#/ 'everyone should be free to question their gender identities even if they're cis' and someone replied with 'that's cis+' and i feel that

[fallershipping]

I love Looker and his gender-nonconforming wife

(I love Anabel and her gender-nonconforming husband)

[cigaretteparfum]

ey mates. i found this post from a terf talking about their commonly used abbreviations and terms. i'll copy-paste it here, unedited (except the formatting for easier read), so yous know better what to look out for + how they think/justify the use of these terms. i'll put an archive link later in case the read more link breaks. also, this post is full of anti-trans and anti-nonbinary bullshit so ... just be aware of that.

post source is gendercriticalthinking. am not making a whole blocklist bc ... would you believe me if i say that i tried but gave up after the first, like, dozen names bc it got too depressing? lmfao. (feel free to click on the link and peruse the notes yourself though. whenever you can take it.)

archive link.

* TIM and TIF stand for "Trans-Identified Male" and "Trans-Identified Female". Basically, TIMs are what others usually call "trans woman", and same for TIFs and "trans man" (although these terms also cover non-binary-identified and neo-gender-identified people as well).

TIM/TIF are used instead to more accurately reflect the reality of the people in question without sidelining their beliefs/identities: we understand you identify as trans, but calling males "women" and females "men", even if there's a "trans" in front, does not accurately convey reality, and we oppose that.

* OSA and SSA stand for "Opposite-Sex Attracted" and "Same-Sex Attracted". Therefore, the label OSA people covers straight and bisexual people, while SSA covers gay and bisexual people. Basically, SSA women/men are what others usually call "wlw/mlm".

Because people who believe in gender identity and use "mlm/wlw" consider some males to be women and some females to be men, the "men" and "women" in "mlm/wlw" do not accurately convey the reality (similar to the above) of the sex and sexualities of the people in question, as a male who is OSA but identifies as trans would be considered by some to be a "wlw". However, OSA and SSA place the emphasis back onto the sex and sexuality of the people in question, which is, again, a more accurate description of reality when talking about people and their sexualities.

* TRA stands for "Trans Rights Activist." However, this is mostly used to mean "people who agree with/support gender/trans identities/neogenders/etc" rather than "people who are engaging in actual activism for those beliefs." The term gendie is essentially used the same way (although it has more of a connotation of "trans/nb/neo-gender-identified people" rather tham "people who support gender identity but may not necessarily identify as trans/nb themselves") and it has been used frequently more recently, although I and others feel like it's a bit juvenile and derisive.

* Gender ideology refers to the beliefs above, e.g. the validity of gender/trans/non-binary/etc. identities. This is usually used to refer to the beliefs about gender that are exclusive to liberals: that you can change gender/sex, that gender/sex are not binary, that everyone has a gender identity, that misgendering someone or pointing out their "biological" (a redundant word) sex is at best highly offensive and at worst a hate crime, etc. Whereas, gender or gender roles/stereotypes are usually used to refer to the more historical/"classical" concept of gender which lines up with conservatives' beliefs: you know, the whole "women like pink and should wear makeup and are naturally submissive, but men like blue and should be muscular and are naturally dominant" crap.

Although they seem different, they're actually one and the same, or at the very least the liberal/new gender ideology is firmly founded in classic sexism. Both conservatives and liberals believe wholeheartedly in gender: that it applies to everyone without exception ("all women must be feminine and all men must be masculine", and in gender ideology's case add on "feminine women and masculine men are cis while gnc people are trans, you must be either cis or trans" aka you must either enjoy your gender role or want to transition because you dislike it), that it must be rigidly enforced and supported to maintain order and understanding ("A girl who likes boy things?!? That's an affront to nature and must be corrected, girls should like girly things!!!" or "A girl who likes boy things?!? That's clearly a sign she he must be trans, because boys like boyish things!!!"), that it's genetic/inherently true rather than something that is imposed upon people due to misogyny ("Women are submissive to men because God made them that way to be men's servants" and "Everyone has a gender identity, it's something you were born with in your brain, and how you feel about your body [which you can change] and your gender [which you cannot change] determines if you're cis or trans. You must be one or the other."), etc.

* GNC stands for "Gender Non-Conforming", aka what technically applies to most people on Earth, to the dismay of the gender fandom. It's usually used, however, to refer to people who are very noticeably/starkly/deliberately GNC in almost every way and proud of it, such as butch women.

* Gender critical (oftenshortened to "GC" ) is an adjective that most-accurately describes how people like me view gender/gender roles: they suck. Get rid of them. We are, you could say, "critical" of the concept of "gender". Not all gender critical people are radical feminists, but because rejection of the misogynistic concept of gender is a defining belief of GC people, we are nearly always some variety of feminist.

This means we don't really fit in with either of the two most-common/vocal "sides" of the trans debate: conservatives who see a male person in a dress and makeup go "This is disgusting! Stop wearing that right now! You're a man, so dress like one!", liberals who see the same guy go "This is so gender! I'm sure you're a trans woman because of how you present yourself! You're dressing like a woman, so that's who you are!", and gender critical people who see him go "This is awesome, keep being you! It's wonderful that you enjoy being a GNC man! What you enjoy or wear does not define who you are, and who you are does not define what you should enjoy or wear!"… or at least we would more often if the previous two groups didn't end up causing most GNC people to either be closeted/repressed, or believe they must be trans and therefore not a GNC man/woman but instead a gender-confirming trans woman/trans man (or some type of enby, same difference: "you don't obey the gender stereotypes belonging to your sex so you must not be that sex/gender" instead of "gender stereotypes are stupid, and your sex is your sex").

* TWAW is short for "Trans Women Are Women," a common chant and circular-logic-nonanswer from gender ideologists, the popularity of which in stark contrast to the lack of saying "trans men are men" (something only ever said after first saying TWAW, never on its own) surely has nothing to do with the coincidental fact that the beloved, supported, face-of-the-movement group are males and the forgotten, neglected, secondary-to-men group are females.

* While these are of course words used commonly by everyone, I think it would be helpful to lay out the gender-critical definitions of gender and sex here: "gender" is short for "gender roles/stereotypes" (see "gender ideology" above) whereas "sex" is used to refer to the biological realities (chromosomes, gametes, hormones, secondary characteristics, etc.) of being female or male.

Basically:

- Conservatives believe gender and sex are the same thing (or at least use the words interchangeably, as well as believe your gender should match your sex) and therefore believe "female = woman = feminine" and "male = man =masculine".

- Liberals believe gender and "biological" sex are different things (yet often confusingly use the words interchangeably or subconsciously believe they are the same [as seen in their frequent slips of the tongue when talked to] but claim to believe they are different because they want to be good allies) and therefore use "woman" and "man" to describe gender (because they believe "woman = feminine" and "man = masculine") while using "female" and "male" to describe sex (but again they often and confusingly use male/female as synonyms of man/woman, and again likely because they want to be good allies and believe anything that might contradict TWAW is horrific and transphobic).

- Gender critical people believe gender is an archaic, misogynistic system that is long overdue for being tossed out while sex is an accurate, scientific term (therefore making "biological/birth sex" redundant, it's like saying "meat-eating carnivore") to describe the reality of being a human. Women are adult female humans and men are adult male humans. "Feminine" and "masculine" are outdated, arbitrary, sexist concepts and should not be associated with anything: not clothes, not behaviors, and especially not one's sex. Your sex is just biology. It should never determine your behavior and lifestyle: neither to say your sex and behavior/lifestyle must match with gender, nor that if they don't match then your sex/gender must change to make them match.

[invinciblerodent]

Hey, why is it that making a character bi when they're straight is good, and when the reverse happens it's bad? Feel free not to answer if people have been stressing you out with this, but, I'm a pansexual male and I don't really understand why installing for example bi sera mods out of convenience is bad. My friend said its gross but wouldn't it all be gross? Thanks in advance. (Not trying to imply anything, just confused, I am not going to install bi sera mods)

I feel like I should add a reaction image here just to break up the monotony of the text, but I don’t think there is one in my library that would accurately represent what I’m thinking.

Okay. This has been talked about for years at this point, and not to be rude, but if you’re still confused, it’s because you have been either not paying attention, or are actively avoiding the topic. You are asking me to redo the emotional labor that has already been done, by people much more qualified than I am, and is readily available if you just take the time to look for the answer to your questions.

But, I realize that not everyone has been around for the past few years, so I’ll give you the benefit of a doubt, and I’ll try my best to explain it in a concise manner. I’m still not an asshole.

(Full disclosure, I say these things as a white, bisexual cis woman whose long term partner is a white, straight cis man. I experience just about as many privileges as a queer person possibly can, and I highly recommend you look into the thoughts and work of creators of color, and the people who are most harmed by this specific issue. This has not been spoken of for a while now so they may be deep within people’s blogs, but if you really care about the answer, you can spare the ~hour or so that it will take to hunt down enough sources to form an understanding. It’s not my job to do your research for you, I’ll just give a summary of it.)

The simplest way I can describe it is with a somewhat clunky metaphor I’ve read about this like a year ago.

Imagine that you have a plate of cookies. Those are all the instances m/f love is seen in media, all the prince charmings and lovely princesses, all the cartoons, games, movies, books that feature a romantic subplot between a male and a female protagonist. Take away one or two, chances are, you don’t even notice that they are gone. You don’t care, you still have enough.

Now imagine that you have one or two cookies. Those are all the instances openly LGBT+ identities are shown in mainstream media. It’s only a few, but it is all you have. And if you must go hungry for someone else to have one more cookie, you will notice.

I don’t like to liken identities to food, but this is the most straightforward way to say it that I can think of.

The thing about the bi Sera and bi Dorian mods in particular (and tbh I find it rather gross to call those mods “bi mods”, they’re more like “availability mods”, they don’t make them bisexual, they just make them romantically available for player characters of another gender) is simply that, unlike mods making originally straight characters somehow LGBT+ (which does not, in any way, undermine the heteronormativity of mainstream media, and especially the shockingly homophobic and sexist boys’ club that the AAA video game industry can be), it is not creating representation where there is none. It is taking away already existing representation with the intent of making SGA characters attracted to genders they normally would not be attracted to.

It’s not created with the intent of carving out a place in which you could see yourself. It’s created because you were told “no”, and you can’t take rejection.

Remember, if you don’t think representation matters, it is because you are already represented.

Those characters are already part of a marginalized group, a sexual minority if you will, and it is part of their identity- which is especially important to people who identify with those characters. The existence of a character like Sera, who is a fully realized lesbian with a happy ending and an actual character arc not revolving around her sexuality, in a big budget AAA game, can be especially important to people who identify as lesbians. Dorian, a gay man whose story actually deals with issues related to his sexuality, is also especially important to people who may have experienced the same- being told by guardians, people they have loved and respected, that who they are, who they love, is an imperfection to be changed.

To put it simply, bi mods for already marginalized characters take away representation from the groups they were created for. And that’s especially gross in the case of mods like bi Sera, bi Dorian (and somewhere down the line I’m SURE there’s gonna be bi Gil and bi Suvi, and at that point all hell will break loose again) because it echoes what so many gay- and lesbian-identifying people have heard over and over their whole lives: That you must conform. You must enter an other sex relationship to be good enough. You must make yourself accessible to me, specifically me, for me to love you and accept you. Who you are is imperfect; let me fix you. (And let’s not even go into implications of conversion therapy, corrective r*pe, the fucking Russian concentration camps for gay men, and all those other delectable issues that are still present in the year of our lord 2017, because I’m SO not qualified to talk about any of this- really, fkin google it. There are so many excellently written articles just within this community, it’s really not hard to find.)

“Bi mods” are not creating representation for us bisexuals. It’s telling gay men and lesbian women that they are not good enough, that they must change, and they must conform to be worthy of romantic love, because someone who claims to love them cannot be assed to make their fictional avatar of the gender that they are attracted to. It’s hurtful, and damaging, and a disgusting mistreatment of not just the characters, but the people they represent.

You see where I’m going with this? Doing the same to a straight character, while I personally don’t intend to do it because I have no problem playing a character whose gender identity is not the same as mine (for others it may trigger feelings of gender dysphoria, or any number of unpleasant feelings, so really I get it), is coping. It’s clawing out a small, imperfect place for yourself where there was none. It does not harm or affect straight people, it does not tell them that they must change to be loved.

Context in this specific issue is key. You can’t just take the whole thing out of the sociocultural environment in which it exists. You cannot examine these things in a vacuum, take them by the numbers, and just ignore all the times LGBT+ people have seen, and heard, and experienced the same rejection before.

Bi mods for gay characters are made because you can’t take it when you are told “no”.

Bi mods for straight characters are made because sometimes all the representation you can get is what you make for yourself.

There is a goddamn profound difference.

[arkeamiiris-blog]

Binary or Not Binary. That is the question.

Before I go into this, I should point out that I'm what you would call a binary person myself so this isn't coming from someone who can be claimed to have a bias that swings in the direction of what I'm saying.

So, let me start by describing identity. Quite simply, it's who you are. In a physical sense it's whatever you have on a piece of paper or a card or a database that, in theory at least - it rarely works out that way - describes who you are. In a greater sense of reality, it's who you are in your heart and in your soul.

As it is, identities come in more than one type. There are fixed identities, such as man, woman, agender, bigender, trans-masculine, trans-feminine, etc, etc. This isn't a black and white rule however, since, for some people, these identities aren't quite so fixed; notably in the case of genderfluid people. There are other aspects of identity too. Your species. Your personality. Your ethnicity, etc, etc.

Then you have your consequential identities; not identities in the fullest sense, they're statusses that are a consequence of how society defines your relationship to a fixed identity. Transgender is one example. I have the fixed identity of woman but society feels I shouldn't be; hence I'm transgender. Woman is considered by society to be a binary gender so I'm binary. I was born in a land society defines as Great Britain, so society says I'm British, etc, etc.

And then there are temporary identities. I'm a butcher, a baker, a candlestick maker. Btw, for all you Trump fans out there, a temporary identity is no basis for claiming lordship over everyone else; no identity is.

These are just three types, there are others.

The thing is, though, that consequential identities/statusses have absolutely no relevance in who a person is. I'm no different a woman being a binary woman as who I am as a woman. I'm no different as a trans woman to who I am as a woman. Being British doesn't make me any different a person as being an Earthling.

Consequential identities are purely human-made; created from a human drive to separate the world into us and them, validating us as much as possible while invalidating them as much as possible. A cis woman can feel a huge sense of superiority over a trans woman simply by adding the trans prefix and, of course, when sympathetic cisgender people try to even the score for us by creating the word cisgender, cis people revolt because it shows there's no difference in the validation of trans people to that of cis people. And, believe it or not, people in the trans community can be just as bad because we also have the subject of binaries. I'm a woman. He's a man. You're neither. So I'm binary and you're non-binary=I'm valid and you're not.

Thing is, what do we gain from invalidating others? Does it make us stronger? Does it make us more real than we already are? Does it allow us to feel fuzzy when we wake up in the morning? I don't think I've ever felt any benefit from being binary; except knowing that it's one less thing for people to attack me over. But why? It's not even as though there's anything special about being binary. It's not like being cis makes people better people. It's not like being British fills me with any sense of pride. In fact, given how British people are commonly taught to behave, similar to American teaching, albeit less extreme, it actually fills me with a sense of shame.

So the point I'm trying to make here is this. If you must cling to a status that does nothing at all to define who you are as a person, then feel free to do so but please, for Elysium's sake, stop using it to separate the world into us and them because you will eventually, find that us turns into me and no one can stand alone in this world.