“Bisexuality is a whole, fluid identity. Do not assume that bisexuality is binary or duogamous in nature: that we have “two” sides or that we must be involved simultaneously with both genders to be fulfilled human beings. In fact, don’t assume that there are only two genders. Do not mistake our fluidity for confusion, irresponsibility, or an inability to commit. Do not equate promiscuity, infidelity, or unsafe sexual behavior with bisexuality. Those are human traits that cross all sexual orientations. Nothing should be assumed about anyone’s sexuality, including your own.”
(From the 1990 Bisexual Manifesto, Bay Area Bisexual Network, “Anything That Moves”)
“In fact, don’t assume that there are only two genders.” -From the 1990 Bisexual Manifesto
So maybe people can stop saying bisexuality’s inclusion of nonbinary folk is ‘new’. Signed, a bi nonbinary person.
french recipes: if you’re not making this in paris then what’s the point. fuck you
italian recipes: use the left leg meat of a pig from one of three farms in this specific area of tuscany, or from this day my grandmother will begin manifesting physically in your house
american recipes: buy these three cans of stuff and put them in a pan congrats you cooked
chinese recipes, as handed down from mother to child: season it with a pinch of this and some of that. you want to know the exact amount? feel it in your heart. ask the stars. yell into the void.
English recipes: boil and salt it. Okay that’s it enjoy
Greek recipes: You followed all the right steps but this isn’t quite right. I don’t know what to tell you.
Australia recipes: chuck it on the barbie
Latinx recipes: you will never make it better than your abuela, face the facts
Armenian recipes: spend eight days laboring over the stove. the food will be flavorful with the sacrifice of your sanity. no one will appreciate it.
Canadian recipes: It either needs more bacon, more maple syrup, more gravy, or an unholy combination of the three
Polish recipes: you have to toUCH THE DOUGH, FEEL THE PIEROGI IN YOUR HEART, TOUCH IT. LICK IT. SMELL IT.
Every time I see this post, I learn more about how different countries’ cuisines AND neuroses.
Indian recipes: there are 500 cuisines and that means 500 versions of this dish that has 500 spices so gl
ashki jewish recipes: no, no. no. more onion.
internet recipes: here is a heartwarming story about my baby sister’s third birthday that i completely made up, and a copypaste from alton brown.
i have thought a lot about censorship and what is “appropriate”. not a lot of people know this, but lolita was written to show what we allow on our bookshelves: there being no swear words in it meant it was free from censorship. a book about child molestation was allowed because it didn’t explicitly use the word “fuck”. he wrote it to show we don’t really care about protecting children, and it ended up being seen as a romance.
someone once told me – actually, many people have – that lgbt content isn’t appropriate for children. any content. not just kissing. i’m drowned in questions: “won’t the parents have to explain it?” “kids shouldn’t be thinking about sex at this age, or do you think differently?” “what will the kids think?”
at six i saw disney movies. people kiss and get married. i didn’t ask “what does that mean.” i didn’t ask “are those people going to have sex?” i didn’t ask anything, because i was six, and no six year old thinks twice about these things. nobody ever “explained” being straight to me, it was a fact, and it existed, and i was fine with that. why would being gay require a thesis, i wonder.
someone once told me that the one of the reasons people hate lgbt individuals is because they can’t see us as anything but sexual. we’re not people, so much as sinners. that they don’t see love, they see sex. just sex. it’s perversion, not a matter of the heart. only of the body.
i think i was in my early twenties before i saw someone like me.
how old were you, though, before you saw violence? before you saw sexual assault on tv? i think something like that is only pg-13, and if it’s implied, they can get away with anything. i remember watching things and learning about blood, but knowing sex – sex was what was really wrong. sex was always rated r. sex was always kind of a bad word. i was told a lot that i wasn’t ready.
i had a dream last night that i made a site where people could ask any question they wanted about sex and get answered by a professional. it was shut down in moments because 15 year olds wanted to know if it should hurt, if “double-bagging” was a real thing, if this, if that. we shudder. don’t let the children know about that!
but at thirteen i had seen enough violence it no longer struck me. i couldn’t say “fuck” but i knew that if you break your femur, you can bleed out internally in under half an hour. in school i wasn’t allowed to write about loving girls because what would the administration think – but i could write about wanting to kill myself and people would say how lovely, how blistering.
i have thought a lot about censorship. sometimes people on this site try it with me: don’t write this, don’t be so nasty. some of it is intrinsic. we know as people with a uterus not to complain about “that time of the month”, we know better than to talk about sexual assault (how shameful), we know that talking about a vagina is somehow scandalous. i can say “dick” and nobody questions me. some people only refer to the bottom half of me by “pussy”. they won’t wrap a mouth around “vagina” like it’s poison to them. even discussing this, that the language halts, that there’s an intrinsic desire to say “girls” instead of “women” – feels naughty, illicit. not for children.
the other day someone suggested i make my blog 18+. i said, okay, it deals a lot with depression and other problems that might be for a mature audience. oh no, they said, that’s not it, i think that’s helpful. i said, okay. so what is it then. well, you’re gay. you write about loving women. and i said, i don’t write about sex often and they said. it’s not about the sex. but wlw isn’t for a general audience. teenagers aren’t ready.
oh.
lolita is recommended for high school and up. i think about that a lot. i know girls who love it, who say it speaks to them on a deep level. it’s beautiful prose, after all. that was the whole point of the novel. something that looked like a rose but was intrinsically awful. i think about how if i was a model they’d want me to look young, thin, prepubescent. how my body would be sold and how through the mall i walk by images of barely-clothed women while mothers cannot breastfeed in public without fear of retribution.
i think about how i can write a novel about violence and it will be pg-13 but if my characters say “fuck” twice it’s inappropriate. i said fuck three times so far in this post, which makes it only appropriate for adults.
i think about that, and how my identity is something that people suggest lines up with a swear word. that people shouldn’t talk about it. that it’s a vulgarity. bad for children, harsh, confusing.
fuck. i love women. which one makes this only for those over eighteen.
This is such a powerful post. Read it fully, and spread it around.
When I was first coming out as trans, I had a lot of internalized transmisogyny. I knew how negative society’s images of trans women were and I was convinced that I was somehow different. I was terrified of being seen as a man in a dress, so I just never wore dresses. In that respect it was rather convenient that I’m butch. I was not going to be – as another trans woman put it to me – “a masturbating freak in panties.” I internalized a list of norms and behaviors that I had to avoid in order to be taken seriously and seen as a real woman. This list of “don’t"s is more or less the autogynophilia diagnostic citeria.
Years later, after I had begun writing on transmisogyny I still had a lot of these messages internalized. I had a wake up moment when I was traveling and visiting a girlfriend. Her roommate came home after a difficult day and mentioned that she had gone clothes shopping to cheer herself up, and quickly showed off her new underwear and dresses, in particular one slinky sequined number. There was much oohing and aahing and her mood significantly improved.
About an hour later she came back out of her room and said that she was having a hard time doing her work for the evening because she was still depressed. My girlfriend sat her down and gave her some sage advice. "Just put you nice new dress on, as well as your fancy new underwear. It will make you feel sexy and you’ll feel better.” "Then what, just work while wearing it?“ “Yeah.”
Warnings had been popping into head the whole time but now alarm bells were going off. I so desperately wanted to warn them “Don’t do that! You’re directly admitting a connection between feminine clothing and sexual arousal and using that almost as if you’re self medicating! No one will take you seriously as a real woman, you’ll just be seen as some fetishist!” But I didn’t say that of course. Not only because it would have been very rude, but because they were cis women. No one is going to take away their womanhood for feeling sexy about lingerie and slinky dresses. This seems to be something cis women, particularly femmes, do all the time.
The bottom line is that the behavior classified as autogynophilia is normal female behavior. Charles Moser did a small study where he tried applying the criteria for it to cis women and found that 93% of cis women qualify as autogynophiles. So why are trans women subjected to this standard and often stigmatized, punished, or denied access to healthcare if they fit this criteria? And why is there no similar criteria for trans men?
It seems to me this is primarily about exerting the control doctors have over trans people to maintain male control over the sexuality of women. It encourages us to be sexually available to men and discourages us from having a sense of sexuality focused in ourselves or in other women. It sets up a pass/fail system so we are beholden to gatekeepers and must prove that we are the good kind of trans woman and not the bad kind. And it pits us against each other as enforcers of this system and keeps us divide so we cannot challenge the psychologists who create the rules of who can and cannot access transition. It’s no accident that one of the main proponents of using autogynophelia as a diagnosis was caught having sex with his patients, not informing them he was using their experiences in his research, and manipulating their testimony by granting/denying medical care based on whether or not they said they fit his model.
It isn’t a game. No one could be that clever. I make it seem so easy. The alternative would be telling.
Your parting gift is a clear an apology. I healed you of your limp and today you’ve crippled me, so I might need it. You like to look at it now and again. The old cane. Remind yourself what we’ve done together. You don’t expect to see it again after today. Your self-hatred is palpable, so I joke. Never did have much sense of comedic timing, just discomfort with sentiment. Easier to make it all seem like a glamorous, clever deception. Twelve steps ahead as usual. But it’s a misstep, like so many others before it. I’ve been told reliably that for a genius, I’m rather often an idiot. My glib bravado fuels that anger again. You don’t trust either of us now, yourself or me.
Expert says many more girls have autism than was thought, and failure to diagnose them can lead to misery
So, basically, what this article is saying is they discovered the way that boys present with autism, went “well that covers 100% of the population surely!” and then didn’t bother figuring out how autism presents in girls.
Girls slip through the diagnostic net, said Attwood, because they are so good at camouflaging or masking their symptoms. “Boys tend to externalise their problems, while girls learn that, if they’re good, their differences will not be noticed,” he said. “Boys go into attack mode when frustrated, while girls suffer in silence and become passive-aggressive. Girls learn to appease and apologise. They learn to observe people from a distance and imitate them. It is only if you look closely and ask the right questions, you see the terror in their eyes and see that their reactions are a learnt script.”
WOW.
Tony Attwood, founder of the first diagnostic and treatment clinic for children and adults with Asperger’s, and author of The Complete Guide to Asperger’s Syndrome, agreed with Gould’s estimation of a 2.5:1 ratio of boys to girls. “The bottom line is that we understand far too little about girls with ASDs because we diagnose autism based on a male conceptualisation of the condition. We need a complete paradigm shift,” he said.
WE FIGURED OUT HOW TO DIAGNOSE BOYS AND BECAUSE WE FIGURED THAT WOULD WORK FOR EVERYONE BECAUSE BOYS AND GIRLS ARE SO EXACTLY THE SAME (child psychology would DISAGREE WITH YOU IDIOTS) NOW WE’RE REAL SURPRISED THAT WE FUCKED UP.
This. This is a feminist issue. This is an issue like holy shit there are doctors out there who will deny a female patient who is referred to them because ‘lul girls don’t get austism’. They didn’t think to do any more research because, whatever right? We figured out how to solve the male side of the problem.
This is so wrong on so many levels.
I want to be surprised but I’m not because basically the exact same thing happened with ADHD.
@merindab happens with ADHD and with other conditions too apparently
Yup! Girls tend to be more often Innatentive type ADHD which means we space out and daydream, but don’t cause a fuss, so, we don’t get noticed.
Chapters: 1/1 Fandom: Sherlock Holmes – Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes & Related Fandoms Rating: General Audiences Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply Relationships: Sherlock Holmes/John Watson Additional Tags: Sharing a Bed, Huddling For Warmth, Cuddling & Snuggling, First Kiss, Developing Relationship Summary:
On a cold stormy night, it’s only natural to keep close for warmth
Attention vagina bearers. These boxerjocks are better than a 50K fanfiction with all the right tags. Why? I’ll tell you why. You know those women’s boy shorts trying to pass themselves off as boxers, but end up bunching up under your clothes, visible as all hell, and somehow manage to wedge themselves firmly in the crack Mt. Doom more so than regular panties? If this is what women’s boy shorts are trying to be, I pity the fool who attempted–and failed–to replicate even a percentage of the comfort of effin’ Under Armour Boxerjocks.
They don’t move. They actually stay put. I’m not digging at my ass while I’m at work because walking around, bending down, *gasp* DOESN’T SHIFT THESE FUCKERS. They’re not cutting off my circulation, no. They’re light, soft, and BREATHABLE.
That’s right. Breathable. As soon as I put these on my Suzie Q was like:
Look. I’m the type that prefers full coverage. G-strings, thongs, tangas, and bikinis just don’t cut it for me. I’m constantly battling my underwear, pulling down the right side of my panties only to have my left butt cheek make a break for it and the tug of war continues until the last syllable of recorded time. Not to mention, my Pikachu feels like it’s been gagged and bound and frankly, I just want to live my best life, which shouldn’t include suffocating my panty hamster.
No visible panty line!
Literally Sir Budge-A-Nots. Slightly baggy in the crotch area (as expected), but it’s not noticeable visually (clothed) or tangibly.
Under Armour can be expensive. I have yet to experiment with other brands, but I wanted to share my findings. Go forth and treat your whisker biscuit to some (imo) proper underwear.
is it weird that as i got through the tweet my understanding of it lessens?
If you had a recent ancestor who went through starvation it actually altered their genetics and may have passed down genes to you that make you hold on to fat. So this tweet is more accurate than you’d think.
MY FUCKING GREAT GRANDFATHER LITERALLY FLED LEBANON DUE TO A FUCKING FAMINE AND MY GRANDMOTHER AND DAD AND I ARE ALL FAT AS FUCKING HELL.
FUCK ME RUNNING I DID NOT KNOW THIS.
…That’s going to apply also to anyone whose recent ancestors voluntarily dieted a lot, isn’t it. Diet culture long-term causes more obesity. Sure, it takes decades to show up, but anything you’d hear today about childhood obesity would reflect that. Exercising is still very good for most people, but trying to lose weight shouldn’t be the goal for most people, because a) it usually doesn’t work very well or it comes back and b) your kids or grandkids could end up with extra wonky metabolisms. (And while fat itself is actually not that much of a problem if you keep your fitness up, it can be hard on your joints. That’s actually the biggest health risk if you’re “small end of fat,” under 40, and active–joint problems.)
…. As someone who’s Irish and Mexican I feel this in my bones…. literally.
So there are these two posts rolling around Tumblr, one about the importance of learning to fail which I already reblogged and so gave notes to; and the other about how antis fail to distinguish what people enjoy in fiction from what they enjoy or will enjoy IRL (nametagging @bai-xue so they know I’m replying to their post even though I’m not giving them notes directly), and I’ve been wanting to sort of—hybridize my reply to them. Because my personal theory re: antis (AMONG OTHER THINGS) is that there’s something more complicated
going on than just an inability to understand that fiction is distinct
from real life.
Broadly speaking, I think what the antis are responding to has to do with how we as a society
conceptualize error, failure, and regret. As in—I think antis’ stance on fiction is part and parcel
of the same all-or-nothing mindset that thinks (e.g.) that children
must never fail at something in school, and that the role of their
parents and teachers is to prevent that failure at all costs; and equally that (e.g.) our faves must not be problematic. In other words, I think we are deciding, as a culture, that there is the Right and there is the Wrong, and in our desire—often admirable—to see the Wrong removed from real life—i.e., we want to protect children from pedophiles, and dismantle systems of oppression, and so forth—we are trying to construct a world in whichpeople are never Wrong.
But often, people are Wrong. And—speaking simply pedagogically—being Wrong is often part of how a person learns how to be Right. So trying to eradicate Wrongness actually can, in a way that I recognize can be counterintuitive, make it harder for people to learn how to be Right.
Beltainefaerie's Flights of Fancy 