Best Miaou Does Anarchism

I think I need to take a break from tumblr for a bit. I’ll see all ya’ll baeddels in a week or three, depending. <3


Shit, the linux install on my laptop is all fucked up. I knew that installing 32 bit libraries to play dwarf fortress was a bad idea, but I did it anyway. I have no one to blame but myself. :(

Unusably broken. I guess I’ll be using windows until I have time to reinstall, which will probably be in a week or two.

Shit, the linux install on my laptop is all fucked up. I knew that installing 32 bit libraries to play dwarf fortress was a bad idea, but I did it anyway. I have no one to blame but myself. :(


hexgoddess/genderbitch has repeatedly pulled a bunch of racist shit against twoc and we can’t just let that all be forgotten and let her ingratiate her self with our community because she still poses a threat to twoc. don’t forget that.

Cycles of salience are what lead us to an encounter with what can look a lot like “lesbianism” in the distant historical periods in which we work. They indicate instead, I want to suggest, symptomatic preoccupations about the meanings of women’s bodies and behaviors. The appearance of consistency and familiarity produced by these meta-logics, the axes of social definition from which they draw their content and energy, and the cycles of salience during which they reappear are not, therefore, simple or self-evident. Nor are these cycles, precisely, continuity—if by that we mean an unbroken line connecting the past to the present. It is less that there exist transhistorical categories that comprise and subsume historical variation than that certain perennial logics and definitions remain useful, across time, for conceptualizing the meaning of female bodies and bonds. Emerging at certain moments, silently disappearing from view, and then reemerging as particularly relevant (or explosively volatile), these recurrent explanatory logics seem to underlie the organization, and reorganization, of women’s erotic life. Sometimes these preoccupations arise as repeated expressions of identical concerns; sometimes they emerge under an altered guise. As endemic features of erotic discourse, these logics and definitions, as well as the ideological faultlines they subtend, not only contribute to the existence of historically specific figures and typologies, but also ensure correspondences across time. At the same time, the forms these meta-logics take, their specific content, the discourses in which they are embedded, and the angle of relations among them all are subject to change. Social preoccupations come in and out of focus, new political exigencies emerge, discourses converge and the points of contact between them shift—and in the process, the meanings of female-female desire are reconfigured.

Valerie Traub, “The Present Future of Lesbian Historiography” (via catalytic-chamber)

so, yesterday i was talking with someone cool about this tendency to ignore certain things because it would be making stuff “transhistorical”.  like, she brought up that Agamben is accused of trying to make Foucaul’s analysis transhistorical, and then there’s this whole discourse around sexuality and gender where, like, because “lesbian” is a construct of the 20th century and contemporary moment, we’re not supposed to talk about, say, lesbians in the 1200s.  likewise for trans women; the whole notion of reading historical documents as writing about trans women has been accused, more than once that i’ve seen, as an effort to make contemporary understandings of gender transhistorical.  i think the idea developed in this essay of cycles of salience is really good for responding to that.  cuz essentially what it’s pointing out is that we’re engaged firstly in a work of historiography—which is to say a study of how we understand the past not a study of what the past actually was (which is, of course, inaccessible)—and that within that study we find moments that match to the contemporary moment or to whatever we’re comparing it to.  this isn’t to say that trans women as-they-are-now existed in England in the year 900 under the name ‘baeddels’, this is to say that some sort of arrangement of gendered life analogous or synonymous with trans womanhood existed in that time and place.

(via baedd-lez)

i’ve been meaning to post this for a few days now and, just having re-read it, am so excited again about this concept and how you contextualized it. i may have some related thoughts to share over time, but for now just want to say thank you so much for sharing this!

(via cmov)

I’m sick, so you get pictures of my cat.


i’m creating a new word called “kittycrush” a kittycrush is when you like someone so much all you want to do with them is make strange noises and cuddle and spend half your life sleeping on their favorite possessions

Truscum stalker alert, avoid and tell to fuck off if possible!



Tumblr user transcoma is harrassing several trans women right now and is being an overall creep.

So let’s agree on getting his massive ass-backwards arrogance and bullshit the fuck away.

I don’t care what you do, but freaking make sure he unfollows every single trans woman in question.

hey ppl who call theirselves allies

do somethin

why do so many trans people use the term baeddel. doesn't it mean hermaphrodite or girlish man?


Hi, sorry it took me so long to get to this ask.

I actually think this is a really good question. To my understanding, it’s a very old term that used to be meant in an offensive way, but now a lot of trans women are reclaiming it. I also think that it was such an old word that had been forgotten for a long time and now that it’s being used again, it’s current meaning is the only relevant one.

I also may be wrong about this and if I am, I hope somebody corrects me.

You’re not wrong, but there’s a couple of more things worth mentioning. Most sources do define baeddel to mean those things, but they need to be read with the understanding that trans women have systematically been erased from history. When we find sources that define it as “female creature with a penis” or “girlish man” we conclude that we existed then and that this word was used in some significant way to describe us.

Another part of the popularity is deliberately embrace being bad/monstrous, which is personally appealing, but I have a really hard time explaining it in a way that makes sense outside of my head.

There are many whites who are trying to solve the problem. But you never see them going under the label of liberals. That white person that you see calling himself a liberal is the most dangerous thing in the entire western hemisphere. He’s the most deceitful. He’s like a fox. And a fox is always more dangerous in the forest than the wolf. You can see the wolf coming, you know what he’s up to. But the fox will fool you. He comes at you with his mouth shaped in such a way that even though you see his teeth you think he’s smiling and take him for a friend.