Keelie's Bunny Cave

medicine:

pollylabruja:

medicine:

systems of gendered/sexual oppression generally don’t care about identities that aren’t historically coherent to it. if i’m panromantic shdjsjsnensjsidissexual snjjdidjsbootycheek-gender and i am still perceived as a woman i’m getting hit by misogyny and maybe even getting some spoils of straight priv if i’m with someone who reads as a cis man. not a big deal u guys smh u don’t gotta lie bout this on the intanets

*sarcastic but genuinely wants to know how OP feels voice*

so do trans women who haven’t transitioned or who don’t want to present ‘femininely’ benefit from male privilege in this respect?

hey, so i wanted to address this since a lotta sj bloggers probably aren’t familiar with the context of this post! i don’t subscribe to black-and-white privilege politics. i regularly eschew them completely because they are far too simplistic, do not give me the depth i prefer when speaking about social issues, and have been commonly, unfortunately bastardized into weapons one can use as a moral bludgeon where it need not be used. privilege politics (in the blogosphere, at least) have also been disemboweled of the social forces they were intended to describe and instead have become associated with reducing serious oppression into checklists devoid of their historical context. i mentioned ‘straight priv’ in my original post cuz i was being lazy and didn’t expect sj tumblr to agonize over this lol. but that’s okay. i’m willing to explain more.

trans people (as well as some cis people to different extents) have a complex relationship to patriarchy, and every individual trans person’s relationship will be different even though many of us may share some commonalities in being trans. i’m a cafab intersex transsexual who has been struggling with medical and social transition by the way. my post was addressing gender/sexual identities that are not coherently profiled under patriarchy nor colonialism - like bootycheekgender and other offshoots of that nature. if i take on Bootycheekgender for myself, no one is going to read me that way because Bootycheekgenderhood is not and has not been targeted in a way by patriarchy nor colonialism that would constitute oppression. sure, i may be made fun of and that sucks and it hurts, but discrimination, while harmful and always worthy of objection, isn’t always tied to oppression (furries are discriminated against but we don’t need a #FurryLivesMatter movement do we). in that situation, how people perceive me will be aligned with the myriad ways that we are socialized and coerced under patriarchy - so in my situation i’ll be treated as a woman.

building off of what i mentioned earlier which addresses your question - transgender people all have complex relationships to patriarchy that may not always be static, and are quite nuanced. i think it is a mistake to say that certain presentations of trans men and trans women and non-binaries will undoubtedly constitute one singular experience, and it isn’t something i argue. that being said, i can only speak for myself in this example and others like me, but when i used to be a trans man full time nothing was externally different for me as i hadn’t transitioned or drastically changed my appearance yet. i was still experiencing misogyny in my community and outside of it. it wasn’t ‘misdirected misogyny,’ however, the ways i was coerced under patriarchy did alienate me with regard to being trans, so i also dealt with transphobic stigma that caused me loads of confusion. no one knew at the time that i was trans, and i made no effort to speak my piece because i had fear.

some trans people who have been in the same predicament as i was can relate to it i bet. and i know there are trans people who have been in the same predicament who walk away with different outcomes, effects, and experiences. all of those avenues of existence are sound and deserve to be spoken for, and we all need to allow a healthy amount of complexity in our analysis that genuinely accommodates these avenues without badgering each other into upholding one singular experience as ideologically pure and all the rest as ideologically worthy of scorn. this is the primary reason why i don’t seriously utilize privilege politics, especially in a fashion that is dogmatic.

hope that can be of some help to you. if you have any further inquiries i can talk about that too since i’m in the mood lol.

I can see where you’re coming from, but I do think that “privilege politics” have an important place in discussions of oppression. After all, it is counterproductive to talk about the ways in which people are oppressed in society without also talking about who gains from said oppression, and in what ways.

One thing I really can’t let go here is how you seem to think that the way you appear in society is directly tied to your privileges and oppression. This is completely false. Are you saying that bi people in “het-passing” relationships have straight privilege? Or that femme lesbians like me also have straight privilege because of how we look? The point is, the way you look at first glance is not an indicator of your privilege or oppression in general. It, as you said, is far more complex and nuanced.

For example, a trans woman cannot have male privilege because no matter how she looks, she will still be the target of misogyny, not to mention the violence that is uniquely directed at trans feminine people specifically. Why is this? Because at the end of the day, what matters is how you fit into society’s predetermined roles, and whether you are breaking any rules it imposes. Superficial appearance is irrelevant in that regard.

Also, on the note of socialization, “male” and “female” socialization do not exist as separate entities. Regardless of the assigned gender of a child, they will be raised to know and understand the ways both boys and girls are supposed to behave, and then are forced into one of those roles based on their assigned gender. No matter how they come to identify as they grow up, they will carry with them the knowledge of how each binary gender is supposed to act, and this will influence their choices and behaviours.

Sorry if I’m a little rambly, I’m just trying to get my thoughts out. Anyways, just please be careful with speaking to experiences that you do not share, otherwise you could seriously hurt and/or alienate people in our community.

(Source: pure, via pure)

joshnewberry:

was my response to that ask like really wrong or something i lost 2 followers right after answering it

just bc people have done wrong things in their history doesnt revoke their status as oppressed people??? white people dont care about nonwhite history, they arent gonna oppress a group of nonwhite folk more or less based on what theyve done to each other. and on that note what about all the GREAT representation white people get when they’ve treated every single nonwhite person like absolute garbage. plus the middle east itself was colonized by white countries.

like it just seems so inappropriate to respond to a post about how a group of nonwhite people get bad representation and stereotypes they face in the media with bad things theyve done in history because its like… its derailing, and its a different conversation to have at a different time. its not something that should be ignored or forgotten but it also doesnt mean people of color who have done wrong things in history deserve to experience racism? there are multiple nonwhite groups of ppl who have done awful things to other nonwhite people but that doesnt mean you literally cannot talk about racism towards those groups of people?

am i wrong like. i rly. dont think i am ? am i just misinterpreting ?

Nope, you’re absolutely right. This is an example of false dichotomy, or the assumption that two ideas can’t exist at the same time. In this case, it is that an oppressed group cannot both have had its members commit atrocities, and also be oppressed. It is also the false idea that the actions of a few people speak to the integrity of a group as a whole, which is itself rooted in racism. For example, we can see this when white men who commit mass murders are seen as “mentally unstable” outliers that do not represent white men as a whole, but small splinter groups like ISIS are enough to consider every Muslim in the world to be a potential threat.

Anyways, bringing up past transgressions to excuse the current oppression of a group of people is indeed derailing, and you are correct to label it as such.

(via angelrecipe-deactivated20180602)

aerithnotaeris:

glamourweaver:

I wonder about reincarnation in the Avatar universe beyond the Avatar - since effectively we assume that anyone who doesn’t transcend and become pure spirit (like Yue and Iroh did) reincarnates, but the Avatar is special because there’s the ability to know who’s the reincarnation (since that person is the Avatar), and there was the access to past lives the continuity of Raava provided (and will provide again for Korra’s future reincarnations).  But everyone else reincarnates too.

It was a truth in the original series bible that never came up on screen, that Momo was the reincarnation of Monk Gyatso.  I assume he spent the 100 years reincarnating into various animals at the Southern Temple to wait for Aang.  My headcanon is that that soul, deeply tied to the element of Air, is now Jinora in Korra’s time.

A thought occurred to me on Azula, if she isn’t still alive somewhere in Korra’s time.  What if what her soul needed above all else was a second chance?  Not peace, not punishment, but a second chance to not go down the path she went down in her life as Azula.  And so she was reincarnated into someone dotted on by a father who would craft her into his weapon, just like before, but when her father’s darkness revealed itself, this time she could choose “No” and not follow him into the infliction of suffering on others - and that’s just what Asami did.

holy shit

(via potsticker1234)

centipeetle:

*man talks about how hot and cool big, brawny, buff ladies are* yeah shut up already.. fuck off asshole

*literally anyone else talks about how hot and cool big, brawny buff ladies are* I KNOW RIGHT AAAAAAHHHHHH

(Source: buippy)

Anonymous asked: I'm sorry if I sound totally ignorant, but what's sga? I tried looking it up, but all I found were things like the Seattle Gymnastics Academy, the Student Government Association, and Stargate Atlantis

cardozzza:

sinbadism:

enoughtohold:

that’s ok — it’s a very new acronym used almost entirely on tumblr as far as i can tell. it just stands for “same-gender-attracted” or “same-gender attraction.” i don’t like to abbreviate these phrases personally because of this confusion and also because it can make it seem like this is some kind of special new concept and not just, like, convenient words to describe the type of attraction targeted by homophobia.

some people also dislike it because it’s similar to “same-sex attraction” which is a phrase that’s been used a lot by conservative christian, especially mormon, homophobes. “same-gender attraction” has occasionally been used like this as well. i’m sympathetic to this concern, but again i think this is a pretty natural wording, and it’s going to be hard to find wording to talk about this stuff that has never been used against us by bigots. so i think we should be careful with it and with the memetic way common ways of talking quickly get turned into Terms with a lot of potential baggage, but i don’t think it’s worth giving up the ability to talk about attraction to the same gender.

It’s not a really new term but it is new to mainstream/white vocabularies.

Yeah, incomes from black communities. It’s really frustrating seeing (white) bloggers criticize it for not addressing certain issues because they are missing the nuances black language already has. It’s like pulling teeth at this point: yes, SGA makes sense fur nonbinary people, too, because it was created in a community that is much more trans, and much more nonbinary, that the white community. The fact that the face of the nonbinary community is white with an undercut is a not unintentional result of white supremacy. The strong division between bisexual non-men and lesbian’s is also not as prevalent in the black community.

I really think that–aside from the almost complete erasure of SGA’s origins leading people to not even realize it’s black–part of it is that white ppl see themselves as the default, and when not the default, the most advanced.

So the idea that this term might already address their concerns will never cross their mind because if they are still struggling with this issue, it is unimaginable that it might not be a universal issue (or at least, might not be as big of a problem.)

There’s a huge problem with nonblack people stumbling on black language, taking the word and misusing it, redefining it, rewriting its history, and then determining it to be in some way violent. (See: white people claiming fuckboy was transphobic)