Avatar

listen, there’s literally no way around the fact that tumblr keeps f/f ships on a much shorter, much more heavily policed leash than it does het ships and m/m ships. in particular, people will list excuse after excuse as to why that female character can’t possibly be a lesbian, so to all the lesbian fangirls out there:

it’s okay to headcanon canonically straight characters as lesbians.

i’m serious. it doesn’t matter if they’re canonically in a relationship with a man. it doesn’t matter if other fans tell you that you have to hc them as bi or pan because ‘they’re into guys’. it doesn’t matter. if a character is canonically bi/pan/any other marginalized orientation, then definitely don’t erase that. if you want to headcanon a straight female character as bi or pan, that’s great too! bi/pan girls are amazing and your headcanons for them are wonderful. but i also know that one of the things that can be hardest to come to terms with about being a lesbian is not being into guys in a world that tries to build your self worth around your availability to men. anyone who claims that a female character can’t be a lesbian because they’ve been with a guy is completely invalidating the complicated feelings that compulsory heterosexuality can cause for wlw. you can headcanon her as a lesbian if you think she’s a lesbian, regardless of her canon dating history/relationship status. and anyone who says ‘you can’t headcanon them as a lesbian because i think they’re actually bi/pan/straight’ is being an asshole, since headcanons are personal and don’t affect canon anyway.

it’s okay to headcanon canonically straight characters as a lesbians. 

your sexuality is valid and identifying with it in your faves is 100% okay.

i love you.

(and psa to anyone who harasses young lesbians on this hell site for doing this: you’re disgusting. grow the fuck up and leave lgbt minors alone with their awesome lesbian headcanons. they’re not hurting you.)

survey closed!

thanks so much to everyone who participated! 100 responses were collected. unfortunately, surveymonkey won’t allow access to any answers beyond that without signing up for a “pro plan,” but i think 100 is probably sufficient considering the number of requests/submissions this blog receives. at least for now.

what the data really shows, i think, is that no one group is a monolith. i noticed several comments from cis respondents who either said that the policy on canonically male characters was important to trans women, or that it was harmful to them. but i received some very passionate commentary from trans women on either side of the fence. to paraphrase a few of them:

  • “I’m a masculine-looking trans woman and I relate to these characters. I would feel more dysphoric if I didn’t see these headcanons.”
  • “I feel comfort in being able to submit characters that are portrayed as stereotypically male. Seeing ‘(x) is a woman and a lesbian’ makes my headcanons feel validated.”
  • “I’m not comfortable with it; it seems like it compares trans women to male actors.”

there are some statistics under the cut- the ones i feel are most important. further data is available upon request, if there’s anything else you think is relevant or interesting. in light of the results, the policy will most likely be changed so that only trans women can submit canonically male characters. i think this is sensitive to the needs of both those who are uncomfortable with it and those who find it validating.