Ananke

Adult — Intersex — POC

[tracheaxe]

Hi, I’m Ananke. I’m 20 years old. I’m intersex, transfem and asian. Pronouns used are *exclusively* shi/hir. Do not use they/them on me I will stab you.

I am diagnosed with ASPD and SzPD. This is not a way to tell people: “Hey, I’m evil, so watch out.” But I have no empathy and expecting it from my posts wouldn’t help anyone. I will most likely post about my experiences with certain parts of my disorders.

I have DID. I was diagnosed in my late teens. Worth adding that I do not owe anyone the proof for these disorders and quite frankly y’all are freaks for expecting people to do that. I will not post about alters, their names, behaviours, but I am opinionated about it. Posts about DID can be expected.

I’m a leftist. I hate terfs, radfems, and any sort of bio-essentialist adjacent bullshit. I might post politically charged takes. Worth adding; I laughed at Charlie Kirk’s death and if you sympathized with him you’re probably not in the right place.

This is a personal blog, without any sort of theme. Have fun while it lasts <3

Tags under the cut.

#Ananke’s venule — Argumentative, ranting posts. This could be me criticizing/ranting about something, or arguing against it.

#Ananke’s viscera — Posts about my experiences. It could be me being intersex, transfem, disordered, of color, etc.

#Ananke’s cerebrum — Informative posts. This is usually objective and just information I’m sharing without necessarily arguing. But, it could also go along with arguing.

#Ananke’s oculus — Reblogs.

#Ananke’s myocyte — Answering asks in my inbox.

[chaotic-neutral-knitter]

never be good at your job. it's a trap. they'll just give you more and harder stuff to do and it'll pull you away from your true passion of writing gay fanfiction for people on the internet

[tracheaxe]

Actively working to stop the demonization of masculinity in queer communities is essential to protect closeted and/or young trans women. Many of you don't wanna hear it though.

[tracheaxe]

I didn’t want to get into the fight between transmascs and transfems on this site but I wholeheartedly believe both sides are wrong for different reasons and it pisses me off to see an argument where neither side is winning and they’re both wrong. It just rubs me off the wrong way.

I am intersex, and transfem. I have had unique experiences of my own regarding transphobia and intersexism. (I won’t even go into detail about how some trans people use intersex people as some kind of rhetoric to back up their arguments.) I have experienced transmisogyny, I am targeted by transmisogyny.

I don’t want people to call me a “birthday boy” because I disagree with them. I also don’t want people to call me whatever they call transfems they don’t like. If you do, whatever argument you have against me will get ignored.

The most absurd thing in this whole argument is that transfems believe trans men have male privilege. The most absurd thing in this whole argument is that transmascs believe they’re oppressed because they’re transitioning to a more *masculine gender*, not because they’re *transitioning*.

Here’s one thing I have learned: In the social hierarchy, with cis men at the “top” of it, you can only go down. You can only lose privilege, not gain it. You were born a cis woman and now you’re a trans man, you’re still in the same place, just from a different angle. You didn’t go up the ladder. You didn’t gain the male privilege cis men have.

This is essential to understand before I go further into my argument. If you don’t agree, then congratulations, you live in an utopia. If people could gain privilege by just appearing masc it would be easier, for them, at least.

Now, let’s move to the more complex part of it: the “kill all men” movement is an attack on transfems, too. Acting as if masculinity is inherently harmful, “I hate men,” just the way people view male privilege... is an attack on transfems, too. That’s why when I see posts from transfems saying “Trans men are really putting the ‘men’ in ‘trans men,’ huh?” I get really confused.

I haven’t been “socialized” (I hate that word, but I hope this helps explain what I mean) as solely a boy. Being intersex made my experiences unique in a way that’s really hard to understand. But when I joined queer spaces, back when I just thought I was a guy that cross-dressed a few times, all I got in response was that it wasn’t my place. That I don’t get it because I’m a man. That men are cruel, evil, that they rape and murder women and that’s all they do. That I’ve never known oppression.

Toxic masculinity harms men. It harms boys, even if they’re the “privileged” cis straight boys. You might be shy, and you’ll get sexually assaulted because of it. “What, do you not hang out with us because you’re a faggot?” and so, so much more. Oppression is much more than what people identify as. Being transfem, the harm toxic masculinity does is especially obvious to you, but living in it, you must have seen men that weren’t like that, no?

Masculinity doesn’t make you evil. I often think about the boys I dated. They weren’t the type of boys queer spaces talked about. It made me feel alienated, because I didn’t hate masculinity as a whole, I hated how toxic masculinity harmed the men in my life. Me being transfem has nothing to do with this, even if I was cis, this sentiment is still true. Masculinity is not evil.

I dislike transfems that feed into this. I dislike transfems that act as if transmasculine people really are traitors and are moving to the oppressor’s side. That is not at all what’s happening. Feeding into the idea that masculinity is harmful, that it’s only there to silence femininity, that anyone that presents that way is inherently an oppressor, is just straight up objectively wrong.

I get it, we’re hurting. The way people treat us is exhausting. Transmasculine people are not the problem. Can we focus on the amount of cis women that say we don’t get it because we were “socialized” as men? Can we focus on the terfs, on the men that fetishize us, that kill us, instead of transmascs that are just a little annoying? This is not the problem you think it is. Feeding into the idea of despicable masculinity doesn’t just harm transmasculine people it harms us, too. Please stop.

Transmascs are not oppressed because they’re masculine— except for the few instances in which masculinity is viewed as bad, like I just explained, but beyond that, they experience both transphobia and misogyny. It’s just a different kind from transmisogyny that transfeminine people experience. Transmascs are not talking over women when they explain how misogyny impacts them, too. Transmascs are not talking over women when they explain how transphobia impacts them, too. And God, once more, framing transmasc as “evil masculinity that silences femininity” is not the “gotcha” you think it is.

Passing isn’t the privilege people think it is. Okay, great, you look like a man at first. What about intimate relationships? Can you tell your partner you don’t have what they expect you to have? What about making new friends? Do you have to tell them or not? What about jobs? What will they think when they see “F” on your ID? What about healthcare? Will your gynecologist be okay with it? Do you need to change doctors? How much does it cost? What about abortions? Pregnancy laws? And so, so much more. Do you see this? Is this “male privilege”?

This is the oppression transmascs experience. Misogyny, and transphobia. Them being masc is still a problem in queer communities but I believe the misogyny is a larger problem.

But that’s why transmascs and transfems are at each other’s throats. Because transmascs, somehow, believe their being masculine is their biggest problem. “Transandrophobia” somehow implies their oppression is because they’re men, not because they’re trans and biologically targeted by society. Transfems see that, and think, “well that’s stupid.” And end up going into the “masculinity is evil” rabbit hole.

You are both wrong. This argument is idiotic. Thanks for coming to my ted talk.

[tracheaxe]

Okay, I think people are misunderstanding this. Even though I went on a rant about how people perceive masculinity and how it's wrong to perceive it as inherently harmful.

The way people treat masculinity as “betraying women” is not systemic oppression. It is cultural and community oppression. This is something transmasculine people experience.

The demonization of masculinity is something transfems experience, too. And that's why I don’t understand why it’s especially transfems hating on masculinity.

What I meant to say towards the end— is that, probably, transfems perceive transandrophobia as transmascs saying the demonization of masculinity is systemic like transmisogyny is, when... quite frankly, it is not. It is still very harmful, especially when it comes from your own community.

No, masculinity is not rewarded in women. That's not because people demonize masculinity primarily— it is because of misogyny and transphobia. Hope I cleared things up.

Transmasculine people aren’t targeted because people hate the fact they’re masculine, they’re targeted because they’re “not supposed to be” masculine. It is not an attack on masculinity, it’s the fact it’s a “woman” being masculine. It’s transphobia, and misogyny. Not misandry (why is transmisandry a thing?).

[tracheaxe]

I didn’t want to get into the fight between transmascs and transfems on this site but I wholeheartedly believe both sides are wrong for different reasons and it pisses me off to see an argument where neither side is winning and they’re both wrong. It just rubs me off the wrong way.

I am intersex, and transfem. I have had unique experiences of my own regarding transphobia and intersexism. (I won’t even go into detail about how some trans people use intersex people as some kind of rhetoric to back up their arguments.) I have experienced transmisogyny, I am targeted by transmisogyny.

I don’t want people to call me a “birthday boy” because I disagree with them. I also don’t want people to call me whatever they call transfems they don’t like. If you do, whatever argument you have against me will get ignored.

The most absurd thing in this whole argument is that transfems believe trans men have male privilege. The most absurd thing in this whole argument is that transmascs believe they’re oppressed because they’re transitioning to a more *masculine gender*, not because they’re *transitioning*.

Here’s one thing I have learned: In the social hierarchy, with cis men at the “top” of it, you can only go down. You can only lose privilege, not gain it. You were born a cis woman and now you’re a trans man, you’re still in the same place, just from a different angle. You didn’t go up the ladder. You didn’t gain the male privilege cis men have.

This is essential to understand before I go further into my argument. If you don’t agree, then congratulations, you live in an utopia. If people could gain privilege by just appearing masc it would be easier, for them, at least.

Now, let’s move to the more complex part of it: the “kill all men” movement is an attack on transfems, too. Acting as if masculinity is inherently harmful, “I hate men,” just the way people view male privilege... is an attack on transfems, too. That’s why when I see posts from transfems saying “Trans men are really putting the ‘men’ in ‘trans men,’ huh?” I get really confused.

I haven’t been “socialized” (I hate that word, but I hope this helps explain what I mean) as solely a boy. Being intersex made my experiences unique in a way that’s really hard to understand. But when I joined queer spaces, back when I just thought I was a guy that cross-dressed a few times, all I got in response was that it wasn’t my place. That I don’t get it because I’m a man. That men are cruel, evil, that they rape and murder women and that’s all they do. That I’ve never known oppression.

Toxic masculinity harms men. It harms boys, even if they’re the “privileged” cis straight boys. You might be shy, and you’ll get sexually assaulted because of it. “What, do you not hang out with us because you’re a faggot?” and so, so much more. Oppression is much more than what people identify as. Being transfem, the harm toxic masculinity does is especially obvious to you, but living in it, you must have seen men that weren’t like that, no?

Masculinity doesn’t make you evil. I often think about the boys I dated. They weren’t the type of boys queer spaces talked about. It made me feel alienated, because I didn’t hate masculinity as a whole, I hated how toxic masculinity harmed the men in my life. Me being transfem has nothing to do with this, even if I was cis, this sentiment is still true. Masculinity is not evil.

I dislike transfems that feed into this. I dislike transfems that act as if transmasculine people really are traitors and are moving to the oppressor’s side. That is not at all what’s happening. Feeding into the idea that masculinity is harmful, that it’s only there to silence femininity, that anyone that presents that way is inherently an oppressor, is just straight up objectively wrong.

I get it, we’re hurting. The way people treat us is exhausting. Transmasculine people are not the problem. Can we focus on the amount of cis women that say we don’t get it because we were “socialized” as men? Can we focus on the terfs, on the men that fetishize us, that kill us, instead of transmascs that are just a little annoying? This is not the problem you think it is. Feeding into the idea of despicable masculinity doesn’t just harm transmasculine people it harms us, too. Please stop.

Transmascs are not oppressed because they’re masculine— except for the few instances in which masculinity is viewed as bad, like I just explained, but beyond that, they experience both transphobia and misogyny. It’s just a different kind from transmisogyny that transfeminine people experience. Transmascs are not talking over women when they explain how misogyny impacts them, too. Transmascs are not talking over women when they explain how transphobia impacts them, too. And God, once more, framing transmasc as “evil masculinity that silences femininity” is not the “gotcha” you think it is.

Passing isn’t the privilege people think it is. Okay, great, you look like a man at first. What about intimate relationships? Can you tell your partner you don’t have what they expect you to have? What about making new friends? Do you have to tell them or not? What about jobs? What will they think when they see “F” on your ID? What about healthcare? Will your gynecologist be okay with it? Do you need to change doctors? How much does it cost? What about abortions? Pregnancy laws? And so, so much more. Do you see this? Is this “male privilege”?

This is the oppression transmascs experience. Misogyny, and transphobia. Them being masc is still a problem in queer communities but I believe the misogyny is a larger problem.

But that’s why transmascs and transfems are at each other’s throats. Because transmascs, somehow, believe their being masculine is their biggest problem. “Transandrophobia” somehow implies their oppression is because they’re men, not because they’re trans and biologically targeted by society. Transfems see that, and think, “well that’s stupid.” And end up going into the “masculinity is evil” rabbit hole.

You are both wrong. This argument is idiotic. Thanks for coming to my ted talk.

[tracheaxe]

There are times in my life in which I decided to stop lying to therapists and psychiatrists. I would tell them, straight up, that I didn’t talk to people because I felt no need or desire to, and they would ask me if I was afraid.

If I was afraid of them judging me, of them hurting me, of them doing anything that would cause harm to me.

I always told them I wasn’t. Because fearing others is a concept I let go of a long time ago. My avoidance of others is not because it’s going to cause harm to me, it is because people are just... useless. I find no interest in having friends, in filtering myself for others’ sake, in interacting with them because it’s “normal etiquette.” I am not afraid of the old lady attempting to strike a conversation with me at the grocery store. She’s just annoying and I refuse to entertain it.

I’ve seen many schizoids fear interaction. They’re still valid. I just don’t, so sometimes posts about SzPD don’t fit me perfectly.

Maybe it’s because I have ASPD with SzPD and not the other way around, I don’t know.

[catboybiologist]

On my string of problematic posting:

I don't think you can properly express to someone who isn't transfemme how seeing a gag about someone disgusted and vomiting over a body like yours over, and over, and over again in every fucking piece of media in the early 2000s

[infernalis-crypture]

Masterlist Link

What Actually Helps When I Don’t Respond to Guilt or Empathy Appeals

There’s a persistent social myth that guilt and empathy are universal motivators. They aren’t. For some people, those appeals don’t just fail; they actively backfire. When someone tries to motivate me with guilt (“how could you,” “imagine how they feel,” “that’s hurtful”), the internal response isn’t remorse or reflection. It’s irritation, indifference, and intellectual dismissal. Not because I’m trying to be difficult, but because guilt has no leverage here.

Guilt-based appeals don’t change my behavior long-term. They end the interaction. Once guilt enters the conversation, cooperation shuts down. At best, you’ll get surface compliance without care; at worst, you’ll get resistance fueled by spite. This isn’t theoretical; guilt and shame were used as control and punishment mechanisms in childhood. That conditioning burned the circuit out. Guilt lost its meaning, and attempts to use it now register as manipulation rather than moral guidance.

Psychologically, this tracks. Research on motivation consistently shows that external moral pressure (especially shame-based) decreases intrinsic cooperation and increases oppositional behavior in people with high autonomy needs or trauma histories (Deci & Ryan, Self-Determination Theory). When guilt is used as a cudgel rather than a teaching tool, it teaches masking, lying, and disengagement; not ethics.

Empathy appeals fare no better. Emotional framing (“this hurts people,” “you should care,” “this makes me sad”) lands as manipulative, infantilizing, irrelevant, and morally coercive; sometimes all at once. High emotional intensity doesn’t soften me; it hardens me. Overt displays of emotion irritate me and increase resistance. At that point, I’m not engaging with the issue anymore; I’m managing my reaction to the pressure.

This is where people often misunderstand what’s happening. They think the lack of emotional response means lack of care, or worse, malicious intent. In reality, it means emotion is not the channel through which motivation travels. I can understand harm, recognize wrongdoing, and act ethically without feeling guilt or emotional empathy in the expected way. Moral behavior doesn’t require emotional distress; it requires structure.

So what actually works?

Clear logic. Functional explanations. Efficiency. Negotiated boundaries. Respect for autonomy.

If you explain why a behavior is an issue in concrete terms, especially if it’s something I genuinely didn’t know, I’m far more likely to adjust. If you frame change as making things smoother, more predictable, or less of a hassle, you’ll get buy-in. If you treat me like an autonomous adult rather than a child who needs to be emotionally corrected, cooperation increases. Requests work better than demands. Boundaries work better than moral lectures.

Consequences can work too; but only if they’re not framed as threats. Threats trigger defiance. Boundaries invite negotiation.

This lines up with research on instrumental morality and cognitive moral reasoning, which shows that some people regulate behavior primarily through cost–benefit analysis, predictability, and rule coherence rather than affective empathy (Blair, 2007; Koenigs et al., 2012). In other words: ethics can be functional without being emotional.

What actually motivates ethical behavior for me isn’t guilt. It’s consistency, predictability, minimizing hassle, and maintaining access to people or environments I value. I follow rules because they work, not because they feel good. Moral language often feels like noise that obscures the actual problem. Strip the emotion away and I’m more likely to engage.

Socially, this causes friction. When guilt and empathy appeals fail, people often escalate; they get angry, double down emotionally, or moralize harder. That escalation makes me more resistant, not less. If someone keeps pushing emotionally after it’s clear it doesn’t work, I’ll avoid them, ignore them, or become openly hostile. At that point, the interaction stops being about the issue and starts being about control. Watching someone escalate after refusing to adjust becomes more amusing than persuasive.

When someone does adjust their approach; when they drop the guilt, respect boundaries, and speak plainly, cooperation increases almost immediately. Not because I suddenly feel empathy, but because I feel respected. Autonomy matters more than emotional alignment here.

The biggest misunderstanding is this: people equate not responding to guilt with being incapable of ethics. That’s false. I’ve acted ethically many times without guilt or emotional empathy driving it. Motivation and emotion are not the same thing. Treating them as interchangeable is how conversations fail.

If someone genuinely wants to get through to me, the solution is simple, even if it bruises their pride: talk to me like an adult. Don’t drag your feelings into it as leverage. Lay out your boundaries clearly. Respect mine. Explain the logic. Give me room to choose.

The fastest way to lose my cooperation is to keep trying to make me feel guilty after it’s already failed once. The fastest way to gain it is to recognize that guilt won’t work, swallow the urge to moralize, and adjust your strategy. That isn’t cruelty. It’s pragmatism.

[am-ace-ing]

how to draw trans characters!

[tracheaxe]

I don’t often hang out in system communities online, and I’m also frequently reminded of why I don’t.

I’m speaking as a diagnosed system that has a few fictives from shows in my childhood and teens— Being a fictive does not mean you’re that character. Being a fictive does not mean people should treat you as that character; or not appreciate that character like they would normally because “it's you.” Being a fictive does not mean you’re entitled to ship rules. “I’m a fictive of x character and I hate this ship! I don’t want to be shipped!” Nobody fucking cares. People aren’t shipping you, they’re shipping a character. I could go on about the idiotic things I hear from fictives that believe being such makes them some sort of God in fandom spaces. It does not.

If you’re a fictive and can’t handle fandom spaces because you’re incredibly source attached and can’t bear to imagine not being that character, then don’t fucking indulge in them. Nobody wants to hear that.

Quick note: If you think I’m being ableist, please reconsider what is actually ableism and what is recognizing people hurting themselves and others when it’s totally preventable. Cheers <3