#why do you continue to disrespect lesbians and trans men | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

molsno · 1 year

Text

what I've experienced and observed as an asexual trans lesbian is that engaging with certain kinks can be unhealthy and harmful, but it doesn't necessarily have to be.

by and large, most of the people who have "unhealthy" kinks are victims. that is to say, their kink originates from a place of trauma. someone who's experienced sexual abuse in the past, for example, may very well have internalized the idea that they deserved what happened to them. and because escaping that traumatic mindset is incredibly difficult, they may find themselves having sexual fantasies about being abused again long after the danger they were in ceases; to them, it can feel like being sexually abused means they're fulfilling what they believe to be their only purpose. these fantasies can be deeply damaging to a person's self worth, not just because they're blind to their own inherent value as a person, but because they're denying themself any form of sexual agency. they may very well seek out relationships in which they're abused once again. and that is unambiguously harmful! I've certainly seen several people that this has happened to, and it's an incredibly demoralizing and heartbreaking situation to observe and an even more miserable one to be in.

however, that isn't a universal experience. for some people, engaging with their kink with someone can actually be a source of empowerment. let's continue with the previous example. if, instead of seeking out a relationship in which they're sexually abused, they decide to engage in their fantasies with someone who genuinely recognizes their sexual autonomy - someone who they can honestly talk to about their experience, who respects their boundaries, and who communicates with them to establish safeguards to ensure that their consent is never violated - then they may well find a feeling of power over the situation that they didn't have before.

that isn't guaranteed to happen; for some trauma victims, their pain may be too great to replicate, even in a state of significantly reduced danger. some people may try to and discover that it is affecting them in an unhealthy way and stop. and that's okay! their sexual autonomy deserves to be respected. however, others who do engage with it may come out of the experience with a newfound recognition and acceptance of said autonomy. if they know they have the power to make the experience stop any time they feel uncomfortable, they may come to realize and truly believe that they didn't deserve what happened to them, and that they don't have to tolerate anyone who disrespects their boundaries in the future.

it's perfectly fine to not want to see someone's engagement with a particular kink. it can be upsetting for those who have been personally affected by it to witness recreations of it. luckily, in online spaces, there's an easy solution to this problem: you can avoid it by unfollowing or even blocking anyone who posts about it.

I find it troubling that so many people are averse to this idea - particularly because of the way they direct their anger toward trans women. it is a regular occurrence on this website and in fact most online spaces for someone to accuse a trans women (or multiple) of having an "inherently harmful" kink. often, these accusations are made with little to no context or even proof, if they're not simply fabricated outright (which they frequently are). accusing trans women of being sexual predators is one of the oldest forms of transmisogynistic violence you can commit, which is why I find it infuriating that this is such a common tactic in purportedly transfem-supportive communities.

perhaps you might be thinking that engaging in harmful kinks contributes to their normalization. I find this idea laughable, because sexual abuse is already normalized in society - it's baked into its very foundation, in fact. marriage, the nuclear family, christianity, police, the judicial system, and just about everything else was designed to give cishet white men absolute unchecked sexual power over women and children. and while some small advances have been made to chip away at this authority, by and large, these men are still free to perpetrate sexual abuse without facing any consequences.

minorities, on the other hand, have always been and continue to be violently punished for even being accused of sexual abuse. for example, there's a very long history of white women falsely accusing black men of rape with the express purpose of getting them lynched. still today, black people are viewed as hypersexual predators who pose a danger to white women and children for doing things as insignificant and nonsexual as wearing a revealing outfit. trans women are in a very similar position, with our mere existence being nothing more than a fetish to a significant number of tme people. it's no surprise, then, that accusations of sexual predation against us largely focus on the non-normative ways in which we often have sex.

what this inequality often looks like in practice is that cis men are free to browse the step-sister category on pornhub to their heart's content, whereas a trans woman who might, potentially, call her girlfriend her "sister" as a means of recovering from a form of sexual abuse she faced in the past is stalked online by people who believe her to be a physical danger to others, who will then publicize all of the details they can find about her private sex life with the intention of isolating her from what is likely the only community and support network she has. this should be obvious, but a trans woman without any community to accept her is significantly more likely to attempt to commit suicide, making this form of social outcasting a form of violence.

so the question then is, why does this happen? because let's be honest, it's not really about "removing predators from our communities", as much as people like to claim it is. if that were the case, then it wouldn't happen so disproportionately to trans women; the demographics of people accused would be more representative of their actual proportions. the real reason this happens is specifically because of transmisogyny. tme people, even those who are outwardly supportive, harbor internal conceptions of trans women based on stereotypes of us being sexual predators, and they react to our every action with undue scrutiny and vigilance. and because they hold the privilege of being transmisogyny-exempt, they can exert power over us in a way that they can't do to cishet white men by exiling us, knowing full well that they'll be believed by other tme people, even if they have no evidence of actual harm being done.

and that's the metric by which we should actually be judging the validity of claims of sexual predation - whether or not someone was actually harmed. if no one has genuinely been harmed, what good does it do to isolate someone from the only community they may have? that in itself is obviously harmful to the person being exiled, so the question to ask before utilizing it is: will doing so actually prevent more harm from being done unto others?

trans women as a whole are a deeply traumatized demographic. I can almost certainly list off more trans women I personally know who have been raped than who haven't. we are victims, in the vast majority of cases. despite that, we live under a veil of transmisogyny that constantly calls us dangerous degenerate freaks. as a result, some trans women develop coping methods you may find unpalatable. I'm not a very kinky person myself, and a result of me being ace is that a lot of even the most basic and common sexual acts are physically repulsive to me. because of that, I feel uncomfortable when I see people engage in certain kinds of sex and kinks, even if they're fellow trans women. you know what I do in these cases? I just don't follow them. I mind my own business and move on. it's really that easy.

arguing that nobody can engage in certain trauma-based kinks because it can harm them is short-sighted at best and actively dangerous at worst. how can you claim to be a feminist who supports bodily and sexual autonomy and be opposed to people having consensual sex you don't like? it's the same conservative rhetoric that aims to suppress women for taking control of their own sexual desires. it's one step removed from telling trans people not to get bottom surgery because they'll regret it. if you truly believe that people have the right to do what they want with their bodies, you're going to have to accept that some people will do things that personally make you uncomfortable, and you're going to have to acknowledge the fact that just because they make you uncomfortable, that doesn't mean they're harming anyone. just mind your own business. it's seriously not hard.

#I've finally had enough I'm done playing nice and tiptoeing around the blue whale in the room #I'm almost certainly gonna lose followers for this but I don't really care anymore #if after reading this you're still a reactionary who chooses to paint trans women as degenerate perverts just get out #txt #transmisogyny #my writing

359 notes · View notes

princessefemmelesbian · 3 months

Note

Hii!! I have a question, what are your opinions on headcanons for same sex relationships where it becomes a hetero relationship bc they headcanon one of the characters as transitioning to the opposite gender (bad wording, english isnt my first language so my apologies 😭)

Example like person a and person b are both in a lesbian relationship, but a person headcanons person b to be a trans boy, so its a hetero relationship now.

Same goes for the other way around, a gay relationship becomes straight because person b is hc'd as a trans girl instead.

I've seen a bunch of discussion about this and I'd love to hear your opinion too, feel free to spread the question around bc im not very sure what to think of it myself 😅

That’s still homophobic. They’re still erasing a gay ship to make it straight AND to make a gay/lesbian partner attracted to the opposite gender and no amount of trans rep will change that.

If the character not being made trans is bi then that’s another matter. But I’m not bi so I can’t say. 😅 Either way, it feels like erasing same-sex couples in favor of a more socially accepted one under heteronormativity. So either way, not a fan.

It also feels kinda transphobic: saying that lesbians can be attracted to trans men and gay men can be attracted to trans women. Especially since lesbians are constantly pressured to be attracted to men and to trans men specifically in some cases, with the idea that we must continue to be attracted to them after they have transitioned otherwise we are transphobic or intolerant, or that we are transphobic for not being attracted to trans men, as if trans women do not exist and are not welcome in the lesbian community. Indeed, I do have to wonder why these shippers never seem to consider making one or both of the lesbian partners trans women, or one or both of the gay partners trans men. It seems like they want to have a gay ship made gay by "cheating".

It also implies that your sexuality has to be open towards dating everyone in the lgbt community and has to be fluid and include every trans label even if doing so would violate the trans person's identity(such as saying that trans men have a place in lesbianism and that lesbians must be attracted to them, even though that is saying that they are not real men). It feels like a way of trying to get away with disrespecting lesbian and gay identities by using trans rep as an excuse so that you can say you care about lgbt rep. But really you just want everybody to be bi.

So I guess in short, I am not a fan of it.

#lesbian #lesbophobia #trans #transphobia #gay #homophobia #fandom lesbophobia #lesbian erasure #op

5 notes · View notes

bubbelpop2 · 2 years

Text

If i hear one more person call the mlm flag the “toothpaste flag” I’m gonna fucking go nuts fr. literally shut up.

Symbols of history are important. It’s important to know the meaning behind the modern gay flag and the pink stripe original flag. It’s important to know what they stood for and why they exist.

the gay flag is the rainbow flag. anyone of any gender is allowed to use it, so long as you aren’t straight. men, women, and non binary people have been using it since it was created. it’s for everyone.

The pink stripe on the old flag stood for sex. Because the first thing homophobic people think of when they think of gay people is how much they want to shame gay sex and make it taboo.

the pink stripe was only removed to make printing the flag less expensive.

You need to learn about stonewall. You need to learn about the black drag queens and trans women that gave us the foundation for our freedom by throwing molotov cocktails at cops.

you need to learn that there are hundreds of identities and orientations you’ve never heard about. you need to learn that, to queer elders, terms and flags might mean different things.

you need to learn that anyone can label themselves how they want

you need to know that cops are not your friend. they have oppressed you and your kind since their creation. and they will CONTINUE to do so.

the absolute MOST important thing to learn, is that queer is a sexual identity, a gender identity, and a political alignment. If you are not allocishet, then you are queer. The only thing that matters is that you are queer. That makes you belong, no matter how you identify. You belong, period.

But knowing that doesn’t give you an excuse to bitch at people who use new flags or who use their own flags :/ zero excuse. None. At all. With that being said, let me ad:

Lesbians have their own personal flag. They can use the rainbow gay flag, and they can use the lesbian flag.

Gay men have the rainbow flag. And now they ALSO have the MLM flag.

Anyone of any gender can call themselves gay. But gay men don’t have a word that is explicitly for them, in the way that lesbians do.

“gay” is an umbrella term. the rainbow flag is an umbrella flag. These are important aspects of the flag that need to be respected and preserved. These are not bad things.

The point is, people like using the mlm flag. they like using the mlm label. They like it. It makes them feel specifically and comfortably identified. the mlm flag is also inclusive to non binary people, just like the lesbian flag is.

So why on earth would you ridicule something that’s important to people? I’m a gay man. I like using the mlm flag. It’s important to me. It’s mine. It will continue to be mine. Stop disrespecting a symbol of my identity, you’re literally just being a fucking dick.

#shut up bubbz #mlm #gay

22 notes · View notes

messengerhermes · 2 years

Text

Every Gender Can Pull Some Shit

Hey, uh, here's a thought: When we frame men as the "violent gender" that is more likely to be abusive (whether we're saying it's due to socialization or some biological essentialist "it's in their dna" shit), we create a massive danger zone that allows a lot of people's behavior to go unchecked. Abuse looks a lot of different ways, and how a cis white man enacts abuse will look different from how someone of another gender or race enacts abuse, because social conditioning and systems impact how those two people think and behave. Cis straight abled white men being more likely to commit acts of harm due to their position at the top of the power pyramid is not the same thing as "people who hold multiple exploited/marginalized identities cannot be abusive or commit harm." Missing that nuance is how we get to a space of rad fems getting to run entire campaigns picking trans femmes' tweets apart for any hint of wrong doing, because hey, they're just trying to hold people accountable for their words, right? Missing that nuance is how we get rad fems wringing their hands over trans mascs being stolen lesbians, because that's just them showing concern right? Missing that nuance is how we get to a space of queer folks excusing their partners trashing their friends and discouraging them from hanging out with certain people because "well gee, they make a point, Chelsea's politics are kind of fucked up." Missing that nuance is how we get to a point of people using movement and psychology language to win arguments and avoid accountability because "oh, yeah, maybe they're right and I am projecting my intergenerational trauma onto this fight and that's why I feel so hurt by their words, I should work on this in therapy." When we use where someone's identities fall on the axis of oppression versus privilege as an indicator of whether or not they are capable of harm/abuse/toxicity, we miss the point of noticing systems of oppression. You can be the most mindful, generous, loving, kind human being, and still passively be part of systemic oppression where you hold privileged identities. That's why it's important to actively do work to unpack white privilege and divest from white supremacy for example, because being a good person as an individual doesn't negate the harm that whiteness does on a large scale, or the violent programming you've been trained with as a white person. Likewise, you can hold multiple exploited/marginalized identities that continuously negatively impact your life and make it harder to navigate the world, and also be someone who disrespects other's boundaries, degrades people's self esteem, or expresses your feelings in ways that hurt people rather than make you understood. Being marginalized in some ways does not mean you can't cause harm in your interpersonal relationships in ways that you need to be accountable for. Regardless of what identities we hold, we have to consider our individual actions and when we cause hurt, be responsible for that. Likewise, we cannot excuse when someone hurts us or others based on the argument that their individual harm is lessened because they hold marginalized identities. Your trauma also doesn't excuse your behavior or get you out of accountability.

0 notes

d3nt4l-d4m4g3 · 3 years

Text

A few days ago, I emailed my former professor about a paper on women’s food practices in the middle ages. At least, that’s what I told him it was about, initially.

But actually, I wanted to discuss heresy. This professor teaches a women’s rights course every year. Every year at the beginning of the class, he calls attention to why he, a man, is talking about women’s rights. He looks us in the eyes and says, no one else is doing it, and I’m sorry it’s me.

This man made us read the SCUM manifesto, Gerda Lerner, Maria Mies. He grazed the subject of the Lesbian Sex Wars, delicately, so gingerly, posing the question: “Can sex work ever be just work?” And my (all woman) classmates, generally mute—in a Women’s Rights class, they all seemed averse to saying the word “woman,” at all. Then one woman raised her hand. and she said, “Sex work is real work.” A statement that, as I hope you know, is a deflection and a discussion killer.

At the time I was non-binary. Hah. I submitted a comic at the end of the year of my final project. My thesis for that project was this: the very language female people have to use for themselves was constructed by the patriarchy. for example, the english word “vagina” comes from the latin word for “sheath”. so the vagina invokes the act of penetration upon its utterance. Whereas the word “penis” has no clear etymological root, implying that it is original while the vagina is constructed for him. Why should I carry the fact that I will always be a tool, the hole, of the human that is man? My solution, at the end of the comic, was to continue using they/them pronouns, to shield myself from the horror of being a wo-man, a s-he—an appendage of Him.

I got a good grade. A stellar report. And it wasn’t a bad comic, for what I knew then. For my condition of blindness and deafness. I made a compelling argument, using sources from class. But oh, how much older I feel now. I’ve always felt old but now I feel almost like I’m dying. Like I don’t have enough time to fix the world before I disappear. And women’s stories never survive. They are not surviving. networks spring up like mycelium and then every century at least they are burned. Witchcraft is in the air shared by women in a room of their own, and witchcraft is doused in gasoline.

I don’t have enough time to explain how the veil lifted for me. Maybe I forget the big moment. the days after were a blur of searching the no-no tags like radical feminist, GNC, gender critical. Amazed at the wealth of journals that these women linked to with real statistics showing that children are being sterilized for no reason. Mostly gay children. like me, a lesbian, who now lives in a house with three “non-binary afabs”. This summer, one of these women, who I have known since freshman year, will start taking testosterone, a procedure I took up for three turbulent months during my freshman year of college. I get to watch her become what I turned away from, knowing the experience fractured my sense of self to a point of terror and estrangement. I get to watch her hide from her problems and cut herself off from womanhood the way I did for 3 years. I am not a woman, so do I not feel Woman’s pain, she is telling me, I told myself, when I was in a dream. She has so many problems, she laughs. But trans is a separate problem that has nothing to do with those other problems. A coincidence.

(For any trans people reading this, you may think: This transtrender fake-trans never-was-trans woman is treating these nonbinary people as if they were dead! as if they weren’t happy people finally living their truth! —well. I put my mom through the process of trying to convince her that I should have always been a man. and I did lose her, for months. For her it was the height of cognitive dissonance that I should want to go on a life-altering hormone to cure my lifelong social awkwardness and self-hatred and self-harm and depression. And I blamed her for not accepting my real self. I was basically made to shun her and my family because of transphobia.. It is disrespectful to anyone’s sanity and integrity for me to perpetuate that cognitive dissonance in this post.)

So I eventually got through to the professor. I knew because of the texts he had us to read for class. He is gay. He has read all the theory, and lives by it. And no (woman) student wants to speak to him. To bring the theory alive. They cannot breathe into it and it sits dead in his mouth.

Maybe it is because he is a man. because the presence of one man in a space of all women immediately sends up alerts. lockdown. Certainly that is the case. Radical Feminists here: I know he’s a man. But I don’t have a woman. And I felt on the strength of the texts he’d given us that he would be my best bet. Maybe somewhere in the corrupted, rotting heart of my college there was a person who knew about thoughtcrimes and was thinking them anyway.

My professor starts with diversion. He starts by talking about my paper. I find it disconcerting that he starts that way. I worry that he won’t want to refer to my email. Where I say: I have woken up from a dream to the apocalypse—Does this man think I’m crazy? Chipper and kind of frantically, he lists off primary sources of medieval nuns and women saints. for my paper. Does this man think I’ve turned into a bigot? Am I confessing lunacy, like a flat-earther?

But I steer the conversation to the meat at his first tentative encouragement. I tell him something like: “children, mostly gay children, a whole generation of gay children, are being sterilized. Porn is a symptom of late-stage capitalism—men’s ownership of women’s bodies. trans is an extension of this. I was part of this. I was in a cult.” I was shaking a bit. I don’t think I’d uttered those words out loud. They sound crazy. Some of the things I said did sound far-fetched. disorganized, remote. But I prayed that my professor would believe some of it, any of it.

What I will say is that he believes me. Thank fuck, right?

He tells me something along the lines of this, vocalizing my fears:

that all of academia is being scrubbed of anything that doesn’t support Trans.

And it is trans-identified female students and women who are reporting him to Title IX, who spend all their time in his classes fuming at the lack of validation for trans women in the history of women. My sisters, footsoldiers for the cause. What cruel irony. This man is holding onto this class by his fingernails, speaking through his teeth, hoping any of the twenty young adult women staring blankly or angrily at him will hear him and listen.

Looking back, the professor’s responses to my emails are vague, completely refusing to acknowledge a point of view other than “WOW. I look forward to discussing this.” I think he thinks he could be blackmailed. Anything he says on gmail dot com can and would be used against him. It’s like, really, really, really that bad.

No ideology should involve a cultural cleaning of women’s history feat. witch hunts.

I will end here with an excerpt from my first email to this professor:

I'm sure you know what a total bummer it is to realize this.

#detransition #tra #gender critical #radical feminism #radfem #radblr #feminism #academia

4K notes · View notes

killyourlocalmisogynist · 3 years

Note

Why do you hate bisexuals so much? You say you're a proud lesbian and yet all you do is call bisexuals homophobes (I'd like to know how you think all of them are homophobes) and say their erasure doesn't exist.

If you're tired of them, ignore them? I mean I have bi friends who feel excluded from all lgbtq+ spaces and people like you only make it worse.

Also, how are you not a radfem when you clearly sit on the border of radfem ideology?

for the 1000th time i don’t hate bisexuals, i hate homophobes. majority of bisexuals are homophobes. yes i am a proud lesbian and i do call bisexuals out on their homophobia, thanks for stating that fact? gay people don’t have the ability to oppress bisexuals. i won’t just ignore bisexuals who are homophobes i will continue to call them out on it and defend homosexuals. bisexuals get away with homophobia way too much and im have no interest in just sitting back in silence and letting them say what ever homophobic shit they come up with. i don’t care that your bisexual friend feels excluded from the “lgbtq+” community, homosexuals face actual hatred and disrespect from the bisexual, trans, and queer community everyday. i only care about being in spaces with other lesbians i hope i can continue to make homophobic bisexuals feel unwelcome in same sex attracted spaces, homophobes are harmful to homosexuals and i pray that all homophobic bisexual stay far away from homosexuals. just because im not a liberal feminist doesn’t mean im a radical feminist, there are many aspects of radical feminism i disagree with and many aspects i agree with. the majority of the women that considered themselves radfems historically and presently are homophobic, racist, and don’t desire actual liberation from men so i have no interest in considering myself a part of that community.

#ask

17 notes · View notes

wilted-sylleblossom · 3 years

Text

"I disagree with the LGBTQ+ because it's forbidden/against my beliefs, but I still support it."

Back when I was in college, a friend of mine who is pro LGBTQ+ defended another friend for saying this.

She defended this friend because it was a better view on LGBTQ+ than most people here who would outright say they despise LGBTQ+ people.

But I can never understand that sentiment.

Warning: this will be a long post.

I can never understand why someone feels the need to disagree about something that does not directly affect them in any way and does not entail any suffering or harm against anyone as well.

I've also seen and encountered a lot within the community which excuses this sentiment or even sees the people as allies, simply because they are saying "I support you, but I disagree with you choosing to like the same gender or identify as a different gender than the one you were assigned at birth."

I feel like this is the prime example of anything that comes before the word but is meaningless. I get that they are trying to be nice and supportive, but are they really? Even if you reverse the positions of the clauses like in my title, it would still come off as like an afterthought: Oh thing bad BUT don't cancel me please I actually support it.

People who have said the same things are often defended or justified because they are just practicing what they believe in, and we should respect that.

Here's the thing, what is it are they practicing?

I understand if they say something like "I support LGBTQ+ but I myself would not participate because it's against my beliefs."

Then that's fine, whatever, I respect that.

But this is simply not the case with the statement "I support you but I disagree."

Because that just doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense if they are not the ones involved.

Let me explain why. And let me explain why from the perspective of a straight people to starkly draw the comparison between straight/cishet people and the LGBTQ+ community.

We have seen a lot of narratives where a parent or a society prevents two people, traditionally a boy and a girl, from being together. And more often than not, it is clearly portrayed in a negative light because it takes away two people's right to be happy. It takes away from their ability to think for themselves and choose their lives. It assumes an agency over their lives and dictating them what to do or who they should marry.

And, of course, the parents or the society often dismisses those and justifies them using excuses such as "It's for the good of the country" or "It's for your own good." It's the classic version of "I disagree with your relationship because (I believe) it's shameful, non-beneficial, and is bad for you."

This was something more rampant in the old times, and some societies or traditions are still going strong with "arranged marriage."

But you get my point. In the modern world, arranged marriages are not a thing for a reason. We as human-beings are starting to pursue for our own fulfilment and happiness, and we are starting to see these acts as clearly an attack on our own human rights, rightly so. So, of course, people condemn arranged marriages and people who are trying to stop two single people in love from getting together are almost always portrayed as villains.

This brings me to my initial point. What makes saying "I support but I disagree," any different? Nothing.

I get that people are trying to be supportive despite their beliefs or whatever they have learned that makes them thing LGBTQ+ is wrong, and I understand that having allies is better than having none at all.

But why? I ask these people why do you feel the need to say you disagree?

Unless a gay person proposes to you, whom are straight, I don't understand why you feel the need to disagree.

You are not the one involved. LGBTQ+ people asking to be treated as other humanbeings are not saying you should participate and become part of the community. Gay people wanting to have the right to get married and seen as equals are not focing you to be gay and marry them. Trans people asking you to respect them for their decisions and their confidence in themselves are not forcing you to change your gender or identify as someone you're not.

So why do you feel the need to disagree?

When you see a straight man and a straight woman in love with each other, and they have a healthy relationship, and they want to be together, you don't tell them "I support your decision to get married even though I disagree." Because there's nothing to disagree. You're not the one getting married.

And don't come at me saying "It happens when I have a best friend getting married to a jerk, I would tell them I support their decision even though I disagree."

That's a whole different thing. That relates to someone's personality and if you have a gay friend getting married to another gay but you disagree because the other gay is a bad person, then that's a different case entirely. You disagree not because you think two men or women being together are bad, but you disagree because you think your friend deserves someone better to make them happy.

But my issue is with straight people (or maybe people who don't realize they're not straight because their belief makes them think it's bad) claiming to be allies or supportive yet at the same time indirectly saying that LGBTQ+ is a bad thing.

They disagree, not because they care, but because they think LGBTQ+ is not okay and wrong according to their beliefs.

And again, I'm not going to dispute that, saying they should disregard their beliefs.

But it doesn't make sense for them to express that disagreement to others, when they're not the ones involved, and when it's their own beliefs which should apply to themselves, and not others.

If they believe LGBTQ+ is wrong, and someone of their gender proposes to them, and they turned it down by saying "Look, I support you and I love you as a person, but I cannot marry you because it's something that goes against my beliefs." If that's the case, I'd understand that.

Better yet, if your beliefs have stated that being straight is the only right way, and you are confidently straight, you could simply tell them you're not in love with them like that. You don't even have to tell them you're not into them because it's against your beliefs. It's between you and yourself (or God, if let's say this belief is something like religion).

Except, of course, you're secretly gay and you are actually into them but you have to say no because it's against your beliefs, then it's on you to solve the conflict within yourself.

But if you're straight, and you believe LGBTQ+ is wrong, please stop saying you support LGBTQ+ community and yet continue to say within the same breath that you disagree with it because it's something wrong according to your beliefs.

Know what a backhanded compliment is? Yeah this is kinda like that.

I appreciate you wanting to be allies, but when you say you support and disagree within the same sentence, I'm sorry, but that's just insincere and disingenuous.

You're perpetuating the idea to the rest of the world that LGBTQ+ is wrong. You're perpetuating the idea that supporting something wrong is okay. Stop it.

Even if you believe that it's wrong, please keep it to yourself. Especially when you say it in the same sentence as you supporting LGBTQ+.

When I heard my friend saying that, I can't help but feel bad about myself. I feel wrong and abnormal. And I feel like I had no power over my own voice that I felt the need to be supported while at the same time being told I was wrong and abnormal.

And for years I couldn't address this uneasiness within me because I was afraid I would be seen as disrespectful against someone's beliefs, or that I would be labeled as a toxic lesbian who just wants unconditional support, who hates straight people who have conservative views on marriage. I was scared that I would be labeled by other people in the community as someone who doesn't like progress or having allies.

But I won't stay silent any more.

And please understand that I'm not writing this as a "call-out" to straight or religious people despite them being allies. I truly appreciate you for being allies and for supporting LGBTQ+ people, and most of you probably don't realize what you meant when you said you support but you disagree. And I am in no way saying you should be cancelled or you are a horrible person for having said that in the past.

But I do write this so that the next time you want to say you support your friend's sexuality/gender identity, you can tell them you support them and that's it. No need to add the nuance to make them feel less than they are.

Additionally, I feel like this is very important to address because I know a lot of people here who are actually extremely homophobic or transphobic but in order to seem progressive or avoid being cancelled, would say the same thing. They would continue the spreading of misunderstanding about the community when they're around people who are also anti-lgbt, either blatantly or not, and yet shield themselves from any kind of backlash by saying they actually support the community. They like playing both sides and appearing like an ally when they're probably the most bigoted and pretentious of all. Because with people who are outright bigoted, we can tell right away they don't care, but with these people, it's far more sinister because they don't actually care, they just want you to think they do.

Because again, your beliefs is between you and yourself, and unless someone is forcing you to be anything other than cishet, I don't think the sentiment that you disagree is necessary just like it's unnecessary for a whole family or society or group of people to stop a man and a woman in love from being together.

Tldr; if you want to really support the community, no need to imbue your support with your personal views that may make them feel less as a human-being, such as saying it's actually "wrong or immoral."

#lgbt #lgbtq+#queer #homosexuality #bisexuality #pansexuality #transgender #trans #pride #sorry if i miss anything :(

9 notes · View notes

just-your-average-tangerine · 3 years

Text

Yall didn’t ask what the cis are up to but I’m going to tell you anyway because maybe yall have some advice or something.

So I attend a group (currently online) for queer youth and young adults. I’m on the youth advisory council (basically a small group of us who help the staff develop programs and act as youth leaders). We were tasked with creating 2 “lgbt+ 101” type programs, one for parents, teachers, and people outside the community looking to learn more to best support queer youth in their lives, and one for queer and questioning youth to learn about other identities.

We started on the one for queer youth first and in our zoom meeting, we discussed and created slides for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, pronouns, and sexual orientation vs. gender identity vs. gender presentation. We ran out of time for that meeting but continued the conversation in our group chat, one of the things that was brought up was that we should include examples of nonbinary identities and that we should include some of the lesser-known ones and micro labels. A few people gave examples of some that could be included and all was going well. Then one of the cis people in the group (let’s call him R) interjected that we shouldn’t include any non-binary labels because it’s too confusing.

We (myself, 2 transmasc non-binary people, 2 other non-binary people, and one person questioning their gender) basically said we get where you're coming from but this is a space to teach people so it’s okay if it’s confusing at first and more importantly we shouldn’t actively exclude certain identities just to make things easier. We all shared our own experiences explaining why that could be harmful. R continued saying that it was more important to talk about sexuality, gender identity doesn’t matter, etc. At this point, one person said “I think you’re not understanding where we’re coming from because you’re cis and don’t have these experiences.” R responded with (and this is a direct quote) “now you’re marginalizing cis gay men like me.”

At this point, someone else suggested we do a 101 program that has basics about non-binary identities(plus all the other stuff we’d already done) and then a 102 program that went into more detail for anyone interested. In response, R told us we were wrong to include those people at all because then we would lose people (cis people), and then he left the group.

*side note: R has in the past claimed that we have too many trans groups and there should be more for cis people (for full disclosure there are 51 groups on the calendar for April, 3 of which are trans specific, they are still open to anyone but are meant for trans people), and he also gets visibly upset and changes the subject when I, a trans man, call myself a gay man.

Afterward, we reached out to the two staff members who oversee the advisory council and asked to arrange a meeting with ourselves, the two staff members, and R to discuss and try to work it out. One of the staff (a trans man) agreed the meeting was a good idea and said he’d get back with us to try and find a time. The other staff (a cis woman) put in the group chat that she was disappointed in us (everyone involved in the discussion other than R) and that we were disrespectful and should have let it go and let him have his way.

So we’ve got this meeting coming up with the staff and I’m not really sure what to say that doesn’t involve me cussing people out. Any thoughts?

#if you read all of this #thank you #transgender #transphobia #trans

3 notes · View notes

shaftking · 3 years

Note

Thanks for the wlw link, I hadn't seen that before. But I can't endorse you saying lesbians can't be attracted to trans men. It happens. It's not super common, but it happens, either when a lesbian stays with a partner who transitions later on, or with a person they know from the get go is a trans man. Trans men have historically been included in the lesbian community. Trans men often do participate in lesbian events. Aydian Dowling, for instance, was a representative during a trans visibility month for a dating app named Her. Lesbians like the female sex, and while transition rules out a lot of trans men, not all of them. There is a butch/transmasc overlap.

I’m not saying that a lesbian wouldn’t find a pre everything trans guy attractive but once she knows that he is a man, it would be disrespectful for her to continue to pursue him.

If a lesbian stays with a partner after he begins a transition, I hesitate to call her a lesbian. Her partner is no longer a women.

I don’t have respect for trans men who date lesbians or lesbians who dates trans men because it normalizes the lesbophobic idea that lesbians would be interested in men at all and the transphobic idea that trans men somehow remain women despite transition.

And I don’t know why lesbians would be comfortable with a literal whole ass man participating in an event exclusive to lesbians.

Lesbians don’t like the female sex, they like women, and trans men aren’t that.

#ask

3 notes · View notes

longgae · 3 years

Text

11 celebrities who've been called out for homophobic comments

This is gonna be interesting...

1. In 2020, Twitter users accused J.K. Rowling of transphobia after comments she made on Twitter. Rowling tweeted, "'People who menstruate.' I'm sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?" Fans on social media quickly told the writer she was not being inclusive to the transgender community. Rowling backed up her statement by tweeting, "I respect every trans person's right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them. I'd march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans. At the same time, my life has been shaped by being female. I do not believe it's hateful to say so." She also said, "I want trans women to be safe. At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he's a woman – and, as I've said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth."

2. Kevin Hart stepped down from hosting the Academy Awards after his old homophobic comments surfaced, saying, "I am evolving and want to continue to do so."

Between 2009 and 2010, Kevin Hart made insensitive jokes on Twitter and in his standup specials. For example, in one tweet, the comedian said he would break a dollhouse over his son's head if it turned out he was gay. In his 2010 special, "Seriously Funny," he reiterated the point that he would act abusively if his son was gay. "I wouldn't tell that joke today, because when I said it, the times weren't as sensitive as they are now," Hart later told Rolling Stone. "I think we love to make big deals out of things that aren't necessarily big deals, because we can. These things become public spectacles. So why set yourself up for failure?" When it was announced that Hart was going to be the host of the Oscars in 2018, his past jokes resurfaced. After backlash from the public, Hart stepped down as host. "I have made the choice to step down from hosting this year's Oscar's....this is because I do not want to be a distraction on a night that should be celebrated by so many amazing talented artists," he wrote in a tweet. "I sincerely apologize to the LGBTQ community for my insensitive words from my past … I am evolving and want to continue to do so. My goal is to bring people together not tear us apart."

3. After Paris Hilton was caught criticizing the gay community in an audio recording, she apologized, saying, "Gay people are the strongest and most inspiring people I know." In 2012, an audio recording of Paris Hilton in a taxi cab was leaked. According to reports, she was in the car with a gay man who was showing her the gay dating app, Grindr. In the audio, you can hear Hilton say, "Gay guys are the horniest people in the world. They're disgusting. Dude, most of them probably have AIDS. ... I would be so scared if I were a gay guy. You'll like, die of AIDS." Her publicist confirmed that the recording was in fact Hilton but emphasized the socialite was not homophobic. (Are they sure about this? God...) In an apology statement, Hilton said, "I am so sorry and so upset that I caused pain to my gay friends, fans, and their families. Gay people are the strongest and most inspiring people I know."

4. After a member of the audience called out Tracy Morgan for his homophobic remarks during a standup set, the comedian apologized. In 2011, a man chronicled Tracy Morgan's standup set in Nashville on Facebook. In the post, the man said Morgan said being gay is a choice because "God makes no mistakes." The comedian also allegedly said he would stab his son if he came out as gay. (Kevin Hart, you here?) After backlash and a half-hearted apology on "Late Show with David Letterman," Morgan issued an official apology. "I want to apologize to my fans and the gay & lesbian community for my choice of words at my recent stand-up act in Nashville," he said. "I'm not a hateful person and don't condone any kind of violence against others. While I am an equal opportunity jokester, and my friends know what is in my heart, even in a comedy club this clearly went too far and was not funny in any context." (Good sir. There is more to LGBTQ+ then just gays and lesbians)

5. Sarah Silverman used a gay slur in a 2010 tweet. When asked about it in 2018, she said, "I'm certainly creative enough to think of other words besides that that don't hurt people." In 2010, Sarah Silverman tweeted, "I don't mean this in a hateful way but the new bachelorette's a f-----." Although the tweet went relatively unnoticed at the time, it picked up momentum again in 2018 when people pointed out that it was unfair for Kevin Hart to step down from hosting the Oscars for doing something similar. "Yea, I'm done with that," Silverman told TMZ when she was asked about it in 2018. "I think I can find other ways to be funny. I used to say 'gay' all the time like, 'That's so gay!' Because we're from Boston. We'd go, 'That's what you say in Boston. I have gay friends. I just say gay.' Then I heard myself, and I realized I was like the guy who'd say, 'What? I say colored. I have colored friends.' I realized it's stupid, and I'm certainly creative enough to think of other words besides that that don't hurt people. But I fuck up all the time."

6. Eminem has been criticized for using gay slurs in his songs, but he insists he isn't homophobic. In 2018, Eminem released his album, "Kamikaze." In one song titled "The Fall," he focuses on fellow rapper Tyler, The Creator. In the song, Eminem raps," "Tyler create nothin', I see why you called yourself a f----t, bitch." This wasn't the first time rapper had been criticized for using a gay slut. Throughout his career, he has used similar words in his songs and received a lot of criticism for it. Eminem, however, insists he is not homophobic. "The honest-to-God truth is that none of that matters to me: I have no issue with someone's sexuality, religion, race, none of that," the rapper told Vulture. "Anyone who's followed my music knows I'm against bullies — that's why I hate that f---ing bully Trump — and I hate the idea that a kid who's gay might get s--- for it."

7. Mel Gibson mocked how gay men act in the early '90s. While doing an interview in 2001 for Spanish newspaper El Pais, Gibson said, "With this look, who's going to think I'm gay? I don't lend myself to that type of confusion. Do I look like a homosexual? Do I talk like them? Do I move like them?" Throughout the '90s, GLAAD protested Gibson's films, but the actor refused to apologize. "I'll apologize when hell freeze over," he said. "They can f--- off."

8. Alec Baldwin went on a homophobic Twitter rant against a reporter he did not agree with. He later said his remarks were "in no way was the result of homophobia." In 2013, Daily Mail reporter George Stark wrote a story accusing Alec Baldwin's wife, Hilaria, of tweeting at James Gandolfini's funeral. Baldwin took to Twitter to express his anger at Stark, calling the reporter a "toxic little queen," among other comments. In an interview with the Gothamist after the incident, Baldwin stood by his decision to call the reporter a "queen." "The idea of me calling this guy a 'queen' and that being something that people thought is homophobic … a queen to me has a different meaning. It's somebody who's just above," he told the publication. "It doesn't have any necessarily sexual connotations," Baldwin said. "To me a queen ... I know women that act queeny, I know men that are straight that act queeny, and I know gay men that act queeny. It doesn't have to be a definite sexual connotation or a homophobic connotation." He later issued an official apology, according to The Hollywood Reporter. "My anger was directed at Mr. Stark for blatantly lying and disseminating libelous information about my wife and her conduct at our friend's funeral service. As someone who fights against homophobia, I apologize," Baldwin said. "I would not advocate violence against someone for being gay, and I hope that my friends at GLAAD and the gay community understand that my attack on Mr. Stark in no way was the result of homophobia."

9. Chris Brown also used homophobic language (no shockers there) when talking about another rapper, but he later said, "I love all my gay fans." In 2010, rapper Raz provoked Chris Brown when he tweeted about Brown's past assault on Rihanna. Brown responded by attacking Raz on Twitter, referencing the fact that Raz was molested by another man as a child and calling him a "#homothug." "I'm not homophobic! He's just disrespectful," Brown tweeted later. "BTW…I love all my gay fans and this immature act is not targeted at you!!!! Love."

10. Azealia Banks has a long history of problematic comments, but she has since said she will no longer use gay slurs. In 2015, singer Azealia Banks was caught on camera yelling at a flight attendant after getting into a fight with a fellow passenger. In the video, you can hear Banks call the flight attendant a gay slur, according to HuffPost.She later tweeted about the incident, writing, "I don't care. I've said it before and I'll say it again."Banks' history with the word doesn't stop there. In 2016, she used the word to attack fellow singer Zayn Malik on Twitter, leading to the deactivation of her account. She has also called the LGBTQ community "the gay white KKK. Get some pink hoods and unicorns and rally down rodeo drive."In 2016, however, she announced she is never using the gay slur again. "The amount of people that get hurt when I use the word vs. the amount of people I've said it to are just not worth it," she wrote on Facebook. "Honestly... This isn't a cop-out, it's just me realizing that words hurt. and while I may be immune to every word and be thicker skinned than most, it doesn't mean that I get to go around treating people with the same toughness that made my skin so thick."

11. Drake Bell received backlash after posting a transphobic tweet. He later called the remarks "thoughtless." When Caitlin Jenner came out as transgender in 2015, Nickelodeon actor and singer Drake Bell tweeted, "Sorry...still calling you Bruce." After receiving backlash, he deleted the tweet and then posted another, misgendering Jenner. "I'm not dissing him! I just don't want to forget his legacy! He is the greatest athlete of all time," Bell tweeted. "Chill out!" After that, he tweeted out an apology. "I sincerely apologize for my thoughtless insensitive remarks," Bell wrote. "I in no way meant to hurt or demean those going through a similar journey. Although my comments were made in innocence, I deeply regret the negative effect they've had on so many."

Here are some tweets that were mentioned earlier (I couldn't find all of them)

So... yeah

2 notes · View notes

butchattano · 4 years

Note

WELP just saw some vixenmoric weirdo declare leslie feinberg was a trans man and not a lesbian

i would urge people to let leslie be dead.

either way, i would urge people to stop using leslie's personal identity as “proof” that butch lesbians who go through HRT/surgeries are “actually men” and to stop using leslie as “proof” that trans men who transition are “actually [confused] butch lesbians”. leslie will be dead for six years as of november. may hir memory be a blessing, but let leslie be dead.

also, minnie-bruce pratt is still active (FB, website) and it just seems incredibly disrespectful to me. leslie may be a historic figure but ze isn’t historical. we’re not discussing the personal identity of a figure from the 1800s. ze died in 2014.

where ever you stand, trans men and butch lesbians have solidarity in our alienation from womanhood. the difference is in the why. let us stand in solidarity with our trans brothers while acknowledging our differences, instead of continually trying to find the definitive line. you’re not gonna find the line!

butches (cis or trans or otherwise) undergoing HRT of any kind doesn’t make them men! butches who pack, bind, undergo surgeries, and use he/him pronouns are still not men. these actions do not MAKE anyone a man.

they can AFFIRM someone’s manhood, though, if they are a man. since trans men are men, packing and binding and using he/him pronouns and undergoing HRT and gender affirming surgeries would then affirm their manhood.

personally, i would rather find solidarity with my trans brothers through these affirming actions than to try to police who is doing what and why.

on top of that, vixenamoric is a label steeped in transphobia and transmisogyny, whose roots are forever going to be stained with “she/her identifying women loving she/her identifying women only” as the origins. i don’t particularly care what the vixenamoric group is going to be saying, as their definition of “lesbian” is taken from google’s dictionary.

i’d urge others to deplatform them and affirm our trans sisters: our trans butches, trans femmes, and trans lesbians, who are beautiful and valued members of the lesbian community.

#anonymous #asked #lesbophobia //#transphobia //#dominic.txt #this is ok to rb if you're so inclined

17 notes · View notes

thebidetective · 4 years

Text

i’ve gotten a few asks in response to the “bi lesbian” discourse...so here are some of my thoughts on the matter.

first let me be clear about where i stand, and you can decide if you want to continue reading or not. lesbianism excludes men. if you’re attracted to men in any way, shape, or form....you’re not a lesbian. i won’t elaborate further on that statement right now bc i think it’s pretty straightforward.

i’ve seen quite a few people on twitter asking “why can’t we just boil it down to using sapphic and wlw as our only labels? then we can all get along.” and while this is ultimately a very juvenile take, i do want to address it. “wlw” and “sapphic” are terms meant to foster community among bi/lesbian women. having “wlw/sapphic” spaces is lovely for us all to be able to bond over our love for women. but we have the terms “bisexual” and “lesbian” to represent our individual experiences. while we do share some commonalities, our experiences are not identical, and having an umbrella term to describe us simply as “women who love women” is reductive and erases both our histories.

now, the “bi lesbian” debacle. after looking into what people are saying on twitter, it seems to have been born in an attempt to give a label to women who are attracted to both men AND women, but have a strong preference for women. these women do not need a label, bc they already have one......bisexual. this honestly seems to have stemmed from a fundamental misunderstanding of bisexuality, as well as a willingness to invalidate lesbianism by definition.

arguing that you can be bisexual AND a lesbian is both biphobic AND lesbophobic. you simply cannot be both. if bi people want to come up w micro terms for themselves under the umbrella of bisexuality, more power to ya! but none of those terms can be “lesbian” or imply lesbianism. bc even if you are a bi woman who prefers women over men, you’re still bisexual. any attraction/interest in men excludes you from lesbianism. and i know i’ll get called an “exclusionist” for that but that’s fine bc words do actually have meaning, and lesbianism by definition excludes men. that’s literally the point.

the arguments i’ve seen in favor of “bi lesbian” have mostly been coming from the idea that sexuality/gender identity is a spectrum and it fluctuates, yada yada. which is true, except when it isn’t. sexuality for lesbians and gay men does not fluctuate. lesbians are interested in, and attracted to women and only women. gay men are interested in, and attracted to men and only men. now, this is not to invalidate people who once identified as bisexual and now identify as gay/lesbian (or vice versa). that’s perfectly fine and happens with lots of us, myself included. that being said...if you adopt one of those terms (lesbian or bisexual) then you must drop the other. full stop. but going back to sexuality being a “spectrum”....bisexuality absolutely can fluctuate. many bi people lean more towards one or the other, and sometimes it just depends on the day. and that’s totally valid and makes perfect sense! this is not the case for lesbians or gay men. i’m not sure how many different ways i can say it, but lesbianism does not bend to include men.

i understand wanting to be inclusive, we should all strive to be as accepting and inclusive of each other as possible. but not at the sacrifice of our history and identity. leave lesbianism and bisexuality alone. those labels exist for a reason, and erasing their definitions, ignoring them, deciding they mean something else now is extremely disrespectful to both parties.

i have no idea who initially started this, it may have been from some kid trying to navigate the extremely confusing waters of lgbt community, in which case i hope they are gently educated and not attacked for their ignorance. and that’s exactly what it comes down to...ignorance. our history is not taught, and so many of you are too lazy to do your own research, so you make up words/terms and decide the old ones don’t have meaning anymore. i can acknowledge that sometimes new labels are needed to include people who truly do not feel they have a home under “gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender” but the new can’t invalidate the old. and if many of you would take the time to learn, and ask questions from people w real life experience, you might find that what you’re looking for already exists within the communities that have been established now for decades.

in short, if you truly feel you need to create a new label to describe yourself then you are free to do that. but do not step on the already established identities that have very deep roots within the lgbt community. do not take already existing labels and claim they mean something they don’t. i urge anyone involved in this discussion to listen to the lesbian and bisexual women who are hurt by this, and maybe do some of your own research to really understand why.

*any reference to men in this, or any of my posts, is referring to cis men only. i do not subscribe to terf rhetoric. trans women are women, and that’s that.

#i just wanna make sure anyone following me who thinks bi lesbian is a thing fucks off #so ya these are my thots #said as eloquently as i can be through my rage at this stupidity #text #lesbian #bisexual #twitter #lesbophobia #biphobia #lgbt

23 notes · View notes

the-working-class-guide-to-films · 4 years

Text

Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

Well, where to begin. After 42 years and 8 films we’ve finally come to number 9, the last film in the Skywalker Saga. Star Wars has probably been the most controversial film series in history, creating more anger and division than Brexit. Some fans prefer the originals, some fans prefer the prequels. Some fans love The Last Jedi, some fans hate The Last Jedi. It’s been a rocky road for these films, no matter how much us fans moan, we love Star Wars. Btw, you’re not a fan if you get annoyed about a black actor being a stormtrooper or give shit to Kelly Marie Tran, you’re a wanker. I personally, get annoyed about every one of the Star Wars films. The originals are too boring and not enough action, although the story is better and using practical effects. The prequels use way too much cgi, however they are much action-packed and they are different from the other films e.g. blowing up ANOTHER Death Star. I was always hoping that the sequels would mix the best things from both lots of films, yes boomers, there are good things about the prequels. Whilst they felt more like the old-school style of the films, they stuck to the same story plot and I was never blown away with the lightsaber/force battles. The Rise of Skywalker unfortunately follows suit. Whilst it’s a great film for fan satisfaction it’s a terrible film that lacks logic, story and imagination.

So here’s the plot. Emperor Palpatine, you know that guy who died in Episode 6, he’s somehow alive in a weird half dead trance and has been controlling Snorke and every bad guy. He wants Kylo Ren to bring Rey to him. Palpatine shows Kylo the army he has been building for him, which is massive, and that he’ll gift Kylo this if he delivers. Rey has been mastering the force and she’s become a bit of bad-ass. The resistance find out about this super army and Rey decides to go and defeat Palpatine to save the world. Finn, Poe and Chewie go with her. Space adventures happen. Turns out Rey is Palpatine’s granddaughter! What? Rey stabs Kylo and then heals him using the force. Cos that’s a thing. Rey goes to confront her grandad whilst Kylo casts aside his dark side ways to be Ben Solo and goes to join Rey. Palpatine doesn’t want to kill Rey but instead wants Rey to kill him so all the Sith, including himself can go inside her and be Empress Palpatine. She doesn’t agree but then sees that The Resistance (currently fighting the big army are being outnumbered). Kylo then turns up but Palpatine drains their life force bringing him back to life. Rey, after hearing the voices of previous Jedi masters, gets up and kills Palpatine, she dies. Ben finds her, he uses that weird force healing skill, she wakes up. THEY FUCKING KISS FOR SOME STUPID REASON. Ben dies and he becomes one with the force. The end.

I’ll start with the good points. Adam Driver was great and has been awfully underused in these films. The fight scene between Kylo and Rey was good and entertaining. Ian McDiarmid is a fantastic actor, and although I think it was such a batshit crazy idea having Palpatine back, it was great watching his performance. It was good to see Finn and Poe have that relationship that we saw in The Force Awakens. That was missing big time in The Last Jedi and I’m glad we saw them together again because it works really well. And it did have some great fan service, I can’t lie. I won’t spoil that bit just in case, but you can’t be a Star Wars fan and not get a bit giddy about that.

However, I do think fan service has been the biggest problem, not just with this film, but with these sequels. They keep bringing back dead characters and in Carrie Fisher’s case (rest her soul), dead actors. It need’s to move on. The characters Poe, Finn, Rey and Kylo are all really cool and interesting characters but I feel like their development and the films progression has been thwarted by this insistence of having the old characters being around. It was great for the first film. I think The Last Jedi had the perfect opportunity to kill them off, but they kept Leia in it. Her appearance in RoS looked dodgy and her death to me was disrespectful. It looked like they had just run out of unseen footage and had to do with what they didn’t have. Having her, and more importantly Palpatine back jut lacked the new characters being the main vocal point. Having Palpatine back as the main villain was a weird decision and shows any lack of planning from the writers/guys in charge. There’s been no hint that Rey was related to him, it’s just really outside the box that it becomes ridiculous. If we had seen hints, or gone ‘oh that makes sense because of that bit in The Force Awaken’ I’d be ok with it, but I don’t think that has happened. I think what has happened is because TLJ was so divisive, J.J Abrams has turned his back on all that the last film set out to do and gone back to a safe, boring and unimaginative film that forgets the previous events. It would be interesting to know what ideas Rian Johnson had for the ending of this saga. As good as it was seeing Finn and Poe back together, their story wasn’t that exciting, they just go from place to place without any real meaning or relevance. The kiss we all wanted was between these two men, their bromance has been used throughout the films and I think it is a shame we never saw that. Not just because it would have been a relevant to what the other films have done but because it’s such a huge moment in Star Wars history for young girls and boys seeing that. Instead they showed a lesbian kiss between two people who were basically extras. We know that will be cut it, it won’t mean anything. What was more annoying was that Zorii, Poe’s old friend, was basically there to make Poe look more straight and manly. You can be manly and gay, and his name is Poe Dameron. And that was a terrible thing about the kiss between Rey and Kylo. They had no sexual tension, yes there was always tension but never sexually. Why these two possible heterosexual characters got this key scene is beyond me, unless it’s society showing us that that is the norm. It wasn’t needed, at all. Also, why did the film try to make Chewie’s ‘death’ emotional, when 3 minutes later we saw him again? Either kill him for real, or pretend kill him and then bring him back at the end for a hero’s return. We didn’t see another transporter that took him away so that was a really odd choice that lacked emotion and sense.

For those reading and probably think I’m a hater, I’m not. These aren’t silly little things like ‘Rey’s hair shouldn’t be that length’ or ‘Poe said that in The Last Jedi so that doesn’t make sense in canon’. These are real film and basic writing points. This film is similar to Avengers: Endgame. It doesn’t do anything new. It’s going back to old characters that will please the fans. And yes it does because it looks cool. But they’re taking the piss out of you, they’re making you look foolish because they’re just showing you lovable old characters without any risk or real emotion.

And one last negative.

THE STROBE LIGHTING RUINED THE MOST INTERESTING BITS OF THIS FILM. FUCK SAKE YOU COULDN’T EVEN MANAGE TO DO THAT RIGHT.

Seriously though, this was incredibly annoying, I had to keep looking away. I don’t know why it was done, it wasn’t needed. Strobe lighting can be a useful tool, but it just became frustrating doing most of the final third. If you guys have epilepsy, beware.

p.s I’m not apologising for the slightly irrelevant baby yoda gifs, that guy is the cutest.

2/5 I went in to The Rise of Skywalker with the lowest possible expectations, I still came out disappointed. The story was ridiculous. Logically, it didn’t make any sense. Even though it did have good fan service and fans would be happy with the surprises that RoS has throughout, it was still massively frustrating.

p.p.s

for those who are wondering, here’s my list of Star Wars film in favourite order. 1 being the highest

1) Revenge of the Sith

2) A New Hope

3) Empire Strikes Back

4) The Phantom Menace

to be honest now they are muddle up into one big pile of crap but for continuity problems...

5) The Force Awakens

6) The Last Jedi

7) Attack of the Clones

8) Return of the Jedi

9) Rise of Skywalker

#movies #movie review #film #Film Review #cinema #cinema review #new #rise of skywalker #star wars #star wars rise of skywalker #Disney

1 note · View note

foob-r · 5 years

Text

listen ladies...cis people dont have to date trans people (bc youre the oppressors but thats another story). nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you. date who you wanna date. however when people (yes, usually cis gays) make jokes All The Time basing gay people’s attraction on genitalia and having same sex sex, like ‘im gay i hate pussy’ or ‘haha dont have to worry abt getting pregnant cuz im a lesbian and i hate dick’ (”classic” jokes for cis gays to make), youre being transphobic AND homophobic in the same breath.

and like. so many transphobic gays on the topic of dating trans ppl are like ‘well i dont wanna get fucked by a dick!’ or ‘i dont want to fuck a pussy’! like. why is gay sex fun and wild and different until trans people get involved and suddenly only piv sex exists? or that trans women can be penis repulsed, that trans men dont want to fuck using their vaginas? or that like. i am not just a walking pair of boobs and a pussy? that i am a three dimensional person who is date-able and fuck-able even if you’re not interested in pussy or boobs? like sure maybe i dont pass and i get that maybe IM not the SPECIFIC guy u wanna date if youre gay, but not every trans guy is me, and swearing off an entire group of people bc in your head theyre different is awful, disrespectful, and creepy! since the “differences” is SOMETIMES in their genitals! im more than my pussy, fellas!! idk its just . continuing the long history of cis people reducing trans people to their genitals so they can ostracize, harass, and damage them and im really tired of it.

oh yeah and for the ppl who get mad cuz im not ‘calling out cishets for the same behavior’ you think i can do anything about them, my oppressors on both axies of my lgbt identity? im just doing my best to fix the behavior of hateful people in my community so the entire place can be better and healthier for everyone.

#transphobia #aj babbles #just some thots ig #homophobia #i hate terfs #trans stuff #gay stuff #feel free 2 reblog

101 notes · View notes

thedeadflag · 5 years

Note

what's your take on nb and butch lesbians hcing male characters as trans women? men are closer to how i present (as a nb butch) and so that's generally why i'll say a canonically male character is a lesbian, but i'm also afab and recognize how that makes it easier for me to present as a lesbian, nb or otherwise, and don't want to continue doing this/making jokes about it if it's disrespectful. also, if this ask is a bother, feel free to ignore it--i totally understand this isn't like, your job.

If we’re talking a trans woman butch lesbian, then sure. As a trans woman, she’s trustworthy, and if she feels a canon male character’s worthy of headcanoning as a trans woman, she’s probably got her reasons. Doesn’t mean someone who isn’t a trans woman should necessarily piggyback on that, because they wouldn’t be doing so with an informed perspective, not unless there’s a broader pattern of trans women HCing the character as a trans woman.

If we’re talking someone assigned female at birth, then I would say that this is being done for the wrong reasons. If you ID more with a male character, that’s perfectly alright, but there’s no need to rope trans women into it. You could just leave them as men.

If it’s just about presentation, change the way female characters present accordingly. Like, I’m confused how that’s not the solution that immediately comes to mind. I don’t understand how a person can say they like a way a guy character looks, and come to the conclusion that they’ll just make him a trans woman so they can see themselves in the character better. I don’t get how the first impulse is to equate trans women with cis men, and not make a shift in presentation/expression of an existing woman character. Or, I DO get how it can happen, because cissexism makes these sort of decisions so rooted in common sense and instinct that people don’t even think twice about them. It becomes the easy solution, because of course a person will jump to HCing a man as a trans woman due to gender-related expression/presentation when they connect trans women with men, or at least overwhelmingly more with men than with other women.

If you absolutely have to have the character be a woman for whatever reason, I’d honestly prefer you rock a genderbend/cisswap. At least then you wouldn’t be directly equating trans women with cis men, even if similar cissexist underpinnings would be guiding the alteration. Still transphobic, but nothing that could pretend to masquerade as trans-positivity like trans HCs often are positioned as.

And this is all, of course, assuming the shift of the character into a woman has some manner of good faith behind it, even if misguided and flawed. I will say that I am a little more cautious and suspicious when it comes to instances like this because I’ve seen similar issues with certain cis wlw and afab NB folks using trans women’s bodies as vehicles for a variety of fantasies and introspection-avoidance and whatnot via the G!P (girl penis) trope in fan works.

There’s a distressingly common pattern of trans women being positioned in deeply cissexist ways that…to simplify maybe to the point of some inaccuracy, but I’ve already written tomes on this matter already, I won’t retread those tracks…cast us as men who are conditionally treated as women.

There’s a lot of cis wlw struggling with comp het who use us in their erotica as the stand in for the male lover, and fill us with all the romanticized and eroticized toxic masculinity, letting us put on the illusion of womanhood until the sexual content hits, and then we’re the ‘hot alpha stud’ reaming into the cis wlw character with our over-sized engorged penises, often pumping them full of cum (and also quite often getting them pregnant). That ticks a lot of boxes when it comes to unprocessed heteronormativity, compulsory heterosexuality, cissexism, etc. and when that baggage can be draining to deal with, it’s an easier sell for folks to indulge in the thrill of taboo and fulfilling a twisted form of the conditioning they were give, especially if they’ve got a strict and homophobic religious upbringing.

Related to the above, there’s a lot of trans men and afab NB folks who see us as some kind of ideal midway point between men and women. Where we get to exist as women, at least in bearing the status of women and mental image of some famous actress or character, but appearing (in some physical ways, at least, largely bone structure and genitals), behaving, and functioning as men. They have a familiar physical form they can see themselves in, but with a penis tacked on as a means of distancing the character from womanhood and sources of dysphoria, to make them the ‘best of both worlds’ in a sense.

I shouldn’t have to explain to you how deeply cissexist and transmisogynistic these sort of instances are, or how harmful it is to be viewed through such a fetishistic lens, and to be represented in such a harmful and inauthentic way. I’ll admit, I usually come across cis butch lesbians upset at the mere notion of having their butchness equated with maleness, who hate when butch lesbians are represented as essentially a man. Like the common critique goes, there’s no “man” of the relationship between two women…with lesbians especially, the point is that they’re both women or woman-aligned, and neither are men. And when people primarily HC canon men as trans women, and rarely (if ever) HC canon women as trans women, they’re doing that exact thing, positioning us as men, equating us to men in everything but the most surface-level messaging.

And that sort of thing might not always be behind the kind of trans headcanons you’re describing. But it’s a persistent theme behind people HCing canon men as trans women, and being a non-trans woman butch lesbian doesn’t eliminate those issues from being in play. There are reasons why people jump to the decisions they make when it comes to our representation. Even if it might seem innocuous to you or others, there are currents underneath our consciousnesses that pull people in certain directions when faced with multiple ways to accomplish their goals. Cissexism is one that nearly everyone struggles with mightily, or has struggled with mightily in the past prior to working at unlearning it. Transmisogyny is one that most folks assigned female at birth don’t really consider at all until prompted with critique relating to it.

Either way, there’s no harm in trying to get a handle on why that urge arises to HC men as trans women, particularly under the reasoning you provided. And while you and others who have had similar motivations in the past are putting in the work, maybe focus on HCing canon women as trans women if you ever feel the urge for a trans woman HC

#long post #trans headcanons #transmisogyny #cissexism #trans fetishization #creative responsibility #g!p #compulsory heterosexuality #heteronormativity #genitals tw #genital mention tw #transphobia #Anons

32 notes · View notes