Avatar

assigned transsexual at birth

@coolfroggyfriend / coolfroggyfriend.tumblr.com

He/him. Icon by @nuka-rockit. My art blog is @froggyfriendart. l I block all Twitter refugees! I'm sorry! Yall are just fucking annoying!

Hi! This user is a dyke!

If you're bothered by the words "queer" or "dyke" (or any variation thereupon) I advise you to stay off my blog as a whole, because I use it to describe my everyday experiences as a queer person and my posts mentioning it often go untagged.

I am not obligated to answer your questions the moment you ask them, nor am I obligated to answer them at all, and I hope you respect that. I block liberally, do not take it personal if I block you. If I ever say something in poor taste, please tell me so I can correct it. It can be on anon if you want, but if you don't tell me I won't be able to fix it. I am also human, and capable of error.

Fandoms I'm involved in (come talk to me!):

  • RWBY
  • Discworld
  • Disco Elysium
  • The Dragon Prince
  • The Witcher (games and books)
  • The Wizard of Oz (and related books)
  • Sherlock Holmes (the books only, BBC sherlock can die in a ditch for what they did to the hound of Baskerville <3)
  • Warehouse 13
  • Sky: Children of the Light
  • Critical Role
  • D&D in general
  • The Locked Tomb
  • Detroit: Become Human
  • The Magnus Archives
  • Hades

My socials:

@froggyfriendart : My art blog :)

@yangsass : Shitpost blog, rarely used

@coolferret : I bookmark things on this account. It is not an active blog.

Posts with potentially triggering content get tagged with the following (Filter them out if you don't want to see these posts.)

enough of this “immortality is a curse” nonsense. “but after millions of years you still have to live another day tomorrow!” yes, and on that day there will be tomato soup and grilled cheese sandwich. sounds like a good deal to me

every time a law is passed under a header stopping just shy of being, like, "the exterminate all trannies act 2023" inevitably there's a discussion on here going on about how some slight minutiae of it is worded incorrectly, and that such a law will affect real cis women too! the horror. except, of course, it never does and never will, because that simply isn't the - extremely clear cut - intent behind it! and all we get out of this charade is people using it as an excuse to completely separate trans women from being the victims of their own oppression, as it happens, in real time. wunderbar.

It's the same appeal to hypocracy that liberals and moderates fucking love to deploy despite the fact that fascists don't care about being hypocrites. 'If you read it a certain way, cis women are affected, which means that if only trans people are targeted then it's inconsistent!' none of the people pushing trans genocide care about consistency - hell, their entire worldview hinges on double standards.

The other deployment is along the lines of 'look at these dipshits they can't even write the genocide laws correctly' which. is not helpful.

like, i've never seen 'cis people could be affected by this' deployed to honestly try to convince anyone who doesn't already think that trans people should be allowed to be alive. it wouldn't be rhetorically effective. It's just also not a particularly useful sentiment in the contexts where it *does* get deployed.

in recent years, there's been a push in therapeutic circles to shift the language from "attention-seeking" to "connection-seeking" behavior.

i was an attention-seeker. i was the textbook example of an attention-seeker. i was a troublemaker. i would self-harm. i destroyed my own relationships. i was uncontrolled, dramatic, sensitive. i took everything personally. i had "nothing" to be depressed "about," but made a big show of how sad i was nonetheless. i was really unsafe about myself in a lot of ways.

the strange thing about that is: it meant others could ignore me. the prevailing wisdom behind knowing something is "attention seeking" is to say: well, since you want it that bad, you're not getting any. it meant i was lower-on-the-list of concern. it meant an eye-roll.

the belief was that: since i was obviously doing these things on purpose, it would be bad behavioral training if i was "rewarded" for it. it would "teach me" that i simply had to make enough fuss, and i'd finally get all that missing attention and love. no, it was better to ignore that stuff.

i was suffering. and it felt like - oh, it doesn't matter how loudly i am in pain, nobody gives a shit about if i'm living or dying.

awhile ago, i went through my journals from that time. a lot of them read the same thing. in them, i am convinced i am invisible. that nobody wants to hear me, to see me. that i could die or vanish and nobody would even notice. i didn't even want attention - not really - because it was always dismissive, mocking. nothing i ever did would be good enough to get someone to actually-worry about me.

that's a terrifying thing for me to read as an adult. that is a child who fully has no problem committing. that is a child who has no concept of feeling loved. the most basic human instinct is missing from her life.

i needed help. i didn't know how to ask for it. i was a kid. i was a kid in a bad home, and whenever i thought things couldn't get worse there - they almost always did.

and the ways i showed that - the ways i tried to deal with that - they made others dismiss me. i wasn't suffering prettily. after all, if i was really in trouble, why wouldn't i just march into the first counselor's office and ask someone to help me? i had the opportunities, right? what did i think would happen, exactly? that someone would finally stand up and do something? who even wants that kind of responsibility?

i heard connection-seeking for the first time about three months ago. my therapist mentioned it when we were talking about my history. it rang some kind of horrible bell, deep inside me. i don't know what she said in the rest of her sentence. i just started... crying.

"oh no", i said to her. "i think i just realized: i have no idea how to forgive them for minimizing the ways i was hurting."

how many other kids, though. how many other kids were out there drowning, snatching around for a lifevest, some kind of rope - how many were straight-up ignored.

how many of those kids aren't gonna get old.

male and female are not opposing forces that cancel each other out. you're allowed to be both, at the same time, even, if that's how you feel. you can be a boy who's a girl. you can be a girl who's a boy. same with masculinity and femininity. they're not mutually exclusive. you don't have to sacrifice one to have the other. you dont have to choose one to like and one to hate. you CAN have both, again, if that's how you feel.

...actually now that i think about it. did you have religion class in school? also was it mandatory??

extra points reblog and tell me where youre from in the tags because for us religion* is a non-mandatory class where in high school you don't get grades but extra points that might help you in other classes**

*and with that i mean Christianity Class because wow i love being in the same region where the pope is /s ** which is the only reason i kept attending

Avatar

Sorry, my what? My pronouns? Oh, yeah I'm between genders at the moment. No, it's cool, I quit my last gender a little while ago because it really wasn't working out. I don't know if I even have a dream gender anymore.

Avatar

Oh yeah, it did come with benefits, but they weren't really worth it. The culture was really toxic. To be honest I think I'd prefer a part-time gender so I can just be self-described in my spare time.

that "we did XYZ to your boyfriend" meme immediately started sucking ass when it stopped being goofy shit like "oh we saved your boyfriend as a jpeg" y'all don't have the range to talk about anything more complicated and also none of y'all are funny enough to do it either

we turned your boyfriend into an unfunny meme. yeah we've run him to the ground and now hes not as funny was he was before. sorry bout that.