SOA Reblogs

SOA, it/hx/hy/he, NO they/them, NO it&/you&, NO human terms // A blog for all our reblogs. Runs on a queue.

[soa-rebloops]

Hiii. We're SOA, it/its, hx/hxm/hxs, hy/hym(n)/hys, he/him, NO they/them, NO it&/you&, NO human terms.

This blog is to direct all our general reblogs so we can focus more on actually posting on our other blogs.

See @bistrocule for more information about us, such as our several other blogs, and the majority of our reblogs from before this blog :]

Brief tagging system notes, more for us than followers.

For the most part:

name.rbg

-- XX Month 20XX

Relevant topics [plain, no themed tags]

You don't need to tag #queued, but #skipping queue would be nice

If you make sufficient commentary:

name.txt alternative — If your subsystem has a name then use that tag [ex: trick.tatt, deenie.kafe], if you're not part of a named subsystem then use a group tag [ex: bob.mf, ricky.as, onyx.ks]. Only use .txt if you're not part of any kind of grouping

add your group blog's .txt tag if you have one [ex: bistro.txt, wine.txt]

add hydor.txt to all of them

in order of, for example: lordy.mf, -- 13 September 2025, hydor.txt, metal.txt, [topics], [// Commentary //]

[gondorrevealparty]

baseball interviewers will ask "how do you throw the ball so good" and Mariners players will casually drop that they have a headmate who plays the game for them

[grubloved]

like people are just going to keep saying “theyre only queer because they want to be/because it gets them off/because they think it’s fun/because they saw a queer person and thought it sounded like a good idea/etc. theyre gonna keep saying it

and we are going to have to stop desperately scrambling to say noooo, they have to be like that, they have no choice, they wouldn’t be like this if they didnt have to. we HAVE to stop falling all over ourselves assuring straight people and transphobes that we hate being us as much as they hate us being us, that we are suffering and that’s why we deserve this decadence and deviancy. we HAVE to start saying “yeah ok and?”

being queer is a delight. deviant sex makes people really happy. being genderfucky is joyful. queerness CAN actually be an option you can choose, and that doesn’t make it worth less than if you only picked it with a gun to your head, because it is a good option and there are good reasons to pick it.

[elodieunderglass]

“They’re only queer because they want to be” nice! My identity is also self-constructed because I’m a human

[jmtorres]

frankly i hope straight people are straight because they think it’s fun and it makes them happy! the implication that one should not pursue happiness is so frustrating!

[lierdumoa]

Regina George voice: So you admit it! You admit that your homophobic ideology directly opposes the right to liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[mylittleplural]

the future is plural means that somehow, one day, people won’t have to worry about losing friends for coming out as plural. somehow, one day, it will be a common courtesy to ask “who’s fronting?”. somehow, one day, plurality will be demystified, and no one will be expected to prove their plurality to anyone. somehow, one day, people will be called out on their pluralmisia and actually be willing to listen.

the future is plural means that somehow, one day, the world will be a little kinder :)

[dramatic-dolphin]

people are so fucking weird about uncontacted tribes/peoples oh my goddddd you are not making it out of the colonialist mindset

[dramatic-dolphin]

fun fact uncontacted peoples are not ignorant they are fully aware of the "outside world" and are CHOOSING not to have contact because they (rightly) feel it would add no value to their lives and place them in an exploited position. it's voluntary. they are isolated on purpose.

[dramatic-dolphin]

sentinelese people aren't like some ignorant noble savages, or actual savages who are all about warfare and killing (wildly racist take i see very often), they are literally regular ass fucking people who have seen the exploitation of their neighbors (other andamanese people) AND the massive disease outbreaks caused by contact, and decided they want no part in that. they are literally regular people choosing to survive. that's it.

[casuallyplural]

[id: edited xkcd 2501. Stick figure person with ponytail hair says, “Plurality is second nature to us plurals, so it’s easy to forget that the average person probably knows multiple personality disorder got renamed dissociative identity disorder.” Featureless stick figure adds, “And people can be plural without that, of course.” “Of course,” ponytail stick figure replies. Underneath this interaction, there is a caption reading, “Even when they’re trying to compensate for it, experts in anything wildly overestimate the average person’s familiarity with their field.” /id]

[thisisparamisia]

Zoophile vs Teratophilia vs Beastiality

[ID: Zoophile vs Teratophilia vs Beastiality /End ID]

Zoophilia refers to human or otherwise sapient beings who are attracted to/aroused by non-human animals. This comes in an array of subsets, as many zoophiles have specific animals they find attractive/arousing.

A few of the most common subsets of zoophilia are Equinophilia (attraction/arousal towards horses), Aelurophilia (attraction/arousal towards cats), Canophilia (attraction/arousal towards dogs), Entomophilia (attraction/arousal towards insects), and Formicophilia (attraction/arousal towards small animals crawling/nibbling them).

Teratophilia refers to the attraction/arousal towards monsters. Like zoophilia, this comes in an array of subsets, many of which share similarities (or fully overlap) with necrophilia (attraction/arousal towards corpses) and zoophilia. This is because many monsters are undead beings and/or have animalistic characteristics (claws, paws, tails, fangs, venom, fur, scales, tentacles, etc.) For example, a teratophile who is attracted to dragons may also be attracted to dinosaurs, snakes, lizards, or similar such creatures.

People who perform beastiality, on the other hand, are abusing, assaulting, or forcing an animal into a situation that it does not have the ability to consent to on a sapient being's level.

What differentiates zoophilia & teratophilia from beastiality?

[ID: What differentiates zoophilia & teratophilia from beastiality? /End ID.]

Zoophiles and teratophiles are having thoughts/feelings. Thoughts and feelings =/= harmful action. Most zoophiles and teratophiles use outlets such fiction, roleplaying with a consenting partner, creating personal vent art, or thought training to redirect their train of thoughts, or a whole other range of activities that do not inflict harm upon others.

Think of it this way - if you have an intrusive thought about breaking someone's neck, does that mean you're going to do it? No, because its an intrusive thought. It doesn't indicate that you're an actually dangerous person.

Additionally, many animal abusers are doing so out of opportunism, rather than attraction/arousal - its the same way that most men who rape men are straight [link.] And even animal abusers who are also zoophiles or teratophiles aren't abusive because of their paraphilias, they are abusive because they have made bad choices.

Paraphilic disorders are skewed towards criminals because the general population rarely seek a diagnosis, and psychologists tend to only test these conditions on criminals who have committed animal-related crimes. Think of it like this - if autism was mainly only tested in criminals, then autism would be known as a "crime condition" too, and be deemed "more common" in criminals than in the general public.

Stigmatization is what prevents the general public from seeking diagnosis. If diagnosed, they are often ostracized, institutionalized, heavily drugged, pushed into conversion therapy (which does not work), and/or put onto anti-androgens to kill their sex drive (which is both stripping them of autonomy and also isn't guaranteed to work, because some of them experience attraction rather than arousal, and killing libido would only kill arousal, not attraction.)

[solarprominence]

I maintain that the best summation of my feminist beliefs are that men and women are not fundamentally different. There are a few quantifiable differences if you average out every woman and every man, but they are not qualitative. And most of them are socially constructed, and would be fixed if we started treating men and women the same. Neither is inherently smarter, neither is inherently kinder, neither is inherently more stoic or stronger or angrier or softer. Everyone is obsessed with the differences between women and men, with finding them and creating them and distancing themselves from the "other half". It's fucked up

[godlessondheimite]

btw. “speaking over” someone as a concept makes sense when it refers to talking loudly over someone who’s physically speaking to prevent them from being heard, or cutting them off in a timed discussion and preventing them from getting their message out. not, like, contributing some written text in a completely turns-based and infinite medium where everyone is free to read and contribute at their leisure. even if the person doesn’t agree with what you’re saying.

[fairygoulish]

You can tell a girl is ready for sex if you throw her against the wall and she sticks like a spaghetti noodle

[r3mvs2695-deactivated20260303]

I made proship ponies!!!

Proship: 🍖🌈

Darkship: 🎱🎀

Comship: 🌸🌙

Profic:🍋🕊

They're basic, but i tried!! :3

[proship-shuujuu]

"i'm a recovering proshipper."

so you're recovering from having reasonable stances on fiction? you're recovering from minding your business? you're recovering from having a good grasp on fiction and reality? you're recovering into harassing people? you're recovering into supporting censorship? you're recovering into a puritan?

you're not "recovering" from anything, you're regressing.

[proship-shuujuu]

question for all the antishippers out there who claim that "fictional csam is still csam":

what child is being abused?

[syscord-out-of-context]

@soa-rebloops

[Image ID: A screenshot of a YouTube comment by jimjohnson394 that says "Caulk is meant to be injected into holes, not rubbed on the outside. You need penetration for your caulk to be effective." END ID]

[dakota-wuz-heer]

so I wore my tail to school today

things were going great until this guy came up to me during lunch and tugged on it, but that's to be expected

he left and I carried on, but then he came back and tugged on it again and this time the chain snapped and he walked away laughing, but that's not what this post is about

this post is about how everyone around me reacted

my bff from across the hall immediately came over to check on me, along with someone I didn't know who was probably her friend

this group of two other people also came over and told me how uncool he was, and actually sniffed him out and confronted him

My bff and her friend were with me the whole time talking to me and assuring me and whatnot

meanwhile while the whole thing was going down my other bestie was repairing the tail,both the chain and clasp, which had broken due to me pulling it off in a fret

it can be scary to be so open, so vulnerable. People will judge you, they'll grab at you, bark at you, try to humiliate you. But the world can also be good. People I've never even seen before or interacted with or even cared about came to my aid, my defense. Out of all the people who saw me today, at a giant school like mine, only two people openly tried "attacking" me, and a great handful openly defended me, protected me, and helped me, and all the rest of the hundred of students who didn't care, who saw my tail and never said anything, never felt threatened by me.

This loving community we've built ourselves is bigger than we realize, there are more people on your side than you'll ever know. It's ok to be confident, it will pay off, I promise. Even after this minor inconvenience, even after I've been touched and barked and meowed at and had my personal belongings broken, this has been one of the best days ever, because this was the day when I realized I'm not alone.

[wolpatinga]

Wait, I don't get it, what's the difference between dissociative disorders and IFS? I thought it wasn't normal for presences that are not you to have their own beliefs and voice and emotions and sometimes take control of you but if I understand it correctly isn't that just what IFS is? So if I'm getting it right having parts that want to do their own thing that contradicts all the things you want to do and be is something instinctual that people force themselves to unlearn, in which case I don't think I quite get the difference between singlets and systems? Like aren't all systems just...people who are good at IFS?

ding ding ding, we have a winner

prefacing this with - i am not a therapist. i am a DID diagnosed system who has been undergoing IFS therapy

IFS is a therapy style that originated with a therapist trying to treat a singlet with an eating disorder. it wasn't a case of this being an entirely separate personality, or a case of her blacking out and this part piloting the body. the therapist had tried everything he could think of to help her remain mindful and not give in to the eating disorder

the man mainly worked in family therapy, which is about mediating conversations between different people and helping them find a solution that works for everyone present. out of curiosity, he started treating the situation like family therapy, and started talking to the part of that patient who needed the eating disorder. by identifying that there is some part of the patient who liked some of the effects of the eating disorder, speaking to that part directly allowed the therapist, the patient, and the part to find a way to give that part a better outlet for those concerns

IFS is a tool specifically designed to help singlets who have other disorders identify that they have parts who are trying to protect them

a part with an eating disorder might see itself as protecting the Self from other people's judgements

a part with an anger disorder might be trying to defend the Self from betrayal

a part with extreme depression might be bottled up emotions Self won't let itself touch so it can function in society

a part with a substance abuse disorder is trying to help Self avoid pain

its normal for singlets to behave in ways they know aren't the way they want to behave ideally. a singlet is someone who, most of the time, can function as one singular identity. IFS steps in when that singlet finds themself with some behavior they dislike and can't shake, and helps them narrow down why they're doing what they're doing

according to the IFS model, everyone starts out as a system, many fragments of identities and thought patterns and behavioral patterns. a baby has no concept of a singular identity. throughout childhood, the kid learns more about themself and most thought patterns fuse together into a singular identity

a dissociative system is a single body that experienced circumstances that didn't allow those parts to fuse together, or circumstances to force those parts back apart. the way that somebody lived was too disruptive and fluctuating for that somebody to handle as a single person, so multiple identities grew up alongside one another and became a system

the only difference between a singlet and a dissociative system is that the singlet believes it only has one set of thought patterns and beliefs. for a vast majority of the population, that's all someone needs

however, IFS therapy has been given to scores of singlets, and they come out of it as endogenic systems. there are no memory gaps for them, but these singlets in IFS generally become endogenic systems. they don't seem to come into plural communities, probably because they don't really consider themselves to be proper systems. however, ive read transcripts of singlets' sessions in IFS, and i believe they undergo endogenic syscovery

i don't believe in clinging to disorders and their definitions. a disorder is a type of behavior that researchers have encountered frequently enough that they want to warn therapists that these behaviors exist and guide them in how to help somebodies with those disorders

imagine you have people exploring a jungle. you have a group that's been walking thru the jungle for years, and a group that is preparing to go into the jungle for the first time. the experienced group made a book for the new people, and it identified broad categories of animals they will see. "this is a frog, its a small slimy animal that jumps around and has a long tongue" "this is a panther, it is a large furry animal with sharp teeth and roars", etc etc. the new people go into the jungle and encounter a salamander and a tiger. the salamander is similar to the frog, but it isnt a frog. the tiger is similar to the panther, but it isnt a panther. however, because those animals are similar enough to what the experienced group described, the new people know how to interact with the salamander and the tiger

this is what the DSM is. it's not a definitive list of every type of disorder a person will ever encounter, its guidelines for therapists to identify what their patients are experiencing, or similar things to what that patient experiences, and to guide therapists on types of treatments that might help the patient

when i started IFS therapy, my therapist told me that because i had already identified that i am part of a system, we can skip step one of IFS, which is learning what a system is. the second step is identifying parts, which went a lot faster for us because we had already started to track altera. the later steps of IFS are focused on getting these parts to talk to one another, which is different for dissociative systems, because cofronting might not be easy

the post that sparked that rant was saying that "because hyde was created by a potion, jekyll and hyde can't be a system". however, i believe a system is about what the end result looks like, not about the circumstances under which the system syscovered. jekyll in the book says he identified a long time ago that he had multiple parts of himself, and that the potion helped him give hyde an easier time coming to front. that sounds like a system to me

or that show severence, where people undergo brain surgery to become a system. those parts of themselves, the happy leader, the zealot, the diligent worker, the rebel, they existed in those people before the surgery. they just didn't need or couldn't find those parts because of the life they lead. they became systems and those other parts of themselves became people in and of themselves. an outie choosing not to let that innie have the ability to front anymore feels like murder to an innie

the only difference between a singlet and someone with a disorder is when the system with a disorder isn't able to function well in the environment they are in, because the circumstances that caused them to form borders between these parts are no longer present in their lives. a person who experiences abuse and develops alters to cope with that abuse only becomes disorderly when that person is removed from the abusive situation

disorder means "the current setup isnt working". dissociation is a disorder when it prevents the person from living a life they and the people around them enjoy. its the same thing with OCD or narcissism or low-empathy, etc. its only a disorder when the behaviors keep that person from experiencing a life they can enjoy, or cause them to directly impact others

being a system isnt necessarily a disorder. being a system isnt some magical prexisting thing that we discovered that a person only experiences when they go through a specific set of circumstances. the world we live in is extremely complex, and many people find it comforting to have multiple parts who each excel in navigating the world in different ways

the game disco elysium did an excellent job representing this. the main character is a system with 26 parts and a Self (host). the Self is able to converse with different parts to decide how the body will interact with the outside world. harry is much closer to the type of system people become under IFS, than the type of system i am part of. the difference is that harry has a concept of Self. he has one singular identity that he uses to make decisions on which parts can be listened to at any given point. we don't have a host. we don't have a singular identity

im not going to police other systems and how they structure things. i am, however, going to defend everybody's capacity to contain multitudes. i think a lot of issues come up when people are too afraid to let themselves be contradictory or have multiple ways they want to be. i think a lot of people would be happier if they could admit that

everyone become more plural now

[werethropy]

"The nonbinary afab who goes by she/her, dresses femininely, and uses a push-up bra when I—" when you what? What's wrong with her?

Is she not nonbinary enough for you? Is the way she experiences her queerness and how she presents not perfect enough for you? Nonbinary people don't owe you androgyny, right? So why is she the exception? Why does she have to hate herself to appeal to your standards? Why is she any less trans—any less worthy of respect—cause it's "not visible"? Queer solidarity my ass. Don't spout this bullshit on Pride, man.

[transfemgabriellamontez]

This, but also for enby amabs going by he/him and with hairy chests and beards

[frustratedasatruar]