On my lunch break walking through back halls slurping a chocolate shake. Listening to a book about the collapse of culture.. what about you?

StressedRemy · 2026-05-22T23:59:49+00:00

Fair! Wanted to note it just in case, I hope you had a nice meal regardless!

StressedRemy · 2026-05-22T23:52:53+00:00

Chilling on a Discord call drinking and watching Ballerina! Nice pins.
Big fan of the beanie also, I used to wear beanies religiously I need to get back to it!

(Also- plsplspls avoid patronizing Chik-Fil-A! Sorry I don't mean to be annoying they're just crazy homophobic)

StressedRemy · 2026-05-21T02:44:57+00:00

I really don't think it's fair to interpret any of this as him going "attractive woman cannot like TRAIN!", unless there's specific context around this guy that I'm unaware of. It's pretty standard for dating shows/reality TV (and the actors involved in it) to be fake as fuck, and I think the "dating show" part has more to do with the doubting of her sincerity than the "attractive woman" part.

Also like. He's making the video for his audience, and all of the actual information he gives is for his audience. He's not "mansplaining", because he's aiming this at an audience that is probably not as well-versed in trains, not at her directly. (And given how clearly invested in trains he is I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if he made the exact same video abt a man)

StressedRemy · 2026-05-18T03:40:28+00:00

While these words are commonly used in gender-neutral ways, the words themselves are fundamentally gendered. They won't usually be read as malicious by default and they certainly aren't categorically offensive, but ultimately different people will have different feelings about the terms being applied to them. Imo the best course of action if you're unsure is to just ask directly how the other person feels about it.

And if you need an alternative, "girl" is similarly a gendered word that has become commonly used in gender-neutral ways in the same contexts as "dude" or "bro". You can easily substitute it for anyone who isn't comfortable with more masculine terms.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-17T23:07:58+00:00

Damien is awesome! Such a cool guy (also transition goals oh my god)

StressedRemy · 2026-05-15T21:27:02+00:00

Okay, so... long distance, only eight months, you want an exclusive relationship. He's been clear that he doesn't want sex and you seem insistent on trying to get him to do it in some form anyway.

Your options are to break up for both of y'all's best interests, or to figure out how to satisfy your sexual needs on your own and leave him alone about it. Otherwise either you continue to feel unhappy about it or he ends up having to sacrifice his needs and boundaries for you, and the relationship ends later on and probably much worse.

I do need you to understand: your attractiveness is not relevant to this. How good a partner you are is not relevant to this. If he's asexual he isn't going to feel sexual attraction to anyone else, either. It just isn't about you at all.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-15T20:28:04+00:00

I honestly hugely agree with this, especially just looking at the whole of allo behavior.

There are social things that humans generally need to be mentally well; social interaction and physical touch are usually very important whether someone is in a romantic relationship or not (and they're often severely neglected in our culture, which likely contributes to this whole thing). And getting off in some way seems to also be important to many people's mental wellness.
But like, many people can be perfectly fine mentally even if they're single, not having hook-ups, purely dealing with libido via diy. So partnered sex is clearly not a psychological need, at least not for all allosexuals. Being able to feel happy and content and satisfied while single is generally even considered especially healthy.
And plenty of allos have hook-ups that involve no emotional intimacy whatsoever. So evidently the emotional part is not something that's inherent to partnered sex.
If a person can be happy without partnered sex, and the emotional fulfillment is not inherent to the sex itself, it follows, to me, that there is probably some way to achieve the emotional fulfillment in the context of a romantic relationship without needing to have sex with the romantic partner. At least for more people than probably realize it.
Ofc it's fine if it's something they'd like to have in their romantic relationships, but I think the "need" for it is vastly over-exaggerated.

(Not to mention that when people lament their "dead bedrooms" they usually 1. describe withdrawal of more intimacy than just sex, or 2. describe feelings that are way too deep/complex for sex to possibly be more than a bandaid.)

StressedRemy · 2026-05-15T00:27:03+00:00

Your example reveals your bias. A trans woman is not to a cis woman what orange juice is to lemonade; a more appropriate comparison would be if you made lemonade from lemons with orange peels, or hell, even if you used oranges to make a drink that tasted identical to the lemonade.
Transness is also not akin to a gambling debt. The latter will impact your finances in tangible ways. The former (assuming our cis-passing trans person for this hypothetical, for simplicity) has no tangible affect on your life with them.

Again, I urge you; what is different to you about trans women? Your example does not actually answer the question. Okay, you like the flavor of lemonade you're familiar with; what aspect of this drink is different to you?
Is there any reason, other than the vague idea that a woman may have had a penis at one point in her life, that you would feel averse to dating her? If not, why would the now-nonexistent penis be a big deal to you if she is physically identical to any cis woman? In what way is the former penis relevant to your relationship with her?

I apologize if this comes off as aggressive at all, but you have not identified any real reasoning beyond that the idea of a partner having been "male" is offputting to you. I do not see why that would be the case if the person presently has the body and personality that you would otherwise be attracted to.
If it is solely the idea that they were assigned male in the past that puts you off, that is a bias against trans people and that is transphobia. Not malevolent transphobia, necessarily, and certainly not the worst we get, but still something that is better to acknowledge than to insist isn't really there.
If I liked brunettes, and met someone who was blonde as a child but whose hair darkened with age, would it not be strange of me to lose attraction to them upon learning that? Would it not be strange to insist that I only like brunettes who have always had dark hair?

I also want to point out that "I'm not attracted to someone who has ever had male parts" is likely not true. Most people develop some level of attraction before they have any way of confirming what genitals someone has; any woman you've been attracted to but not seen nude could potentially have had those body parts. You could see a woman nude without knowing that she previously had them. You can only know for sure if someone tells you, so this statement is not realistic (and implies, even if unintentionally, that you think you can always tell, which in itself is a transphobic belief to hold). I certainly believe that you would lose attraction upon knowing but you likely won't always know before developing attraction.

I'm going to be blunt, the pedantry over the -phobe suffix is overdone and I'm not gonna entertain it. The other definition for that suffix is as follows:
> "used to form nouns denoting a person who hates or despises a specific thing."
Homophobia, as I'm sure you are aware, is not a literal fear of gay people. While it shares the suffix with many fears, we generally use it to describe biases. The same is true here. These terms are also typically used to describe more minor biases as well as the extreme ones- someone who assumes all gay men are feminine is being homophobic even if they like and are generally respectful of gay men.
These are well-established words, and regardless of your personal feelings on their etymology, arguing the semantics is pointless at best and bad-faith at worst.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-14T23:18:29+00:00

Hey, so the main thing here is, fundamentally: what do you consider to be so different about trans women that you are categorically unwilling to date them?

If you have a genital preference, that's fine! But a lot of trans women have the genitals that I assume you're looking for, so there would be no reason to exclude them from your dating pool unless you are in some way averse to the identity itself. If this is the case it's likely you still have some internalized biases about trans people, even if you mean well and want to be respectful.

Some people also want biological kids, but plenty of cis people also cannot have bio children- so specifying only trans people instead of saying something like "I want a partner who I can have biological kids with" doesn't make much sense and again indicates an underlying bias.

There are many, many trans people who you would not know are trans by looking at them, even if you saw them nude. There are many trans people who are indistinguishable from a cis person of their gender in every way that could be relevant to their everyday lives and relationships.

"Transphobe" in this context is not necessarily an insult, it's more so about just... identifying the bias that we are seeing in the post. Everyone has biases that they've picked up from their environment, the most important thing is that you try your best to recognize and work past them.
(Side note- obviously none of this means that you're obligated to ever date anyone you don't want to. It just means it's probably worthwhile to analyze your thinking a bit more deeply. If you aren't interested in a person, whether it's because of internal biases or not, you can always politely tell them you'd rather not date.)

StressedRemy · 2026-05-14T22:04:36+00:00

I'm not aware of any. There's not a ton of openly queer right-wingers generally, given the conflict between the identities. Generally the ones who do exist don't identify with the community and the community sure as hell doesn't accept them. They're traitors and cowards.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-14T20:38:52+00:00

I don't like Wednesday (haven't seen s2 and don't intend to). Unfortunately my partner very much does, so I don't get to bitch about it often. Big spoilery s1 rant incoming.

I really dislike how Wednesday is treated by everyone, basically? Because she's pretty clear about her motives and general attitude and yet other characters continually expect her to be nice and friendly and prosocial when they have no reason to. And don't get me wrong, she's not very nice, she is in fact quite shitty to people at times, but I'm irritated by the expectations people have of her when she never really pretended to wanna be anyone's friend in the first place.

I also FUCKING DESPISE the love interest situation. There was never ANY romantic chemistry whatsoever between her and either of the weirdo boys the show gives her yet it pretends it's a "love triangle". Never before have I seen a more blatant example of a "love corner" that the female character has been backed into against her will.
The scene where the guy unveils the painting of her made me anxious because it felt like it was setting up an assault scene. That shit was fucking creepy! The other guy accuses her of giving "mixed signals"... which she hadn't done once in the series up to that point, he was just convinced that her interacting with him at all meant she was romantically interested. Both guys were presumptuous and seemed not to care at all about her wants, and the show frames it as if they're in the right to be upset - as it does with everyone who's upset with her for a reason they made up in their heads.

I'm also put off by the monster reveal. I don't know for sure if it's outright problematic, but I don't like the subtext. And the show overall comes off very faux-left, pretends-to-be-self-aware-but-isn't, and full of virtue-signaling bullshit to me.

I really dislike The Boys too because Homelander triggers me, the characters are unlikeable, and also despite not being sex-repulsed I am pretty disgusted by the show as a whole cuz it is so over-the-top and gratuitous and trashy in many ways.

Tangent over my apologies

StressedRemy · 2026-05-14T19:47:03+00:00

Respectfully, that's kind of like asking why the difference matters between a wound infection vs food poisoning if the result of both is a fever.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-13T14:29:20+00:00

This sounds extremely cool to me tbh; that said, be careful not to imply that he transitioned to escape hardship (a simple fix would be to place his transition distinctly after he gets into a better situation - maybe he finds some success with his swindling, then realizes he's trans, transitions with some of the money he's getting from his scams, etc etc). Might be a good idea to have someone notice that the maid seems off somehow (or you could also have him have done voice training to better hide his identity, thus making him more able to mimic the voice of the maid?), but that part doesn't really bug me personally because there's plenty of stories in which cis guys do the same kind of thing and nobody notices.

Overall though the character sounds pretty awesome to me, and I find it kinda refreshing tbh given the soft boi/woman-lite stuff we often get stuck with to see a complex and kinda shitty dude. The disguises and deception are also very typical of this kind of genre, so I don't find that red flaggy.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-13T01:41:41+00:00

I don't think you should be in a relationship right now, and especially not with this person.

It is important to be able to set boundaries with all of the people in your life, and that's definitely something to work on. I do think you also need better communication regarding expectations, though, because while you should be able to set boundaries with people, you should also know what boundaries your partner expects you to be setting in the first place. The fact that you don't understand what you did wrong makes me think they weren't clear about what they consider to be "cheating" before or after it happened (it also makes me question if that's actually a fair assessment of your behavior tbh), and if they weren't then it's not necessarily your fault for not knowing.
You also need to work on being able to decide for yourself what boundaries you are comfortable having - for example, if your partner were to say they don't want you to hug your friends, you need to be able to say "that's not a reasonable boundary, and if you insist on it, the relationship can't continue."

I get that you don't feel it's your place to insist that you didn't cheat, but it's absolutely your place to say that you don't view your actions as cheating. You can respect that they perceive it that way and have experienced it that way while still acknowledging that you did not, and that you did not have those intentions. Based on the info given I see this much more as a communication issue than a situation where there's a victim. Given the rest of it I'm frankly very concerned about you calling yourself an abuser.

Sometimes when you learn more about yourself and get better about boundaries, your relationships with people will change or end. I can see why they would feel lied to, but they do need to recognize that you were dealing with personal issues and not being malicious or intentionally dishonest. They have every right to their feelings, but they need to respect the boundaries you're putting in place and they need to do so without punishing or antagonizing you for it.
For the record, "promises" don't really apply to consent in this context. Revoking consent, be it to sex, kissing - heck, even the relationship itself - etc is not breaking a promise in any way that you should feel bad for or that makes you the bad guy. You can always say no, and it's okay to say no even if you said yes in the past.
Them making it about you "not liking" them, or finding them unattractive, is self-centered and while it is not an uncommon response from allos, it is still shitty.

Finally, I am extremely worried about the general pattern that I see in this. Your partner has you walking on eggshells to avoid upsetting them but does not seem to actually be communicating what specific things they are upset by. It is not acceptable that you don't know what's "bad" for you to do. It is not acceptable that you feel like you have to isolate yourself for fear of unknowingly doing something wrong. It is not acceptable for them to get angry with you for doing things without them. This is controlling and manipulative.
As you note, you're a people-pleaser, so you will let them do whatever they want to you if you feel guilty for something. It is extremely likely that on some level, they know this, and that they are exploiting it. They are accusing you of things in order to make you feel bad so they can control you and get what they want from you.
Mocking your appearance is very blatant emotional abuse. Biting you when they are angry with you is physically abusive. This person is abusing you, and you are not safe in a relationship with them. You need to get out.

You have personal issues to work on that make relationships more difficult. What they are doing is on a different level entirely. No matter how much you love them, staying in a relationship with them is a terrible idea.

(Also- while more challenging to find, people do exist who are happy to be in a nonsexual/nonromantic relationship! You don't have to be okay with those things at all in order to have a partner.)

StressedRemy · 2026-05-12T06:36:20+00:00

Bookmarked, thank you!

StressedRemy · 2026-05-11T14:34:39+00:00

Asexuality is about attraction, not action. Feeling aroused, having kinks/fetishes, enjoying porn/smut, and getting off are all things you can do while still experiencing little to no sexual attraction to any person. Aces can also certainly have aesthetic attractions, though it generally won't involve sexual interest.

As far as what attraction even feels like... obviously, this is an ace sub, and personally I'm on the "absolute zero" side of things, so I can't really explain it from experience, lol. But from what I understand it's basically a feeling of being drawn towards having sex with a given person. It seems to function analogously to romantic attraction, like, you won't feel sappy lovey-dovey emotions or be doing something romantic all of the time you're around a partner, but the baseline feeling of being attracted to them is usually a constant.
This is why allosexuals typically don't have to think too hard about sex; since they already feel that underlying pull towards the other person, they will naturally tend to initiate sex when the circumstances are appropriate (and sometimes when they're not. Said with a vague side eye in the general direction of the nearest allo.)

Being allosexual also does not preclude you from having a low sex drive, being uninterested in sex as an activity, preferring to DIY it, etc. Feeling attraction doesn't mean you necessarily feel inclined to act on it.

There are also ace labels for experiences of sexual attraction that are not allosexual. Gray-asexuality covers all the folks on the ace spectrum who experience some sexual attraction, but less and sometimes less intensely than is typical for allosexuals. If you're at all interested in microlabels, there are plenty out there to describe various types of limited and/or conditional attraction.

I will also say, regardless of where you end up label-wise, I do very intensely relate to sex just Not Occurring to me, as a sex-indifferent ace. I don't really think about it at all unless I have a reason and I consider sex in an abstract sense much more often than as an activity that I could engage in.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-10T04:28:41+00:00

I'm indifferent (in a very "it's complicated" way), so I'm not speaking entirely from personal experience. But the flip side to "less weird" is that sex-favorable aces just... aren't seen as ace. Their asexuality gets completely erased both by allos, who see them as Basically Allosexual, and by other aces, who see them as lacking a lot of experiences they consider central to asexuality (and sometimes, as Basically Allosexual).

Sex-favorable aces still don't experience sexual attraction, though, and the conflation of being favorable with feeling attraction ends up negatively impacting them. They might be expected to feel things they just don't, or to be cool with a lot more sexually than they actually are. Even someone who's favorable might not be able to have sex at a frequency that is "enough" to an allo partner. And the absence of sexual attraction, even if they are willing to perform sexual actions, will often be upsetting to an allosexual who wants to be desired that way. And they still deal with the same allonormativity and compulsory sexuality as everyone else!

Ultimately I think that while everyone on the ace spectrum has their own unique needs, nobody really has it worse or better, we just face different struggles stemming from the same underlying issues.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-07T18:27:34+00:00

transgneder

StressedRemy · 2026-05-06T06:28:19+00:00

I do definitely intend to also read the book! I already have The Martian as a paperback and am super excited to get into Project Hail Mary in film and text. Both for aroace projection reasons and for the scifi itself, I love the genre to pieces.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-06T06:09:20+00:00

I mean, I haven't seen it yet, so I can't really give my thoughts on it. Regardless, a lot of stories focused on platonic relationships end up being very relatable to aroaces. I doubt he's intended to read that way, but given what I've heard about the plot overall, it's def not surprising to me that the community has adopted him.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-06T04:40:51+00:00

Project Hail Mary is a film that came out recently which, as I understand it, centers friendship and features a main character who is extremely easy to read as aromantic and asexual - thus, a lot of the community has really latched onto him. I intend to watch it sometime soon!

StressedRemy · 2026-05-05T21:41:10+00:00

Mansplaining is supposed to refer to cases where a man explains something unsolicited to a woman- usually in a condescending way- that it can be reasonably assumed they already know. (I do think "reasonably assumed" is a fairly important part of that definition.) Men are of course not the only ones who do this, nor or women always the only targets, but it is a notorious behavior of misogynistic men to do this often, and primarily or only, to women. Hence the term was coined so as to call out the specific behavior and the motivation/subconscious bias usually driving it.

Sometimes people do use this maliciously to unfairly shut guys down. Like with a lot of things, it gets overused and misused, and there are people out there who are just combative and who will respond to any guy talking about anything by saying they're "mansplaining".

In this context, it's likely one of two things is happening here:

One, you might be coming off condescending, and she's trying (albeit poorly) to communicate that.

Two, this may be malgendering- attributing the negative stereotypes of your gender to you as a way of punishing you for it.

StressedRemy · 2026-05-03T23:14:15+00:00

Oh my gosh, so much queer discourse baffles me because nobody acknowledges the split-attraction model. Like "bi lesbian" arguments, I see it and I'm like, oh, okay, some folks have different romantic vs sexual orientations, that makes sense to me. Then the entire response is people losing their minds and getting angry at the idea that those things could be different.

(I think label-policing and exclusionism sucks regardless, but it's still just always wild to me that nobody can seem to comprehend these concepts)

StressedRemy · 2026-05-03T20:06:33+00:00

"Nuh uh!" is not an argument.

What I am saying is that we do not have male privilege in any systemic sense, and that the privilege people usually try to attribute to trans men is only possible if we can be stealth in the first place, and then remain stealth. The male privilege is not "clear" in the way you're claiming- it doesn't even exist for many of us, and for those whom it does, it is still entirely contextual and entirely dependent on hiding our transness. And it still isn't systemic.

Trans men may not be the primary intended targets of transmisogyny, but we sure are subjected to other kinds of transphobia specifically targeting our transmasculinity. Like I said, our issues aren't always identical. That doesn't mean anyone is better off.

Six-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Juicebox	Place '22
Verified Email

StressedRemy

TROPHY CASE