Virago Flag (from carrd):

Note: It is unclear who created this flag.

Post written by viscasi (on June 3, 2025):

(link)

Important: Terminology Discussion

Note: Please read this even though it is long. I think this foundational work is really important for the growth and maintaining of our community and it can’t be put off any longer than it has been!

In the background, I’ve been chatting with Anibelle (@viragoposting), Holly (@hollycantkeeptrackofthedaze) and Zuno (@prof-zunoshade) about the use of the words Virago and hetGNC, and what situations each would cover, versus what still needs separate terminology. We haven’t quite come to a solid, concrete, all-comprehensive answer yet, but I have been thinking it’s time to at least go public with the brainstorming so that maybe we can all figure it out together.

It’s so exciting that our little community has grown so much so quickly! But I think that also means that it’s time: we really need to have some productive conversations about our community and language, so that we can communicate more effectively in the long term.

Here’s the thought process so far:

The Needs

Anibelle (@viragoposting) coined the label Virago a while ago, and she has a post here describing its intended meaning and use. In summary, a Virago is a woman who is one or more of these things: Attracted to feminine men, dominant, and/or masculine.

“Virago” works well as a broad term— but, because it includes women who are technically GNC but still feminine-aligned (e.g., femdom, etc.), that means “Virago” doesn’t work as an identity label to explicitly convey having an “internal sense of masculinity”, which is an important distinction a lot of us are looking for. So that’s where my thought process is: Virago works great as an umbrella term, but we’re gonna need some additional ways to get more specific (for the people who want to.)

If I say “I’m a Virago,” I want to be able to differentiate myself from feminine Viragos, and they probably want a way to differentiate themselves from masc Viragos like me. Also, we’re going to need an equivalent label for feminine men. (After this was written, the term “Mollis” has since been proposed— not necessarily as an equivalent/inverse to Virago, but as a nickname of sorts. You can find the discussion about it here!)

I think Virago is a great label and we should absolutely use it. I also think that to describe us all, we are going to need more than one word.

The Reasons

I’ve been thinking about the concept of one’s masculinity/femininity, versus gender identity, versus gender presentation. I think gender nonconformity, in the textbook sense of the word, is separate from masculine(/feminine) identity.

For example: Being muscular is considered gender nonconforming for women. But, still, there are feminine buff women and there are masculine buff women. So, being muscular isn’t actually masculine, even if it is considered gender nonconforming.

So, how do we communicate the difference in identity between these two hypothetical types of people? We can’t say that one of them is GNC and the other is not, because both are technically not conforming to gender norms. So how do we convey the distinction between women who are masculine in identity, versus feminine-identifying women who defy gender roles? (And vice versa for men?)

Additionally, everyone will define masculinity differently. Tale as old as time. For the sake of this conversation, to save breath, assume ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ are defined by the person using the label.

The (Proposed) Solutions

Here are my thoughts on what language we can use (and how), in order to include all of these experiences while still being able to differentiate between them:

[Image 1: Who is hetGNC? Any straight, bi, or pan person who is gender nonconforming in some way. Refers specifically to gender nonconformity but people may or may not also be gender transgressive in some way as well.

Femdom: Women who dominate men. Usually a sexual dynamic, independent from participants affinity.

Role Reversal (RR) & Female-Led Relationships (FLR): Reversal of gender norms in relationships. Usually in regards to Gender Expression and Gender Transgression, not affinity.

GNC Allinity: Allinity identity diverging from the norm for that gender. Intramasculine women (Virascian women?). Intrafeminine men (Gynascian men?).

Virago Women & (unnamed) Men. Women who are (one or more): Attracted to feminine men; dominant; masculine. Men who are (one or more): Attracted to masculine women; submissive; feminine.]

[Image 2: What is allinity identity? Allinity refers to masculinity/femininity/androgyny collectively, whereas allinity identity refers to one’s internal conception of self as a masculine person, feminine person, or androgynous person.

Separate from Gender Expression: Allinity goes deeper than clothing, interests, or body. Example: A masculine man and a feminine man could both wear the same suit, but could different in essence which may (or may not) be apparent to the people around them. (see movie clip: “The Birdcage,” Albert’s suit scene)

Why does it matter? While some people may feel indifferent about the existence of allinity identities or about their own, many people feel strongly about their allinity and a word to conceptualize that would be useful.]

[Image 3: What is gender nonconforming? Any deviation from cultural expectations of one’s gender. Examples: Clothing (women wearing suits and baggy clothes; men wearing ‘women’s clothing’); Interests/Hobbies (men enjoying knitting, women enjoying fishing); Build/Body (muscular women, men shaving body hair); Allinity (intramasculine women, intrafeminine men); Behaviors (men being stay at home parents, women drinking beer).]

[Image 4: What is gender transgression? Any intentional deviation from societal expectations of one’s gender usually as a form of protest or to communicate/play with the irony and taboo. Examples: Women refusing to shave their legs, motivated by feminism rather than preference; people doing drag as an artistic commentary on gender norms; women taking on a sexually dominant role, where that ‘dominance’ is defined by withholding pleasure, juxtaposed with the expectation to be the passive source of it.]

[Image 5: Who is intramasc? Any person of any sexuality whose allinity identity is masculine. To name a few, these people could be: Masc gay men; Butch women; Masc nonbinary people; Straight masc women; Hetnorm men.]

[Image 6: Who is intrafem? Any person of any sexuality whose allinity identity is feminine. To name a few, these people could be: Fem gay men; femme women; Hetnorm women; straight fem men; fem nonbinary people.]

(It’s not pretty but it’s also just a rough draft haha)

(Info about the asterisks:

• Virascian and Gynascian (Latin meanings: masculine essence, and feminine essence, respectively) — These are a couple of proposals for alternative terminology for intramasculine women/intrafeminine men. They could be used as a “sapphic/achillean” equivalent for hetGNC people.
• Unnamed section for men, equivalent to Virago: Currently, this identity hasn’t been officially coined or named. Given the historical origin of the word Virago, I’m not quite sure how to go about making an equivalent for men. If anyone has ideas, voice them!)

(Bonus info: the Latin in “Intrafeminine/Intramasculine” about translates to “inner feminine / inner masculine”, in case anyone is wondering where I got that from too. And my justification for the etymology/necessity of the word “Allinity” can be found in this post.)

What do you guys think?

This is the most important part: Community discussion.

• Do you have any questions/concerns about the propositions outlined here?
• Do you like the new words, or should we keep looking for different ones? (Specify which ones?)
• Should anything be changed or added?
• Any other comments/ideas?

hollycantkeeptrackofthedaze (June 4, 2025):

mostly going under the other comments section because i once again am not really the main audience for these proposals:

• allinity seems like a subsection of gender identity as gender identity encompasses both gender and presentation/internal conception, cis/trans/intersex status, and political struggle. in wider queer community it’s generally understood that gender can encompass all of those (including what is defined as allinity) but among straight circles i can see allinity being a helpful word.
• perhaps some recognition of that these words are not exclusive or permament for the folks who allinity is fluid or simultanous (the butchfemmes, etc.) someone need not always be gnc fem/masc to count.
• i will say that most women who refuse to shave their legs are at the very least doing it on more than just feminist principle, even if they still are gender conforming. this ties back into “why is acceptable femininity/masculinity this horrible box where the ideal turns you into half a person” and how some things that get you put in the same vague box politically as gnc folks simply just shouldn’t.

also sometime i might put out a do whatever you want forever post about gnc deconstructionism* which is definitely not meant to be a a rebuke of the search for specific labels but meant as a simultaneous or alternate approach.

(that masc women dandies and fem men dandies and long haired masculinity in women, etc. thing)

viscasi (June 7, 2025):

Ontology

Yes, that sounds about right! I want to emphasize that intramasculine allinity is the same entity across genders, in the sense that (for example) intramasculine allinity in women isn’t some separate, different thing from instramasculine allinity in men “in just a different, womanly flavor.” (To me, part of the point in distinguishing allinity as independent from gender is to allow people to get away from that perception, if they want to.)

Delicate analogy here, but: this is much like how a cis man and a trans man can both equally be men– even if their cis/trans status is different, their gender is the same. Likewise, even if two intramasculine peoples’ genders are different, their allinity is the same. (So long as that’s an understanding of allinity that you guys agree with?)

Accidentally very long note: “Delicate analogy” because I’m aware that gender identity is incredibly complex and there are trans people who feel their trans identity does actually inform their gender as a whole, who do not want those aspects of their identity separated, unlike the example I gave. There are also other trans identities that I’m aware of that are literally defined by the feeling that one’s gender identity is intrinsically distinct from its cisgender counterpart, iirc? Anyway, the transgender experience is diverse and I’m certainly no authority on what that does or should look like for anyone– I’m just bringing up one kind of trans experience to hopefully help get my point across here.

On that note, now that I think about it, I’d imagine that there are situations like those other perspectives on transness with allinity as well– I bet there are some men who feel that their intrafeminine identity is directly informed by their manhood, that there are some women who feel their intramasculine identity is informed by their womanhood, that some NB people may feel that their intrafem or intramasc identity is informed by their nonbinary identity, and so on;

That said, personally, I would still like to designate allinity as the same entity across genders at least by default, so that we can avoid gender nonconforming allinity identities not being taken as seriously, and then acknowledge that there are exceptions/nuances for some people? Like, if allinity is a neutral entity then it makes it a bit harder to paint a woman’s intramasculine identity as the watered-down, lesser version of a man’s. Idk. These are all just propositions, by the way, I don’t know any of this, I’m just rambling on about hypotheticals at this point. Hopefully y’all get the jist.

Nuances

“These words are not exclusive or permament for the folks who allinity is fluid or simultanous (the butchfemmes, etc.) Someone need not always be gnc fem/masc to count.”

Yes, 1000% agree!

Gender Nonconformity v.s. Gender Transgression

Yes, totally agree that shaving isn’t inherently feminine or anything. (I think Holly is referencing this post, in addition to just the general idea.)

What I was getting at there is the matter of intent/motive being the distinguishing factor between gender transgression and gender nonconformity, so in this case:

• There are women who don’t shave their legs because they don’t want to (GC women can do this, and so can GNC women).
• And there are women who deliberately use the act of not shaving as a visual act of protest against the social demand that they should have to (GC women can do this, and so can GNC women– this is what I would classify as gender transgression)
• And there are situations where both of those things are true for the hypothetical woman in question.

To me, the point in distinguishing these situations is to avoid the too-familiar “you’re just doing xyz gender-nonconforming thing because you hate the patriarchy” directed at GNC women just… existing. And, moreover, to give those who are doing those things for other reasons (whatever those may be) language to express that as well, since we all tend to get thrown in one pot.

You bring up an important point though– different people define “gender nonconformity” in vastly different ways. Is “gender conformity” what women should do, or is it just what is expected? How far do we go with that definition? Is a woman with a job “gender nonconforming?” Is a man who is nurturing “gender non-conforming?” I think those definitions are extreme, and I think these are among the long list of stupid things that shouldn’t have to be considered gender nonconforming, but still are by many people. Depends who you ask.

That’s why I opted to define gender nonconformity as “any deviation from cultural expectations of one’s gender,” in order to account for the fact that many things considered GNC are arbitrary and subject to change across time and culture.

(On another note, the broadness is also why I think breaking down “hetGNC” into more specific labels will be incredibly helpful for us, because “gender non-conforming” is an INCREDIBLY vague and convoluted term, and many of the people under such a broad umbrella are going to want and need ways to communicate their differences.)

Practicality

I second the notion that everyone should do whatever you want forever! I think that sounds like a really helpful post, Holly, I look forward to reading it!

I also think it’s worth mentioning that hard definitions for identities (or anything, if you want to get philosophical) aren’t really possible anyway. A word acquires meaning through a collective abstract understanding of its use. So, I think we should take notes from what the asexual community did (explained briefly in this post)— we can have external definitions for our terms like the ones we gave above, but as far as who “counts,” our internal definition can be “whoever feels like the term describes them.”

Note

These are my tentative thoughts, but none of them are assertions!!!!! Seriously! I have my own blind spots like anyone else, so please take what I say with a grain of salt and add to the thread (or send an ask) if you disagree or have additional thoughts about anything being said!

hollycantkeeptrackofthedaze (June 7, 2025):

[…] I bet there are some men who feel that their intrafeminine identity is directly informed by their manhood, that there are some women who feel their intramasculine identity is informed by their womanhood, that some NB people may feel that their intrafem or intramasc identity is informed by their nonbinary identity […]

This is definitely true – it’s often loadbering for why gnc trans men aren’t “just women” and gnc trans women aren’t “just men”. I definitely was not trying state tht we should divide allinity because women’s masculinity is a watered-down form of men’s masculinity – that’s bullshit – but that, as you said, a lot of people even if their masculinity/femininity is as legitimate as mainstream masculinity/feminity, cannot and do not separate it from their gender.

To me, the point in distinguishing these situations is to avoid the too-familiar “you’re just doing xyz gender-nonconforming thing because you hate the patriarchy” directed at GNC women just… existing.

this is true! i was not thinking about that so much, so good point. (gender essentialism: comical bullshit.) and letting those who are doing it as a form of communication be able to distinguish themselves, too is also useful. mostly just mean that often there is a fair bit of overlap, as women who don’t want to shave are the biggest agents in forwarding no-shaving as a way of pointing out duble standards, because they’ve simply got the most stake in it.

How far do we go with that definition? Is a woman with a job “gender nonconforming?” Is a man who is nurturing “gender non-conforming?”

definitely. if i had to put a personal rule of thumb, it’s a Berlin-conference categorizing roguelikes style gradient of elements based on how likely you are to get called a homophobic (or transphobic) slur. in recent history wanting a job as a woman won’t get you called a lesbian and there are ways to masculinize being an emotionally responsive father.

(On another note, the broadness is also why I think breaking down “hetGNC” into more specific labels will be incredibly helpful for us, because “gender non-conforming” is an INCREDIBLY vague and convoluted term, and many of the people under such a broad umbrella are going to want and need ways to communicate their differences.) I also think it’s worth mentioning that hard definitions for identities (or anything, if you want to get philosophical) aren’t really possible anyway. A word acquires meaning through a collective abstract understanding of its use. So, I think we should take notes from what the asexual community did (explained briefly in this post)— we can have external definitions for our terms like the ones we gave above, but as far as who “counts,” our internal definition can be “whoever feels like the term describes them.”

1000% support this, and in my personal corner (from my background of queer means queer) support always also including “just ask” in conjunction with do whatever you want forever because like you said, hard definitions are practically impossible.

viscasi (June 12, 2025):

I definitely was not trying state tht we should divide allinity because women’s masculinity is a watered-down form of men’s masculinity” […]

Oh, of course not! I wasn’t trying to imply you were. I was bringing it up as a concern of the effect it may have, not the original intent.

[…] it’s often loadbering for why gnc trans men aren’t “just women” and gnc trans women aren’t “just men”.

I’m having a bit of a difficult time interpreting what you’re saying there; here are my thoughts:

If allinity identity is separate from gender identity, a feminine man (cis or trans) does not share a whole identity with a feminine woman, even if they do have one aspect of their identity in common. If we package allinity with gender, I think that’s when things could get misconstrued. I don’t think separating allinity from gender (and allowing it to be the same entity across/independent from gender) would mean that trans men are “just women,” like:

[Venn diagram. Top of left side reads “Intrafem trans man’s identity” while the right reads: “intrafem woman’s identity.” On the left side of the Venn diagram: “Gender: Man” and on the right: “Gender: Woman”. In the middle, shared by both sides: “Allinity: Intrafem”]

I conceptualize it this way because often intrafeminine people tend to feel a sort of resonance/comradery with other feminine people (regardless of gender), and vice versa for intramasculine people— while still not identifying as that gender, and being distinct from them by gender identity but similar by allinity identity.

That said, I mean, we could leave the internal conception of the categories up to each individual if they feel differently?

[…] letting those who are doing it as a form of communication be able to distinguish themselves, too is also useful. mostly just mean that often there is a fair bit of overlap […]

Absolutely! I should have clarified that “gender transgression” versus “gender nonconformity” are not mutually exclusive, nor are they necessarily identity labels on their own. They’re more meant as terms to be applied to a person’s actions, and if a situation entails both things, as you said, then both terms can be used in conjunction to describe the situation.

hollycantkeeptrackofthedaze (June 12, 2025):

If allinity identity is separate from gender identity, a feminine man (cis or trans) does not share a whole identity with a feminine woman, even if they do have one aspect of their identity in common.

i think what i’m trying to say is that what i am picturing is that a feminine trans man doesn’t share a whole identity with a feminine woman as though they share the similar allinity, but different genders, but the trans man’s “gender identity” is informed both by his allinity and his regular “gender” (no identity appended at the end). so to say, this:

[A diagram of a feminine trans man wherein his gender (man) and allinity (feminine) are separate but make up his gender identity.]

so gender and allinity are separate things but it is acknwoledged that they may very well interact and inform one another in a larger sense (identity) of one’s gender.

wherein his gender identity is not just that he’s a man, but in what ways he is a man, too. and what makes him feel like “a man” could be very well different from a intramasculine one.

(fundamentally i think we’re on the same page about this, i’m just trying to be specific about what i mean.)

Context:

Post on r/GNCStraight from u/Secret_Classroom4555 (link):

“Problem: I have no idea how we have gotten this far in English having to always collectively refer to Masculinity/Femininity/Androgyny in full with slashes. It’s so awful.

*More importantly, it’s clunky and inefficient, and a hindrance to any deeper discussion about the concept.

Solution:

Allinity. noun.

Umbrella term / neutral stand-in word for Masculinity/Femininity/Androgyny. (Gender is to woman/nonbinary/man/etc., as Allinity is to Masculinity/Femininity/Androgyny.)

(first syllable intended to naturally feel like a combination of the words, plus the Latin suffix -ity meaning “the state of being”)

Example of use: “One’s allinity is self-defined.” “What does your allinity mean to you?” “How do you express your allinity?”

Also: I’m aware “gender expression” is technically the label used to denote allinity as of now, but a) it’s also clunky and b) it doesn’t refer to the masculinity/etc itself, just the state of expressing it, usually via clothing. “Allinity” is more flexible in use as it can also be used as a neutral stand-in word. Idk, does that make sense? When I write/talk about GNC things, I keep finding myself short of a word that serves this purpose. Anyone else?

However: If anyone has a better proposition— especially someone with a better understanding of Latin/word creation— or, obviously, if a word already exists for this and it has somehow eluded me— let me know. Otherwise, I think I’m just gonna use “allinity” from now on.”

Post from viragoposting (on June 1, 2025):

(link)

Opposite of Virago? That’d be Mollis! Although, I just like to shorten it to Moll.

Unlike Virago, this one I’ve only seen women in my circle and otherwise call extremely feminine boys molls rather than it being used as a term. (Most likely because they tend to be mlm.)

viscasi (June 2, 2025):

Interesting! Where does this word come from?

I won’t lie, I don’t personally loooove the way Mollis sounds..? I did some brief research and I think the etymological link to softness is very fitting and I love that aspect to it! but the phonetic feel to it doesn’t feel quite right for what we’re trying to describe. It reminds me of mud, moles, and mollusks more than femininity

viragoposting (June 2, 2025):

I actually feel the same, that’s why I feel like I shortened it? Lol, yeah it’s more of a nickname than anything set in stone. It has that sort of roundness too it but I do agree it can sound similar.

What do the feminine men here think?

hollycantkeeptrackofthedaze (June 2, 2025):

still not the first guy to ask because i don’t often use hyperspecific words and being not straight means i have much more ease just using words like butch or gnc, but i like mollis, to be honest!

Post from viragoposting (May 29, 2025):

(link)

Anonymous asked: Is the word Virago supposed to refer to a sense of self as a masculine woman, or does Virago just attempt to capture the experience of being any woman attracted to men in a queer/dominant way? And do those men have to be feminine? (And if so, what counts as a ‘feminine’ man)

I’m quite sure we answer this exact strand of question almost every day on all of our pages with different terms.

It’s both.

Comparing my own experience, it’s use locally as slang, and by how I’ve seen it used. It’d lean towards women having a dominant or “othered” sense of womanhood and attraction to what that entails, feminine men.

Answering what feminine men are could depend on who you ask. But traditionally things like feminine presentation is easy to point out. It could also be internal identity in personality for those not attracted soley to physicality. When it comes to body, it’s common for upon softer physicality with typically feminine body fat distribution or ourglass figures from a range of weight types.

There are three criteria. The more you have the more it applies, but all still fall under the label.

Dominant
Masculine
Attraction to feminine men.

I’ll make it digestible with all types of virago:

Masculine Woman (Bi, Het, Pan)✔️
Masculine Woman (Attracted to men in queer/dominant way) ✔️
Masculine Woman (Only Attracted to men in queer/dominant way) Masculine Woman (Attracted to masculine man)✔️
Masculine Woman (Attracted to men)✔️
Feminine Woman (Attracted only to feminine men) ✔️
Feminine Woman (Only Attracted to feminine men in dominant way)✔️

Feminine Woman (Attracted only to feminine men) ✔️

I think that does a good job!

Post from viscasi (July 4, 2025):

Anon asked: “Few questions! Hopefully this is a good place to ask!

Would virago be a good term for someone who’s a woman but wants a masculine and boyish outershell? Maybe sometimes liking imitate a guy or a soft guy but never feeling man enough because one can’t relate to men? Or would I just be a cosplayer or cross dresser?

Forgive my rambling, I want to make sense of this:

Tbh it’s been a bit interesting floating and lurking in the demigirl, tomboy, butch, transmac spaces but not really feeling entirely connected there. I can’t shake it and I know I’m not trans because I’m truly a woman at heart even if I may feel different some days (trust me, there is no egg, I checked the coop for a month now). Gender identity gets discussed a LOT and that’s great but I don’t think I ever hear about expression a ton and if there’s expression it likely is connected to a non-cis/non-hetero identity.

Like okay gender identity? check, now what if I want to merely present as a different gender despite my inner core being unchangeable? (I.e. maybe being called a boyfriend because it feels good or wanting to grow out my mustache so I register as a guy to myself in the mirror or others?)

That’s where I feel like an outsider to transman spaces, more power to them but I’m not a man. Or butch spaces, cheers to them but I’m not lesbian either. Sure SOME from each space could relate to being or previously being female but again it’s barely connection other than that.

Are there any spaces or terms for me? How do I know what I’m eligible for? I don’t feel really confident either so it’s hard to know if I’m being shallow or if it’s a phase. Also anymore virago resources to follow? Thanks so much for the blog!”

viscasi replied:

“Yes of course always! I’m happy to help!

Yeah I think “virago” could describe you! Ultimately only you can know whether a label is right for you since idk what’s going on in your brain, but if you’re wondering whether what you described is at least in the ballpark I’d say so. (“Virago” is defined as a woman who is one or more of these things: masculine, dominant, and attracted to feminine men.) Beyond that, a lot of it just depends on whether or not you feel a sense of unity with other viragos, whether you feel like your experiences are similar enough to theirs to make sense to you to call them by the same name.

Don’t apologize for rambling! It’s helpful to know where you’re coming from, anyway. That sounds pretty similar to my own experience— I related on some level to many of the experiences of butches and transmasc people, even nonbinary or genderqueer people, but at the end of the day I knew I didn’t like women and I knew I wasn’t any flavor of transgender, so it must be something else.

(“Trust me, there is no egg, I checked the coop for a month now.” lmaooo you’re funny, I might steal that haha. Also, you might appreciate the “#egg sherlocking” tag, it’s about this experience exactly!)

And hey, if it’s something you care this much about, it’s worth looking into at the very least. Self exploration is never a waste. Especially with labels, you can’t ever really be “wrong” if you wind up changing your mind— just means you have a better understanding of yourself. Even if it does end up just being a phase, phases are a healthy part of life and nothing to be ashamed of! If it’s who you are right now, it’s who you are right now. Personally, I used to be VERY firm about my identity as an Asexual for years… but then I came to understand myself better, and ended up dropping that label which I never thought I’d do— and I’m not mad at myself for it at all, like past me might’ve feared. Instead I think of it fondly as an important stepping stone in my journey toward understanding myself 🙂

Generally speaking, if you feel like a feminine woman at heart but simply like the aesthetic of masculinity, then the broader label of “gender nonconforming” or “gnc” might be the most fitting way to describe that (in which case, your gender expression is nonconforming but your allinity identity is not— more about that later). On the flip side, if you feel like a masculine woman at heart and feel that your masculine aesthetic tastes are an extension/result of your masculine identity, then “intramasculine” (intramasc) may be a more specific word that applies to you.

Also, in case this is helpful to you, I’ve been informed that “butch” is not an exclusive label to lesbians. Apparently there are some who gatekeep it, and of course words mean different things to different people, but I’ve been told it’s generally supposed to mean “queer masculinity” or simply someone who feels a unity with/aligns themself with other butches. Just in case you didn’t know! (There’s a lil meme about it too.) But, if you don’t feel like “butch” is a label that really encapsulates your identity in a way that’s helpful to you, you certainly don’t have to make it fit— a different label might fit you better or, some people prefer not to use labels and that’s just fine too. Personally, I feel like “virago” suits me better than “butch.” (If you’re wondering about the difference between “butch” and “virago,” there’s a brief post for that I’ll link here.)

And yes, there’s a few other blogs who post about these kinds of things! Some are more active than others, and as far as I’m aware, Anibelle, Holly, and I run the only blogs fully dedicated to advocating for hetGNC things. At least for now— our circle is rapidly growing! So I wouldn’t be surprised if we see more blogs keep popping up. Here’s a list of every hetGNC poster I know of off the top of my head (let me know if I’m missing anyone!): Myself, @viragoposting, @hollycantkeeptrackofthedaze, @prof-zunoshade, @cadybear420, @minnwins, @gnc-het-text. There’s also a blog I know of who posts about GNC things just in general: @gnc-culture-is.

There are also some subreddits you can check out— I want to emphasize that there is a reason why our group came to Tumblr instead (no drama, just that the subreddits are a very broad mixed bag of experiences with no clear distinction between them, and didn’t quite provide the specific community and content we were looking for- things like that). BUT, the subreddits still have their uses and I didn’t want to withhold them in case they’re helpful for you. They are: r/GNCStraight, r/RoleReversal, and r/Genderqueerstraight. So you can check those out too if you feel like it!

Ultimately – The best thing you can do is get familiar with the terminology available, and go from there. This linked post would be very helpful for that—I highly recommend you look through it, more than anything else I’ve linked (at the very least, read the white definition cards towards the beginning of the post). It goes over all the terminology I use on this blog and the kinds of people who might identify with each one. (Post linked here!) One distinction in particular that will probably be helpful for you to make sense of your identity: your allinity identity v.s. your gender expression.

I also extended the explanations found in that post in an answer to another ask, if you want it elaborated on after that: (post linked here!)

If you have any more questions let me know! My internet will be a bit spotty for the next few days but I promise I’ll get back to you as soon as I can :)”

Archive of Post: https://web.archive.org/web/20250704125405/https://viscasi.tumblr.com/post/788141821780000768/few-questions-hopefully-this-is-a-good-place-to