching her to be better— thereby highlighting her experience and “salvation,” rather than making a point of her past, and the reality of her actions. In other words, a “pity the white woman” fest.

(Because I’m crossing my fingers that TOG production/Netflix know better) In an effort to prevent that from happening, I wonder if Rucka will combine Force Multiplied with Fade Away for the 2O2G script. Given the series’ track record, I think it is feasible that FA’s release coincides with 2O2G’s, and that it finally resolves Andy. Whether by revitalizing her energy as a do-some-gooder, or finalizing her vulnerability by putting her 6,000 years to rest, thus handing off the reigns to Nile and a new generation of leadership.

The last thing I want to leave off with is: I don’t hate Andy. It’s a credit to Rucka and fellow writers (from film and fandom) that I don’t.

I might not love her character as enthusiastically as I used to, but that doesn’t mean I’m not amazed by her creation. She’s a female lead whose sexuality is not exploited by the male gaze; whose emotional vulnerability is not considered a hindrance to, nor an explanation for, her battle prowess; and whose unabashed queerness is not reinforced by cookie cutter stereotypes. Andromache the Scythian is AMAZING.

That doesn’t mean I’m going to excuse or ignore her most glaring and contemptible flaw. More than anything, I’d love to sweep her past under the carpet so that 2O2G can be problem-free. Like many people, I just want to enjoy a movie without getting triggered.

I want to see Quynh and Andy kiss and make up. I want to see Joe rocking Those Shorts, and a cheeky shot of Nicky appreciating his ass. I want to see Nile welcoming Booker back to the family again. Some form of group therapy would be chef’s kiss.

But something about glossing over/removing slavery from Andy’s narrative reeks of dishonesty, and reminds me that the (Hollywood) movie industry is full of people who do not want to be tainted with negative perceptions. Understandably, appearances are their livelihood— but that particular truth is something they still have to reckon with.

#the old guard #tog #vi rambles

6 notes · View notes

tundrainafrica · 3 years

Note

hi, maybe you're tired about this kind of convie regarding hange's gender but i really need your opinion. is it that wrong if i consider hange as a she? istg i'm not anythingphobic, i'm just still stuck with female hange in anime. i stan aot since 2013 and felt just fine to open up about my preference in hange's gender but lately, considering hange as a she is like the most sinful thing in the whole planet and even being attacked and i don't know what to feel about it. 😩

Thank you for the ask anon!

Lmao, I am tired of this discourse but I’ve kinda accepted that it’s never gonna end really so I’m still happy to give you my opinion about this again.

I have written about it here.

Before I go into this long ramble again I’d like to clarify some terms which tend to pepper the discourse of gender, sexuality etc etc etc.

Biological Sex: What genitalia where you born with? Either born male, female or with both genitalia.

Gender: What do you identify as? CIS, Trans, Nonbinary etc.

Sexuality: Who are you attracted to? Homosexual, Heterosexual, Bisexual, Asexual, Pansexual etc.

Gender roles: Where do you fall on the gradient? Feminine, Masculine etc.

And the point of this is, the discourse on gender is soooo complicated. Like very complicated because Hange being interpreted as NB to some people only covers the question of gender. Like these do not cover every other facet of the gender sexuality discourse.

Because everything up there is ‘mutually exclusive’ to a degree because everyone is so complex. Like you can take a random option in each of those, fit it together in our heads and you would still come up with a realistic person. Because that is how complex human beings are. I have friends who decided to get a boyfriend, realized they were trans, transitioned to male but had both boyfriends and girlfriends. I have a butch lesbian friend who dated a few guys then decided to date girls then decided to transition. You have me who literally tried everything on the sexuality spectrum, crushed on a few girls in high school, crushed on a few more girls in college, thought I was asexual for a while, fell in love with a guy and realized I love dick.

You can actually have a biological male who identifies as nonbinary but is bisexual but has feminine tendencies.

And that’s why even I find it so confusing to address the issue of non binary Hange vs female Hange. Because they are not even in the same bracket. Like we can have a non binary female feminine bisexual Hange all at the same time if you think about it.

If you have read all my fics and all of my meta about Hange, you would see that I refer to her as a ‘she,’ but at the same time, I do not portray Hange as overly feminine. I headcanon that Hange has tried dating women and I also head canon that Hange has female genitalia (yo, I write preggo Hange fics). She actually falls somewhere in the middle. And what makes the gender part so hard to consider is because usually whether someone decides to identify as CIS, NB or Trans is up to the person.

And there are just so many other hcs I want to tackle as a fanfiction writer and as a Hange stan beyond her gender and that’s why I don’t really headcanon the whole discovery part because even as a kid, I have never been so particular about my gender. I know I’m a biologically a woman, I have feminine and masculine tendencies. I have loved both men and women. but gender just seemed like just a decision which I just didn’t want to think too hard about.

I mean where I live, my first language doesn’t have gender pronouns so I can avoid the whole discourse altogether by just using Tagalog. I’m the type of person who will just have this person think I’m a man all the way until they meet me because I just wanna get things done and I feel no need to correct people. My first crushes were all women, despite my being a woman and the first people I have ever loved were women and I didn’t want to decide whether I was bisexual, heterosexual, homosexual etc. yet because even teenage me just found it way too complex and too final and just went around saying I liked this girl or I liked this guy and generally because I’m that type of person, I don’t spend a lot of my time thinking about gender even in a fandom space unless somebody asks.

And does it make me homophobic/LGBT-phobic etc etc for deciding to use ‘she’ and deciding to tackle questions about Hange beyond her gender? No. Like this conclusion is inherently flawed. I was hella gay for a huge point in my life. 99% of my crushes were women. Then there was this period where I didn’t enjoy romance The only guy irl I have ever crushed on is my current boyfriend. But even when I explored my own gender, sexuality, it was always an ‘in the back of my mind’ thing. I didn’t have huge personal metas about what exactly my gender was or where exactly I fall or what pronouns I prefer.

And nobody is obliged to look so deep into this discourse. The important thing is in real life, we respect people’s pronouns, we respect the names they want to go by and we respect people’s preferences (as long as they aren’t dangerously criminal.)

And the thing is, this isn’t even real life. This is a fandom space. And in a fandom space, everyone is literally interpreting characters however they want. We have people literally pairing off Levi with both men and women and technically we’re assuming Levi’s gender, sexuality etc. Sure it might diverge from canon but does that make our headcanon any less than the others? Like Levi’s sexuality has never been confirmed and technically we’re all just assuming what kind of person Levi would have wanted to fuck right? Like every yaoi pairing, every ship is just fans assuming someones gender, assuming someone’s sexuality.

And sure people could argue, ‘Yams’ didn’t confirm her gender. But Yam’s didn’t confirm anyone’s sexuality either but here we are pairing Mikasa off with Annie then pairing Mikasa off with Eren. Like same energy with ships, are there ships which are inherently superior to others? And technically, I could headcanon Levi as a woman if I wanted to and no one could stop me. I mean sure let’s celebrate that some of our headcanon and preferences have been acknowledged but what battle are we trying to win here really.

To answer your question, it is not wrong. Having any opinion and having whatever headcanon you have about any fandom in this space is not wrong.

Sure, Hange is a comfort character to many people for various reasons. Hange is a comfort character for me but Hange is not any single person’s comfort character. Hange is a gift to us by Yams to interpret and play with however we want. Hell, every other character we’ve ever grown to love was a gift to all of us by the author. And we can choose to hc them however we want. That is the magic of fandoms.

If I wanted to, I could make some eruri and ereri mpreg fics for the kicks, I could interpret Levi as every single gender, sexuality on the spectrum and it would be just as valid. I mean I won’t because I don’t jive with those headcanons or those types of ships but I would respect people who have those types of preferences.

This space is free for everyone. We can choose what we want to consume and we can choose how we want to interpret characters.

The only responsibility we have as fans is to use the right warnings when we post shit and to respect everybody else’s preferences.

What I would consider ‘sinful’ is just dropping some unnecessary hate into a place which is supposed to be our safe space or pushing an agenda or an opinion and being hateful about it in the process. Like sure, spread your agenda, spread your opinions and your headcanons but please be nice about it.

We’re all just sad people trying to survive in this crapsack world.

#levihan #hange zoe

40 notes · View notes

thejakeformerlyknownasprince · 4 years

Note

Speaking about disability in fiction, would you say Toph from a:tla is one of the best written disabled character? Is there anything that could've been improved about her character?

DEAR FUCKING GOD do I love Toph. I would humbly submit to have Lady Toph “The Blind Bandit” “The Runaway” “Greatest Earthbender of All Time” “Inventor of Metalbending” Beifong harvest my organs to achieve eternal life if such a thing were possible. There are a ton of things that Avatar: the Last Airbender does really well when characterizing Toph, and a few I wish they’d done differently. [PLEASE NOTE: I am nondisabled, so if I err, please tell me so.]

Is she one of the best-written disabled characters?

She’s certainly a damn cool character whose disability informs but does not define her. I can’t really say if she’s “the best” or one of, because I haven’t read everything, but I can say that I really like her.

First of all, her story is intersectional AS FUCK. Toph’s gender, her disability, and her social class are so inextricably linked that there’s no analyzing any single element in a vacuum. She’s all about being tough and independent. Partially that’s about being underestimated because of her disability. Partially that’s about being commodified because of her gender. Partially that’s about being privileged due to her upper-class upbringing. All three interact to inform her identity.

“Tales of Ba Sing Se” shows that blindness bars Toph from certain aspects of femininity — she can’t perform the traditional motions of making herself up, attracting young men, being pretty and delicate — which causes her to embrace a more accessible masculine identity. “The Runaway” shows that Toph enjoys femininity as well as masculinity, but that she struggles to build nurturing relationships when she’s concerned with appearing weak, and that that sometimes leads her to cross ethical boundaries. “The Chase” and “Bitter Work” are all about how Toph values her independence above all else — because she’s had to struggle against her gender and disability influencing others’ perceptions, but also because she’s had the privilege to avoid helping others due to her social class. In “The Ember Island Players” she loves being represented by a big tough strong man, but she also clearly associates masculinity with power in a way that becomes troubling when contrasted with Aang’s horror at being played by a woman. Etcetera.

Even the whole Earth Kingdom’s role as a sort of middle rung of imperialism – less powerful than the Fire Nation, more powerful than the Water Tribes and Air Nomads — informs both the relative strictness of its gender roles and the ability of individual Earth citizens to subvert those roles. Toph’s identity, like the identities of the other Avatar characters, is inextricably linked to her position in society.

Secondly, Toph has a lot of the features of a complex and agentic character, and her disability is neither ignored nor centralized. She’s often right, as when she becomes the first person to trust Zuko and the only person capable of making Aang an earthbender. She’s often wrong, as when she tries to justify theft with a “they started it” argument or belittles Sokka for being a non-bender. She’s often somewhere in between, as when she chooses to let Appa get taken by sandbenders in order to protect her friends or gets into screaming matches with Katara over matters of procedure.

There’s also the fact that Toph interacts with certain environments differently based on her blindness, drawing attention to (in)accessible aspects of those environments the others wouldn’t have necessarily noticed. She finds sand and wood flooring inconvenient, she hates navigating water and ice, and she initially avoids walking on metal. Although she’s not a big fan of flying, she mostly adapts as long as her friends actually remember that she can’t navigate when they’re on Appa’s saddle.

When conflicts do occur with the environment, Toph puts the onus on the environments and on other people to adapt or help her to adapt. She’s amused and annoyed when Sokka tries to fake correspondence between her and Katara, or stupidly asks why she doesn’t like libraries. She rips the bottoms off of her shoes. She calls attention to her inability to do things like scan the ground while flying when her friends are at risk of forgetting. She plays into others’ assumptions to try and get onto ferries or get away with breaking the law.

Another thing I like: the art style for Toph avoids the trap of “draw sighted person, change eye color, call it a day.” She doesn’t turn to face people most of the time when she’s talking to them, but also doesn’t seem totally clueless as to their relative locations. She gets the lay of the land by stomping her feet or pressing a hand against the ground, not turning to “look” in various directions. She doesn’t bother to keep her hair from blocking her eyes, because her bangs don’t interrupt any sight lines. She’s neither a comically blind character who apparently can’t navigate at all with sound or touch, nor a dramatic “blind” character whose every action comes off as those of a sighted character. Toph repeatedly mentions that she doesn’t get the value in sight, clapping back at the assumption that of course she’d want to be nondisabled.

[Image description: A screenshot from “The Chase,” which shows Toph shouting at Katara, with her face turned away from Katara. Toph is pointing in anger, making it clear that she’s addressing Katara and that she knows Katara’s location relative to herself based on Katara’s voice.]

One last small but important victory for Avatar: it passes the Fries Test. It has two or more disabled characters — I can explain why Zuko counts as disabled if anyone’s not sure — who survive to the end of the story without being cured, and who have their own narratives rather than existing primarily to educate nondisabled characters. As a bonus, they have at least one conversation with each other about something that isn’t disability-related. The Fries Test is meant to be a minimum standard for representation, much like the Bechdel Test, but it’s still nice to know that Avatar passes.

[Image description: A screenshot from “The Ember Island Players,” which shows Zuko and Toph sitting on the floor in a hallway of the theater, talking about the play and about Zuko’s uncle.]

Is there anything that could’ve been improved about her character?

If I ruled the world, or at least the Avatar writers’ room, I’d start with two changes. One’s small-ish, one’s big and controversial.

The small-ish change: tweak Toph’s narrative to make her earthbending super-abilities less directly counter to her blindness. As it is, she has shades of a superpowered supercrip: a disabled character from SF whose superpower primarily acts to nullify their disability, thereby giving them the lived experience of a nondisabled person for most or all of the narrative. Toph is definitely not an egregious example — she’s not Daredevil, who can use his superpowers to read handwritten papers, navigate unfamiliar environments, “feel” colors, detect tiny gestures, and shoot guns. She does embody experiences with blindness like disorientation when flying and frustration with hanging posters. She just also has several instances of not experiencing blindness when she (as she puts it) “sees with earthbending.” I’m not sure what that tweak would look like, precisely, but I’d like to see one all the same.

The bigger change: I’d cast a different voice actor. Jessie Flower is, based on what little I can find on Wikipedia or IMDB, not blind or visually disabled. Disability rights activists are right now fighting hard against the trend of “cripping up,” wherein nondisabled actors use mimicry or makeup to pretend to have disabilities on TV and in the movies. Avatar doesn’t go that far, because it doesn’t have Jessie Flower onscreen in (for instance) contacts that mimic blindness. However, it nevertheless does not cast a blind actor for the role. The issue here is that disabled actors are almost never allowed to play nondisabled roles… and disabled actors are also almost never allowed to play disabled roles either. By failing to find a blind voice actor, the show denied that opportunity to a less-privileged talent.

The Guardian compares the issue to the way that cis actors of the wrong gender are too-often cast in trans roles, men used to play female characters onstage, and white actors used to play black characters in American movies. I never know how much those comparisons make sense, because among other things they completely ignore intersections of those identities. But I also think that it’s sometimes the best way to help people understand why excuses like “but it’s haaaaaaarrd to find blind female actors of Asian descent” don’t hold water.

And here’s where I go from “slightly controversial” to “extremely controversial” and might have to enter Witness Protection. Avatar is getting a live-action adaptation in a few months. I predict that it will cast a nondisabled actor to play Toph. And I predict that the same voices which (rightly!) raised such a cry against “racebent” white actors playing Aang and Katara will be completely silent on the topic of “abilitybent” actors playing Zuko and Toph. I’m saying this on Tumblr partially to get this statement out there:

I am an Avatar: the Last Airbender fan who will ONLY support the live-action show if it casts disabled actors to play disabled characters.

I’m saying it partially because I hope to be proven wrong, either because a blind actress will be cast as live-action Toph or at the very least because Avatar fans will object when a sighted actress is cast. I’m also saying it because I think that fans can and should protest responsibly when marginalized voices are erased by beloved works of fiction. Will casting a blind actress require more “work” to make the set accessible? Probably. Will casting a blind actress perhaps necessitate more CGI for fight scenes than using a sighted one? Maybe. Will it be worth it to cast a blind actress anyway, so that a girl with the lived experience of Toph can portray her on screen and actually get the chance to break into an industry that bars most blind girls from participating? YES.

#toph beifong #avatar #atla #avatar the last airbender #nothing to do with animorphs #disability studies #disability representation #blindness #atla criticism #intersectional feminism #long post #atla meta #anonymous #asks

901 notes · View notes