disgusting cockroach

》《🪳⚠️❗️PRIMARILY A VENT BLOG❗️⚠️🪳》《 》《This blog will contain posts about MY struggles with mental health, self harm, emotions, coping, and life issues in general! 》《 》《This blog is not one you should follow for the !few! posts i put in main tags, it will NOT be enjoyable to follow this blog! It's your choice to follow this blog though, i will not stop you, but you do so at your own risk. 》《 》《 Do not send me asks or messages or comment on my posts and ask how i'm doing or try to help me, i will not answer anything. This is a hard boundary i'm setting and if you cross it more than once i will have to block you. 》《 》《 DNI if you are anti-recovery, especially if you are anti-recovery for ED and SH. I am not always going to speak about these things in a healthy way, i have a low sense of self worth. I'm still pro recovery even if i don't always think that i deserve it for myself. 》《 》《 whatever. cockroach attack 🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳

[the-black-day]

Hey thanks for enjoying some of the posts i made but to anyone who follows or wants to follow me; this is primarily a vent blog. This is a blog where i post vent posts, and it will mainly just be vent posts. You are free to interact but please keep in mind that this blog is a vent blog, and even if i might post some deeoer thoughtful posts, or shitposts, that is not the main purpose of this blog. The main point of this blog is for me to cry and write about my urges to self harm, or how i had a bad day, or about how mad i am about something someone said to me. This blog will not be very fun to follow, and most of the time will not have anything useful posted to it either.

I sometimes post or reblog other things here, usually to have very easy access to it, but again, most of this blog will be depressed whining.

Like you can choose to still follow but it will probably not be fun or useful in any way, it might be better to just reblog my posts that pop up in tags, which is usually also the posts that people think are worth reblogging and that people follow me for. The other posts will more than likely be me crying about something though.

[zetsubonna]

I feel like “addiction” needs to be added to the shelf of things people can’t use anymore because they aren’t using it correctly.

[zetsubonna]

”Dopamine addiction” you mean “reward seeking”

“AI addiction” you mean “self destructive antisocial behavior enabled by predatory technology”

“Porn addiction” you mean “internalized sexual shame and desensitization”

“Sex addiction” you mean “self destructive promiscuity”

“Addiction” is a clinical fucking disease. These people are not diseased, by and large. Some of them are experiencing/committing maladaptive behaviors and trying to absolve themselves of responsibility for their actions. Some of them are just existing in an evolutionarily explicable way, but our Puritanical/Calvinist society thinks they should be ashamed for ever experiencing pleasure or gratification at all rather than sacrificing every scrap of enjoyment they can claw out of life and suffering all the time because humans are tainted by sin and have to do penance for living.

I’m taking that word away and putting it on the top fucking shelf.

[the-haiku-bot]

I’m taking that word

away and putting it on

the top fucking shelf.

Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.

[hyperlexichypatia]

"Dopamine addiction" you mean "Doing what makes you happy."

"AI addiction" you mean "Over-reliance on a dubious source of information."

"Porn addiction" you mean "Enjoying media that some arbitrary authority considers too erotic."

"Sex addiction" you mean "Choosing to have sex more frequently or with more partners than is considered normal in a sex-negative, monogonormative society," unless what you mean is "Cheating on a partner to whom one promised exclusivity, the problem with which is the lying, not the sex."

We don't need to replace the "addiction" framemwork with a different framework of pathologization; we need to reject pathologization frameworks entirely.

[genderkoolaid]

transmasculine erasure is a part of trans genocide. its not passive or ignorable, but fundamental to transphobic violence.

[genderkoolaid]

transmasculine erasure includes:

ignoring and obscuring transmasculine history, such as by refusing to acknowledge real or potential transness and insisting that transmascs did not exist until recently, or that transmascs have not added much to (trans) history

disqualifying transmasculine people's experiences with their identities, deciding that they cannot be trusted and require outside guidance/explanation

physical and emotional violence towards transmasculine people with the intent to either kill them or force them to detransition

misgendering and deadnaming transmasculine victims of violence as women in police reports and the news

only acknowledging a very specific type of transmasculine person, and treating anyone who does not fit into this mold as a faker or an outlier

treating transmasculine people as if they are identical to cis women or cis men, forcing a divide between their transness and their masculinity/manhood and refusing to acknowledge the existence of transmasculinity as it's own concept

all of this aims to eradicate transmasculinity from existence. it is not an accident that we are erased; we are an embarrassment and a threat to the patriarchy and it's control. we are systematically kept from describing our experiences, finding ourselves in culture and history, or being able to assert our transmasculine identities without the permission of others. it's not an accident that our deaths by murder and suicide, our experiences with sexual violence, are folded into violence against (cis) women to erase the way that transmasculinity shaped them. transmasculine erasure is not "getting forgotten sometimes", it is an active part of trans genocide. and when we cannot be erased, we must be punished and "corrected".

[genderkoolaid]

sorry but this is maybe THE most annoying response i see to discussion of anti-transmasculinity and exorsexism in trans spaces.

i hate to use "sides" in this context because things are not that binary and they are not that uniform. but like. i need to fucking remind everyone that one ""side"" created the term transunity specifically to call for less infighting and for transfeminist theory that integrates all kinds of trans experiences, and the ""other side"" immediately began insisting the people behind it must hate trans women.

its so fucking infuriating. like jesus fucking christ you do not need to condescend to us about how this infighting shit is gonna get people killed!!!!! WE KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! & its ESPECIALLY fucking gross when you type this shit on a post about intercommunity bigotry, as if the people being anti-transmasc or exorsexist and the people talking about how that is bad are equally contributing to infighting.

this discourse is not actually pointless or meaningless i'm sorry. there is real shit, real rotten fetid wounds in our community, that we have never properly addressed (& that goes for the anti-transmasculinity, the exorsexism, the transmisogyny, the biphobia, the misogyny, the aphobia, the racism, the classism, everything). we cannot just "stop fighting" because the REASON there is so much fighting is because people - bi people, aspec people, transmascs & nonbinary people, queer people of color - keep saying "hey this shit is hurting us, can we talk about it & stop doing it?" and then other people react to that like its a personal attack on them to have somebody question their emotional support lateral violence. and then because the internet is built to incentivize outrage over productive solutions & meaningful community-building, it becomes something huge and messy and shitty, and the core problem struggles to ever get actually properly addressed.

most of the time, at best, you get what happened post-ace discourse, where the community goes "fine okay the A can stay" but never actually grapples with the acephobia and arophobia or amatonormativity, never grapples with the extent of the hostility towards aspec people, and everyone just pretends it was silly terminally online teen arguments that had nothing to do with real life, and we return to a slightly modified status quo. and that is not fucking improvement.

don't come onto posts about transandrophobia, written from a transunitist perspective, castigating people about "you need to be united" that is literally. what we have been trying to say. for multiple years. if you zoom out it has been a major thread of conflict in the queer community for decades, fucking decades, without a true resolution.

[genderkoolaid]

i did not realize Monet X Change was also nonbinary (she/her in drag, she/him out of drag)!!!!!! if god hates genderqueers why do we keep winning

& his drag sibling Bob the Drag Queen (she/her/him/his) is nonbinary, and their drag mother Honey Davenport (she/her in drag they/them out of it) is nonbinary.... this is why i don't like people always drawing a strict binary between "trans women" and "binary cis men who are gnc/crossdressers/drag queens." i hate the erasure of nonbinary/genderqueer/tgnc people who are seen as male. the world is so much more beautiful when you start assuming every person you see could potentially be nb/gq/tgnc & recognizing the ones who actually are

[feminist-space]

[feminist-space]

[feminist-space]

[parsio]

Interesting how the first article link’s title named him the restaurant owner and referred to Thy Mitchell only as his wife.

The next article credits her as a restaurateur. That all should have been easily verifiable and uncontentious information.

[humphreybogie]

It's so fucking infuriating that Trump can make a post comparing transgender people to domestic terrorists and say "we will find you and we will kill you" (verbatim) and aaaaall the news articles in the entire world are busy debating whether he REALLY meant to say that or if its being taken out of CONTEXT or if it can LEGALLY be CONSTRUED as a threat. And meanwhile our actual sisters are being murdered in real time for the crime of *checks notes* doing laundry in public. When will these chucklefucks wake up and realize you're wasting time debating his intentions and all the while the only thing he gives a shit about is whether his most loyal worshippers realize he's just greenlit our public genocide?

[the-black-day]

"Errm he didnt say that he will kill the trans people" im sorry but how is classifying 'pro transgenderism' as a terrorist organization/ideology and then saying that he will kill all the terrorists NOT a direct threat saying that he wants to have the trans people killed?? Please believe your trans siblings when they say that this is a very clear way of threatening trans people.

[shrimpmasc]

how being transmasc feels when you don’t have a radfem in your ear saying you’re a traitor to feminism

[myirlnameiscloud]

B-but people with micropenises are my emotional support minority to bully!! 🥺🥺 B-but it's funny that their penises are small!! 🥺🥺 B-but I only make fun of BAD people by calling their penises small!! 🥺🥺 I have good reason to make fun of people with micropenises!! 🥺🥺 It's not intersexism if it's funny!! 🥺🥺 It's sooo funny because their penises are small!! 🥺🥺 Guys it's sooo funny come on!! 🥺🥺

[myirlnameiscloud]

Aaand here's some of the lovely comments under this post:

I think I hate tumblr.

Anyways BLOCKED!!!

[genderkoolaid]

There is no feminist way to participate in toxic masculinity, and mocking people for having fragile masculinity is toxic masculinity, point blank period. Its fundamentally patriarchal.

The idea that "having fragile masculinity" is inherently a personality defect or moral failing is patriarchal. So much of this kind of bullshit is people taking fundamentally patriarchal ideas of manhood (for example, that men being vulnerable is a defect or moral failing) and defining it around slightly more feminist values.

Like, the only thing that is different from bog standard patriarchy here is the inclusion of "macho." But like, the idea that there are "fragile" men who fail to be "real men" with unshakeable firm masculinity, and they also secretly have small penises and are biologically less manly compared to "real men" whose real manhood can be located in their large penises... babe that's just toxic masculinity. The same "macho" shit you hate those men for, you yourself engage in, just a little to the left.

Fragile masculinity is not a moral failing, and it doesn't intrinsically make someone a worse person. And tbh I think talking about "fragile masculinity" like this is kind of disgustingly individualistic, and doesn't do much to encourage conversation about how patriarchy constructs manhood and masculinity as tools of control and oppression (what some feminists might call misandry).

[genderkoolaid]

also the thing about "we need to focus on the people most vulnerable, and transmascs may be vulnerable but not more than trans women!" is that it doesn't consider transmasc erasure as an active force.

its a take from the perspective that trans men are "vulnerable" is some vague abstract generalized way, not in a way which would behoove anyone to adjust their behavior or take action on their behalf. its the erasure of erasure; the assumption is that trans men probably have enough resources and support anyways, which could not be farther from the truth. some local communities may have more transmasc-focused resources, but many others do not. transmasculine people are left out of vital conversations, are excluded from vital resources, are ignored and forgotten when they are abused and killed.

it treats transmasc erasure as something which is passive in itself and which can be solved passively. which is erasure itself in action. i do not really give a fuck about "who has it worse," it is not about that. it is about the fact that if YOU do not make an ACTIVE EFFORT to advocate for transmascs, to make transmasc suffering and oppression visible and legible, it will not happen. it simply will not happen.

erasure is an active force. we all internalize transmasculine erasure and we can all easily contribute to it; we are expected to contribute to it. trans men&mascs cannot afford the model of "well we only need to raise awareness for the most vulnerable" because our vulnerability is defined by being ignored.

this is why unlearning anti transmasculinity has to start from (un)learning erasure. once you start to see it as an active force/tool of the patriarchy you realize it is the lynchpin that holds so much (especially intercommunity) anti-transmasculinity together. transmaculine absence is so normalized people experience our presence as an intrusion, and people genuinely do not understand why we would ever need to be more visible than we are. it is fucking everywhere.

[the-black-day]

"Man if one more peson says 'dont use certain brands because they support x thing' and are an american i will explode. Like no shit you americans have so many different brands for the same item so you can pick and choose!" Dude you're from western europe, you can ALSO pick and choose between many different brands for the same thing. Just say you don't think that a boycott should inconvenience you at all and own up to the fact that you are just unwilling to change which brands you use and go, dude. Like im sorry but if you cant even be bothered to stop supporting brands that are supporting a whole genocide, especially when those brands are for non-necessities, you are lazy and your moral backbone is weak af.

Like im sorry but you have so many different options for regular groceries like dairy or bread or whatever, you can easily find another one around the same price range and quality, so you could easily switch brands if you found out that your regular brand feeds babies to woodchippers or whatever. You are just lazy af.

Also it's even funnier when the soecific brand you DO bring up actually has a lot of controversies and has faced boycotts before due to their practices, and the people boycotting that product could easily just buy another brand lmao. Again, you are just lazy af and don't even actually care about yout own morals when you cant even be bothered to even try other brands, or god forbid, not buy the product in cases where it's not a necessity.

[ftmtftm]

I see a lot of Tumblr users who don't know their feminist history attributing the fact that women* are "allowed" to be masculine under the patriarchy as some sort of facet of the patriarchy universally accepting masculinity over femininity and that shit pisses me off so bad.

The reason why women* are "allowed" to be masculine when men* "aren't" allowed to be feminine under patriarchy is because DYKES and BUTCHES and other masculine women* SPENT DECADES FIGHTING FOR THEIR RIGHTS TO EXIST PUBLICLY.

The fact that women* can wear pants and suits etc. and are not constantly forced to be hyper feminine/in adherence with strict gendered dress codes without punishment (AND ONLY IN SOME COUNTRIES!) is a win on behalf of feminist political action NOT because of some baseline acceptance of masculinity in everybody by the patriarchy.

(*and people forcibly socially classed as women and men)

Like oh my lord some of you need to shut the fuck up and learn what it was like to be socially classed as a woman before the sexual revolution and what it continues to be like outside of the imperial core.

You are reaping the benefits of the activists who have come before you but because you do not know your history you are treating it like the boons of the oppressor classes and you are blind for it.

[mantis-lizbian]

this implies drag queens and male transvestites never fought for their corresponding rights. if that's not the argument you want to make, then maybe we can put some thought into why one direction might have been more successful than the other? 🤔

no one is denying the existence of oppositional sexism, but your analysis seems to suggest that only one form of oppression can ever apply to any given issue at a time.

[ftmtftm]

that's a whole brand new bad faith sentence that you made up in your head

[mantis-lizbian]

look, maybe you didn't mean it this way, but i've been seeing a lot of very similar arguments being made lately in order to deny the applicability of certain intersectional forms of analysis to certain demographics.

again, maybe you weren't thinking about those arguments when you wrote this and were simply intending to give a round of applause to the feminist movements of the 20th century for an oft overlooked or downplayed win, and if that is the case, then agreed. it was a very important accomplishment.

however, at the present time, we've got some very charged and harmful rhetoric going around that use pretty much the exact same framing you used here with the exact same blindspots, and so i figured i'd do you and your audience the kindness of making sure the implications of your omissions didn't go unnoticed.

sometimes a whole brand new sentence needs to be said when you leave out part of the story.

[ftmtftm]

I was literally doing none of those things actually, and you made a bad faith assumption about what I meant.

I made this post because I have seen the, frankly, anti-feminist anti-butch argument that "masculinity is inherently accepted by the Patriarchy, even in women and people assigned female, whereas femininity is always inherently punished by the patriarchy in everyone of every gender identity" go around this website for awhile now. The argument that regularly gets brought up in favor of that misconception is the fact that women* (and people classed as women) are allowed to dress "masculine" whereas men* (and people classed as men) are always punished for dressing "feminine" — and this is simply false in both cases.

This post has nothing to do with drag queens and male transvestites fighting for their own rights to exist as gnc people, and everything to do with the fact that one very specific feminist success and the lack of education around it has led a lot of under-educated people to believe that one form of gender non-conformity is accepted by the Patriarchy when another isn't - when that's literally just lie actually.

This is a post about the history of masc activism being erased and ahistorically treated like a facet of the Patriarchy.

Your "kindness" is rooted in a lot of bad faith assumptions and is not appreciated.

[mantis-lizbian]

huh. maybe you didn't see that "scone butch" is my blog title. fun fact, it was butches who first welcomed me into the queer community. they were my introductory education into queer theory and queer history. i am, myself, an butch.

so, i've looked through your blog some now, and it seems that when taking this post in the context of many of your other posts, it seems my suspicions were, in fact, right on the money about the dogwhistles i was hearing. anyway.

is my masculinity always an asset? fuck no. a central tenant to intersectionality is pointing out how conditional pretty much every privilege and oppression can be, but it acknowledges this complexity in order to build a more robust way to talk about patriarchy and other systems of oppression.

and at the end of the day, if i know nothing else about the place i'm going and want to ensure my smoothest interactions with people there? i'm going with the vest and Oxford shirt or the tank top and jacket rather than the flowery blouse.

and while yes, it took a lot of fighting to get even here, you can't tell this story without also asking why men in dresses are still largely met with ridicule by most of society. was it because the equivalent fight wasn't fought? or was it because patriarchy is more amenable to people seeking or emulating masculinity than people rejecting it?

are there situations where masculinity is punished or at least not rewarded? absolutely. as a butch, i know how slim the dating market is for us, doubly so being butch4butch. but does that mean that i can't also acknowledge that, on average, i actually have an easier time with it than most gay men who'd like to wear dresses as often as i wear vests? of course not.

[ftmtftm]

"Or was it because patriarchy is more amenable to people seeking or emulating masculinity rather than people rejecting it?"

NO IT ISN'T. IT LITERALLY ISN'T.

And that's a fucked up thing to try to imply to someone who was correctively assaulted for just verbally expressing the desire to present more masculine.

You are actively denying the lived realities of people just because you haven't personally experienced it and that's a terrible thing to do to other trans people.

"The dating market as a butch" — people are still harassed and assaulted and murdered for being gnc masc people globally, like be so fucking fr right now.

[ftmtftm]

Apparently it's oppositional sexism when people classed as women and girls (which inherently includes trans women because I get accused of saying shit I'm not) are violently corrected for expressing masculinity. And not just like. sexist Patriarchal coercion.

This bullshit is exactly why I made the original post in the first place. This is what happens when someone's only exposure to intersectional analysis is a game of telephone on Tumblr about misconceptions of some bullshit Julia Serano wrote 20 years ago.

[riv3rboychaos]

ya sure about that?

all of these people claim that transandrophobia isnt real, and claim that trans men aren't oppressed / are less oppressed than trans women (and cis women apparently???)

[riv3rboychaos]

oh yeah but sure its "not a way to force non-binary people into boxes" lmao these people keep on contradicting themselves it would be funny to watch if it wasnt so annoying

[transfemme-shelterdog]

A reminder for those who need it

[transfemme-shelterdog]

Why are we telling trans men and transmascs who talk about their problems "Welcome to being a man/being masc" when we wouldn't say the same to a trans woman/fem about "Welcome to being a woman"?

If you wouldn't say:

"Women get raped all the time. Quit whining, welcome to being a woman"

"Women get talked over all the time, welcome to being a woman, now shush"

"Women are paid less all the time, just get a second job like every other woman. Welcome to being a woman"

"Women get cat called all the time. Get used to it and welcome to being a woman"

"Women get groped all the time by strangers and coworkers, welcome to being a woman"

"Oh your spouse hits you? Welcome to being a woman, here's some concealer"

If you wouldn't say any of this, or other similar sentiments to a trans woman/transfem, don't do the same shit in reverse when it comes to trans guys talking about their problems. Don't be dismissive, be supportive.

[kittenscratches]

This is just. So fucking sad and one of THE most terminally online things I have ever seen, and I've been on the internet for a long time.

Like, sure, it's a "parody" blog, but even if it is joking, it's still spreading vitriol and hate and transmisogyny - even if the "confessions" are meant to be satire. Regardless of intention, its still platforming very real examples of transmisogyny that DO happen to people. Why would anyone want more people to see that, even as a joke? It's just. Sad.

And to add on the fact that the header is one of the transmasc flags and both that and the icon are the exact same of @tmasc-confessions just makes me think that whoever is running this blog saw that transmascs had a supportive space to talk about their issues, and decided they were all raging transmisogynists for doing so. Like that's just so blatantly transphobia. And again, an extremely online reaction as well.

Why don't the people who run that blog actually go and engage in genuine activism? Find places where they can physically put in the work to help trans people. Not create a space online that just invites more hatred, jokingly or not. I don't even want to imagine young transfems and trans women seeing this and going "oh so this is what everyone thinks of me", and that having detrimental effects on them, maybe even pushing them away from transition or finding community. Like it is genuinely not helping anyone. It's just spite and pettiness. It's not activism.

Do better.

[transfemme-shelterdog]

Good God that is so fucking pathetic. Imagine seething so hard about transmascs sharing their experiences that you go and create an account to mock them, pretending to be another account that is know for giving transmascs a place to talk.

To the owner of that account, if you're reading this (and I bet you are), you're a very, very, sad person that is full of unnecessary and misplaced hatred. Do better. Thus bit isn't funny, it's verging on harassment. You're not in the right here.

[velvetvexations]

They said they wanted a transfem to help run their blog. I offered. They were, unsurprisingly, not interested. Sad day for the listen-to-transfems crowd, as always.

[transfemme-shelterdog]

Yeah not a surprise that they didn't want someone who doesn't hate transmascs for the crime of... existing, to run it.