too tired to sleep

This is one of those non-poem things that are among my favorite poems.

As the OP stated, the use of alliterative consonants is aesthetically just great, especially the placement of the strongest use at the end: “fuck him on the floor.” The use of “chintz” is indeed great word choice.

Because I’m insane, decided to scan the poem:

Not only is the second sentence, indeed, perfect iambic pentameter, the entire poem is perfectly metered, though the first sentence has four iambs rather than five.

There are further things I love about this poem, though: I like the casual connotations of “keep it real” juxtaposed with “chintz.” It causes me to interpret the “chintz” more strongly as meaning something fake, a facade. There is also of course the coarseness of “fuck,” which is a contrast with “chintz” but a different kind of contrast, gutsy and carnal where “chintz” is flimsy and inanimate.

And then there is the storytelling: there is SO MUCH storytelling in just these two lines. To break it down: The speaker is having sex with a married man, in the house he shares with his wife, which is “filled with chintz”—something that here connotes fakeness, in contrast with “keep it real.”

The illicit encounter in the poem takes place within a house filled with facade, the flimsy construction of the wife’s marriage and domestic sphere, but the encounter itself is a taste of something “real.” That’s a story, and it’s just two lines.

This is EIGHTEEN SYLLABLES, y’all. The amount of meaning condensed into these eighteen syllables is stunning, and it is so elegantly done.

Section 28 banned the mention of or "promotion" of being gay within schools and ushered in decades of silence and violence in this country. Its impact is currently unrecorded, but keenly felt. With the UK currently banning the discussion of being transgender in schools, libraries and other public spaces, along with the bathrooms guidance, we run a risk of repetition. We need statistics on what Section 28 did to two generations of queer people.

Please sign if you can, it needs 100,000 signatures to be considered. Non-UK residents please reblog.

It's rude. You're making someone take their time to read something you couldn't bother to write. You're telling them they were so unimportant you couldn't be bothered to actually take the time to say something yourself. And frankly, you're lying about it while you're at it.

artists and writers are not their audiences’ parents or babysitters. it’s not our job or responsibility to hold our audiences’ hands and teach them the differences between fiction and reality. it’s not our job or responsibility to censor ourselves just because someone somewhere doesn’t like what we create when we never force anybody to consume the things we create to begin with.

your identity, your dignity and your worth as a woman have absolutely nothing to do with how or why abusive people lash out at you. the insidious narrative that survivors should feel special on some level for having been worthy of their abuse is battered wife rhetoric. it's the perpetrator-system of violence grooming you to accept, and even shamefully yearn for, violence it always intended to inflict. and women are so often complicit in repeating the narrative back to each other. sometimes it's very well meaning and springs up out of the solidarity of shared experience, trying to reclaim power from situations where power was wielded against you, but sometimes it's lana del rey sadgirl coquette I need a man who'll slap me around so I know he cares. sometimes it's eating disorders and self harm. the twinning of femininity and female worthiness with suffering, associating the scars of misogynistic violence with acceptance of one's femininity by somebody who hates you, is profoundly unhealthy and profoundly unfair.

bottom line: trans women have never needed to be identifiable by their abusers at a glance to be subject to misogynistic violence. they have never even needed to be out. remember the early days of the internet when online culture was so outspokenly misogynistic as a baseline that most women just never disclosed their gender, never went on mic, never posted pictures? would anyone ever seriously argue that women weren't subject to misogynistic abuse online until they broke anonymity? and that being the case, would it ever ever seem appropriate to hear someone had been doxxed or sexually harassed for disclosing her gender and respond "heh, proves you really are a woman"?

I have asked this myself in the past and never gotten an answer.

It became pretty standard jargon, as I understand, to disambiguate when writing to other humans. First phys!Steve vs the Steve right next to you, just like you were taking to the machine, then getting looser (as jargon does) to reference, say, bearded!Steve vs bald!Steve.

she's the hottest woman in any bar she walks into. she started off at the edges of the most toxic polycule in the brunch circle and she demolishes the entire group dynamic in two weeks flat by fucking everyone until they realize that they all hate each other. she'll snort coke off your tits, fingerbang you until you cry in the club bathroom, and then completely disappear from the scene for three months.

when she showed up at Dyke Night at Machine in Fenway it was like a shark showing up at a beach full of swimmers. She'll hold your hair in the bathroom when you're sick, give you a breath mint, and then buy you another shot so you can get back in the game. she hooks up with couples who are looking for bi unicorns on the dating apps with the express goal of breaking them up bc that woman deserves better than a man who talks about being an early crypto adopter.