Hello there! I'm Drakmanka, an Asexual, Genderfluid/Non-Binary, plural Dragonkin. I use They/Them pronouns and often refer to myself as "This Dragon".
Current age: 32 years.
Though I am host of a plural system, this blog will predominantly or possibly exclusively be run by me, Drakmanka. My headmates prefer more private settings in which to front and share their thoughts.
DNI if anti-endo, we have nothing to say to each other.
I intend this blog to be PG so it is safe for minors.
Additional info about me and my interests below the cut
My alterhuman identities (that I am confident about) are as follows, in order of importance to me: Dragon, dinosaur, raven, Tigger, demigod (of some sort, still figuring that one out), and elf. I am also exploring a vampire Archetrope. I identify as both Therian and Otherkin.
I am also cat-hearted, rat-hearted, horse-hearted, and ent-hearted.
My plural system is primarily comprised of fictive walk-ins, but a few of my OCs have also shown up (this actually makes writing about them really hard with someone actively critiquing my portrayal of them).
While wearing my Human Costume(TM) I drive a school bus and make cat noises at my coworkers (some of whom do it back!). In my free time I enjoy chatting online with fellow alterhumans, working on one of my original stories, drawing (mostly dragons), reading, playing video games, and building LEGO sets and MOCs.
I have two cats: Layden my heart-cat; a grey tuxedo rescue who's been with me for over 10 years, and Jasmine the family cat; a flame-point Siamese who was rehomed to us last year when her original owner had to move to a retirement home.
I've been keeping rats for nearly 17 years now. I'm currently without rats after the passing of my elderly boys Frodo, lost to cancer, and Samwise, who mercifully passed from simple old age. I'm unsure when I will be ready to open my heart to new rats, but I know myself; I go a special kind of crazy without them.
And lastly on the pets front, I keep a tropical freshwater aquarium. It's a 29-gallon community tank. Ask about fish names if you're curious!
Some of my favorite titles and franchises of various media (in no particular order) are: Bionicle, Lord of the Rings (especially the books!), Minecraft, Dishonored, Metroid, The Legend of Zelda, D&D5e, Girl Genius, Avatar: The Last Airbender, Stargate SG1, Star Trek, Star Wars, Dragonriders of Pern, Super Mario Bros, Spyro (the Dragon/Legend of), Calvin and Hobbes, TES Skyrim, The Age of Fire, and Wings of Fire.
Some of my non-media-related interests are: Zoology, Paleontology, Meteorology, electronics, horticulture, auto mechanics, Astronomy, forestry, and Geology.
I also enjoy training my pets, practicing music (I play piano as well as ocarina, and am trying to get good at guitar), language study (I am low-level conversational in Spanish, am attempting to learn Thai and Japanese, and want to learn German, Chinese, and Russian someday), and I'm trying to raise a bonsai tree from seed but keep losing my seedlings.
I collect rocks, rubber duckies, and suffer from an affliction known as bibliophilia which has rendered my bookshelves utterly stuffed. I have a plushie collection that takes up a little over half my bed. I'm also addicted to music.
I enjoy most forms of music except jazz, rap, and blues. My favorite music genres are Alternative, Rock, Metal, World, and Ambient Music.
I live with my Found Family whom I affectionately refer to as my sister, my gramma, and Sensei/grampa.
I am adopted, which definitely makes the way I define family looser than some.
My adoptive mom, I refer to as just my mom, and same with my adoptive dad. I have an adoptive older sister who amusingly is almost the same age as my chosen sister. I have two biological half-sisters, whom I generally refer to as my bio-sisters. I refer to my biological mother as my birth mom, and my biological father as my father. I have never met either of them but I have met my bio-sisters.
I also have step-family: my dad divorced my mom many years ago now (amicably) and she remarried when I was 18. My step-dad is a pretty nice guy, and I also have a step-brother and step-sister (my step-sister is also, amusingly, almost the exact same age as my adoptive sister and chosen sister).
My family situation is a bit of a tangled mess to explain but it all makes perfect sense to me!
When I refer to "my family" I am almost always referring to my Found Family. I don't expect I will make such references often though.
If this data-dump wasn't enough for you, feel free to message me with questions!
If you’re heading to the comments to say that actually testosterone is much more impactful than estrogen, you are exactly who I had in mind when I made this post.
Why is it that every trans woman saying “well I’ve been on E two years and still look like a man” is just “being realistic”. But a trans man saying “I’ve been on T two years and still get misgendered” is just a “skill issue” and “not trying hard enough?” Why is transfem pain inevitable and transmasc pain a personal failure? Have you considered there may be a bias here as to why you don’t believe the trans man? Shaped by either societal sexism or a projection of your own experiences and/or dysphoria?
“biological therian” was supposed to be the word we get to have to mean we’re literally, physically, genetically our theriotypes! it was supposed to be the one term we get to keep, after “physical therian” evolved to mean basically any nonhuman for any reason!
what do you MEAN you’re “biologically a therian but know your body is actually completely scientifically physically human”!!! do you know what biologically means!!!!!!
it is so unbelievably frustrating having our terms taken from us and watered down over and over and over again. can literal physical nonhumans not have anything to ourselves? all of our terms must be taken from us and morphed into something else? and what’s worse, so often those ‘physical nonhumans’ taking those terms will then turn around to us and go “wait, you think you’re ACTUALLY physically nonhuman?? that’s delusional!”
This has been happening in this community for ages. Much as I hate it I just don't see it ending anytime soon.
I hold out hope it will end eventually, but it's unlikely to until we are actually properly acknowledged as legitimate identities and not just "lol these kids think they're animals hyuck hyuck."
Because unfortunately, until we have that form of acknowledged legitimacy, we really don't have the power to say "hey, please stop appropriating our terminology" and expect anyone to do anything but laugh and double down.
There’s a phenomenon I actually see extremely commonly when literature is used to teach history to middle school and high school students. Let’s call it “pajamafication.”
So a school district nixed Maus from their curriculum, to be replaced by something more “age-appropriate.” IIRC they didn’t cite a specific replacement title, but it will
probably be something like John Boyne’s “The Boy in the Striped Pajamas.”
The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is tailor-made for classroom use. It’s taught at countless schools and it’s squeaky-clean of any of the parent-objectionable material you might find in Maus, Night, or any of the other first-person accounts of the Holocaust.
It’s also a terrible way to teach the Holocaust.
I’m not going to exhaustively enumerate the book’s flaws—others have done so—but I’ll summarize the points that are common to this phenomenon in various contexts.
First, obviously, the context shift. Maus, Night, et al are narrated by actual Jews who were in concentration camps. The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is narrated by a German boy. The Jewish perspective is completely eliminated.
Second, the emphasis on historical innocence. Bruno isn’t antisemitic. He has no idea that anything bad is happening. He happily befriends a Jewish boy with absolutely no prejudice.
Thus we’re reassured that you too, gentle reader, are innocent. You too would have have a childlike lack of prejudice and you too would be such a sweet summer child that you would have no idea the place next door is a death camp.
In Maus, by contrast, the children are not innocent. They are perpetrators of injustice just like adults.
[ID: Picture of part of a page of Maus where children run away yelling “Help! Mommy! A Jew!! - the next panel says “The mothers always told so: ‘Be careful! A Jew will catch you to a bag and eat you!’ …So the taught to their children.”]
Maus also smashes the claim that people just didn’t know what was going on in the camps.
[ID: Picture of part of a page of Maus where a Nazi truck is arriving at Auschwitz guarded by men with sticks and a pointing, growling dog, the boxes say “And we came here to the concentration camp Auschwitz. And we knew that from here we will not come out anymore…” “We knew the stories that they will gas us and throw in the oves. This was 1944… we knew everything. And here we were.”]
Third, nonspecificity. The Boy in the Striped Pajamas turns a specific historical atrocity into a parable about all forms of bigotry and injustice. I’m sure Boyne thinks he’s being very profound. But the actual effect is to blunt and erase the atrocity.
There’s the too-cute-by-half way it avoids terminology: “Off-With,” “the Fury.” Harsh language becomes “He said a nasty word.”
Notice how “it’s a fable” ties in with the goal of eliminating anything parents might object to.
And that’s our fourth point. Bad things can happen, but only abstractly. Someone’s dad disappears. He’s just…gone. How? Who knows. People stand around looking hungry and unhappy and saying “It’s not very nice in here.”
The ending is sad, but it’s sad like a Lifetime movie. It’s sanitized, it’s quick, there are no details, it’s meant to poke that bit of your heart that loves crying.
Maus’s description of the gas chambers, meanwhile…
[ID: Picture of part of a page of Maus where the process of gassing and then taking out the bodies are described in detail as inmates are working. That it took 3 to 30 minutes to gas people. That the largest pile of bodies was by the door. The worker telling the story mentions “We pulled the bodies apart with hooks. Big piles, with the strongest on top, older ones and babies crushed below… often the skulls were smashed…” “Their fingers were broken from trying to climb up the walls… and sometimes their arms were wera as long as their bodies, pulled from the sockets.” Until the narrator says, “Enough!” “I didn’t want to more to hear, but anyway he told me.”]
A historical atrocity can never be a metaphor for all bigotry because the specifics are what makes it an atrocity. The Nazis didn’t just do “bad things, generally,” they did THESE things. And leaving out the details is simply historical erasure.
Finally, fifth: Fiction.
However much poor little Bruno and Schmuel might rend your heartstrings, you can ultimately retreat into the knowledge that they aren’t real and they didn’t really die.
Now, I write historical fiction, and obviously I believe it has a place, in the classroom and out. But no Holocaust education can be complete without nonfiction that teaches about real people who genuinely did experience it.
One of the striking things about Maus is how big the cast is and how few of them survived.
[ID: Picture of part of a page of Maus where one character describes to another many other people who didn’t make it. Eventually covered over in lower panels by pictures of the dead.]
Because it’s a true story, Maus can also explore neglected aspects like the intergenerational trauma, which simply vanish in a pat fictional story that is just finished when you get to the end.
[ID: Picture of part of a page of Maus where the illustrator sits at the drawing desk above the pile of bodies. The artist says: “At least fifteen foreing editions are coming out. I’ve got 4 serious offers to turn my book into a TV special or movie. (I don’t wanna.) In May 1968 my mother killd herself. (She left no note.) Late’y I’ve been feeling depressed.” Someone calls from out of panel, “Alright Mr. Spiegelman… We’re ready to shoot!…”]
Thus, books like The Boy in the Striped Pajamas are not an age-appropriate equivalent way to teach the Holocaust, but a false construction of history.
This ends the first part of the thread. But there’s more…
The Maus incident is not an isolated case. It’s part of a broad trend of replacing the literature used to teach history with more kid-friendly, “appropriate” alternatives.
And outside of the Holocaust, it usually doesn’t meet with much controversy.
It might mean replacing Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave or Solomon Northup’s Twelve Years a
Slave with modern historical fiction, for example.
Wars, the Civil Rights movement, Apartheid: any “icky” part of history can be a target.
But it plays out along the same general lines: Primary sources replaced with modern fiction, victim perspectives replaced with perpetrators, specificity replaced with Star-Bellied Sneetch-style “Why can’t we all just get along?” metaphors.
I think it's pretty telling that I grew up with the type of mother who coddled, smothered, infantilized, and sheltered me to great excess... but she still made sure I learned about the Holocaust from first-hand accounts, documentaries that pulled no punches, and visits to museums that covered the topic.
It's gruesome. It's chilling. It's horrifying. But erasing it because it makes us uncomfortable is not the answer.
If you want to stand up for transgender Canadians, then there's a petition to ask the federal government to repeal the acts signed into law that restrict transgender medical care for transgender youth:
You need only be a resident of Canada, not a citizen to sign. Please help us give transgender youth a fighting chance. Their medical care decisions should be between the handling physician and family only. This isn't a matter for politicians to decide.
dragon who's just a big lizard doing lizard things, but they've lived with birds for way too long, so every now and then, you'll catch them squeak, try to fluff up (tail coils around their body and their head rests on their swirled up neck), and communicate through a variety of squeaks and peeps rather than groans, grunts, or comprehensive vocals.
I'm deeply curious over something with other experiences, so I want to open an opportunity for discussion ⸻ for other fellow alterhumans of any sense, does your identity affect your sense of/reaction to/how you experience love? Platonic, queerplatonic, romantic, it doesn't matter. Whatever you deem as love counts
I have personally been thinking about this topic for a short while, so before I write my own thing, I'd love to hear your own experience
I think it affects how I express my love. Modern human cultures are, by and large, kind of distant and even somewhat cold compared to my impulses for expressing affection. I want to get way too touch-heavy for most people's comfort.
I think it also affects how I react to how others express their love. I really have never understood the attitude that gay people expressing affection for their partners is somehow "gross". It's... it's two beings who love each other. That's beautiful.
i dont think whites understand how being white makes literally everything easier.
it effects everything.
being trans is easier when youre white.
being gay is easier when youre white.
being disabled is easier when youre white.
being a woman is easier when youre white.
being autistic is easier when youre white.
oppression is eased when you are white, as you get extra privileges, and your whiteness is seen as a positive characteristic that in some ways counter-balances your other forms of being a minority. whiteness controls everything.
you are automatically way more innocent in your own oppression as a gay, trans, disabled person because of your whiteness.
It's true and I've seen it with my own eyes. There's privileges that white people don't even realize they have until faced with it not being someone else's normal.
Gender Binary: Ancient Truth or Colonial Invention? An Essay
Most people outside LGBTQAI+ communities insist “everyone knows” there are only two genders. But history tells a different story.
From the Bible to rabbinic texts to global traditions, gender diversity is ancient and the binary is a recent invention.
Note: Intersex is a biological variation, not a gender identity. This essay discusses how ancient texts sometimes treated intersex categories in relation to gender, but my intention is not to conflate the two. What I want to emphasize is that intersex people were historically recognized as normal, accepted members of society.
Full essay under the cut ↓
Cited sources will be linked at the bottom of this essay.
Let's dive right in starting with Biblical sources, as these are the most common sources used to claim that non-binary identities are wrong.
What Does the Bible Really Say About Gender Binary?
Genesis 1:27 is often cited in religious arguments about the validity of non-binary identities. However, was this scripture meant to mean "There are only two genders"?
Bible scholars take a deeper view of this scripture, beyond the English translation. Written thousands of years ago in ancient Hebrew, the passage we read today is only a modern rendering.
When observing the original Hebrew text, we see something interesting: this passage was not meant to show that God created only male and female humans. This passage was meant to show that God created all humans equal. [1, 2, 3]
So, then, where does the Bible touch on gender? Some of my readers may be thinking it already: Eunuchs. They are mentioned 76 times throughout the Bible, and most interestingly they were not necessarily castrated men. The words rendered "eunuch" in English could refer to an official with a trusted position with a ruler, not exclusively someone who had been castrated. [4]
In Matthew's Gospel, Jesus speaks of eunuchs: "For there are eunuchs, that were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, that were made eunuchs by men: and there are eunuchs, that made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake." [5] An examination of the sentence structure of the original Greek text shows us something fascinating: this is an ancient reference to people who we would today call intersex. [6] Jesus doesn't say they're broken, that they need to be fixed, that there's anything questionable at all about them. He just says they exist, and further suggests that being that way is even a boon!
What About Historic Records?
If intersex people are mentioned in the Bible, a book perhaps most famous for its sheer age, then it suggests that people back then were at least aware of circumstances that place a person outside the binary. But how did they treat it? How was it handled day-to-day and legally?
Contrary to modern Western narratives, countless cultures across history have embraced a “third gender” and honored those who lived within it. [7] In India, the concept of hijra has existed in records and cultural norms throughout South Asian history. In South Sulawesi, Indonesia, three genders outside the typical binary are recognized: Calalai, Calabai, and Bissu. The Sakalava people, an indigenous group living in Madagascar, recognize a third gender sekrata. Some Indigenous Americans use the term Two-Spirit to describe a broad "third gender" category and though the term was coined relatively recently (in 1990) the concept it represents stretches back deep into Indigenous American culture and history. [8]
There are historical records that show us that even ancient cultures understood such a concept and made room for it in their societies. Ancient Egypt had sḫt ("sekhet") alongside their terms for male and female. In ancient Mesopotamia, people acknowledged gender as a spectrum, with myths and teachings exploring the concept of people who did not fit neatly into the rigid binary. [9]
In ancient Jewish records, we see that Rabbinic Judaism recognized multiple gender categories as part of legal and religious frameworks. They even include terms for those who technically fit the binary by secondary sex characteristics but do not follow behavioral expectations for their perceived sex. In total, they had six distinct names for different genders and gender expressions, along with one "sub category" that includes castrated males. Androgynous, Ay'lonit, Ish, Ishah, Saris, and Tumtum, along with "Saris Adam" to differentiate someone made sterile rather than being born that way. [10]
So What Happened?
The logical question to ask after exploring these facts is "if ancient humans recognized and accepted multiple genders, why does society today insist on a rigid binary?"
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the answer is complex and covers a tremendous amount of world history. The roots of suppression can be traced to ancient Rome, where law enforced a strict gender binary for inheritance, marriage, and citizenship. Over time, this rigidity seeped into culture and was absorbed by the Christian Church. [11] Here, we can see the earliest seeds of what was to come.
As Christianity grew in power alongside the Roman empire and expanded alongside it, it brought its influence to other nations, other cultures, and said "now you must do things our way." In a word: colonialism. The erasure and assimilation of other cultures by force, the conversion of adherents to other religions, again by force. [12] And so Roman law and Christian belief, entwined ever since, suppressed the expression of gender outside their rigid binary. Failure to comply resulted in punishment, including the legal persecution of gender expression that fell outside the accepted binary. [13]
Once the suppression was in place, it began to influence how people thought about biology. If there are only two genders, then bodies must be "simple", and this was reinforced by budding medical science. Women were classified as a “lesser sex,” [14] but non‑white groups were likewise forced into the “inferior” category. Gendered language erased the depth and breadth of meaning possible in many indigenous languages, and further flattened humanity into "white" and "not white" categories with "not white" being inherently inferior. [15]
Why the Lie Persists
If the gender binary was historically a minority that rose to power, how has it hung on for so many centuries? It's persisted long enough that many people today mistakenly believe that the concept of non-binary gender is a new idea.
Psychologically, people often treat the unfamiliar as dangerous. Instead of seeking understanding, many respond by labeling it a threat.We don't understand it, and instead of trying, the majority of people decide to treat it like a legitimate threat. Moral panics are nothing new, and there's a new one every few years. It's seldom about the actual target of the panic, but about what it represents. [16]
Right now we live in a world that is terrified of the very concept of non-binary gender. Lawmakers, leaders, whole governments, they're all frantically trying to destroy any evidence of this "new idea". [17]
But just what is so scary about gender? Again, it has nothing to do with gender itself and entirely what the movement to (re)normalize non-binary gender represents. And what it represents, to those who are afraid of it and are fighting back, is the perception of loss of power, control, and privilege. [18]
To use a surprisingly old Internet quote: "When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression." [19]
Conclusion
The history of gender is not a story of rigid binaries, but of diversity, recognition, and later suppression. Across cultures and centuries, gender has been understood as fluid and multifaceted. Only in relatively recent history was this richness erased and the binary imposed.
This concept was not only introduced, but enforced, often violently, through colonialism, law, bureaucracy, and even medicine.
What we see today is not a “new movement.” It is the scaffolding of the binary cracking under its own weight. We are rediscovering an ancient truth: human beings cannot be forced into rigid boxes.
The backlash we face now is a fear response from those with the most privilege to lose. To them, equality feels like oppression. But history shows that diversity is natural, enduring.
The gender binary was never an ancient truth; it was a colonial invention. What we are witnessing now is not novelty, but renewal.
Be yourself. Your ancestors are smiling on you.
Citations:
Journal of Gender and Religion in Africa - "Male and Female God Created Them; Man and Woman Man made Them!" Using Genesis 1:26-27 and Genesis 2:20b-23 to understand and dialogue on sexuality and gender complexities within the Church
Lionel Windsor - Male and Female: Equality and Order in Genesis 1:27
Bible Hub - Genesis 1:27
Christianity - What is a Eunuch in the Bible? Definition and Examples
American Standard Version
Megan K. DeFranza, Sex Difference in Christian Theology (Eerdmans, 2015) [Available via academic libraries or Google Books preview]
PBS Independent Lens - A Map of Gender-Diverse Cultures
Britannica - 6 Cultures That Recognize More than Two Genders
Ithy - A Comprehensive History of Third Genders Across Cultures
Shoshana Fendel - Six Sexes of the Talmud
Arc Telos Saint Amour (2025). Decolonizing the History of the Gender Binary. In Fundamental Concepts and Critical Developments in Sex Education edited by Reece M. Malone, Tracie Q Gilbert, Catherine Dukes, Justine Ang Fonte (Routledge, 2025) [abstract available online; full text via academic libraries]
Juanita Elias; Adrienne Roberts, eds. (2018). Handbook on the international political economy of gender. Cheltenham, UK. [available through academic libraries]
UN Human Rights Office - The impact of colonialism in violence and discrimination based on SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity)
PDXScholar – Institutionalizing Femininity: Medicalization in 19th Century Asylums
GLBT Historical Society – Challenging the Gender Binary: Primary Source Set
The Psychology of Us – “Psychology of Moral Panic: Fear, Backlash, and Culture Wars” (2025)
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (2025) – “The New Global Struggle Over Gender, Rights, and Family Values”
UN Women – Women’s Rights in 2025: Hope, Resilience, and the Fight Against Backlash
Quote Investigator – When You’re Accustomed to Privilege, Equality Feels Like Oppression
There was one of those hyperspecific polls that had an option like “your grandfather told you war stories that he never told anyone else” and now I feel like I have to tell the story about how a spider saved my grandpa’s life in WWII and how my family doesn’t kill spiders because we owe our existence to that One Single Spider
So to set the scene, it's the height of WWII in France and my grandpa—a 6'3" 20 year old upper Michigan farm boy—has been separated from his company after their temporary camp was shelled. My grandpa (who, I have to add, was nicknamed 'the Suicide Kid' at this point because he worked in demolitions and bomb interception and kept taking the jobs no one wanted with the expectation that he was never going home anyway) is scared out of his wits, wandering around the French countryside alone. He has to move at night and sleep in barns and sheds during the day to hide from people who most definitely want him dead.
On one of these days, he finds a farmhouse of a very jittery couple who agree to let him sleep in the barn, with the conditions that he sleeps in the barn loft and if he's found, they disavow all knowledge that he was there. He agrees, because he's exhausted and will sleep in a hay pile if he has to. My grandpa manages to fit all six foot three inches of himself into a feed trough stored upstairs and tries to get some sleep.
However, right when he's half-snoozing, he hears motors outside and sure enough, here are some very angry officers of mixed Nazi and Vichy make confronting the couple saying someone up the road spotted an American soldier walking this way. They wouldn't know anything about that, would they? No, of course not.
All the while, my grandpa—now trying to figure out how to either escape the barn unseen or how to fight off six? seven? eight? people at once—freezes up and waits for the inevitable. While he does, a HUGE spider crawls next to his head and onto the loft railing. For one second, he thinks about swatting it away, but that would risk him being seen and killed.
So, instead, he lays there and waits to either fight to the death or get executed in a feed trough. And while he lays there, the spider starts making a huge web on the railing. My grandpa's transfixed by this thing. He watches her go around and around, building a solid web before plopping herself off to one side and waiting for breakfast. At the same time, the officers finally go into the barn.
My grandpa can hear them searching around, turning over crates and checking animal pens. Then, he hears one say to check the loft.
And then another say, "Don't bother. Look at the spiderwebs up there. No one's been there in a while."
And they leave.
Because my grandpa didn't swat the spider away and let her build her web, the officers thought no one was there and left him alone. They drive off and my grandpa immediately thanks the farmer couple and hauls ass out of there as soon as he can.
After this, my grandpa refused to kill any spider, and his kids did the same. Because if it wasn't for her, he wouldn't have lived and would never have had kids or grandkids. So we owe her one.
I disagree with the wording of "cooking is art, baking is science". No, art has far lower stakes than cooking - if you set out to make art, it is simply not possible to fuck up so bad that the end result would not count as art if you're still willing to call it so. It might be ugly as hell and look nothing like what you meant it to be, but art is art nonetheless. However, if you start cooking with the goal of making food to eat, it is entirely possible and actually quite easy to fuck up so bad that the end result does not count as food, as it isn't something you could or should eat.
Cooking is a science: you can, should, and even must fuck around to find out, as even if you end up making something terrible, you have now learned what happens if you do that. You have gained valuable information. And sometimes, you accidentally strike gold and have invented something tasty and awesome.
Baking is religion. You have been told how things must be done, and if you stray from the righteous path that was shown you, you just go to hell. Doesn't matter what it was that you fucked up, you go to hell forever. And if the scriptures that were given to you are somehow incorrect, you go to hell for following them. Fuck you and good luck.
No, user of the internet. You don’t need a slur for someone you disagree with or find mildly annoying. I think you need to take a step back and reconsider how you view violent language like slurs because if you don’t, you’re going to desensitize yourself around the usage of violent language that’s already present in our society.
To you, it may be “name-calling” in a vacuum, but to many a marginalized person, slurs have also been thrown at them or their peers as they were assaulted– or worse– killed in hate crimes.
The concept is not harmless. It was created with harm at its core. They exist to degrade and dehumanize, to bypass the personhood of someone else as if this oppression against them is excusable or “just”. It has always involved treating another like they are not worthy of respect and inalienable rights.
You don’t need a slur for anything.
You’re capable of articulating your feelings without relying on the bullshit that white supremacy has served the world for fucking centuries.
