>;3 @polyphonetic - Tumblr Blog

Hello! 💜🔮💕 I'm Kassandra, she/they, 25 ('99). Thai polyam futch dyke wizard girl. I love physics, philosophy, queer culture, being silly, and playing games. I'd describe my sexuality as 20% pan, 80% lesbian / T4T. I'm antiexclusionist and Buddhist. I love getting asks and also DMs from mutuals! Occasionally 18+, so pls no minors.

#kassandra rambles: My silly textposts and thoughts

#my face: Selfies

#denali: Photos of my sweet kitty cat (rest in peace)

#fluff: Animals :)

@erophonemic: Horny / sexwork blog

[Twitter][Bluesky][Soundcloud]

#kassandra rambles #my face #denali #fluff

coolsnake

I need to watch this video every day or I get sick

achillesinhighheels

janicemascarenhass via IG

valtsv

do you think a cemetery angel and a gargoyle could fall in love

valtsv

fantasiona

to draw this was a very impulsive decision

they seem so sad <33

if you think about it, the social contract of the Car largely mirrors antiquated notions of patriarchial chivalry... the Big, Strong Automobile, which inherently has the power to maim and kill, must yield the right of way to the misogynized pedestrian, as a show of the Automobile's power & potential lethality. "ladies first," all in a world where more and more space is carved out day by day for the Automobile... now, contrast this with the locomotive, where all passengers are equal... thus you can see that not having a car is emasculating, having to ride public transportation with other people is emasculating, and women are even derided as being poorer drivers. Men do not like the train because it renders them effectively homosexual; they thrive on the upper end of inequality and feel like nothing without it. Taking the train is essentially lesbian frotting

probskay

Wouldn’t being AMAB will still matter to doctors even after bottom surgery, say, if there’s something up with the prostate? Wouldn’t they need to know you were amab to know, like, risks for certain cancers, or how much medication to give you (because amabs and afabs can need different doses) etc ???

Women who have had vaginoplasty still use their prostate. The prostate is used in functions related to production of ejaculate, which both men and women produce in different forms. When a woman gets vaginoplasty, the prostate's function is adapted to producing lubricant in the vagina. Women who were born with a vagina have skene's glands instead of a prostate, which is how they produce their lubricants. This is why natal vaginas tend to produce more lubricant than neovaginas, as the glands were specialised for slightly different roles in the reproductive organs.

A good doctor should be able to hear you say "I have had vaginoplasty" and do their research to understand these processes and how your medical treatment should differ from a woman with a natal vagina.

To your point regarding medications: dosage differences between people who are on testosterone and people who are on estrogen are not decided based on a label applied at birth, but rather based on understandings of how those hormones will affect their systems internally.

Sometimes this is a justified decision, as someone with testosterone in their system will react differently to a medication that someone with estrogen. However, sometimes this is a decision based on certain biases and preconceived notions that may lead to a person receiving improper doses of medicine. If you are prescribed a medication that may interact with your hormones in a particular way, it would be responsible for a doctor to request a blood test to check your hormone levels and ensure the medication is safe, which can be done without ever needing to state your assigned gender at birth.

Ultimately, disclosing the actual genitals you currently have, any intersex conditions you have (if you even know you have one), and any surgeries you have received to alter your genitals are more informative and useful to a doctor than simply stating that someone several decades ago assumed you fit into a specific societal role and body type. If you provide a doctor with that information and they ask "but what gender were you assigned at birth?" they are asking for a redundant piece of information they feel they need based on either outdated understandings of gender or are acting on a need to affirm a specific bias they have.

Not once have I ever discussed with my doctor the gender I was assigned at birth, whereas I have had multiple discussions with her about my genitals and my breasts. No trans person I know and have discussed medical experiences with, masc or fem, who regularly sees a doctor has been asked to disclose their gender assigned at birth to that doctor. It isn't useful medical information

probskay

Also, I have an English degree, so let me ask a question in return about the use of your language: when you say "amabs and afabs," what are you pluralising? "Assigned males at birth" or "assigned male at births?" I made the assumption that you meant people with one set of genitals against another, and simply pluralised the acronym as a shorthand for that idea.

However, we must remember that amab and afab are acronyms, and specifically are acronyms that have referred to an event that has occurred in the past. An acronym like POW makes sense to pluralise, as the plural version of "prisoner of war" is "prisoners of war." CD goes from "compact disc" to "compact discs." Hell, even LASER goes from "light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation" to "lights amplification by stimulated emission of radiation." There are clear nouns in these acronyms to pluralise.

The acronyms associated with assigned genders at birth are used to describe an action that occurred in the past, the assignment of gender, and not a noun that is used today.

What you refer to as "afabs" would be more accurate to call cis women and trans men, or people who were born with natal vaginas. It is longer to type and more words, yes, but it describes what you're actually talking about more accurately rather than simply trying to boil people down to genitalia they may or may not have been born with. In fact, if boiling people down to their genitals is necessary for some scientific classification or study, then simply "subjects with vaginas" and "subjects with penises" would more accurately describe the individuals you are classifying, and that matters immensely when writing scientific papers.

#i am wholeheartedly against boiling people down to their genitals