trans rights!

[ ArtFight 2026 ] [8] Doomsday Fih

every now and then i scroll across a post from a racialize person that essentially amounts to "white people i hate you. i hate all of you. die in a ditch."

i am not making up a strawman here to beat down. because a) i have come across posts that say this practically word for word and, more importantly, b) i agree with the sentiment. it is a very, very understandable anger. to quote malcom x,

“When all of my ancestors are snake-bitten, and I’m snake-bitten, and I warn my children to avoid snakes, what does that snake sound like accusing me of hate-teaching?”

anger at your oppressors, even anger at those who may have not oppressed you directly but inadvertently wield privilege to aid those who do, is justified and righteous.

but at the same time, a post that's only an expression of that anger sometimes feels a little too personal to broadcast. it feels as though i wasn't really meant to see it. and i don't want to just reblog a stranger's expression of distress for all of (majority white) tumblr to see because that might endanger their online presence or worse.

and there's also the issue of tone deafness. for someone to go "man i hate white people" only for a white guy to come in and say the online equivalent of "yeah same lmao" without having anything to add just feels. really disingenuous? like i'm not in a position to truly empathize as i'm not racialized, so i'd rather be able to give advice. but i can't really do that either as, again, i'm not racialized and any advice i give should be sourced from those who are. there's nothing i can really say that would add to the conversation so i'd rather not say anything at all.

(this obv doesn't apply when it's appended with "white people can rb" or something along those lines because then that implies the poster wants their post to be seen by white people en masse, vent or otherwise.)

at one point i did rb one of these vent posts thinking it would help but i got dm'ed with the advisement that it's common courtesy not to and i took it down. i've been iffy about reblogging those kinds of posts since. but meanwhile when a post says "i fucking hate you. here's what you can do about it." that carries the implication that it's more than just a raw expression of anger. there's an invitation and advisement for action. that i will rb because it carries a clear purpose outside the outlet of emotions. it doesn't feel like i've just stumbled upon someone's personal journal, but more like they want to be seen and heard. if it doesn't really have an overarching goal in mind other than venting than i don't fully get why i should reblog it. it sounds antithetical to a lot of what i've learned so far. i wouldn't reblog my friend going through it. so why should i reblog a stranger doing the same?

This post is also on the same wavelength on what I was saying. I'll also reiterate the specific examples I gave in the notes and replies. There's a lot of (White, especially) users on tumblr who are reluctant to reblog posts that directly call out racism in general, but are even more reluctant when the post is directly mentioning racism BY White tumblr users (as in, racist actions by White users & the post is made by nonwhite users) or specific examples of it. More specifically like my post says, I'm talking about essentially tone policing. If someone is visibly, vocally angry about the racism they're talking about on the post, White tumblr users will avoid it. But if the wording says something to the effect of like "I know White people aren't trying to be racist when they do x" etc, then the post will be more popular. In my example in the notes, I was talking about racism within cottagecore many times, and I've noticed that even though I have multiple posts that boil down to the same thesis, the ones where my wording is (rightfully, justifiably) angrier are more ignored and have less notes than ones where I'm not. And like my mutual said as well, posts about White tumblr user's racism that are less direct in their wording will be more popular because White people will think "well this can't possibly be about me!". It's the same kind of idea.

i HATE self-censorship for a lot of reasons, but being in crisis work makes it even more frustrating. who are you censoring for? like i am being so fr, WHO are you censoring for? have you even thought it through? people who have been raped know that they have been raped. if someone attempts suicide or is grieving someone who did, saying "sewer slide" isn't going to protect them from any of the feelings. a murder victim's family isn't going to feel better bc you said "unalived" instead of murdered. if anything, it's just extremely invalidating and othering. it's saying "what happened to you is so bad that i won't even say the word," which is NOT trauma-informed care. you are not protecting survivors/victims when you self-censor. the ONLY things you protect when you self-censor are the puritanical ideologies that are being encouraged by rich fascists who want your money and obedience

nobody pointing out the face ALWAYS being covered in photos is bothering the FUCK out of me, like how much more obvious of a visual depiction of dysphoria can you get through social media posts for a repressed trans character?

This is because topless equality has been a basic push from feminists for literally decades, until Radfems and NeoCons bonded over wanting a trans genocide less than a decade ago.

It's literally why the "no tits on tumblr" and other lesser SESTA/FOSTA consequences* like it were so jarring. It set back FORTY. YEARS. OF PROGRESS in the rights of people with breasts or perceived as women to wear the same clothes as people without.

Do not let conservatives lie to you about this. The majority of people in the us and the VAST majority of States recognize the right of people to not wear a damn shirt. It isn't obscenity, it isn't even nudity, it's just something pericis men are allowed that everyone else isn't.

Y'know.

Basic sexual discrimination.