why are we here? just to buffer?

I think a lot of people misunderstand why enemies to lovers is so popular. It’s quickly become one of the most pervasive tropes in many novels. Is it the banter, the tension? That’s definitely part of it. But if that were true, then friends-to-lovers and literally any romance with good dialogue and characterization would scratch the same itch. For some, it does, but for many…enemies-to-lovers just hits different. 

My theory is that it isn’t actually about love, not really. I think it fulfils a fantasy that no other trope can provide: the fantasy of being seen as an equal. 

Think about what specifically makes someone an enemy in fiction. It’s not just someone the MC dislikes, it’s someone who can affect them in tangible ways, maybe even have the power to ruin them, challenge their worldview, expose their weaknesses, etc. The relationship begins with conflict because the characters are fundamentally opposed in some way. It doesn’t matter why, but they’re fighting. There is a struggle for dominance. 

I would argue that the most impactful enemies-to-lovers moments are never the romantic moments, they’re the scenes where power shifts. They BOTH lose: they’re forced into a position that would have horrified them at the beginning of the story. They end up needing (or wanting) each other. 

That’s why I think people are often disappointed when a supposed enemies-to-lovers story turns out to be a milquetoast attempt where they’re just kinda mean to each other for a few pages, and then immediately start making out. Where’s the risk, the actual threat? If the characters aren’t capable of genuinely affecting one another, then the relationship isn’t actually transforming in a satisfying way. The appeal is in the fact that they have power over each other, because the eventual trust they build requires real surrender.

Because here’s the thing about enemies; they pay attention, and usually more attention than anyone else. They notice weaknesses because they’re actively looking for them, they notice strengths because they need to account for them. They notice habits, blind spots, ambitions, fears. 

They study the MC with a level of scrutiny that borders (and later crosses) intimate, but unlike friends (or supporting characters in the MC’s corner) they’re not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, they don’t overlook flaws out of affection. Which is exactly what makes the eventual romance so satisfying. It feels earned. 

It’s easy to imagine being loved by someone who sees the best version of you, but it’s an entirely different thing to be loved by someone who has seen you at your worst. That’s why this dynamic often feels more convincing than romances where the characters are immediately into each other.

I imagine there are many who go through life feeling misunderstood, or worse, that the people who love them only love the polished, perfect version they present to the world, almost like impostor syndrome. But what if there was someone who couldn’t be fooled by this carefully constructed image? 

When someone more powerful chooses someone, maybe the fantasy is protection. When it’s someone less powerful, the fantasy might be admiration. But if there’s someone intelligent and observant enough to see the MC as an equal, the fantasy there is the most intense and honest validation. 

terfs' attitudes towards transmascs vary quite a bit and are a lot more complicated than their attitudes towards transfems are. often you'll see terfs who very clearly give straight trans men more sympathy than gay trans men. you'll see one terf talk about how gay trans men are victims of the patriarchy who deserve help and another say that we're all homophobic rapist straight women. but in general, we are seen as "salavageable". they want us to detransition and join them.

is this violently transphobic and predatory? absolutely. 100%. but they just straight up want transfems to die. they are pretty unanimous about that across the board.

so because of that, there is far more of a concerted effort to get us to join them. and, unfortunately, they are very good at it.

they'll often have a blog where they don't outright say anything hateful but will suspiciously never utter a peep about trans women. they'll have a multitude of posts about how they consider trans men to be comrades of theirs and how it's so important that gnc women and trans men have solidarity. they'll talk at length about how trans men and butch lesbians have a rich shared history but never mention transfem butches even when asked directly. they'll follow young insecure transmascs from these blogs and they'll be respectful of their pronouns, they'll like their vent posts and offer them advice on dealing with their conservative parents and when enough time has passed they'll start making comments about trans women ("isn't it odd that trans women have so much representation compared to trans men?") and usually the guy in question already has some transmisogynistic tendencies so he doesn't call them out. at some point they'll own up to being a radfem "but a trans inclusive one" and start being more upfront about the less offensive aspects of their ideology. slowly but surely they're getting him to actually agree with what they're saying and eventually they'll introduce him to their radfem friends. they'll make comments like "see how nice everyone is? isn't it weird that people on tumblr say that we're supposed to hate each other?" and it'll progress until suddenly he's a "desisted womyn" and attacking trans women like it's his goddamn job

and i know this happens because i have seen it happen to others and when i was a baby trans guy i had cis women who i now know were terfs try to pull this shit on me (thankfully they never got past the "follow and act like you're his friend" stage)

and these transmascs are still absolutely responsible for their own actions just like a cis boy being groomed into a neo nazi group would still be responsible for his. I am not approaching this from a "won't someone think of the poor transmisogynists" angle. but I think it's something that is worth keeping in mind especially with the rise of the "transmisandry" shit. I don't buy the theory that it's all a terf psyop (and i think that's just brushing the transmisogyny within the trans community under the rug tbh) but don't think for a second that terfs aren't taking advantage of it.

if you're a young trans guy reading this, the best advice i can give you is to go out of your way to look at what your new friend's mutuals circle looks like. if you don't see a single trans woman, just block and move on.

You are framing a concerted effort to detransition trans men and mascs as us being somehow inherently more suited to philosophies of hatred and violence, rather than a targeted act of transphobia. You are dismissing their victims and blaming them for being targeted. Any harm they do afterwards does not negate that.

I've been seeing this attitude that trans men and mascs must be held responsible for not only their past and current actions but their potential actions around a lot. I don't really understand why so many people (even other trans men and mascs, as you've demonstrated) seem to think we're more capable of harm than cis people or other trans people. Or why the fact that we have invented language to better advocate for ourselves could be a bad thing or potential "terf psyop" (even if you don't agree with the latter). But if we're treating each other as time bombs, how is anyone going to feel safe reaching out for help when they are being targeted by hate movements?

like I said in my addition, i perhaps could've worded that better but I was hoping my elaboration would let people know what i was actually getting at (guess I forgot which website I was on)

>You will find the overwhelming majority of radfems are cis women.

I never said otherwise <3

> for all I hear about trans masc TERFS I have encountered maybe one or two (genuine TERFS, and not "people who said something once some other trans people didn't like") in all my time on the trans internet.

sounds like you haven't been here long then. I have lost count of how many transmasc terfs I've had to block (and yes in this case i mean people who refer to themselves as radfems/terfs. not just run of the mill transmisogynists. I'm assuming thats what you meant by "people who said something trans people on the internet didn't like :)) I'd be happy to show you some examples if you'd like

> You are framing a concerted effort to detransition trans men and mascs as us being somehow inherently more suited to philosophies of hatred and violence, rather than a targeted act of transphobia. You are dismissing their victims and blaming them for being targeted.

first off, I go out of my way repeatedly to say that what is happening to these guys is transphobic. I even refer to it as grooming for fucks sake.

second of all, would you extend this same sympathy towards white boys who were groomed into joining neo nazi groups? or cishet boys who get groomed into joining incel groups or red pill groups? I guess the difference between you and me is that I don't really see trans men who align themselves with terfs, even if they are groomed, as any less culpable than the aforementioned nazis and incels.

third of all, if transmasc terfs are the real victims here. what does that make the transfems who they gleefully harrass?

> I've been seeing this attitude that trans men and mascs must be held responsible for not only their past and current actions but their potential actions around a lot.

I'm sorry, but why on earth is trying to keep trans men from falling down terf pipelines a bad thing? that is something we SHOULD be doing.

> I don't really understand why so many people (even other trans men and mascs, as you've demonstrated) seem to think we're more capable of harm than cis people or other trans people.

i never said this

> Or why the fact that we have invented language to better advocate for ourselves could be a bad thing or potential "terf psyop" (even if you don't agree with the latter).

ah you're an MRA. that explains a lot.

if you can't see the problem with claiming that misandry, even when it's directed at trans men, is a real axis of oppression then i can't help you dude. we are oppressed because we're trans, not because we're men and the word "transphobia" is perfectly sufficient to describe our experiences.

> But if we're treating each other as time bombs, how is anyone going to feel safe reaching out for help when they are being targeted by hate movements?

I really don't see how any part of my post is treating trans men like time bombs. I think you are projecting.

> Everyone should engage with trans women and their work and treat them with respect and solidarity. We as trans men and mascs are not alone in this. But also everyone should offer us that same dignity. Including each other.

this is true, however my post was specifically about trans men. there are countless posts telling cis women or cis men to support trans women. what's the problem with having one directed at trans men?

> The people who are most susceptible to grooming by any hate group are the ones who feel the most alone and unwanted.

by that logic i guess the white men who are groomed into nazi groups and the cishet men groomed into incel groups are the most oppressed of all of us. great insight. keep it up.

anyway just gonna sum this up by saying that while i understand your sympathy for trans men who are being taken advantage of by terfs, you seem to have very little care for the trans women whose lives they ruin and that's, obviously, a problem and actually illustrates quite nicely what I meant when I said that a lot of trans men (tme people in general, but i am a trans man and made this post addressing my own community) already just don't really see trans women as fully fleshed people.

a. enter a long legal proceeding in the hopes that enough evidence was compiled along the way to prove that the educator is guilty beyond doubt

or

- it’s fun to be awake & in an upright position

- consciousness is a gift

Sex is not essential. You can live without it. Full stop.

Not having sex isn't shameful or a sign of failure. It also doesn't make anyone boring.

You are not entitled to having sex with anybody and nobody is entitled to having sex with you.

Sex is not what makes someone an adult.

Nobody's worth is defined by how much sex they have or don't have.

Sex is not equally important to everyone.

You can have fulfilling and happy relationships without sex.

You should only have sex on your own terms, not because you feel like you owe it to someone, or because you feel like you'd be incomplete without it.

Know your boundaries around sex and be firm about them. Know how to respect other people's boundaries.

The previous point also applies when it comes to discussing sex. If someone doesn't wanna talk about it or hear about it you have to back down.

Ask yourself, how does this piece make you feel? (No wrong answers)

Look for an artist statement nearby. What does it say about the artist and their relationship to their work? What does the artist say that they are trying to convey with their art? What contextual clues can you pick up from what they say about their background, or what they omit?

Look at the title of the piece. What is the artist saying about their work by naming it that, either explicitly or implicitly?

Look at the medium. Is there anything about the piece that stands out to you, knowing what it's made of?

Look at the year it was made. What cultural events might have been happening around this time? Was this piece part of a particular art movement? What was the purpose of that art movement, and what was it trying to say?