🇵🇱 ***** *** 🇵🇱

main: @s****j // Michael/Jason, bisexual, male pronouns only // transmed, battleaxe bisexual, exclusionist // fluent in Polish and English

[naotocourse]

transmed source document

hello! i made a transmedicalism source document. i compiled a bunch of sources regarding brain sex/dysphoria as well as some explanations. it’s not 100% complete and i do plan on adding additional sources in the future. if you think i should add any sources, feel free to send me an inbox message or a dm!

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WXAeg42utWNr-3r7LsP3nlbhMWfj9EgP_UOB4JTgWZ8/edit?usp=sharing

please share/spread this around. i think it’d be pretty beneficial to have a compilation of transmed sources, even if i’m sure there are others that exist.

[emo-and-dumb]

Meme Made by My bestie 💖

[trans-wojak]

I need more exclus blogs to follow

Follow me and I’ll follow back if you

you think you need gender dysphoria to be transgender

you think the full acronym is LGBT

you are anti micro labels and MOGAI

you think asexuality is valid but not inherently LGBT by default

Not a TERF.

you feel unwelcome or unsafe in mainstream LGBT spaces because of an influx of trans trenders and bisexual women in heterosexual marriages trying to overcompensate (not saying ur not bi if you’re in a straight relationship, it’s just a common theme for some bi women to overcompensate their “queerness” because they’re in a straight marriage)

I post anime stuff too so totally understand if that bothers you, maybe don’t follow. ^^

[cowardly-bisexual]

just saw a post saying that pointing out that bisexuality includes trans people and not mentioning pansexuals in bisexual posts are “panphobic dogwhistles” and i 

[cowardly-bisexual]

this is also peak pansexual logic because on one hand you’re insisting you’re different enough from bisexuals to warrant a separate label/flag while at the same time absolutely losing your shit if bisexuals don’t include you and cater to you in everything we do

which one is it babe, are you one of us or nah

[chillmeds]

I love the rhetoric of "X is a social construct so it doesn't have to exist and me identifying as [extremely obscure and pointless microlabel] is harmless!"

You are two steps to the left of "age is just s number" and I'm so glad you lack the self-awareness to realize that.

Yeah, of course labels are a social construct, but the experiences they represent and describe are not. They have a defined meaning, no matter if you like it or not.

"Sexual orientation is fluid" sure, but not in the way you're thinking. Two gay men are not going to experience their attraction perfectly exactly identically. That's what the fluidity comes from.

Two bisexuals will describe their attraction differently. One may describe preferences with no gender attached, another may describe both genders with no preferences. That's why it's fluid.

Two trans people of the same gender will not experience being a man or a woman exactly the same as every other trans person of their gender, but the point is their shared experiences.

A "bi lesbian" is a pointless label because you either don't need to describe your attraction to men as a lesbian, or just be bisexual with a preference. It's lesbophobic to imply any lesbian would be attracted to men, and it's biphobic to imply bisexuals would just shift their attraction to be one or the other exclusively. This goes for any and all "bisexual [monosexual]" label. They are redundant at best and actively erasing history at worse. It's reductive to break down your attraction to sexual vs romantic, as if there's a hard line between them, when it's more of a fluid gradient.

Adding all of these labels erases the simplicity of being LGBT. Nobody questioning their orientation or gender needs a billion microlabels in order to find "that perfect fit". It's regressive.

[swords-and-aros]

“Demisexual/romantic is how normal people experience attraction, you’re not special”

That’s our bad, I guess there’s been a misunderstanding

I didn’t realize:

- “love at first sight” is just a joke

- celebrity crushes are a joke

- characters from shows and movies being one’s sexual awakening aren’t actually a thing

- people don’t actually ask their friends to set them up on dates

- everyone had formed a friendship with their current partner months/years before ever viewing them in a romantic light

- the idea of dating someone you’ve been friends for years with is normalized and not viewed as potentially ruining the friendship

- that whole “I’m in love with X, but they don’t even know I exist” thing is made up

- the whole “X changed their look and I find them hot now” is also made up

- flirting with strangers isn’t a thing

- asking out someone you just meant isn’t a thing

- blind dates aren’t a thing

- one night stands are complete fiction

- no one has ever been turned on by a stranger

- “sex sells” is a complete lie, no one really knows why those women are washing those cars in bikinis, it’s a weird choice of clothes

[chillmeds]

You’re missing the point. It’s not about “if it’s real” it’s about if it’s useful. Or helpful.

“I can only date/have sex with someone after I’ve known them for awhile”. Okay, that’s chill, but who are you attracted to? Men? Women? Both? Neither?

What you are describing is a preference. Orientations are about who you’re attracted to, not how. That’s the issue people have with the demi label as a concept.

I didn’t start dating my fiancé until 3 years after we met and were friends. I’m not going to say I’m “demiromantic” because of that. I’m going to say I’m bisexual because gender is inconsequential to me.

Imagine you’re at a convention where everyone has an interest on display; drawing, writing, crafting, they all have different ways of expressing their interests, but they all have a specific interest in mind. When you’re asked “oh, what’s your interest?” And your reply is “I like to write for my interest!” But don’t say what your interest is, or if you have one at all, why are you there?

The same can be said for demi. You’re at a club specifically for LGBT support. “I was in an altercation last night for being with my boyfriend at the bar” says one gay man. “My mother told me I was never going to be allowed to bring a man I’m dating to her house because it’s disgusting” says a bisexual. “Well, I just don’t like how in media everyone is so focused on sex like one night stands, and love at first sight” says you, the demisexual.

Do you see how much of a faux pas that would be in comparison?

Like, actually you’ll find people getting to know each other before dating/having sex is the norm. All of my friends knew their partner at least platonically before they started dating. You are exaggerating how normal people experience attraction to make a point that doesn’t exist.

Is sex overblown in media? Yes, of course, but so are beauty standards. Are you going to say every single celebrity who is the pinnacle of conventional attractiveness is the norm, too?

[emeraldmercury]

90% of the stuff OP is describing is only normal in Hollywood movies and big cities (especially “love at first sight”, it literally only exists in movies).

Hollywood was a mistake.

[cookingwithroxy]

Forget hollywood, the stuff OP describes tends to be limited to high hormones during teenage years, and fiction. And honestly from finishing this list, I’d think that they have very VERY little experience in the real world, period.

- “love at first sight” is just a joke

‘Love at first sight’? That’s you having high hormones. It matches often with ‘first love’ and generally is well known to fade fast and break up messily.

- celebrity crushes are a joke

Celebrity crush? That’s appeal to aesthetics, nothing more.

- characters from shows and movies being one’s sexual awakening aren’t actually a thing

Finding out your sexual orientation by figuring out which specific aesthetic and gender match is a bad thing, apparently. Do you not know your orientation at all, then?

- people don’t actually ask their friends to set them up on dates

That’s not about sex, that’s about anxiety and awkwardness, appealing to others to help you find someone to be with.

- everyone had formed a friendship with their current partner months/years before ever viewing them in a romantic light

Unless you’re picking up people in bars, yes. That’s standard and normal. Do you think people just date the first random person they meet in a grocery store?

Like, I have a friend who knew his fiance for three years before they dated, and they dated for a decade before they got engaged.

- the idea of dating someone you’ve been friends for years with is normalized and not viewed as potentially ruining the friendship

Do you not think that sex and romance changes a relationship? Isn’t that LITERALLY the cornerstone of your entire position, that you have to build to the feelings, and as such a partner feeling a thing where you don’t quite feel it would break that relationship?

- that whole “I’m in love with X, but they don’t even know I exist” thing is made up

Again, this is ‘not everyone feels the same way towards each other’ I mean jesus fuck how lucky has your dating life been that you’ve never developed feelings for someone who failed to reciprocate them towards you instantly?

- the whole “X changed their look and I find them hot now” is also made up

Appeal to aesthetics, which has nothing to do with romance. Again.

- flirting with strangers isn’t a thing

One doesn’t have to have desires towards a person to flirt.

- asking out someone you just meant isn’t a thing

Not for most people. Do you get all your views on life from fiction?

- blind dates aren’t a thing

Do you think people have sex on their first blind date? What the fuck is this even being here? A blind date is literally people going ‘I think you two might be compatible, how about you have dinner together and find out?’

- one night stands are complete fiction

Like, I am probably one of the more sexual people I know. I do sexual RP’s a lot, I have a reasonable to strong libido and I’m openly a pervert and I can say this to you.

I have never, IN MY LIFE, had a one night stand. Fuck, people who constantly have one night stands past college age are considered to be flawed people, because they obviously have difficulty building permanent relationships.

- no one has ever been turned on by a stranger

Appeal to aesthetics. AGAIN. People have been turned on by TREES, it doesn’t mean you have sex with the fucking tree.

- “sex sells” is a complete lie, no one really knows why those women are washing those cars in bikinis, it’s a weird choice of clothes

And again, appeal to aesthetics. Because you don’t have sex with the magazine, or the tv show, or the video game.

[swords-and-aros]

I can’t get through reading this, I don’t know if you purposefully misunderstand things because you get a kick out of trying to anger people or if you’re reading comprehension is that poor

It takes a lot of effort to misunderstand a point this much

[airasilver]

Why the fuck did you reblog from me? Go argue with @cookingwithroxy on her own reblog.

Ra, why do people actually reblog from others and not the ones they’re arguing with?

I got nothing to do with this. I just reblogged the post which isn’t a crime.

[cookingwithroxy]

Because then I’d get notified of their reply, instead of only finding out that they did because you tagged me for this.

And as for OP?

You claimed that a whole host of things, mainly in fiction, must be false, because of the proposal that the boundaries of demisexual are themselves entirely within the norms of the alosexual experience.

My entire response is that most of them are not, in fact, either fully sexual (finding someone attractive does not match to sexual drive, it might contribute but it does not connect one to one) or are not themselves actually existing in reality to the degree you seem to presume that they are.

If your (sarcastic) claim that all those things were in fact real, and linked entirely to sex. That’s what I was countering. If that was not what you meant, then I’m going to have to ask exactly what the fuck you did mean, and exactly where do you think that meaning should have been drawn from. Because if this is a failure of reading comprehension I damn well would love to actually know what the living fuck you ‘really’ meant.

unless of course your entire response is based on my using the general ‘you’ instead of the general ‘they’ for the one about love at first sight, and while that might be my mistake, if that’s so it honest to fuck says more about your failure to read than about my failure to understand.

Then again, I also expect only to get a TL:DR response from OP, because I find so very often that the kind of people who do rants and replies like this don’t actually like being expected to read things as long as what they themselves write.

[perfect-bi-paradise]

Pansexuality can fuck ALL the way off! The fact this label still exists shows how fucking biphobic and transphobic people really are.

[teenagemonster]

the irony of seeing people say "queer people/queer community" to be #inclusive but it makes you feel alienated instead

[teenagemonster]

like as someone who grew up with queer being on the same level as faggot as fun anti gay slurs to throw around, it makes me cringe so bad that it's like becoming the politically correct term to call gay/trans people, that cishets use it constantly, and that instead of people saying like "lesbian actor"/"bisexual musician" etc. they just say queer. it's just really not a fun experience and so tiring when you have absolutely no desire to reclaim it but it's basically forced on you 24/7. and honestly i cant tell if it feels worse coming from cishet people or those who are supposed to be your "fellow gays"

[space-coyote-judal]

Full offense but people who infantalize gay, bi, and trans men and act like they’re all soft smol uwu beans creep me out and erode my faith in humanity. LGBT+ men have just as many different thoughts, feelings, emotions, temperaments, and personalities as other men and to single out LGBT+ men as being soft and pure and unproblematic is unfair to them, the people who interact with them, and men in general. Sexuality does not equal personality and neither does gender, stop pretending otherwise.

[jokeboy-deactivated20260221]

hi gay boys weird lesbians and nobody else

[crazydoodlez]

what about curious pansexuals?

[jokeboy-deactivated20260221]

they're being put down sorry

[femmebisexuelle]

"umh actually you see pansexuality was used in this study from the 60s to describe rats who would fuck anything which means that historically its been "attraction regardless of gender" since longer than bisexuality :)"

[ruimtetijd]

[truanism]

I’ve still yet to see a decent reason why asexuality should be included in LGBT. 

People always want to argue, “well why can’t they be in the lgbt community?” But it’s not the case that every single aspect of human sexuality is “LGBT unless otherwise specified”. You make the claim that asexuals should be included in LGBT, the burden of proof is on you to explain why. 

I think this is the problem with defining LGBT as “everything that’s not heterosexual or cisgender.” LGBT isn’t just about what you’re not, it’s also about what you are. LGBT is based around the concept of historical prejudice and oppression on the basis of same-sex attraction and transsexualism. While asexuals may not be heterosexual, if they don’t experience same sex attraction or are not trans, then I don’t see a reason for inclusion.

[spacious-time-deactivated202108]

AFAB non-binary demigirl: Yeah, I've never felt uncomfortable with being female but I don't like my period or when guys look at my chest. I still like wearing dresses though so I must be a demigirl. I'm okay with any pronoun.

When will y'all realize your describing being cis 😃.

[guerrillatech]

[battlesaxe-deactivated20230322]

going against multi genders is transphobic tho :/ this is just throwing mogai people under the table

mogai is the thing thats transphobic

[shrimpmandan]

Speaking as someone who once identified as a multi-gender (bigender/genderfluid), they are a LOT more harmful to trans people.

I thought I couldn’t be a guy because I had some ‘’feminine’’ mannerisms and interests. I liked dresses and skirts and other things that weren’t traditionally masculine so I thought that meant I couldn’t be a boy. My dysphoria fluctuated on a daily basis/typically only flared up when triggered, which I thought was my gender changing when it wasn’t because that’s not how it works. And hell, I had a friend who went through that too for the *exact same reason* and shut me down when I tried to tell her that what she was experiencing was called just being a fucking person.

MOGAI actively thrives off of and encourages misinformation about what gender dysphoria is like. That’s all there is to it. And this isn’t even touching on about how it’s ableist garbage, which is a whole other tangent.

[cruelfeast]

imagine if you could make a post about being bisexual without the pansexuals showing up in the notes. i thought you were so different from us why are you here

[michael-png]

@listeningboy fun way of saying you're privileged but being trans doesn't slap when you live outside of Canada, the US, the UK, or wherever the fuck you have to live to think having a body that will never truly fit you is in any way desirable. I don't care if "many of us LOVE being trans" (which sounds fucking insulting), the post said that being trans "slaps". You know, in general.