#but acting as if it's Written Fact to assume he's a binary trans person is just. weird. | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

littleoddwriter · 3 years

Text

Issues with Reader Fics

Okay, I'm probably going to be a bit controversial here. Yet, I'm asking you to hear us out, please. Fanfic writers, specifically those who write "x Reader" fics, please read this. My dear friend Jack has already made a post, where I and others have contributed our experiences and feelings towards certain issues with these fics. Those issues still prevail and therefore I've decided to make my own post, which is more of a PSA, I think. Anyway. You can and should read Jack's (@mlmxreader) post here, please. It is long, yes, but it is extremely important and will say a lot of things we will not talk about here again. Now, what this is mostly about is the tagging of those fics. Every single time, we (men and non-binary people) come across Reader fics and they're tagged with just "Reader", so, naturally we assume they'll be gender neutral then. Well, they basically never fucking are. Every time, in the first few sentences or in later paragraphs something like "baby girl, girlfriend, wife, she/her" will come up and it is frustrating, can be triggering (for trans people, like myself, especially because it can cause dysphoria), and is honestly just very excluding and rude. By doing that, you show us that you do not consider anyone but women to read those fics. Even though that isn't the case. Men who like men exist and we read fics. And we want to be able to read some that don't make us feel bad or excluded. We're not asking you to suddenly write Male!Reader fics. We're asking you to tag properly. If your reader is female, tag it as "Female!Reader" or "Fem!Reader". It doesn't take more than two seconds to do that. So, please for the love of everything good, take those two seconds and type in that one word, even the abbreviation is enough. But tag it! Please! Also, please, stop tagging "male reader" or "gender neutral reader" when it's a female reader. You won't get more notes from it. All it does is clog the tags and push down fics that are actually targeted towards those groups. So, don't do that, please, thank you. One thing I personally wanted to ask actually. Why do women read "Male!Reader" fics? This is a genuine question. Why do you, if you're a woman, read those fics? They aren't targeted at you, and frankly, I don't understand it. If I were cis and not dysphoric, I still wouldn't read "Fem!Reader" fics. They aren't for me, and I wouldn't be interested in it, even if those were the only fics for a certain character. So, if anyone could answer me this, genuinely, then I'd actually appreciate that a lot, I'm truly just curious, as I have noticed women reading my "Male!Reader" fics, too. Which is cool, as we've said, you may interact, as long as you're not creepy or fetishistic, but I still don't understand why you would read that in the first place. Now, onto what my two wonderful friends have said, when I asked them if they had anything to add to this issue, or perhaps overall, still: @iscariot-rising said, "It's just disrespectful for writers and readers alike to assume that everyone reading their fanfics is inherently female, to the point where for some it has become the standard that any fic has female reader - leading to writers not tagging their fics as female readers or mentioning in their descriptions that reader is female, instead only titeling it as "character x reader", before then three sentences in referring to reader as some sort of female term. This isn't just rude, it can also be triggering for people or make them dysphoric, if not just plain uncomfortable. Fandom spaces are something that is shared across all genders and sexualities and it is only courteous to respect this and tag your fics accordingly, since it doesn't take a long time and saves a lot of trouble for readers." And you know what? He is absolutely right and he should say it. You need to listen to us, please. @mlmxreader said a lot, too. For example, he's mentioned that there is a reluctance to even write Gender Neutral Reader fics, which is true. Even though it would be much easier, to be perfectly honest. Yet, people seem not to do it. Do y'all not want people of different genders to enjoy your fics without feeling excluded? He also said, "oh! yeah! there's also the whole thing about lingerie, too, like putting men in women's lingerie and talkin about panties and stuff, which comes off as extremely fetishising (when it's not written by mlm) as well as just... really gross bc like that stuff can trigger dysphoria and half the time it's not even tagged? Like it wouldn't be so bad if y'all tagged it; on top of that, there's also the whole fact that they assume that all mlm relationships revolve around sex and that that's all that matters. But then also using (m/n) standing for "male name" instead of (y/n), like, what the FUCK is up with that?? /gen" Again, he is absolutely right. Tag your shit, please. I know it can be tiring to pick out everything relevant, but trust me; you'll do a lot of people a big fucking favour when you tag your stuff properly. And frankly, I agree with him. I don't understand the whole '(m/n)' thing because if we're men, our names are automatically male because, well, we're male. It doesn't really make sense. That might just be a thing that personally bugs us, though, I honestly don't know. TLDR; Tag your fics properly, be respectful, don't assume everyone is female and therefore exclude everyone who isn't, just say (y/n)???, and yeah, that's basically it. Just be more considerate, please! That was it. I don't mean to personally attack anybody, but if you do feel attacked, that probably means that you're guilty of doing something I've listed here, and perhaps should consider changing that. I also wanna note that if you consider sending me threats or hate of any kind, I will delete it and not engage with it. If your first response to this post is something rude and hateful, you should take a step back and reconsider why you're about to do something so senseless. Does it help you in any way? No, it doesn't. So, what's the point, other than acting like a complete dick? Anyway, have a lovely morning/day/night; cheers!

#x reader #reader fanfiction #reader fic #reader insert #female reader #x female reader #x fem!reader #fic writing #fanfic writing #fanfic writer #this is genuine and comes from frustration rather than a place of hate #tag properly #same goes for content and trigger warnings #be more considerate #be mindful

372 notes · View notes

bluewatsons · 4 years

Conversation

Alone Ferber, Judith Butler on the culture wars, JK Rowling and living in “anti-intellectual times”, New Statesman (September 22, 2020)

Alona Ferber: In Gender Trouble, you wrote that "contemporary feminist debates over the meanings of gender lead time and again to a certain sense of trouble, as if the indeterminacy of gender might eventually culminate in the failure of feminism”. How far do ideas you explored in that book 30 years ago help explain how the trans rights debate has moved into mainstream culture and politics?

Judith Butler: I want to first question whether trans-exclusionary feminists are really the same as mainstream feminists. If you are right to identify the one with the other, then a feminist position opposing transphobia is a marginal position. I think this may be wrong. My wager is that most feminists support trans rights and oppose all forms of transphobia. So I find it worrisome that suddenly the trans-exclusionary radical feminist position is understood as commonly accepted or even mainstream. I think it is actually a fringe movement that is seeking to speak in the name of the mainstream, and that our responsibility is to refuse to let that happen.

Alona Ferber: One example of mainstream public discourse on this issue in the UK is the argument about allowing people to self-identify in terms of their gender. In an open letter she published in June, JK Rowling articulated the concern that this would "throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman", potentially putting women at risk of violence.

Judith Butler: If we look closely at the example that you characterise as “mainstream” we can see that a domain of fantasy is at work, one which reflects more about the feminist who has such a fear than any actually existing situation in trans life. The feminist who holds such a view presumes that the penis does define the person, and that anyone with a penis would identify as a woman for the purposes of entering such changing rooms and posing a threat to the women inside. It assumes that the penis is the threat, or that any person who has a penis who identifies as a woman is engaging in a base, deceitful, and harmful form of disguise. This is a rich fantasy, and one that comes from powerful fears, but it does not describe a social reality. Trans women are often discriminated against in men’s bathrooms, and their modes of self-identification are ways of describing a lived reality, one that cannot be captured or regulated by the fantasies brought to bear upon them. The fact that such fantasies pass as public argument is itself cause for worry.

Alona Ferber: I want to challenge you on the term “terf”, or trans-exclusionary radical feminist, which some people see as a slur.

Judith Butler: I am not aware that terf is used as a slur. I wonder what name self-declared feminists who wish to exclude trans women from women's spaces would be called? If they do favour exclusion, why not call them exclusionary? If they understand themselves as belonging to that strain of radical feminism that opposes gender reassignment, why not call them radical feminists? My only regret is that there was a movement of radical sexual freedom that once travelled under the name of radical feminism, but it has sadly morphed into a campaign to pathologise trans and gender non-conforming peoples. My sense is that we have to renew the feminist commitment to gender equality and gender freedom in order to affirm the complexity of gendered lives as they are currently being lived.

Alona Ferber: The consensus among progressives seems to be that feminists who are on JK Rowling’s side of the argument are on the wrong side of history. Is this fair, or is there any merit in their arguments?

Judith Butler: Let us be clear that the debate here is not between feminists and trans activists. There are trans-affirmative feminists, and many trans people are also committed feminists. So one clear problem is the framing that acts as if the debate is between feminists and trans people. It is not. One reason to militate against this framing is because trans activism is linked to queer activism and to feminist legacies that remain very alive today. Feminism has always been committed to the proposition that the social meanings of what it is to be a man or a woman are not yet settled. We tell histories about what it meant to be a woman at a certain time and place, and we track the transformation of those categories over time. We depend on gender as a historical category, and that means we do not yet know all the ways it may come to signify, and we are open to new understandings of its social meanings. It would be a disaster for feminism to return either to a strictly biological understanding of gender or to reduce social conduct to a body part or to impose fearful fantasies, their own anxieties, on trans women... Their abiding and very real sense of gender ought to be recognised socially and publicly as a relatively simple matter of according another human dignity. The trans-exclusionary radical feminist position attacks the dignity of trans people.

Alona Ferber: In Gender Trouble you asked whether, by seeking to represent a particular idea of women, feminists participate in the same dynamics of oppression and heteronormativity that they are trying to shift. In the light of the bitter arguments playing out within feminism now, does the same still apply?

Judith Butler: As I remember the argument in Gender Trouble (written more than 30 years ago), the point was rather different. First, one does not have to be a woman to be a feminist, and we should not confuse the categories. Men who are feminists, non-binary and trans people who are feminists, are part of the movement if they hold to the basic propositions of freedom and equality that are part of any feminist political struggle. When laws and social policies represent women, they make tacit decisions about who counts as a woman, and very often make presuppositions about what a woman is. We have seen this in the domain of reproductive rights. So the question I was asking then is: do we need to have a settled idea of women, or of any gender, in order to advance feminist goals? . . . I put the question that way… to remind us that feminists are committed to thinking about the diverse and historically shifting meanings of gender, and to the ideals of gender freedom. By gender freedom, I do not mean we all get to choose our gender. Rather, we get to make a political claim to live freely and without fear of discrimination and violence against the genders that we are. Many people who were assigned “female” at birth never felt at home with that assignment, and those people (including me) tell all of us something important about the constraints of traditional gender norms for many who fall outside its terms. . . . Feminists know that women with ambition are called “monstrous” or that women who are not heterosexual are pathologised. We fight those misrepresentations because they are false and because they reflect more about the misogyny of those who make demeaning caricatures than they do about the complex social diversity of women. Women should not engage in the forms of phobic caricature by which they have been traditionally demeaned. And by “women” I mean all those who identify in that way.

Alona Ferber: How much is toxicity on this issue a function of culture wars playing out online?

Judith Butler: I think we are living in anti-intellectual times, and that this is evident across the political spectrum. The quickness of social media allows for forms of vitriol that do not exactly support thoughtful debate. We need to cherish the longer forms.

Alona Ferber: Threats of violence and abuse would seem to take these “anti-intellectual times” to an extreme. What do you have to say about violent or abusive language used online against people like JK Rowling?

Judith Butler: I am against online abuse of all kinds. I confess to being perplexed by the fact that you point out the abuse levelled against JK Rowling, but you do not cite the abuse against trans people and their allies that happens online and in person. I disagree with JK Rowling's view on trans people, but I do not think she should suffer harassment and threats. Let us also remember, though, the threats against trans people in places like Brazil, the harassment of trans people in the streets and on the job in places like Poland and Romania – or indeed right here in the US. So if we are going to object to harassment and threats, as we surely should, we should also make sure we have a large picture of where that is happening, who is most profoundly affected, and whether it is tolerated by those who should be opposing it. It won’t do to say that threats against some people are tolerable but against others are intolerable.

Alona Ferber: You weren't a signatory to the open letter on “cancel culture” in Harper's this summer, but did its arguments resonate with you?

Judith Butler: I have mixed feelings about that letter. On the one hand, I am an educator and writer and believe in slow and thoughtful debate. I learn from being confronted and challenged, and I accept that I have made some significant errors in my public life. If someone then said I should not be read or listened to as a result of those errors, well, I would object internally, since I don't think any mistake a person made can, or should, summarise that person. We live in time; we err, sometimes seriously; and if we are lucky, we change precisely because of interactions that let us see things differently . . . On the other hand, some of those signatories were taking aim at Black Lives Matter as if the loud and public opposition to racism were itself uncivilised behaviour. Some of them have opposed legal rights for Palestine. Others have [allegedly] committed sexual harassment. And yet others do not wish to be challenged on their racism. Democracy requires a good challenge, and it does not always arrive in soft tones. So I am not in favour of neutralising the strong political demands for justice on the part of subjugated people. When one has not been heard for decades, the cry for justice is bound to be loud.

Alona Ferber: This year, you published, The Force of Nonviolence. Does the idea of “radical equality”, which you discuss in the book, have any relevance for the feminist movement?

Judith Butler: My point in the recent book is to suggest that we rethink equality in terms of interdependency. We tend to say that one person should be treated the same as another, and we measure whether or not equality has been achieved by comparing individual cases. But what if the individual – and individualism – is part of the problem? It makes a difference to understand ourselves as living in a world in which we are fundamentally dependent on others, on institutions, on the Earth, and to see that this life depends on a sustaining organisation for various forms of life. If no one escapes that interdependency, then we are equal in a different sense. We are equally dependent, that is, equally social and ecological, and that means we cease to understand ourselves only as demarcated individuals. If trans-exclusionary radical feminists understood themselves as sharing a world with trans people, in a common struggle for equality, freedom from violence, and for social recognition, there would be no more trans-exclusionary radical feminists. But feminism would surely survive as a coalitional practice and vision of solidarity.

Alona Ferber: You have spoken about the backlash against “gender ideology”, and wrote an essay for the New Statesman about it in 2019. Do you see any connection between this and contemporary debates about trans rights?

Judith Butler: It is painful to see that Trump’s position that gender should be defined by biological sex, and that the evangelical and right-wing Catholic effort to purge “gender” from education and public policy accords with the trans-exclusionary radical feminists' return to biological essentialism. It is a sad day when some feminists promote the anti-gender ideology position of the most reactionary forces in our society.

Alona Ferber: What do you think would break this impasse in feminism over trans rights? What would lead to a more constructive debate?

Judith Butler: I suppose a debate, were it possible, would have to reconsider the ways in which the medical determination of sex functions in relation to the lived and historical reality of gender.

#judith butler #interviews #gender #controversy #transgender #TERFs #trans issues #jk rowling #transphobia #radical feminism #feminism #trans-exclusionary feminism #cancel culture #internet culture #anti-intellectualism #online abuse

12 notes · View notes

curewhimsy · 4 years

Text

Utane Uta x Soune Taya infodump (Shiro-Sora)

General Chemistry Uta is pretty sarcastic, blunt, and reserved, so it’s an interesting development to see her grow and interact with the pure and shy Taya as they both overcome their shortcomings together. Uta just lost her passion to depression, but that's touched on eventually/later. She's all like "I hate life" but that's because of depression. She also lost her interest in music to depression, but being with Taya and being in a musical school has her slowly regain it. Taya tries to help out Uta and make her smile but... he ends up upsetting her one time... When Taya finds out how depressed Uta really is he starts crying for her and saying "I'm sorry..." and Uta is like "Why are you crying? Nothing is your fault..." And Taya apologizes again and says it's a habit that he feels responsible for his friend's sadness. Uta hugs him. "I haven't been able to cry for years, so I'm a bit jealous..." She says. "But... I still don't want you to cry though... I like to see your smile, ok?" Taya is very polite, and selfless. He's always willing to do favors for people. He speaks in polite language. He bows at many occasions (Even in this universe that takes place in the USA, and not Japan.) He is humble as well. These may seem like quirks or obsessions as first, but it stems from his feeling of obligation to do things for people and "not be a burden," because he had friends and teachers who treated him like a burden before. When his anemia caused him to faint or miss classes, everyone treated him as a burden. When he starts hanging out with Uta, she comments on how he feels like a butler and tells him to loosen up, it's okay to be a bit more relaxed, and selfish even. Well I think the day Uta finally cries and lets out her emotions is when something bad happens to her (fighting with her father perhaps,) but Taya comes and helps and comforts her, then confesses his love for her. And then come the waterworks, from both of them! Other General Background Stuff (including their gender identities and such) Uta Utane is non-binary, and first discovers it at age 20 through Taya, after getting to know him and realizing she is non-binary as well. Uta eventually switches to identifying as demigirl and uses she/her and they/them pronouns. Taya Soune is non-binary (he/him, trans-masculine, lesbian) and discovered his identity at age 14. He is DFAB and had been raised as a girl until then. A lot of his gender identity is still a secret from his parents, even though they know he takes testosterone hormone therapy. (They assume he is a trans man.)

Uta’s mother died when she was 4 years old. This fanfic takes place in the USA, so she is Japanese-American. Uta’s mother loved music and singing, and named her daughter after the Japanese word for song. After Uta’s mother died, her father didn’t take it well. He abandoned all music and began to hate it, because it brought back painful memories of Uta’s mother. Taya is also Japanese-American. His parents named him “Taya” with the intent of giving him an easy name to pronounce and relate to for Americans. Since Taya was designated female at birth, he was also given a name that sounded female to Americans. He still decided to keep the name after transitioning, however.

Taya picked up his habit of politely bowing when he was 15 years old and took a summer trip to Japan for two months. For this trip, he studied Japanese extensively to be able to communicate with the local people. He can speak Japanese at an intermediate skill level because of this. While he was in Japan, he felt that bowing was an expression of utmost politeness and now continues to do it back in the USA out of both out of reflex and courtesy. Uta had never been to Japan. Her father, who abandoned music after Uta’s mother died, never taught Uta the meaning of her name. When Uta was 10 years old, she was mistaken as being named Utah by everyone and was teased for it. So she Googled her name. She learned that it meant “song” in Japanese. She began to learn about Japanese culture, especially pop culture and music, in secret from her father. Quirks and Funny Moments Uta’s catchphrase is “Yare yare...” (“Good grief...”) Taya’s catchphrase is “Is that sou, desu ne?” (“Sou desu ne” is basically “Is that so?” in Japanese. I combined the two. He also tends to mumble “Sou, ne” which means “oh, well,” and alludes to... his last name! Taya is smart and dignified but... very clumsy and naive as well. Uta is badass, but kind of “chaotic dumb” in certain ways. Sometimes she forgets to do her homework while doing her homework. Don’t ask. Taya loves sweets, and his favorite is strawberry shortcake. He is also a good pastry chef... Uta is horrible at cooking! She is so horrible, that she makes things mega-explode! She is so horrible, she needs Taya to cook for her just so she can get by! Taya gets completely drunk after just a few sips of alcohol. When his 21st birthday comes in the story, he has his first drink. He gets drunk almost instantly and becomes a lot less shy. He starts singing drunk karaoke along with an intoxicated Meiko. (The songs Ghost Rule and World is Mine come to mind.) Taya and Momo Momone once got into a rather heated argument over whether strawberries or peaches are better. Uta asked herself why she was surrounded by airheads. Uta buys Taya a strawberry Squishmallow for his birthday. In no time, Taya is able to think of a personality and an extensive backstory for his new plush friend. Uta is... impressed.

One time Taya tried playing Uta’s violin instead of his usual cello. He played an earsplitting tune and ended up breaking the violin. Not only does it just break, it comically explodes into little pieces! Taya wears fancy and posh menswear all the time. To every occasion. Even to sleep. Don’t judge him. Taya is 5’4” but wishes he were at least 5’8”. He has a slight Napoleonic complex, which is somewhat unexpected. It is eventually revealed that Taya started dressing in such an elegant way to make up for his lack of height. Uta reassures Taya that his height is fine. (Once before they started dating, she accidentally slipped out that she thinks Taya is “handsome the way he is” and became flustered. However, Taya didn’t take Uta’s compliment as having any romantic undertones.) Uta’s height is 5’0” and she is rather fine with it. Deep down, she doesn’t want Taya to be tall. She likes Taya just the way he is. “Why did you set me on fire, Uta? Why didn’t you just write your essay?” -Quote from Taya, when Uta didn’t write her essay and ended up setting Taya on fire instead. (Don’t ask.) Their Part-Time Jobs Uta works part time at a hat shop. This is because Uta loves hats. In fact, she is usually never seen without her favorite hat, a black beret. Even when she is wearing a different hat, such as a beanie, she still usually is carrying her beret with her somewhere. Uta’s hat shop is at the mall, in the dimly-lit corner where nobody really goes to. It is a small shop and she is the head of it. The sales at the shop are poor. The place is named “Defoko’s Hats,” after the nickname Miki gave Uta. The nickname Defoko came from now Miki thought Uta was such a “default” type of person the first time she met her, whatever that was supposed to mean. (The word default written in Japanese katakana is pronounced “deforuto.” The first part of “deforuto” was combined with “ko,” a common ending in Japanese girls’ names, to make the nickname Defoko.) Taya works part-time at Denny’s as a waiter. He started working there to pay back the funds it took to fix a window that he broke by crashing through said window like the Kool-Aid man while he was drunk after having only one drink on his 21st birthday. (Because he cannot hold his alcohol.) Taya over-achieves at his job at Denny’s and acts as if he is a waiter in a five-star restaurant. Along with always wearing his posh, elegant clothing to the job, he is very overly-polite and tactful when taking orders, even bowing at times... people have commented that he feels more like a butler than a waiter. Taya also tends to pour the drinks at the table. In fancy teacups. He pours from a fancy kettle into the cup from a high angle. In fact, he pours them from so high, he has to get a ladder. Everyone in the restaurant stares at him. Taya is quite odd, but he does get a lot of tips. And more people have been coming to the restaurant since he had started working there. He isn’t even going for a gimmick however. He is literally just being Taya. The Theatre Club Taya wanted Uta to join the musical theatre club with him. He felt unconfident in himself alone. Taya is somewhat experienced in singing, though he is a complete beginner in the acting aspect of musical theatre. Uta has no interest in theatre, though joins to help out Taya. The biggest reason Taya wanted this is because he had a play he dreamed of acting out with everyone. It’s a play he wrote himself, from his heart. Taya is alone a lot, but he hopes this play can bring him and his schoolmates closer together. This is all Taya asks for. Uta admires his sincerity. However, since Taya is a newcomer, and the other members of the club are well-established, nobody is thinking of considering Taya’s play as their acting source material, even though nobody else’s ideas are really clicking. Given his nature, Taya doesn’t speak up. They only pay attention to him when Uta tells everyone that he’d like to share an idea. The play is… short, and similar to the one in Clannad? Except with… more people… lol. Haven’t thought too hard about the plot yet. However, it has the line, “Take my hand, I’ll take you to a place where miracles happen.” Taya’s character will be the one to say this line. Note: Okay so I thought harder and brought in the lyrics to “Dolls” by Rozenkreuz-P. So it’s basically about a child who felt alone in the world, so he built a mechanical doll to have as a friend, though he had to leave the doll behind one day to depart to “a world beyond ours” AKA death. The doll was left all alone to age and weather. The doll comes to life and is able to move. It becomes able to speak, so it sets out on an adventure, meeting people in the world it was left behind in. The doll helps out many people with its magical power. The doll’s favorite saying is “Take my hand, I’ll take you to a place where miracles happen.” One day, the doll eventually breaks, and is unable to contain the spirit within it. The doll’s spirit is able to reunite with its beloved owner who created it. Also the doll is a genderless character, because well… Taya wrote this. The work is eventually given the name “Fantasia Story,” exactly like Nagisa’s play from Clannad. Taya is playing the role of the doll. In-universe, it is said to have an “otherworldly feel” to it, and even “Wow, did you write this, Taya? That’s incredible…” A few songs are composed and written by the music club for the play, and the only one mentioned by name in the fic will be the solo Taya sings. It’ll be an actual song as well, Dolls by Rozenkreuz-P (feat. Kagamine Rin). Since this fic takes place in the USA… pretend it’s been translated to English or something. I imagine that maybe IA was the one who composed the song in-universe. Friendship Interactions (From when they were still just friends) Taya felt platonic (friendship) love for Uta the moment he first met her. He was lost on the college campus during his first day, and Uta offered to help Taya find where he was going, even though she didn’t know much about the campus herself. Taya immediately sensed that Uta was a good person. Taya wanted Uta to stay longer and talk with him for a while. When Uta went on her way and left Taya after she couldn’t help him, he felt dejected, but he felt so happy and blessed when he met Uta again later in the day and got to become close friends with her. He states the memory of their meeting is enough to make him cry. Taya is very fond of Uta. He sees her as such a wonderful and special person. He cannot stand seeing her hurt or upset, it hurts him as well. Uta grows to be very fond of Taya. The kindness and pureness of Taya’s heart widens Uta’s perspective on life. She is inspired to be someone more like him, who doesn’t harbor harsh feelings in their heart. Uta grows very protective of Taya. In a sense, she becomes willing to do anything for the sake of him, even doing something embarrassing in front of everyone in physics class to take the attention away from Taya sleep-talking in class. As best friends, they open up about their problems to each other and are always willing to be each other’s shoulder to cry on. When their lives take a turn for the stressful, they have each other. Their bond deeps this way. Uta’s crush on Taya began when she saw how confident he became when acting in the play he wrote himself. Also through the story in the play, Uta felt she got to learn so much about what’s in Taya’s heart. Uta began to see Taya as a wonderful, sweet, humble, and charming person. Taya’s crush on Uta started out as a “platonic crush.” It gradually grew into a romantic one. Taya began seeing Uta in a different light when he realized she was not only kind, but very brave and willing to help anyone in need. Once when Taya wasn’t feeling good, he still felt obligated to work and to do Uta favors. Uta told Taya he needed to rest and to take it easy. She attempted to cook chicken and vegetable porridge for Taya but nearly made the kitchen explode... however, by a miracle of friendship (or love?) the actual porridge didn’t turn out so bad. However, that night Taya’s condition worsened and became severe. He needed to go to the emergency room for pneumonia and a blood transfusion (due to anemia.) Taya began to feel like a burden, but Uta reassured him he wasn’t and blamed herself. They then worked out that maybe it was nobody’s fault. This bout of illness happened shortly before Taya was to perform his musical theatre play. Therefore, Taya isn’t in top condition when he performs. However, he still does his best and gives a good performance. Shippy Details and Interactions (From after they became lovers) Taya is a very gentle and affectionate person. Right after he confesses his love to Uta, he is rather chaste about showing his affection out of shyness. But they grow to trust each other more about these feelings. Taya is a huge hugger and loves to cuddle. Uta is gray-romantic, meaning she rarely feels romantic attraction. She seldom felt romantic feelings in her life. She never felt them substantially before meeting Taya, who she considers her first, and really, only love. Uta never thought she would be big with hugging and cuddling, but physical affection with Taya gives her comfort. (DISCLAIMER: I’m not trying to state that people who lack romantic attraction are “broken” or need to be “repaired.” Other types of love, such as platonic or familial love can be just as, or even more meaningful and fulfilling than the romantic kind.) Taya likes singing Uta to sleep. He even recorded his voice softly singing lullabies for Uta to listen to while falling asleep for when he can’t be available to sing for her. Uta thinks this is very sweet of him. Taya likes holding/hugging or clinging to Uta gently as they fall asleep together. Sometimes when Taya is feeling down, Uta does this to Taya and it comforts him greatly. The Emotional Part TW: ABUSIVE PARENT

———

Taya is practicing lines from the short play he wrote himself. He reaches his hand out and says “Take my hand... I’ll take you to a place where miracles happen.” This captures Uta’s heart.

Eventually in the story, something emotional happens. Uta gets in a fight with her father over her college major. Uta has learned to love music again and now truly wants to pursue it. However, Uta’s father still hates music, and hates that his daughter’s name is Uta (meaning “song”), and hates that the family’s name is Utane (“singing sound”.) Uta’s mother died when she was young. Her now single father is distant, abusive, and wants Uta to be a business major.

Things get emotional between them, and even a bit physical. Taya sees the whole thing, and steps in at a certain point as Uta’s father is about to hit his daughter. Uta tells Taya to stop for his own good, not wanting Taya to have to get hurt. Uta grabs Taya by the hand and runs off.

Once away from the scene, Uta then vents to Taya and tells him that life has been terrible because it lost all its meaning... Uta starts sobbing and letting out all her pent-up emotions. Taya hugs her, unable to handle seeing Uta cry, letting tears slide down his own face. After crying and comforting Uta for a bit, Taya says... “Uta, take my hand... I’ll take you to a place where miracles happen...” This time he’s for real. He‘s reaching his hand out to Uta. He‘s trying to comfort her. Both of them are misty-eyed. Uta takes his hand... and smiles at him. “Now, shall we go?” Taya smiles back. “Yes...” They take a walk to the place where they first met... And after a talk about their memories, Taya confesses his love to Uta at the top of the hill under the stars. Uta’s Life, Music, and Singing Uta Utane started out not being a singer. Until she went to Sonare Community College, the music-oriented college the story takes place in, and met Taya, she had never taken a singing lesson in her life. Uta’s late mother used to love singing. Uta herself was exclusively a violinist at first. She started playing the violin in childhood. When she lost her passion for music to depression, she still continued to play the violin simply because she felt she’d come too far to abandon it. Early in the story, Uta went to karaoke with Taya to help themselves come out of their shells a bit and become less shy in performing. Their new acquaintances Ritsu Namine and Ruko Yokune gave very powerful performances of -ERROR and The Lost One’s Weeping, and blew everyone away. Next, shy Taya gave a performance of From Y to Y, and Uta found out that he actually had a really beautiful singing voice. Uta went up on stage next and sang Jitter Doll rather horribly. Her voice was screechy, scratchy, and off-key. It was actually so bad that the microphone started making a weird feedback noise. She became so embarrassed that she stopped in the middle... and confessed with shame that she wasn’t a singer, and that she just came to help out Taya. Everyone cheered Uta on regardless. It was a great feeling, and pushed Uta to want to pursue singing. Uta becomes Taya’s singing partner, and Taya coaches Uta with what he knows about vocals. Within a year, the quality of Uta’s voice develops well. Eventually, Uta is outside with Taya. A mood strikes them and they start singing. Uta is singing a solo part, and suddenly her father comes up. “Uta?” He says. Uta is suddenly revolted by his presence and ready to take Taya’s hand and run away. She hates her dad and was ready for him to say something awful. But rather... “When did you learn to sing like that? You sounded just like your mother. It brought back memories...” Uta’s father is smiling sentimentally? Uta still doesn’t trust him, and neither does Taya, but Uta’s legs somehow just won’t move. “I...” Uta starts to speak. “You know, I realized something.” Uta’s father interrupts. “I should’ve stayed strong for you. I should have let you pursue music if it made you this happy. Your mother may have passed, but... music is where she lives on. How... how have I not realized that she lives on in you...?” Uta’s father suddenly begins sobbing. Uta doesn’t know how to react at first... but Taya pats him on the back. “Dad...” Uta eventually finds the words to say. “It’s okay now. I’m sorry I never realized you felt this way. I’d recommend not bottling these things up. Seek some professional help, okay? The first step to recovering is realizing these things. I promise, things will get better.” Uta’s father never fully redeems himself, but he lets go all his hatred caused by a traumatic past he cannot change and stops burdening his daughter with his harsh feelings. Two years after the beginning of the story, Uta goes back to the same karaoke place where she first sang Jitter Doll horribly. Little does she know, her performance became somewhat infamous there among the workers for being awful. All 46 Vocaloid and UTAU characters featured in the fic will be present in this scene. This will be a party scene, and perhaps nearing the series’ finale. “Hey, isn’t she that one who couldn’t sing?” The staff says upon seeing her. “Yes, and I’m back.” Uta says. “Now let’s turn up the volume in here. I’ll be requesting Jitter Doll.” This time, Uta totally slays every note of the song with great power and technique. She isn’t impeccably skilled yet, but she’s getting there. Applause booms from the group. Uta’s improvement is as clear as day. Not only did Uta’s singing improve within those two years, but so did her life and character. Her personality is now more cheerful and less closed-off, and she managed to overcome depression alongside Taya, becoming much more confident and buoyant in the process. Eventually... (After Story and Epilogue...) Taya plans an event on the hill where he and Uta first met. It’s a formal evening cookout with a lot of karaoke. In the place where they first met, Taya proposes marriage to Uta on a day in April. They are 24 years old. Their honeymoon is in Tokyo that June. Two months after the honeymoon, in August, they have their wedding and get married. Three years later at age 27, the two adopt their first child, a baby girl they name Sonata.

9 notes · View notes

the-goofball · 4 years

Text

Judith Butler on the culture wars, JK Rowling and living in “anti-intellectual times”

Thirty years ago, the philosopher Judith Butler*, now 64, published a book that revolutionised popular attitudes on gender. Gender Trouble, the work she is perhaps best known for, introduced ideas of gender as performance. It asked how we define “the category of women” and, as a consequence, who it is that feminism purports to fight for. Today, it is a foundational text on any gender studies reading list, and its arguments have long crossed over from the academy to popular culture. In the three decades since Gender Trouble was published, the world has changed beyond recognition. In 2014, TIME declared a “Transgender Tipping Point”. Butler herself has moved on from that earlier work, writing widely on culture and politics. But disagreements over biological essentialism remain, as evidenced by the tensions over trans rights within the feminist movement. How does Butler, who is Maxine Elliot Professor of Comparative Literature at Berkeley, see this debate today? And does she see a way to break the impasse? Butler recently exchanged emails with the New Statesman about this issue. The exchange has been edited. *** Alona Ferber: In Gender Trouble, you wrote that "contemporary feminist debates over the meanings of gender lead time and again to a certain sense of trouble, as if the indeterminacy of gender might eventually culminate in the failure of feminism”. How far do ideas you explored in that book 30 years ago help explain how the trans rights debate has moved into mainstream culture and politics? Judith Butler: I want to first question whether trans-exclusionary feminists are really the same as mainstream feminists. If you are right to identify the one with the other, then a feminist position opposing transphobia is a marginal position. I think this may be wrong. My wager is that most feminists support trans rights and oppose all forms of transphobia. So I find it worrisome that suddenly the trans-exclusionary radical feminist position is understood as commonly accepted or even mainstream. I think it is actually a fringe movement that is seeking to speak in the name of the mainstream, and that our responsibility is to refuse to let that happen.

AF: One example of mainstream public discourse on this issue in the UK is the argument about allowing people to self-identify in terms of their gender. In an open letter she published in June, JK Rowling articulated the concern that this would "throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman", potentially putting women at risk of violence. JB: If we look closely at the example that you characterise as “mainstream” we can see that a domain of fantasy is at work, one which reflects more about the feminist who has such a fear than any actually existing situation in trans life. The feminist who holds such a view presumes that the penis does define the person, and that anyone with a penis would identify as a woman for the purposes of entering such changing rooms and posing a threat to the women inside. It assumes that the penis is the threat, or that any person who has a penis who identifies as a woman is engaging in a base, deceitful, and harmful form of disguise. This is a rich fantasy, and one that comes from powerful fears, but it does not describe a social reality. Trans women are often discriminated against in men’s bathrooms, and their modes of self-identification are ways of describing a lived reality, one that cannot be captured or regulated by the fantasies brought to bear upon them. The fact that such fantasies pass as public argument is itself cause for worry. AF: I want to challenge you on the term “terf”, or trans-exclusionary radical feminist, which some people see as a slur. JB: I am not aware that terf is used as a slur. I wonder what name self-declared feminists who wish to exclude trans women from women's spaces would be called? If they do favour exclusion, why not call them exclusionary? If they understand themselves as belonging to that strain of radical feminism that opposes gender reassignment, why not call them radical feminists? My only regret is that there was a movement of radical sexual freedom that once travelled under the name of radical feminism, but it has sadly morphed into a campaign to pathologise trans and gender non-conforming peoples. My sense is that we have to renew the feminist commitment to gender equality and gender freedom in order to affirm the complexity of gendered lives as they are currently being lived. AF: The consensus among progressives seems to be that feminists who are on JK Rowling’s side of the argument are on the wrong side of history. Is this fair, or is there any merit in their arguments? JB: Let us be clear that the debate here is not between feminists and trans activists. There are trans-affirmative feminists, and many trans people are also committed feminists. So one clear problem is the framing that acts as if the debate is between feminists and trans people. It is not. One reason to militate against this framing is because trans activism is linked to queer activism and to feminist legacies that remain very alive today. Feminism has always been committed to the proposition that the social meanings of what it is to be a man or a woman are not yet settled. We tell histories about what it meant to be a woman at a certain time and place, and we track the transformation of those categories over time. We depend on gender as a historical category, and that means we do not yet know all the ways it may come to signify, and we are open to new understandings of its social meanings. It would be a disaster for feminism to return either to a strictly biological understanding of gender or to reduce social conduct to a body part or to impose fearful fantasies, their own anxieties, on trans women... Their abiding and very real sense of gender ought to be recognised socially and publicly as a relatively simple matter of according another human dignity. The trans-exclusionary radical feminist position attacks the dignity of trans people. AF: In Gender Trouble you asked whether, by seeking to represent a particular idea of women, feminists participate in the same dynamics of oppression and heteronormativity that they are trying to shift. In the light of the bitter arguments playing out within feminism now, does the same still apply? JB: As I remember the argument in Gender Trouble (written more than 30 years ago), the point was rather different. First, one does not have to be a woman to be a feminist, and we should not confuse the categories. Men who are feminists, non-binary and trans people who are feminists, are part of the movement if they hold to the basic propositions of freedom and equality that are part of any feminist political struggle. When laws and social policies represent women, they make tacit decisions about who counts as a woman, and very often make presuppositions about what a woman is. We have seen this in the domain of reproductive rights. So the question I was asking then is: do we need to have a settled idea of women, or of any gender, in order to advance feminist goals? I put the question that way… to remind us that feminists are committed to thinking about the diverse and historically shifting meanings of gender, and to the ideals of gender freedom. By gender freedom, I do not mean we all get to choose our gender. Rather, we get to make a political claim to live freely and without fear of discrimination and violence against the genders that we are. Many people who were assigned “female” at birth never felt at home with that assignment, and those people (including me) tell all of us something important about the constraints of traditional gender norms for many who fall outside its terms. Feminists know that women with ambition are called “monstrous” or that women who are not heterosexual are pathologised. We fight those misrepresentations because they are false and because they reflect more about the misogyny of those who make demeaning caricatures than they do about the complex social diversity of women. Women should not engage in the forms of phobic caricature by which they have been traditionally demeaned. And by “women” I mean all those who identify in that way. AF: How much is toxicity on this issue a function of culture wars playing out online? JB: I think we are living in anti-intellectual times, and that this is evident across the political spectrum. The quickness of social media allows for forms of vitriol that do not exactly support thoughtful debate. We need to cherish the longer forms. AF: Threats of violence and abuse would seem to take these “anti-intellectual times” to an extreme. What do you have to say about violent or abusive language used online against people like JK Rowling. JB: I am against online abuse of all kinds. I confess to being perplexed by the fact that you point out the abuse levelled against JK Rowling, but you do not cite the abuse against trans people and their allies that happens online and in person. I disagree with JK Rowling's view on trans people, but I do not think she should suffer harassment and threats. Let us also remember, though, the threats against trans people in places like Brazil, the harassment of trans people in the streets and on the job in places like Poland and Romania – or indeed right here in the US. So if we are going to object to harassment and threats, as we surely should, we should also make sure we have a large picture of where that is happening, who is most profoundly affected, and whether it is tolerated by those who should be opposing it. It won’t do to say that threats against some people are tolerable but against others are intolerable. AF: You weren't a signatory to the open letter on “cancel culture” in Harper's this summer, but did its arguments resonate with you? JB: I have mixed feelings about that letter. On the one hand, I am an educator and writer and believe in slow and thoughtful debate. I learn from being confronted and challenged, and I accept that I have made some significant errors in my public life. If someone then said I should not be read or listened to as a result of those errors, well, I would object internally, since I don't think any mistake a person made can, or should, summarise that person. We live in time; we err, sometimes seriously; and if we are lucky, we change precisely because of interactions that let us see things differently. On the other hand, some of those signatories were taking aim at Black Lives Matter as if the loud and public opposition to racism were itself uncivilised behaviour. Some of them have opposed legal rights for Palestine. Others have [allegedly] committed sexual harassment. And yet others do not wish to be challenged on their racism. Democracy requires a good challenge, and it does not always arrive in soft tones. So I am not in favour of neutralising the strong political demands for justice on the part of subjugated people. When one has not been heard for decades, the cry for justice is bound to be loud. AF: This year, you published, The Force of Nonviolence. Does the idea of “radical equality”, which you discuss in the book, have any relevance for the feminist movement? JB: My point in the recent book is to suggest that we rethink equality in terms of interdependency. We tend to say that one person should be treated the same as another, and we measure whether or not equality has been achieved by comparing individual cases. But what if the individual – and individualism – is part of the problem? It makes a difference to understand ourselves as living in a world in which we are fundamentally dependent on others, on institutions, on the Earth, and to see that this life depends on a sustaining organisation for various forms of life. If no one escapes that interdependency, then we are equal in a different sense. We are equally dependent, that is, equally social and ecological, and that means we cease to understand ourselves only as demarcated individuals. If trans-exclusionary radical feminists understood themselves as sharing a world with trans people, in a common struggle for equality, freedom from violence, and for social recognition, there would be no more trans-exclusionary radical feminists. But feminism would surely survive as a coalitional practice and vision of solidarity. AF: You have spoken about the backlash against “gender ideology”, and wrote an essay for the New Statesman about it in 2019. Do you see any connection between this and contemporary debates about trans rights? JB: It is painful to see that Trump’s position that gender should be defined by biological sex, and that the evangelical and right-wing Catholic effort to purge “gender” from education and public policy accords with the trans-exclusionary radical feminists' return to biological essentialism. It is a sad day when some feminists promote the anti-gender ideology position of the most reactionary forces in our society AF: What do you think would break this impasse in feminism over trans rights? What would lead to a more constructive debate? JB: I suppose a debate, were it possible, would have to reconsider the ways in which the medical determination of sex functions in relation to the lived and historical reality of gender.

22 September 2020

*Judith Butler goes by she or they

#judith butler #feminism #trans #terfs #jk rowling #gender

5 notes · View notes

realisationanddoubt · 4 years

Text

The binary: realisations and rants

Can we talk about the gender binary a bit? Of course we can. It’s my blog, we can talk about Naruto or the impossibility of clown cars if I wish. So I’ve been thinking a lot about me after my break up as, I suppose, is normal. Thanks to this I’ve stumbled across an identity crisis I’ve been putting off for years. I’m non-binary and that’s a weird thing to just non-chalantly write down for me. See, I’ve spent years talking about how I don’t really care about gender. As a bisexual, I’ve had the conversation numerous times. As a stereotypically effiminate person I’ve spoken many times about how I’m comfortable in myself acting however I want because the gender stereotypes hold no interest to me. But I’ve never really bothered to delve into why.

It’s taken awhile to come to terms with being non-binary. It’s like coming to terms with my sexuality all over again. As usual, I’ve been presented a choice. The sexuality and identity fairy came to me twice now and happily asked “men or women” and I, in classic me style, didn’t really pay attention to the fact that there was a clear binary choice and only half listening just replied “Oh, no thank you!”

It’s difficult to live in a world defined by binaries and then realise you’re not really interested in participating. When I very first realised I might be non-binary a couple of months back, I got lost in a strange narrative. Do I need to start wearing make up? Should I make myself more androgynous, shave my beard? How do I present as non-binary? Of course the answer (For me) is you don’t. I should have really known that from the start because I had to do the same thing with my bisexuality. It took many years to get from “How do I let everyone know I’m bisexual?” to “I don’t really care who knows what my sexuality is and I have no desire to share that information.” I’ve approached being non-binary much the same. I get that people are proud of their sexuality and identity and seriously, good for them. That must be a nice thing to have. Thing is I’m not particularly proud. Let me see if I can put this into words.

So for me, sexuality and identity are both very matter of fact. I’m not proud of either of those aspects of me but don’t get me wrong, I’m not ashamed. The idea of being proud of either of those things is, for me at least, the same as being proud of having curly hair or brown eyes. Sure, there was some emotional turmoil coming to terms with my sexuality and identity but it’s not like these are things I had to strive and work for. They’re just facts. I don’t really care if people call me he or they. They feels a bit more natural I guess but it doesn’t particulalry bother me being called he. And note, I get called he because I have a beard and a masculine build. When I was a teenager with heavy eyeliner and long flowing hair I got called miss and she a lot and that never particularly bothered me either. I’ve never particualraly felt some kind of rage at being misgendered. I don’t really care that people assume I’m straight (I kind of care in that way of, Jesus dude open your mind and stop making assumptions but not enough that I’ve felt the need to correct anyone.)

Though I wonder how much this is a story I tell myself. Just like it’s difficult telling yourself actually, you’re not any of the traditional genders, telling yourself you don’t really care about presenting and pronouns in a community that’s so fired up about them feels weird.

“Welcome to the queer community! Would you like to be angry about misrepresntation of your sexuality or your identity?” The queer fairy politely but firmly asks.

“Ah, no thank you, I’ve already eaten.” Josh replies, not really paying attention to the climate or the question.

I even considered whether I’m supposed to change my name. Am I supposed to change my name to something a bit more androgynous? Maybe start calling myself Alex or Frankie or any other name that could be either gender? But I don’t want to. I’m just Josh. I’m a bisexual, non binary mess and Josh is my descriptor.

Should I care more? Should I be fighting some war against ignorance? Am I somehow doing a disservice by not participating?

Not participating is basically my default. “Here lies Josh, they didn’t participate.”

I kind of make life more difficult for myself by not divulging these things. People have asked me before “Are you gay?” and I just reply “nope!”. Then I get annoyed that people just assume I’m straight despite literally never giving any evidence to the contrary. I guess it’s just a problem with the system. My sexuality and identity are improtant to me but they’re personal. I’m not going to talk about them to work colleagues or friends anymore than I’m going to talk about my kinks.

“Hey Josh are you gay?” My well meaning but misguided colleague asks.

“Oh no, I’m bisexual, non-binary and I like scratching and biting during sex.”

You really going to just out your kinks like that online huh my dude? It should say enough about me that I feel a swell of anxiety to putting a fairly vanilla kink on a personal blog no one I know will ever read. Do I really want Tumblruser420 to know I like biting in bed? Feels like an overshare.

This really became a bit of a deep dive into gender identity huh? I guess I’m just going through some stuff.

Quick tangent, whenever I hear a noise in my house, despite having two cats that are always the cause, I need to check every room just in case. I even check the bathroom which only has one very small window next to the door. Just in case some sneak thief broke in through the plughole I guess. Some S’wit. Some N’wah.

God I’m just going through some Stuff y’know? I worry how much of my outlook might be down to internalised shame and not just non-chalant IDGAF attitude. I haven’t put Non-Binary on my tinder profile. I mean I have but I’ve set it not to show. I don’t know if that’s out of fear of being judged for it or simply because I haven’t come to terms with it myself. To be clear, I definitely haven’t come to terms with it myself yet. I have bisexual on my profile but I guess I’m still kind of ashamed of that.

Is it shame? I guess it’s more fear. Not like a fear for myself or my safety or anything. More a fear of people’s perceptions. It’s not even that I’m scared people will be shitty to me because of it. If that’s the kind of person they are, fuck them. I just don’t want to be “That queer one”. Does that make sense? I kind of hate to term cishet because it only seems to be used as derogatory but I need to use it a sec. I think the main reason I’m happy to just pass as cishet is because then I’m allowed to be a person. The second you’re something different that’s it. That defines you. I get it needs to be a conversation so people stop being ignorant and hateful but at the same time even just the discussion about it feels like it’s pushing me into this definition. Like being bi or being non-binary means I’m a certain kind of person.

I guess it’s the classic tale of any ism. Racism, sexism, homophobia...ism. I am bisexual. I am non-binary. But I don’t want to be the bisexual. Being defined by something like that, something so out of your control... It feels so... dismissive? I’m not a person anymore. I’m not Josh. I’m a bisexual. I’m non binary. I’m white. I present as a man. All that shit. This is starting to become a rant on the construction of society as a whole and the role of privelege and what that means huh?

I’m creative, emotional, witty. That’s what I’m defined by. That’s who I am. I’m not just some pigeon hole word. Define me by my facets, not my facts.

Realisations are a funny thing. I have a lot of realisations in my life and mostly I like them but this one leaves a sour taste in my mouth. It’s not that I don’t care, that much is apparent after this rant. I’m just so tired of it. I avoid all the discourse and conversations about any kind of identity issues because I’m tired of defending myself. It doesn’t matter where you fall on the spectrum. These kind of labels aren’t useful. They’re just a method of pinning something to someone that says “Can I just hate this person out of hand.” and it’s rife. It’s everywhere and it’s all the same. I don’t care if you’re having a rant about black people or a rant about cishets. It’s all just vicious hate. We live in a world where people are so desperate to have someone to hate because they’re different. Whether that difference is in the majority or the minority it doesn’t matter. Hating all men or all straights or all whites is no different from hating all trans people or all queer people or all black people. Hating all millenials because they’re special snowflakes is no different from hating all boomers because they’re not progressive. It’s just pure hatred because they’re different. Just blanket statements attached to something someone can’t control to give you a reason to say “Oh don’t worry, I’m allowed to hate them”.

Maybe keeping my identity or my sexuality to myself makes me a coward. Fine. I refuse to participate in these wars of hatred. I just want to spend time with my cats, fall in love, help people and laugh.

As always, as will be written on my gravestone one day, I refuse to participate. To all those people who fight for my ideal world on my behalf, thank you. To all those people on either side, progressive or traditional, just to hate one subset of people, go fuck yourselves. I’ll just be over here, trying to make the dying smile and trying to give people a little longer in this world to spend with the people they love.

That’s it. Rant over. I’m going to try and get another hour or two of sleep before work. I know it’s customary to drop the mic after a big speech but know if it felt like I did, I just fumbled putting it back into the mic stand and I’m trying to own it. If you look closely you’ll see that the blood has drained from my face and perspiration is clear on my forehead.

#non binary #emotions #rants #hate #I really went off on this one #identity #gender #sexuality #bisexual

1 note · View note

feministlikeme · 6 years

Link

1. Before explaining something to a woman, ask yourself if she might already understand. She may know more about it than you do.

2. Related: Never, ever try to explain feminism to a woman.

3. Trans women are women. Repeat that until you perish.

4. RESPECT PEOPLE’S PRONOUNS. It’s not hard.

5. Remember that fat women exist and aren’t all trying to get thin. Treat them with respect.

6. In fact, just never comment on a woman's body.

7. Be kind to women in customer service positions. Tip them extra. (But not in a creepy way.)

8. Trust women. When they teach you something, don't feel the need to go and check for yourself. And especially do not Google it in front of them.

9. Don’t maintain a double standard for… anything, ever.

10. CLOSE YOUR LEGS ON PUBLIC TRANSIT, OH MY GOD.

11. Trying to describe a woman positively? Say she's “talented,” “clever,” or “funny.” Not “gorgeous,” “sweet,” or “cute.”

12. Examine your language when talking about women. Get rid of “irrational,” “dramatic,” “bossy,” and “badgering” immediately.

13. Don't think to yourself, I describe men like that too. A) You probably don't. B) If you do, it's to criticize them for acting like a woman.

14. Do you love “fiery” Latina women? “Strong” Black women? “Mysterious” Asian women? Stop. Pick up a book on decolonial feminism. Read.

15. Stop calling women “feisty.” We don't need a special lady word for “has an opinion."

16. Recognize women's credibility when you introduce them. “Donna is lovely” is much less useful than “Donna knows shitloads about architecture.”

17. Think about how you describe the young women in your family. Celebrate them for being funny and smart, not for being pretty and compliant.

18. Examine the way you talk about women you’re attracted to. Fat women, old women, queer, trans, and powerful women are not your “guilty crush.”

19. Learn to praise a woman without demonizing other women. “You're not like other girls” is not a compliment. I want to be like other girls. Other girls are awesome.

20. Share writing by women. Don't paraphrase their work in your own Facebook post to show us all how smart or woke you are. I guarantee the woman said it better in the first place.

21. Buy sanitary pads and tampons and donate them to a homeless shelter. Just do it.

22. How much of what you are watching/reading/listening to was made by women? Gender balance your bookcase.

23. Feeling proud of your balanced bookcase? Are there women of color there? Trans, queer, and disabled women? Poor women? Always make sure you’re being intersectional.

24. Don't buy media that demeans women’s experiences, valorizes violence against women, or excludes them entirely from a cast. It's not enough to oppose those things. You have to actively make them unmarketable.

25. Pay attention to stories with nuanced female characters. It will be interesting, I promise.

26. If you read stories to a child, swap the genders.

27. Watch women's sport. And just call it “sports.”

28. Withdraw your support from sports clubs, institutions, and companies that protect and employ rapists and abusers.

29. Stop raving about Woody Allen. I don't care if he shits gold. Find a non-accused-abuser to fanboy over.

30. It's General Leia, not princess. The Doctor has a companion, not an assistant. It's Doctor Bartlett, not Mrs Madame First Lady.

31. Cast women in parts written for men. We know how to rule kingdoms, go to war, be, not be, and wait for Godot.

32. Pay for porn.

33. Recognize that sex work is work. Be an advocate for and ally to sex workers without speaking for them.

34. Share political hot takes from women as well as men. They might not be as widely accessible, so look for them.

35. Understand that it was never “about ethics in journalism.”

36. Speak less in meetings today to make space for your women colleagues to share their thoughts. If you're leading the meeting, make sure women are being heard as much as men.

37. If a woman makes a good point, say, “That was a good point.” Don't repeat her point and take credit for it.

38. Promote women. Their leadership styles may be different than yours. That's probably a good thing.

39. Recruit women on the same salary as men. Even if they don't ask for it.

40. Open doors for women with caring responsibilities by offering flexible employment contracts.

41. If you meet a man and a woman at work, do not assume the man is the superior for literally no reason.

42. If you're wrongly assumed to be more experienced than a woman colleague, correct that person and pass the platform to the woman who knows more.

43. Make a round of tea for the office.

44. Wash it up.

45. If you find you're only interviewing men for a role, rewrite the job listing so that it’s more welcoming to women.

46. Make sure you have women on your interview panel.

47. Tell female colleagues what your salary is.

48. Make sure there's childcare at your events.

49. Don't schedule breakfast meetings during the school run.

50. If you manage a team, make sure that your employees know that you recognize period pain and cystitis as legitimate reasons for a sick day.

51. If you have a strict boss (or mom or teacher) who is a woman, she is not a “bitch.” Grow up.

52. Expect a woman to do the stuff that's in her job description. Not the other miscellaneous shit you don't know how to do yourself.

53. Refuse to speak on an all-male panel.

54. In a Q&A session, only put your hand up if you have A QUESTION. Others didn’t attend to listen to you.

55. If you have friends or family members who use slurs or discriminate against trans or non-binary people, sit them down and explain why they must stop. (This goes for cis women, too.)

56. If you have friends or family members who use slurs or discriminate against women of other races, sit them down and explain why they must stop. (This goes for white women, too.)

57. If you see women with their hands up, put yours down. This can be taken as a metaphor for a lot of things. Think about it.

58. Raising a feminist daughter means she's going to disagree with you. And probably be right. Feel proud, not threatened.

59. Teach your sons to listen to girls, give them space, believe them, and elevate them.

60. Dads, buy your daughter tampons, make her hot water bottles, wash her bras. Show her that her body isn't something to be ashamed of.

61. But dads, do not try to iron her bras. This is a mistake you will only make once.

62. Examine how domestic labor is divided in your home. Who does the cleaning, the childcare, the organizing, the meal budgeting? Sons, this goes for you, too.

63. Learn how to do domestic tasks to a high standard. “I'd only do it wrong” is a bullshit excuse.

64. Never again comment on how long it takes a woman to get ready. WE ARE TRYING TO MEET THE RIDICULOUS STANDARDS OF A SYSTEM YOU BENEFIT FROM.

65. Challenge the patriarchs in your religious group when they enable the oppression of women.

66. Challenge the patriarchs in your secular movement when they enable the oppression of women.

67. Trust women's religious choices. Don't pretend to liberate them just so you can criticise their beliefs.

68. Examine who books your trips, arranges outings, organizes Christmas, buys birthday cards. Is it a woman? IS IT?

69. And if it is actually you, a man, don't even dare get in touch with me looking for your medal.

70. Take stock of the emotional labor you expect from women. Do you turn to the women around you for emotional support and give nothing in return?

71. Remember that loving your mom/sister/girlfriend is not the same as giving up your own privilege to progress equality for women. And that gender inequality extends beyond the women in your direct social group.

72. Don’t assume that all women are attracted to men.

73. Don’t assume that a woman in public wants to talk to you just because she’s in public.

74. If a woman tells you she was raped, assaulted, or abused, don't ask her for proof. Ask how you can support her.

75. If you see a friend or colleague being inappropriate to a woman, call him out. You will survive the awkwardness, I promise.

76. Repeat after me: Always. Hold. Men. Accountable. For. Their. Actions.

77. Do not walk too close to a woman late at night. That shit can be scary.

78. If you see a woman being followed or otherwise bothered by a stranger, stick around to make sure she’s safe.

79. This should go without saying: Do not yell unsolicited “compliments” at women on the street. Or anywhere.

80. If you are a queer man, recognize that your sexuality doesn’t exclude you from potential misogyny.

81. If you are a queer man, recognize that your queer women or non-binary friends may not feel comfortable in a male-dominated space, even if it’s dominated by queer men.

82. Be happy to have women friends without needing them to want to sleep with you. The “friend zone” is not a thing. We do not owe you sex.

83. Remember that you can lack consent in situations not involving sex—such as when pursuing uninterested women or forcing a hug on a colleague.

84. Champion sex positive women but don't expect them to have sex with you.

85. Trust a woman to know her own body. If she says she won't enjoy part of your sexual repertoire, do not try to convince her otherwise.

86. Be sensitive to nonverbal cues from women, especially around sex. We’re not just being awkward for no reason. (You read “Cat Person,” didn’t you?)

87. It is not cute to try to persuade a woman to have sex with you. EVER. AT ALL. Go home.

88. Same goes for pressuring women to have sex without a condom. Go. Home. And masturbate.

89. Accidentally impregnated a women who doesn't want a kid? Abortions cost money. Pay for half of it.

90. Accidentally came inside a woman without protection? Plan B is expensive. Pay for all of it.

91. Get STD tested. Regularly. Without having to be asked.

92. Examine your opinion on abortion. Then put it in a box. Because, honestly, it's completely irrelevant.

93. Understand that disabled women are whole, sexual human beings. Listen to and respect them.

94. Understand that not all women have periods or vaginas.

95. Believe women's pain. Periods hurt. Endometriosis is real. Polycystic ovaries, vaginal pain, cystitis. These things are real. Hysteria isn’t.

96. If a woman accidentally bleeds on you, try your absolute best to just keep your shit together.

97. Lobby your elected officials to implement high quality sex education in schools.

98. Uplift young Black and Indigenous girls at every possible opportunity. No excuses.

99. Do not ever assume you know what it’s like.

100. Mainly, just listen to women. Listen to us and believe us. It’s the only place to start if you actually want all women to have a “Happy International Women’s Day.”

#feminism #sexism #misogyny #patriarchy #equality #truth #rape culture #trans #lgbtqia #girl hate

121 notes · View notes

petitalbert-blog · 7 years

Text

"I want to get into ceremonial magic, but the gender/sex stuff is annoying af”

Don't worry, little sparrow! I'm so bothered by the anti-queer sexism in high magic, and this morning I have written a lot of words on why it's annoying and inaccurate; and capped it off with some "how to adapt this bullshit so you can participate without turning to drink" ideas.

I think translating that queer body into a strong man taking a vulnerable woman makes extremely clear that sexual imagery and sex itself, which have a host of egalitarian and sacred meanings in magic, has been tainted by society's shitty ideas about sex. You know, jumping straight from sex rituals to "man dominating woman!", says everything about the person jumping to that conclusion.

But the sexism was also there from the start.

You look at original Crowley, and he talks about the symbolic roles of the (male) Beast and (female) Scarlet Woman, and no amount of "both the male and female are sacred and have separate symbolic roles!" can compensate for his belief. That there was only one Beast, but Scarlet Women could be interchangeable - and in fact were, in his life, and you can read his notes about why his seven women all "failed". With no self awareness that, perhaps, he was an unworthy Beast to a succession of powerful women.

The very idea of the sacred feminine being so disposable makes me angry. I'm angry we call the Thoth tarot deck the "Crowley deck", and the trad deck the "Rider Waite". When in both cases they were illustrated by women who were occultists in their own right, who brought their own scholarship and insight to the decks, and yet for some reason the decks are still named for men. Lady Frieda Harris and Pamela Coleman-Smith were fiercely talented artists, and mages; but the sacred feminine is disposable and interchangeable.

Plus: high magic is built on drawing together stories and mysticism from throughout history. Crowley writes too fast for me to keep up; for all his flaws, the fucker knows a LOT about history, myth and culture. But those sources...are also all sexist. Arthur's knights; Egyptian myths; if you're drawing from the culture of the world, then you're inevitably drawing from the sexism of the world too.

No shit, this same imagery recurs across cultures? What if I told you that women internationally all experience sexism, in one way or another?

Yet also: from its inception, "sex magic" was very queer indeed.

Homosexual sex was a huge, and I mean huge part of Crowley's practice, and had specific ritual meanings. To do Thelema properly, you pretty much had to be au fait with bisexuality. There were different roles for solo, het and homo sexual acts in different rituals.

Now, I think it's good we've moved away from that. I think it's a Good Thing that people aren't being coerced into sex they're not into (which did happen in Crowley’s original working group). But when you look at sexy satanic imagery. It's all - alt white babes with normative bodies, being vessels and chalices for powerful dominant male avatars. In other word, we've replaced one Sex Expectation with a different one - as I hardly believe those images are the authentic form of sexual expression for 100% of Satanists.

I definitely like to consider queerness as a broader term, representing sex which is non-normative, and reflects genuine self-expression and will. And I think that's definitely key to the role queerness should play in Satanic/Thelemic/High magics. It's not so much about symbolic rituals between males and females, but about freedom, pleasure, the body, things for which you need to know your own desire and own it.

For some people, that's going to be ravishment by goat.

But it boils down to certain sexual expectations existing in magic, expectations that are unequal.

For Crowley, the expectations included gay sex; nowadays, it seemingly includes normative bodies, and het sex.

And unequal because, no matter how often a mage or a witch talks about men and women having equal, complimentary sacred roles...I don't believe it. I don't think anyone does. Crowley saw sacred women as interchangeable. Modern sexy Satanic art always puts a male figure dominant over a female one - by turning Baphomet's queer body into an explicitly male body (Have you ever seen sexy Baph art where Baph is a woman, or even a trans person? Of course you haven't. The cock maketh the man).

Sometimes I think, maybe it's sexist for me to be rejecting symbolic female imagery. Maybe disliking the passive/the cup/the receptive/the mystery is actually all about how I subconsciously rate masculinity over femininity. But no, it's just a shitty role. It still places active, will, and decision making as male qualities; "the sacred male embodies curiosity about the secret and hidden world of women, who hold the key to the mysteries" was clearly made up by male undergrads who desperately needed to get laid. The idea that women have a mysterious knowledge could only ever have been made up by a man. I don’t even know how to book a train ticket.

But it's endemic magically.

And...when you look at Thelma and Baphomet and stuff, it's a deeply queer ideology, where a true mage is neither male nor female, and engages sexually with both men and women.

And there doesn't seem to be a way to engage with it queerly, without relying at some stage on "here are the magical qualities of men and of women". You know, you could as a trans person with a Baphomet body use it to channel both male and female energies more potently, but there is nothing present in our magical culture challenging the fundamental man-as-active-lance-wielder and woman-as-passive-mysterious-vessel symbolism.

What can be done? Here are some thoughts.

So the role of sex in both high magic and Wicca and all that jazz goes something like this. Men and women have different symbolic roles. The true mage is powerful enough to have access to both energies. Sex is a kind of metaphor for the magical/alchemical process, where the male and female come together. Or magic is a kind of metaphor for sex, surpressed in our puritanical society. Either way, the coming together of opposites into a unity is a powerful magical symbol and magical act.

For those of you who just threw up a little in your mouth, let's try and make something a touch queerer and less essentalist from this mess.

"Male and Female energies"

Instead of relying on traditional symbols, seek out your own associations for the male and the female. What qualities do you associate with men? With women? With people who are neither? Build your own set of correspondences. Build up a list of figures who embody different genders as a personal bank of symbols.

Assuming you're coming from a queerfeminist bent, do try and come up with positive and negative qualities for both. “Men are inherently powerful dominant oppressors” is more or less what men have been saying since the dawn of time ;p

When thinking about sexual pairings - what associations do you have with these things? Trad gender magic plays with ideas of two halves of a whole coming together - sex, and metaphors for it, are at the core of most of it. Don't just consider the associations of men-with-women. What symbolism do you find in ff and mm couplings? What do you find when you consider other genders? Try and focus on the kinds of sex you have (or don't have) to avoid being needlessly skeezy. What is the meaning? What power and energies can you find in the kinds of things you do?

Think about non-sexual pairings. Trad gender magic always, at some point, boils down to a penis doing something with a vagina. Is that the most important way what people of different genders interact? Are there different, perhaps more powerful acts and behaviors, which could take the role of the sexual act in your gender magic.

Try and be aware of your cultural baggage. You don't have to reject it outright - pop culture magic has taught us that something doesn't have to be real to be powerful - but do know what you're dealing with, where it's coming from, and use that awareness to oomph up what you do. If you want to have feminine chalices, that's fine.

The goal is to yes, use gendered symbolism, but to use it on your own terms, and find your own meanings. It won't reflect reality perfectly. It won't necessarily have a lot to do with being a person in the world. It will always be slightly objectifying.

But you can probably do better than "women are indistinguishable vessels for men".

"The Mage is both Male and Female, as symbolised by Baphomet"

Be aware of your relationship to gender. If you are transgender or non-binary, you can incorporate that experience if you like.

How do you feel about that? What are your positive experiences of your gender? What qualities of other genders do you wish to cultivate? What sort of gender-based role models do you have and why?

I think the key is that mages ought to be powerful - if there are male and female energies, the mage must master both. Look back at your personal list of gender symbolism, and cultivate mastery of these things. If gender differences isn't a big thing in your life or system, replace this with seeking mastery over key dualities which are in your system.

If you do this, then reconsider whether sex is part of your system at all. For example, if your key duality is light and darkness - the dawn and the dusk, where the two powers are mingled as one, likely has the same charge as sex has in a system where the two powers are male and female.

"Sex magic which ought to be done as follows"

Sex magic & symbolism has two sorts of things going on.

The first is alchemical - the combination of opposites is powerful. We've already touched on this, but look at your sexuality - your real, authentic sexuality - and find its unique meanings and power. It could still be based on opposites coming together - but opposites with more egalitarian symbolism. A gay couple could find their magic in working with sameness; or with difference (say, butch-femme); or with something completely unrelated (say, the magic of reciprocity, of giving and receiving, which you practice with all your partners)

The second is the more Satanic approach, where it's about expressing yourself and hedonism. For this, too, you need to be expressing your authentic self, working on shame, working to tune out society's expectations. Again, if your authentic sexual self is monogamous and vanilla, this is as excellent and beautiful as any other expression. The greatest power is to be found in something you enjoy.

An important part of either approach is, of course, freely given consent. Violating the free will of others is Satanic no no.

"This is all bullshit"

...and that's ok. For a long time, I avoided gender magic entirely. I still think that's a wise approach.

Because I increasingly want to do the high magic thing, just without being someone’s bloody chalice; I'm hoping to use this framework to prevent my brains from dribbling out of my ears.

But if you want to ignore gender, that's cool too.

#baphomet #high magic #queer magic #gender magic #thelema

34 notes · View notes

zorilleerrant · 7 years

Text

I read Maze Runner (the first book) a while back, to see whether I wanted to watch the movie, and because it’s pretty popular. I couldn’t continue past the first book, because there’s something downright appalling about picking the hundred or so brightest babies, and they all turn out to be boys? (Also, the fact that the single girl is named something other than Marie, which is the obvious choice, but also neither Rosalind nor Sally.)

The thing is, it’s written by this extremely uncritical dude (I’m assuming dude here; I haven’t actually researched him), who presents what we have to assume is a group of people from roughly modern Western society. It goes on to have some white dude show up a bunch of poc, because of course it does; it’s n-1 boys, which is overkill even for this genre; all of the boys are immediately and aggressively sexual towards the one girl, despite having previously demonstrated zero in the realm of sexual thoughts or behaviors; she somehow seems to find it amusing and then acts as if it’s simply not okay to behave that way towards her, rather than being like, ‘hey, your mindset is fundamentally flawed’, but whatever, she’s the smartest of all of them, despite being a girl and shit, you know, how occasionally you get a woman who’s a person too.

On a more technical note, he seems to have confused the verbs ‘grieving’ and ‘griefing’ and is apparently unaware that ‘Newt’ has always been short for ‘Newton’ when used as a name. The lack of profanity is obscenely noticeable, but that’s not his fault children’s literature is so prudish, so it’s pretty unsatisfying to be mad at him personally for it.

The thing is, what he’s done is an extremely common thing for SFFH authors to do; he’s assumed his cultural worldview is somehow innate to civilization.

Now, we can assume that these kids were raised in an environment that presents a binary gender system, and so are more likely to be inculcated into a binary gender than something else. So most of them would be either girls or boys. Half of them should be girls, but leaving that aside, maybe we can assume that none of them are trans. That’s pretty rare in a strictly and violently binary society, and we’re not working with an extremely high number of samples, so statistically, it’s probably fine. What doesn’t make sense is that none of the boys act overtly feminine in any way.

Since none of them have more than vague memories, they obviously don’t remember social taboos. What internalized self-concept they have wouldn’t change, but their attitudes towards what they and other people do would no longer have the pall of social enforcement hanging over it. Thus, any boys that wanted to act strongly feminine would simply do so, which should cause very little in the way of problems. Any boys who wanted to act moderately feminine would do so. Any boys who wanted to do one particular feminine thing (or a few, or act very mildly feminine across the board) wouldn’t even stand out in this context. Instead, all the characters are presented as very typically adventure-novel masculine fare (this is also boring). The only reason most (and, honestly, nowhere near all) boys act masculine and constantly eschew feminine things is because society keeps telling them they should.

Then there’s the part where none of the boys are in relationships with each other (or, if they are, it’s extremely sidelined to the point where I’m not finding it). The thing is, we can find a lot of historical studies, done during times with a much stronger homosexuality taboo than now (or, presumably, this future), that are pretty clear on the fact that when you remove all the chicks, even the dudes who would ‘usually’ or ‘always’ prefer a chick start pairing off with each other. This is more pronounced during adolescence (raging hormones), which is the life stage of all the characters in the book. This is despite taboos that they know and remember. Take that away, and why would anyone stop themselves or anyone else?

Also, at least of couple of them ought to be attracted to other boys. Even if this were only a very mild attraction, it would be amplified by the raging hormones and the fact that there are only boys around. We know they haven’t been selected (or programmed) not to have that kind of desire, because they express it very strongly as soon as the one girl appears. And while it would make sense, for efficiency reasons, to only select a team that had no sexual or romantic desires, it doesn’t make any sense to select specifically for het kids, especially when they have a negligible chance of pairing off, which would only make them irritable and resentful, causing them to sabotage each other and focus on a goal other than whatever the hell mission they have and generally be distracted and distractable.

Then we have the sexism. Why would they be so pervasively overtly sexist? Certainly they’ve internalized some things, but they wouldn’t remember any taboos or cultural expectations. Instead, they’d just have a low level feeling that she’s unqualified. They would most likely constantly say that this was because she was the newest one, or because the circumstances of her appearance were strange. They wouldn’t know they dislike her for being a girl. They would also not call dibs on her, because where would they even have the idea that only one of them could be with her? Certainly, if more were, they would begin to get jealous of each other, but there’s no reason for them to know that would happen, as they obviously haven’t developed their own structure of how relationships work.

Plus, it’s an imaginary future society, so it would be easy enough to pretend sexism was just over and not have them treat her in a shitty way like that regardless of all the other implications.

Point being: CULTURES DON’T WORK THE SAME WAY AS EACH OTHER. If you’re imagining up a culture, think through the implications. Think how the setting would change. Think how the average interaction would change. Think how characters would perceive the world, what they would expect to happen, what they would think of as common knowledge and what they would have no way to know, what things they would think ‘just work that way’, and what they would assign into moral categories of ‘good’ and ‘bad’.

Having a revolution isn’t a normal thing to plan in a society that never teaches about revolutions. Thinking ‘that’s unfair’ is not a normal idea to have in a society that doesn’t prize fairness, or in a context where society has deemed unfairness the morally correct state of existence. Wanting freedom of speech and freedom of expression in a society founded on censorship and self-censorship doesn’t make sense unless an outside source explains how it works and that it does work, and even then there might be a lot of backlash, given how awful some speech and other expression is. You can’t just transplant someone from the modern world into an alien society and expect that they would grow up with the same personality and the same plans.

#the maze runner #book review #writing advice

2 notes · View notes

fem-mem-mine · 4 years

Link

Every year, I wake up on March 8 to a flurry of tweets from men wishing me a “Happy International Women’s Day!”

And every year, I find myself thinking: Well, thanks, but is that it? Is that all the support for gender equality that you can muster? For the entire year? It’s a nice sentiment, but at a time when the gender pay gap means that women in the UK work for free for 67 days each year, Black women in the US are three to four times more likely to die in childbirth than white women, and trans women in the US are four times more likely to be murdered than cis women, it doesn’t quite do it for me.

So, to ensure that men aren’t missing direction, a few years ago I started compiling a list of easy actions that men can take to meaningfully support gender equality. Every year, I would post it on social media. Slowly, other women started contributing suggestions. So the list grew. And grew. It will likely never stop growing.

The suggestions cover many realms of life—from home, to work, to the ways we interact with strangers, to the language we use—but it is in no way comprehensive. Below, I’ve included a mere 100 entries out of the several hundred I’ve crowdsourced and personally compiled.