not back~







look you do you I guess but the fact of the matter is each and every baeddel is doing things like, say, reblogging from rape apologist labhag. Like they don’t have to come out and say “I stand with (noted rapist) autogynephile” for their position to be clear. Why would you choose to associate with these people?

probs bc eve was actually the rape victim and it’s tremendously transparent that y’all are more invested in rallying around her abuser’s narrative b/c it’s politically expedient, and b/c propping up abusers is what your crew does best.

I’ll go ahead and come out and say that i DO stand with Eve, who is a survivor facing constant harassment about her own abuse by your lot.

Eve is a close friend and an inspiration to me. You scum are the rape apologists and enactors of abuse.

i love and stand with eve, she is a survivor who is being attacked by abusers and rapists and their apologists

eve is one of the nicest and coolest trans lesbians ive met on tumblr, and anyone who believes what elle and their supporters and anyone else who has abused her or supported her abusers have said about her needs to fuck off forever.

I stand with eve compleatly. So many women in our community had already talked about elles emotionaly abusive controling shit- and the fact that anyone accepts that consent can be broken in the future- by someone realizing, naming and leaving an abusive relationship- is absurd. especialy when eve had already told elle she wasnt comfortable with knifeplay only to have elle shut her down and basicly told her she was being a shit partner if she wasnt willing to. Its dishonest, to pretend that consent can exsist in a dynamic like that. this is just abuse enabling for the sake of winning political faction points and guilt about cat. many people close to this situation said thaey wanted to avoid involvement for fear of elle coming after them. it would be good if any of them would speak up finally.

Anonymous asked: "the failure of ”political lesbianism” then is the lack of a real understanding of and reaction to the difference of desire and the inevitability of our traumatized place in compulsory heterosexuality and the constrains that trying to coherently speaking of ourselves to men has induced." im sorry i cant understand this at all could you rephrase it

ftr i’m a lesbian, who didn’t realize this from any discourse of political lesbian, whoes been in heterosexual relationships and am deeply fucking bitter about it.

i cautiously support a lot of actual political lesbianism- i think its foolishly sometimes used to cover a really broad spectrum of ways of relating to lesbianism, and i fucking despise all of heterosexual ”political lesbianism” (which ftr, isn’t any of the people i follow who talk about it)

my contention is not that its inherently bad- but rather than a lot of it doesn’t go far enough- theres a lot of notion of choice and deciding not to partner w/ men b/c men are bad or w/e  but i feel whats its missing is an analysis of how compulsory heterosexuality traumatizes all women and specifically how that necessarily creates a division between what lesbian desire is and what heterosexual desire is.

so a lot of the discourse takes desire as neutral, but merely that men are bad. And i think this is a problem for the way it takes truamatized desire as a given- and specifically doesn’t address leaving a desiring relation to men, and i question the lack of addressing that as the effects that that continuing to take desire for men and desire for women as both just desire causes— both on lesbians generally, but especially people finding ways of leaving compulsory heterosexuality. 

its not a shutting down critique, but rather a hoping to expand the possibilities for women fleeing heterosexuality without taking their seeming hetero desire as a given, or identity or fact of life. 

and to be honest, i think people bringing desire-as-het-women into lesbianism is like, actively harmful, but i dont see only people who identify as political lesbian doing this, but most women who actively identify as bisexual do.

Anonymous asked: Serious question here. I am a butch trans woman. I feel like saying that masculinity cannot be attributed to me erases part of my ability to describe myself. How am I supposed to describe my style and presentation without referring to masculinity?

there is a difference between having notions of us being part of a power structure that abuses and destroys us being applied to us, and needing to offer a coherent explanation of our existence to our self and others in a social order where we are not supposed to exist. 

i think its ultimately self-destructive to imagine “masculinity” and “femininity” as being just presentation or behavior or originating within ourselves and not out of a power dynamic- both of which are destructive for women and lesbians- and attempts to liberate the two ultimately find ways to replicate that division, but that’s totally not the same as having to explain our existence.

so, like, that question implies the two are the same, but they aren’t.

 my problem is with how notions of what masculinity is for men/ in reference to men being applied to butch women- which is a super common discourse of understanding butches (that, honestly, i think has its origin in the lesbian community in trans men trying to make themselves seem just like butches which is repulsive). how someone chooses to navigate having to explain themselves (which i think is an issue for both femme and butch lesbians and lesbians which fit neither), is really their call because its not really something determind by or orriginating from us.

Anonymous asked: I'm just wondering what they them/they/their piece is about. I'm a trans woman, don't worry. <3

the need/pain/self-erasure of avoiding outting one self as a lesbian- not about they/them pronouns.

"Most street-smart lesbians who frequented the gay bars knew about undercover agents and tried to take precautions against entrapment, but there was not much that could be done. Perhaps the tyranny of the ‘appropriate’ butch and femme dress in working-class bars can be explained in part by patrons’ fears: A Columbus, Ohio, woman recalls walking into a lesbian bar in the 1950s and finding that no one would speak to her. After some hours the waitress told her it was because of the way she was dressed - no one could tell what her sexual identity was, butch or femme, and they were afraid that if she did not know enough to dress right it was because she was a policewoman."

— Lillian Faderman, Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in Twentieth-Century America
(via straightallies)

(Source: partyspoopy, via rubybrave)


*cis voice* let’s abuse children for their whole lives and then when they’re violent just call them irredeemably broken misogynists and just chuck them in fucking prison we are such radical feminists we believe in Putting People In Prison 

its direct and unquestionable support for csa, abuse and white supremacist rape culture.


jcatgrl replied to your post“she assaulted a female staff member she’s a violent misogynist’ SHE…”

also even if there wasn’t a power disparity like, i’ve never seen two girls who got into a fight called ‘violent misogynists’ just because they hit each other??? that doesnt even make any sense???

no see we took this woman who had been hideously abused for Literally Her Entire Life and then locked her in a facility with solely other women around and then when she acted out (and Literally The Only Other People Around Were People Of Colour Are Basically Just Animals And We Can Use Their Physical Metrics To Describe Their Bodies And This Isn’t Questionable Shit At All I Love Being Such A Radical Feminist Haha Fight Institutional Power

all prison workers must be annihilated without pause or sympathy

anyone who stands in the way is a white/male supremacist- regardless of the gender or race of prison staff.



why do all trans girls under 16 get constantly accused of being predators or w/e

It’s a way to place a young girl in a sexual context, without the person placing her in that context being seen as the creep.

(via labhag)

the full extent of compulsory heterosexuality’s control of our desires and needs has yet to be known and understood 

we desire to be annihilated by men for the horrible comfort of our selves not existing and merely the image of us as women remaining- the enactment then of the foundational structuring of women as Lack. Compulsory heterosexuality then becomes indistinguishable from an endless trauma- desire for men comes from exhaustion without escape.

the artificial separation between “mere” desire between women among lesbians and the political centering and reciprocal care taking for other women that has come to define the political aspect of lesbianism is a false, deeply destructive one.

desire should never have been framed as neutral and equivalent between hetero and lesbian 

the failure of ”political lesbianism” then is the lack of a real understanding of and reaction to the difference of desire and the inevitability of our traumatized place in compulsory heterosexuality and the constrains that trying to coherently speaking of ourselves to men has induced.

but lesbianism under patriarchy will always be incoherent 

radical queerness is merely offensive hetero-relationality

furiously reject the attribution of any form of masculinity to butch women

reject the inherit gaslighting and abuse of erasing butch womens trauma as women


Are cafabs even capable of empathy towards trans women? Besides the sort that involves apprationg everything from us, even the violence done to us.

(Source: wifbeoforbunny)

(Source: autogynephile, via baeddelaire)