Anyway, I'm sure you can guess what's coming.
... I don't think this bears further introduction, really.
If you could ask the leader of your country anything, what would it be?
What's it like knowing you are inept and weak?
"How do you plan to do on living with this knife jammed straight through your heart?"
All right take it easy. He's inept, but unfortunately that isn't a crime worthy of death.
It should be I'll grant, but it isn't.
No, not really. Few things are worth killing over, and I don't think this is one. Besides, killing a politician for being corrupt and morally bankrupt would lead to either a lot of work or (accurate) accusations of hypocrisy when you didn't do all the others.
Very true.
I've often thought that killing one politician for being scum would necessitate a lot of killing.
Then I read that samurai would often obliterate entire familial lines for similar reasons, as did the Romans so I can't say it isn't impossible.
I feel slightly sour, tonight. As though I've had a couple of drinks, and maybe not enough to eat, and then the drink has soured inside me and made me the same.
It's not to do with events. I had a really good night on Thursday, a nice night in a pub on Friday, and exciting trip to Newcastle on Saturday to do vampire roleplaying, and a fun afternoon at a munch today. I don't remember much of today, I was too tired, but it seemed fun at the time.
... Is this the second blog in a month that has prominently featured vampire roleplaying?
I hope?
What was/is your favorite class?
Pffffft I dunno.
Paladin.
Oh, wait, is that not what you meant?
LOL
Idiot.
Who has paladin as their favorite class?
I had an awesome paladin planned out once in the long ago dark time when I did play D&D like a nerdling, speaking of. Wasn't allowed to run it because he wasn't "lawful enough".
Cue 2 hour debate about the definition of law versus chaos.
Then they later added the class I really wanted to be to the game after I quit. Thanks a lot.
Grey Guard.
Apparently this is a thing I do now.
The entry is entitled "passing", incidentally.
As in passing for-- man or woman, as the case may be.
I'm guessing man passing as woman because it's the safe bet.
My appearance and mannerisms are acceptably within cis norms, and therefore I am no longer instantly read as trans by everyone I meet. I can tell, because in addition to the torrent of abuse dying down (several months ago) the torrent of whispers has also died down, and men keep hitting on me.
Yes, I am awesome.
Man, I am so good at this bullshit.
Other trans people have written about this like it's the holy grail. Like once it happens, everything will be perfect. I've heard the phrase "it's just so validating" chucked around with varying numbers of exclamation marks after it. I don't understand this
You're not fooling me. No deception survives my sight.
It's nice to be less visible. I enjoy that.
It's sort-of-almost flattering to be chatted up by men, until you realise they'd do that to anyone they believe to be in possession of boobs and a vagina. Then it stops being flattering and starts being irritating.
DECISION YOU MADE.
It's like in FFXIV when I advertised the fact I could fix your shit.
Then I got pissed when people started asking me to repair their shit.
No, I didn't. I just started charging.
I do like the people who think I'll fix their shit for nothing, though.
I'm not running a charity, buddy.
"But I have no money!" someone seriously argued today.
Well, come back when you do.
Goodbye.
It's not validating, not for me at least. I know what the general public think of me - I remember them shouting it at me. Now they've stopped shouting. So what's changed? They've suddenly stopped being cruel and cowardly?
Cruelty can be a positive trait--
I think--
cowardly is never good, though.
No. I've stopped being a despised target? No. I've merely stopped being perceived as a despised target (in a trans sense. There's still that whole "sexism" thing going on). They're still cruel and they're still cowards and they're still hostile to people like me, it's just that now I'm demonstrating that they're also relatively easy to fool.
Lord knows I wouldn't be half as rich as I am in FFXIV if people weren't easy to fool.
Is there a real life situation that the parable that is FFXIV can't be applied to?
Of course not.
Made some high quality horn glue today.
Another 600,000 in my pocket~
That was such a fluke thing, too. Just grinding some out to sell no quality. Make a little money on the side but mostly in it for the experience when bam, horn glue +2.
It's not validating for me to know this. It's not validating to know that I'm only considered a non-target because I am successfully lying (about being cis).
I'm sure there are people who would call me insensitive for calling her deceptive earlier but she just admits she's successful at lying.
The definition of deceptive.
Actually I guess success has nothing to do with it but the lying part does.
I can't place any trust in people who are only being polite because they don't know what I am, and I can't build any sort of friendship or relationship on that.
So you don't give them a chance to prove they wouldn't be polite knowing the truth--
Even if a guy were sympathetic to this situation and would still date you he has to know that taking more hormones than a pregnant won't make you an easy person to deal with.
Personally I don't think anything at all about this although I do question why a heterosexually geared man wouldn't follow my plan, but then again as I've demonstrated time and again most people aren't as smart as I am.
Common birth, common man.
This does raise an interesting point, though. If this person was born a man but can pass as a female so convincingly no one can tell (I don't buy it but let's assume for the sake of this deep, philosophical issue) and a guy knew this person was born a man but still chose to hit that, would he be gay?
I mean ultimately he was originally attracted to features that are feminine--
I don't know, honestly.
I just want to know why you'd mess with that when there are DBGs about.
One thing I'm willing to admit is from a philosophical standpoint I have a very narrow range of interests and this isn't one of them so I'm not equipped to answer whether or not being attracted to traps makes you gay or not.
was trying to describe myself physically the other day, and I couldn't work out how. There are plenty of words that I could use that are accurate, but they're only accurate in a literal sense, not in a contextual one. I could say that I'm "big". this is literally true. I am larger than the majority of women my age.
Of course, that is assuming this person is so feminine as to fool me, which has already been established as so unlikely it's almost impossible.
I'd say practically speaking being attracted to traps at the very minimum makes you kind of gay.
But if I describe myself as "big" then contextually that could also be phrased as "distinctly chubby". I don't think I am. I'm over a BMI of 25, but that's more down to muscle than fat. I could describe myself as "heavily muscled", but that conjures up images of body-builders.
... SOOOO FEMININE SHE FOOLS MEN!
You have a BMI that calls you fat but you aren't fat, it's all muscle tone.
I can literally only think of two people who are like that and they are Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone.
It's difficult to think of two less feminine people than those two.
In fact, Sylvester Stallone is one of two people injected straight into the grim darkness of the far future without changes.
I have obvious muscles, but that's not what I look like. I could say I have an "athletic" build, but "athletic" is (contextually) carrying less weight (both muscle and fat) than me. I could say I'm "lean", but contextually I think that implies, well, a narrower figure.
No. I've seen athletic people and none of them have a BMI of 25.
I'm wide in the shoulder (and as it turns out not that small in the arse). I could say I'm "toned", and that's sort of true too... but it's the same problem as "athletic" - it implies an "I do lots of jogging" figure, which is not what's going on here. I could say "curvy", and that's true too, now... but I'm back on "big".
How about this? I'm a trained and highly qualified litfag who came from natural talent in the field. Show me your image and I will describe you.
I could just give some numbers, but what do those mean?
... A lot, actually. Numbers exist to eliminate subjectivity.
So I'm at a bit of an impasse. The two most common adjectives used to describe me are "cute" and "scary", neither of which is helpful.
No, those are the words I use to describe my FFXIV character and I guarantee you don't look like her.
I'm tired of being told my muscles will shrink. I'm tired of people telling it to me semi-gloatingly. I'm tired of people telling it to me "as a warning". I'm tired of people telling it to me as though it's a good thing. It isn't. I don't want less muscle and I don't want to have to work harder to maintain the stuff I've got. I'm not going to stop taking hormones, but that doesn't mean that all the effects are good and pure joy.
Yes they are. It's a marvel of technology.
If there's one undeniable positive of this entire thing it's that this is clear proof that the mastery of the technology of man is so complete it even extends as far as our biology.
No Space Marines yet, though.
Born too late to be a Knights Templar, born too soon to be a Space Marine.
WHY.
I don't want to lose an inch in height if/when my cartilage shrinks.
But these are things women are. They have less muscle mass than men (on average). They are shorter than men (on average).
Though I have met women both taller and more ripped than I, paragon of manliness though I am, so it does it happen that way but I'd hardly think someone trying to "pass as a woman" would consider losing muscle mass or height a negative.
I don't want to lose a shoe size while I can't afford to replace all my shoes (though if I could, fine I suppose).
Jesus, does this really happen?
There are drugs that decrease things as fundamental as height in an adult and it isn't somehow draining all the calcium in your body?
Why aren't there Space Marines, again?
I need one legitimate reason that isn't boo-hoo ethical nonsense.
I am starting to feel a little persecuted now. On the inside I feel like an Imperial Fist Space Marine and yet there aren't miracle drugs to make me look how I feel on the inside.
Some people might see a bit of difference between a man wanting to be a woman and a man wanting to be a nine foot tall genetically engineered killing machine who can spit acid and breathe underwater but I consider the issues the same at their core.
I don't want my cartilage to shrink at all if it means an increase in my joint problems. I don't particularly want a lack of erectile function - as long as I have this penis, I want to get some use out of it!
In fact, I'd say my desire to be a Space Marine is purer than your desire to be a woman. I would be willing to risk the incredible metabolic strain that claim so many initiates.
Futurama. A programme I enjoy, usually. Episode from season 7 (or possibly 6), titled
"Neutopia". The episode was basically wall to wall sexist stereotypes, with a pro-male bias. Also obviously the usual utter lack of acknowledgement that anyone trans or non-binary could exist. It hurts because I expected better, I think.
Futurama is a great show.
The only bit I could even half agree with was the romantic line that I might be paraphrasing: "I don't care what bits I've got, as long as it's you I'm sharing them with."
Nice line, cis writer. Now fucking try it. Come back when you've found out how dysphoria feels.
... Except that doesn't make funny jokes.
Leave the comedy to the professionals, please.
Today is one of those days. I'm not part of this society, I just happen to live in the same place.
I'm not part of society, using electricity and the computer and the internet and living in shelter.
Today I had one of those thoughts that seemed utterly revelatory to me, but which I rapidly realised would probably seem axiomatically obvious to anyone who'd already had it. Is there a name for those?
Common sense?
I don't know.
I'm still debating about how redundant the phrase "axiomatically obvious" is.
An axiom, by definition, is something that isn't proven (mathematically) but is so evident it doesn't need further proof.
Logically, shit like a + b = b + a.
Or, to make it even clearer, shit like a = a.
This is it: some people consider the definitions of words to be personal things - they consider that their definition is their and only theirs, and they don't mind that other people use the same word to mean something different.
I certainly fucking do mind when people have different definitions for shit than me. I've spent a great deal of time to make sure my speech is as clear and concise as possible and here you retards come along and fuck it all up.
Unless I've been defining a word incorrectly (unlikely) our definitions should agree. I hate to be narrow-minded about this but I can say with confidence that if our definitions don't agree there is a fair chance you are mistaken.
The slightly more surprising (to me, anyway) thing is this: from personal observations it seems this viewpoint difference is somewhat socially gendered. That what we might call the "personal" viewpoint is correlated with being raised female, while what we might call the "standardised" viewpoint is correlated with being raised male.
Call me a woman but I willingly acknowledge my viewpoint is often atypical.
This fits strangely with trans politics I've observed. Trans women (generalisation alert!) seem to argue more over the definitions of words, while the trans men seem to just make them up (or use them how they like) as they go along, and then get offended when you point out that they are nowhere near the usual definition.
I'd appreciate it if people would stop using bionics and cybernetics interchangeably, incidentally.
Cybernetics are an attempt to make an artificial living system (artificial intelligence, for example) versus bionics, which are an attempt to integrate man and machine.
They are both very important to the future of man but they aren't the same.
A troll on fetlife started a thread about having a munch for "those of size 12 and under, and admirers".
Fetlife.
Not the first time I've run into Fetlife thanks to Livejournal, you know.
Not sure what a munch is.
Dare I Wikipedia this?
Oh, let's.
A munch (short for burger munch) is a low-pressure social gathering for people involved in or interested in BDSM, usually at a restaurant.
Or "lunch" as we normal people call it.
He did this because he's a troll, looking for an argument, and some guy he was arguing with before had been in favour of a BBW munch. The thread was unpleasant in places. Most people who commented did not recognise it for trolling.
One common theme is expressed here:
"I'm inclined to agree that if BBW munches are perfectly acceptable, then this is perfectly acceptable too, though I'm undecided as to whether either is desirable, as I'm not keen on anything divisive.
I'm inclined to agree there are drugs that can decrease height and muscle mass but there aren't any to increase them. I'll agree some of the Space Marine implants are a little far off and perhaps a bit impractical but there should at least be proto-Space Marines if what I'm reading is correct.
But accepting one and not the other amounts to double-standards, on the usual basis that political correctness sides with the 'oppressed minority.' I wonder how many of the people who are objecting aren't actually over size 12 themselves but feel driven to do the right thing on behalf of those that are."
I don't want to date any fat women.
I don't care if that makes me a sexist pig but I'm not fat, I don't want my lady friend to be either.
That's probably what this guy is thinking, too. He just likes different things than I do.
I feel for you, brother. You have a difference of opinion and suddenly you're a troll.
Not really how trolling works, guys.
If we accept that group X are discriminated against, then we don't need to provide a service for not-X. We do not, for example, need a cis-people only munch to balance the trans-people munch that some misguided cis person set up in London. The point of equal opportunities is not to give everyone the same stuff and call that fair. It's to give people who are disadvantaged more stuff in an attempt to make up for the acknowledged disadvantage.
Yeah, that was pointless. But I'm grumpy about it.
So let me see if I can keep this bullshit straight: you're a man who passes (sarcasm quotes) as a woman and is indeed transgendered and you're into the bondage thing.
And there's a thing called a munch and bondage people do this, because--
Anyway, there's one for fat people (or skinny people) and so the other group wants one and everyone is butthurt.
Do you people post on the FFXIV boards, by any chance? Because all I'm reading is a lot of nonsense.
Also, in order for your description of yourself to be of any value in conversation, the words you use have to be understood or at least decipherable by the people you're having a conversation with. The phrase "kinky sex-positive polyamorous heterodemisexual queer panromantic femme genderqueer transsexual man" has some problems with it
Has a few problems, really?
Just a few?
"Polyamorous" is just fancy for "slut" in my book.
"heterodemisexual" I had to look up, and I'm not convinced it warrants a word.
I'd have to look that one up too but I assume it means attracted to the opposite sex-- demi means half.
Half attracted to the opposite sex.
Apparently "demisexual" means you're not sexually attracted to people unless you're romantically attracted to them (which doesn't really seem to need saying),
On the contrary, you can easily be sexually attracted to someone without being romantically interested.
This is where the Greeks have this shit right: erotic love doesn't automatically imply romantic love.
and since "hetero" is in there presumably you're only sexually attracted to women? All told then, I don't think this word is doing anything useful.
I will agree it is a bullshit word.
In fact, I'm refusing to classify it as a real word.
Anyway it's late and I'm going now.
Bye losers.
No comments:
Post a Comment