hot take: the phrase “there is no platonic explanation for that” fucking sucks, bc it not only hurts aromatic people, but also emphasizes the ‘friends can’t be too close’ which can either be rooted in homophobia or sexism

Game Changer & Make Some Noise
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year

Jar Jar Binks Fan Club
Claire Keane
One Nice Bug Per Day

No title available

#extradirty

Jimmy Eat World
No title available

gracie abrams
Noah Kahan
Interview Vampire Daily
cherry valley forever
macklin celebrini has autism
Cookie Run:Kingdom Official!

PR's Tumblrdome

tannertan36

roma★
The Stonewall Inn
YOU ARE THE REASON
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Ukraine
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from United States
seen from Australia
seen from Spain
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Chile

seen from Türkiye

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Uruguay
@dr-j-hawthorn
hot take: the phrase “there is no platonic explanation for that” fucking sucks, bc it not only hurts aromatic people, but also emphasizes the ‘friends can’t be too close’ which can either be rooted in homophobia or sexism
"Kill all (insert trait)" is always and I mean always an unhealthy statement, but people still defend it. Here's how to shatter the 3 main arguments.
"but we don't actually mean all of them" Words have meaning. All means all, and the attempt to backpedal it makes you look like a spineless coward.
"it's just venting" Your way to vent is to happily imagine genocide? That is what killing the entirety of a population for a trait would be, and while you could never do it, people who have those traits will see what you say and hold you to your hatred.
"they actually are dangerous or bad" No one is inherently bad for having a trait like birth or chosen gender, or skin color or whatever. A person's experiences shape who they are, and your hatred isn't going to help.
I know we make jokes about the proverbial asexual pervert who has written hundreds of thousands of words of smut on ao3, but also shoutout to the aces who aren’t perverts. to the aces who skip the sex scenes and wince at sex jokes and awkwardly leave the conversation when your friends start talking about sex. your boundaries aren’t childish and fuck anyone who says otherwise.
The Rules of Anti-Transmasculinity
1. Your body is not your own.
1a. Your body is a site for other’s desires.
If they want you to be beautiful, it is cruel of you to deny them that. If they want you to be feminine, it is cruel of you to deny them that. If they think you should reproduce, it is cruel of you to divest yourself of reproductive duties.
1b. Your body is owned by the state.
Reproductive laws that can affect cis women also affect you, but you cannot weigh in on them, because you are not a woman.
Anti-trans laws affect you, but you must not bring this up; you are never the “real” target, even when you are, because you are not “really” trans.
When the legislation talks about “protecting” your fertility, you should feel lucky to be safeguarded from yourself.
- - -
2. Your experiences are not your own.
Your childhood does not exist. You cannot claim girlhood if you are a man, and you cannot claim boyhood if you did not grow up within it, and no other visions of childhood may exist. Your history, however you define it, is fundamentally incompatible with who you are.
Forms of sexism which are aimed at women, by a binary logic, cannot be aimed at men or mascs. If your experiences contradict this, either you are invalidating your identity, or you are appropriating womanhood.
It is your duty to blithely dissociate yourself from any trauma patriarchy may have inflicted on you. Men cannot be affected by these things even if it happens to them personally. A “real” man must be stoic and uncaring.
- - -
3. You are a “default” body.
You are to be assumed affluent, perisex, binary, and passing, with no legal or situational barriers to medical or social transition, and no reproductive concerns to speak of — unless your nonconformity can be used to dismiss you.
You are assumed to be able-bodied, sane of mind, white, and thin — unless your mental health or appearance is good for mockery.
You are to be treated as essentially cismasculine. Being treated as if you are cis is a compliment, even when it is erasing your lived experiences, and even if it is known and true that transfems have their own unique struggles from cis women too.
- - -
4. You are an “aberrant” body.
4a. Your body is a site of fascination. You (are presumed to) have a gestative capacity, and a fun extra hole. These traits are relevant when others assess your attractiveness and their kinks. They are not relevant in the context of your health. You’re a submissive little bottom, right?
(Your body is something to conquer and claim. This may be done to emphasize your femininity, deny your androgyny, or defang your masculinity.)
4b. Your body is a site of disgust. Any steps you may take to masculinize yourself are “ruining” your “female” features, regardless of any joy you personally take from the changes, and regardless of if you engage with medical transition or not.
(You are killing the woman you are supposed to be. Stand trial.)
4c. Your body is too unattractive to be sexually violenced. It doesn’t happen. When it does, you have anatomical privilege, because you are (presumed to be) in possession of a vulva, and victims with those are of course always believed. But it doesn’t happen, because you are essentially a cis man, and of course men don't get raped.
(It is not possible to be targeted for this violence because you are transmasculine. It is always misaimed violence, intended for someone else. Apologize to her for taking up her space.)
4d. Your body is a proxy for other’s ideas about activism. Womanhood is good, and manhood is bad, and things in-between are uncomfortable and hard to classify; therefore, a detransition back to cisfemininity would be a preferable state of being, wouldn’t it?
(Your transition is at odds with good feminism.)
4e. Your body is a joke. Men don’t menstruate. Men don’t gestate. Men don’t lactate. Men can't have breasts. If the suggestion sends people into hysterics, you must take it lying down.
(Remember; comedy is subversion, and you are an “abberant” body.)
4f. Your body is a hypothetical and not a lived reality. If men could menstruate or gestate, that would fix patriarchy. It would not result in men being denied at the door of the gynecology office, surely.
(To entertain your existence is a rhetorical inconvenience.)
4g. Your body is a source of put-down. You are a cunt, a pussy, a fembrained bitchmoid — and it isn’t sexist to refer to you as such, because you are a man. Your disinclination to be reduced to bioessentialist biogotry is simply proof that your masculinity is fragile. It is not proper for you to object to it, even when it is the same rhetoric spewed by patriarchy itself, and even if it would be equally galling to say to a woman, cis or trans.
(Have you not considered that your trans body is privileged under cis patriarchy?)
4h. Passing is universal to all transmasculine bodies and all life situations. Closeted, clocky, queer, or femme trans men and mascs cannot exist, and are not subjected to the same violence as women or other queer men. Legal gender markers don’t matter. Medical access isn’t a concern. People from your past cannot possibly be vindictive enough to out you, because queer or not, you have male privilege.
(Have you considered that you simply aren’t trying hard enough to pass?)
- - -
5. If you are inadequately masculine, pre-transition, nonbinary, or bi-gendered, you cannot “really” be a man.
Remember; you are a lost little girl when you need to be talked down to.
Remember; manhood and womanhood are diametric opposites, exclusive states of being.
Remember; poverty is not an excuse.
- - -
6. If you are inadequately feminine or too masculine, you cannot “really” be queer.
Remember; you are a “default” body.
Remember; you are essentially cis.
- - -
7. If you are too assertive or too unwilling to serve as a punching bag, you cannot “really” be a feminist.
Remember; men cannot be feminists.
Remember; men cannot need feminism.
Remember; your masculinity is most readily acknowledged when it provides a rhetorical threat.
- - -
8. If you really insist on your masculinity, then it must be in service to others. You owe them labor, defense, money, and deference.
You are not owed equality or reciprocity, because men are responsible for patriarchy. You are on the hook for the patriarch’s debt, and you are presumed to share his wallet.
(A man is a protector and a provider. I thought you wanted to be a man?)
- - -
9. Your interest in your own autonomy is indistinguishable from power-grabbing.
Your self-determination and self-advocacy aligns you with patriarchal interests, or is a sign that you are too battered by patriarchy to self-determine in the first place. Someone else must decide these things for you. Someone else must speculate on your motives. You do not get to speak for yourself.
- - -
10. Your inclusion and representation is not important.
10a. When you notice your absence from culture, art, and storytelling, others ask; why do you not simply project your experiences onto cis men? Remember, you are a default body. Surely you are different from other queer people who need direct representation.
(When you try to do that, you are classically fembrained and illiterate for thinking a given character could have transmasculine subtext or themes.)
Projecting onto cis women is akin to killing them.
Why are you not satisfied with mpreg fanfic?
10b. When you make your own art and stories, you are playing with dolls. It is unimportant, juvenile, and easily dismissed much in the way that people discuss teenage girls who act as culture-makers.
(If transmasculinity is not present in the world of art, it must be because it has no artistic merit.)
- - -
11. Your erasure is proof that you have nothing to offer.
The muffling of violence done to you or your brothers is proof that no violence occurs in the first place.
The muffling of you or your brother’s contributions is proof that none of you contributed in the first place.
The removal of your brothers from the historical narrative is proof that they didn’t exist, or that they never stood in solidarity with other feminists and queers.
Silence is proof that you need not speak.
- - -
12. Denying any danger that you may be in is affirmative to your masculinity, because men cannot be harmed.
There are no statistics that say otherwise if we never read them.
There are no patterns of abuse if we never speak of them.
There are no dead if they are recorded as femicides.
There are no victims if we do not speak their names.
- - -
These contradictory impositions are not aimed at transmascs alone, but they are the recurring patterns I notice as a transmasculine feminist. We are not the only ones in danger, but we are queer all the same, and all queerness is targeted under patriarchy.
The Amnesty International report that JK Rowling is trying to censor through legal threats.
It can also be found on Google Drive here and on Bluesky here.
Please save and share this info where possible. This report has since been removed by Amnesty International due to legal threats of libel from JK Rowling. This information is no longer easily accessible.
🪙?
I like this one, I think it's charming
Puppy gave himself his first T shot!!!
happy trans day of visibility!
ID: Art of the trans flag with Shadow the Hedgehog, his fur in the same colors of the trans flag, standing on the left with his arms crossed. On each part of the flag (except the white) is text in all caps reading: "If The World Chooses To Become My Enemy...I Will Fight Like I Always Have!"
End ID.
UK transgenders you CAN DO DIY. It's NOT ILLEGAL to purchase T or E for personal use. Yes T is a class C drug but it is LEGAL to possess it for personal reasons. Intex pharma is the source I use for my T, it's safe and cheap and you don't need crypto to buy it. For me it works out at something like £3 per injection. Do not let people fearmonger into making you think it's illegal to buy and use T. It's NOT. It's only illegal if you give it to someone else (ie selling or sharing it). But for you, as the buyer and sole user, you are not breaking any laws!!!!
Thank you so much for sharing anon! You heard that UK trans people, you've all gotta trans your genders, you gotta. Happiness is within your grasp
A word I'm a big fan of is positionality. As in, the way someone is treated by, perceived as, and moves through the world. It's closely linked to intersectionality in my mind.
A big problem in queer feminist theory in my opinion (in general, not just in the discourse) is a tendency to treat identity labels as positionality in and of themselves. This frequently goes hand in hand with gender essentialism and extremely deepseated cisnormativity. People will take two groups that share an identity, and then use that to transitively map a certain positionality onto one of those groups by comparison. And generally, the cis, binary perspective is the one being imposed on the other. And if you're not watching for it or familiar with the topic, you might not notice the switch, because of how common it is to treat the two concepts as interchangeable.
But they're not. For example, A cis man and a trans man and a bigender man all share the identity of "man," but they each occupy a different positionality in the world. As in, the way other people perceive them and treat them, and the way they act in response to the world, is different. They occupy a different material context.
A lot of theory by and for trans women has already explored and firmly established this idea, in regard to trans and cis women. We have words like transmisogyny to describe how the positionality of being a trans woman or transfem effects, for example, the misogyny a person experiences.
Many people don't extend this to its natural conclusion when it comes to trans men and non-binary people, though, and justify that with a misunderstood definition of intersectionality. Our shared identities with other groups are used to project experiences on to us that are not actually true–and in doing so, to silence us.
This is what someone is doing when they say things like "of course trans men have male privilege, they're men," "trans men aren't the primary targets of misogyny, because they're men," or "as men, trans men are treated better than trans women." These ideas (setting aside for now the exorsexism of how transmascs who are not men get shoved into this categorization) rely on taking a person's identity, in this case, "man," and making it synonymous with the positionality of another group with an overlapping identity, cis men. "This is true of cis men," they say "so it must be true of all men." Identity (a fluid and internal thing that a person expresses via dialogue with society) is subsumed by positionality (the material conditions a person operates in).
And when you point out that none of those arguments are materially true, they meet you with "so you don't believe trans men are men?" Here, the argument is sort of a reverse motte-and-bailey (is there a word for this fallacy more specific than strawman? I'm not sure), taking one statement, that being "trans men do not occupy the same positionality as cis men" and treating it as synonymous with another, "trans men do not share the same identity as cis men." The strong, obviously hard to challenge argument is rhetorically swapped for a strawman that can easily be knocked down, and it's done by merging positionality and identity into interchangeable concepts with a meaning that they can move between as suits them.
Here, we get the "weaponizing your AFABness" and "misgendering yourself" strawmans too. When a trans man says he doesn't have the same experiences as a cis man, he is stating something material, such as "I need to access gynecological care and being a trans man makes that more difficult" or "I'm targeted by misogyny in my everday life because of how people perceive me." Note that the supposed rebuttals I listed are identity based again. To this argument, if you acknowledge a different positionality, you must be admitting to a different identity. In this way, unique transmasculine struggles are erased by folding the entirety of transmasculinity into, and making it subservient to, cis masculinity. Our experiences must be judged first to see if they apply to cis men before we are allowed to talk about them applying to trans men.
This affects non-binary people too in both similar and different ways. In the overlap, you see people taking the existence of non-binary people who also identify as cis to justify the idea that a certain kind of non-binary person is "cissexual" or "has cis privilege," or something to that affect. Similarly, they might isolate a part of a non-binary person's experience (such as using the pronouns associated with the gender enforced on you) and use it to say the same. An overlap, or even a perceived overlap in identity with a binary cis person is seized on to impose a binary cis person's positionality. Again, the purpose is to erase them, to silence discussion of their unique struggles, and to exclude them from community.
Another way this manifests against non-binary people is in forced binarization. A very, very common non-binary experience is the questions that amount to "are you a boy enby, or a girl enby?" and "are you an enby I will assume to have a penis, or an enby I will assume to have a vulva?" People will assign, or at least try to "figure out," which binary identity you're supposedly closest to. And once they've assigned you one, they will map a positionality onto you based on that (typically either that of a binary cis person or a binary trans person). The experiences that are distinct to being non-binary get erased in this collapse of the venn diagram.
A lot of this, I think, stems from oppositional sexism and overconfident assumptions. A member of one group, lacking insider knowledge on another group, takes the shortcut of simply making their best guess based on overlapping or "opposite" groups they assume they already understand. And then, when members of the group they confidently spoke over say "this is not true about us," the person retreats into that overlap to justify themselves. A binary trans man assumes a non-binary transmasc has basically equivalent experiences to his own, or a trans woman assumes trans men are treated better than her because cis men are.
That's where it often starts, at least, but if someone doubles down on this fallacy when confronted, they may start to believe (or act like they believe) in more and more absurd ideas based in positionality and identity as interchangeable concepts. I think this is the stage you see nonsensical arguments like "trans men have privilege over cis women," "trans women are overall more impacted by abortion bans than trans men," and "non-binary people are cis trenders pretending for attention."
This impacts other groups of queer people too, like bisexuals and asexuals for example. This post is already long and I wanted to focus on gender in particular, though. Intersex people as well, but I don't feel personally equipped to explore the examples there, and I'd welcome elaboration from anyone who does.
I feel like we might benefit from a word for this rhetoric. I'm not sure what it would be, and "positionality" is a bit of a mouthful to make affixes out of. It's also closely tied to intersectionality (as it's essentially a denial and replacement of the particular intersection a person occupies with an allegedly-similar one), but that concept is...poorly used, in queer discourse, as it is. I'm a big proponent of the utility of very specific terminology, and feel like especially as people who face so much erasure that we could use more of it.
Positional collapse, maybe? I need to chew on it more.
I'll share my food and pharamones with you <3
Raaaah
birthday
wasps are crazy man theyll parasatise a bugs a spiders a plants a fruits a eggs. theyll parasitise eachother ... i love the humble wauce
I've been iffy about posting this one, it's not at all like what I would prefer to make. So...obviously this isn't just a trans allegory. I mean I would love to be able to be a nightmarish eldritch creature of flesh and metal, but that's not the main point of these renderings.
I'm tired of insatiable greed dominating the world. I'm tired of being squeezed for more and more while making less and less. I'm tired of not even being able to help everyone I care about, let alone my broader community.
Imagine having an incomprehensible amount of wealth and choosing to increase it further instead of making lives better. I will never understand billionaires or our corporate overlords.
HAPPY NEW YEAR JACKIE‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️
Yayy!! Hears to leaving the clusterfuck that was 2025 behind!
Everytime a man acts gallantly or otherwise like a sir he is awarded with #GentlemanPoints which can be redeemed for any number of knicknacks like pipe tobacco or top hats or similar gubbins. I myself am saving up for the .45 revolver #TallyHo
the people yearn for nonplastic fabrics