#I'm either a gay feminine man or a trans woman and it really depends on what people WANT to hate at any time for which they choose me to be

[brick-van-dyke]

This, plus I'd argue that it often leads to being treated as trans women as well and being subjected to parts of transmisogyny, it's why I don't really think the whole TME and TMA thing really works very well in actually identifying transphobia because of how often we're all grouped together as either "lying men pretending to be women" or "lying men pretending to be women and lying about being female to male transgenders", or just "you don't look like either so you must be a male" or some other brand of transphobia and intersexism as well mixed in.

Tbh actually I think that's kind of the point. There's so much intersexism and sexism in general that goes into the whole idea behind "all those who don't conform to gender roles and are their assigned sex are automatically trans women" in terms of grouping us all together as a monolithic entity. "You can't be a happy trans man, so you must be a trans woman" and "it's only when you're unhappy that you're a trans man who's a victim that we must save". Like that in and of itself is kind of the point with transphobia. We can't exist because we undermine the idea that "the issue of transness is trans women so trans men and intersex people are all trans women by default, unless they are sad or traumatised in any sort of way because then they're victims of trans women". It's only ever one or the other, and that always changes he idenity you're perceived as because the only "real" ftm in existence are "victims" they have been able to label as 'detrans victims of the transgender cult". If you're not, you don't exist; you're not supposed to exist. So you "must" be a trans woman, that's the "only" explanation for your being here. So they treat you as that because anything else is a lie.

A lot of the times I've been called transphobic bs on the street or online, or treated like shit in an institutional setting like a hospital, it typically starts off with assuming I'm a pre-transition trans woman and start treating me with either microagressions meant towards trans women or explicitly start calling me things like "a creepy man pretending to have a girl's name", and then when I say I'm a trans man they either deny the fact I'm a trans man or insist that's another word for "trans woman" because that ruins their transmisogynistic world view of "all trans women look like men" and "trans men don't exist" or "are broken women so they can't look like men", and I don't look like a frail, broken down victim to them, so I "must be" the former.

"Trans men benifit from invisibility", actually we suffer from the intentional erasure of our identities, history, and culture. An erasure, that is violently enforced through the constant assault, rape, and community isolation that we have to endure silently (because if we speak up we are further punished, further pushed out of communities, and silenced harder).

[our-lesboy-experience]

hiii!!! so uh, this is sorta about 'contradicting' (?) identities in general, but i only recently found out about, like, lesboys and gaygirls and all of that, but what is it exactly? like how does it work? or is that weird to ask? i'm trying figuring myself out but a lot of stuff i've seen doesn't exactly... explain it (or explain it well), and while i guess i do get why, it's just kinda hard to understand it myself for my own identity

also, probably a question you get a lot in a hating way, but isn't the definition of lesbian nonman loving nonman? so then how does lesboy work? like is it for people with more complicated gender identites, like fluctuating genders and bigender? just genuinly confused, my apologies...

sorry for not getting to this sooner- been busier lately and didn't have the time to collect everything I needed to respond!

About what it exactly means to be a lesboy or a gaygirl ('turigirl' is the more common term, 'turi' meaning turian, another word for gay attraction to men. so I'll be referring to it as that from now on), there isn't exactly....one right way to call yourself such. it really depends on the person, but I can give you a basic definition and a list of common reasons someone may call themselves such

im gonna put a read more because this ended up being super long so sorry

lesboy is a term for any lesbian who may have a connection to manhood and/or masculinity. turigirl is just the opposite of that, a gay person (mlm/nblm) who may have a connection to womanhood and/or femininity. common reasons I've seen are:

being multigender or genderfluid

being cusper/in between trans and cis gnc (in between trans man and cis gnc woman, in between trans woman and cis gnc man)

being a system who uses lesboy/turigirl as a collective identity or when identities blur together

a person who uses man/boy or woman/girl as a means of masculine or feminine gender expression but not actually identifying as such

being a trans man/ftm or a trans woman/mtf who still identifies as lesbian or gay for personal reasons

those are far from all the reasons, everyone has their own unique experiences, but the gist is these people may have some sort of connection to manhood/womanhood while still having a queer attraction. personally, I'm multigender, genderfluid, and transmasc. lesboy I find is a nice label to express being both my bigender self and being a lesbian, as it forces people to acknowledge both without separating the two. it's cute and makes me feel validated!

as for "nonman attracted to nonmen" definition of lesbian......it has its issues. it's received criticism all around from all sorts of lesbians in the community. this definition is very new - it emerged only in the recent years, and someone on twitter had date searched it and found it didn't even really exist before 2019. and having that as the one and only official definition that every lesbian has to abide by, when lesbian is a centuries old word with so much history behind it, is a bit ignorant. people who are multiple genders or ftm or bi being lesbian is not even remotely new, going back decades upon decades, and it never stopped existing too. It's a bit weird to have a whole new definition that doesn't include all sorts of lesbians that have been here for so long and just tell them they're not welcomed anymore, right?

that's not even close to the only issue there is with it. it's been disliked for centering lack of attraction to men, or defining lesbian in relation to men, rather than who we're actually attracted to. putting nonbinary people in a new binary of either being "men or nonmen," which not all feel comfortable putting themselves into. especially when considering a definition of gay being "nonwomen attracted to nonwomen," man-woman bigender people are simultaneously excluded from being both lesbian or gay. It inherently overlaps with mspec identity ("attraction to nonmen, which is more than one gender" and "any orientation that involves attraction to more than one gender" kinda obviously overlap), despite people insisting that a lesbian can never be mspec. people have found multiple loopholes in it, (which I can elaborate on if someone wants me to, for the sake of trying to make this as short as possible), and lastly, and term "nonman" (and nonwoman) were found to have existed before to describe the degendering of black people in society. this isn't the only source I've seen for this, but sadly I can't exactly find it (or find it without going back to that hellsite called twitter and I'm not doing that to myself)

oh and as the link points out, defining lesbian by these words also ends up excluding a lot of two-spirit people from ever identifying as lesbian, myself included. which is also really racist. I don't know how you're gonna end up excluding a whole cultural gender that's common for indigenous americans to describe themselves with and try to prove it somehow isn't racist, to be honest

and lastly, some surveys/polls have shown that the definition isn't the most widely accepted by lesbians as people make it out to be. there's this simple poll that someone posted asking how lesbians felt about the definition that received 1,529 responses, and 61.1% of voters said they disliked it. comments gave lots of reasons I've stated already. there was another survey put out that received 211 responses that for any lesbian who had a genderqueer or unique relationship with gender, and one of the questions asking opinions on the "nonmen loving nonmen" as a definition. the average among the group was slightly negative (average 2.838), and reported that the group who tended to feel the most positively about it didn't consider themselves to be trans, with the other positive leaning group considered themselves to be somewhat cis. the group that felt the most negatively sometimes considered themselves to be trans. and of the multigender participants, the average opinion was 2.255 (more negative than the overall average). When concluding, the original poster stated, "When divided by gender, the only groups to feel positive about this definition were "not trans" and "somewhat cis" participants. Multigender participants felt especially negative about this definition"

all of this shows that this definition isn't nearly the best for everyone who considers themselves a lesbian. I know it's been a way to include nonbinary people who are lesbian in it's definition, but I think it really misunderstands why nonbinary people are included in lesbianism in the first place, and just assumes that all nonbinary people aren't men and fails to recognize that multigender/genderfluid people are nonbinary too. and it's not like lesbian has to only have on definition- it can definitely have multiple and depend on each person's experience with it. if someone personally defines them being lesbian around being a nonman attracted to nonmen, and takes pride in not being attracted to men, that's totally fine. what becomes a problem is forcing all lesbians to define themselves like this and make it the standard, or else they're "not real lesbians." it is ahistorical and ignorant to require this or else you'll strip them of their lesbian status, and is really at the end of the day, lesbophobic. especially as a requirement that primarily exists in online spaces. im sure the lesbian who is not at all connected to these circles doesn't particularly care about strict requirements or whether someone is a "nonman" or not. in conclusion, it is not the best nor most accepted definition of lesbian, and deciding which lesbians are valid or not based solely on that definition is pretty exclusionary and ends up policing a lot of lesbians, myself included

[midnight-fox-boy]

Ya know, it took me a long time to accept that gender (and sexuality) is so complicated and individual that for some people, there may never be a perfect word or even a perfect few words to label it with 100% accuracy. I spent many years trying on different identities, trying on identities that felt partially right but like I was missing something, and many that felt comfortable for a little while and then things changed.

In my strong desire to just find a few labels that could encompass all of me, I got really stressed and frustrated. I wanted to know which communities I would relate to the most! Even when I tried to just take a break and allowed myself into trans man spaces and nonbinary spaces, I found that I related to some or many people in each category, but not everything. After so long of just giving up it hit me. One, that I was allowed to be both. I could be nonbinary and a guy. Two, that everyone is so diverse that I'm going to relate to people of so many different identities, and there will be people who share the same labels as me that I will not relate to at all.

I can relate to some genderfluid people in some aspects, androgyne people, nonbinary trans mascs, binary trans men, femboys etc. and it's okay for me to look at experiences of people who don't share the exact same labels as me. I used to feel as if it was wrong or "intruding" for me to do so. I don't have to use a label to relate to common experiences, and I also realized I don't need to fit a label 100% to use it. I had similar issues with my sexuality.

In addition, I had to learn to be okay with not knowing every facet of my gender. I know who I am, and what I like, but I can't tell you every piece that makes up my internal gender puzzle. And I can't say with full accuracy that my sexuality is one specific thing set in stone.

I'm a nonbinary trans man. I know I'm a guy, I know I'm nonbinary. I know at least one aspect of my gender is androgyne, and I'm not sure if that is the reason I have some internal sense of feminity with my gender, but I'm fine with that. I can't say I'm fluid but it's not completely static either. I do have some fluctuations that are usually small, with the extremely rare stronger change.

I consider myself gay. I include nonbinary in my gayness because I'm both a guy and nonbinary (also the majority of my partners have ended up coming out as nonbinary during our relationships). But I know I'm capable in some circumstances of being attracted to a woman or someone who leans heavily on that side of the spectrum. Primarily if a partner ever came out to me as one and went down that transition path. But generally speaking, I'm gay, in my own way. It'd be more accurate to say men and in many cases, masculinity and androgyny. Feminine guy? Hell yeah. Feminine woman? depends lol

I'm also aspec which is weird and unique. I consider myself demisexual(/romantic). I do experience strong sexual attraction and am very sex favorable, and Ive come to understand that's partially the reason why I'd still love and be attracted to a partner if they ever realized they were a woman. But my Demi-ness doesn't require knowing someone for a long time necessarily. I can develop an emotional bond very very quickly in the right circumstances. I don't have a lot of issues when it comes to relating to a lot of "allo things" because I can relate to many, just maybe but in the traditional sense of the word. I can find random people hot AF, but it's more strong aesthetic attraction than actually wanting to bang them.

I can consume adult content because I don't do so for the people in the content itself, I just naturally "self insert" for the fantasy aspects of what's going on.

This is all to say, it took me way too long to understand that I'm not ever going to be exactly like another queer person, and that's okay. Yes it can feel alienating when I can't relate to so much that is correlated to a specific identity I use, but I know I'm not alone in that, even if not in every way.

It's been 8 years since I came out as trans, as of December 3rd 2023 💜 I'm so proud of how far I've come.

[asexual-means-no-attraction]

so do you just think all nonbinary people are cis people pretending to be trans, or...? it genuinely makes no sense to me how you can conflate the entire nonbinary community with "people who perpetuate gender roles" when the vast majority directly criticize the existence of gender roles. there's barely a "nonbinary community" anyway because there are so many different ways to be nonbinary, the experiences of these people will vary. i highly suggest reading books/memoirs about gender being more complicated than "you're either a man or a woman" instead of just making generalizations and assumptions about nb people and their intentions

I'm assuming your coming with the best intentions here. So I'm gonna come back with a very simple-- please reread what I've said or leave. Cuz you didn't understand it fully.

There's a million and one ways to be trans, to be gay, to be literally any group thats only dependant one a single factor about yourself that you can't change. We still have communities. Likewise, there is still a nonbinary community.

The nonbinary community as a whole criticizes gender roles while further enforcing them. Another reason why I genuinely want to be supportive but find myself unable to. In the same vein that I hear "women shouldn't have to wear makeup/men don't have to be strong" I will hear "I don't feel female because I don't want makeup/I don't feel male because I like my emotions." That's not actually progressive and it's honesty just sexist. It's conflating womenhood to feminine things and manhood to masculine things on why they identify as nonbinary. When in actually there is no such thing as femininity or masculinity as they are made up gender roles. <- this does end up pushing transphobic, sexist, and even homophobic ideas.

And for the record, which I have already mentioned, this information is coming from talking irl and online with people, reading books, articles, and memoirs, researching things as much as I possible could. It's not from personal experience nor based on the nonbinary people I've met irl. I consistently find the community conflating women with feminine and man with masculine. Stating things that are very clearly gender roles and then saying it's gender itself.

As for what I think they actually are??? I just think their people. I will not claim they are trans, cis, or something else cuz I don't know them. I can give ideas on what they might be. Similar to how I've given ideas to people who aren't sure if their trans/gay/bi. But that's just me saying "if this is what's making you feel a certain way, maybe try going in this direction. If that doesn't work, try this, etc etc." Cuz as I've said a million times. It's your personal journey and only you can make the determination of how to define yourself. Its your right as a human to be respected and called according to your wishes within reason (ie. It doesn't cause harm or is disrespectful).

And for a last little clarification. Your relationship to gender can be complicated-- this could be dysphoria, how gender roles type into your experiences, etc. But gender itself is very very simple. And people try to take it way more seriously than it is. I find this both within the nonbinary and the trans communities. And I really think we'd benefit from people actually separating gender from gender roles. Cuz you'll find a lot more people blurring the lines between what we know to be feminine and masculine while still just being their gender. Which I find great.

[burning-thistles-bt]

fuck i mean sure okay i understand maybe but really i’m very sure that if a person is attracted to the same gender and is gay/lesbian you really. cant. w. you cant call yourself a lesbian / a gay man if ur attracted to the opposite gender ,, and keep in mind im lesbian myself so really… I AGREE with you about the certain part where its like they can realize they’re a different gender / sexuality but everything else is a not so much moment , but i realize i cant really change your opinions on things /lh thats just your view on it i suppose , i’m not gonna try and convince otherwise

I totally understand why you believe that as well! By definition, a gay man means "a man attracted to men and not women." That is The Definition and trying to define it as anything else is just undermining the identity. But trying to box in those who identify as gay into One Scenario Only isn't very helpful.

Let's say a gay man dates a non-binary person. They are not a man or woman. Is that okay? Are they still gay? Or are they no longer gay? Do they now have to be bisexual or pansexual?

Some people say they're still gay if the non-binary person appears masculine or was previously a man (see below*). Some people say that's offensive to the non-binary person as they don't identify with masculinity but masculinity is now being forced onto them so that the gay man can remain gay. Whose right?

Now, let's say a gay man becomes attracted to a trans woman. Their appearance is more masculine, whether because they choose to be masculine or because they have not transitioned fully into a more ambiguous or feminine appearance. This is a tricky situation, isn't it? Is the gay man no longer gay because they are technically attracted to a woman---or are they still gay because they were attracted to the masculinity of the woman? And is it okay for the guy to be attracted to the masculinity of a trans woman, or are they transphobic for having those feelings? What's the right answer?

To some, it's easy---he's not gay. Or, he is still gay. To others, like myself, that answer isn't black and white. It depends on the circumstance (is the gay man acting transphobic to the trans woman? is the non-binary person okay with a gay man dating them? is the gay man more attracted to masculine or feminine traits or do the traits not matter? is it more of the "biological" attraction or an emotional attraction?). Not everyone fits into the binary.

I'm not saying that gay men can date a bunch of women and call themselves gay, either. That's not what I'm supporting. I can't emphasize that enough. Hetero men can't genuinely date only women and call themselves "gay" just for queer points. What I'm supporting is the gray area, the rarer occurrences. The "my husband came out as trans and is now my wife. I still love her, but I've never been attracted to women before. What do I do now?" Because Holy Shit, isn't that a hard scenario? You've been confident and happy with your identity for so long, and then suddenly this one thing makes you have to rethink it all. Because here's the facts:

You are attracted to men.

You dated a man.

You married a man.

You love this man.

This man is now a woman but still has the body you love.

They start to transition (if they choose) and their body changes, but you still love them---perhaps the attraction for their body is different, but you still love them. Who they are, how they laugh, how they smile, how they snore, what they stand for, everything.

You are still attracted to other men, and not attracted to women.

You still love your wife.

Are you gay?

This is a scenario where I'm like, yeah, I don't care if you call yourself a gay man still. I understand the implications---other people see a happy man-woman couple and are like, "Uh? What do you mean you're gay, Steve? You have a wife!" And then homophobes point to Steve and Jill and go "Look! That guy says he's gay but he has a wife! You're all just liars and frauds looking for attention!" And that's not very fun for the rest of us who have to defend ourselves from those assholes.

But I don't care about those assholes. I care that Steve and Jill are happy. I care that Steve is okay with who he is and that Jill is okay with who she is.

And then there are the people who say, "But you can't be gay, Steve! You have to be bisexual now! You have to call yourself that, or pansexual, or maybe call yourself demisexual but just for your wife, or have you heard of abrosexual? What about agentosexual? I think that's what you are!" and Steve is just like "I don't know. Can't I just love my wife and that's the end of it? Maybe I'm not gay anymore. I don't know." And these people aren't ill-intentioned. They feel they're just trying to help, or trying to "correct" things. But there isn't always a correct answer, and the more you try to force one, the further away the "correct" answer gets.

Some articles I think are worth a read that go into more on the topic are these:

*‘What happens when you’re in a gay relationship and your partner comes out as non-binary?’ "This experience has highlighted to me more than ever that sexuality and gender exist on a spectrum; they are fluid and ever-changing. Despite my partner being non-binary, I still feel that I identify as a gay man. I still consider myself attracted to masculinity and my partner acknowledges that they are still predominantly male-presenting and have no intention of changing this, I still respect their gender identity and will continue to do so."

‘I wanted to be supportive but I was terrified of losing her’: what happens when your partner comes out as trans? "I didn’t fall in love with a gender, I fell in love with a person," is by far my favorite quote. Though, be warned, the second interviewee is Definitely Transphobic and I don't like them, but the first and third interviews are so sweet, I love them 🥺. But really this whole article is great to really get a wide perspective on how people react to their partners transitioning. "Any couple, whether or not they stay together, is changed by the experience of transitioning," is also a great end note.

What My Partner's Transition Meant For My Sexuality "It became very clear to me that being a lesbian married to a man was in fact not the actual problem. My problem was I could only see in black and white, yes and no. I had entwined my ego, my sense of self, with my lesbian identity. A lesbian shall not be married to a man. A lesbian shall not enjoy sex with a man......I lean on that inspiration when I'm asked, "So, what does his transition mean for you? Are you straight now?" I just answer, "I'm in love.""

Just in general, there's so many ways humans react to this kind of complicated stuff. Some people have a realization of sexuality---they realize that they were always X sexuality, or that they are okay with being X sexuality. Others find themselves able to "adjust" and love their partner(s) regardless of gender, even if the attraction is muddled.

Something I'd also like to mention is that there are fair points on both sides of this argument. I am not solely and utterly right on this topic. There are things that I concede could be my own bias---for one, I've never experienced romantic/sexual attraction myself, so what could I really know about allo experiences?---but I try to research topics before I fling myself into anything. I can see the logic and the reasoning on both sides. And also the other in-between sides. I don't think there's an absolutely right or wrong for this scenario---not right now. Not with how culture and society is right now. But this is the side that I stand with the firmest ground on.

[ed-nygma]

What do you think gay men are attracted to in men that they can’t be attracted to in women?

It can’t be anything about femininity or masculinity obviously. That’s both sexist, and cultural so can’t be what drives men-only attraction.

It can’t be anything about stated identity because someone could lie just as easily as they could tell the truth in such a statement, and it makes no sense because homosexuality and heterosexuality exists in other species with no stated identities. It’s not like other animals without gender are all pan.

Saying idk it’s the vibes or some indescribable trait men have that women can’t but “I can’t explain” is a nonanswer.

Soooooooo what is it? Or do you think any sexuality but bi/pan is just cultural performance or an identity rather than an inborn orientation?

- [ ]

I'm not sure why you're asking me specifically but my opinion on human sexuality is that it manifests slightly differently for everyone.

There is not one specific quality that makes gay men as a whole be not attracted to women, and it more so will depend on each individual.

There are however "averages," which are mostly built on physical features and aesthetics. The average gay man will be attracted to physical features which he associates with manhood. The thing is, none of said features on their own is exclusive to either sex. Sexuality, I believe, is born out of attraction to a combination of those features.

Proceeding to TMI territory...

People may assume sexuality is inherently related to genitalia, and that's probably the subject you want me to head into based on your wording. I think sexuality goes beyond that.

I am physically attracted to men. I am attracted to COCK and BALLS.👍But let's say there's a trans man who I find extremely physically attractive, and he happens to not have a dick. That wouldn't really bother me because I'm not repulsed by vagina. I'm not attracted to it either, but it wouldn't turn me off from sex. I wouldn't mind touching it, is what I'm saying. Give that boy a strap to shove up my ass, I really couldn't care less.

A vagina is gonna be a deal breaker for many other gay guys, that's not really up for debate, but not for all. And while we're at this, I'd never find a pre-op feminine trans woman physically attractive just because she has a cock. I'm not physically attracted to people who I look at and think "that's a woman."

Now think about cis guys whose dicks have some sort of visible malformation, or which were lost in accidents. That's not gonna be attractive to most people, but someone who's not repulsed by it could still easily have a relationship with a man like that. Like, I don't find micropenises attractive, but I wouldn't turn down a man with a micropenis if I found him otherwise physically attractive. There's more to sexuality than sex.

So, ultimately: There is not one lone trait that gay men are attracted to which they can't be attracted to in women. It's a combination of traits, and most gay men are attracted to similar combinations of traits.

[mcivercomix]

Tw, I mention rape and sexual assault / harassment and suicide in this response

I really wasn't expecting a reply, and I certainly didn't think it would be respectful as it is, thank you for that.

Most certainly there is misogyny, homophobia, and racism amongst trans people. But I don't think it in any way shows that trans women aren't women at all.

Just as trans women can be misogynistic, so too can cis women. Because again like you said, it's all encompassing. Everyone is taught to be misogynistic. There are women who advocate advocate against abortion and birth control of any kind. There are women who teach their daughters to be passive and to ignore male violence. Yet they're all still women.

You say trans women want to use female only spaces as to feel validated, and while I can't speak for every trans woman on the planet, I can say that for myself and pretty much every trans woman I know, the reason we'd use something like the women's restroom is because we're worried about getting assaulted in the men's.

All the trans men I know also prefer the women's restroom for this very reason. We don't have spaces where we can go that are deemed appropriate. Gender neutral spaces exist but certainly not in most places, at least near me.

It's not about our feelings, it's about safety.

You linked an article about desexed language and for the most part that language is for trans men. Men who often still have their breasts, uterus's, and may or may not be on hormones. They're the group of people being included with language like "pregnant people" and what not. I'm really arguing in support of desexed language, I couldn't read the article you linked actually because of a paywall but I found this and I think this section is a pretty good objection to it.

Like most things I think it depends on context. The hemoglobin level in my body is in the range of cis womens, and HRT has done everything from redistribute my fat to change the amount of oil produced by my skin. My medical needs are more complex than "male" or "female". Still, I'm not fully disagreeing with you on this point and I'll be sure to read Invisible Women.

When it comes to your claim that trans women call all lesbians who don't want to sleep with them transphobic... I'm really sorry but it sounds like you're fighting a strawman.

I don't know anyone with that mindset, and while I'm not saying it doesn't exist (I have seen it one or two times online) I am saying that it's ridiculous to act like most trans women think like that.

I don't care who you do and don't find attractive! Any serious person doesn't either. I'm not a lesbian, I won't speak about what's happening in lesbian spaces but is the presence of trans lesbians really that detrimental? We're not some huge percentage of the population. And most trans lesbians I know are exclusively in t4t (trans for trans) relationships.

I did grow up male, and I have no problem saying I was socialized as one. But do you really think that If a man came up to me and started sexually harassing me, he'd start treating me like a man if I told him I was actually trans?

The answer is he won't, I've been in that exact situation. Luckily we were alone so he just ignored it and kept harassing me, trying to get me to do things I don't wanna repeat. If there were other men around though I might've gotten my ass beaten or killed.

That's because of male socialization. Young boys are socialized to see women as some sort of prize and not as people. They seek to segregate themselves from women altogether, only interacting when receiving their "prize".

In these boys only congregations though they still seek blood, and constantly ridicule, exclude, and sexually harrass/assault any other boys they deem as too feminine or gay.

This is what it was like for me growing up.

I remember attempting to perform some hyper masculine persona for like a year in middle school but it didn't work. I eventually started to spend more of my time with girls which the other boys did not let go unpunished.

In highschool I wore a dress to school one day. I didn't pass at all, anyone looking at me would've thought I was a boy. But in the middle of some math class a boy I knew began to rub his foot up and down my legs, and just laughed when I told him to stop, moving his foot higher up to my thighs. I remember him telling me it was because of what I was wearing before almost kicking me in the crotch.

Men do this to keep other men in line, it's how they're socialized. Every trans woman knows this, every trans woman goes through this. Men look at us like they do cis women. Some of them only support us because they desire our bodies, others who either don't find trans women attractive, or do but are ashamed of it attempt to paint us as hideous hardly human monsters in order to dehumanize us.

When trans women are forced into male spaces, especially prisons, they are subject to this playground mentality times a thousand. Trans women in male prisons are raped every single day, in locker rooms and bathrooms they're often harassed if not assaulted.

I can't force society to see me or other trans people in the way we want to be seen. That's why we transition, because we want to be seen as women or as men and people won't accept that unless we completely change everything about ourselves. So when you see us advocating for stuff like this, please know it's about our safety.

This is the biggest thing that confuses me, and really just makes me sad. I've seen Terfs and Radicals Femisists reply to articles about this with laughter and mockery. If I didn't look at the profiles, I wouldn't have been able to tell them apart from the men. How can women who advocate for female liberation, who speak out against the exact same issues I also face, find the suffering of people like me amusing?

You mentioned stuff like terfbre@king, of course I think that's disgusting. I've never heard of it until now, and honestly yeah that might speak to a problem of trans people not calling gross shit like that out in our communities. But I've seen people with your exact mentality celebrate sexual violence against people like me. In fact, I've seen them deny that it's even possible for any not born a girl to experience sexual violence.

How is that not apart of rape culture? How are people like that any different from men?

I'm not trying to say you're like this btw. I hope it doesn't come off like that.

I simply don't think of gender like you do. I think people just make assumptions about people based on physical characteristics and social behaviors to determine someones gender. Both man and woman are social roles we've created, vaguely defined. It's like asking me to define a chair.

I can't give you a concrete definition of what a woman is, or what a man is. The best I can do is gesture vaguely at a handful of things we associate with each and yes, you're 100% correct to call out some of those as misogynistic stereotypes. Man and woman, it's a creation of culture. We force people into these roles, I've read countless stories by intersex people who say how surgery was done to their genitalia in order to put them into one of these boxes, irregardless of whether or said genitalia presented a problem for the child.

As for what separates someone like me from a feminine man, it's that I live as a woman. A feminine man might be treated exactly like me, or he may be treated entirely differently. I will say, one exception to the playground mentality I talked about earlier is performing femininity to mock it. When boys jokingly shove tennis balls down their shirt to look like breasts or talk in a overly exaggerated high pitched "girl voice". Sometimes a bunch of these dudes get together and build a whole culture out of it, and yeah it's really annoying and upsetting.

However it doesn't matter if he's a normal dude™ or some racist misogynistic femboy from the depths of 4-chan. He's a man if he thinks of himself as a man. Just as I'm probably a man to you. Ones gender is the role we assign to ourselves and others, typically based off appearance.

Lots of trans women will tell you the whole "I was always a girl" line, and that's really just a line to say to cis people. But myself and a lot of the trans women I know explain it as "we wanted to be girls, and then became women". Sometimes I look in the mirror and see a man, sometimes I don't know what I see, but most of the time these days I see a delightful young woman who I don't hate. Probably the best perk of transitioning is being able to look at mirrors.

I'm not just saying that trans women also experience a lot of the issues cis women do under a patriarchal society. I'm saying all trans people experience it.

Trans men and some non-binary people grow up as women, and those actively transitioning might not (and might not want to) fully pass in order to be viewed as "real men".

I just don't think gender works like some immovable switch. I think we're meant to get a little silly with it, experiment, and find what makes us comfortable. And it's so fun looking at all the weird shit trans people do!

Trans men who still identify as lesbians

Trans women who still identify as gay men

People with xeno-pronouns (I don't even understand these but they're so interesting from a linguistic perspective).

All the crazy shit non-binary people do.

And Im sure you're frowning with disapproval reading this, lots of trans people might be too. But imagine a world where that's all perfectly ok, a world where gender doesn't really matter all that much and people have the freedom to move between them as they please. In this fictional society, a patriarchy couldn't exist, because it requires control.

I do understand your counter to this, that a society where gender is no longer completely determined at birth would opt instead to control whatever class of people could give birth. And that's a very genuine thing to worry about. However trans rights are largely an issue of ones bodily autonomy, just as woman's rights are. It's why trans people align themselves with cis feminists and why they often align with us. I think your reasons make sense in vacuum, but I think the reality truly is that we truly do just have the same problems, the same enemies.

Sure, I doubt this society will ever exist on this planet, and if it does it certainly won't exist within my lifetime. But neither will the fictional female only society plenty of Radical Femisists strive for, and both of them will be filled with countless other problems.

I hope I'm not misunderstanding the Radical Femisist idea of this too much. I am still a little fuzzy on the topic, hence my general interest in it. I'm really sorry for how long this response is, I didn't intend it to be 😭😭😭

If you read this all (won't blame you if you didn't) thank you very much.

I go into a lot of detail because I'm worried about not explaining myself properly, so I'm sorry if it seemed like I'm talking down to you at any point in this. Not my intent at all.

Thank you for typing out your response too. Most of it didn't change how I feel but the bit about language did interest me and have me question a few of the beliefs I already had since it's not really a thing I think about alot. Your citing of sources is also very much appreciated.

lately i've been doing a lot of thinking about why women are the main supporters of transgenderism, and i think i've boiled it down to three main elements

1. women are socialised to be more accommodating and accepting of uncomfortable situations than men are. this has been discussed at length in the radical feminist tradition and the gender critical movement, but it bears reiterating. women are taught from early childhood to disbelieve their feelings of fear, anger and humiliation for the benefit of men.

2. i'd argue that the description of physical dysphoria is one that almost all women empathise with, because of how alienated women are from their bodies by society, in a way most men are not. even women who would say they are comfortable with their bodies have complicated feelings about having a female body in our society, even if they don't have the framework to express it. therefore, when women are confronted with men who make claims about sex dysphoria, they relate and empathise and some can draw conclusions that this distress aligns them with femaleness (i would argue that all women experience sex dysphoria in a misogynist society like ours but i digress). i think there many women also find solace in the idea that someone else could possibly have their physical distress alleviated and want to believe it is possible to find a solution to it.

In other words, “The body has been made so problematic for women that it has often seemed easier to shrug it off and travel as a disembodied spirit.” - Adrienne Rich

3. women want to believe that male oppression and men aren't really that bad. to comprehend the scale of women's oppression, and to fully understand that the men you know and love are as complicit in it as any other, feels like balancing on the brink of madness. women are desperate for evidence that things aren't as bad as they suspect.

Andrea Dworkin says it best: “Many women, I think, resist feminism because it is an agony to be fully conscious of the brutal misogyny which permeates culture, society, and all personal relationships.”

that is part of the allure of the trans movement for these women in denial. breaking down the categories of male and female, and denying the social dynamics therein, means they don't have to grapple with the ugliness of misogyny.

anyone else have thoughts on this? i'd be keen to hear if others on radblr think

[rjalker]

What Julia Serano said:

Misogyny, (AKA traditional sexism) and transmisogyny (AKA oppositional sexism) both exist and both are serious problems we need to combat. We cannot dismantle transmisogyny until we dismantle misogyny. The only reason transmisogyny exists in the first place is because misogyny exists. You can't defeat one without defeating the other. We have to combat traditional sexism if we want to defeat oppositional sexism.

What too many god damned assholes choose to hear instead:

Oppositional sexism is the only real sexism. Traditional sexism is not real, or if it is, it's not actually a problem and doesn't really oppress anyone. If you say that traditional sexism exists you're saying oppositional sexism doesn't. Only one of these forms of oppression is allowed to exist at a time. You are not oppressed for having a pussy. Cis women do not need to celebrate their bodies. Cis women celebrating their bodies is inherently transmisogynistic. Women are not oppressed for their bodies or reproductive systems, only their genders. Trans men and AFAB nonbinary are not oppressed by traditional sexism, because they aren't women. Only one form of oppression can exist at a single time and if you talk about other forms of misogyny that means you're a transmisogynist. No, in fact I didn't read the book that coins the term and explains what it means. I'm a bigot, I don't actually care about making a good argument, I just want to shit on other people for my own benefit.

It must also be noted that Julia Serano is exorsexist and racist(1) as fucking shit, and homophobic(2), and literally straight up lies about trans men to downplay and erase their oppression(3), but it's not like any of the people touting her words like holy gospel while literally going against what she's actually saying give a single shit about that...

1: Says nonbinary people are all actually just binary trans, but in denial and specifically claiming to be nonbinary to feel superior to trans women. She also claims nonbinary people are privileged for being nonbinary, and doesn't bother to even pretend to explain how or why she came to this conclusion, and goes on to state that human brains are inherently gendered either male or female, and that gender is biologically innate, and that the white western gender binary only exists and is so prevalent /because/ it's the only natural one. [Sarcasm: Because I guess she, a white woman, lives in a world where white people have never ever committed genocide against any other culture that has more than two genders. Nope. That never happened, totally. It's just natural for the white western gender binary to be dominant because it's the only one that's right! End sarcasm.]

2: Says gay people are not oppressed for their same-gender attraction, only for being gender nonconforming. She then goes on to say that butch women are treated better by our society than traditionally feminine women. No I'm not joking. I wish I was joking. So she apparently thinks that only gay men are oppressed for being gender nonconforming, because a man being gender nonconforming means he's feminine, but a woman doing it means she's masculine, and since she's masculine that means she's no longer oppressed for being gender nonconforming. So by her logic, only gay men are oppressed for being gay, except they're not actually oppressed for being /gay/, they're just oppressed for being feminine!

3: First saying trans men are privileged for always passing, then saying they're privileged for always being treated like women. Even though her Whole Entire Argument™ is that women and people perceived as woman-like are always more oppressed than men. She's literally claiming shit about trans men that literally two seconds of talking to a single trans man will instantly disprove. She literally switches between saying trans men are treated as men or treated as women depending on which one will make them less oppressed in regards to her current argument. Literally Schrödinger's Privilege.

[uncloseted]

lately i've been VERY confused about gender and sexuality (not mine, just in general, although more on that later). so i always called myself a lesbian because it made sense, im a girl i like girls. about 2 years ago i had a lot of internalized homophobia and i tried to be as feminine as i could so people would think i was straight. and i remember one time i thought "what if i'm a trans man and i'm doing this because i feel like i have something to prove". +

but then i thought "nah, i can't be a man (or non binary) i like girly things too much". but that's awful too. ellen always wears suits and has short hair and she's still a woman. jeffree star likes girly things and he's a man. but now i don't even know what IS a girl/woman. i mean i didn't choose to be a woman and i never had a chance to be anything else. but i don't think i ever wanted to be. even if i identified as "agender" and i still looked and acted the way i do know, society would still

be seeing and oppressing me as a woman, so at least to me, personally, it feels useless. but also, a lot of nb people (most of them are afab) identify as lesbians. it's very confusing. i never had any kind of dysphoria although i felt uncomfortable with my body, periods, and sex but i always thought it was because of shyness, anxiety, internalized homophobia, insecurities and beauty standards. and i have a friend who's studying psychology in university and she told me dysphoria does not exist

trans girls. i think it depends on, like, how "far" they are in their transition?. i think i could be attracted, physically and emotionally but i couldn't have sex with someone with a penis. and i know even the most trans-positive people will tell you that it's ok to have a genital preference and not want to date trans people. but it still makes me feel horrible because it's like i'm seeing nb people as "more woman" than trans women. but also in all honesty it's very hard to "tell" cis people

from nb people. if you showed me a picture of jeffree star and jonathan van ness (or elena and syd from one day at a time, or amandla stenberg and king princess, or sam smith and harry styles) and asked me which one is nb, i wouldn't know. i would probably say jeffree. so i agree that monosexual (straight/gay) people will inevitably be attracted to nbs because nb is a spectrum, and also some people (I think all of us, in some way? maybe it's a controversial opinion) are gender non-conforming but

but don't identify as nb. does that mean we should change the definitions of gay/lesbian, since any gender could have any type of body and look as feminine and/or masculine as they want? do sam smith, jvn, vander von odd/sasha velour/gigi goode (all genderfluid drag artists) have male privilege despite not being men?. should we change the words feminism, sexism, misogyny, male privilege, etc for something more accurate?. honeslty i think a lot of this confusion is actually intrusive thoughts

and me just being an overthinker in general but it's been causing me so much distress that now every pronoun feels wrong and i can't even masturbate. please forgive the rambling, the buts, the incoherence and the ignorance. thanks in advance. oh and please tell me if this comes through in pieces and i will send them again

So there’s a ton to unpack here, but for the record, I’ve had this exact train of thought, too.

I want to preface my answer by saying that I’m not a gender scholar and I haven’t read nearly as many academic works as I’d like to on this subject, so this is coming very much from my personal opinions and less from an evidence-based/academic place. I also want to say that if pressed, I would describe myself as a pansexual gender anarchist (as in, attracted to people for who they are instead of their parts and I think we should get rid of the concept of gender entirely), but I think that sounds a bit wanky, especially since it has almost zero bearing on my everyday life. So I think the concept of sexuality and gender is maybe different to me than it is to other people, and my perspective on this topic might be unusual in that sense.  If anyone reading this thinks what I’m saying is bullshit or problematic, please join in the conversation! I would love to hear what you have to say.

For me, the more I think about gender and sexuality, the more i don’t really “get” either concept. Gender has begun to feel (to me) like one of those Buzzfeed quizzes where you answer a bunch of questions and they’re like, “you’re rocky road ice cream” and you’re like, “I have no idea what that implies except for it’s the collection of traits I chose from the options above”.  

What I mean by that is that gender is a social construct. No traits are inherently masculine or feminine- things that are considered masculine in one culture can be feminine in another and vice versa. 

Especially now, when we’re really moving towards disentangling gender from our world, I wonder what’s left to take the place of those items to define what gender is.  Gender used to be like “feminine is cleaning, nurturing, creating (or Barbie dolls, dresses, and makeup), and masculine is destruction, being powerful, and being ambitious (or football, beer, and video games)”, but clearly that’s not what it means anymore. Ellen’s suits are feminine suits by virtue of the fact that she IDs as female, even though suits used to be considered a male thing.  Jeffree Star’s makeup looks are male makeup looks by virtue of the fact that he IDs as male, even though makeup used to be considered a female thing.  I’ve heard some people say that there are as many genders as there are people in the world. At that point I think we’re just using the word “gender” as a synonym for “personality”, which is fine, but I think we need to be clear about our definitions and what these words now mean and imply about a person.

Going along that train of thought, if gendered words don’t really mean anything anymore, I don’t see the point as identifying as a particular gender, at last not in the abstract.  In practice, our world still sees gender and cares about it, and other people’s interpretation of our gender has very real consequences.  As you say, even if you identified as agender, society would treat you as a woman because you present in a way society considers to be “traditionally feminine”, and as a result, you would be oppressed in the same way women are.  This is why I said that my position on gender impacts my life zero percent.  I can identify as a gender anarchist all I want, but at the end of the day I still get passed up for opportunities because the way I present is read as female.  Likewise, nonbinary people who were assigned male at birth do have a degree of male privilege (or at least, can access male privilege), depending on how well they “pass” as a man.  Sam Smith likely still experiences some male privilege, because they look (most of the time) like what society might consider traditionally male.  Someone like JVN probably passes less frequently, due to his long hair and frequent wearing of what we might think of as traditionally female clothing (skirts and dresses and high heels).  However, the flip side of that is both Sam Smith and JVN risk being even more marginalized than female identifying, female presenting people when they do dress in a gender non-conforming way, because nonbinary identities are less understood and less accepted than female identities are. 

So now that we’ve considered what gender means in relation to society, maybe let’s consider it in relation to our bodies and sexuality.  This is a bit of a minefield so I’m going to try to tread carefully, but again, feel free to call me out if I say something problematic... 

I don’t think being uncomfortable with your body, especially feminine features of your body that are widely looked down upon (for example, periods) or sexualized (physical features like boobs, butts, hips) necessarily makes a person trans or nonbinary.  As you say, those feelings can be a result of shyness, anxiety, internalized homophobia, insecurities, beauty standards, and dozens of other things.  However, it is something many trans or nonbinary individuals experience.  So the question then becomes, where are those feelings of discomfort coming from?  Are they internal to you (as in, your body physically feels like there’s something wrong/those features shouldn’t be there) or external (you feel shame for having those features because of the society you grew up in)?  It can be really hard to detangle internal influences from external ones, given that people who are assigned female at birth learn to hate our femininity and female bodies from a very young age.

I would say that if those feelings are internal to you, then that’s what referred to as gender dysphoria.  Gender dysphoria is a real, ICD and DSM diagnosable condition, and there’s some evidence to suggest that there’s a neurobiological basis for it.  My (very controversial) hypothesis is that gender dysphoria is like other body integrity identity disorders, where there’s a mismatch between the brain’s map of the body and what the physical body actually looks like.  I want to make it clear here that I don’t think being trans is a disorder.  I don’t think it’s bad or that all people who are trans have a body integrity disorder.  I don’t think you need to physically transition to be trans, or that we should pathologize gender/gender expression, or that gender is a binary (hopefully that last one is obvious).  I just think if society has less stringent gender divisions and a less binary understanding of gender, fewer people would physically transition, but some people would still experience a mismatch between their idea of how their body’s sexual characteristics should look and how they physically are.

So then, what does that mean for our terminology?  I think in the context of a world where the meaning of gender is changing, gay and lesbian just refer to genitals (people with penises attracted to people with penises and people with vaginas attracted to people with vaginas, respectively).  Or perhaps we need to separate it out further- maybe you can be romantically and physically attracted to female and male presenting people, but sexually attracted to only vaginas.  Maybe that would fill the gap between being interested in a person romantically and being interested in having sex with their genitals, where you’re attracted to someone without yet knowing what’s in their pants?  In general, though, I think labels should exist to be useful.  I don’t know how useful it is to have a term for “I'm attracted to you, given that you have the genitals I’m sexually attracted to.”

I think under that framework of centering labels like gay and lesbian on genitals, a lot more people are pansexual than would identify that way if you took a poll right now.  In general, I think a lot of people never recognize that they’re pansexual because they aren’t in contact with nonbinary or trans people that they’re attracted to frequently enough to know they don’t actually care about genital preferences.

When talking about other labels like feminism (the advocacy for AFAB and female-identifying/presenting rights), sexism (prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, generally towards female identifying/presenting people. but also towards gender nonconforming people), misogyny (dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against AFAB and female identifying/presenting people), male privilege (the system of advantages or rights that are available to men and male identifying/presenting people solely on the basis of their sex/gender presentation), etc., I think those terms refer to the societal construct of sex/gender that is still prevalent in our culture.  We perhaps need to start using other words to describe discrimination against nonbinary people, but I think the existing terms continue to serve a purpose and it’s not time to retire them just yet.

I don’t know if any of this is at all helpful or if I’m expressing my thoughts clearly.  Maybe it will just add more confusion to your existing thought process, but I hope it helps to minimize your distress at least a little bit.  Ultimately, all of this is kind of made up, so don’t beat yourself up too much while trying to unravel all these different threads. People spend full academic careers and sometimes their entire lives trying to figure out what they believe on these issues.  It’s okay to not have it all worked out or to not be sure in your ideas.  Even for me, this is just where my thinking is right now.  Maybe in the future it will change with new information I learn or as my feelings towards myself change.  Try to let yourself think of this as a journey instead of something you have to already have figured out.

[the-mira-life-project-mtf]

My MtF~H.R.T. Journey -- As Gender Nonconforming, People Still Love Me

Finding Acceptance Where I Though None Existed

     COMING OUT...IT ALWAYS OCCUR OVER AND OVER

     Back in 2018, I initially came out as gender-nonconforming as I did not want to fully convert as I was terrified of my family and being outcast by my friends. My transgender identity keep changing as I found myself adapting and becoming Mira. I was turning from gender-nonconforming and turning into gender-fluid.

     Even now, I am gender-fluid as I prefer to remain between genders. Male when it serves me and female when it comforts me. Since the start of 2019, both of my genders have been active with a case of a-gender to protect my feelings. Unknown to me, I have lived my life as a-gender as I have no set of pronouns and typically refer to myself as ‘they’ or ‘we’. However, since March of 2019...I have converted once more into a trans-woman as I am now on the path to turn my appearance and identity, female.

     To this day, I still call myself gender-nonconforming and gender-fluid as I know I will always have a male and female side, however, my trans-woman side will take dominance.

     MY NEW FAMILY IS LETTING MIRA BLOOM

     Ever since I have came out to the Messinger’s, I have witnessed Mira bloom. Even though I am the same person, I ‘feel’ different now. I feel allowed to act out my emotions, show love and seek family. My whole Transgender nature depended on the Messinger’s accepting me as Mira and since they did, that is why I am writing this.

     I was visiting the Messinger’s as I was dropping off some of my stuff from my old home as Michelle was sharing her day. “I had to take Ryan to the doctor today, we thought he might have a nasal polyps, and as a mom, I was concern for him.” I released a concerned groan as I listened from the stairs, which I was sitting upon. “Luckily it wan’t that, his nose has a deviated septum. Anyhow, I told him about you moving in with us and joining our family, he thinks that is a good idea. Then I told him about your other issue and he was excited. He said that he wants to help you!”

     “Oh?” I ask as I know that I will need all the help.

     “He said, if anyone messes with you, he will protect you. He can’t wait to do your makeup and do your hair...I told him that you need to ask him.” Michelle says as I thought about having makeup and having my hair done...looking feminine.

     REACHING OUT TO ONE WHO ONCE HATED THE GAYS

     Barb:  Your dad and I would love to get together with you. We could meet at a restaurant, your grandmother's house...wherever. Whenever, just let us know what works for you. Scratch Crisco's and AJ's ears for me.

Mira:  I certainly have been needing to have a revisit, and look forward to setting up a time.      Might have to be awhile, I am in the process of moving and transitioning to a new family who has asked to take me in (countless times). They are wonderful people, very loving and have been there for me when my family would not (besides you and Dad, who have came more times then my mother, which really means much to me). I believe their willingness to adopt me as a member of the family is due to the fact that Mitch lost both of his daughters to CF and for two years prior, one of his daughters named Amanda, was the one who keep pushing me to be tested for CF. If it wasn’t for her diligence, I probably would not be here today. So I feel indebted to the family, and I believe it is a way he can properly grieve and hope to save me from the mistakes he made with his own girls. Ironically, I am much healthier with them as they keep me true to my regiment and help with clearing my airways.      They are also willing to let me live my life without hiding an embarrassing secret, which I am certain will nevertheless have me excommunicated from the family. I am not certain how you both will take the news, and if you wish to distance yourselves, I would not be offended and honor your wishes. Only four people know this, and you’ve both been quite like family to me, so I will share it with you, so you can decide if you still want to visit:      Since I was seven years old, I’ve struggled with identity. I have come to a conclusion that my gender dysphoria was caused from being raised in a female-styled family with no male influence, many links to me being female started when I was nine, steroids I was taking for my asthma starting my development on the incorrect path. Teen years were not easy, my actions certainly were not masculine as I avoided sports and sang soprano in my choirs until I was 18 years old, then lowered to alto. With my failing health, and depression from hiding this from my family, and hearing their opinions about transgender individuals with borderline on the violent side, I lived a double-life. About five years ago, when I could not work, my health was crashing, grandfather passed away and my relationship with Ruth failed, I accepted my nature and began converting my identity. I am enrolled in hormone replacement therapy and have plans to change my name and identity once I am fully adopted into the new family.      I don’t press my views on other people (as that personally annoys me); and so I will not be ashamed or upset if you still wish to refer to me as David. However, my identity will be shifted to Mira Carlene Messinger probably by the summer.      It has taken me much will to write this, and again, I understand this is much to accept...it took me a year just to accept it myself. So I expect, and understand that many old relationships will be destroyed by this.      Please let me know your thoughts.      I will certainly pass on your love to Cisco and AJ...they love the attention!

Steve: Your my son and I love you, that will never change! Barb's cares about you. Search your heart; seek Jesus . Remember, your my son. I will not turn my back on you!! We love you. Dad.

Barb: David your dad and I love you, We love you as David and will love you as Mira. We still want to be part of your life and we still want to see you.

 Mira: That is so comforting to hear! I can’t express how happy it makes me, that both of you are so willing to except me for who I am!  I still like to meet-up, catch-up on how you’ve been doing. Hopefully sometime in May would be great! With all my love!

     I was shocked to see that Barb and my biological father were so accepting of my transgender nature. When I sent the message, I watched the message gain a thumbs-down, then a angry face and finally a thumbs-up. This was probably because the revelation was shocking for Barb and Steve that she did not know how to respond. (amended 9-26-2019 — misleading information in article has been corrected after learning family past)

     REKINDLING A LOST LOVE

     Back in 2016, Ruth (Bisexual) and I got into a fight while traveling the Oregon Coastline. We had dated for over eight years and after that August disruption, we called it an end. It wasn’t until 2018 when I reached out to Ruth to talk about my transgender revelation; but did not tell her I was taking hormones and wishing to become female. Today, I sent a message to her to see what she thought.

     I have started coming out to a selected few as I don’t want these people to feel bad when I come out officially in May. It is easier to privately speak to these people...preparing them for my transformation:

Mira:  Thank you so much for reaching out...it means a great deal to me! I just want to drop a few lines to bring you up to date about what is going on. Much is about to change in my life and a few are on board to see me through, and I want to inform you too before I decide to go public about my choices.      So, after long deliberation, I have decided to move from my grandparents place and to Mason county. This move is due to the nature of my health, knowing they will not be there for me, and placing myself in the hands of someone who has experience with treating end-stage cystic fibrosis. They have asked for me to come live with them, and willing to adopt me into their family permanently. For about a year I said no, but have decided that living there is best for my physical and mental health.      The second change that is coming soon is to align myself with my identity. I have been in deep consideration and reflection and last year, I decided to act upon my gender-fluid issue by taking hormones to correct my physical form. As you know, I closely identify as female over male, and my discomfort in my body made me isolated and unwilling to be affectionate. Sorry for the ordeal this has put upon you, since taking hormones...I’ve noticed that it is so much easier to be comfortable with myself and have became deeply empathetic. It is wonderful!      If this makes you uncomfortable, I apologize and totally understand your feelings and respect any decisions you make. I     f you are willing to continue our relationship, I would like to start over! I know the past two years had some strain and I hope my choices will help us become closer. This experience has been hard upon me as I fear losing people I love, but I think it is time. I have came out to my new family to see what they think and they fully support my decisions and will help me convert over time. By summertime, I hope to leave my old life behind and become Mira Carlene Messinger.      Let me know your thoughts.      I’d like to set up a time for us to see a movie, there is a sad one about cystic fibrosis in the theaters right now. I’ve read the book, it was well written and hauntingly accurate. We could wait and see Avengers Endgame. Maybe this summer we can take a few day trips until we feel comfortable to take longer ones. Love you!

Ruth:  Hi Mira, I must say I am in awe of your courage in embracing who you are. I must also say you were right about me in noticing the characters I identify with are primarily male, and I have suspected for awhile that am either bi-gender or identify as male.

     For the time being, I'm staying physically female, but I am absolutely willing to both continue our relationship and start over.

     Once you admitted to me that you are female, it was like the whole universe aligned and everything just made sense. I would love to see a movie with you, and have been wanting to see both the CF one and the Avengers one.

     I'm dog sitting at the moment and am enjoying the time to be the alpha male I am inside. BTW, if I had been born a man, my name would be Timothy. As things stand now, I identify as both Ruth and Timothy, although only you, my sister, and my shrinks know that.

     I love you, Mira, and am excited to date my new girlfriend. Much love,      Ruth/Timothy

Mira: Much love too Ruth/Timothy...I love that name, very pretty. Be curious to hear about it!

     Sorry my last message was rushed, was talking with my soon-to-be family; been busy planning my room and needs...it is all rather exciting!  Just wanted to acknowledge your wonderful comment.      I certainly love you, either as Ruth, Timothy or both! And I wish to express my sincere gratitude that you shared this with me.      I always was pleased that you played the masculine role in our relationship...and it comforts me to start anew as your girlfriend.      It will take some time to conform, but from what my mom and dad say, looks like I am conforming quite well...even my moms 13 year old daughter is going to help me adjust...and I can always use advice along the way.      I can’t express how excited for our first date! As Mira, my world has open...it is amazing and I can’t wait to legally take the name!      Have fun dog sitting my young Alpha and I look forward to even possibly sharing our first kiss.      Let me know when you are free sweetheart!      Mira

Ruth: I will be done dog sitting on Monday. On Tuesday I work at L'Arche, but I am free all other days. As for my male name, the story behind it is quite simple. Either ultrasonic imaging hadn't been invented yet, or my parents chose not to know my gender right off the bat. My parents each chose a name for me. Dad chose Ruth Ann if I was a girl, and Mom chose Timothy John if I was a boy. I feel like both

Mira: Oh...that is so awesome! That is so wonderful that you have both of your given names! You are blessed to have such a loving mom and dad! They are great people! My schedule is pretty free, will be gone the weekend to clam dig and then gone the third weekend. I have my facenra injection on the 19th, digging clams 20-24th at Ocean Shores and see my transgender physician on the 26th for the first time. Anytime next week be wonderful!

[blakelywintersfield]

The Owl House would not have the kind of representation it does now if not for Steven Universe. Alex Hirsch tried having a brief appearance of two old ladies falling in love. Not even kissing. And it was struck down by Disney. Same with the trans symbol appearing on a necklace. This was in 2014. And in Gravity Fall's season finale, he couldn't even have two side characters explicitly say they were together -- it's used as part of a joke and could easily be written off as such (or as non-queer). That's as far as he could get by 2016. The fact that Lumity gets to be canon is a huge fucking break that we wouldn't have gotten five years ago.

And Nickelodeon isn't innocent in this either -- did y'all forget how hard the writers of The Legend of Korra had to fight back in 2014 to have the ending they did where Korra and Asami smile at each other and hold hands? That was their limit! They weren't allowed to show them kiss! Not even a quick peck! It was unallowed! Do you think they would've allowed one of the sisters from The Loud House to be queer or had two husbands with a child back then?

Not to mention the fight to show Bubbleline on screen for years and years, and it was thanks to Rebecca Sugar that we got to see them kiss. Like. All these shows? That you're mentioning right now? Where they've clearly shown portrayals of queer relationships and nonbinary representation? They premiered these specific reveals in the past 5 years. The McBride husbands were introduced in 2016. Luna was shown to have a crush on Sam the year after (and the intention of her being named Sam was to keep her gender vague during the pitch); requited feelings in 2019; and confirmed to be her girlfriend this year. In 2021. The "I'm texting my girlfriend" bit mentioned? 2019.

All these examples being thrown around to snub SU's representation happened extremely recently; all of them happened after Steven Universe showed Ruby and Sapphire embrace and kiss briefly in the first season finale. All of them are possible because of Rebecca Sugar's tireless fight to have more queer representation in children's media.

They faced immense backlash from the studio. They faced backlash from other countries. Not only was Ruby given a man's voice in the Russian dub, they edited her to have a mustache so it wouldn't appear queer. Y'all want to see the list of censorship done to this show that you think did such a milquetoast job of queer representation? It's really fucking long because there were different edits done depending on which of the 30+ countries were censoring them. Sure, not all of those edits are specifically aimed at queer content. But the fact that the UK straight up censored Pearl and Rose Quartz's dance in 2016 because it was "too intimate"? (No inappropriate touching, no kissing, nothing that could be possibly inappropriate for children to witness -- just too queer!)

And, as a final little sidenote before I get off my damn soapbox -- Rebecca Sugar is a nonbinary woman. Perhaps part of her reason for never explicitly stating they were "girlfriends" was because the gems are all nonbinary as well? They prefer to take feminine forms, but they are all still nonbinary in the end, and even binary gender-leaning nonbinary people may not be comfortable with gendered titles like husband/wife, boyfriend/girlfriend, etc. I'm all for clear representation, but y'all also have a history of erasing nonbinary and mspec sexualities in favor of fitting gay binary ideology (I could get into a whoooooole separate rant on that, especially erasing canonical bisexuality and pansexuality; but I've said enough for now). So like. For all that has been won, you all still have work to do yourselves in unlearning views and opinions that hurt your fellow community members.

10 years ago my 16-year-old baby queer self would never have thought that I'd see... any of this in my lifetime on G-rated media. I thought I'd only be lucky to see non-sexualized queer women, non-stereotyped queer men, and genuine, non-demonizing trans representation in adult media. The strides we have seen in these past 10 years are immense. The implications of yesterday are the reason you have confirmation today. Do not forget your history.

Steven Universe: Eh, I don't really feel like saying "girlfriend" or "wife". Maybe they're together. They have a special connection...

(gets violently shoved aside)

The Loud House/Craig of the Creek/The Owl House: Pfft, amateur. "My GIRLFRIEND Sam and I..." "I'm texting my GIRLFRIEND, mind your business." "Luz's new GF showed her..."

[alleycat4eva]

being gender critical is more than just acknowledging sex based oppression. it's about analyzing and being critical of the social construct in whichever way it presents. from how it originated (from social roles based on sex which differ from culture to culture) to how the term gender was coined by who and why (john money...) to how it evolved in the last century in the west due to the post modernist movement to analyzing third genders from yours or other cultures (and how some of those third genders were originally social categories forced on gay men or people with disorders of sex development) to analyzing definitions, the concept of "passing", why people get misgendered and how does that reflect the majority's understanding of the words man and woman, and any argument why someone identifies as this or that gender (not just trans people, cis people too) and looking for fallacies. and from my experience ive seen arguments like the male brain/female brain theory, relationship with femininity or masculinity, feeling like a certain gender to name a few beside gender dysphoria or lack of it (and even that one isnt a be all end all since there are GCs with dysphoria).

for short the core belief is that gender is a social construct (it is not innate or biological), that man and woman arent genders but words that refer to adult humans of either male or female sex, that you cant "feel" like a man or a woman you either are or you arent depending on your biology, that your sex doesnt determine how you should dress or act or what job you should have your likes dislikes your personality etc - that would be bioessentialism - and that those traits dont determine or form someones gender (and if it did then gender would just be a label for what kind of lifestyle someone has). so if gender is none of those things then what is it?

as for being a terf - while it is a misnomer who gets thrown around a lot for any reason - it was originally meant for radical feminists so im guessing that's what you're talking about. radfems are gender critical but being GC doesn't automatically make you a radfem (neither does acknnowledging sex based oppression). radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical re-ordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that our experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, sexual orientation, disability etc. you have to agree with most radical feminist tenets to be a radical feminist (im saying most because there are still debates regarding certain ideas)

Okay so I suppose to even say gender critical I'd have to start off by doing even more research? I'm not sure how to break this down exactly.

I'm not sure that there is enough difference in uh, male and female brains? To really say there is sex based differences? And vioessentiqlism is, uh, not real I'm pretty sure.

But it sounds like more research is needed on my end?

[animentality]

With all this discourse, do you think Ishida is really homophobic/transphobic ? Or would it be a false assumption. I'm not straight btw.

I don’t imagine that a man who kills off and demonizes all his transgender, gender non conforming, and effeminate men could be that progressive.

Seriously, he made Nico out to be a flamboyant creep.

He made that guy who crushed on Urie, I forgot his fucking name, strip NAKED in his office to profess his love for him for no reason I can tell.

He makes the woman “pretending” to be a man obsessed with a man…and then kills “her” off. She literally kills herself to save Tsukiyama and is never thought of again.

And now we have Mutsuki.

Transgender…except not.

Because Mutsuki is actually just a confused woman, as all trans gender people are, who needed to accept the fact that she’s in “love” with her superior.

As “weak” women often are.

She fucks a corpse because transgender people, right, gay people, just crazy.

Oh and remember Big Mama?

Yet another man “pretending” to be a woman.

But worse, this fucker mutilated Suzuya’s genitals because they wanted him to be a girl. Like seriously, I guess trans gender people just do that, right? Cut off penises because they want their kids to be transgender too.

Those sexual deviants.

You see, i don’t know ishida personally.

But look at that evidence.

Ishida has LGBT characters…

Who are insane predatory assholes.

He uses their sexualities and identities are horror fodder.

He treats women who think they’re men as obsessive and “feminine” in virtue whether they realize it or not.

“Feminine” meaning obsessed with men, just like Touka, the love interest, who’s the epitome of perfect feminine wiles right now. Any female character who’s not obsessed with a single man fucking dies. Nutcracker? Slut. Dies. Rise? Slut. Is tortured repeatedly for her sex life. Eto? Too self dependent and also sexually liberated. Is killed off screen to a man who's so afraid of his childhood friend's newfound sexuality and freedom that he wants to lock her up to be his wife and broodmare.

But Touka and Hinami and Akira ? Well they’re heterosexual, they love their husbands, so they’ll live…until they’re needed for angst purposes. And of course, they need to have their husbands’ children before they die.

So Ishida seems to have a healthy fear of sex. Which is hilarious, given his newest chapter of Touka and Kaneki fucking like rabbits, no fucking pun intended. Maybe I should clarify, he’s afraid of a woman who’s sexually liberated. Touka can have sex with Kaneki because they’re getting “married” (as we saw her give him his parents ring…like, ishida clearly is one of the “fuck anyone once and you’ve gotta marry them” types). She can have sex with Kaneki because she was LOYAL. She waited for him and never bothered to get a life of her own. And as you can tell by her look of pain? She never had sex with any other man. She's "pure." She's "Kaneki's" and her body can only be used by him. I think ishida's wife either cheated on him or a girl he was interested in was promiscuous or something because he seems to have a fucking complex, what with this "slutty women are evil and virginal loyal women who love men" trope he's got going on. Maybe his girlfriend came out as transgender or gay and LEFT HIM, so now his stories are littered with women who're not gay, who are secretly attracted and deeply attached to any men who treat them with basic human decency, and any women or men who identify as the gender they are "not" must die, be crazy, and/or be creepy? But that's speculation. Let's look at Eto.

Another sexually liberated, self driven woman. Had her own goals, made her own angsty criminal empire. And what happens? She gets killed OFF SCREEN. By fuckboy Furuta, who made sexual advances towards her, said he wanted to punish her or spank her or WHATEVER.

And Rize? furuta’s sex slave? Can’t be fucking anyone else. She deserves to be tortured dutifully before being returned to the status of broodmare. She's been horribly treated for no real reason, Ishida could've honestly used someone else for Kanou's experiments. But Ishida has a hard on for punishing sluts. And he's made Furuta out to be an anti villain, a crazy "cool" fuckboy type who gets to be as disgusting as he wants but with impunity. It’s not like he’s demonized Furuta. If anything, Furuta is so obviously his creator’s fucking pet. He makes that absolute jackoff out to be this goofy Gary su type anti villain who beats fucking ETO off fucking screen, and the new villain for no fucking reason.

So straight men no matter how fucking gross, get to be venerated.

If Furuta is his author insert, and he makes him out to inexplicably be the strongest character of the series, then well. I guess that means he's got a real misogynistic mindset.

While he also treats men who think they’re women or who are gay as flamboyant and creepy and incredibly predatory. Talk about hypocritical.

Like.

Mutsuki Tooru was the only character who seemed to break out of this ugly mold of hating LGBT people.

But here he is.

Completely stripping any sympathy for Mutsuki and making them out to be nuts.

I think he’s homophobic/transphobic.

Only based on the evidence in canon, since I’ve never met the guy.

But no one who treats men who identify and dress as women or who are attracted to men and women who identify as men with any respect would do all the horrible shit he’s done to these characters.

It’s one thing to make a villainous LGBT character.

It’s another to completely strip away all of their sympathy and humanity, and to constantly punish them.

And to portray them as wretched and pathetic and creepy.