hello i just want to say that i understand the thought process behind “wlw cant fetishize women” and i understand where this comes from but also its still relevant to the conversation to talk about how white wlw sexualize woc. i saw a post claiming that bringing this up is derailing and that “ppl know what we mean” but i really dont think it is!

white wlw need to be aware of how they view woc. they need to be conscious of this sexualization. conscious of how they speak about our bodies. conscious of how they touch us. conscious of their expectations on our sexuality and wants and desires. white women have a long history of violence! yall contribute to our fetishization and abuse!! its relevant to the conversation and it may be uncomfortable to acknowledge but it needs to be said and heard.

a woman viewing another woman sexually is not inherently dehumanizing, but you still need to take into consideration the way race plays into it.

jasper-rolls:

there’s a difference between “just do a little yoga it will cure your depression forever :)” and “going for a run won’t solve your problems but it will make you feel a little better and that’s the first step” but this site seems to treat them as the same thing

Taking care of yourself is still good even if it won’t cure you. Cleaning my room won’t cure my anxiety or make me less lonely but it is a healthier environment to live in.

startrekgenerator:

you fucked-up a perfectly good vulcan is what you did. look at it. it’s got this simple feeling

trans-mom:

Some people on this site will talk about gender being a social construct and that sex is bullshit, but still refuse to break out of the man/woman dichotomy. They come across people identifying with space or stars or something and ridicule them for not being the Stamp of Approval Non-Binary Gender™ and start cursing the mogai acronym no different than the anti-sjws and transphobes that spew similar rhetoric.

dustyhobo:

yes

[id: the car salesman meme. the car salesman has a thick moustache and bright yellow jacket. the text reads:

car salesman:

*slaps roof of car*

*claps his hands*

*slaps roof of car*

*claps his hands*

*slaps roof of car*

*claps his hands*]

Source: dustyhobo

this isnt even a criticism i just find it hilarious

chefpyro:

peridot: we were created to serve the diamonds, i love the diamonds, the diamonds are perfect in every way

yellow diamond: *makes an irrational decision*

peridot: actually you know what fuck that, fuck you, fuck the diamonds *spends the rest of the series dumping on the diamonds at every opportunity*

new rule if you say shit like ‘i don’t care about ace discourse either way’ and then do weird shit like, reblogging both positivity for ace people but also those “lol, look this ace said something cringey” posts, i unfollow you. i don’t like playing this guessing game of ‘yeah they just reblogged something gross from someone who thinks aces are fucking “invaders”, except they haven’t explicitly shared the same sentiment yet, so maybe they’re still ok to follow?”. or like, “sure it’s a punchline about aces being homophobic/transphobic/incels (fucking what?) but maybe they meant this person specifically and not as a group?” it’s a huge source of anxiety feeling like i’m just waiting for you to share the same sentiment.

i definitely Get You that Discourse Tumblr is a garbage fire and an endless source of anxiety and i do a lot to distance itself from it now. but like. if you don’t want to have a “discourse stance” then like… those cringey ace memes are a discourse stance. it means ace people who read your blog get to be subjected to this same guessing game

startrekgenerator:

star trek is a lesbian

profeminist:

UPDATE TO TRANSGENDER STYLE GUIDE: AVOIDING INVALIDATING LANGUAGE TRAPS

Full description of the featured image for the post “Update to Transgender Style Guide: Avoiding Invalidating Language Traps” (word bubbles and text that illustrate an update to the style guide):

Title: The Radical Copyeditor’s Style Guide for Writing About Transgender People: 2.8-2.11: Avoiding Invalidating Language Traps

Speech bubbles contrast the following phrases under the headings “Invalidating language” versus “Validating language”: “Women and trans women” versus “Cis and trans women”; “Students who consider themselves ‘non-binary’” versus “Non-binary students”; “Zed, who identifies as agender” versus “Zed is agender”; “her secret was exposed” versus “her history was publicized”; “closeted,” “stealth,” and “passes” versus “private” and “nondisclosure”; and “an out trans man” versus “openly trans” and “public.”

Source: profeminist

argumate:

unknought:

argumate:

judiciousimprecation:

argumate:

judiciousimprecation:

argumate:

unknought:

“Catgirl” may be used metonymically to refer to a larger clade which contains true catgirls as its largest subtype but also includes cuttlefishgirls (aka cuttlegirls) and the elusive crowgirl.

cowgirls

incidentally, also an ambiguous category that includes at least two very distinct subtypes

when he says he wants to try doing it cowgirl style, get clarification before jumping to conclusions

“should I get the lasso or the bucket”

saddle up or udders down, you might say

what have you done to my post

milked it for all that it’s worth!