{ hi welcome to my blog. we/i are used to mean one person.

{ we're stolas and azriel. we use she/him, and both xenine xenics. daemian and daemon.

{ i am mixed raced and brown skinned. i am deviborn and have polydactyly.

{ transspecies, fableeri, pshifter. here are my transition plans.

{ im a nullo, autosexual, and sex-favorable but prefer not to be sexualized other than by myself.

{ i have source memories from my otherhearted identity, you can read here @sourcedfrom-az

Ref sheet:

There is no ongoing situation right now but I was recently exposed to the information that Naia Ōkami is going by Aspen Ōkami now, please remember that she dated and sided by known zoophiles while manipulating the therian community and continuously slandering therians online (unintentionally in interviews but still knowing who interviewed her) and that she's rebranding to move on.

I'm well aware that I have my own issues and have always been slightly on the "bad" side of a person, who's trying to become what is known as "good" in a way that at least supports others. I know callouts and posts that scream "kill this person" won't work because it didn't work on me.

So, I'd say leave her alone and let her figure out what grave to pick from. I think it's better than fighting for her to change when the only way she'll ever change is if she chooses to and simply... doesn't defend what she did. That's all.

i keep forgetting to take my lavalced !!!

said in a previous post that my identity is fragmented not into people but into parts that make up me, similar to how my mixxhood is..

i listed multiple things.

tigon, na'vi, luffy, jimmy.

most of these are fictional, with tigon being a real, rare hybrid.

in my transition, i want to mix these things together and find common ground between each of them, and i feel as though i have in a way - especially in depictions of me and myself. i now am, as a whole, an eros vampyre and more loosely, a shifter.

i also mentioned how these things appear in my nonhumanity. "jimmy personality wise, luffy ideology wise, tigon traits, and the na'vi as comfort."

while im not big on labeling every single experience, in this post, I'll do just that - for my own sake really.

I feel as though this fits my relationship with this. I don't feel as though I am him anymore, even if I did claim so. It was more of, I was him and I am in a new life repeating his mistakes and I'm glad that both mine/his story is being told publicly rather than beinf kept in the dark w/ no way for me to look back on it and fix my behavior before it gets as bad as I did in that past life. Because me and him share a lot of similarities and that allowed me to believe that I am him - but I feel as though I WAS him and no longer wish to be him, but know that I feel confident in his body and being depicted as him in a way.

Same with Jimmy, I thought I was him when in reality, It was a choice and a choice I made to brighten up my day and also as an ideology. Luffy's ideals and premises are usually "An eye for an eye, and the right to exist and eat is inalienable." He is constantly seen fighting anyone of any gender not because he's a bit of trouble - but because he's willing to stand for what he believes is right - which I mentioned above. Food, liberation, and dreams are his main theme and I resonate heavily with it.

I feel as though the traits that tigons have are what I have. In my current depictions, I have a tigon's tail and in my transition plans, I hope to have whiskers and feline polydactyly (restore my polydactyly in a feline way ig.) I identity partially as a tigon, so I was slightly correct in my November writing, just not all the way.

I would say copinglink fits. Not because of my FPD, but because it helps me relieve stress and I feel as though I am connected to them in a way of tigons, where the Na'vi embody very close feline traits just like me, and it causes me to feel a little comforted to see tigon representation outside of zoos.

I personally don't listen to the "Autosexual isn't asexual" crowd, entirely because asexuals found the term on AVEN and literally brought it to light and have identified it as asexual culture. Most of this "I'm not asexual" business conflates asexuality with sexual activity.

So, as me, an asexual, who is specifically autosexual. No, I don't feel sexual attraction towards others - just myself. Asexual doesn't just mean the absence, it means the interpersonal meaning of sexuality is reserved as a you only thing. Asexual means, imo, "how sexuality is of no concern to you because you either don't feel it or it is so interpersonal that it is not experienced the same way as others", leading to a mass disconnect when it comes to sex and attraction.

The only way I will describe asexual as "little to no attraction" is when im formally talking about it outside of like wki pages and introductions to asexuality because that above is probably too complex for people to understand, but it is better than a loose definition like such. I am also a little upset that asexual has stuck with a definition like that, because it just doesn't actually catch the vastness of asexuality.

Asexuality is not the absence, but can embody it due to the greatness of the experiences of different asexuals, but others aces can very well experience full sexual attraction and be asexual if they experience sexuality like a void-like state in which attraction comes and goes, or shows up once a month, or is distant but there. That's asexuality and it doesn't fit into the "little to no attraction," because they experience that fully, just differently and in separate increments. Asexuality, to me, will never be about sex or the lack of sexual attraction - but how personal it is to someone who either can't experience it or experiences it on levels segmented from others.

Autosexual fits both descriptions of asexuality, really, and always has. Autosexual is the sexual attraction to oneself, either exclusively or not. This would probably fit the "experience segmented from others". Said experience doesn't revolve around others. And this is often where some autosexuals (redditors) get confused. They think asexual means "no sex, no attraction", when it never meant that and that was always a cishet's way of understanding asexuality - especially those who are generally out of the loop.

I honestly blame a lot of purity culture for this, especially on asexual reddit, where there are younger aces that constantly complain about sex and seeing sexual themes and never actually making spaces where they get together and just create safe spaces for non-sexual aces (and not care if ppl get upset bc purity culture is infectious, safe spaces are better than enforcing the sanitization of others.) It is the assumption of not being sexual at all that leads to autosexuals on that platform to see it as something they are not because the anti-sex positivity shines bright the most to fit into the "meme". Asexuals aren't eunuch little beans, they're people who have an array of experiences, and that includes autosexuality.

Yet, at some point, that platform split themselves away from positively talking about sex and sex education and in my time there, fleets into sex negativity because they're "asexual, they have to be against sex."

Nuh uh.