#3 Devotee to the Crawling Rot

My mother is in the ICU and her life is on the line. We need $503 TODAY not tomorrow, not later.

No more time. No more chances. If people act NOW, she can still be saved.

Donate or reblog right now.

Just 4 people at $25 to reach the goal.

I AM A GLORIOUS EMPEROR, I CAN EARN THE LOVE OF MY CITIZENS!

I AM A GLORIOUS EMPEROR, I CAN ADEQUATELY PREPARE MY SUCCESSOR!

Something I notice is, when men discuss the manosphere, they either centre the reason boys fall down that pipeline on some inner weakness or defectiveness of the boy, ie. "they're just autistic weirdos who want rules for women because they can't get their dick wet," or they centre the reason on women, "feminism had made women too woke, mean and impossible to socialise with."

What I noticed while working is that every single little Tate goblin I had to work with had conservative parents, and I have never once seen that aspect of all this discussed. Boys will reflect the social norms they are raised in within their household. The biggest preventative for manosphere bullshit I saw in the boys I worked with was a dad who isn't a fuckwit and a household that isn't LARPing the 1960s.

Lets take a look at the thought experiment of a patriarchy centring transmascs as the most prioritised group:

FGM would be banned and practically non existent - if it was ever even thought of - because a natal vagina would have no stigma attached to it

Child Marriage could not exist, because it would be recognised as morally wrong to try and force such a huge decision before children had reached their final form

Abortion would be free and accessible for all

Children would be able to express their gender as they wished, as it was imperative that they find out who they really are

HRT would be free and accessible from an early age

Intersex, afab and other non-pericis male bodies would have to have be studied

Different hormone systems would have to be included in all medical studies

Crash dummies would be an actual average human rather than the average pericis male, this would mean fewer women were outside the range of testing and therefore people die in crashes

There would be no homophobia or lesbophobia

Free the nipple would have succeeded (because transmasc bodies which often include breasts are the default)

I would be supreme ruler cause I'm cool as fuck

Everyone would have to listen to Michael Jackson

There would be no disparity in education and literacy

There would be no female infanticide

Everyone would have swag

There would be no underfeeding of 'young girls'

Dyke butches would reign supreme

Endometriosis would be studied

Forced Pregnancy would be seen as horrific and rare, much like cannibalism

The ability to create life would never be seen as shameful

The temperature would be lower (because i as supreme leader would suplex global warming)

Something I felt was worth pulling out of the comments because, seriously, if whipping girl is so central to your transfeminism then you probably are not taking transfeminism seriously.

even though the bread machine let the dough rest in intervals i'm gonna cover them and leave them in the fridge overnight before boiling and baking them tomorrow :3

For example, 20 years ago, many people i knew simply could not comprehend the idea of a trans person. The idea simply would not compute. You could practically see the gears grinding to a halt as they did their best to understand and completely failed. People often respond quite poorly when this happens, but not always.

These days in my little corner of the world everyone has at least some intellectual understanding of the idea of being trans, so you don't get the failure to compute reponse basically ever. It doesn't mean they are going to be nice about it, but at least they can comprehend.

These days the thing I see most often resulting in a fail to compute response is disability (especially mental disability) and alternative relationship models, like polyamory or queer platonic partnerships. The idea of forever injured or forever sick especially is hard to get across to people, and the idea that I might be happy that my wife is finding romance with another person is so foreign that people often just refuse to belive it is possible.

The thing to understand is that:

1. This will happen to you, and you need to be prepared to be completely, brain grinding to a halt and smoke pouring out of your ears confused about something without reacting poorly to it. Understand that sometimes your brain is just going to fail you and you have to be prepared to fall back on general ethical principles to minimize harm.

I am going to start with this comment on my last post that I think expertly nails down the particular issue with whipping girl, where all the problems stem from. I am not going to cite the person who wrote it because I guarantee this post is going to generate a lot of hate and I want to put as many steps as possible between seeing this and harassing that person, but if you wrote this know I think you are great.

I am going to be less kind about it than the above comment. Julia Serano came up with a social theory that explains the experiences of Julia Serano and then decided that was reflective of all of reality, which she then insists on very vehemently without any consideration of other points of view. She makes light of any prejudice people experience that isn't easily explained by her theory and outright denies and erases prejudice people experience if it is inconvenient to her theory.

I don't think she even accurately represents trans women (even most trans women) as a group. Her theory certainly does not line up with my experience as a trans woman, and the way she makes light or dismisses things that don't fit in her theory is honestly kind of offensive.

As written in whipping girl, her perspective is myopic, her conclusions unsound, and her thinking biased.

I would like to reiterate at this point I don't think she is a bad person, and there is a lot of good in whipping girl. Mainly when she is talking about her own experiences and resists the urge to extrapolate to what that means for other people. And from what I have seen she has improved significantly in the last twenty years. Like I said in my last post, be very critical of a person's words, be as generous as possible with the person.

She fucked it up bad with Whipping Girl, but that doesn't mean she has nothing of value to say or she is a bad person or she can't improve or anything like that. What it does mean, unfortunately, is that many key elements of Whipping Girl are critically flawed and steeped in bias. And even more unfortunately, its the most important parts of the book.

In particular, the section where she coins transmisogyny. To read the whole section, start at the part titled "Trans Woman Manifesto". It is too long to cite in it's entirety here, but this is the part where she actually coins the term transmisogyny:

"When a trans person is ridiculed or dismissed not merely for failing to live up to gender norms, but for their expressions of femaleness or femininity, they become the victims of a specific form of Trans Woman Manifesto discrimination: trans-misogyny. When the majority of jokes made at the expense of trans people center on “men wearing dresses” or “men who want their penises cut off,” that is not transphobia—it is trans-misogyny. When the majority of violence and sexual assaults committed against trans people is directed at trans women, that is not transphobia—it is trans-misogyny. When it’s okay for women to wear “men’s” clothing, but when men who wear “women’s” clothing can be diagnosed with the psychological disorder transvestic fetishism, that is not transphobia—it is trans-misogyny. When women’s or lesbian organizations and events open their doors to trans men but not trans women, that is not transphobia—it is trans-misogyny."

The thing to notice about this section is that transmisogyny is coined almost entirely in terms of comparative oppression. Its not just that trans women experience qualitatively different oppression, it is, according to her, they experience the worst oppression. The most jokes, the most violence, etc.

As it is coined in Whipping Girl, transmisogyny is defined by comparing oppression. That is the central point. And I think this is especially driven home by what she says immediately proceeding her coining the term:

"While trans people on the female-to-male (FTM) spectrum face discrimination for breaking gender norms (i.e., oppositional sexism), their expressions of maleness or masculinity themselves are not targeted for ridicule—to do so would require one to question masculinity itself."

A statement I have called out in the past for being ignorant and completely divorced from reality. This is one of the major points where she outright dismisses the oppression of others because it is convenient to her theory. This is so important to her defining transmisogyny that it immediately proceeds it. What is the single most important thing she wants in your mind when she defines transmisogyny? What does she choose to be the thing that frames the definition? Her assertion that trans men don't have it as bad.

This is really fucking bad.

The context required to understand why comparing oppression, especially in a very hard way like this, is so bad is the stuff of entire books worth of theory.

It is in fact so bad that I don't even know how to explain how bad it is. It is too big a subject to get across in so brief a format. It is the sort of thing you can only do safely with very, very careful consideration, probably something only an expert should do with a lot of careful qualifying statements, and the rest of us should just avoid it completely. Anyone who has studied exclusionist movements of the past 60 years will understand that comparing oppression is always a pillar of exclusionist movements. Disabled communities warn against this, and specifically consider it prejudice to compare "how bad" different types of disability have it. The autistic and neurodivergent communities warn against it. We have special, insulting terms for the prejudice comparing oppression results in ("Playing oppression olympics", for example.)

You don't and shouldn't have to take my word for it. But I can't meaningfully demonstrate it any further here. Go study this on your own if you need more context.

And I don't even think her definition of transmisogyny rests on sound facts. If we include the immediately proceeding statement about trans men, she makes six statements. Of those six, the statement about trans men is just pain prejudice on her part, the statement about trans women suffering the most violence we know isn't true (though it could be argued it was the best information she had at the time), and the idea that women can wear men's clothing shows a deep lack of understanding of recent feminism. Women (in some parts and cultures of the USA, because that is the very narrow view we are actually talking about here) are not allowed to wear mens clothing because masculinity is seen as better, but because feminists fought long and hard to make that a reality. Bias, ignorance, and dismissing the reality of the situation to better fit her theory are in full display in these three statements.

I would even argue that the statements about jokes and who is allowed in queer spaces are questionable in how lightly she addresses what are very complex issues, and that she is assuming much. I would argue that the only thing in the entire section that is not questionable is the second statement:

"When a trans person is ridiculed or dismissed not merely for failing to live up to gender norms, but for their expressions of femaleness or femininity, they become the victims of a specific form of Trans Woman Manifesto discrimination: trans-misogyny."

Now I don't think we should throw out transmisogyny as a term, it has evolved since then. But I do think that we have been dealing with the fallout of such a disastrous coining of the phrase ever since.

Understanding how transmisogyny was coined in Whipping Girl explains a lot about the behavior of people who have based a lot of their understanding of the trans woman condition on Whipping Girl. I am going to highlight two such things.

First off, there is an enduring hatred from many trans women towards any effort of trans men who speak out about their own oppression, especially when they try to create terms to use for themselves.

If a core part of the definition of transmisogyny is that trans women have it the worst, specifically in comparison to trans men, then someone trying to coin a similar term for trans men is directly challenging and attacking the very concept of transmisogyny. For example, if "transandrophobia" is, as many have said, "like transmisogyny, but for trans men", then they are incompatible terms under this understanding of transmisogyny and transfeminine as a whole.

People who understand transmisogyny as "trans women have it worst" see transandrophobia, a term that seems to mirror transmisogyny and is even sometimes explained in those terms, then they assume "transandrophobia" asserts that trans men have it worst. And since only one group can have it worst, this means they see transandrophobia, or any attempt to coin a conceptually similar term, as a direct attack on the idea of transmisogyny. This quickly becomes a deep and enduring belief that any trans man talking about their issues is making a direct attack at the concept of trans femininity. It becomes of overwhelming importance to establish an us and them and to establish who has it worse (TMA vs TME). And it becomes necessary to drive out anyone who would challenge the narrative they believe is so important.

And so an exclusionist movement is born.

The second consequence I want to talk about is the way that this kind of belief necessitates the flattening of trans women into fitting into the Julia Serano model. Trans women who do not fit this mold, who do not agree, who are not like Julia Serano, are excluded and silenced for going against the dominant narrative.

That covers trans men and trans women, but I know it hurts other trans people just as much, but I don't think I understand enough to explain why and how. I am sorry for that, but understand that this is incomplete without talking about how this contributes to other prejudices, especially exorsexism.

🌟Elliot Page Edition🌟

CW FOR EXCESSIVE TRANSPHOBIA.

Brought to you by the Facebook comments on ANY article regarding Elliot Page.

This was a small fraction of the comments I saw while sifting through facebook articles. While absolutely sickening to read, I also think these show a lot about the specific brand of transphobia that effects transmascs and trans men. There is so much in these comments that paints a complex picture, one that has been trivialized in conversations online.

Such as the way these comments fucking REEK of misogyny and how that clearly paints the picture of how these transphobes see Elliot Page. Or the way his masculinity is mocked because, no, masculinity is not universally embraced! Rather, hegemonic masculinity excludes and violently puts down those it see as "lesser". The aggressive and misogynistic reaction from so many men trying to protect their idealized form of masculinity that Elliot Page is infringing on. Alternatively, mostly from women, the "lost little girl who needs to be saved" mentality.

It just bleeds this specific kind of anti-transmasculinity which denies our autonomy and treats us as less legitimate of trans people- and pathetic for that. To detransition for your boyfriend is like mocked as if it is a lack of backbone or a failure. There's a projection of weakness and frivolity on our identities- so this is just proof of our lack of commitment to being trans.

But even these jokes, stereotypes, and expressions of disgust- they have an acknowledgement that the transmasc person here is denying themself, that they're repressing. That's why it's humiliating, that's why it is shameful. You're folding on who you are for someone else's approval. And I just don't understand how people see this as anything other than a tragic byproduct of the fact that transmasc people are treated as unlovable to the point one would betray their own happiness to pretend not to be trans.

Our bodies are used as examples of horror and disgust, people who push detrans grifts focus hugely on how testosterone corrupts and defiles our once beautiful female bodies. As afab people we're raised with the treatment of our bodies as that which makes us valuable, lovable. Beauty and sex and the objectification as a collective, cultural possession. The value of gender conforming, cis femininity.

Transmasculine people, especially those who medically transition, are treated like shit. Like we're ruining ourselves, our value is stripped, our bodies are themselves a graveyard. Caricatures of us focus on how ugly we are, portrayed as grotesquely masculine for what should be a woman, obscenely and impotently feminine for what is trying and failing to be a man. Fearmongering about testosterone focuses on how disgusting our bodies will be.

On one end, cis gay male spaces can be intensely transphobic to transgender men and mascs. Straight trans men face rejection from cis women as well under a similar disgust that we just are not man enough. Manhood is so wrapped up in having a dick, it's like we're created as castrated and people treat us like that.

Then the cis men who are attracted to women who will still date and fetishize transmascs for their agab or feminine traits, they are revolted by our transitions towards masculinity, and feel an ownership over us, that we're taken away what makes us good. If we transition too much, then we're too masculine to fuck, too masculine to love.

And to a lot of society, that's, like, our whole point. Women and afab people's fuckability and its tie to the consideration of our humanity, to extensions of empathy. We give that up when we transition. Enough that it's treated as a threat to stop us from transitioning, that you're ruining yourself and no one is going to want you like that.

There are those who are attracted to masculinity look at transmascs and will never see us as masculine or man enough. No matter how far we transition. They call bottom surgery mutilation and never living up to "the real thing." To many, we'll always be stained by a ghost of femininity that will delegitimize our masculinity and our manhood. We're treated as, at best, a downgrade.

We get treated as too feminine to be loved for our masculinity. But too masculine to be valuable for our femininity (as cis women are).

It feels like no matter where you look, the world that feels you are owed to it, it is beating into you that you're ruining your chance at love and happiness. That you're disgusting and unlovable. That you'll never be enough of a man, that you need to accept your place as a woman because at least then someone might like you, or treat you kindly. Every where you look there is shame and the insistence you were supposed to be a girl.

And then when people cave to that shame, because they are so terrified of being alone, of being unloved- we're out here mocking them? Blaming them for it? Doing the same shit, projecting this toxic masculinity on us that I guess they just weren't man enough. That being afraid of being unlovable and rejected by society is just like. Skill issue.

Get a load of this guy. Being afraid of becoming an object of disgust and ridicule. Being afraid of losing the ability to be worthy of being loved especially after being raised in a world that treats you as if your feminine body is what makes you valuable and how demonized transgender men are as objects of disgust and seen as destroyed and soiled bodies that will never live up to true manhood or masculinity.

Definitely coincidental they might be particularly vulnerable enough to be manipulated back into the closet by a controlling partner. Putting aside your authenticity because we live in a world that does not show us a life for people like us where we are celebrated, loved, and wanted.

Why are other queer people so cruel about this phenomenon? We are literally subjected to high rates of intimate partner violence, SA, and psychological abuse. What compels you to look at this with such a lack of empathy, with such scorn.

It's often seen as a tragedy when queer people feel pressured by a queerphobic world to go back into the closet. But so many people just don't think of transmasc people as trans enough. That we're not as committed or legitimate, and that those who would do something so humiliating as detransitioning and repressing themself for (yuck) a man- are proof of that lack of backbone. Never do they consider how unlovable we're made to feel, and how desperate you can be to be loved. This trauma which primes you into being a victim of abuse.

It's just victim blaming, and so intensely rooted in anti-transmasculinity. Drenched in it.

This is just more of the widespread dismissal of our autonomy, the refusal to take us and our transgender personhood seriously- the projection of us as weak, shallow, and illegitimate. Paired with the ingrained misogyny of these attitudes, and treating our separation from womanhood as a free pass to treat us misogynistically without it being misogyny.

soooo apparently "tme" means having a vagina now. This makes complete and total sense. Very useful framework./sarc

Also the presumption that everyone with a penis is "tma" and all "tmas" have penises is wild. Do tme/tma users not know bottom surgery exists 😭😭 or do trans women become "tme" the second they get bottom surgery. This is why I hate these fuckass terms. Like why not just say "trans women" and "non trans women" if that's what you mean not "tme/tma" and "having a penis/vagina"

record scratch sound effect

what

August 1, 2026 - Every morning in Gaza, the search for water begins.

Video journalist Bisan Owda follows children carrying heavy water containers, families waiting for water trucks, and the people working to keep one of the few desalination plants still running.

Along the way, Bisan reveals what has been destroyed, why clean water has become so hard to find, and what it now takes to provide water for millions of people in Gaza. [video]