#headers feminist

[xxx-ang3l-w1th-a-sh0tgun-xxx]

made myself a new header image!! :)

#header #riot girl #riot grrrl #bikini kill #le tigre #lesbian #wlw #nblw #sapphic #lgbt #the julie ruin #julie ruin #kathleen hanna #rebel girl #punk feminist #feminist punk #feminist #feminism #punk rock #punk #pussy riot

[radfemboards]

Crescent moon - https://www.tumblr.com/radfemboards/743529628523724800/maureen2musings-photobydania?source=share

Purple mushrooms - https://www.tumblr.com/radfemboards/743529624171053056?source=share

Purple snail - https://www.tumblr.com/radfemboards/743529620633190400/wittyusernamed-the-rain-monster-i-i-didnt?source=share

Two glowing purple butterflies - https://www.tumblr.com/radfemboards/743529598329995264?source=share

Bisexual colors (pink, purple, blue) sky with aurora - https://www.tumblr.com/radfemboards/743529590814916608?source=share

Goddess/woman candle - https://www.tumblr.com/radfemboards/743529583053307904?source=share

Pastel febfem flag - https://www.tumblr.com/radfemboards/743529566245634048?source=share

Female solidarity + WLW symbol - https://www.tumblr.com/radfemboards/743529559494918144?source=share

#sources are through the read more #purple febfem radfem magic header #purple #header requests #febfem #bisexual #bisexual woman #bi woman #female exclusive bisexual #female exclusive bisexual woman #radfem #radical feminist #feminist #fairie #magic #goddesses #goddess #knowingsmile

[lostryu]

isn’t feminism bad because it is a TERF concept and talking point? Like, aligning yourself with the TERFs isn’t a good look.

hey, you just roll in from stupid town?

#ask #anon #yknow the header to my askbox says ‘be smart about it’ #i don’t think you read that #terfs are not feminists

[candymylove]

#new feminist women love pepsi header #chicchi #@

[housefreak]

this is just. rent free. world's most feminist movie starring a shirt that says "your manologue is boring me" and watching someone put on a pad. it's black christmas (2019)

#my first impression of the movie was saying the header has them look like closet cosplay victorian orphans. #i wish thst was still my impression of the movie. #i could list a lot more of the hashtag feminist thinfs abt this film but i dont want to reread my lb but its. just so much...

[azuremist]

A message to Twitter users coming to tumblr: a message from your local duel-hellsite citizen

So, I’ve seen a ton of Twitter users talking about making and sharing their new tumblr blogs, to escape Elon Musk’s “anti censorship” bullshittery. First of all: welcome! I know it’s looking bleak over there; especially for trans people. But, now that you’re here, I’m here to tell you all about tumblr etiquette, how this website works, and how it’s different from Twitter. Because you can’t come onto here acting like it’s Twitter, lest The Beast get to you.

First, here are a small handful of tips and tumblr facts!

Your likes and who you are following are automatically set to public. You can make them private in your settings!

You can block tags from the settings, too.

There are lots of bots on here. If you’re not careful, you could be mistaken for one! The main way you can avoid this is changing your icon and header from the defaults. Adding a bio helps too!

You can queue and schedule posts so that your account posts throughout the day.

Like Twitter, tumblr has a radical feminist and TERF problem. However, they’re pretty easy to spot. There are lots of guides out there to help you learn how to spot tumblr TERFs!

Tumblr, for the most part, does not have any celebrity or brand accounts.

Your tumblr follower count is private.

You can have multiple accounts with the same email, and they’re very easy to switch between! These are called “sideblogs”.

Your main page is not a “timeline”. It is a “dashboard”!

You can have a custom desktop theme using HTML! Think like ye olde MySpace days. There are tons of pre-made tumblr themes available, if you’re not already proficient in HTML; including free ones!

Now, let’s talk tumblr etiquette and how it’s different from Twitter. You’re a tumblr user now! It’s time to start acting like it!

Don’t just like posts. They don’t increase visibility whatsoever. The way that you can help posts that you like is reblogging them to your blog. Especially for art!

We don’t say “oomfs” or “oomfies”. Just “mutuals” is fine, thanks!

Adding onto a post with pointless comments is frowned upon. If all you have to say is “this is so true,” or something else to that effect, you should put that in the tags of your reblog.

Most people don’t have carrds or rentries on here. Some of us do, but it’s not an obligation like it is for Twitter.

Similarly, we don’t censor words like “die” and “death”. Posts about wanting to brutally murder people in power go viral all the time, and it’s completely allowed. I’m serious! Enjoy your newfound freedom!

Blocking isn’t a big deal here. Get rid of any weird notion you have that morality is linked to blocking certain people.

But lastly, and most importantly:

Drop your discourse at the door.

If you try to post about most of the things that Twitter users discourse about, you will be laughed off the site. Especially Twitter LGBT+ discourse. Posts actively mocking topics of Twitter discourse go viral on here regularly.

Tumblr has mostly healed since its discourse-ridden days, and it’s now much more chill. Of course, discourse still happens, but it is so easy to avoid now. For a lot of us, tumblr is the last pleasant social media site left, so don’t ruin it.

Here is a list of discourse-related things that tumblr users don’t do:

Most of us don’t do callout posts, unless it’s something actually serious (like that one blog that had a human slave).

Everything that you heard on Twitter was “exclusive” to certain LGBT+ groups is used by just about everyone on here. Bi women use the double venus symbol on here. You’ll just have to learn to live with that.

In particular, I want to emphasize how much we don’t do flag discourse. To the point that somebody caring about flag discourse of any kind is how we tend to identify an ex-Twitter user.

On here, you will never have to see another slur discourse post again, unless you actively seek it out.

You’re free.

You’re welcome. And enjoy your time on here! If you have the time, please consider watching StrangeÆons’ Tumblr Etiquette Manual on YouTube, as well.

#elon musk #twitter #tumblr culture #tumblr #azure does a thing

[aresianrepose]

Before the semester kicks off and murders me, @disniq​ asked for my essay on Jason Todd and hysteria. So, without further ado, here is an actual essay (fucking dissertation) because I refuse brevity. It is extremely long. I’ve split it into sections so you can find the section header and read what you want. This does not encompass all the narrative trauma themes and lived experiences that this boy holds, just specifically hysteria. 

Jason Todd, The Hysteric & Bruce Wayne, The Batman

I think it’s a common reading that Jason Todd is girl-coded and the patron saint of victims, at least within the circle that I’ve fallen into within this fandom. There are plenty of meta discussions on why those readings stand, so I’m not going to reiterate them. A pillar of him being girl-coded and someone trauma survivors have latched onto as one of our own has to do with being written in the context of hysterical femininity. And let me just say, I don’t think that writing was done in a way that he was intentionally coded as hysterical, but it is a function of our patriarchal society that this coding was used on him albeit without the explicit purpose of writing a hysteric story. 

For the purpose of this post: the word woman includes ciswomen, transwomen, and any person who is socially positioned as a woman regardless of gender identity. I include the positionality here because anyone can experience misogyny and sexism depending on the perception of the perpetrators either interpersonally or systemically. 

The History and Context of Hysteria

To understand the context, we have to look at the history and oppression of hysteria. Hysteria (in the modern context of psychology) emerged in the nineteenth century and is difficult to define by design and often applied to traumatized, unruly, and broken women. The main patriarchs who contributed to hysterical study were Jean-Martin Charcot and Sigmund Freud. I only mention this because it’s important to know their names moving forward for any of this to make sense. The beginning of this started with Charcot literally putting women whose lives had been marked by rape, abuse, exploitation, and poverty on display in his Tuesday lectures (which were open to the public) to show his findings on hysteria. This was actually seen as restoring dignity (fucking yikes) to the women because before Charcot these hysterical women were cast aside and not treated at all. In Charcot’s work, the women’s speech was seen as simply “vocalization” and their inner lives, their stories, their words, were silenced. After hearing a woman cry for her mother during one of the public sessions Charcot remarked, “Again, note these screams. You could say it’s a lot of noise over nothing” (Herman). 

This led to Freud, Charcot’s student, wanting to surpass his teacher by discovering the cause of hysteria. This was disastrous. Freud started with listening to the hysterics. In doing so, he learned and believed them about the abuse, rape, and exploitation of their pasts. He then published his work and gave a lecture on it. The work rivals even contemporary psychological work on trauma in it’s level of compassion, understanding, and treatment of survivors. However, he was then labeled a feminist (this was all happening during the first wave of feminism) and professionally ostracized. How in the world could these aristocratic French men be sexually abusing their wives, sisters, and daughters??? Insanity, truly. And... This always fucking gets me. He recanted his work and then told his patients they all imagined it because they wanted to be sexually abused by their husbands, brothers, and fathers. This set back the study of trauma by literally a century. One colleague called his work “a scientific fairy-tale” simply because he had the audacity to believe victims. Also, I want to point out that the famous hysteria case during this time was the case of Anna O and she was ultimately villainized by the entire psychological community for going into crisis after her care provider abruptly ended their therapeutic relationship after two years of DAILY sessions. 

Anyway. We can see how the power of these men over vulnerable women silenced, pathologized, villainized, infantilized, and used male ‘logic’ to completely destroy their credibility and lives under the guise of care and hysteria. Even when credible men lend their expertise and voices to the victims, their voices are silenced. This particular iteration of hysteria lasted over a century, and we are still dealing with the consequences of these actions and ideas within our social construction, medical and mental health care, interpersonal relationships, and more. Patriarchal pillars such as hysteria don’t die. We saw it move from hysteria to schizophrenia (which used to have the same symptoms of hysteria before the diagnosis changed in more contemporary psychology) after this which led to widespread lobotomies and electroshock therapy (my least favorite case of a lobotomy being done is on a woman who was diagnosed with LITERALLY ‘narcissist husband’) to depression in the 40s-50s with the over prescription of benzodiazepines to house wives to keep them in a zombie state (these prescriptions were sometimes double and triple what we take today with the intent of medical catatonia). In my opinion, as well as other counselors within the feminist therapy theoretical orientation, we are currently seeing it with the emergence of borderline-personality disorder. Think about how BPD is treated and demonized for a second. I professionally know therapists who refuse to work with BPD clients due to this villainization and just fucking gross perception of victims.

These are just the highlights, but it shows the history of hysteria. There have been centuries of women being marked as hysterical and the cures have ranged from lobotomy to bed rest (which sounds not so bad but read the Yellow Wallpaper and get back to me on that one). While the Yellow Wallpaper is fictional, the life behind it was not. After the traumatic birth of her child the author, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, was remanded to bed rest by the authority of her husband and doctor. Within the sphere of medical control, hysterical women are often treated as children while their doctors make decisions for their mental well-being without consulting them, or they hide the truth of their procedures for “the woman’s own good” and because “she’s hysterical and wouldn’t comprehend the logical need for this.” She then had a mental break due to the treatment. Again, we see hysterical women being silenced, infantilized, discredited from their own experiences, and under the narrative control of male logic and voices. 

Hysterical women have often historically been seen as beneath men, except for when they’re dangerous. Listening to victims is inherently threatening to the status quo because all trauma comes from a systemic framework. The framework that upholds patriarchal power. It’s easy to see why that would be seen as dangerous to powerful men. We saw this with the European witch genocide in which oppressed women were targeted and wiped out under the excuse of what was considered women’s work. (Before this time, witchcraft wasn’t tied to any religion and was mostly just seen as women’s work. It was targeted specifically to have an excuse to persecute widows, homeless, disabled, and vulnerable women who no longer had men to reign over them during a time of political unrest and scarce resources). This time period saw hysterical and traumatized women demonized as dangerous, evil, immoral, hypersexual, and supernaturally wily. A threat to the moral fabric of society. 

(Interesting history side note: this caused the view of women’s base traits we have today. It stemmed from the Victorian era that came after this time period in which women learned if they behaved a certain way, they would be spared the stake. For example, before the witch trials, women were actually seen as the ones with unsatiable sexual appetites, something we culturally prescribe to men now.) 

Notice how none of this has to do with the actual abuse that happens to the women, but instead the labeling and treatment of women when they are already showing the symptoms of abuse, trauma, control, exploitation, and rape. 

Jason Todd, The Hysteric

So, how does this relate to Jason Todd? To say that Jason has experienced trauma would be an understatement. Extreme poverty, loss of parent to death and addiction, loss of parent to the justice system, parental abuse, manipulation, witnessing violent crimes, witnessing the aftermath of sexual abuse and assault, arguably (not explicit in the text) his own sexual trauma, witnessing the dead bodies of victims, a violent death, and subsequently a violent resurrection. There’s also an argument to be made for being a child soldier and how that is romanticized up until he dies, but the text does not treat this as traumatizing.

Now, I’m not going to dive into the trauma he experienced. The purpose of this is only to look at how he’s framed as hysterical in the narrative, and as I stated, hysteria was a word slapped on women after they tried to talk about their trauma or exhibited symptoms (or were just unruly women). Jason does embody many facets of the victim experience and this is just one of them. 

Feelings vs “logic” - Firstly, it is really hard to talk calmly about things that you carry, your experiences, your trauma, and things that specifically harm you. It is easy to talk calmly about things that don’t. This is why there is an abuse tactic of gaslighting or silencing victims by framing their very real reactions to harm or their triggers as abuse, this is known as “reactive abuse.” This tactic is also employed in oppressive settings where the privileged group will often default to ‘winning’ a debate by being able to remain calm while the marginalized group whose life, personhood, etc is being harmed by the things being discussed and are unable to have a sterilized, emotionless debate. 

Both of these settings fit Jason nicely within the moral context of vigilante comics. He fought back, he didn’t lay down, and he will do what he deems as necessary to protect himself and others from his fate. This, however, is framed by Bruce and others as being just as bad as his murderer or even just as bad as Joe fucking Chill. To put this in perspective of a real world equivalent. Combine every billionaire on this planet into one person and instead of their shitty business practices murdering people, they did it with their own two hands. And due to their resources and political power, they would never, ever stop killing or be reasonably contained. More people would die with absolute 100% certainty. Would killing that one person make you equally bad as that person or violating the sanctity of life? That’s the moral question that Bruce puts onto Jason. While the moral question inherent to Jason is actually, is there a line worth crossing to provide reasonable safety (for yourself or the nameless community)? There is actually a difference between those two questions and the reactive abuse framing is certainly a choice. Also, it is funny to me that a man with the amount of power Bruce has (and frequently misuses) can lecture a murder victim on the misuse of power and morality. Are we supposed to be agree with his stoic, philosophical lecturing to a marginalized, abused, murder victim? (yes, we are). Bruce leverages (personal) philosophy against victim’s voice for their own safety, and take a wild guess which one is framed as logical and reasonable.

Jason’s morals come secondary to Bruce’s philosophy in a universe where there is still harm being done (but it’s an acceptable harm). Why is killing the line? Bruce is regularly destroying families and lives by feeding them into the prison industrial complex while supporting it with his whole chest. Or he’s disabling and seriously maiming people with the level of violence he uses. 

Crying - Throughout the entire story of Under the Red Hood, we never once see Bruce emote while interacting with Jason outside of tight grimaces. With the exception of the shock he shows at the Joker’s life being threatened, which... Okay, suuure. We never see him cry during any of their interactions, but we do see Jason cry. Specifically, we see him crying when he’s at his most emotionally vulnerable and physically dangerous to the toxic male power fantasy. This kind of vulnerability is rarely shown by male characters, and when it is, it’s usually done with a mist of a tear in their eyes or their face is hidden. There are a few narrative devices that allow men to cry, but they are the exception rather than the rule. Usually, it’s to play for laughs, infantilize, or emasculate. Here, we see Jason combine the violence of a bad victim, bucking the system of power, and fully crying. Just slide right into that hysterical coding like a glove. Jason often shows his feelings entirely. Time and time again, the readers have seen Jason have breakdowns, cry, and be overcome with grief. This is tied to his portrayal as hysterical and unstable in the narrative, but in actuality it shows his capacity for love and how vastly impactful his death was. 

This fits nicely with the next point that Jason fits into the hysterical box. Love is framed as one of his key faults. A son reaching for his father. 

Love - One of Jason’s defining features is the amount of love and compassion he holds. He’s willing to put up with any treatment, shoulder blame, and sacrifice himself for others to almost an unhealthy degree. However, this doesn’t extend to what he defines as his baseline safety. This one line of safety is the one thing that can’t be crossed, even with all of the love he feels for his father. He desperately wants to feel connection, have a family, and be loved in return with the same unwavering ferocity love that he gives. This is such a fucking key part of the victim experience, especially victims of childhood trauma. The desperation to just be chosen. He’s raw and honest with his reasonable expectation for love to provide safety for him and that is framed as hysterical, needy, unstable, naive, and fucking childish. Victims know what they need to have safety, and this framing as Bruce knowing what’s best for Jason and literally giving a cold shoulder to his needs is disgusting. 

Less than - Jason is portrayed as less powerful than Bruce even though they have similar expertise. There are so many instances of this that if you just open any media they both appear in, you can close your eyes, point, and land on an example. It makes me die laughing every time I remember that the Arkham games made Jason just one inch shorter than Bruce. Like, they can’t even be the same fucking height, that’s the level of insecure masculinity surrounding this relationship. Jason cannot and will never be able to be on par with Bruce because of his hysterical femininity and the power of Bruce being the self insert for the toxic male power fantasy. This power dynamic applies to the other batkids as well, but specifically in Jason’s case there is an element of hysteria. The reasons change because he’s so inconsistently written but usually he can’t surpass or even meet a stalemate with Bruce because he’s too emotional, he’s unstable, traumatized, and simply Bad. It’s even explicitly stated by Alfred in Under the Red Hood. 

Victim blaming - Jason deserved to die because he didn’t follow orders. Jason deserved to die for not following his training. Jason deserved to die because he was an angry Robin (oh no a child had an appropriate reaction to sexual violence). Jason deserved to die for being human.

Infantilization - Jason is repeatedly infantilized in contrast to Bruce. When given the ultimatum at the end of UtRH, Bruce speaks to Jason like a child, or a bad dog. Ordering him to do things like, “enough!” or “stop this now.” Bruce knows what’s best for Jason (and for everyone in the entire world), we should really just take his word for it and not the victim’s. Imagine staring at a 6 foot wall of a man and scolding him like a child. Beyond that, as mentioned above, his views of love and safety are framed as childish. Even though they are actually leaning more toward collectivism rather than the rampant individualism that Bruce so strongly defers to. (also, just a side note, collectivistic methods in healing from trauma is actually the only scientifically reliable way to heal. Every other method has absolutely abysmal results and higher rates of relapses.)

Silenced and Safety Villainized - Jason is silenced in his own story, acceptable and honored when he was dead and met with vitriol in life. All of the love given to him as Robin turns to ash as soon as he collides with Bruce’s power and morals. I think any survivor can relate to the experience of being told that what happened to them was a long time ago and it’s time to move on. Or even that they’re leveraging their own safety to get what they want in a manipulative way. Regardless of whether or not there was any accountability or justice for the harm done to them. Alfred asks Bruce if he should remove Jason’s memorial in the cave like two seconds after learning of his resurrection because Jason’s methods of securing safety for himself and using his own voice to define his story. Bruce was able to tell Jason’s story when he died. He was able to memorialize, grieve, and ultimately define Jason’s story because Jason wasn’t there to speak for himself. When Jason does speak for himself, he is villainized and literally stripped of his past significance as Robin (or a good victim) by Alfred within seconds. This is reflected in real life with adoptee advocates speaking about how adoption is unethical/harmful/traumatizing and subsequently being framed as ungrateful, selfish, etc. They were little perfect victims without voices before they grew up and could speak for themselves.

Erased - Gestures at the entirety of how Jason is either talked about or completely erased during the 90s Tim Robin run. He wasn’t convenient to talk about, as victims rarely are. This also ties into how Steph’s death was erased and Babs was written like she “won” at trauma by simply... beating it??? 

Dangerous - Jason is framed as threatening the basic fabric of society (in a story with vigilantes this is hard to do, so they have him oppose the no-kill rule, and then doubled down on Bruce’s characterization of no-killing). Anything that bucks the status-quo is usually marked as villainous in mainstream vigilante/superhero comics, but this is a step beyond that into the interpersonal and political sphere. Hysterical women are often framed as dangerous, villains, snakes, and treacherous (the other side of this coin is weak, pathetic, and pitiable) because they are victimized and then have the audacity to do something to the system about it. Whether that be the system of their immediate families or the political sphere. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Jason was paired with Talia in Lost Days to hammer this point home to the reader. It could’ve just as easily been anyone with access to the Pit that rescued him, but no, we had DC’s favorite brown, treacherous, venomous, female punching bag. 

Bruce Wayne, The Batman

Bruce fits well into the father, enforcer, and logical man slot in Jason’s hysterical story. There is a history of ownership throughout women’s history when it comes to their subjugation to men. Women actually couldn’t be put on trial before the witchcraft genocide because they weren’t seen as legally a person. Their male owner would be put on trial instead. Women would go from being owned by their fathers to their husbands after entering marriage, the most dangerous woman being one who isn’t owned (orphaned, widowed). Bruce does treat (and even thinks) about Jason like he’s something that he owns. He’s his protege, his son, and his responsibility. 

The narrative function of Bruce as a perpetrator in Jason’s story. 

“The perpetrator asks the bystander (reader) to do nothing. He appeals to the universal desire to see, hear, and speak no evil. The victim, on the contrary, asks the bystander (reader) to share the burden of pain. The victim demands action, engagement and remembering” (Herman). 

Bruce does remember what happened to Jason. He keeps a permanent memorial to his dead son. However, this doesn’t translate into any kind of tangible action. He doesn’t do anything to actually stop the murderer who took his son’s life and he continues to throw child soldiers at the problem of crime (how many children have died for the sake of his no-kill rule at this point?). When met with the reality of his inaction, he fits into the perpetrator’s role like a glove:

“In order to escape accountability for his crimes, the perpetrator does everything in his power to promote forgetting. Secrecy and silence are the first line of defense... If secrecy fails, the perpetrator attacks the credibility of his victim. If he cannot silence her absolutely, he tries to make sure that no one listens... From the most blatant denial to the most sophisticated and elegant rationalization... One can expect to hear the same predictable apologies: it never happened; the victim exaggerates; the victim brought it upon herself; and in any case it’s time to forget the past and move on. The more powerful the perpetrator, the greater his prerogative to name and define reality, the more completely his arguments prevail” (Herman). 

I think it is simply fact at this point that Bruce is the head patriarch in Gotham if not, arguably, in the entirety of DC. That level of power in the narrative cannot be ignored, especially when faced with the very real, screaming voice of a victim that Bruce uses all of that power to silence. Bruce, because of his status as patriarch, default protagonist, and self-insert for the toxic male power fantasy, has the ultimate power to name and define reality. Especially to the reader. Bruce doesn’t deny what happened to Jason, because that’s physically impossible to do. But what he does do is ensure that no one listens to Jason, discredits him, and rationalizes his own inaction, actions of violence towards Jason, and victim blames.

Here’s Bruce using the most base form of denial and victim blaming:

After this panel, Bruce also revokes Dick’s access to his childhood home simply for asking a question.

This theme extends to other members of the batfam because of Bruce’s narrative power over them. It’s why we can’t have Dick, Steph, Babs, or even Damian step in and relate to Jason’s trauma or vindicate him. Even when we, the readers, can see parallels and wonder why these conversations or bonds aren’t forming. Jason HAS to be a lone wolf because he is hysterical and a threat to the system of power. This also shows why most of his runs in group settings outside of the batfam fall apart or fall flat. If he was humanized by any other character or had his trauma validated in any actionable way, it would be recognizing the failure of the toxic male power fantasy. The readers are not supposed to see the flaw in this system that allows the bodies of children to pile up and sympathize with one of their voices. It would be a crack in the system of power that exists not only in the source material, but very much within our real world.

Side note: Jason is allowed to interact with others in a wholesome and validating way when he no longer threatens the systemic power of Bruce. When he is silenced by the writers and plays the “nice victim” (like Babs does), he is allowed connection. Only when his healing is done in a way that doesn’t demand action and is only his personal responsibility (gotta love the rampant individualism). If he is hysterical, demands action, and asks for someone to be held accountable for his death, he is shoved away into a lone wolf box. Examples: Gotham Knights (from my very basic understanding, I haven’t played the game, only seen play throughs) and WFA. Victims are acceptable if they do their healing in a neat little box and stay there, but hysterics are the ones who step outside of that box.

Red Hood, The Political Voice of Hysteria and Trauma

Red Hood is deeply political in terms of hysteria and trauma. Herman stated that victims and those that authentically care for them or listen to them intently (whether that be interpersonally, clinically, or professionally) are silenced, ostracized, and discredited. Survivors need a social context that supports the victim and that joins the victim and witness in a common alliance. On an interpersonal level this looks like family, friends, and loved ones. However, trauma is systemic and the social context mentioned above must also be given on a wider social scale. For this to be done, there had to be systemic change and political action. Jason had the interpersonal social support and witnesses to his trauma ripped from him by Bruce. So, we see him move onto a systemic level of addressing trauma in his own political way. He literally cannot escape Bruce and this constant trigger because of Bruce’s philosophy and just... fucking power to define reality... being re-enforced constantly in DC no matter where he tries to go. So, he tries to heal by taking the systemic issue of perpetrators who cannot be held accountable or have fallen through the cracks of accountability into his own hands in a very personal way. A one man political movement.

Whether his methods are moral or ethical doesn’t really matter in the overall framing him as hysteric. He simply has to be opposed by the male power fantasy in some significant way. This shows that the goals, needs, and work towards victim’s and the marginalized’s freedom is dangerous, doomed to fail, and ultimately unethical if the victim is framed in a villain light instead of the more pathetic/pitiable iteration of hysteria. 

You can see how this is not only problematic but also reflects the real world values instilled in arguments against human rights movements (which are intrinsically tied to victims rights). Defunding the police is dangerous, the MeToo movement is dangerous, abolition is dangerous, trans rights are dangerous, etc etc etc. Think of the victims voices tied to each of these movements and how they are integral to the real change offered by these political movements. You can’t have human rights violations without creating victims. And you can’t have political movements surrounding human rights without listening to victims.

We can also see how the individuals within these movements are ostracized, villianized, and often silenced (sometimes ultimately silenced with death) because they rally against the systems of power that victimized them. The framing of traumatized, vulnerable people as hysterical is integral to upholding the system of power that traumatizes and harms them.

A popular comic book movie adaptation that highlights the importance of Jason’s hysterical framing and how it impacts the political narrative/how he is written is V for Vendetta. To be fair, it received an insane amount of backlash by conservatives (not within leftist or liberal spaces) for V’s methods in over throwing fascism, but only because of the movie’s release date being so close to 9/11. V and Jason have many parallels, it’s only the lack of hysterical framing that makes V more palatable to the viewer. We are told, not shown through behavior, that V is traumatized by his past and he does not pick a fight with the protagonist that functions as a toxic male power fantasy. He is the protag, with his version of Bruce being men who are not framed in a sympathetic, heroic, or relatable light. 

Additionally, there is literally an unemoting mask standing between the viewer and V, whereas Jason takes off his helmet to allow the reader to see every aspect of his trauma and pain. V readily dehumanizes himself into an idea, rather than a person. Whereas Jason screams to be seen as a person in a very hysterical way. So, we can see how the framing of Jason as hysteric against the logical, heroic man greatly impacts how the audience reads him when contrasted by a very similar political story/character who uses similar (and arguably more violent) methods to meet his ends. (This just made me realize that I would die for a Jason adaptation written by the Wachowski sisters). 

Jason’s work as Red Hood is seeped in leftist, victim, and community centered politics. His portrayal as a hysterical antagonist (at best an anti-hero) is rooted in misogyny and upholding patriarchal, capitalist, and the prison industrial complex systems of power. He is the righteous embodiment of “the personal is political” for victims. Even his Robin run draws attention to and shows correct, angry reactions to the system of patriarchal power in sexual violence.

Patriarchal Writing and Enforcement

Jason is girl-coded and hysterical because he’s supposed to be emasculated, discredited, and disliked by the reader. He serves the narrative function of boosting the toxic male power fantasy of Bruce and in doing so, the writers use one of the oldest tropes in the book (one that we have all subconsciously been taught since birth) to get the reader on their side. Make him a hysterical woman. 

References: for anyone interested in furthering their understanding of any of the concepts mentioned above and to, you know, use sources for my own writing.

Barstow, A. Witchcraze

Bondi, L., Burman. E. Women and Mental Health: A Feminist Review

Freud, S. The Aietology of Hysteria

Gilman, C. P. The Yellow Wallpaper

Herman, J. Trauma and Recovery

Ussher, J. The Madness of Women.

Van der Kolk, B. The Body Keeps the Score

Wilkin, L., Hillock, S. Enhancing MSW Students’ Efficacy in Working with Trauma, Violence, and Oppression: An Integrated Feminist-Trauma Framework for Social Work Education

#jason todd #bruce wayne #hysteria #dc #meta #clovis writes #listen I regularly have to write 20-30 page research papers on therapy theory and mental health #I'm so sorry this is so long but it is actually impossible to shorten it #one of my profs once said I write in a way that's academic but still readable and know the meaning of brevity #and I was like: sir I've never been accused of brevity before #this took 3 days to write and get my thoughts straight on it #remember: you asked for this lol #holy fuck the word count on this is nearly 5k I'm so sorry #I literally can't proof read this because my brain has shut off from reading this post #there's probably some stuff misspelled and also missing from this but I'm done with it lol

[animefeminist]

2024 Winter Three-Episode Check-In

This has been a season of reversals so far, with strong premieres stumbling and wobbly starts finding their stride. Check out the shows in need of a second look!

The team split up the three-episode reviews between staff volunteers, with one person putting together a short(ish) review on each series. Like we do with our check-in podcasts, we started from the bottom of our Premiere Digest list and worked our way up.

If we didn’t watch a show for at least three episodes, we skipped it, and we’ve used nice bold headers to help you quickly jump to the shows you’re interested in. We’ve also excluded shows that are continuing on in basically the same vein as our premiere review to conserve space. Unless specifically noted, we will not be mentioning overt spoilers for anything beyond episode three.

We don’t have the time to keep up with everything, so please let us know about any gems we might be missing in the comments!

Read it at Anime Feminist!

#the witch and the beast #tales of wedding rings #bucchigiri?! #villainess level 99 #the demon prince of momochi house #7th time loop #solo leveling #sengoku youko #metallic rouge #fluffy paradise #a sign of affection #yubisaki to renren #cherry magic #cherry magic 30 years of virginity can make you a wizard #brave bang bravern #bang brave bang bravern #articles

[gentle-giant-swag]

Hello! Before I continue with the new bracket. I have to say something.

Block accounts @/mysteriesofmilo @/mysteriesofmarcy @/ireblogthetruth @/mysterycharacterbracket

More info under the cut

MAJOR CONTENT WARNING for transphobia in this post

My cat before I continue

So this summer, mysterycharacterbracket was confirmed to be transphobic and pro life. They deleted all of the posts about it. But there are eye witnesses and screenshots of the things they said here, here, and here

Well I’m going to bring up that conversation again. I have a second poll account @dumbass-duo-showdown, which between may and September. Had two homophobic and transphobic accounts interact with me, the first one is called @/mysteriesofmilo I guess it was because I had Dofenshmirtz in the bracket (it was a dad bracket). And for pride month they reblogged a post I made with a Bible quote going “pride goes before the fall”. They actively knew I had character from media with lgbtq characters (dream daddy, sailor moon, ok-ko, psychonauts). I even pointed it out to them.

Well after the rebranding, I went “hey, I’m bisexual and a trans ally. So I don’t want you to be you know a bigot around here” then a new account came, called @/ireblogthetruth. IF YOU ARE SENSITIVE TO TRANSPHOBIC MATERIAL JUST BLOCK AND REPORT THAT ACCOUNT. DO NOT EVEN TRY TO LOOK AT THEIR STUFF. Saying some extremely transphobic stuff and telling me to find Jesus. Actively approaching someone who says they’re safe for EVERYONE and saying bigoted stuff followed by “Jesus is always there for you” is rubbing salt on the wound. Luckily enough my mututal came to my defense to help me and I ended up blocking the account.

I blocked all these accounts. But well I still check up on them. I just don’t want them to interact with me.

I’m now entering speculative territory. Everything i say might be false. But that doesn’t mean that they are piece of shit humans. Block them and report because we can’t have someone who’s so transphobic on that app.

Look at the pfp/header. It’s the same owner probably. Mysterycharacterbracket and mysteriesofmilo might and probably are the same person

I am pretty sure Mysteriesofmilo and ireblogthetruth are the same. And I do have some proof outside of the headers. First, they @ed my second poll account and not this one. Second, ireblogthetruth are very much with TERFs on the whole transphobic thing. Actively agreeing with J.Ks transphobia while going “I’m not a feminist,” is something very common with right wing transphobes.

In a deleted post, mysterycharacterbracket went “I’m not a terf, I am not a radical feminist”

And in a now deleted post, when mysterycharacterbracket is asked about what happened. They start talking about their faith despite labeling trans people as mentally ill. Who else would uses religion as an inherent cure for being trans? The other account.

Who is pro gun? Both of them

Now, the mysteriesofmilo (and mysteriesofmarcy) is known within the Dampyverse Tumblr community for being a piece of shit. Saying transphobic stuff about the creators child.

Both of the accounts are aware that mysterycharacterbracket is blacklisted from tournament tumblr. So maybe that’s why mysteriesofmilo used third person pronouns to refer to them.

Because hey isn’t it a funny coincidence that there’s two transphobic, pro gun, Christians, who are both a fan of Marcy Wu from amphibia? ISNT IT!

To finish this off. Block all of those accounts and report. They have used transphobic slurs. We can’t actively have a rampant transphobe be on tumblr.

That’s all. Hope everyone has a great weekend

Have some photos of my families cat

#important #psa #not GGS related #cw transphobes #cw transphobia #long post #this post is not spellchecked

[jeonginssa]

what’s your sine? | masterlist

a/n: yn has a name in this i hope that’s okay 🙈

content: college au, non idol skz, mild astrology theme, lots of angst

pairing: lee minho x reader (named jia but you’re welcome to read it with your own name)

warnings: brief mention of murder in a jokey way, seungmin’s twitter header mentions unaliving, alcohol is mentioned a few times, swearing, i think that’s it?

taglist: @junhour

mad scientists profiles

the limit does not exist profiles

1 - what the fuck is a moon sign?

2 - hey hey hey i’m a feminist

3 - that is where we keep the snake, yes

4 - what math boys?

5 - promise not to get mad

6 - you’re lucky you’re cute

7- lucky guess

8 - lay it on me

9 - you’ve kissed? (written)

10 - they’d better be

#skz imagines #skz fic #skz x reader #skz smau #stray kids #stray kids x reader #lee minho #lee minho x reader #lee minho smau #minho smau #minho x reader

[hydrangea-bindery]

Trillium and Ivy by @shastafirecracker

Nick Wolfwood is the new director of Conrad-Chapel Funeral Home in May City, located across the street from Saverem Greenhouse & Landscaping. Over time, the owner, Vash, gets to know Nick and introduces him to the rest of the neighborhood, including local busybodies and married feminist bookshop owners Meryl and Milly. Vash and Nick are inexorably drawn to each other until they have to start admitting their feelings.

But Vash's brother, co-owner of the garden center, hasn't left his past as far behind as the twins had hoped when they started their lives over in May.

I love this fic, and I love this book even if it endeavoured to kick my ass the entirety of its binding!!! From realising I had run out of board, to consistent laptop and printer issues and going back and forth on the paper and color choices…..but I loved how it ended up! I also ended up watching the entirety of the Trigun dub again while binding this, as well as all of the dub Stampede episodes lol.

Also!!! Check out the most perfect font I found for the headers!!! All the text conversations have also been transcribed into actual text as well - even if I wasn’t able to print them in color🥲

I have plans further down the line to bind the rest of this series, hence the ‘1’ on the spine, but I have a few other fics on the list above it, including but not limited to a bunch of DE fics and possibly some Yakuza stuff? Also Demon Slayer, and BrownieFox’s Detours, which is shaping up to be a monster of a binding.

And of course as usual, the best quote of all time for the wonderful Vashwood pairing, hidden on the book cover💜

#my bindings #bookbinding #hydrangea-bindery #trillium and Ivy #fanbinding #ficbinding #fanfiction binding #renegade bindery #trigun #trigun stampede #vashwood #nicholas d wolfwood #vash the stampede #millions knives #elendira the crimsonnail

[tickledpink31]

A thought about Princess Yue from the Live Action AtLA

So, I did watch all 8 episodes of Netflix's Avatar just to give it a fair chance. I went in thinking that this is obviously not going to be as good as the original, and I thought it was okay. There are things I that liked and things that I didn't. At least I was feeling some excitement as opposed to the emotionless drag that was the live action movie. At least I get to shamelessly eat up all that Zutara scarfgate content.

But there was this thing that was bothering me in the back of my mind. It's gotten to the point where I actually jotted down notes before my shift at work started, as if I'm writing an essay for school and I don't want to lose my ideas because of my squirrel brain. You've read the header, it's about our favourite Moon Princess and her relation to the patriarchal system of the Northern Water Tribe.

We all love to complain about how Sokka's sexist to upcoming feminist character arc was taken away, and I do too, but I'd like to complain about the inconsistencies of the worldbuilding in this post.

In episode 7, we get this scene:

And in the very next scene we get this:

And I thought, "Huh, something's not right here."

I don't know about you, but a culturally sexist tribe wouldn't allow a woman to do something like that, at least not without her fighting for that right. You might say that, "Oh, but Hahn said breaking off the engagement is her prerogative. She's a princess."

I say nay. If she could do that in the original cartoon, then why was she so moved to tears after hearing about Kanna and Pakku's arranged marriage.

It's never explicitly said, but something tells me that Yue wouldn't have been allowed to reject Hahn's proposal even if she wanted to. It won't matter if she's in higher a position than Hahn. She's a woman and that's that.

Yue breaking off her engagement in the live action doesn't feel like a progressive move, but a conflicting part of the worldbuilding. We end up losing the tragedy of Yue's role as a woman and how that arc pairs well with Katara going toe-to-toe with the tribe's chauvinistic waterbending traditions. The Water Tribe's misogyny is not just about how women aren't allowed in combat, it's about the little things too. It's about how decisions are made for women by men, how women are told to know their place, how they don't have a say in who they marry, and how even men are made to feel emasculated if they stray too far from the "ideal" man's customs.

I do have a way to fix this, though. You want a Yue fighting for her rights? Here are some suggestions:

I love the original Yue the way she is. We love a soft-spoken and compassionate princess, but it's fine if the live action wants to give her a sprinkle of rebellion, just a sprinkle. Maybe you could SHOW Yue tirelessly fighting tooth and nail to break off her engagement.

You can characterize Hahn in the same way as the original—an egotistical warrior. The arrangement ended up forcing Yue's hand, so she decided that she won't have much to lose if she took a stand for herself.

Maybe because of her willingness to break traditional customs, the elders of the tribe are beginning to show Yue less and less respect than they used to.

Yue's defiance is a slow burn arc. Perhaps she and Katara bond even more and Katara's natural fury and rebelliousness rubs off on Yue, so she decides to stick it to Hahn.

Man, I cannot believe I wrote all this. If only I was this passionate while writing essays in high school.

#avatar the last airbender #avatar live action #netflix avatar #princess yue #yue #essay #avatar essay

[skaldish]

I talk a lot about agency, and how I learned certain psychological tools to reroute trauma and whatnot, but I haven't actually mentioned what model of therapy taught me this:

It's called the Adaptive Internal Relational (AIR) Network Model.

(Note, the word "Feminist" in the header is used in the older sense of the word and more akin to "Humanist," as opposed to the way it's used as a buzz-word or even dogwhistle. Just a small disclaimer in case anyone would be put off by seeing that.)

The reason why I haven't brought it up before is because, as far as I'm aware, this therapy is only available in my state with few exceptions. But given all that's going on, I think it's worth at least spreading awareness about it. Like anything, it may not be suitable for everyone, but for me, its philosophies and methodologies play critical roles in my ongoing healing process, and they have proved themselves effective in repairing and preserving my self-sovereignty.

Here are some excerpts from the page. I've bolded some parts for emphasis:

Adaptive Internal Relational (AIR) Network therapy is a neuro-developmental, competency-based model of therapy developed over the past 20 years by Dawn McClelland Phd, LP, Patti Miller MA LP and Phyllis Solon PsyD, LP. The Adaptive Internal Relational (AIR) Network model is primarily oriented towards giving people the freedom to engage fully with themselves and in relationships with others. Clients who live with complex neuro-dissociative states, a developmental-neurological organization of experience, have very different relational and therapeutic needs than those who have trauma histories without more complex types of dissociation.

Most of the AIR Resourcing Strategies initially focus on building clients’ abilities to develop an internal stance where there is at least a neutral noticing and awareness. Overtime these internal relationships move towards more cooperation and caring, which allow them to also connect externally without violating themselves or others.

AIR Network Resourcing Strategies help clients to define themselves separate from the memories, conditioning and programming that they have experienced. This phase of therapy can take many years depending on the severity of symptoms the degree of neuro-dissociative states and the complexity of the organization of the Core Survival Networks.

Trauma affects how networks of somatic experience, emotion, thought and perception are formed and neurologically embedded. For all people, regardless of trauma, neural networks form in a developmental sequence and are impacted by environmental and relational experiences and resources. Human competence, potential and neuroplasticity are all foundational assumptions of the Adaptive Internal Relational (AIR) Network Model. The Core Survival Networks that our clients present with are completely adaptive for the time and place that they were created. What makes them currently problematic is that these Core Survival Networks, in present reality, are no longer working to meet the legitimate needs of clients. Still operating within a past framework due to how trauma memories get encoded and stored, these old, Core Survival Networks “feel” necessary to clients and therefore remain running and active. This type of neurological ‘bottom up’ activation gets triggered when clients feel unsafe or are activated by internal or external triggers to traumatic memories. Our therapeutic stance is that no one is trying to do anything wrong. We believe that clients are doing the best that they can given how they see their situation or perceive their available resources.

There's more talk about the neuroscience that goes into this on the page itself.

#zan speaks #self-sovereignty

[dykefaggotry]

love the concept of so many ppl following me for Hot Feminist Takes and getting slapped w a ch//erik header since I've never left 2011

#watches xmfc about 50 times this year but does it in a Progressive fashion #thats a joke btw #although if u ask me abt my transfemme erik takes I do have them #read a fic abt it that made me throw up and cry and it's been haunting me since #it wasn't even that good a fic the ending just made me goofy float for a while

[who-is-riley]

Found a blog that's like, a classic right-wing "feminists hate men" etc type guy. except his header is Gale & Emperor kissing

#only on tumblr #meant to put this on my sideblog oh well

[iridescent-incubus]

Weird to see you get a death threat? I just redownloaded tumblr after a year because I was thinking about your account and wanted to scroll through again… i never even realized what your pfp was lol

Yeah I'm getting accused of exposing myself to minors because I engaged in a serious debate using my fetish blog.

The thing is, tumblr already blocks me from posting "explicit" images, so anything you can see on my blog is something you can see on a beach. Also, I have "minors DNI" in both my header and pinned post, I mean there's a clear difference between engaging with someone's fetish blog and simply responding to a comment chain.

I suspect the real source of the outrage is that I dared to ask the feminists what exactly they're lacking in terms of gender equality. Simply asking the question "what specifically do we need to do to achieve gender equality" was met with ridicule and shame. And death wishes.

Apparently what we (*ahem*, men) should do is hang our heads in shame for being born one way and not the other and suffer for the alleged crimes of men who are all dead.

Ahhh, just as visionaries like Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed of.

"But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred."

Ah yes, I've never met a feminist who seemed bitter or hateful.

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

I don't mean to put words in the man's mouth, but he probably wouldn't have wanted his boys treated worse than his girls, either.

People are going to ridicule me as if I'm comparing the plight of African-Americans in the USA to the plight of modern men. Those people have missed the point entirely. Read his words, the words of a man who both suffered through and fought against real oppression. Would he stand behind you?