#but there’s really no other way to describe my experience than disabled and also i literally categorically have disabilities | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

heliza24 · 28 days

Text

Let’s talk about parallels between Wilhelm and Sara in Season 3 of Young Royals

Because there are so many! This is a continuation of sorts of this meta that I wrote about them being A and B plot protagonists in season 1 and 2. I don’t know that I would describe them exactly that way in season 3, but I do think their plots, character arcs, and themes are meant to mirror each other very closely this season.

One of my favorite things about the parallels between Wilhelm and Sara this season is that comparing them really makes you hold Sara’s friendship with Felice on the same level as Wilhelm’s romantic relationship with Simon (and Sara’s with August) which I think is so important. Both Wilhelm and Sara go through breakups over the course of the season (I think Felice’s reaction especially frames her friendship breakup with Sara similarly to a romantic breakup, which I love). And both of their arcs are about mending those relationships.

Sara and Wilhelm both need to experience the world outside of Hillerska before they can mend those relationships. Sara is able to glimpse some independence, even just through getting her license. The whole world is open to her now, as Felice says in ep 6. I don’t know that she would have been able to make her decision not to go back to August without experiencing that freedom. And Wilhelm also needs to experience the full force of what life in the monarchy would be like before he is able to decide to leave it. Because of this they also act as our window into the two different worlds outside of Hillerska, the palace and Bjarstad. They create the larger context in which we understand Hillerska this season.

I love that both of their journeys of personal growth are symbolized through cars. Wilhelm is always getting trapped with his mom or a member of the court in a fancy car; it’s where almost all of the monarchy’s most onerous instructions on how to live are delivered to him. So it’s huge when he leaves his parents in the chauffeured car at the end of episode 6 and goes to find Simon, Felice and Sara in Sara’s beat up used car. Meanwhile, Sara has traded in horses for the car. This is stated pretty explicitly when her dad asks her if she would like to work with horses and she declines, saying that she has come to realize that horses are simply traded by rich people as status symbols, and her dad suggests she get her drivers license since it will help with any job she wants. In seasons 1 and 2 Rousseau is pretty heavily associated with August, along with the pressures put on August and the other elite kids at Hillerska to conform to expectations (@bluedalahorse has written the Bible on that here), so the fact that Sara swaps out the horse for a car that can take her anywhere feels like a step away from both August and the prescriptive norms of Hillerska.

Sara and Wilhelm both reject what they saw as their destined future. This is obviously really clear for Wilhelm; he assumed he would be prince and then king after Erik died, and his greatest moment of character growth is when he decides he doesn’t have to fulfill that assigned role if it will keep him from being happy and living authentically. I love the scene where Sara talks with her dad about her fears that she will fail in the same ways that he did because she also has autism and adhd. This is a less clear-cut assigned destiny, but that fear of becoming a self fulfilling prophecy is equally overwhelming, especially because Sara has already let down someone she cares about in a way that’s not dissimilar to how her father breaks promises. The fact that she’s able to come to terms with her dad’s influence in her life, but realize she really is in charge of her own future, is really powerful. (I also think it’s such smart writing about the way disability and internalized ableism can really affect your self image).

In order to break free of those predetermined destinies, both Sara and Wilhelm need to see a father/mentor figure as more than black and white. Wilhelm needs to acknowledge that Erik wasn’t perfect, and did help contribute to some of the abusive traditions of Hillerska. Sara needs to recognize that even though her dad isn’t a perfect parent, she still loves him for the care he is able to show to her and wants to have him in her life. I love that both Wilhelm and Sara learn to hold multiple conflicting emotions about their loved ones. They can be disappointed by some of Micke and Erik’s actions, but they can still value their relationships with those family members and recognize them as complex, complete people.

They also both go on a similar journey with how they see August. Wilhelm comes to recognize that August is both a perpetrator and victim of the class system and Hillerska’s systemized abuse. Sara similarly realizes that August is an adult who needs to be responsible for his own emotions. She’s no longer interested in saving him from his complex feelings of guilt, and recognizes his potential to find self healing. Both of those new assessments of August grant him more maturity and complexity than earlier in the show. (They also reflect the way that August grows, in fits and starts, over the course of season 3. If there was a season 4 of the show, I think we would really see August respond to Sara and Wilhelm’s new attitudes towards him in a way that would fuel future character growth).

Viewing Erik, Micke, and August more complexly also allows Sara and Wilhelm to forgive themselves for the ways they are similar to those people. They are able to acknowledge the shame they feel around their actions, but also forgive themselves in the same way that they forgive others.

Both Sara and Wilhelm have specifically let down Simon in pretty big ways (Sara by secretly dating August, Wilhelm by perpetuating the royal family restrictions onto Simon). But they are able to recognize those mistakes and reconcile with Simon.

Wilhelm and Sara both leave the monarchy (Wilhelm literally, Sara by refusing a relationship with August), but they also leave a kind of prescriptive romance behind. Wilhelm says no to having to monitor Simon, to having to roll out his relationship in a certain way to please the court, and to having their future together mapped out and their decision around children made for them. Sara says no to a smaller set of requirements, but the traditional ways that August sees romance are so influenced by the monarchy (which is in turn so influenced patriarchy) that they are similar in some ways. Sara says no to having to do August’s emotional labor, to managing him so that he will fit the image of a good heir. She says no to waiting for him to visit on weekends while he does military service. She says no to this grand plan that he has. (This was @bluedalahorse’s point originally that she shared with me, and honestly I think it's so smart). Wilhelm chooses a romantic relationship that he and Simon are free to create together without rules; Sara chooses a friendship based on honesty and support. Both are valid options that give the characters a sense of peace and freedom. And they would not have been able to make those choices without all of the growth they went through over the course of the season.

I think Sara and Wilhelm's arcs compliment each other so well, and it was one of my favorite things about season 3. I loved watching both of them get to grow so much and end up in such a happy place.

#young royals #my meta #wilhelm young royals #sara eriksson

59 notes · View notes

librarycards · 5 months

Note

Hello! Sorry if you’ve posted about this somewhere already/if it’s redundant, but I thought your coinage of “transMad” was very cool and I’m wondering what that term means to you? I’m really happy to see other people talking about madness being intertwined w their gender/transness and looking forward to checking out your reading lists :))

thank you so much for asking about one of my favorite things to infodump about!! rather than rehash a bunch of stuff, if it's okay, I'm going to borrow a few quotes from past!me that i've published in different places // offer you some things of mine to read.

broadly, though, i use transMadness as a way to explore the identificatory, epistemological, methodological, and theoretical implications of an orientation (to use Sara Ahmed's term) toward bodymind noncompliance and self/selves-determination. this orientation refuses to delineate diagnostically between Maddened / transed experiences of the world/our many worlds, and instead takes this shared/overlapping ground as a jumping off point for solidarity and speculation - that is, something that allows us to imagine otherwise worlds / make them manifest through creativity and collaboration.

(Ha, and I claimed i wouldn't talk too much...famous autistic last words)

ANYWAY. here are some clips that might help explain more dimensions of transMadness. note that, in my dissertation-in-progress, i'm focusing on xeno/neogender and/as self-diagnostic cultures among queercrip and transMad internet users. i'm interested in the anti-psych liberatory potential of this digital community work, especially as it centers forms of knowledge and scholarship devalued within Academia Proper, especially because so much of it is made by and for disabled, Mad, queer, trans people, esp. youth. Onward to quotes!

On transMad epistemologies: citation/power/knowledge:

I’ll spend most of this piece looking not at what transMad is, but what it does. First and foremost, transMad cites. Even its name alludes to other portmanteaus: neuroqueer and queercrip being the best-known among them. Many people have offered many different (ever-“working”!) definitions of these terms; today, I offer co-coiner Nick Walker’s (2021) definition of neuroqueer: a verb and an adjective “encompass[ing] the queering of neurocognitive norms as well as gender norms” (p. 196). In terms of queercrip, I also return to its coiner, Carrie Sandahl (2003), who for whom the queercrip (as person and as method/movement) confuses the diagnostic gaze, bears sociopolitical witness, and performs glitchful[4], incongruous, confusing in(ter)ventions into possible community. At base, “queer” and “crip” appear as analogous, reclaimed slurs signifying marginalized transgression. When combined, they describe a loop, perhaps a Möbius strip: crip (ani)mates queer, queer tells-on crip. The specter of crip haunts queer—and even more explicitly, as we will see, trans—and the crip(ped) bodymind holds, moves, and fucks queerly. Who knows where “queer” stops and “crip” and “neuro” begin? Likewise, transMad, whose citational style leaves little room for diagnostic clarity amidst a pastiche of noncompliant text.

On transMad epistemologies: multiplicity (h/t @materialisnt):

They encourage us to remove others’ names from our bodies, to reign in unruly citations, to set “boundaries” which violate Mad, crip ethics of care (see Fletcher, 2019). In truth, any framing of individual authorship in which the body text is “mine” and the citations gesture “elsewhere” belie the inherent interdependence of all intellectual life, and particularly of transMad intellectual life. transMad plural scholar mix. alan moss (2022) argues in relation to the pathologization of multiple systems: “all people, indeed all that exists, is a system that itself is constantly enmeshed in several overlapping and interconnected systems.” In short, I am full of Is, and will continue as many more. Just as disability justice helps us understand all life as interdependent and deserving of access, a transMad approach sees our selves as numerous and fuzzy. We have permission to dispense with the need for tidy texts, with our interlocutors, edits, and iterations either obfuscated entirely or exclusively relegated to a bibliography. transMad citation may thus be considered akin to visible mending[6], creating flamboyantly messy, multiplicitous work that does not seek to pass as objective or discrete.

On the value of (crip) failure and/as "virtuality":

Don’t get me wrong: Zoom PhD work is a failing enterprise. That is to say, it is a queercrip, transMad enterprise, which is to say, it is a beautiful, beautiful project. Mitchell, Snyder, and Ware describe such “fortunate failures” in the context of “curricular cripistemologies.”5 Coined by Merri Lisa Johnson, the term “cripistemologies,” refers to “embodied ways of knowing in relation, knowing-with, knowing-alongside, knowing-across-difference, and unknowing,” ways which frequently exist outside the purview of mainstream academia.6 Curricular cripistemologies, then, refer to an intentional, queercrip deviation from normative pedagogical approaches which trades the corrective impulse of “special ed” and other rehabilitative programs, and offers instead a generative noncompliance.7 That is, rather than trying to identify, isolate, and ameliorate difference, curricular cripistemologies lean into difference as it is experienced by disabled students ourselves, querying how atmospheres of in/accessibility shape normative approaches to education and how the embrace of “failure,” not as a last-resort but as a first choice, poses potentially transformative possibilities.

On transMadness and fat liberation: (for @trans-axolotl's Psych Survivor Zine)

A transMad, fat approach to disorderly eating requires making connections with humility and understanding, and, as I discussed above, engaging in compassionate, critical interrogation of our own anti-fatness.

[...]

A transMad, fat, abolitionist politic is one that makes room. We imagine beyond the cage, even if the details of that imagining are not yet clear. Just as we have carved micro-sites of support within violent digital and in-person contexts, just as we have learned to think about our lifeworlds beyond the paradigm of “recovery or death,” we can also reconceptualize fatness not as the enemy, but as another form of bodymind noncompliance in alliance and/or entanglement with disorderly eating practices. For thin disorderly eaters, this requires us to fundamentally challenge the way we view food and embodiment, even while maintaining a Mad respect for alternative ways of approaching reality.

On xenogenders, virtuality, and self-determination:

It is this very “irrationality” –– the “unrealness,” the “you’ve-got-to-be-kiddinghood,” that is most frequently weaponized against xenogenders, as well as their newly-coined sets of xenopronouns. The perceived and actual virtuality of xenogenders is often placed against the notion of “actuality,” in this case, of “real” (or “practical”) genders and pronouns to be used in one’s “real life.” Disabled activists have rightly resisted the distinction between online and (presumed-offline) “real life,” given that this categorically excludes homebound bodyminds, as well as those without IRL social and support circles. That said, I believe the virtual –– as almost, not-quite, proximite, making-do –– is incredibly useful in thinking about xenoidentities as transMad tools –– particularly, as transMad tools of underground collaboration / co-liberation.

[...]

What if gender was a project we wanted to fail? That is, what if trans- was a process not of getting better, not of moving-toward a bodymind more sane, more straight, and more cisheteropatriarchially desirable, but rather a line of flight on a longer trail to illegibility? Indeed, what if we replaced pathology’s narrow “path” with a trail lighted by the language of our comrades, whose linguistic interventions make and break gender in ways heretofore unimaginable? Xenoidentities, both individually and as a trans-gressive M.O., are fundamental to a broader transMad project of crafted, collective illegibility; intersubjective citation (imagine what it feels like for someone to be the gender that you coined!); and collective care that refuses a politics of cure. Crucially both virtual and digital, xenoidentities are furthermore a manifestation of the power of trans, predominantly disabled digital counterpublics, who overturn the hierarchy which places the IRL-real above the digital-unreal, making unruly, Mad space in which (with apologies to Donna Haraway) a hundred xenoselves might bloom.

On Maddening queer "diagnosis":

In her indictment of all “Kwik-Fix Drugs,” Gray further indicates the practice of forced treatment as in and of itself as a project of violent normalization, regardless of specific target or reason. The intentional ambiguity between her narrative of Madness and her narrative of asexuality disrupt mounting demands for a healthy (sanitized, neoliberal, and consumable) queerness. A Mad ace approach identifies these demands as, indeed, comparable with cis heteronormative notions of sexual maturity and responsibility – the idea that participation in culturally-normative sexual practices is a prerequisite for health (Kim, 2011, 481) and thus, personal autonomy (Meerai, Abdillahi, and Poole 2016, 21). By fusing the “lack of sexual appetite” attributed to her medications for bipolar disorder with her asexuality, Gray destabilizes the binary between healthy-sexual-diversity and unhealthy-psychopathology. She is once again disrupting contemporary queer impulses to dissociate from ongoing histories of pathologization. Here, Mad and queer/asexual activism are as inseparable in text as they are in Gray. Gray and her comrades collectively refuse both sexuality-as-“rehabilitation” (See Kim 2011, 486) and asexual acceptance predicated upon normative “health” (Kim 2010, 158) – that is, they Madden asexuality. Twoey, in her own voice, remixes the sources of her own pathologization, staggering the supposedly-divine pronouncement of the DSM across pages and bookending its extracts with her own writing and art. In this undermining of the DSM’s epistemological polish, Gray disrupts the domination of written prose over poetry and visual art, while also critiquing the role of the DSM in commercialized health “care.” Her zine opens with the lines “sex sells and sex is sold / sex was being sold and i didn’t buy” (Gray 2018, n.p.). Gray indicates a pathology perceived not only in a refusal to practice sex, but also in a refusal to buy (into) it. After all, a refusal to buy into existing sexual paradigms is for her also a refusal to buy into a feminized reproductive mandate.

#sector-v #thank you genuinely!#ask #transmad #antipsychiatry #xenogender #epistemology #madness

89 notes · View notes

zscribez · 11 months

Text

you know i remember reading someone’s meta pointing out the casual racism in lena’s dialogue when you bring up the kind green ape and she reveals that she believes kim to be a completely separate species from the rest of them

and up to that point, lena was shown to be a very loveable character and understandably everyone loves her (i do too) and so plenty of people would be caught off guard by her casual racism

i think when lena’s casual racist remarks came up in my playthrough, i was prickled and disappointed but i don’t think i would describe my feelings at the time as complete surprise. lena’s remarks were not dissimilar from the kinds of comments i would get about my own background and country of origin

although i never encountered rhetoric that was explicitly race science in its ideology that is evident in lena’s remark, all of the rhetoric i encountered dehumanizes my heritage and assumes that i wish to ‘ascend’ from my own home culture. for instance, many canadian queers i encountered would overly presume that i had suffered greatly due to my queerness in my home country when that is very far from my actual reality as a queer person existing here. they would ask if i had applied for asylum, when that isn’t really an option for me because i would have to prove that my life was in immediate danger, which is an experience i just do not have even though my home country is very queerphobic in its society, institutions and legal system. there exists a strong undercurrent of homonationalism that threads through a lot of my interactions with most queer people who are invested in first world countries as being inherently more lgbtq friendly than other countries, despite evidence to the contrary.

whenever i encounter the opinions of liberals on asian politics (both irl and online), they betray their actual convictions that view asian-ness as inherently ‘lesser’, ‘backwards’ or ‘barbaric’. they constantly refer to the asian immigrant narrative as one of realizing their liberal subjectivity and by extension their personhood via moving towards the first world liberal democratic countries and to shun and cut off ties to the homeland, with the implication that asian cultures and societies are inherently ‘sexist’, ‘homophobic’, ‘racist’ and ‘unenlightened’. this does the work of ignoring the historical, political and socio-economic contexts of issues within asian societies and instead attributes these problems to our own heritage and ‘backwards’ culture. liberal rhetoric frequently dehumanizes the people who still remain in our countries, framing the high population count as ‘swarms’ or ‘brainwashed masses’ and our prioritization of the collective over the individual as ‘authoritarian’. although many liberals i meet would pay a lot of lip service to being pro-asian, their actual words reveal their continued subscription to yellow peril tropes disguised as concern for the poor yellows in their despotic homeland.

lena’s casual racism couched in her benevolence is way more pervasive than the blatant racism espoused by the racist lorry driver and measurehead. lena’s disability also factors as i could never be free from the racism within other marginalized communities, my encounters with queer communities being a prime example

#disco elysium #zee.txt

328 notes · View notes

batshaped · 11 months

Text

twitter stop fucking up for one second challenge (impossible)

well,

here’s the thing. it feels like social media is changing lately. every social media site seems to be fucking up or getting worse in its own special little way. i recently read and thought a lot about this article which coins the term “enshittification” and describes the process by which every social media platform eventually becomes so greedy as to become unusable. it makes me wonder if the social internet is due for a big shift in the near future.

for a long time, twitter was the best place for me. for all its issues, it had the audience that i could reach the easiest, that was the most invested in my art. i got (still get) a lot of awesome replies and really great analysis of my work on twitter, which i didn’t receive on any other platform. i was able to encourage those readers by retweeting their comments and theories to show that i liked hearing their thoughts. i could use the Moments feature to organize my art and make my comic easily readable in order. and anyone could look at my twitter, account or no.

ever since the site was bought out, twitter is getting worse. i can’t use the app on mobile anymore because every reply section is drowned out by blue checks and choked with ads. the Moments feature was disabled and people couldn’t easily read my comics in order anymore. and this is without even touching on the bigger/more serious issues the buyout has brought to the app. these are just the ways it has made my personal experience of being an artist on there worse. and now, apparently, you can’t even look at my work unless you have an account.

it’s been pretty common in the past year for the new management to implement a bad feature and then undo it after backlash, and maybe this too will be reversed. but even if it is unimplemented, the platform will continue to get worse. all platforms are getting worse right now. all of them are becoming untenable to use without 7 bespoke browser extensions to block ads, hide specific unwanted content, force chronological order, and so on. on mobile i don’t even bother. apps are unusable.

on top of that, i have the personal issue of not being the type of creator who is particularly good at staying on top of more than one or two platforms daily. twitter has been my main for years now, so i’m pretty good about updating it very regularly. instagram is trailing behind, i usually remember to post there daily (especially as i’m remaking mine right now and posting my entire backlog) but sometimes i forget. and that’s kind of my limit. every other site falls by the wayside because i just don’t want to spend my whole day or life updating platforms. i know there are tools that can do it automatically for you but i don’t want to do it that way and then i’d have to figure out a new tool and get yet another account on yet another app and install yet another extension to use it.

i just want to draw. i don’t know how we arrived at this place where we need to be 700 other things when we are just artists. i draw and write, isn’t that enough? if i wanted a presence on tiktok i’d also have to be a video editor who pays close attention to trends and makes sure to transform my artwork into something people on that app are interested in. even if i just wanted to have a strong presence on say, twitter/instagram/tumblr/tapas/webtoon i’d have to take on another (unpaid) job as my own social media manager, meticulously managing my uploads across 5+ apps and making sure everything is up to date and tailored to what “works” on each particular platform. i already have a day job—i’m a storyboard artist. the art i post online is supposed to be made and given freely for my own enrichment first and foremost, and for the joy of sharing with others as a close second.

i wonder if we’re due for a mass rejection of this increasingly draining cable-wars-style model of spreading ourselves thin across multiple platforms just to reach the exclusive audience each one provides. i’m starting to feel done with that concept, but i still want to share my art. i want to hear my readers’ thoughts. i want to create things that connect with others. i want to do it without these ever-mounting obstacles.

what i’m doing about it is creating my own website at my own domain that belongs to me. i doubt i’ll be quitting social media when it’s done. social media is still where the audience i cherish lives. but you can bet that when that website is ready to be shared, i’ll be talking about it on every social media account i own. i’ll be telling everyone there’s a place to look at my art where you don’t need an account, you don’t have to struggle through a morass of ads, and you don’t have to line the pockets of a billionaire who bought a social media app on a whim. it’ll just be you and my art. alone together.

by the way, to @whatthehelljake i apologize for writing a fucking SAT essay on a screenshot of your reply. any exasperated tone here is not directed at you at all. it’s directed at this sea of obstacles that disrupt the simple concept of “i made art and i want to share it with you.” your reply is how i found out today that twitter made this change. i cherish the fact that you want to connect with my art so much that you alerted me to this. i wish that wasn’t necessary. i want to make my work on my own terms—and want you to be able to experience it on YOUR own terms.

all that to say, i think the website is going to be the main answer to this issue. i don’t see myself having the energy to update tumblr that much more often than i already do, though maybe i’ll try to pick up the pace a little now. we’ll see. holy shit if you read all this go drink a glass of water or something get up and stretch. ok thank you bye <3

#not art #fucking essay length thing under the cut #i don't know what else to say just read it if you want to know LOL

334 notes · View notes

jaskierx · 6 months

Note

[CW for discussion of severe mental illness (PTSD) and suicide]

I want to add my perspective to the conversation about canyon people picking and choosing which disability rep is worth telling. It’s really offensive to me because I’m mentally disabled so it feels like these people are glossing over the mental illness rep in the show.

I hesitate because i do not want to seem like I’m chastising people for acknowledging the physical disability rep. OFMD has better physical disability rep than any show I’ve seen, while I’ve seen many shows with mentally ill characters. I also do not want to give credit where credit is not due, because ultimately these characters don’t have any diagnosed mental disabilities. However, I don’t think that that subtracts from the representation because 1)the show obviously takes place before many mental health diagnoses that we have now did,2) even if those diagnoses did exist, the crew would not be able to access them, and 3) I think the show is clearly trying to tell us that characters are suffering from PTSD, or at the very least struggling to process a traumatic event, they just don’t have the words to describe it as such.

Many characters exhibit what would today be classified as symptoms of a psychiatric disorder. In this fandom we often joke about that, especially Ed’s (which is more than okay), but I also want to appreciate the way that season 2 deals with the trauma of the kraken era. They freak out and have flashbacks over blindfolds and birthday cakes because of what they’ve been through. They have interpersonal conflicts due to differing ways of processing the trauma and not seeing eye to eye on each others own unique experience (Lucius and Pete come to mind). Lucius takes up smoking to cope with the pain. Ed dissociates (I think, because he doesn’t remember wanting to have a talent show) and is literally suicidal, first passively (“you mean curl up into a ball and die?”) and then actively (the whole storm thing). He also turns to using drugs to self medicate.

Anyway sorry for the novel I just wanted to add my perspective because this show means a lot to me as someone who’s mentally disabled and I want to know if anyone else with a mental disability feels the same/differently.

no don't apologise this is a really good point!

i've posted about it a few times and so has glam and several other people whose links i don't have to hand but the depiction of ed's mental illness and his suicidality is fucking spot on and the show absolutely deserves all the praise it gets for that

especially because it's quite possibly the first show i've ever seen that depicts suicidality in a way that manages to be accurate without being pitying and manages to be hopeful without romanticising the issue. the show brings ed to his lowest point and then shows him being helped to come back from that by people who love him. it tells us that there's always a way for things to get better and that you can get there by yourself but it's easier if you have help, and it tells us that this help is available because there is always going to be someone waiting for you even if you doubt that. it never shows ed as 'cured'. it never shows stede being angry with ed for his symptoms. when lucius suggests that ed might just be 'broken', stede very quickly shuts him down and the show makes it clear that the narrative is on stede's side here.

and all of this just doesn't get brought up by izzy stans. discussion of mental illness portrayal tends to be one of the following:

ignoring ed's arc altogether to focus on izzy's suicide attempt and his 'i want to go' line while he's on his deathbed (and in a massively different place to where he was in s2e2) and using this to pretend that the show's message is 'disabled queer people deserve to die' (yes unfortunately this is a take i have seen with my own two eyes)

writing ed's arc off as an example of 'magic dick' and using this to pretend that he was fine as soon as he got stede back

ignoring ed's arc completely and instead insisting that he's a violent serial killer and abuser with anger issues who traumatised the crew and will inevitably physically abuse stede and kill all their inn's customers

ignoring all portrayals of mental illness completely because they will deliberately downplay the disability of every other disabled character in order to centre izzy

the canyon will bend over backwards to centre izzy and to view the entire show through a lens where he is their longsuffering protagonist who can do no wrong and it's led them to ignore so much of what makes the show great

#sorry i wrote you a novel in return lmao #asks #anon #the izcourse #fandom critical #cw suicide #cw suicidal ideation #lyse.jpg

90 notes · View notes

perplexingluciddreams · 6 months

Text

An exploration of gender as a nonverbal autistic

This is going to be an attempt at expressing my feelings about my own gender and queerness, as a nonverbal autistic with language difficulties, low awareness of the world around me, barely any sense of self, and so many other things that affect my ability to understand and be aware of the concept of gender and sexuality to begin with.

I tried to write this like a properly structured essay, but because my thoughts are so disorganised in general (and I have so many thoughts on this topic), I couldn’t manage that. So, I have decided to present this as if it is a collection of journal entries; that is basically what this is, in truth! You will just have to experience the disorganisation in a similar way to how I experience my own mind. The most organising I was able to do was split it up into some categories, to make it slightly easier for you, reading this. Some things that I wrote could fit into more than one category, but this is how I chose to divide it up.

I have written a lot about the words I use to describe the way I feel, how I choose those words, and how that has changed over time. My delays in certain areas of development, and the other ways my various disabilities affect me, have a significant impact on the ways I have come to understand my gender identity and the internal (and partially external) process I went through to get to where I am now.

I have no doubt that things will continue to shift and change and as a result, the way I define myself in different contexts will also change. This is just my first attempt at getting a lot of this out of my brain and into words, for other people to read.

I wrote this is many fragments, so it doesn’t flow or connect, and there may be some repetition. Each paragraph may have been written at a completely different time, and therefore doesn’t relate to the last paragraph, or the next. Some of this is just stand-alone statements, some is longer examinations of my feelings. But all of it is true to my experience of the world and of queerness.

I have never been able to express the majority of this before, so I think it is pretty good for a first attempt!

**Note: I make a reference to having speech at a point in my life. I am nonverbal due to late autism regression, and grew up semiverbal with very unreliable speech, and language issues. I had very poor communication.**

Here we go!

I am inserting a “read more” here because this is very long. Really, very long.

Part 1 - The Words

I don't really think of myself as a man or a woman, or a boy or a girl. I have called myself a transsexual man before, simply because that is the clearest way to explain to someone where I'm coming from and where I'm headed. But I don't particularly like the word "man" to describe myself. I like the word boy, just because the word is nice. But that doesn't mean I am insistent on people calling me a boy.

I choose the words I use for myself simply from what I like the sound or feel of the most. The last thing I want is to be boxed in, though. I only use labels as descriptors, to explain to other people - they are a tool to communicate something, not a set of limits and boundaries to put on myself.

I know a lot of people might read this and think "that sounds like nonbinary", but I don't use that word. Again, simply because I don't like the way it sounds or feels when i read/write/hear it. And yes, I suppose I do exist outside the conventional binary, but that would be the case regardless of whether I was transsexual or not, because of my autism. So that is not something that needs to be labeled in my opinion (for me personally). Because the conventional binary is not something that exists in my experience of the world.

I hate that there's one set of accepted terminology to label queerness - such a fluid and complex piece of identity - and that I am even more "other" if I choose to say that I AM female, I WAS a girl. I don't like the word transgender unless it is being used as a verb - transing gender. I like the word transsexual because it describes something I will DO (top surgery, eventually). And partly because of how it sounds and the pattern of typing it on a keyboard.

My gender is what I DO, not what I AM. Gender as a verb.

Socially, changing my name and pronouns is much more connected to my barely-there sense of self, and past trauma. I needed to start again, because I felt that my life had changed completely (and it *had*). I like he/him pronouns because they sound different to how i was always referred to growing up. And they simply sound nicer.

Even though I don't understand most of the social stuff that comes with gender stuff, I still have positive and negative connections to certain gender-related things. And relating to the way I was raised - it still affects me, even though I can't grasp the complexity of how and why.

I enjoy the fact that I am fucking with gender, fucking with expectations. I am a female that is also a boy. I love the contradiction.

I still call myself female, because if people really mean it when they say "gender and sex is separate", then "female" does not mean "girl" or "woman".

Most words I used to describe myself as a child were put on me by other people. I used to repeat them over and over in my mind, as if to explain to myself that that's what I am. Especially my own name. I felt that if I just repeated it enough then maybe those words would stick and feel real. They never did. I don't know what words I would use to describe myself now, but I don't think I need to know. I'm just me. No words are needed for that.

When I just exist as myself in the world, words are barely relevant. My world is so sensory-based and rich in sensations that there's no point even trying to put words to it.

I don't think there's anything wrong with creating new words for things that already have words to describe them, language is constantly evolving and different people will have different experiences that they want to describe in different ways. However, I don't think it is useful to argue for stopping the usage of "outdated" terms, as there are always going to be people who prefer those terms. Not all people are going to agree on a word that they find most fitting or appropriate, even in one community.

I try my best to examine my feelings about myself and what causes a good reaction in me and what causes bad reaction in me. And then I use whatever words I have to try and explain it as best as I can.

Often the words I have are not enough and either I cannot communicate something at all, or I try and it is inaccurate and/or inadequate.

It is very difficult for me to put such abstract thoughts/concepts/feelings into words, I lack the language for that and often also the awareness - there is so many steps to communicating something for me. For example, most people have the automatic urge to communicate things, and know that option is always there. For me, it takes mental work to even remember other people exist and I am capable of interaction with them. And of course after that follows so much more work to do the actual communicating.

For years I thought of the words "transgender" and "transsexual" as off limits. "Those are the things I am not allowed to be".

A lot of words have shaky definitions and that makes it hard for me to even understand what they mean, never mind use them to describe myself.

I would often rather use a phrase, or a paragraph, to describe myself, rather than a singular word. I really don't want to be misunderstood.

I think that the way I experience gender cannot be put into words, and it certainly can't be labeled with one thing. I'm just grateful to have the opportunity to even try and communicate these things, and to explore it openly in the first place. Because of course I would still explore it inside my own head, even if I didn't have the words or couldn't tell anybody - I was already doing that, before I had access to all this new language.

I know a lot of people don't like the word "tomboy", but since I was a kid I've always really liked it. It brings to mind a mental image of young girls (in a time when clothing for men and women was much more separated) dressing up in boys clothes, boys school uniform, and the feeling of freedom from that. I always wished people would call me a tomboy when I was a kid.

I had a feeling of "oh, that's what I want to be when I grow up", when I first learnt of what butch is. Even though I am not sure at all of my sexuality, because that relates to other people and I am never sure how I relate to other people, or if that’s even possible, especially in a romantic or sexual way.

The words I use will always be slightly "out of date", or "not right", because of the time it takes my brain to catch up with everything. I will never find words to properly describe myself in a way that feels fully correct. I live in a world of my own that doesn't need words, only the acknowledgement of a feeling inside my own head. However, that is not very useful when trying to communicate things to other people.

Some words just taste and sound like defiance.

Part 2 - My Physical Existence

With puberty, I had so much discomfort with the change in my body, not only because it felt as if I was developing wrong, but also because of age and developmental stage - I felt it was too early, I was not ready for that. Big changes are bad.

I do have dysphoria, but only really around my chest, and the way people refer to me (which is also complicated and related to trauma). And other than that, I don't care a lot about how I am viewed, as long as I feel free to express myself however I want.

Aside from my chest, I am comfortable being female. I like having a vulva (as much as it intrigues me about what having a penis is like), I don't want to change that about my body. I don't mind having a uterus (apart from menstruation, which is not fun, but it's not the worst thing ever and it doesn't make me feel overly dysphoric).

I recognise that I have a physical form. I did have to develop the awareness of that, but I do not see that as ME. I am just a floating mass of thoughts and feelings and experiences.

My body was made for me, it wasn't made wrong. There are things I need to change about this body to make it more comfortable to exist in, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it was made wrong to begin with, despite feeling that way sometimes.

Disabled bodies inherently break the rules.

Many times I have wondered, perhaps, if my chest were much smaller, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. The main thing I struggle with due to my very large chest, is the physical discomfort. It aggravates my sensory issues in a massive way, it causes back and rib pain from the weight and pressure. The ways that having a large chest increases symptoms of my disabilities are the biggest reason for needing top surgery. Gender wise, I think I would be unbothered by a more “neutral” body, where I could easily forget about my birth sex. If/when I get top surgery, I will be removing my entire chest - the end result being a flat chest - however if I naturally had very small breasts I wonder whether I would pursue top surgery at all. I’m not sure of the answer to this, I can’t imagine hypothetical situations well, but it’s something I think about often.

I find relief in having physical reminders that it is different now (to when I was a child) and I won't get hurt again, I am safe now. I now have a buzzcut that I touch every time I am scared and remember it is not like when my hair was long, not anymore.

Sensory issues and physical limitations affect my physical appearance. And, my mannerisms are affected. I cannot look how I WANT to look. How I WISH I looked. As a result, my perception of myself and my external appearance, are even further divided. My generally low awareness and weak sense of self comes into play here as well. There is such a disconnect.

Part 3 - Awareness and Understanding

I can't stick labels on myself because in order to do that, I need to perceive myself as a person first. If other people want to use certain words to describe the way I am and the way I try to find joy and comfort in this confusing and scary world, that's absolutely fine by me - words are important and helpful and useful. But I don't know enough about the character that other people see and perceive, to say those things about "me".

I don't understand the concept of gender at all really. For me being trans is just about having more of the things that make me happier and more comfortable. I don't know what it means to BE a boy, versus being a girl - just that, out of the two, I would much rather be a boy. It is complicated, having such strong feelings towards and/or against things that I barely grasp the concept of.

My (lack of) understanding of gender and awareness of the world and myself definitely impact the way I define my identity. I would like to say that I am not bothered about labels much. That, to me the human experience is too complex and varied and colourful to be fit into black and white labels, I am just somewhere on the spectrum of human, but as descriptors they can be useful. And all of that is true, however, I do have intense preferences on which words I and others use to refer to me, even if I don’t at all understand why. Those preferences have shifted over time, as well, which sparks a period of questioning and examination, every time I hear someone use a word I previously preferred and find myself physically recoiling from the discomfort.

I cannot understand social constructs such as gender and gender roles. It just add to the confusion that surrounds my brain every day of my life.

If someone views me as a woman (or a girl), nowadays I am okay with that. It definitely would have bothered younger me, because I couldn't yet wrap my head around the complexity and fluidity of identity, and how it can't always be described by words with strict definitions. But as long as people use the name I chose for myself, and refer to me in the the way I ask, I am okay with any assumptions they may make about me based on my outward appearance. Because it's me, and how I define my own identity, that matters. Not how I look to other people. And my appearance is not something I have much control over at all, anyway. The first thing people notice about me is that I’m disabled.

Part 4 - Growing Up

The stages to breaking down my identity enough to identify it as a trans experience, for me, were this. First, it was necessary to understand what gender and sex is, and that there’s a difference between the two. Then, to understand social roles assigned to male and female that create "girl" and "boy" expectations. Thirdly, to have enough awareness of myself and understand my individual experience (and be able to compare my experience to others’) enough to figure out how I feel about gender. Lastly, to finally get communication skills and the control over my life to be able to TELL anyone. This last step is a work in progress!

The way I see it, I was by default a girl when I was younger. Because I had no control then, and that's what was assigned to me. I really couldn't say what I wanted almost at all until I was about 16 years old. And one of the first complex things I finally could communicate (at a very basic level, just scraping the surface) was the gender stuff. I attempted this a lot of times before 16 but I simply didn’t have the language, the understanding, the awareness, the communication skills, etc. to get my point across. The first time I tried to tell another person about experiencing queerness, I only had the words “gay” and “lesbian” to use. I knew that these were not right, but that was all I had. The only words I could use were ones I had read or heard, from other people, and that greatly, greatly limited my ability to express my unique internal experiences. Instead of trying to find other words, I instead became very insistent upon being gay/lesbian, only because I knew it was more than that.

I have a lot of memories of scary experiences where my unreliable speech took over and blurted out scripts (delayed echolalia) about being queer (using words I wouldn’t choose), simply because I was trying to learn and understand my feelings about queerness better with watching/reading media from other people. And that lead to ridicule and more exposure than I was ready for or wanted. I didn’t want other people to know, at that stage. I wasn’t done with the processing, and I needed it to stay internal. Unfortunately, I didn’t have a choice in the matter.

I was one of those people where it was always obvious I am queer, or at least “different” in just about every respect. I have never had a choice to hide it. I mourn the fact that I was never allowed the chance to inform other people of this part of my identity in my own time, with my own words. I am grateful that I even have the privilege of writing this, but there is a reason that there’s so much to write here in one go. There is so much I haven’t had the ability to say at all, until now, and even more that I haven’t had the chance to say right.

Sometimes I have the feeling that, even in the queer community, with the accepted labels and identities, I don't fit. It makes me sad sometimes, that I couldn't fit an accepted “role” or label. I have come to an understanding that that is not what being queer is about at all, which helps. I think part of the reason this upsets me, is because I am so disabled that I will never “fit” in any real queer space with other real queer people. I am left outside, watching from the edges. I am outside of everything.

But - It comforts me that there have always been people like me, just existing in the world. We have always been here. When I was younger and had all these thoughts and feelings about gender that I didn't understand yet, had no context for, couldn't express and didn't have proof of anyone else who had the same experience - it comforted me to think "if i am feeling this, then statistically another human at some point in time must've felt the same way".

When I was younger I used to believe - queer is what people say when they mean "dirty" and "wrong". It’s what people say when they mean something worse but don't have a word for it.

My identity of being trans is simply my identity of being me.

When I think about "passing" and wishing things to be easier for me, I don't think "I wish I passed as a boy", I find myself wishing I was just a girl, and then my life would be so much less complicated. But, of course, it will always be complicated for me, because of how others perceive my autism first, before anything else. I feel I struggle to be seen as a whole human with a complex human experience, because to so many people I am just my autism. Then also lacking of awareness of gender and only knowing my own feelings - even if I was a girl, I would still have this difficulty! - but still, in this situation, I think "I wish I didn't have these feelings to begin with". I think that shows it is more about the difficulty of coping, rather than other people's view and opinion based on my appearance and outward expression.

When using words to refer to my younger self, those experiences and the way they were labeled and explained at the time does not cease to exist just because I choose to use different words for my present-day self. I am more accepting of this now, I used to really struggle with the fact that it had changed over time and my black-and-white thinking of “one or the other is true”, made it very challenging.

When I was younger, the only way I knew how to make everything “wrong” with me (autism, physical disabilities, queerness, lack of faith in God, etc.) an understandable concept, was to come up with the overall explanation that “my brain is broken”. I just thought that must be the only answer. It was the only way I could process how many things I thought were completely and utterly wrong about me.

It feels like two facts colliding when I see my birth name, and it makes my brain hurt and my understanding of the world shatter.

Part 5 - The Choice

When people misgender me, it is more upsetting to me that people ignore my choice than that they perceive me "wrong" or make the wrong assumption. I actually don’t mind assumptions much, if someone looks at me and thinks I’m a woman that’s okay with me nowadays - I understand that I appear female, because I am, and a lot of people connect female with woman (or girl, as I am often also assumed to be quite young). But I also can easily forget that someone might not know my pronouns straight away, simply because of struggles with theory of mind - I forget that other people don't automatically know what I know, that they can't read my mind.

It is upsetting only because my choice is not being respected or understood or seen, from my brain’s point of view. Having the ability and opportunity to choose the way I am addressed, the way I identify, the way I talk about myself and want others to talk about me, is incredibly valuable to me. For so long I have only had other people’s words, both for them to freely put onto me, and to use in my laboured attempts at communication. Attempting to grab onto the closest words to my true meaning and piecing them together like jigsaw pieces from different puzzles that don’t quite fit.

Now that I can write something like this, with so many words that are mostly my own, to have someone go against that (whether it is intentional or not - it doesn’t change things because of my low theory of mind, I can’t think from another’s perspective and understand that they don’t know what I know) is spirit breaking.

A lot of the parts of my transition can be (partially) attributed to different things, different reasons. I changed my name partly because I had no connection to my birth name, and struggled to remember to respond to it. It also reminded me of bad memories that I don’t want to relive every day. Having a new name was part of a necessary process of changing every part of my life so it never feels the same way it used to - at least, not in the ways that I can control. I already wrote about how I need top surgery for reasons including but not limited to dysphoria, pain, sensory issues, and so on. I love having my hair buzzed (as much as I have the occasional urge to grow it), because it feels like me. It feel different to when I was younger, and it’s a physical reminder that I am safe now, every time I touch my head or catch a glance of myself in the mirror.

Technically, with these other reasons to attribute many parts of my transition to, I could choose not to identify the way I do. If I didn’t feel a strong connection to queerness, I don’t think I would spend so much time trying to sift through thoughts and feelings and experiences and memories and holding them up against different words to see how it fits. I have basically no awareness of gender outside of myself, I can’t figure out my sexuality because I don’t know how I can even relate to other people. I could put a mental block between me and this topic, and never call myself queer or trans or anything like that ever again.

But - I DO choose to collect these parts of me, and spend the time holding them up to the light and squinting at them from every direction, to come to align them with these words. That is my choice.

I am the same person I always have been, I just get to choose now. I have the power and control.

Thank you for reading, if you got to the end! I love to know that my words are seen by other people.

97 notes · View notes

artist-issues · 1 month

Note

Your words and your posts have been incredibly disheartening for me to see. My mother left the church. She is not an apostate, but she did question the church’s teachings in secret. She completely left faith when I was born. I have congenital heart defects, which I was born with. I nearly died on the operating table. For this reason, my mother and I do not believe in God, who is said to be all-powerful and all-benevolent. My mother is a wonderful person. She risked her life in the Covid-19 pandemic as she works at a hospital. If anyone deserved to live in an eternal paradise, it would be her. Your LGBTQ+ views have also upset me. My oldest friend, who I have known since before I could even remember, is transgender and gay, and have been more supportive to me as a disabled person than any Christian has been. I’m only 18 years old, yet I know that you chose faith over experiences with the wonderful parts of humanity. Respectfully, please reconsider your views on gay and trans people.

I truly appreciate how thoughtfully and respectfully you typed out this message. It is clear that these matters mean a lot to you and I'm going to go ahead and assume that you aren't speaking out of any kind of hate.

I would just offer you a counter-perspective, and maybe by understanding where I'm coming from, you can see that I'm not speaking out of any kind of hate for people, either. I'm half blind. I was born that way. My twin sister and I were taken by emergency cesareans-section when we were incredibly, dangerously premature. My twin was given no chance of survival; the cesarean was just meant to give me a 50% chance of survival. At the time, my mother was recently married to a 19 year-old drug dealer after her own father abused and abandoned her and her mother. She'd been living apart from the faith for years, rejecting God to follow the occult or whatever political party had hear heart at the time. My father hated God.

But when my sister and I were fighting for life for weeks on end, and nobody was sure if we would live or die, and they had to bring us home with heart monitors because our hearts would literally stop beating several times a night, my mom realized how helpless she was to do anything to save us. And she prayed. And we lived. Both of us. Not only that, but my father, at 19 years old, addicted to drugs since the age of 13, narrowly escaped death and gave his life to Christ. After a whole life of having no social skills unless he was high, doing whatever he wanted to whoever he wanted, and caring about nothing but himself, now he is a Pastor (bi-vocationally; he is also a tradesman working with his hands) and has given me and all my family, and many other families, everything we have in our lives through his dedicated and faithful life. He and my mother have been happily married and serving God with their whole lives for almost thirty years now.

And not only them, but me, my twin sister, my younger sister, my little brother, my grandfather (who was an actual killer and drug addict as well) we all know God. We all have a relationship with Him. And that's the biggest most wonderful gift He gave us, out of all those wonderful things He did for us. Saving my life, my dad's life, my twin's life, changing who they were and making them new people.

I'm not telling you all that to like, compare disabilities or traumas or whatever. That would be ridiculous for lots of reasons. But I'm just trying to be honest.

It's not a religion or a system of beliefs that I've subscribed to. It's not a social flag I live under. It's not something I do just because my parents or the people in my immediate community have shown me. It's because He's real, and He showed Himself to me—when it's just me and Him, and nobody else's opinion or say-so matters— and it's all really true—everything the Bible says. And He's so much better, and so much more benevolent, than anyone on earth can describe to you.

And, at the same time, when you understand who He is, and who we are...the question isn't "how could a good God let anyone go to Hell instead of paradise?" The question is, "how could He let any of us live after what we did?" It's hard. But seriously, just play pretend with me for a bit, if only to "understand my perspective." Pretend there was a God, all-powerful, endlessly loving, in fact, Love Itself. The love that was His very nature spilled out so much that He created—created beautiful, amazing, complex creatures who were intrinsically full of worth and light, and made to reflect Him, that Love, back to Him, and share in it. A big happy family.

And then those creatures from the dirt committed cosmic treason and said "screw You, I don't care if You created me and I don't care if You love me or want to be in relationship with me: I want to be You. I want to call the shots." And those creatures from the dirt basically did the cosmic version of climbing in their father's lap to spit in His face, and go stab each other over fleeting pleasures in the gutter because the mansions He was offering them wasn't as good as pretending they could be gods of their own lives.

That's the story. Thats what happened. Read Genesis, if you have the time and if you're of the heart to. And because of what we chose, we got twisted up. I'm sure you read that, in my posts. So even the thing we were made for—love—got mangled up inside us and we can't express it the right way anymore.

He would've been justified in wiping us out. Starting over with new creatures. We were His creation. He gets to decide what we are and what to do with us: we betrayed and insulted and defied our rightful King. But He's not like that. He had no reason to--no obligation to--but He chose to do the work and make a way for us to be back in relationship with Him. And He chose to do it by subjecting Himself to unimaginable torture and darkness, which would have been ours by right if He hadn't taken it for us.

I know that you love your mom. It is plain to see. And I understand the feeling. But if you really get to know the God of the actual Bible, instead of just the memes and the flawed people who try to explain Him—if you really get to know Him, between you and Him, you'll see that He actually loves your mom more than you do. And He loves you more than you, or anyone, does. Because He knows you both better and more intimately than you even know Yourselves. He made you. It'd be like an author getting to dive down into the story and tell their characters everything about themselves.

That's the kind of love we were made for. The kind of love that is there even though you don't deserve it, even though you're not entitled to it—the kind of love that would die for you while you're still hating Him.

I mean just stop and think about it, clear your brain of everything everyone has ever told you about LGBTQ+ and all that. And just think: can you love someone wholeheartedly and still know they're in the wrong? Even when they wholeheartedly believe they're right? Even when they're hurt by you believing they're in the wrong? Of course you can. Anyone who's had a loved one with a self-destructive habit, like alcohol addiction or an abusive lover or just a toxic personality trait or two, can relate to that common sense. They can say, "of course I love you. That's why I'm telling you to stop doing this, it's hurting you, it's not good for you, I know it doesn't feel that way, but it's the truth."

So if you believe that there are some circumstances where that applies, what makes it so unloving for this hypothetical God, who knows the best thing for your friend and knows your friend better than you do, to say so about being LGBTQ+? Why should LGBTQ+ be any different?

Well, the answer, of course, is that you don't believe it is true that it's wrong. Because, if we rewind, you don't believe in God. But you just told me that you came to that conclusion kind of...after feeling hurt by Him. You almost died, first , then your mom chose to leave Him behind and go ahead and live as if He doesn't exist. And you did, too.

But let's go back to playing pretend. If God exists, then He didn't act how you think He should've, as an "benevolent" God: He didn't do YOUR version of "good." So you abandoned Him. (We're pretending like He exists, from your perspective.) He didn't do your version of good, you feel mistreated, so you walked away from Him.

But He would never do that to you. If He's the kind of person the Bible says He is, He doesn't treat you that way. When you (humanity) didn't do His version (which is the only real version, since He invented it) of good, He didn't abandon you. He totally could have. But instead He made a way for your relationship to get fixed. But you have free will. So He's not going to force you to love Him and accept the gift. If you want to continue for all eternity without being with Him, you can. He gives you that option.

But then don't wonder why people who choose that option don't get "eternal paradise." Because according to the Bible, that's all heaven is: getting to be in relationship with God forever. Fully who He made you to be. If you don't want that, He won't force it: in fact, He couldn't. It wouldn't be just, and He is always just.

The truth is, after what we did to Him, none of us deserve anything from Him. I didn't deserve to survive in that ICU. Neither did my sister. Neither did my father or mother or grandfather. None of us should be allowed to inhale another breath; we're the King's people who betrayed Him and tried to steal His throne. But He is so good that instead He turns around and adopts us.

I know this is rambly. But you messaged me so genuinely, I just sort of wrote this as if I were sitting down and talking it all out, one word in front of the other, with you. I don't know you. I know these are very hot button topics, and very personal issues; but like you, I think they're of the utmost importance.

So I will keep considering the LGBTQ+ and transgender issues—but you have to understand that I'm in service to the King, so to speak. I love Him, He loves me, and He's my God. When I consider any part of reality, it's impossible to do so without Him as the center and standard of truth. Without Him, who gets to decide what's right or wrong? Just me. And on my own, I am inconsistent, selfish, ruinous. But I'm not on my own. And in the meantime, I'll ask you to consider God, the real God, of the Bible. Not what a church of whatever denomination tells you—not to start with. Not what I tell you, or anyone tells you. Just what He said about Himself, straight from the Bible. Let Him speak for Himself. Thanks for reaching out.

#very long post #Asked #answered #Christianity #me #LGBTQ+#transfenderism #testimony #Christian #Bible #Jesus Christ #Yahweh

39 notes · View notes

northern-passage · 1 year

Text

i've been thinking a lot about the word "representation" and what it means and how it's changed over the last few years, particularly when it comes to the writing/publishing landscape but also in movies and tv shows… and i really don't like it anymore. to be clear, of course i think it's important to have diversity in your work, i'm not saying i hate the concept of representation. but i do really dislike the way it's used now, and i really just hate the word itself

in a broader sense it's just become a marketing tool. i'm not impressed by any publisher or author who just describes their book by listing all of the minorities/identities the characters represent as if that should be enough. it feels very gross, very exploitative and disingenuous. it also really bothers me because it's always marginalized identities- which i understand Why, but it feels very othering to me (and again. Very exploitative as an advertisement). you would never list out "cishet able-bodied white man" as a character description to pat yourself on the back over. so why do it to everyone else? why insinuate that one is the "default" and the other one is "special"? (and when i say this i'm mainly talking about advertisements/marketing. i understand why people would specify about characters in descriptions with the plot, but i don't like to see an ad that's just "this book has gay people!" with nothing else)

which then leads me to my other point, which is that a lot of people treat "representation" as if it's "too hard." like "oh i don't know enough to write about that, i don't have that experience, etc" which is a fair way to feel! however… it's weird that people only say this about writing trans characters or characters of color. i'm writing a story right now with a character who is really into motorcycles. i personally do not know that much about motorcycles, so i researched what parts are what & what different kinds of models there are & what basic bike care looks like. i guarantee Most people will have to google something at some point in their writing process. so what's the problem? it also, again, feels very othering when authors treat certain groups of people as "impossible" to write, "too hard" to understand. they are just.. people. you write them as a person. and then you figure out the rest later.

and i think part of the refusal or fear to write something outside of your experience is because of the way representation is treated as So Special. these characters are So Special that they aren't allowed to be anything other than "representation." they're Not allowed to be characters with complex emotions and interesting motivations, they have to just be Trans or Gay or Disabled or whatever. they're not allowed to be people. which means, at the end of the day, we loop right back around to where we were at the start….

there is bad representation. there are depictions of certain marginalized people that are harmful and that are damaging, i'm not trying to minimize that or argue against it at all, in fact we should all be mindful of that while writing and reading. but i also think it's possible to swing too far in the opposite direction as well and put certain groups of people on a pedestal and not allow them to do anything at all but be Perfect Representation, if that makes sense.

#anyways. is this anything #sorry i dont have anything insightful to say at the end here i just wanted to ramble #especially abt the way ppl market books now it like. genuinely disgusts me #cannot imagine marketing tnp in that way. my characters are many things AND they are trans. and their transness #is not just a flashy feature for attracting attention #also i do understand the fear of 'getting it wrong' but that's why you have beta readers or even actual sensitivity readers #that's why you ask for feedback. especially in this space like... people will give it #that's what makes sharing your process and early draft in this community so rewarding #and there's also just the reality that no matter what you do some people will Not like it 🤷#and ime a lot of ppl look at representation very individualistically #as in it's only good representation if it represents Me #which sucks. and you're never going to please those people #ANYWAYS also to be clear this is not a vague or meant to be targeted at any one person please don't be fucking weird #this is just some thots i've had recently esp since ive seen the representation conversation pop up quite a few times #and since i've been doing research for characters in my other project #personal

269 notes · View notes

hiiragi7 · 8 months

Text

Honestly, it's talked about a lot just how rigidly medical many anti-endo spaces are, but I don't think it's talked about nearly enough how pro-endo spaces often fall into the exact same rhetoric. In fact, I have seen many pro-endos who push for even more strict medicalization than anti-endos do with regards to CDDs.

I cannot count the amount of times I have seen a pro-endo system say "I cannot have DID because I did not experience this specific type of severe abuse" or "I cannot have DID because my trauma didn't happen before the age of 9" or "I cannot have DID because I can still function fairly well in my daily life".

By making statements about what kind of trauma needs to happen, or quoting rigid age ranges for DID, or drawing lines in the sand at how disabled you need to be in order for it to count as "disordered enough" to be DID, pro-endos very much frequently fall into the exact same arguing points as anti-endos in order to seperate themselves from DID even if they claim to be against and mock the strict medicalization of DID often seen in anti-endo circles.

Despite claiming all the time that the rules are not as rigid as anti-endos make them out to be, pro-endos still often view DID as something "other" and create similar strict rules and binaries surrounding DID. It's especially prominent in systems who call themselves OSDD, who view OSDD as "less bad DID" and so cling to the OSDD label when their symptoms actually align more with DID. The lines they draw between OSDD and DID very often just show a lack of understanding of what DID's diagnostic criteria actually describes based on their own misconceptions about what DID is, which tends to be very narrow and specific. (Not to say everyone with OSDD is actually DID, of course, but it is a much higher number than people are really comfortable talking about.)

A lot of the time, this is very heavily related to downplaying symptoms as well as misinformation about what DID is. However, when downplaying is related to trauma, it is also a massive issue that the pro-endo community largely does not know what trauma is, either. Similar strict binaries and rules that people make about DID are also applied to the concept of trauma as a whole; especially when trauma has been so discoursified and used as an arguing point to harm endogenic systems, many systems are not comfortable talking about trauma at all.

We see this not only as it relates to dissociative disorders (ex., "Emotional neglect isn't enough to cause DID, you have to have been physically or sexually abused and I wasn't so I cannot have DID") but also as it relates to origins, particularly with things like traumagenic vs. stressgenic. Many pro-endos have very extreme ideas about what counts as trauma, and so do not believe they are traumatized if whatever their idea of "severe abuse" is was not present. Many who were abused in less overt ways or who dealt with trauma that was not related to abuse (ex., chronic stress, major surgeries, or natural disasters) tend to believe they are endogenic and non-disordered because they do not fit the picture of "trauma survivor" they have stereotyped in their head.

A lot of systems also have very narrow ideas of what a trauma response looks like, and believe it only ever looks like classic PTSD symptoms. If they do not have PTSD symptoms such as flashbacks or nightmares, there is a tendency to say "I am not traumatized".

Pro-endo spaces absolutely need to become more comfortable discussing and sharing information on disorder and trauma, because the current lack of knowledge is depressing at best and a barrier to recovery for many systems at worst. I do feel that syscourse has definitely worsened a lot of the pro-endo community's avoidance of discussing trauma and dissociation and the push to seperate experiences into anything except "traumagenic DID", though I do also feel it's related to unchecked trauma responses and internalized ableism as well. There's a lot of nuance and complexities to be found there, and this isn't a problem that can be solved overnight, but I do believe it can get better.

#syscourse

128 notes · View notes

jackiestarsister · 2 years

Text

There is a musical about ADHD

Since apparently it’s ADHD Awareness Month, I thought I’d share something I wrote recently: my reaction to discovering the musical adaptation of The Lightning Thief by Rick Riordan.

I read The Lightning Thief as a young teen, though not the rest of the Percy Jackson and the Olympians series. I’m now revisiting the series because this summer, I came across the musical soundtrack on Spotify, and then found recordings of productions on YouTube.

With music and lyrics by Rob Rokicki and a book by Joe Tracz, The Lightning Thief: The Percy Jackson Musical is impressively faithful to the source material. Even with some changes from page to stage, the storytelling quality is fantastic (much better than the movies!). But what really surprised and impressed me was how much it resonated with me as someone who has ADD. Altogether, the musical feels like an allegory for the neurodivergent experience.

In the book, there are scattered references to ADHD and the kinds of symptoms it manifests—impulsiveness, procrastination, time blindness (demonstrated quite literally by the lotus-eaters). But the show delves much deeper into the emotional life of a person who has a learning disability or mental disorder: alienation, anger, resentment, self-blame, low self-esteem. The music matches these emotions, often angsty and sometimes harsh. The overall tone of the show is chaotic, which is how our brains and our lives can feel. The lyrics of some songs may sound like a lot of whining, but imagine the kind of real-life thought spiral that that represents. (Then imagine being frustrated with yourself after realizing how much time you just wasted on that worrying.)

What’s cool is that in the story, conditions like ADHD and dyslexia are explained to be characteristics of the demigods, because their minds are hardwired for ancient Greek, and their bodies have instincts and reflexes that would keep them alive in battle. In a very real way, the things that make them different—the things that Percy initially thinks are causing his problems and holding him back in life—turn out to be their greatest assets. That’s an empowering idea, and expressing it through music makes it even more powerful!

It's also good to see that the characters with ADHD are not stereotyped. The same condition can look different in different people, due to a variety of factors--how they are wired, the individual’s response to having it, and the kind of environment they are in. Contrast Percy, who is put through tough schools and labeled as a delinquent, and Annabeth, who trains at a camp for kids like her and is a complete perfectionist. We have different personalities, we develop different kinds of coping mechanisms, and we go on different journeys of learning to function in a world that was not designed for minds like ours.

Honestly, it feels like Percy and the other half-bloods could be speaking for all neurodivergent people. The encouragement of “Strong,” the anger and despondency of “Good Kid,” the longing for recognition and approval in “My Grand Plan,” the acceptance and conviction in “Son of Poseidon,” and the determination of “Bring on the Monsters” all ring true. Finding people with experiences like yours can feel like finding a new family and home. And Percy’s indecision in “Last Day of Summer” describes the kind of dilemma I've faced at different points in my life: whether to stay in an environment that is easier to function in, or venture into the world where we’ll have to face challenges.

You can find the soundtrack on YouTube or on Spotify. I strongly recommend seeing or listening to the musical if you or anyone you care about has AD(H)D, dyslexia, or other mental disorders or disabilities (or whatever the medically/socially acceptable terminology is now).

Even as an adult, the idea that qualities we consider weaknesses and deficits can actually be strengths is really encouraging and inspiring.

488 notes · View notes

mj-theskywitch · 2 months

Note

Hi! I am new to the term "transandrophobia" and I've been trying to understand it, do you have any good sources for learning more about it? From what I've gleaned so far it just sounds like "trans men experience a unique kind of bigotry" which makes me insanely confused as to why people I follow and generally agree with are arguing against it so passionately. Am I missing something or is this just another case of terf brain rot leaking into really weird places?

hi! thank you for asking, im happy to try and explain. you're correct, transandrophobia is just a term to describe the unique forms of oppression transmasculine people face. some examples are discrimination when trying to access reproductive care, forced detransitioning by pregnancy, the myriad of ways transmasc poc are treated differently (hi thats me), just to name a few.

to my understanding there's a lot of pushback because people believe anyone that identifies as a man or masculine can't experience bigotry because of being a man, because all men benefit from the patriarchy. i find this to be vastly oversimplified, in fact i would say that the majority of men don't benefit from the patriarchy 100% of the time. ask any men of color, or disabled men, or trans men. there are unique experiences we have that are inextricably linked to maleness, and people don't like to acknowledge that.

i think another part of it, and i might be swinging a bat at a hornets nest with this one, but people perceive women, including trans women, as being the Most Oppressed group, so when transmascs try to talk about our specific struggles (not even saying they're inherently worse, just speaking about them in general) people think we're saying that *we* have it the worst and no one else is as oppressed as us, which is total bullshit. it isn't a contest, no one is claiming one is worse than the other, we just want to be able to talk about our unique struggles that are more specific than general transphobia.

i also think a large part of the issue is that for some reason lots of people believe the transphobia transmascs experience is inherently easier than what transfemmes face, which again is bullshit. there's plenty of statistics about how prevalent violence against us is, it just often flies under the radar because the victims are misgendered posthumously. there's been a recent conversation about how transmascs aren't the main targets of terfs and are basically just collateral which. i don't have the time or energy to fully explain why thats a ridiculous and lowkey actually dangerous belief.

anyways, this ended up being a bit long so i hope i was able to answer your question. @genderkoolaid has a lot of resources in hir transandrophobia tag that can also help!

#i appreciate the sincerity in your question anon #transandrophobia

21 notes · View notes

suffersinfandom · 2 months

Text

I’m still thinking about dumb discourse because my brain is broken and guys there’s so much “Ed and Stede are not as queer as Izzy” out there what the heck.

Anyway. I said this in response to a different post:

There are so many ways to be queer and so many kinds of queer experiences. Not everyone is going to see themselves in Ed or Stede, and that's fine. Some people are going to see themselves in Izzy, and that's also fine. What's not fine is asserting that your pet white guy (who, yes, conforms to pirate standards of masculinity better than anyone else on the Revenge) is the only character with a valid queer arc.

But why do some Izzy fans (can we call them Izzy Heads? Izheads? I want a word for that specific flavor of fan) relate only to the queerness in Izzy's story? I can't stop thinking about it.

It seems that at least some people who consider Izzy the best example of queer rep in OFMD do so because they relate to the character. They don’t have a romantic partner or they’re in love with someone who doesn’t feel the same way. They’re disabled and focus on the intersection of disability and queerness. They feel as though they’re outsiders, even in a queer community (or a largely queer fandom like this one). They’re not cis men and they’re not trans in the same way as Jim is, so they don’t see their gender explicitly represented onscreen.

On paper, most of that describes me too. The thing is? I do relate to Stede and Ed and I don’t relate to Izzy at all.

I’m an AFAB nonbinary person who’s physically and mentally disabled. I’m aromantic and asexual with the sliders all set to 100%; I have never so much as dated, and I almost never engage with romantic media because I just don’t get it. I feel like a freak in most circles, like I’m missing a fundamental part of what makes humans human. There isn’t a character in OFMD who shares my specific gender or sexual identity, but Ed and Stede are absolutely queer in ways that are understandable to me and, I think, a lot of other people in this community.

Ed and Stede both grow up and live the first decades of their adult lives in societies that don’t want them to be themselves. Stede can’t love flowers or bright and flashy fashion; he needs to dress down and become a family man. He’s forced to marry a woman he doesn’t love (and who doesn’t love him) and father children to inherit his wealth. Ed can’t fancy a fine fabric or pursue a peaceful life because his world is one that demands cruelty and violence. He has to wrap himself up in leather and layers of myth and legend to survive. They’re both GNC and wearing masks and entirely miserable.

I know -- I think most of us know -- what it’s like to suppress who we are so we can fit in or be who the people around us expect us to be. I think we know what it’s like to be miserable and lonely for ages -- to bury who we really are deeper and deeper until we barely remember who that person is -- right up until we find out that there are people out there who get us. There are places where we can be who we are, or at least experiment a bit and discover ourselves.

Even if we don’t know what it’s like to find a great love like Stede and Ed do, there are parts of their relationship that we understand. I'm sure plenty of us know what it’s like to meet someone who doesn’t ask us to pretend for the first time. We know what it’s like to be on the same silly, stupid wavelength as someone else, and we know how it feels to play with someone who gets us. I think that the friendship that Ed and Stede share, even with the romantic and sexual elements removed, is a distinctly queer one.

So I guess I still don't know why Izheads only relate to his queer experience when Ed and Stede, in my opinion, are both extremely queer even beyond, like, the thing where they're wildly in love.

I want to think it has something to do with Izzy's status as a side character and not racism, internalized homophobia, or anything else like that. Characters without fully fleshed-out backgrounds provide opportunities to project whatever we want, you know? If you want to see your specific gender or sexual identity in a character, just grab one with little canon lore and fill in the blanks. Maybe I can be happy with characters who aren't just like me, but I don't expect everyone to be content with that.

What was I even typing about?

Oh, right.

Ed and Stede are super fucking queer. You don't have to relate to them because there are infinite ways to be queer, but you do have to acknowledge that there is nothing heteronormative about their relationship or them as individuals.

#ofmd #me typing things #like no really #i'm just out here typing things #no thesis no plan #gentlebeard #ofmd discourse #edward teach #stede bonnet #breaking news: ace discovers their first OTP #now i even read smut!#(if there's good character work)#(which there usually is with these guys)#queer #< tagging just in case

13 notes · View notes

variousqueerthings · 8 months

Text

also interesting because I just watched a video doing a rundown on the history of queerness in doctor who, which naturally had a lot dedicated to aro and/or ace reads of the doctor, which at one point discussed that ofc reading the alien character specifically as such can be alienating (not... that as an aroace person my own reads would be attempting to alienate... myself... although also here insert other discussion about how the aliens often are just the blank slate upon which non-normative behaviours are placed, so it makes sense to see the neurodivergent/disabled/queer/otherwise othered body reflected from them, while also understanding that this means the world views you as inherently alien, while also being like "sure, yeah, I always have done," while also knowing that's dehumanisation, while also...)

but, when it's consciously done, when does this alien being (whatever narrative we're looking at) resonate through the lens of xyz because we're interested in how social structures built Not on today's earth human constructs could end up in wildly interesting different spaces in which what is non-normative to us is presented as normative to them (thus making an argument of stop being such freaks against trans kids, for example), and also when do we read those characters as incongruent with their own societies (I think also here of star trek's the outcast and rejoined, which blend queerness as we recognise it in our societies with characters who break alien normative structures as expressions of an alien queerness, and then there's ofc left hand of darkness in which gender-and-sexuality is at the centre of the political narrative and it's queer on multiple in-universe and out-of-universe levels)

for example, the doctor isn't really an outsider timelord if we look at them through the lens of genderbending regeneration -- that's normalised in that society in canon, and the interesting thing there is usually how that interacts with human social constructs and politics of gender and as a scifi way of deconstructing and dissembling real life consturcts... but they are clearly an outsider in terms of many other things they do, for example seeming neurodivergent if looked at through a human lens and a timelord lens

so where do aromantic and asexual reads fit in there?

well to start with aro!doctor -- I am into the science-fiction ability to create societies with completely different expressions of "connection" that eschew simple human monogamous ideas and histories, but if we were to take that second lens as well of "what if the doctor is aromantic as an identity and not simply as an alien," the doctor continuously (with the exception of romana and the master) creates deep connections with beings that don't have a particularly long lifespan/aren't timelords, especially considering they're near-immortal. and with romana and the master there seems to be a different set of rules happening there than anything one might describe as uncomplicatedly romantic, bitter exes vibe of the doctor/the master acknowledged

the doctor interests me from the lens of "aromantic as non-normative/queer from the pov from both our and timelord society" because they seem to continuously struggle with people not accepting the connections that they're offering them. the doctor's way of having a relationship is often not "enough", isn't easy to describe/vague, and people get jealous or angry or feel betrayed for reasons that isn't the doctor's fault, because there simply seems to be a lack of language to properly describe it in easy digestible terms

that is... a very aromantic experience

and then sometimes the doctor will just have little non-romantic connections that work, like donna -- and, despite not being my favourite seasons, the bits where the doctor simply lives with/drops in on the ponds is very sweet. and the tardis of course. am a "doctor-and-the-tardis are a matching pair and one without the other is wrong, but it's not romantic" person at heart, beyond anything else

(I am interested in how this will play once my rewatch gets me back to 13 and I can watch until the end, because I know yaz confesses that she's in love with the doctor near the end, and the doctor has an interesting reaction from what I understand)

(I guess at this point asexuality is another post)

but yeah. I think I'm not saying anything new with regards to the writing of aliens (and android and otherwise non-human characters), in that obviously one would like to imagine some interest in exploring these forms of non-normativity outside of "well that's an alien" (she's an alien and he's gay) but also there's reasons we're all so into aliens

genderbending genderfluid regenerating aliens is all well and good, but it only becomes really interesting in this case when we see trans/non-binary/genderfluid/genderbending humans (as is coming up soon! and I hope we see many more actors of the trans and gender non-conforming persuasion on this show!) similarly -- while I do think we have had more than a taste (donna my heart and soul honestly) of that non-alloromantic queerplatonic vibes doctor-companion dynamic -- I'd be fascinated in what a consciously aro (and maybe ace also) companion opposite the doctor would be like, how that would restructure their relationship with the doctor, compared to others who had expectations that the doctor couldn't ever hope to fulfill, like rose, martha (although they did let down martha in many ways that had nothing to do with romance), amy, possibly yaz, (here the confession that I never did get much of what was going on with clara but maybe this watch will clarify for me), possibly sarah-jane, possibly river song although she seems to have just kind of gone with it I guess, possibly romana... heck, possibly the master (I guess possibly that american woman from the movie, I forget her name... I cannot remember rn if other companions ever expressed an interest like that in them, but if so, then them too)

also I just want to rub moffat's face in it if I'm being honest. writing snide commentary about what was described as "asexual" doctor pre-nu!who, in a way that very much encompassed aroness (because romance-and-sex has so often been and still is put under one header), and totally misunderstanding why fans were into it or why it's interesting, and then being obsessed ever since with his weird little crusade of making doctor who "sexier" and alloromantic and imo utterly failing, despite it all

#dw #aroace doctor #doctor who #im rewatching doctor who #aro doctor #anti moffat #can you tell all my posts are gonna be this?#because they very much are #interested in how that'll play out in s3 when we have the triple whammy of martha jack AND the master #all being like 'notice meeeeeeeeee 🥺🥺🥺'#oh martha my sweet beloved you deserved so much #in some ways i feel like her tragedy is the doylist perspective #it's INTERESTING that she joined the army for sure #but then it's kind of just... and then that (by the specials) and pair the spares with mickey #that's also the rip when it comes to mickey for sure #but with martha it's SO much more #i also didnt mention bill in this i know it's platonic but i need to rewatch to remember the Dynamic

38 notes · View notes

johannestevans · 4 months

Note

Hey, i just read ur first Finding Ur Personal Style post (the shape & silhouette one) and wanted to say i really liked it and how you structured it to rly invite oneself to question not just what looks “good” but what one enjoys and feels confident in. as a person who’s always been on the bigger side, it’s really lovely to see, esp bc im currently trying to more firmly develop my own sense of style.

so yeah, im excited to read the other parts and wanted to give a quick shout of appreciation to u for formulating these posts!

Finding Your Style, Part I: Shape & Silhouette (x)

I'm so glad, thank you so much for reaching out and letting me know!

I'm very aware that as a very slim white guy with an hourglass figure who passes as a man without issue, it's often easier for me to buy clothes that fit with what I want and the figure that I enjoy cutting, but also people are a lot more open with praise for me because I'm a slim, conventionally attractive white guy that can be gender nonconforming and still "pass" as male.

Part of the reason I look so good is I have a particular style that I want and I go for it, and I know how to make a cohesive outfit, but it took me time and study to build those skills, and they were aided by people fully supporting the ways in which I experimented.

Most people have a lot of bigotry they need to get over when it comes to people's clothes and outfits - not just around people's size, whether being fatter or broader, bigger, etc, or other visible aspects such as people's disability, skin colour, race, gender and perceived gender, and so forth.

That comes across in how style guides are written, often with a line of desiring that certain people should hide their bodies or dress themselves down more, and it comes across in how open people are with praise for people's outfits and bodies themselves as well. It's hard to experiment with this stuff without feeling like people are supporting you in that, without feeling like you're not just "allowed" to but like it's good and fun to do so, and it's hard to know where to start with that, you know?

I shop a lot in vintage shops with my boyfriends and with friends who are much bigger than I am or who have very different desires for their figures or style than I would or I do, and I know from working with some of them that like...

Without having someone ask them the questions, it's hard to start, which is why this series of guides is going to be about how to settle on these potential questions and dig into the details that you don't necessarily know how to look for until someone teaches you they're there.

With cooking and with food, you're taught from a very young age that there are different tastes - salty, sweet, umami, sour, and bitter - and you're not taught that one of these is good or better or only acceptable compared to the others, and you're taught about the ways these tastes interact with and complement one another.

You don't necessarily get taught to develop that same sense of tastes with style, much of the time. You might get taught some styles "look good" or that some are cringe, and sometimes this will be based along the lines of class indicators and commercialism - these are expensive clothes, or look expensive; these look cheap. These look slutty, these look tasteful. These look "slimming", or these bulk you up.

None of these descriptors describe the clothes. They almost entirely describe people's ("society"'s) potential reaction or relationship with the clothes or styles you might favour, because they're about like... what people will like, or if they'll think of you as professional or trustworthy as a consumer or employee or sexual partner, etc. None of that's about like, your actual personality, but about conformity.

Even terms like "cozy" or "utilitarian" have become appropriated for commercial reasons, to the extent that they indicate a certain buying class, you know?

And the thing about all of those styles is that they're often applied to people's bodies as much as they are the actual clothes - the same clothes on one body might be praised, and then heavily policed or even abused on another. The personality you have and your manner of expression is less relevant than the desire you should conform.

So yeah, this is important for me!

I feel very strongly about my personal style as someone who's very much a dandy and enjoys my combination of period styles, and I want people to be able to play with the same tool set and seek out things that make them feel as joyful about how they dress and style themselves as I feel about mine, regardless of their own bodies or what people have said to them or expressed to them in the past!

And to feel like... the important thing for your style is you rather than a nebulous set of approvals people or groups might or might not have of you.

I'm glad it's helpful, Anon, and I hope the next few guides are useful as primers too. <3

#musings #anonymous

14 notes · View notes