3D dorito

Some things never change ❤️

(Source)

Feed the baby

(via)

The wildest part about being a system and having known you are a system for a while (6+ years for us) HAS to be seeing people who are just figuring it out fall into holes that you've long left behind.

Like. Yeah. We also thought we needed to keep tabs on everyone to increase communication. In the end it became too unwieldy. Especially since DID evolves with what you experience all the time.

Microlabels are cool and I fully support anyone who uses them, but figuring out what to call every single structure in your system isn't for us anymore.

Another thing we notice is people who try their best to know who is fronting at all given times. A lot of that comes naturally to us nowadays, but it's also... OK not to know. Especially if you're not focusing on anything system related at the time.

I guess a lot of this boils down to, it's okay not to care. It's okay to go with the flow of things and figure out at your own pace. Identity is fluid, especially if you have a dissociative disorder. You don't HAVE to have everything figured out 100% of the time.

It's okay to take it slow. It's okay to not know. It's okay to just exist for a bit. It's okay to live and experience things beyond being a system.

To all the people who are just starting to comprehend this. You do not need to know and label exactly what is happening in your head all the time. Fuck, we sure don't. And we're happier for it.

It's okay to just be you.

my fellow tboys I'll hold your hand when i say this but you can't afford to hate yourself in a world that hates you. sometimes just loving yourself is the greatest act of rebellion you can do.

guy who has chronic pain and fatigue: man why can't i do more stuff

Also, on the topic of AGAB.

AGAB is intended to be a verb in the past tense. "Assigned" is a verb (action), "at birth" is a time period (past-tense). It is something that was done to you, not something you currently are.*

I am not, currently, "assigned female at birth". I was assigned female at birth. I am currently a man. I am no longer AFAB. That was something that was done to me in the past, against my will. It is not part of who I am, and it says absolutely nothing about me.

And I sure as hell am not "an AFAB". If you use someone's assigned gender as a noun**, that is no different than just calling someone "a male" or "a female" directly. Yes this includes calling someone a "theyfab". It makes you a transphobe and bioessentialist, full stop.

*If you want to consider yourself, personally, as still currently being "assigned [gender] at birth", that's your prerogative. That's a personal choice. We personally distinguish identifying as your assigned gender as different from using AGAB terms as an identity label, but that's a semantic thing and I don't really care how you choose to label yourself. The "you" here is a general you.

**Obviously we know not everyone's first language is english and that acronyms can be very confusing in their usage. The point of this post is not to be the grammar police. The point is to make the case that we should not be using AGAB terms to label and categorize people. AGAB terms were intended to be a shorthand way to explain whatever gender was assigned to you when you were born. To use them to categorize people in the present is ironically repeating the process of arbitrarily assigning someone a label against their will.

similar to that post i made about tboys: shoutout to genderfluid androgynes/or anyone who is male and female at various times who can't "shapeshift." there's people out there who only give us respect (or talk about us at all) when there's someone who can pass as Masc Cis Guy or Fem Cis Girl. but not everyone is doing all that. i don't shave my face or my body; when i'm fem, i'm a hairy fem who sounds like a guy. when i'm masc, i'm a short masc with obvious tits and ass. some people present the same all the time regardless of how their gender shifts!

we deserve respect when our gender isn't being treated like a party trick to entertain cis people. we deserve respect when we look visibly trans & genderqueer. i am not spending my spoons on that bullshit

Leave me and my weird names in peace

I also drew this a while ago but I think Miles kept the bear from the Engarde case

message for girls: you can be a boy too. you dont have to stop being a girl to be a boy. if you dont want to be a girl you can stop, but you can also keep being a girl and be a boy at the same time. you can be a trans man and still be a woman if you want. if your womanhood is real to you and not just an imitation of what you think you're supposed to be doing, the way a lot of trans men describe, you can keep doing womanhood and just start doing manhood alongside it. and even if yours is an imitation you can keep it forever if you want to, if it is dear to you, you do not have to give it up to be valid.

and btw if your womanhood is hard-won and you feel like any hint of manhood is a threat to your validity, you can still have both things if you want both of them. you can be a trans woman and also a man if you wanna. you don't have to but if you want to, you can.

also no matter what kind of womanhood you have you can stop doing it whenever you need to. including if your womanhood is sincere and genuine btw. and it doesnt have to mean you were never a woman. you can do whatever you want forever i love you

...he is weaving the chocolate. Do you copy, this bitch is WEAVING CHOCOLATE

I think the reason I dislike the Joker being given backstory is not that I don't want to feel sympathy for the Joker (I mean, that's a small part of it) but rather that I think it undermines the point of the Joker. I don't mean as a character with motivations, I mean narratively. Others have probably said this before, and better than I'm about to, but this is my blog and I'm going to ramble.

The whole point of the Joker that some writers seem to miss (especially films! films are ADDICTED to backstory for some reason) is that there IS no real reason. He's a primary antagonist because his entire schtick is that nothing matters, and that's funny as hell. He can treat people's lives as a joke because they don't mean anything.

Bruce, or Batman, as the protagonist is the exact opposite of this. The motivation to save others from what happened to him as a child is rooted in this concrete, fundamental-to-Batman truth: everything matters. This is why Bruce's parents dying in a random act of violence in a before-then obscure alley has had such staying power: it wasn't a massive event that changed the lives of dozens or hundreds. It was a small thing, a statistic in the grand scheme of violent crime, with no real motive other than desperation or greed. And it changed someone's life completely. For Batman, the hundreds of small acts that fill a patrol all matter because each person does.

Joker's obsession with Batman hinges on him believing the exact opposite, and trying to convince him that he's wrong, and that THE joke is that nothing matters at all-- walking away from a victim and torturing a victim have the same moral weight because there is no moral weight. The point isn't to be the most evil or the most cruel, the point is to prove that it's all pointless.

In a way, this means Joker's greatest ally is the apathy of Gotham. Every person who turns away or keeps walking with their head down and claims "not my problem" supports his claim that nothing matters, because Gotham is proving by inaction that it's pointless unless it impacts them personally. Nobody else matters unless I do, and then it's too late. Do I think Joker's crimes are Gotham's fault, narratively and within their fictional world? Not exactly. But I do think Joker isn't actually an embodiment of chaos but is a representative of what Batman is actually fighting against: a Gotham that doesn't care.

Batman's existence is a defiance of this. His work, masked and unrewarded, is a symbol of the fact that no wealth, no material comfort, no border of security, no past trauma, no law, no excuse justifies not caring. Every life matters, even if it isn't your own, even if it's a stranger. He can't kill Joker in-world because of his moral stance on killing. He can't kill Joker narratively because Gotham won't kill Joker. Batman's driving core is a relentless anti-apathy, and Gotham's current collective social spirit is that they are helpless and not responsible for it.

Joker thinks it's funny that anyone would care, and Batman thinks someone not caring is the opposite of funny. Caring can often hurt, but it isn't pointless. Every single life saved or lost creates a ripple effect that matters and hurts or helps others. Each victim Joker encounters is met with the same presupposition: "I can hurt you and it doesn't mean anything because you're nobody. It doesn't hurt Gotham because Gotham isn't anyone."

Every person Batman saves is saved by the same presupposition: "If I can save you, it's like saving all of Gotham. Everyone matters...because each single life matters."

The more people that build their lives on caring regardless of how they think it impacts them personally, the less sway the Joker has. Every person who shuns apathy is another person who will fight back against the Joker's Chief Joke: It doesn't matter.

And they fight back best by, like Batman, looking at each individual they come in contact with and deciding, "Yes, this one matters."

Good turt

Hey guys maybe before you call a trans man ‘fem-presenting’ check to see if they are actually purposefully being gnc. Because if you call me ‘fem presenting’ just because I am visibly trans and visibly have boobs I’m going to maul you.