The new Harry Potter is gonna be set in the 1920’s and so was the Great Gatsby. Jay Gatsby saw a green light across the lake I’m not saying death eaters but death eaters
best crossover ever.
Except wait, didn’t the death eaters not exist yet in the 1920s? Maybe time travel.
DISCLAIMER: The contents of this blog entry speak for me and me alone. I only speak for my story. Please proceed with an open heart.
TW: Cissexism, account of ‘heteronormative’ sexual experience
Accessibility - A young woman is literally holding the Weight of the World up on her…
Every cis woman who dates women should read this. Now. Actually pretty much everyone who dates women should read this, but cis women especially.
And, for what it’s worth, fellow cis ladies, as a cis lesbian who is dating a trans woman, I can say from personal experience that the fact that the woman you’re dating is trans does not have to be a big deal except insofar as it affects her life.
Not because it’s not okay to have sexual preferences, but because you can’t predict your response to a trans woman’s body based solely on your previous responses to men’s bodies.
I get that you can’t choose which bodies you’re attracted to. I tried to be bisexual for about seven years. Every person that I dated seriously during that time was socially perceived as male at the time I dated them (one was a trans woman who was closeted at the time and came out years after we broke up). I have deep affection for the people I dated, but I just couldn’t will myself to be sexually attracted to them for very long.
If it weren’t for my friendships with really awesome trans people - including the woman I dated before she came out, who is now my closest friend - I might have been one of the many lesbians who assume that their lack of attraction to men’s bodies mean they wouldn’t be attracted to trans women’s bodies, and ruled out trans women before the first date. I am very thankful that I wasn’t, though, because I would have missed out on dating my super-awesome, fun, loving, devoted,extremely attractive girlfriend, which would have been very sad for both of us.
onemv said:chubbyfemme-fatale said:
I hate to give this a note, but I’m going to reblog it and say I’m a feminist who believes that neither men nor women should have to do that.
Maybe I should have clarified this: if men have to do it because it is legally required, then it should be for women as well if we truly want equality.
I don’t see it that way at all. I view it as if we want true equality, we need to stop requiring it for men. It’s a point of view thing. I don’t want extend something oppressive to men to include women. I want to stop it altogether.
I do not agree with the selective service; however, if it has to be the case, then I support women voluntarily joining the selective service. The only time the selective service is used is during war time when more soldiers are needed than we currently have. Seeing as that MAY end up occurring with military budget cuts, I support it. It is a point of view thing, and this is my point of view based off of being raised in a predominantly military family.
"I support women voluntarily joining the selective service."
It’s not voluntary for men. Not remotely. For the record women can volunteer for the military as it already. Allowing women to sign up voluntarily is not equal to being required under penalty of law. Women can already volunteer for service.
Including more people in an unfair policy, doesn’t make it fair, it just hurts more people.
Yeah. The primary problem with a draft is that it’s a draft, not who is drafted.
That said, how much does selective service registration hurt people? It’s politically impossible to actually use the data to draft folks.
(Serious question - I think it’s entirely possible that I’m missing something here).
It is the draft. It’s just a slightly nicer name for it. If it were activated, they have a ready roll of male names to pick up and send to war against their will. I don’t know your life experiences, but it was a very troubling and scary moment when I realized I was required, by law, to sign my body away. I was not my own person, I did not have agency. I was in every literal aspect, property of the government.
The consequences of not registering are more than just fines($250k) and jail time(5 years). In the event you went through all that, you are still required to sign up. You won’t be able to participate in many federal programs. No federal student loans, no pell grants, you can’t even get a government job.
So it’s that:
- Even though it’s not plausible that you or anyone will actually be drafted and forced to fight a way
- Knowing that you legally *could* be, and that there’d be nothing you could do about it
- And having to sign papers affirming that which would help people to make you fight a war if things changed and drafting people became politically possible
- Is really scary and destructive in and of itself?
That makes a certain amount of sense.
I’ll support requiring people assigned female at birth to sign up for selective service on the day that I can legally get an abortion, on demand, at no further away than the average commute for my area, anywhere in the U.S. And when trans people can get a driver’s license in all states without needing a doctor’s note discussing their genitals. And when rape in the military becomes a lot less prevalent (note: a large percentage of rapes in the military are against men, but this is only because there are so many more men in the military to begin with; a woman in the military is much more likely to be raped than a man in the military).
Not intended as a derail to talk about abortion/transgender/rape issues. But it is an example of how bodies that are seen as female are constantly being invaded and hijacked for other people’s political ends, and not in a solely theoretical way. Patriarchy tends to throw a couple of bones to women (or to people assigned female at birth) in order to make it look like there’s some sort of equal trade-off between the sexes. The draft is one of them. Demanding that women and people assigned female at birth agree to give up these bones and give up even more of their bodily autonomy, before they’ve actually gained the level of bodily autonomy that men enjoy in other spheres, and with no real promise of getting to that level of bodily autonomy in other spheres, is not ok.
I agree her VMA performance was painful and offensive in many different ways. It was racist, it was misogynist, it was badly performed, it was not sexy and just plain gross. I nearly threw up in my mouth watching it.
But, if I had a multi-million-dollar career - one that I couldn’t easily leave or change because I’d been a public figure since I was a child and had few transferable skills - and the people in charge of it said that I should go on TV and dance like a drunk 14-year-old who had somehow snuck onto amateur’s night at a local strip club alongside a creepy dude who sounds a lot like he’s singing about date rape, there’s a good chance that I’d do it as well. And, most likely, so would you.
So maybe when people complain about this performance, they should stop acting like it’s Miley Cyrus who “went too far,” and not a large and fantastically well-paid team of producers and choreographers..
I FOUND A THING EVERYBODY. I FOUND A THING. Jennifer Wilson, the dead woman from “A Study in Pink” was AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE WITH LESTRADE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE EPISODE.
IN LONDON FOR A DAY?
WORKS IN THE MEDIA?
HOW DID SHE KNOW TO LEAVE THE TRAIL? BECAUSE SHE KNEW STUFF ABOUT THE CASE FROM LESTRADE AND SHE WAS HEEELPING.
apheline said: That’s the point. The reason to use cis instead of non-trans is when you are talking specifically about people who identify as their assigned gender. Non-trans could encompass cis people AND other non-cis, non-trans people.
I very rarely have occasion to talk specifically about…
I disagree with apheline. You don’t have to actively identify as your assigned gender or be ok with your assigned gender role in order to be cis. “Cis” and “non-trans” are synonymous, it’s just that “cis” is a little less awkward to say (in my opinion).
Personally I think the reason “cis” got invented is because people were using other, really problematic and not actually accurate terms instead (“real women,” "actual men," "women women," etc.).
So guys! Jacobin (a socialist magazine) published an article by Samantha Allen (an awesome trans writer + grad student) which discusses the negative impact of transphobic “feminists” including Cathy Brennan (a terrestrial crustacean group in the order Isopoda). Brennan is now threatening to sue the magazine for libel (for… calling her transphobic? which she is?) and Jacobin has no legal defense fund, therefore!
If you can donate or signal boost, that would be a good thing!
I really, honestly, truly don’t understand how any of you function in the real world.
It’s not libel to call me transphobic. That’s an opinion statement. Do that all day. Yey!
It is libel to publish false statements.
Also, I would expect women who are lawyers and say they are radical feminists to know this.
With all due respect to Brennan, It’s not libel to publish false statements.
It’s libel to publish false statements ONLY if those statements expose the victim to public scorn or ridicule, if the person making those statements was negligent (or, if Brennan is a public figure, actually malicious), AND if the victim suffered actual harm.
Reading over the Jacobin article, the only potential candidate for a libel claim is the (now retracted) statement that she was removed from her position as Gonzaga’s liaison to the ABA as a result of her views on trans* issues. That statement was apparently false and has now been corrected, and in no way called into question her professional competence or ethics. She’ll have to show that she’s suffered some sort of actual damages as a result of a mistaken statement that was up on a rather small Internet publication for one day.
I haven’t seen a public statement from Brennan explaining how Jacobin’s article satisfies any of the necessary criteria for libel aside from falsity. And her repeated implication that false statements alone can constitute libel are alarming and disappointing. As an attorney licensed to practice in Maryland, she almost certainly knows better than this.
[Disclaimer: although I am an attorney, I am not licensed to practice in Maryland. This post is an attempt at educating the public about defamation law and is not intended as legal advice or an opinion as to the merits of any individual claim].
fun facts about how law woooorks
Also, did she just assume in that post that you were a lawyer and self-described radical feminist? Aren’t those both… false statements? I know a good lawyer if you’re interested in suing.
Think she’ll sue you for calling her a terrestrial crustacean group of the order Isopoda? I mean, that’s a false statement, at least on a literal level.
Honestly, I feel left out that I haven’t been sued by her yet. So here are some fun facts, which I swear are Absolutely True.
Ms. Brennan, if you want my address so you can sue me, just send me an Ask.