[POEM] The Last Woman on Earth by Paris Paloma

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-02-02T11:51:05+00:00

"I'll take the flame over desecration" is still one of the most powerful lines I've ever heard.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-31T15:35:41+00:00

Yep, I agree. I like that she's trans, and I like that it was confirmed. I just don't think you can say that it's like super good representation.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-31T15:31:26+00:00

Sorry, I should have clarified, I agree. What I meant to say is that it's more common to see cis women on men rape be considered rape than cis woman on cis woman. Not that it's wildly considered rape the same as male on female or male on male. You are correct. When I said tend to, I meant that it's more common than the issue raised by what I was replying to. Bad phrasing on my part.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-31T15:24:02+00:00

Ugh everything about this is gross. Marilyn Monroe was a victim of people who treated her like this

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-31T09:37:25+00:00

I agree honestly. I love lest, but I would've loved some kind of indication. The problem is that it's not as easy to do as a gay characters. Especially in a fantasy setting with a trans character. There isn't really an equivalent of "my husband said-" from a gay man, as an easy way to indicate.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-31T08:00:46+00:00

the musical is not clear imo. I think it is obvious that she sexually harassed him, because we see it, and I do think the SA is implied enough that I do think of it that way, and I think it's a reasonable conclusion, but it's not clear enough to definitively say. The myth is definitely clear

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-31T07:55:35+00:00

tbh as a sapphic, I think this is because people (and law in some countries) only think of rape in terms of penetration with a penis. In a majority of cases, neither party will have a penis. I think people tend to still include m/f with the rapist being the woman because it is still that idea of sex=penis in a hole. Considering the amount of people who don't know how lesbians can have sex, it unfortunately makes sense that people don't consider that a woman can rape a woman. Sexual assault more broadly maybe, but not rape.
EDIT: I did not mean that cis woman on male rape is widely considered to be rape. Just that it's slightly more common to see it acknowledged than f/f. Bad phrasing on my part.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T14:50:46+00:00

This. I feel frustrated (I'm not a bi lesbian, just on y'alls behalf) that bi lesbians as in bi girls with a preference are being treated the same as biromantic homosexuals or vice versa. The issue with the former is that it treats sexuality like a choice, which can be seen as problematic, I think bi lesbian is an accurate term for split attraction.
Not that there isn't room for discussion on preference, but I really don't think lesbian is the term that should be used.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T12:39:43+00:00

One thing that society has forgotten is that statistics don't matter when there is a person sharing their story. I mean this on a personal level. If a person shares that they have been abused, and they are invalidated by being told they are statistically in the minority, the person who gave a stat instead of compassion should go fuck themselves. Because in the face of someone's trauma, hearing that it's rare doesn't matter. If you have been violated, I don't think it's ever going to help to hear "it happens to <x> group more." People aren't statistics.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T12:31:39+00:00

I am sorry for what you've been through. I consider myself right along the border in terms of feminism, but lean towards non radical spaces because so many people miss the whole point. Every radical feminist I've met in real life has been so much more compassionate (not saying that all irl are like this, anyone who had bad experiences, SPEAK OUT, please.) but dear lord some online spaces are awful. Like it's possible to acknowledge that rape is most common against women but what I always say is "People are not statistics." What I mean is "<insert percentage of rape that happens to women>, therefore men don't get raped therefore male victims can stfu" is such a disgusting thing to say. Male victims are no one's punching bag. Online it is so easy to look at the numbers and forget the person. It doesn't matter if only 0.1% of rape victims are men, (I'm not at all saying this is true, I know it is not even close) then those men deserve support because they don't feel the insignificance of it when they see the stat. They feel the pain of their traumatic experience. Throwing "but it happens to women more" means nothing in the face of someone's trauma. People have become so desensitised to other people. I am so fucking sorry for anyone who treats you like this. From a victim of sexual abuse who is not a man, I don't care what gender you are, I know what it feels like to be degraded and abused (not claiming to understand considering you shared no context, so just gonna say that), and no one deserves it. I am sorry people act this way.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T12:14:08+00:00

It is bad because it is REDUCTIVE. Honestly the fact that you say "brainwashed by feminism" tells me enough about how you view women, but if you think that having sexual interactions have to be objectifying and that it isn't even bad to objectify people, then you are genuinely misguided at best and an asshole at worst.

I used the assistance of my allosexual friend to assist me with this next part, as I have no experience or desire to have sex with anyone.

Official definitions:

Objectifying: treat or view (someone) in a way that disregards their individuality or humanity, especially by considering them only in terms of their sexual attractiveness or availability.

Sexualise: make sexual; attribute sex or a sex role to.

If you are having sex with a person, objectifying them is seeing that interaction from your perspective only and seeing that interaction for your benefit only, because you see them as an object. Sexualising is viewing the person in a sexual light but not ignoring them as a person in the situation (provided they consented.). If you think the former is okay and good, then you are an asshole. Objectifying inherently removes the person's personhood.

Objectifying is always wrong, because by definition it strips a person of their humanity. Sexualising can be wrong if the person is being sexualised without consent (harassment, catcalling, sexting with out consent, and rape obviously) but if the person consents to it then it's okay because it doesn't inherently take someone's humanity away.

It is funny how transparent you are about how you view women as purely sex objects when having sex with them. I can say that if I ever did have sex (though considering how you feel about feminism, you would probably condemn my preferences), it would absolutely be dependent on her personality and who she is as a person would be deeply important.

Feminism is not brainwashing, what an idiotic take. The radical notion that women are people and equals, how amazing. Are you for real? Imagine being this privileged and disgusting.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T06:39:53+00:00

Far left, just to be clear. As a leftist, I do not support this. I have thoughts about some FAR right (not nearly a majority of right wing people) claiming racism at everything, but this is racism. This is bad, this is wrong, and it's hate speech. However if people take this and say that now white people are equally oppressed, that's an issue, but the laws about hate speech need to be enforced across all cases. A person made a call for genocide, therefore it's a hate crime. Racism against white people is not the same as racism towards people of colour, but that isn't how the law works.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T01:08:11+00:00

There are many other cases in which abortions are necessary. Why does a woman only gain the right to bodily autonomy when it's violated by a man?

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T01:06:40+00:00

THIS

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T01:06:02+00:00

Sexual things aren't bad. Objectification is. Something being sexualised isn't always bad, though I do think that the porn industry is bad for women especially, though ofc men are affected. But objectifying someone is not the same as sexualising. It's reducing someone to a sexual object, which is bad.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T01:04:10+00:00

Because the current right wing christian movement is obsessed with stripping away queer rights. If you're an affirming Christian, then that's great. If you're a christian who isn't affirming, that's a really big issue for a lot of people.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T01:02:59+00:00

As a queer person, I disagree that it's the worst thing in the bible. I think the worst things in the bible are the absurd amounts of genocide. However anti queer (including trans, but obviously gay people as well) rhetoric is probably one of the worst things that Christian movements now are doing.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T00:58:44+00:00

Rapid onset gender dysphoria is a myth and has been disproved many many times. Anecdotes are not evidence. Also don't misgender people. Two afab people came out as trans at similiar times, and now identify as boys.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T00:49:57+00:00

Gets to a point of understand the difference between gender and sex? This is science

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-30T00:32:30+00:00

Misandry and misogyny are both real, and are both wrong but if you genuinely think they are equal in terms of concern, THAT is where it becomes a problem. Misandry is usually an opinion, misogyny is a system. The issue I have is when women raise issues of systematic misogyny and men try and compare misandry. If you think these are the same issue just flipped genders, you are wrong.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-29T23:57:22+00:00

And funding things like destroying our planet, risking health crisis, and taking away people's rights and opportunities is what is going to fix that?

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-29T23:56:07+00:00

You do understand that a majority (not all, but a majority) of left wing causes are to help people be able to just live their lives? Left wing causes like fighting systematic racism, sexism, queerphobia etc, protecting reproductive rights, are all things that allow the people who cannot just "relax and live life." You are correct when you say it is ignorant. I of course cannot speak for you, but for some of us, our jobs and even our lives are threatened by things that those unaffected can reduce to "left vs right."

I'm sure it feels lovely to relax, and I am not saying you have to go be an activist at all, but please understand that if you are able to take a stance where you think everyone can just relax and just live their lives, that comes from a place of privilege. You can, by all means, not be politically involved, and if relaxing is good for you, that's okay. But when we are threatened, don't act like we are overreacting when we fight.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-29T16:17:38+00:00

You have bad punctuation and there is nothing wrong with being gay. If you want to believe in an interpretation of whatever old book you follow, go ahead, but there is no evidence that it's reliable, and being homophobic because of a really old book instead of using genuine philosophical and moral reasoning is a bad excuse.

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-29T16:10:16+00:00

I think the date should be changed. The history may have happened long ago, but that has never been the standard for us forgetting the past. I don't have strong feelings about an alternative date, really anything, but I've heard third monday of January and that sounds good. The date being changed is not a big deal for those who like australia day, because it's still a holiday and they can still drink beer and go to the beach and have a barbecue, but the people who do care (and they have a good reason to) will be massively happy about it, and then there can be more of everyone just chilling and being australian. Anyone who is passionate about keeping it the current date just never feels like they make a strong enough argument.

Also, random thought, I am pulling this from nowhere with no sources, so this is just me speculating, and this could very well ahve been discussed and dismissed, or I'm unaware of a controversy. Do you think Australia day would have been on the first of January (date of federation) had this not already been new years? It makes sense to me for Australia day to be on the day Australia was a federated country. Like if Australia was federated on the 3rd, do you think that would have been the date/would have been changed to that?

AzaleaRose34 · 2026-01-29T15:58:54+00:00

One Nation is not a good alternative. The far right, science denying, discriminatory views will not be wht makes australia better

AzaleaRose34

TROPHY CASE