#I think it’s wrong to deny that many transmen

[area51-escapee]

I guess that what I wish people understood is that “trans men often spent years being perceived as, treated as, and possibly even identifying as women” and “trans men are not just women who happen to look like men” are both very true statements

[sometimes-men-need-help-too]

Hi, I'm a trans man and I just found your blog.

Since coming out I've had a lot of hatred from other people towards me. I've always been comfortable and happy with myself, being a man is who I truly am, but the world doesn't really see it that way.

I've been asked "Why would you want to be a man, being a girl is so much better, everyone wants to be a girl, you're just weird"

Or "Oh so you're a lesbian, got it" (Even though I'm asexual anyway and even if I wasn't asexual, I still have a romantic interest in men?)

Some people refuse to even accept I exist and deny up and down that transmen are real because they've only seen transwomen in media, as though being a transwoman is the only acceptable trans.

I've been called other things like a femboy or a tomboy or a drag king, so many different terms trying to offend me and denounce my identity because I don't completely pass yet, even though I've had surgery and take hormones.

Not only are they wrong, but it's incredibly hurtful because I don't WANT to be a feminine man, I love masculinity and I want to be a bodybuilding sort of man.

Although I'm just sorta ranting right now, even though I'm not a cis man, a lot of the comments I face are not just transphobia but also misandry AND misogyny.

What do you think about this? And would transmen count for your men's rights topic? Would you be able to comment about this sort of topic?

I've gotten a few asks/messages like this, where they've said that people will treat them differently and such

I had at least one person tell me that they were caught off guard by what they dealt with after transitioning. Would you say this was surprising to you? 

As for coming about this topic, I am very hesitant about discussing anything trans related. I can reblog stuff, that’s fine. But making a post and giving my opinion on it, I don’t know. The reason why I’m hesitant is because of how some people can be if they believe you’ve said the wrong thing or it’s offensive. I apologize, I really do. 

If you haven't checked out @egalitarianchica she's made some trans related posts. I can't recall if any were about this topic, though

[thepoetlillies]

I am not an oracle fyi, this is just what I have gathered so far and if I am wrong about anything or say anything insensitive, please correct me and I’ll better myself to be a greater ally, because even though I’m queer/fluid, I don’t know the struggles of being trans/gnc firsthand x

Transwomen are women. Ciswomen are women. Transmen are men. Cismen are men. Nonbinary folk are not men or women.

Yet they are all valid.

Firstly, to define a woman by the biological functions of ciswomen is not only cruel, but a disguised act of transphobia.

Not all ciswomen have wombs. Not all ciswomen menstruate. Not all ciswomen go through the menopause. So already this definition is flawed.

Your gender identity does not rely on these.

The concept that the acknowledgement of transpeople is dangerous to cispeople, specifically ciswomen, is atrocious. Allowing transwomen to use the restroom/changing room that they identify with should be common sense but instead transphobes twist the sick tale that it is dangerous. That transwomen will assault ciswomen in those places, or that men will dress as women to get in there to assault ciswomen. It is cruel to deny basic rights to transpeople just because of the most sick people in society who might abuse it. Transwomen are not a danger to ciswomen. Transmen are not a danger to cismen. Nonbinary folk are not a danger to cispeople.

I also find this argument ridiculous for the fact that it recognises that the problem is not transwomen, but cismen who assault people. So how about instead of discriminating against the trans community, we address the issue of cismen harrassing/assaulting/raping people. That’s the real issue there. Instead of denying transpeople their right to exist and teaching people that it is wrong to be trans/nonbinary, teach people not to rape.

Another argument I have seen claims that the acknowledgment of the trans community and nonbinary community erases the struggles/experiences of ciswomen. This is also not true. We know about women’s suffrage, it is an incredible part of world history and therefore cannot be erased. By allowing transwomen, this does not erase modern struggles/experiences either. I assure you. There are still struggles facing women in this day and age but transwomen will not take that away. They face their own struggles/experiences on account of gender identity, such as this one you have created for them. Ciswomen will still face discrimination on account of their gender, just like transwomen do, so why aren’t we working together to create equality among everyone regardless of gender? Unless that isn’t what these transphobes want.

Moreover, I’ve seen the argument that the acknowledgment of transpeople erases the identity of cispeople. Again, this isn’t the case. Nobody is saying that a ciswoman is not a woman and that a cisman is not a man. Because they are that. But also transwomen are women and transmen are men. They are not a threat to cismen and ciswomen. Because the rights granted to the trans community and nonbinary community are not rights taken away from the cis community. That’s not how it works; it just means that there are more rights. What it does mean however, is that cispeople lose the unfair privilage they have by identifying with their born gender and the world becomes a more equal place because certain people don’t benefit from the discrimination and oppression of other people on account of gender. To say that you don’t accept transgender or nonbinary identities is to say that you want to maintain the privilage you get from their oppression, and therefore do not want gender equality. And that’s not okay, so we will continue to point out your insensitive, discriminatory actions and comments until we reach equality which we deserve.

Additionally, it is not misogynistic to point out these behaviours, i.e the case regarding JK Rowling. It is not misogynistic to argue with one ciswoman for her blatantly discriminatory views. By correcting her, we do not diminish her identity as a woman, for she is one, and we do not criticise on the basis of her gender. We also do not criticise with the intention of discrediting all women, as she does not speak for all women. We criticise on the basis that she is oppressing the gender identity of so many, including so many that previously looked up to her. And it is not misogynistic to do so. Also JK, nobody is saying that sex doesn’t exist, we are simply providing the distinction between sex and gender as they are different, even though your sex and gender are both female. And TERF isn’t a slur by the way so it’s also not misogynistic to say because Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists do not actually fight for equality.

To the trans/gender nonconforming community, you are loved, you are supported, and you are valid !

I think this was pretty much everything I wanted to say, and if you identify as trans or nonbinary and I’ve said something wrong, please correct me because I just want to be the best ally I can for you 💜 !

[neonstatic]

(transcripted convo)

i’m reposting a discussion i had w a terf. i previously posted screenshots but she messaged me and said she didn’t want her url or avatar displayed. editing the pics to post them again was hell so i’m posting a script instead (i learned my lesson tumblr: you suck). if anyone ends up finding the convo and thus the redacted speaker... idc. this is a public website and we technically had this convo in public - the notes of a post aren’t private spaces afaik. i’m posting this as proof that sometimes calmly reasoning with ppl lead to nothing. (i know anyone could say the same but lmao leave me alone.)

tw for transphobia/transmisogyny 

[redacted] (speaking to a transmasc discourser about the "woman path"): Ok let me explain what I mean :) if your experience was totally different then thats fine :) im 24 and when I was little i was encouraged to play with dolls and learn 'motherly things' like playing with baby dolls while my brother played with toy trucks. There was a lot of pressure at school to wear dresses, and be sweet and polite. @[transmasc discourser] then of course, learning to deal with periods and the shame and taboo around them. Removing body hair because its considered unladylike. Etc

@[transmasc discourser] have you had none of those experiences?

neonbaebae: these are all common experiences for women bc of gender roles/stereotypes but none of that defines womanhood as an identity.

[redacted]: completely agree they are gender roles. But menstruation isnt a gender role. Its a frustrating part of being female. But that said, what IS womanhood then?

(rest under cut)

neonbaebae: menstruation is a biological function that is in no way exclusive to female bodies. remember intersex ppl, who come in all forms and shapes. women aren't all the same and it's likewise for men. there are intersex women who don't fit all the criteria for being "female" yet still identify as women. there is a distinction to make between womanhood as an experience and womanhood as an identity.

the woman experience is what you've described. the woman identity is feeling like one, e.g.: liking female-coded clothes, makeup, hairstyles, feeling comfortable in the societal role of being a woman. identity is essentially abt self perception most of the time

[redacted]: intersex is unique and I respect that not all womens bodies are the same. Intersexuality is complex but it doesnt represent the majority of biological women. I dont have a strong baclground in intersex knowledge so I'm certainly not gonna speak on behalf of intersex women. so if identity is self perception (which I completely agree with) how can a biological man self perceive his femaleness.if he's never experienced it?

neonbaebae: trans women never identify with being male and all in entails. and they can see, thru watching women counterparts and how they interact with the world around them, that they id more w the idea of womanhood and much less w the idea of manhood. it's esp why dysphoria often settles around puberty bc the dissonance manifests physically and that's harder to handle

[redacted]: but what youre talking about is what trans women see women do.  If thats what someone aspires to, its a very basic and narrow understanding of  what womanhood is. Its only what they see. And people are far more complex than this. Does a biological male aspire to periods stigma, beauty conformity and lesser social stance in the world? Or do they aspire to femininity? Something many biological women dont feel comfortable with

neonbaebae: womanhood as an identity is a feeling that is strengthened by a disconnection to manhood, its polar opposite. someone who completely rejects the idea of being man is likely to prefer being a woman (not always but likely!). many trans women do aspire to femininity and it has nothing to do with the cis women who are uncomfortable w it, just like there are many cis women who embrace it too.

many trans women cannot quite explain their transition in another way than "being a man felt wrong but being a woman feels right and authentic to my true self". i'd suggest to ask an actual trans woman for her pov tho since i'm not one, i'm just basing myself on what i've heard them say

[redacted]: but feeling disconnected with manhood (which is understandable and gender roles are frustrating) doesnt make someone the opposite of a man. As society we need to open our understanding of gender expression. But this isnt the same as thinking 'if I dont feel like a conventional man or connect with male social expectations, then I must be the opposite'. Theres no logic in that

we live in a world where gender stereotype binaries are considered natural, and people who dont fit this understandably feel marginalised. In fact Id argue to a greater or lesser degree, none of us truly fit the prescribed gender binary.

but i find it problematic when a man thinks they're a woman based on what they think 'woman' is.

neonbaebae: you're right in saying that a disconnection from manhood doesn't make someone a woman - a connection to womanhood does. it has v little to do with the upbringing of women which you seem to define thru misogyny and menstruation alone which is frankly a pessimistic view of womanhood. it's less not feeling like a conventional man and more not feeling like a man At All. tru it doesn't sound logical but gender is not logical it's abstract and complex

it seems problematic bc one might think men would gain smth from iding as women but stats show that trans women are at higher risk of assault for being out and open, both of bc of misogyny (not directly related to having a vagina or menstruating after all) & transphobia. it's esp telling that trans men aren't targeted as much. do you disagree w trans men as well?

[redacted]: but as a women i dont connect with womanhood. Lol i am a women. It would be nice to think we live in a world where women are equal, but that's not the world we live in. Womanhood is hard. And we do live under a patriarchal society that's cultivated female inferiority over many centuries. We're still negotiating freedoms today.

Its not about gaining or loss. Its about the male right to self define womanhood on their terms, without the biological or social conditioning. In fact, many have recieved MALE conditioning as children. This comes with its own privileges.

I think transmale is a very different experience so no I categorise them very differently to transwomen

neonbaebae: "as a woman" you say. even if the experiences and stereotypes don't fit you perfectly, even if you reject it, you still id as a woman. you feel like one and you suffer the consequences of being one. believe it or not trans women suffer from iding as a woman as well and thrice as harshly. i can provide sources if you want.

trans women don't think like men bc they feel like women. the thought patterns are different. they don't digest the social messages abt men bc their mind doesn't relate to it. male entitlement and all doesn't apply to them. and in sociology alone womanhood is often defined as more than a biological or upbringing thing. it's a social identity and trans women have a right to it if they don't id and reject manhood altogether

my question tho was do you think trans men aren't men either cus otherwise that'd be hypocritical

[redacted]: my point is its not an identity. Its a reality. Im a woman. I have xx chromosomes and the world treats me as such. Similar to my race. I dont identify as my race, i am treated as the world sees me.

male entitlement does apply. Statistically baby boys are fed for longer than baby girls. And little girls are left to cry for longer than baby boys. Little girls learn many motherly caretaker roles while many of their male counterparts are encouraged to conquer the world. Children are raised by gender. Even subconsciously. I can also provide sources :)

there are many more male leaders and men in authoritive positions in the world. Women fight very hard for the same respect, but womens voices are less valued. It takes no genius to see men have greater standing in the world

about transmen. No I dont consider them men but I'll respectfully use the pronouns anyone prefers, male or female. Its common decency.

I think society needs to get more comfortable with non confirmative gender expression

neonboobear: but it is an identity. that's why there's a distinction between sex (bio) and gender (identity & expression). if it would feel wrong for you to be called a man or nonbinary then that'd be bc you don't id as such. (also there are women with chromosomes other than xx maybe you should avoid phrasing it that way.) i id as my race but race has v different roots & impact than gender historically and it cannot be compared. let's stick with gender.

and i'm not denying gendered socialization but it doesn't shape a child more than their personal feelings on their identity, which can differ v early in life bc (some) would rather engage in activities associated with the opposite gender for example. if it were that simple trans ppl wouldn't go at lengths to "play the part"

you're right society does need to accept gender non conformance but that's v different from the trans experience. i rly think you should have a deep conversation with a trans person to try and see their pov

[redacted]: if womanhood is an identity, it totally invalidates what it means to be female. And yes its arguable that there're are women who arent xx but how about the majority of the population that are. Must we pander to the few at the expense of the majority? also what makes you assume I dont talk to trans people? Critique doesnt mean lack of empathy.

Children and gendered socialization is complex. Maybe if 'feminine' activities werent coded as female and just 'childhood play' we wouldnt have the same degree of dysphoria. It goes back to the irrational logic, 'if I like the pink toy section then I must be a girl.'

neonboobear: i'm afraid that is your pov for the ideology that womanhood is an experience but also an identity is considered a v valid theory in the science field. the fact that there are women with chromosomes other than xx is proof alone that xx chromosomes aren't what makes a woman. and i've suggested a deep conversation and an intention to Understand the Other. not just a talk. i said nothing abt empathy.

there would be less dysphoria but i'm sure it's still be there. many think the abolition of gender would solve everything but i doubt so

[redacted]: i have a close mtf friend and we have the debate constantly. We don't always agree with her but there's a lot more common ground then you might expect :) Gender roles damn us all. Hmmmm... abolition of gender is impossible but theres is a lot that can be done to challenge gender expectations. But not an easy battle! neonbaebae: i mean this with the least offense okay but i sincerely think neither of you should be friends. i’m black and i’d never befriend a racist. that’s a lack of self respect on her part and a plain lack of respect on yours. 

i’d like to end this conversation here. i’ve said my point and i’d only repeat myself by continuing. and since i’m not a trans woman i don’t want to misinterpret them (so sorry if i’ve already did. trans girls feel free to bring up clarifications). might sound tedious but i strongly suggest you watch this 50-min long video essay by youtuber contrapoints. her vids are informative and entertaining and so v easy to digest despite the length. i’ve heard she’s not v liked in terf circles but it’s worth it to listen to what she has to say as a trans women.

[lavendeerlesbian]

But the definition of man is adult human male which is what transwomen are, therefore transwomen are men. It doesn't make sense to let a man into women's only spaces. And studies have shown that letting men into women's spaces harms women. Repeating to yourself "transwomen are women" like a mantra does not change reality, does not make them women, and comes off as very cult-like.

Nah, transwomen are one of the safest demographics on the planet if not the safest demographic. Ellen page cited a study claiming that 40 something trans murders a year was an epidemic, yet literally any other demographic has more murders than that per year. Even if you account for transwomen being a tiny percentage of the population it is a ridiculously low murder rate. For comparison around 80 THOUSAND women are murdered per year.

I think you need to check your reading comprehension because I said all of those things happening to me did not actually change my opinion on trans people, it was learning that my experience did not happen in a vacuum and thousands of other people had experiences similar if not worse compared to mine. And that in combination with actual scientific studies and statistics also backing up the idea that the trans narrative is harmful.

So women's feelings don't matter but only trans people's do? I am not allowed to be upset about being called dehumanizing language but you can deny being called any language you want because it upsets you? Why is it that 1% of the population's feelings matters more than 50%? Why should I respect anything you have to say if you can't respect me? Also I have heard of plenty of transmen being uncomfortable with the language of "uterus bearer" and other terms relating to their biology and therefore triggering their dysphoria. You aren't even respecting your own community.

I am surprised that you seem to have no problem acknowledging that HALF of transwomen incarcerated in the countries listed in that study are sex offenders. HALF. That is not "one bad egg" or a tiny minority. That is an extremely high percentage of sex offenders, even higher than cis men. The trans community has so many "ex" neonazis in it that they regularly joke and make comics and memes about it. Marginalized groups do not do that. Not on that large of a scale.

Trans people aren't asking for equal rights. They are demanding to be prioritized and have more rights than everyone else. Marginalized groups do not demand to sleep with their oppressors. Marginalized groups advocate for separate spaces away from their oppressors. Marginalized groups form their own movements and do not leech off of other already established movements. Marginalized groups do not demand to have access to spaces and resources reserved for other marginalized groups that inherently do not include them.

Wrong again, don't try to act like Marsha Johnson and Sylvia Rivera were the founders of the gay rights movement because they weren't and they weren't trans. The credit for Stonewall goes to a black butch lesbian Stormé DeLarverie and if you want confirmation ask the actual living gay activist who was there Fred Sargeant - oh wait, trans rights activists beat him and kicked him out of a pride parade... a movement that he HELPED CREATE.

YOU should listen to women and gay people, actually.

Yea, there are two sexes, the one I had with your mother and the one I had with your father.

Funny how you acknowledge there are only two sexes when you are insulting people. But notice how there is no third type of parent you can claim to have sex with, because there are only two sexes 💖

[antigendercult]

If you don't comply I will kill myself

I have been struggling with this repeated idea by Transcultists about sex reassignment surgery (genital mutilation), hormone replace therapy (hormone poisoning) and calling them by their pronouns, new names and their gender (denying reality around them) being what keep trans people from committing suicide. I find this extremely worrying, troublesome and dangerous because in any other case, we wouldn't comply with the demands of the suicidal person, but when it comes to trans people, we quickly accept their terms.

Gender Dysphoria (GD), like any dysphoria is a terrible condition classified under the obsessive-compulsive spectrum. Believing that there is something horribly wrong with your body and that you need to change it in order to be able to function and live is a nightmare. This is why I agree with the idea that helping those with this ailment is very important. But I find dubious that people with GD are not treated in the same way we treat people with other Dysphorias.

For example, people who suffer from Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD) experiment Dysphoria. They present an obsessive preoccupation that their appearance is unbearably flawed (the "flaw" might be a real thing, but in these cases, the importance of this trait is highly exaggerated).

One subtype of BDD is Muscle Dysmorphia in which the patient believes to be too small (mostly experienced by men). Like GD, this condition has very high rates of suicidal thoughts and attempts.

But we don't treat people with BDD by telling them that they are right. We don't tell them to go and take steroids to have bigger muscles or any surgery. We don't go around telling them after the hormones and the surgery that they were born big and buffed, denying that they look big now only because of the hormones and not because their genes made them look like that. We treat people with BDD with anti-depressant medication, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT).

We don't tell people with suicidal thoughts that they are right to want to take their lives, unless they are trans people. In their case, we "understand" their reasons to want to kill themselves. In their case, when they take their lives, we don't blame their mental illness, we blame the "bigots" who refused to give them access to the hormones and surgery. We blame the "hating transphobes" who refused to deny reality and say that transwomen are women and transmen are men. In other words, we tell the other people with GD that the ones who killed themselves were right to do it, that their reasons were valid and that the ones to blame aren't the ones who refuse to treat their illness like any other Dysphoria, but those who refuse to play along with the delusion.

Why aren't we teaching coping mechanisms to people with GD so they can bear with their reality enough to not kill themselves? Why are we instead making laws and using slurs like TERF or transphobe to force people to comply with these delusions? Why aren't we treating this illness like any other condition with Dysphoria?

The only answer I can think of is a mix of different things. First, a misogynistic, sexist and homophobic society that prefers to make people change in order to fit the expected masculinity and femininity stereotypes, than to have people who defy these labels. Secondly, the liberal virtue-signalling people who, wishing to be seen as "good", "fair", "compassionate" and "progressive", support this madness that has also terrible consequences for women and children. Third, the fact that the pharmaceutical, medical and psychiatric industries are making millions (and wish to make even more) with this plan of action.

We need to stop this nonsensical and dangerous trend. Let's call things by their names. Trans people are mentally ill and this is not by any mean an insult; it is a reality and we need to accept it to start giving them the right treatment. It doesn't matter how many hormones and surgeries they get, transwomen (trans identified males) will never be women, they are men, and transmen (trans identified females) will always be women. We need to stop denying this truth so we can start giving trans people coping mechanisms to deal with it and ultimately, accept themselves and learn that they don't need to change their sex in order to like, do, behave, be interested in what society says is reserved to their opposite sex.

[frankendeers]

For the first and last time:

I think I am dealing with this now: I am a man. I tend to call myself a boy sometimes, maybe to make up for the lost childhood I never had. Like many transpeople I had a phase - about two years long - where I tried one last time to just “be a girl”. I tried to be ultra feminine. Even though I have used male names for myself since I was about eleven and hated people calling me by my birth name. But really? I am a man. Statistically, I am older than most people here and I am old enough to know who or what I am. Also old enough to not deny myself simple pleasures because some presumed child is against it.

I have been to therapy, I have talked to gender specialists, I have socially transitioned and am living my life as the man I am for three years now. In university, with friends, in my job, with my family.

To doubt me, people are a little late I suppose.

There is nothing wrong with a man being feminine - even though I don’t even see myself as that. I am no Arnold Schwarzenegger but whatever. So…I do not even know where this comes from as none of my clothes were bought outside the men’s section. (Because I like it that way not because I have to)

I am adressing this now, so it will not come up again. Telling me you do not see me as a transman is the most ridiculous shit to me. Deary, I do not exist to please you. Neither I, nor transmen who really are feminine need this bullcrap in our lifes.

To all the nice people sending me messages over this: Thank you. I was very confused and I have to admit I felt rather uncomfortable that someone could just swoop in and vomit their invalid opinion into my inbox.

[ukftm]

Question about blockers: my Gender Therapist would like to start me on blockers the same time they offer me hormones. Now, I'm the same person who asked about fertility and shared-care quite some time ago. I'm still wanting to keep options open, so I'm a little hesitant on whether it would be okay to suggest to my GT not to use blockers. They told me that blockers would cease my cycle and likely dry things up, shrink my inner reproductive organs.. (part 1).

Is taking blockers mandatory? If I wanted to preserve any chances of being fertile, or resuming fertility once I'm taking a break from hormones, do you think it may be a little risky asking the Gender Therapist about this? I know it'll have to be something to bring up, for my own sake. I'm just scared that... well, I still have fears over the NHS denying me treatment because of being open to conceive. They have dealt with pregnant transmen before, mostly "accidental" cases. I'm wanting to try this by choice, which makes the situation somewhat different?? (I apologise for my bad choice in words. It's a "touchy" subject and I really don't want to create a trigger for anyone reading this). I'm mainly anxious over having my feelings understood. I wouldn't like anyone getting the wrong idea (e.g. not "trans enough", doubts, etc) and I'm starting HRT at the beginning of next year. Any comforting/reassuring thoughts would be vastly appreciated. Many thanks. (End).

Blockers do not, to the best of my knowledge, permanently affect fertility. Indeed, the whole reason blockers are prescribed before hormones in adolescent clinics is that their effects are considered completely reversible. There don’t seem to be any long-term effects on fertility when people stop taking blockers - you can bet that if there were, there would be a public outcry about them being given to adolescents as an interim measure before testosterone/oestrogen!

I don’t think you need to worry about being prescribed blockers alongside testosterone and whether this will affect fertility in the long term, so you don’t need to try and persuade your clinic not to prescribe blockers, or be open with them about your future plans at all if you don’t want to. The bigger concern re: fertility is testosterone itself, but assuming you were able to have children to begin with, the evidence (limited though it is) seems quite good that people generally regain fertility if they come off testosterone in order to conceive.

I know this doesn’t directly address your question about whether blockers are mandatory, or your concern over how the clinic would react to you telling them your intentions, but that’s because I don’t think you specifically need to worry about these issues. If you would like these things addressed, feel free to let us know, but in the meantime, I hope this is reassuring.

~ James

[cosmos-constellation]

saying transmen experience misogyny is misgendering us and i want try to explain why. by saying i experience oppression that women experience, you are saying i am not a man. this is misgendering me and very invalidating, please try to see where i am coming from. i am closeted and i do not pass, but i am still a man. i am not effected by misogyny because i am not a woman. misdirected misogyny is not true misogyny. not being seen as my true gender is transphobia and cissexism, not misogyny.

I am a transman too dude. And I would argue you are or at least at one point would have been wrong that it is something that is purely misdirected. Until you recognize you are male you are going to experience misogyny exactly like a cisgender afab person. Just because you later realize being afab isn't relevant to your actual gender identity does not mean you did not internalize everything precisely or almost precisely the same way a cisgender girl or woman would, growing up. You didn't think "oh this sucks to be treated this way but it's only because of a mistake". You thought "I am treated this way because of something I am and it is something inherent about myself I cannot change". That thought occurred whether you were twelve and recognized misogyny consciously for the first time and thought it in words or you were two and you understood on a subconscious level that you wouldn't be given the some of the cool toys from the "boys' aisle" in toys r us. That you later realized you were male does not erase that thought process or any of the psychological conditioning involved in being raised and perhaps spending part of your adult life (I don't know how old you are) living as supposedly female. I am male. I have always been male even before I understood that is what was going on. But I still experienced the hatred and/or prejudice/violence against and oppression of my person due to having what was a "female body" (typical afab body in its original state) and living as a woman and everything about my place in society both as far as others were concerned and as far as I was concerned corresponded to being a woman. When someone says a nonbinary afab person cannot experience trans misogyny except by misdirection, this is the case for several reasons but primarily because a)this person themself knows the assumption is not true and therefor that the hatred etc being directed at them, while unpleasant, is not truly at them; and b)this person does not occupy either medically, legally, socially, or any other context the position of being a transgender woman (mtf trans person) and so cannot be directly harmed by the oppression of such. You and I as transmen did at some point fail to meet either of those criteria of misdirection. We may somewhat or entirely in your case, since you say you are still closeted, still fail to meet criterion b. I think to say that we did not experience this is to deny something deeply important to address. As we transition we hit so many walls that are built specifically from this experience. Walls not just external but internal.If someone wants to coin a word for the exact experience of misogyny that a trans man faces before his position in society changes (if it ever fully does) and the affects that has on the psyche, then I will be happy to use it. Until then I will continue to use this word. Because I will not refuse to acknowledge that I went through this or that it still fucks with my head just like it does with countless actual women (cisgender and otherwise). There may be a tendency to assume that once you transition or begin to that poof you magically are healed and free from all the damages of misogyny, but sadly that isn't even slightly true. It is important for women to heal the internal effects of it. It's just as important for us. I don't have to deny that I lived this experience identically to my sister -who is completely satisfied with having been afab- until the age I began to transition (or at least until I realized i *wanted* to), in order to be a man. It does not misgender me to say this experience took place. It does not make me less of a man to face the effects it had on me. In fact I don't think I could ever have found the strength to claim my manhood if I had NOT faced the teachings and structures that created those walls I mentioned. I understand that you thought you were talking to some poor misguided cisdude who was just trying to be an ally and bungled it. But you're not. You don't have to share my way of seeing this- your life and your transition are yours; but for me, recognizing this experience and accepting that it affected me the way it did have been essential in allowing me to more fully embrace my manhood, and I am going to keep acknowledging this on my own blog when I see fit. I wish you good luck with all the struggles of your journey to embracing yours.-Skylar (co-Zane)

[in-soviet-russia-appa-rides-you]

Oh hey look drama about who can be on Rupaul’s drag race.

Which is funny because I’ve been thinking about the lines between being called a drag queen, a bio queen, or a faux queen.

There are so many queens who come out as transwomen.

Which makes them women.

But they are still called drag queens... from what I can tell they get to because they started out with a penis.

But if gender truly isn’t about genitalia.. why are they not “faux queens”?

(Bio queen as a term rubs me the wrong way in the first place...)

And many queens identify as something in between! Nonbinary, genderfluid, etc... Still. Penis entitles them to the title of “drag queen.”

So then where do transmen lie? Faux queen sounds fucked up because that denies that these men are truly men.

What about afab nonbinary folk? Probably would be called faux queens because of their vagina. But also seems... icky.

Drag is an art form designed to blur the gender lines right?

In the end I totally get wanting to keep ciswomen off RPDR. BUT I feel like it’s important to acknowledge lines are blurry and that you can still say transphobic things even if you have a trans friend.  But in the same vain, like people are going to say things you don’t agree with because we’re still figuring out these lines and I DON’T think your immediate response should be to thrash someone when what they say isn’t quite right to you...

TLDR; life IS gray area, and navigating that shit is hard. 

[awesomenell65]

Part II (A little late) of my thoughts about my participation in the Women’s March on January 21, 2017, in Washington DC. This part address my reflections about race, identity, whiteness and state violence (or the lack thereof).

The security presence – state or private – at the March, though on their webpage the organizers insisted would be there, was nearly invisible. I am sure the numbers simply overwhelmed whatever provisions had been made.  One thousand march marshals – however zealous – were a drop in a very large sea. If, as announced beforehand, there were also private security present, many dressed to blend rather than stand out, they too were overmatched by the crowds. 

As for the cops – I saw one cop directing traffic early on. I saw one National Guard truck with two guys, who had moved in to separate a bunch of noisy god-botherers from marchers who found them increasingly irritating.

And then I didn’t see another cop until the end, as they arrived to push back the barricades to block car traffic to allow the marchers to disperse. The DC cops seemed friendly and supportive, I even saw one guy in a pink hat, all of them giving directions and assisting with elderly marchers who had been overwhelmed by the crowds (this was common. There were ambulances throughout the day picking up marchers who were undone by the press of humanity). We passed a bunch of firemen sitting outside their firehouse, who also seemed generally cheerful – if as amazed as the rest of us – by the scope of the event. 

This was lovely. It was equally clearly a response to the general perception – though not uniform or monolithic by any stretch of the imagination – of whiteness, and of middle-classness, dominating the feel of the March. This perception emerged in the days leading up to the event, and has been strengthened in the days since, despite the huge diversity among the actual marchers, the march organizers, and the rally speakers and performers.

There was – as has been widely reported – no violence, no smashing of windows or cars. As a result, there was no basis for arrests. Equally important of course, perhaps even vital to this peacefullness, there was no action on the part of the state security forces to provoke resistance, violence, smashing or burning.

In fact, as we walked towards our bus late in the day, my sister commented that she was finding it increasingly eerie, even vaguely sinister, this absence of policing by the state.

We had all mentally prepared for worse. The website itself has instructions for what to do if you are arrested. Tumblr and other social media were full of regular reminders to white allies (or hope-to-be allies) to stand with, not just for, marchers of color who might face greater vigilance or active interference from police. A handful of our husbands and sons had given us reminders of what to do if the event turned into a riot, one of my more intensely organized aunts had printed up wallet-sized cards with relevant contact information, including the lawyers in the family. One among us dutifully wrote all her information on her arm with a sharpie as her middle-twenty-something son had begged her to do, and sent him a picture as proof.

In short – we all had, I had expected a hell of a lot more cops. And potentially hostile cops at that.

That there were none was shocking, and ultimately very disheartening to me. It suggested two overlapping issues for our consideration as we walked, and for me in the days since then as I continue to reflect on the experience, and read the reflections of others. And ponder how I proceed in the months and years ahead.

First, it seems obvious to me that the forces of the state continue to find white women and their concerns utterly trivial, and by definition, wholly unthreatening. Millions of women around the nation and the world came together and – in the eyes of leaders, and of the state, and of too many observers  – made only vague, empty, meaningless sounds easily dismissed as mere womanish carping.

This is – not comforting or uplifting.

We – my white feminist sisters and I – do not (yet?) rise to the level of threat, only, at best, to minor puzzlement. (Witness the reaction on the conservanews sites: “What were they even there for, Ron? Do they even know?” Because reading the damn signs was clearly too much to expect or ask.)

I could append links here to the news in the days after the March, full of pundits and ‘thinkers’ and chatting heads, all of them busy reconfiguring the marches, the marchers, their goals, their agendas, as wrong, silly, immaterial, non-political, un-serious, off base and wholly inconsequential. And White. So so white. All in their silly little pink hats. (I won’t link because I don’t feel like throwing up in my mouth any more than necessary.)

Some have also picked up the language of the alt-right women’s groups, of modern anti-feminists with skater-colored hair, berating us for our many failures of white womanhood. For our failures of tolerance, of inclusion, of not loving our enemies more than we love ourselves, of loving our own pussies to the exclusion of others, with and without them.

Scolding us for being simultaneously too white and too female to accomplish anything meaningful, and yet, clearly not very good at white womanhood, having failed in our first duty to be quiet, self-effacing, and charming to our oppressors, to the oppressed, to the scolds, the cheerleaders, the critics, in short, to everyone but ourselves.

So. Yes. Despite the actual, real, lived diversity of the organizers and the program and the crowds, (Oh the crowds! it was beautiful and intense and a vision of the very best of all our hopes of the promises of our shared political experiment – people from all over the US from all kinds of backgrounds, races, ethnicities, genders, ages, and abilities), as the March has entered into the public dialogue, it has carried with it pervasive, inescapable whiteness at all levels.

I believe the state did not police us because they do not (yet…?) find groups of white women threatening, our concerns to be legitimate, or our demands worthy of even the slightest pretense at consideration.  They certainly know they have trained us well not to fight back. They can silence us, therefore, without much strain at all. Simply by using deflection, denial, and denigration they can shut us down. They can let our own movement critics take up the challenge of dismissing our efforts as too little, too late, insulting and without meaning.  

So we shrink and shrink and shrink until it is as though we were never there at all.

This affords white women and ‘white’ groups a certain privilege, a protection, for a time, from state violence. Yes it absolutely does. 

At the price of trivializing and dismissing every single issue that brought us all out to march, in DC and all over the world, just through association with our foolish, silly, confusing and confused white-women selves.

At the price of dismissing reclaiming the pussy as a sign of power and self, instead framing it as gross and unseemly, as exclusionary and disgusting.

At the price of erasing the participation of all the tens and hundreds of thousands people of color, women and men, who attended the marches in DC and elsewhere.

At the price of erasing those women of color who actually organized the marches, spoke and performed at the marches, and led the way.

Eliminating in a series of tweets and think pieces all these amazing women of color from the history of the March, the meaning of the March just like that…

Again. Same old song. New verse same as the first.

This aspect of white womanhood is not a privilege.

This is an infuriating curse we carry with us wherever we go, whether we wish to or not.

We undermine professions as soon as we enter them in large numbers. We get forced out once they are perceived (again or for the first time) to be important. It renders homemaking invisible unpaid labor unless we sing its joys (and we still don’t get paid).

It mutes and denies our multitude of calls for women’s healthcare, reproductive justice, affordable childcare, prison reform, saving the environment and the planet, ending/stopping the Dakota Pipeline, ending fracking, clean air, affordable colleges and universities and better housing.

Any of these issues, all of them, are being denigrated and made small, dismissed as ‘side’ issues, and not ‘real politics’ and all because white women are elevated to leadership by their critics (whether they are doing the work or not), and then by the curse in their touch, contaminating the whole.

The process is unfolding right now, as I watch my Tumblr feed while I work.

This safe pedestal of trivial, useless, wrongheaded white womanhood is also deceiving. Because once white women do finally step off it (leap off it, blow it up and burn it down) we become just as much a target of state violence as any other perceived threat to the existence the world-as-it-is.  Our bodies are not, in fact, bullet proof, fist proof, arrest proof.

Especially those white women who actively continue to make common cause with women and people of color, immigrants, transwomen and transmen, queer groups in general. They will be arrested, assaulted, and shot. 

Our preparations were serious over-kill this time. If we continue, as we most definitely should, they won’t always be.

Second, and this was the eerie rather than the infuriating and infantilizing aspect, what if something had happened?  

If the Haymarket bomb (or some more modern equivalent) had been thrown, in DC or any of the hundreds of other spaces around the nation and the world, the chaos and damage and danger to the marches and to the marchers, to their causes and their demands, and yes, the accompanying injuries and death, would have been absolutely horrific.

We were so jam packed, so close together, for block upon block upon block, with no where to go, no where to take cover, no where to run, and absolutely no visible security or other official leadership presence. The elderly, the frail, the small, the unlucky, would surely have gone down under the feet of the younger, stronger and larger.

I sincerely believe the marches were not so targeted because of the above perception of triviality, and the protections of whiteness that triviality bestowed.

I also fear that the very visible lack of state security forces was an invitation.

One that now…. by virtue of the marches previously unimaginable visibility and success, will surely be taken up. Future marches will be targeted by hate and haters, by those seeking to damage, to maim, to eliminate the threats being posed to their power, to their perception of self.

The state has dramatically signaled that they will not be there.

Make of that what you will.

[pajaritafem]

How does your boyfriend feel about your label?

I don't want to answer this at our current state, because that would erase the progress it took to get here. So, I'll give you the entire history of how he felt. When we first met, I was playing around with labels due to internalized lesbophobia, and because I had never heard of comp het before. I went as bi, and then pan for like a week, and then poly for about three days, until I settled on lesbian. This entire time, he only knew about the bi and pan stages. He was aggressively against transmen dating lesbians. He actually went on this long rant one day (While I was a closeted lesbian) about how all lesbians do is hurt transmen and how transmen should never, ever EVER date lesbians and they should just stick to bi/pan girls. Reasonably, this induced a lot of fear into me, and so for the next 3 months, I never once brought it up. I never once fought for myself. I was scared. And, since I was so scared, was I actually a lesbian? Couldn't I go as another label? I struggled with myself a lot, but something just felt so damn right about lesbian. So, I took my tumblr, which was originally going to be a poem blog, and made it my little nook. My space away, and created the lesbian positive, lesbian centered blog it is today. I also created a board on pinterest full of all the sapphic love and posts I could find. I convinced myself this way, I could be happy. I mean, my label didn't necessarily deny that I liked girls, I could just ignore the penis part, right? Wrong. I realized that on the 4th month, when I became comfortable calling myself lesbian and came out to my close friends, safe family. My "space away" did something else to me: it filled me with pride. I fell in love with being a lesbian. I felt liberated. I was liberated, and I wanted the whole damn world to know. So, I told him. And I was met with a lot of adversity. And again, I was silenced. But this time, I was silenced with rage. He was so rich in a luxury he didn't realize he had. He was so rich, in fact, he didn't even realize it was a luxury. He has been out for 4 years now, and he was surrounded by support. I sent him trans positive posts, researched trans issues, I did my best to be the lover he deserved. I never once told him he couldn't possibly be trans because I was a lesbian and conventionally, that just didn't work. I wanted that. I wanted selfless support. But, I didn't get that. I got things like "You're not a real lesbian." "Why don't you just go as bi with a preference for women?" And it hurt. Every part of my soul hurt. So, one night, I went onto my instagram, and changed the part in my bio that read: Queer Queen and changed it to: {L}GBT It was a small victory. A whisper into the roar of the world. It was public, but it was small. It fit perfectly into the palm of my hands. It was exactly what I needed. Even though I never said that damning L word around him, that was it. I finally stood up for myself. He found it that night, while he was at work. I wasn't expecting him to notice, I had so much in my bio, why would he even pay attention? But he did. I got a text asking me, "Why are you trying to give people the idea you're a lesbian?" Rage. Red hot rage is all I felt. The idea?! No, mister, you've got it all wrong. There isn't a damn idea to it. I would never imagine in a million years sending him a text like that about being trans. That would be abusive. I would be the scum of the earth. Why is different about me?! That night we fought. We fought hard. I was done hiding. I was done giving and not taking. And if he didn't like it, then he could leave. It was time I loved myself. It was time I celebrated me. I get to be selfish, but, how could being honest about who I am be selfish?! He cried that night. I cried that night. The fight drug on for hours. I wasn't going to budge this time. He wasn't going to closet me, no way, not again. And because of my relentlessness, I was convinced we were going to break up that night. We didn't, thankfully. He came around to accepting me, because I advocated for myself, because he didn't define my label. Because I wouldn't let him define my label. He came around to accepting me because we chose our love, especially over some words. But, it didn't stop there. The happy ending isn't here, not yet. He accepted me, but he had that straight rhetoric, "Why can't you just be what you are and be quiet about it?" It still hurt. He got trans pride, but I couldn't be proud to be a lesbian? No. It wasn't enough for me. When it came to telling my grandma, she made one comment, mildly referring to his body. "I figured that much with that boyfriend you have." I didn't think anything of it. She didn't intentionally misgender him, didn't pry me for his deadname, didn't make slurs. I didn't think anything of it. But he did. He made that night (the night I came out to the most important person in my life!!!!!!) About him. About that one tiny comment, about how I didn't defend him. He had forgotten this is my first time being close to a trans person. All my research didn't tell me when to protect him from slightly transphobic comments. I didn't know that was a problem. And he was relentless. When I messed up, he forgot that I needed him to guide me, and he was hard on me. We fought again that night. I felt he had robbed me of a beautiful, memorable moment. He felt I didn't care about defending him. It eventually got better. He let me talk about it, but he'd tell me that my "obsession" with lesbians was unhealthy. I wasn't obsessed. But seeing lesbian representation in media, seeing lesbian couples in love, it made me happy and excited. So we fought, again. I was tired of this conditional support. I was tired of the comments meant to silence me. I was proud, dammit! But, we over came it. We communicated, as we had so many times before. I advocated my way to where we are now. Now, he tells me when there's a lesbian couple at our job. He doesn't give the devoted, selfless support, like looking into lesbian-specific issues, but I don't need that. I just need to be heard, without being silenced. To answer your question, he is supportive of my label, because he doesn't define mine. Because my label is my identity only and not an attack on his manhood. But make no mistake, it took us a long time to get here.