Latest articles

On the subject of mental health disorders

“Even severe mental illness is the result of society labeling unusual behavior rather than of biochemical processes.” ~ Thomas J. Scheff

Many Western countries have experienced a dramatic increase in reported rates of psychiatric diagnoses and use of psychiatric drugs.

Under the label of “mental illness”, people are deprived of life, liberty, and property, which the law ought to defend. Mental health is one of the rare branches of the medical system where treatment is involuntary, baring life-threatening physical conditions, usually court-ordered. This is mostly justified by the notion that the person in question can not tell his illness, a fact that is in fact entirely manipulative, a classic, and actually most prevalent case of gaslighting. When one's arm is broken, or one suffers from any health issue, that person seeks medical help himself. I have never in my life heard of someone being ordered medical treatment by court, even cancer patients are given free choice for chemotherapy, which is due to associated health risks. Similarly, anti-psychotics and depression medication among others, have been shown to exhibit often severe side-effects worse than the diagnosed condition. What Scheff said in practice, is that there is no such thing as mental disorders at all, it is merely society that judges certain behaviors as improper and – by force, subjugates people into treatment against their will.

In most psychiatric cases, there is no objective case for a diagnosis. When a brain scan shows no damage, a documented symptom of “schizophrenia”, that fact has no bearing on court orders or diagnosis. What actually holds weight is stigmatization and conjecture of behavior that is deemed improper. Similarly, it is never properly defined whether one is “mentally ill”, labeled so without objectively fact-based diagnoses – practically an attach on character, or a social problem – leaving the line blurred with subjected people falling under the coercive nature of social programs.

At present, insurance companies and health professionals are directly- financially profiting from the sale of pharmaceuticals with no oversight, or responsibility for maltreatment.

The issue is far too complex for the state medical system to resort to court proceedings in most cases, when the person in question is mostly- in court, pitted against an “expert” who invokes no insight other than a repetition of the psychiatrist's opinion, which rests entirely on the doctor's educational rank, not definitive objective factual analysis.

The incentive for society to manage this is clear to me, since society labels actions as wrong, it ought to provide it's own faculty in response to the accusation, not rely on the state.

May he who throws the rock at glass houses pick up that rock and build a house himself.

Involuntary intervention should require clear, demonstrable impairment of decision-making capacity and immediate risk. At present the threshold is practically baseless.

We lost tradition on a massive scale. Certain replacements are inhumane and baseless, some are better, most are without a structured long-term foundation. The take here is- the current model is a reaction, hence threading backwards to see what worked before in practice remains the rational position.

Atleast i'm going somewhere

Credits: @babydoll-4444 and @rocknrollangelsblog from Tumblr.

Rachel Reid : Heated Rivalry

Da ich nicht auf den kommerziellen Plattformen bin, hatte ich von dem Erfolg des Buches nur am Rande mitbekommen, selbiges gilt auch für die TV Serie.

Falls jemand noch nicht weiß, worum es in dem Buch geht: Es ist die Geschichte zweier Hockeyspieler, Shane Hollander und Ilya Rozanov, wie sie sich kennenlernten und später ineinander verliebt hatten.

Mit all dem Smut in der Handlung kam ich mir ein bisschen vor wie in den alten Zeiten der Slash fanfiction. Die Szenen waren gut geschrieben, zumindest soweit ich es als weiblich gelesenes Wesen beurteilen kann.

Die Autorin hat einen Prolog aus 2016 dem ersten Kapitel vorangestellt, das erste Kapitel spielt dann allerdings in der Vergangenheit, in 2008. Also nicht überrascht sein, wenn der Smut gleich auftaucht.

Es war auch interessant, wie die Autorin es gestaltet hat, dass Shane klar wurde, dass er schwul ist, und nicht bisexuell wie Ilya. Das fand ich gut dargestellt.

Man kann auch gut festmachen, wann sich die beiden ineinander verliebt haben, ohne es zu merken (Kapitel 13), spätestens als sie sich begannen, mit Vornamen anzusprechen.

Ein wenig amüsant war, wie Shanes Vater von den beiden erfährt und wie offen seine Eltern die neuen Tatsachen akzeptieren.

Wenn ihr keine Probleme habt, gay smut zu lesen, ist dies dies eine gute Version der Enemies to Lovers Trope. Für mich selbst ist es gut gemachter Smut, mit einer Handlung, die auch beleuchtet, wo die Hauptcharaktere herkommen und in der sie herausfinden, wer sie sind und wen sie lieben.

---

Translation of the review for my English speaking netpals:

As I’m not on the commercial platforms, I had only caught wind of the book’s success in passing; the same goes for the fact that they made a TV series.

In case anyone doesn’t know what the book is about: the story is about two ice hockey players, Shane Hollander and Ilya Rozanov, and how they met and later fell in love.

With all the smut in the plot, I felt a bit like I was back in the old days of slash fanfiction. The scenes were well written, at least as far as I can judge.

The author has placed a prologue from 2016 before the first chapter, though the first chapter is set in the past, in 2008. So don’t be surprised if the smut appears straight away.

It was also interesting how the author portrayed Shane realising he was gay, and not bisexual like Ilya. I thought that was well done.

You can also clearly see when the two fell in love without realising it (Chapter 13), at the latest when they started addressing each other by their first names.

It was a bit amusing how Shane’s father finds out about the two of them and how openly his parents accept the new reality.

If you’re comfortable reading gay smut, this is a good take on the ‘enemies to lovers’ trope. For me, it’s well-written smut, with a plot that also explores where the main characters come from and how they figure out who they are and who they love.

Gaea Schoeters : Das Geschenk

Eines Morgens befinden sich in Deutschland 20000 wilde Elefanten, die ein Geschenk des Präsidenten von Botswana sind. Sie wurden magisch dortin befördert, weil Deutschland ein Einfuhrverbot für Jagdtrophäen beschlossen hat.

Auf den ersten Blick scheint es eine einfache Geschichte mit einem Fantasy Element zu sein. Auf den zweiten Blick steckt eine Satire dahinter, mit Analogien zur derzeitigen Politik: zum Beispiel könnte Holger Fuchs, der Parteiführer der größten Oppositionspartei, einer Rechtsaußenpartei in der Realität entsprechen.

Es erscheint wichtig, die zweite Ebene der Handlung zu erkennen, sonst wäre die Novelle eher langweilig. Trotz alledem ist das Buch empfehlenswert.

When 87% of Games Are “Missing,” Is Piracy Still a Crime?

The cult classic game No One Lives Forever (NOLF) is a masterpiece of its era ... and completely unavailable for legitimate purchase. This isn't due to technical failure, but a complex, unresolved ownership dispute involving major corporate giants: Microsoft, Disney, and Warner Bros. None of these entities are motivated to spend the money or legal effort to sort out the rights.

When Nightdive Studios (known for game remasters) offered to take on the work, the corporate response was a perfect illustration of copyright dysfunction. They admitted they couldn't find the original contracts but threatened to sue Nightdive anyway if they proceeded. This leaves fans with only one option: downloading the game as abandonware. A Crisis of Legitimacy: Why Should We Pay?

The availability of NOLF forces a critical question: Why does “legitimacy” depend on us giving money to corporate behemoths who refuse to even make their ownership known? When they use copyright to restrict the marketplace, why should we care?

As Valve founder Gabe Newell once famously said:

“We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem…”

Newell's point is profound. If the legal provider makes the product impossible to buy, then the “pirate’s service is more valuable.” When corporations fail to provide the service of sale, the moral obligation to “buy” digital data evaporates. The term “victimless crime” does not apply when the alleged victims are the perpetrators of cultural hoarding. The Corporate Lock-Up: 87% Missing

The NOLF tragedy is not an isolated incident; it’s systemic. The problem is simple: the marketplace no longer aligns with the public interest.

A recent study by the Video Game History Foundation, “87% Missing: the Disappearance of Classic Video Games,” found that only 13 percent of classic games published in the U.S. are currently in release and available for legal purchase. The figure drops to under three percent for games released before 1985.

This hoarding affects all media: the initial success of Netflix in reducing piracy was reversed the moment major production companies fractured the streaming market, demanding higher prices for incomplete content libraries. Content is now disappearing from services entirely (like Future Man Season 3 or Close Enough being delisted), reinforcing the idea that digital purchase is an illusion and that possession is temporary. Copyright Misuse: The Anti-Competitive Hoard

This widespread corporate behavior is the definition of Copyright Misuse—the use of intellectual property rights as an anti-competitive tool. This action directly contradicts the stated purpose of copyright: “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.”

The process is clear:

Hoarding: A creator sells the copyright to a major company. Restriction: The new rights holder has no intention of creating sequels or remasters, but uses the copyright to prevent the original creator or third parties from doing so. Motivation: This restriction pumps up the value of their existing, unrelated works and eliminates potential market competition.

In the NOLF case, the threat of an uncertain lawsuit is being used to prevent a beloved game from re-entering the market, making the property effectively useless to everyone in a state of “licensing hell.” This is the exact opposite of the limited, temporary monopoly originally intended to encourage creation. Conclusion: Stop Waiting for Legislators

The current copyright system, heavily manipulated by entities like Disney to extend terms far beyond any reasonable measure, has betrayed its original purpose of protecting creators. It now primarily serves to empower corporate interests and suppress market competition.

We should not wait for out-of-touch legislators to enact the needed reform—or the ultimate reform, abolition. As consumers, our moral compass should align with access, preservation, and creation. When corporations weaponize copyright to prevent cultural works from reaching the public, downloading those works is not a crime; it is a moral reaction to a broken system.

Anyway long way of saying: http://nolfrevival.tk/

The Case for Revolutionary Socialism: A Response to Rising Fascism in the United States

Introduction: Capitalism’s Decline and the Rise of Authoritarianism

The United States stands at a crossroads. Decades of neoliberal policies, corporate greed, and systemic inequality have pushed the country into what many describe as late-stage capitalism—a phase marked by extreme wealth concentration, environmental collapse, and a hollowing-out of democratic institutions. As economic disparities widen and political repression intensifies, the threat of fascism looms larger than ever.

History shows us that when capitalism fails, fascism often rises to protect elite interests. But we do not have to accept this fate. The working class must organize, radicalize, and, if necessary, prepare for revolutionary struggle to dismantle the structures of oppression and replace them with a socialist future. The Failure of Late-Stage Capitalism

Late-stage capitalism is not an abstract theory—it is the lived reality of millions.

Economic Exploitation: Wages stagnate while corporate profits soar. Workers toil under grueling conditions while CEOs rake in record earnings.

Housing & Healthcare Crises: Millions are unhoused or uninsured, while real estate tycoons and pharmaceutical giants prioritize profit over human life.

Environmental Collapse: Corporations continue polluting with impunity, prioritizing short-term gains over the survival of the planet.

The system cannot be reformed from within. Voting alone will not dismantle a political machine rigged in favor of the wealthy. When electoral avenues fail, history has shown that revolutionary action becomes necessary.

The Rise of Fascism & The Need for Armed Resistance

Fascism does not emerge overnight—it grows gradually, fed by economic desperation, xenophobia, and state violence.

Authoritarian Crackdowns: The criminalization of protests (like those seen during the George Floyd uprisings), anti-LGBTQ+ laws, and attacks on abortion rights signal a slide toward authoritarianism.

Militarized Police: Law enforcement agencies increasingly function as enforcers of capital, brutalizing marginalized communities and suppressing dissent.

Far-Right Mobilization: White supremacist militias grow bolder, often with tacit (or explicit) state support.

If fascism consolidates power peacefully, history teaches us it will not relinquish it without force. The working class must be prepared to defend itself.

Building a Revolutionary Socialist Movement

To combat fascism and capitalism, we must build power through:

1. Mass Organizing & Dual Power

Expanding mutual aid networks, tenant unions, and workplace militancy to create socialist alternatives outside state control. Strikes, rent strikes, and boycotts to disrupt capitalist exploitation.

1. Armed Self-Defense

Learning from revolutionary movements worldwide, from Rojava to the Black Panthers—disarmed populations are conquered populations. Community defense programs to protect marginalized groups from fascist violence.

1. Revolutionary Politics

Breaking from the Democratic Party, which serves capital, and building independent working-class parties. Preparing for scenarios where electoralism fails and direct action becomes necessary.

Conclusion: The Choice Is Ours

We face a stark choice: gradual surrender to fascism and ecological collapse, or a militant, organized fight for socialism. If the ruling class refuses concessions, then revolutionary struggle becomes not just an option, but a necessity.

The time for reformist half-measures is over. The working class must seize the moment, before it’s too late.

Solidarity forever—by any means necessary.

Villainous: Why This Mexican Animated Gem is the Best Villain Show You're Not Watching (Yet!)

Villainous: Why This Mexican Animated Gem is the Best Villain Show You're Not Watching (Yet!)

In a world saturated with tales of heroes and their valiant triumphs, it's easy to forget that every story has another side. We've seen countless narratives where good unequivocally conquers evil, but what if the “heroes” aren't so heroic? And what if the “villains” are just… misunderstood, or even good at being bad?

Enter Villainous (Villanos in Spanish), a Mexican animated web series that doesn't just flip the script – it gleefully shreds it, laughs maniacally, and then uses the confetti to decorate its deliciously dark universe. If you're looking for a show that defies expectations, offers a fresh perspective, and is just plain good, then stop what you're doing and watch the pilot on YouTube (available in both English and Spanish!). Trust me, especially after you get to episode six, you'll be hooked.

The Black Hat Organization: Where Evil Gets Professional

Born from the brilliant mind of Mexican animation veteran Alan Ituriel, Villainous began as web shorts, captivated Cartoon Network executives at Pixelatl, and evolved into a phenomenon. It tells the story of the infamous Black Hat Organization, run by the titular, impeccably dressed, and utterly terrifying demon, Black Hat.

His team is a dysfunctional delight:

Dr. Flug: A brilliant but perpetually nervous mad scientist, always seen with a paper bag over his head. His inventions are truly evil, even if their execution often leads to hilarious chaos. Demencia: Black Hat's wild, reptilian-themed assistant with an unhinged, obsessive adoration for her boss. She's tough, impulsive, and a force of nature. 5.0.5.: A gentle, sweet-hearted blue bear, accidentally created by Flug, who desperately tries to bring kindness into the villainous lair.

Their mission? To help other villains achieve their dastardly goals by advertising Flug's inventions and eliminating those pesky “heroic problems.” But as you might expect, hilarity, and often unexpected destruction, ensues.

Why It's So Gloriously Villainous

What truly sets Villainous apart isn't just its villainous perspective – it's how it delivers this realistic, morally grey worldview in such a unique and engaging format.

A Nuanced Look at Evil: While not new to mature audiences, Villainous excels at presenting a world where good and evil aren't black and white. Black Hat's organization thrives on helping villains who actually win, showcasing a spectrum of evil that's both terrifying and refreshingly authentic. This isn't your typical Saturday morning cartoon, but a delightfully dark and twisted comedy.

Visual and Character Design Masterclass: The animation is a feast for the eyes – glorious, colorful, and boasts a natural flow that makes every movement captivating. The character designs are instantly iconic:

Black Hat: Fancy, menacing, and undeniably badass, with powers like teleportation, shapeshifting, and portal creation. Dr. Flug: Simultaneously funny, sympathetic, and mysterious behind his signature paper bag, hinting at a deeper backstory. Demencia: A vibrant whirlwind of chaos, from her colorful hair and reptile hat to the unsettling rattlesnake sound effects that accompany her slithering movements. She's a Harley Quinn-esque character with a disturbing, yet compelling, devotion. 5.0.5.: Dangerously cute with his flower and teddy bear design, a beacon of innocence in a den of villainy.

Beyond the Screen: An Expansive Universe: This show is a true multimedia experience. While the core episodes are fantastic, Villainous extends its lore far beyond your TV or streaming device. It incorporates websites, social media accounts for its characters, and even functions as an Alternate Reality Game (ARG). The “Villain Orientation Videos,” where Black Hat brutally reviews other Cartoon Network villains (often to their unfortunate demise), and Demencia's hilariously drawn “Demencia Tips” shorts, further flesh out this rich universe.

Mystery and Intrigue: The show masterfully plants seeds of curiosity. We're left with so many burning questions: What is Demencia exactly? Why does Flug wear that bag, and what are his recurring nightmares about? What's the deal with Demencia's reptile connection, or Flug's affinity for airplanes? Who is the “Black Charro,” and how might Goldheart retaliate? These unanswered questions aren't flaws; they're integral to the show's allure, making us crave more and fueling endless fan theories.

A Landmark in Mexican Animation

Villainous holds the distinction of being the first Cartoon Network show primarily produced in Mexico, a testament to the thriving animation industry there. It's a fantastic blend of influences, reminding viewers of the dark humor of The Grim Adventures of Billy & Mandy, the alien absurdity of Invader Zim, and the villainous antics of League of Super Evil, all with a unique Latin American flavor.

The Road Less Traveled

While the show has garnered immense critical and fan adoration, its production journey hasn't been without its bumps. Fans have eagerly awaited new content since the first season hit HBO Max, and there have been reports of production challenges and delays. However, the passion of its creator and fanbase ensures that the Black Hat Organization continues its reign, with books and comics helping to bridge the gap between animated releases.

Join the Organization!

“Villainous” is a triumph of character, design, and storytelling. It offers a unique blend of dark humor, compelling mysteries, and a refreshing take on the hero-villain dynamic that's often missing in mainstream animation. If you appreciate shows that delve into complex characters, boast stunning visuals, and aren't afraid to get a little twisted, then give Villainous a chance. You might just find your new favorite evil corporation.

Catch the pilot and shorts on YouTube today – your inner villain will thank you!

es waren meine ersten linuxtage in chemnitz. ich wollte bewusst auf keine große veranstaltung. war eine gute wahl, war ein schöner kleiner event. stattgefunden hat das ganze in der tu chemnitz. so als allgemeiner eindruck: unten (eingangsbereich tu chemnitz) war es sehr laut, oben war es ok. entsprechend habe ich da sehr viel zeit verbracht. auch praktisch: oben war die verpflegung. anonsten habe ich ein paar vorträge geguckt. wie immer bei solchen veranstaltungen viel weniger als auf der liste :) empfehlungen in dem sinn kann ich hier nicht aussprechen. ich hätte mir bei ein paar theme was anderes/mehr tiefe gewünscht, aber das ist ja nicht das problem vom clt. bei vielen vorträgen fand ich aber genau das gegenteil gut: sie waren sehr gut für einsteiger*innen. und ich denke das ist auf so veranstaltungen sehr wichtig. es gab viele schöne gespräche und einen schönen abend im lokomov. nächstes jahr reise ich freitags an. kleine notiz an den zukunfts-wiu.

#clt2026 #wiulinuslog

When “Nuance” Becomes a Shield: The “Enlightened Centrist”

Some commentators choose to acknowledge the complexities present in difficult situations. They may observe the actions of different groups and note, with some resignation, that extremes can be found on all sides.

This performance of wisdom can sometimes lack the courage to address tough realities. Nuance may be expressed without a full understanding, and balance may require overlooking important context. And that’s exactly what’s happening in these posts.

The argument goes like this: trans people say “trans women are women,” anti‑trans activists say “trans women are men,” and both sides are just shouting slogans instead of engaging with the “complexity” of the issue. The writer positions himself as the lone adult in the room, the one brave enough to admit that the world isn’t simple, that slogans don’t solve policy, that ideologues on all sides are ruining everything.

It sounds reasonable until you look at what’s actually being equated. And you can’t talk about nuance until you start from a foundation of humanity.

“Trans women are women” is not a slogan. It’s a statement of identity, safety, and recognition. The baseline from which any good‑faith conversation can even begin. “Trans women are men” is not a slogan either. It’s a denial of identity. A justification for exclusion. A political project aimed at restricting rights and access. These are not mirror images. They are not two teams chanting across a football field. They are not equal claims with equal stakes.

One is a community asserting its existence. The other is a movement trying to legislate that existence out of public life. Calling them symmetrical isn’t nuance. It’s erasure dressed up as sophistication.

You cannot have a nuanced conversation about healthcare access if you deny that the person sitting across from you is a real person. You cannot debate sports inclusion if you refuse to acknowledge the athlete’s gender. You cannot “compromise” on someone’s right to exist.

And the sleight‑of‑hand doesn’t stop there. Once he flattens the trans debate into “two simplistic sides,” he zooms out to abortion, then the Middle East, then polarization in general. This is a rhetorical trick: when your argument is weak in the specific, you universalize it. You turn a concrete issue with real power dynamics into a grand philosophical meditation on human nature.

But not all conflicts are interchangeable. Not all disagreements are symmetrical. Not all clarity is simplistic.

Some truths are simple because they’re foundational. Some positions are clear because they’re rooted in lived experience, not ideology. Some stakes are non‑negotiable because the alternative is harm.

The existence of trans people is not a geopolitical puzzle. It’s not a negotiation between equal parties. It’s not a matter of “everyone needs to compromise.”

You don’t compromise on whether someone is allowed to exist. You don’t compromise on whether someone deserves safety. You don’t compromise on whether someone’s identity is real. And here’s the quiet part these “reasonable centrists” never say out loud: Nuance is only meaningful when you start from a place of recognition.

So when someone tells you the issue is “really complex,” look closely at what they’re calling complex. If the complexity is being used to obscure harm, flatten power, or avoid taking a stance and that’s not nuance it's cowardice dressed as wisdom.

And let’s name the quiet cowardice at the heart of this performance. To say “it’s complicated” when the answer is clear is not wisdom. It is fear. Fear of being unpopular. Fear of being wrong. Fear of being on the wrong side of history and yet unwilling to stand on the right side now.

But history does not reward the “balanced.” It remembers those who acted. Those who said, clearly, bravely, “This is wrong,” even when it was easier to sigh and look away.

Nuance is valuable and Clarity is too. These people are one of the many problems with US voters. They stand by the sidelines believing that they are the reasonable ones however they are in the way of progress and responsible for the regression of Dementia God Emperor Chetto. Christian Nationalism is not Christ like and legislating morality their religion dictates is not freedom and the opposite. The truth is this: Nuance without recognition is nihilism.

Generally “Enlightened Centrist” are those who are social and “fiscal” conservatives that are too afraid to admit it. Anyone that has opinions that are strongly for oppression is just as bad as the people implementing it. It's the same story as Civil Rights Movement of the 60's.

As MLK JR. said “I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice.”

Because why push for a better America for everyone when one can complain that it might be decisive.

Today i saw a post on tumblr complaining about a trans woman being shitty to trans men, with someone putting „this is why im wary of transfems“ and „they actually legitimately scare me“ in the tags. And i sympathise because i have similar irrational anxiety towards transmascs *¹.

I dont begrudge transmasc people for being resentful of transfem people based on the constant barrage of transandromisia and ignorance coming out of transfem spaces. Transfem people need to realise that there is a genuine big problem. But i also need transmasc people to realise that transfem people expirience very similar things from transmasc spaces and also carry resentment based on actual hurt. What i need transmascs to realise is that a lot of transmasc spaces i have seen back in my twitter days and especially on tumblr are exhibiting the same patterns of behaviour they rightfully complain about in transfems without realising it. Quantifying any of this is impossible, so i wont even try. There are transfem radfems, but trans radfem is not limited to transfems. I have seen transmasc radfem, based around the idea of female and male socialisation. There are both transfem and transmasc people who try to manouver themselves into the „victimised class“ of primitive feminism while claiming the other group to belong to the „oppressor class“. Transfem people who more or less openly claim themselves as part of the „victimised class“ for being women, and claiming transmasc people as part of the „oppressor class“ for being men. And transmasc people who more or less openly claim themselves as part of the „victimised class“ for having female socialisation, and claiming transfem people as part of the „oppressor class“ for supposedly having male socialisation. I remember an example in the time a transmasc person on Twitter posted about how all the white transfems are supposedly racist, but none of their white transmasc friends are racist, and transmasc people in the replies argued that this must be because white transfems supposedly grow up super privileged while white transmascs grow up to not be racist because of the misogyny they face. Yes racism is a problem in trans spaces but this line of argument is a radfem argument. I remember the quite popular thread by a transmasc complaining about radfem trans women doing self-victimisation and dismissing suffering of trans men, and then claimed they were just like Incels and MRAs. I think that even was the person that posted on the same day about being „hounded by accusations of transmisogyny“, i might be misremembering though. Equating egocentric transandromisic trans women to violent misogynist cis men is really transmisogynist for anybody that didnt immediately catch that. And transmasc mutuals that thought themselves aware shared this thread. At least the person i DMed to explain did eventually understand. This is a pattern i have seen so many times: Transmasc and transfem people being completely oblivious to the transmisogyny and transandromisia they peddle, thinking themselves to be unable to do harm. I’ve seen many transfem people claim transmasc people have „joined the oppressors“, villainise Testosterone, justify transandromisic and exorsexist slurs and similar clown shit without giving it a second thought.

There is a problem both in transmasc and transfem spaces of self-victimisation, villainisation of other trans people, isolation into echo chambers. None of you are the „smoll bean“, none of you are unable to do harm. Anybody who claims their flavour of trans to be the sole punching bag of transness is flat out wrong, because there is a lot of punching going around. Anybody who thinks they can only ever punch up is prone to cause a lot of unjustified hurt. Anybody who believes that only people like themselves are „safe“ and all other queer people are evil and out to get them are going to end up in spiraling echo chambers.

Transmisogyny provides the grounds for villainising transfems. Transandromisia provides the grounds for villainising transmascs. When i look at transmasc spaces, i see a lack of awareness and care for transmisogyny. And when i look at transfem spaces, i even see a lot of clowns treating the very concept of transandromisia as a joke or an attack and openly peddle radfem ideology.

I have seen a lot of heinous transmisogyny from transmasc people on the internet. I have also seen a lot of heinous transandromisia from transfem people on the internet. Both of these things can be true at the same time. I have also seen a lot of heinous exorsexism but thats not the point of this text.

There is no flavour of trans people that has it too good or too easy. There is no flavour of trans people that is overrepresented in media. From personal memory, i remember 1 sympathetic portrayal of a trans woman and a whole bunch of trans woman villains. I remember 2 sympathetic portrayals of trans men. Thats shit, thats nothing to be envious of, even though there are queer people who have even worse representation. We are much more likely to expirience sexualised violence than cis people. We are much more likely to expirience homelessness than cis people. We are more likely to be killed than cis people. We have a lower life expectancy than cis people. Its shit, and its important to talk about specifics of suffering (especially when intersecting with other forms of marginalisation), but minimising others suffering or focusing on envy is misguided.

A lot of us have expiriences of hurt and trauma through other queer and trans people. But it is incredibly difficult and perilous to try to extrapolate from these personal expiriences of hurt and trauma to generalisations of society, at least when it comes to relations between queer people *². There are a lot of different expiriences of hierarchies and hurt among trans people, but people need to realise that these expiriences are extremely dependant on context and will look extremely different in different contexts. But none of these expiriences should be constructed into some kind of universal truth about queer people of certain flavours being inherently victims and queer people of other flavours being inherently oppressors.

The expiriences of hurt are real, the trauma and feelings are real. But they must not delude us into radfem ideology. We must keep trying to work on our trauma and try to not let it make us hurt others. We must keep trying to be aware of our trauma and not search out theoretical justifications for unhealthy trauma-induced reactions. And we must try to keep in mind that the people we talk to and have fights with in trans spaces are almost guaranteed to have lots of trauma and hurt as well. I started sketching this text after shaking and spiralling because of trauma being triggered by transmascs on tumblr, i know that you dont have reasonable thoughts in those moments. We need to give each other more grace and also just block more if necessary. Just blocking is always preferrable to having public escalating fights between groups of triggered trans people.

I will risk making a sweeping claim of my own: I think the danger transmascs as a whole pose to me is miniscule compared to the danger posed by cis people. And i do think the danger an average transmasc person poses to me is very much lower than the danger posed to me by an average cis person. And i think the same is true for the danger posed by transfems to transmascs. And i think we have a lot to offer each other. Trans people who would rather ally themselves with cis women over their fellow trans people are misguided. But that also means we have to work to understand and accomodate each other.

*¹ For context, i am an AMAB nonbinary genderfluid person. Transfemininity is part of my gender but most of the time not the foremost part. I do identify with femininity and masculinity to a varying extend. I write this text from a transfem perspective because thats mainly how this topic impacts me. Im mainly talking about transmasculinity and transfemininity in this text because thats how these topics are usually framed, i know there are other trans people, nonbinary people, genderqueer people etc.

*² When i talk about expiriences of hurt and trauma, i am not talking about racism, ableism, classism, antisemitism or other forms of discrimination that also take place in queer spaces. I will not attempt to negotiate these to any significant extend in this text.