So I’m on a trip with my robotics team and there’s only two “girls” (me, an enby, and a cis girl), so we get our own beds in our own room, but the guys are rooming four to a room, but there’s only two beds in each room. Which means that two guys are sleeping on the floor every night.

I’m not joking. They were literally arguing over who’s sleeping on the floor tonight (apparently they plan on rotating).

And I asked them “why don’t you just share a bed?” And they all gave me the same answer:

“No, that’s weird! That’d be gay!”

And I just looked at them and I decided to break the bad news to them

“If lying next to another guy makes you wanna suck dick, you already wanted to suck dick.”

I’ve never seen so many Straight Guys™️ enraged by a single sentence before

Hi so I was wondering if I'm alone in this and you're one of the transhet guys I follow so I'm asking you :) hope you don't mind

So some joke I've seen a lot of gay trans guys make in response to the "you're just a confused lesbian" is "haha silly transphobes don't know I'm gay",, or just holding an mlm flag.

And I personally always felt kinda thrown under the bus? Cause not every trans guy is gay and not everyone can answer it with those jokes.

As in, to me, it feels like they're implying transhetero guys are just "confused lesbians". That gay trans guys are either the default or that transhetero guys are less than? That the thing that makes them more trans is their attraction to men or something.

I know it's just a joke and I don't really care that much, but I always felt a little iffy. Just wanted to know if there's anyone that can relate.

You're definitely not alone in that! It's something I've been thinking about for a while actually, but struggling to articulate it.

It just kind of feels like if that's the main argument against "you're only trans because you're a confused lesbian" or "trans men are just confused lesbians", it sort of implies the existence of gay/bi/aroace/otherwise non-straight trans men is why "trans men are just confused lesbians" is wrong, and not the fact that it's still wrong when directed at straight trans men. But that's not something people tend to acknowledge.

There's something to be said about how someone telling a gay/non-straight trans man "you're just a confused lesbian" makes the assumption that trans men are straight, and how that's shitty- but when that's the only thing people acknowledge, it completely ignores the way straight trans men are specifically targeted and misgendered by this sentiment, and that fucking sucks.

I do think the "you're just a confused lesbian" "i'm literally a gay man" jokes can be funny on occasion, but when that's the only (or even primary) way the community talks about the "confused lesbian" sentiment... it does feel a bit iffy to me as well.

chewing on drywall thinking about how many people never pursue phalloplasty because of transphobic misinformation about functionality & appearance & the belief that anything less than the Platonic Ideal of Human Penis is completely worthless

Story time! a few years ago my grandma found out that my sibling is nonbinary. Sibling was nervous at first bc it was an accident, and even tho our grandma fully accepted me as a trans guy, she presumably had no idea what being nb or genderfluid meant. and to an extent the sib was right—she was totally unaware that those concepts existed when we agreed to meet for lunch that day

but. but. she brought a full on PACKET of printed research and a pen. and asked questions. she took honest to god notes.

so anyway. thank you Grammy for loving your grandkids unconditionally. the feeling is mutual 💕

happy to be the giver of rent free thoughts in your brain >:)

fr youre so cool I'm so happy you liked my post

I'm also happy you gave me rent free thoughts because they're so!!!

<- me with your post

when canon gives you an underdeveloped character and you just have to make do:

A chimera occurs when genetically distinct tissues co-exist within the same plant. The mutant plants exhibit different sections of color on a flower.

When I say “school should be disability accessible”, I don’t just mean we need handicap rails and EAs. Kids should be able to miss a day without failing out of school. You shouldn’t be dismissed from clubs because your attendance record is “spotty” (true story). I once missed an entire week of school because of a terrible, unending migraine. I was expected to keep up with my studies despite the blinding pain that came with working on my computer. When I heard my teachers say that you couldn’t miss exams, I asked what I would have to do to be excused from them. Their response? “Either get a doctor’s note an hour before the exam or death of an immediate family member.”

I cannot express how rigid this expectation was. First of all, with my condition, I wouldn’t have enough warning about my sickness to go to the doctor and request a note. For many people, this is exceptionally difficult, especially with the current shortage of medical professionals. Next, it ignores the fact that my schedule may not line with theirs because of my medical needs. Once, I had to visit a hospital a province away (which I was on the waiting list of for over a year) on the same day as an exam. I begged my mother not to take me because I was so nervous that I would be marked as an automatic fail. I was lucky enough to make it work, but that’s only because of my spectacular support system consisting of family members and wonderful doctors.

Disabilities aren’t always about needing a bus that can accommodate wheelchairs. It’s already difficult enough for many of us to maintain school attendance without the harsh punishments involved for skipping a day. We need to be able to miss school without being punished. Only than can you claim that the school is “accessible”

You ever think about Fitz post-Exile when Alden is healed and the initial like relief and joy of their reunion is wearing off and it finally hits Fitz the extent of what his father did to Prentice and how awful it was, and Fitz has to come to terms with the fact that his father, who he loves, who he is so so grateful to have back in his life, did something completely horrific and Fitz can never be okay with that but he still has to live with it because that's his dad

hiii!!! so uh, this is sorta about 'contradicting' (?) identities in general, but i only recently found out about, like, lesboys and gaygirls and all of that, but what is it exactly? like how does it work? or is that weird to ask? i'm trying figuring myself out but a lot of stuff i've seen doesn't exactly... explain it (or explain it well), and while i guess i do get why, it's just kinda hard to understand it myself for my own identity

also, probably a question you get a lot in a hating way, but isn't the definition of lesbian nonman loving nonman? so then how does lesboy work? like is it for people with more complicated gender identites, like fluctuating genders and bigender? just genuinly confused, my apologies...

sorry for not getting to this sooner- been busier lately and didn't have the time to collect everything I needed to respond!

About what it exactly means to be a lesboy or a gaygirl ('turigirl' is the more common term, 'turi' meaning turian, another word for gay attraction to men. so I'll be referring to it as that from now on), there isn't exactly....one right way to call yourself such. it really depends on the person, but I can give you a basic definition and a list of common reasons someone may call themselves such

im gonna put a read more because this ended up being super long so sorry

lesboy is a term for any lesbian who may have a connection to manhood and/or masculinity. turigirl is just the opposite of that, a gay person (mlm/nblm) who may have a connection to womanhood and/or femininity. common reasons I've seen are:

being multigender or genderfluid

being cusper/in between trans and cis gnc (in between trans man and cis gnc woman, in between trans woman and cis gnc man)

being a system who uses lesboy/turigirl as a collective identity or when identities blur together

a person who uses man/boy or woman/girl as a means of masculine or feminine gender expression but not actually identifying as such

being a trans man/ftm or a trans woman/mtf who still identifies as lesbian or gay for personal reasons

those are far from all the reasons, everyone has their own unique experiences, but the gist is these people may have some sort of connection to manhood/womanhood while still having a queer attraction. personally, I'm multigender, genderfluid, and transmasc. lesboy I find is a nice label to express being both my bigender self and being a lesbian, as it forces people to acknowledge both without separating the two. it's cute and makes me feel validated!

as for "nonman attracted to nonmen" definition of lesbian......it has its issues. it's received criticism all around from all sorts of lesbians in the community. this definition is very new - it emerged only in the recent years, and someone on twitter had date searched it and found it didn't even really exist before 2019. and having that as the one and only official definition that every lesbian has to abide by, when lesbian is a centuries old word with so much history behind it, is a bit ignorant. people who are multiple genders or ftm or bi being lesbian is not even remotely new, going back decades upon decades, and it never stopped existing too. It's a bit weird to have a whole new definition that doesn't include all sorts of lesbians that have been here for so long and just tell them they're not welcomed anymore, right?

that's not even close to the only issue there is with it. it's been disliked for centering lack of attraction to men, or defining lesbian in relation to men, rather than who we're actually attracted to. putting nonbinary people in a new binary of either being "men or nonmen," which not all feel comfortable putting themselves into. especially when considering a definition of gay being "nonwomen attracted to nonwomen," man-woman bigender people are simultaneously excluded from being both lesbian or gay. It inherently overlaps with mspec identity ("attraction to nonmen, which is more than one gender" and "any orientation that involves attraction to more than one gender" kinda obviously overlap), despite people insisting that a lesbian can never be mspec. people have found multiple loopholes in it, (which I can elaborate on if someone wants me to, for the sake of trying to make this as short as possible), and lastly, and term "nonman" (and nonwoman) were found to have existed before to describe the degendering of black people in society. this isn't the only source I've seen for this, but sadly I can't exactly find it (or find it without going back to that hellsite called twitter and I'm not doing that to myself)

oh and as the link points out, defining lesbian by these words also ends up excluding a lot of two-spirit people from ever identifying as lesbian, myself included. which is also really racist. I don't know how you're gonna end up excluding a whole cultural gender that's common for indigenous americans to describe themselves with and try to prove it somehow isn't racist, to be honest

and lastly, some surveys/polls have shown that the definition isn't the most widely accepted by lesbians as people make it out to be. there's this simple poll that someone posted asking how lesbians felt about the definition that received 1,529 responses, and 61.1% of voters said they disliked it. comments gave lots of reasons I've stated already. there was another survey put out that received 211 responses that for any lesbian who had a genderqueer or unique relationship with gender, and one of the questions asking opinions on the "nonmen loving nonmen" as a definition. the average among the group was slightly negative (average 2.838), and reported that the group who tended to feel the most positively about it didn't consider themselves to be trans, with the other positive leaning group considered themselves to be somewhat cis. the group that felt the most negatively sometimes considered themselves to be trans. and of the multigender participants, the average opinion was 2.255 (more negative than the overall average). When concluding, the original poster stated, "When divided by gender, the only groups to feel positive about this definition were "not trans" and "somewhat cis" participants. Multigender participants felt especially negative about this definition"

all of this shows that this definition isn't nearly the best for everyone who considers themselves a lesbian. I know it's been a way to include nonbinary people who are lesbian in it's definition, but I think it really misunderstands why nonbinary people are included in lesbianism in the first place, and just assumes that all nonbinary people aren't men and fails to recognize that multigender/genderfluid people are nonbinary too. and it's not like lesbian has to only have on definition- it can definitely have multiple and depend on each person's experience with it. if someone personally defines them being lesbian around being a nonman attracted to nonmen, and takes pride in not being attracted to men, that's totally fine. what becomes a problem is forcing all lesbians to define themselves like this and make it the standard, or else they're "not real lesbians." it is ahistorical and ignorant to require this or else you'll strip them of their lesbian status, and is really at the end of the day, lesbophobic. especially as a requirement that primarily exists in online spaces. im sure the lesbian who is not at all connected to these circles doesn't particularly care about strict requirements or whether someone is a "nonman" or not. in conclusion, it is not the best nor most accepted definition of lesbian, and deciding which lesbians are valid or not based solely on that definition is pretty exclusionary and ends up policing a lot of lesbians, myself included

I didn’t mean to come across as rude or anything and I asked you cause I don’t really interact with OP but I really love your blog and your opinions I tend to agree with and was a bit confused as I had seen the post before and was a bit confused if you had seen the whole thing or not

Okay yeah that makes sense. I didn't feel that you were being rude or anything, I was just a bit baffled about me being the person asked because I didn't feel I had the relevant credentials (seeing the post) lmao

Glad to have cleared things up

Okay update I am, in fact, much heterosexual

Fifth grade me:

Also fifth grade me: What no I'm not a lesbian that's ridiculous. I am straight. Straighter than straight. Much heterosexual.

radical feminists will talk like “i will only accept trans men into my feminism so long as they’re willing to detransition or feminize themselves, if not i dont care if they live or die and actively joke about transsexual male’s difficulties in ‘female’ spaces they need access too” and people will log online and go “wow. can you believe how radical feminists will accept trans men into their feminism? 🤔 suspicious”

sorry every age gap is problematic now. yeah the only ethical relationship left is twincest it's the only way to avoid a power dynamic

https://www.tumblr.com/arson-goku/748767908456448000

What exactly is wrong with this post? I’m confused is it just a criticism of the beginning or the whole thing?

If you're asking someone to explain a criticism of a post, I would recommend asking the person who posted said criticism?? Because I had not seen the post you linked until now and I was not really the one criticizing it.

So I can't speak for the op of the post I reblogged but speaking for myself having now seen the full post, I think overall it is a good post. It is absolutely important to talk about medical transandrophobia and the way trans men&mascs who pass as male struggle to access necessary, even lifesaving medical care.

I don't like that the part at the beginning frames it as though that op thinks we're focusing "too much" on non-passing trans men, which is... very much not the case. When people do emphasize non-passing trans men, it's not to erase trans men who do pass, it's to push back on the constant erasure of trans men who don't.

The people who deny that transandrophobia exists/is a problem repeatedly insist that trans men can pass mostly effortlessly ("all they need is a haircut and a hoodie") and can easily access medical transition. So we have to talk about trans men who are in an environment where they can't pass, who physically can't pass, who don't want to pass, who can't access medical transition, who don't want to medically transition, etc in a desperate attempt to get people to recognize that these types of trans men exist, and are suffering, and that their experiences fucking matter and don't deserve to be erased.

(Also in these same discussions I have seen people also talk about how trans men who pass can still be outed, and how trans men who pass can be harassed, assaulted, denied necessary resources or medical care for looking too masculine, so I don't feel that passing trans men are being ignored in any way? Maybe the op of the post you linked is in different circles and doesn't see those same discussions, idk)

The beginning of this post just seems to communicate "I feel as though my struggles as a trans man who passes well don't get acknowledged enough" by saying "because the struggles of trans men who don't pass get acknowledged too much," which again, isn't the case. I don't think that op had bad intentions, but it came off that way.

(Also, in seeing the screenshot of the post's beginning without context, I thought it was going to continue something like "trans men who do pass have all the male privilege but don't want to admit they have male privilege so they keep talking about trans men who don't pass to insist trans men are oppressed because they are whiny mras" or some shit. Which is a take that pisses me off. Knowing the actual full content of the post, I am significantly less pissed off, I think it's a good post overall with a clumsily worded beginning)

epic aro sculpture i did for class

the heart is made out of plastic bags wrapped with tape, so it's squishy ^_^ and the knife is qtips hot glued together. the knife is also removable!