#Like every post that isn't specifically about trans men

[somecallmekay]

Would be nice to read some nice posts about men. Not cis men, not trans men, not fictional men, not men you're horny for, just men.

[genderkoolaid]

tbh my opinion isnt so much that trans men cannot have male privilege. its that the way we understand male privilege is based in cis women, specifically otherwise privileged (esp. otherwise-gendered privilege, i.e gender-conforming/straight/perisex) cis women's understanding of gender as something static and inherent to who you are, rather than something fluid which is, in part, constructed by society and placed onto you separately in every moment.

can a trans man experience (cis) male privilege? yes. can a trans woman? yes. and so can a cis woman! hell, a femme perisex cis woman with a gender neutral name could if she's assumed to be a cis man on a resume. male privilege is not an on/off switch. the idea that it is stems from cissexist understandings of male/female as entirely separate and static categories which everyone can and must be understood through. trans people in feminism are expected to constantly defend and deflect accusations of being Privileged Male Oppressors by promising cis perisex women that our experiences are just like theirs! we don't have any scary opinions that don't align with their worldview! we swear we won't ever make them have to reflect on how being cis+perisex has biased them and potentially made their analysis of gender at all inaccurate! trans experiences are only considered valuable to cisfeminism to the extent that they reaffirm what cisfeminists already hold true. thats why they only ever want to talk about a very simplistic narrative around wages pre/post-transition. its extremely unthreatening to cis people because it presents transness in patriarchy as just going from one cis role to another; it doesn't ask cis feminists to expand their paradigm to include the ways in which trans people are treated as a class and their own complicity in transphobic oppression.

which is why trans men have been getting fucked over by trans-affirmng cisfeminism. because by virtue of having our gender acknowledged, we are expected to forfeit our place in the feminist movement and adopt the role of outsider along cis men*. and its also why trans women and MTX people get fucked over the minute they cannot or refuse to describe their experiences through the one or two approved narratives. cisfeminism cannot tolerate transness-as-transness. it has to be compressed and reduced and diluted into something that fits within a cis-centric framework. we aren't allowed to have nuanced and intersectional conversations about trans men & other trans folks relationship with male privilege, the things we have to sacrifice to there, how fleeting it can be, the fact that for some of us being read as "biologically male" is actively more dangerous than being read as female... if it isn't familiar to cis women, then it means you aren't really oppressed.

*cis men should not be outsiders in feminism either btw but thats another post

[vaspider]

So I'm not responding to the particular post because it's making a good point -- mostly -- that I don't want to derail, and I want to address the general idea without pointing fingers at a specific person. This mindset is common, so I'm talking about this thing as an example, not an indictment.

Yes, you're right, it is really weird to treat trans women/transfems as though they should always top/dom(me) and be aggressive and act "like cis men," and it's really weird to treat trans men/transmascs as though we should always bottom/sub and be passive and act "like cis women," but keep going, because you've almost gotten to the core issue.

It isn't normal to expect cis people to have gender-assigned sexual roles or behaviors, either. The problem isn't just that people are treating trans women "like cis men" or transmascs/men "like cis women" sexually, but that the people behaving this way and saying these things also have a stereotyped idea of what cis men and cis women should behave like in bed!

Liberation from gender bullshit has to also encompass cis people or it's not gonna work, whether that's not assuming that every guy wearing a dress is an egg or every girl with a particular haircut is an egg or not assuming that cis people have A Way They Are Expected To Behave In Bed. FemDom is a punchline & a sub/bottoming cis male is, too -- the joke being, of course, that he's not 'really a man' if he lets a partner top/dom him.

[velvetvexations]

my personal take on "antigonism" is that it's entirely what you make of it. which is to say, i agreed with your post explaining why you felt such a term was necessary, and i do think this mentality of "most of us are normal about each other" and simply assuming we understand each other's experiences by virtue of being trans is reinventing artificial gender solidarity between cis people ("bros before hoes", "girl's girl") but superimposed onto trans people. which can be particularly contentious, given that we're an extremely traumatized bunch with a lot of baggage and massively diverging perspectives on all kinds of things. relating to each other outside of conventional gender relations means we have to put in that much more work to bridge the gaps between us, because we can no longer rely on the common assumptions made about men and women to carry our interactions, if that makes sense.

i do think a whole word for transfem-to-transmasc solidarity does toe a line between being unnecessarily inflammatory and conditionally useful. i'm genuinely glad for the people who felt seen and appreciated by the fact that a transfem made so explicit her stance on intracommunity issues. i'm also sympathetic to the people who feel put-off by such a word. when does allyship become chauvinistic? there is no word for a non-misogynistic man to signal to women that he is explicitly anti-antifeminist, for example. do we need one? i think a vast majority would say no, on account of simply stating he believes in feminist principles to suffice. so i'm wondering what specifically the push was for you to coin a word around tfem4tmasc solidarity, because while i do think trans people as a whole need to take significantly more initiative about rooting out transmisogyny and transandrophobia both, i'm not quite clear on what could signal more clearly a transfem's stance on intracommunity dialogue than just saying "i believe in transandrophobia and condemn all radfems". all feminism, transfeminism included, has had their malicious actors-- the existence of transradfems isn't really anything noteworthy as far as the broader feminist conversations go.

i hope this doesnt come across as confrontational because i think the people who found comfort in the fact that you are willing to go that far for them is truly heartwarming. i just don't want to see us splinter further into microfactions over something like one person coining one maybe-overenthusiastic word on the internet

Sincerely, there is a word for men who are anti-anti-feminist, though, they're feminists. Granted, self-identified "feminist" men have somewhat of a negative stereotype associated to them, but still, feminist men are feminists.

One of the biggest reasons I think a term would be useful is because so many people feel unsafe in the trans community because of trans radical feminism right now that it can help them relax a lot when they see a trans woman identifies as such. Just reminding people with assurances that most trans women are Normal doesn't really help that when they keep running into ones who aren't over and over.

TRFs are aggressive about this stuff. Seriously, every single day, post after post, their primary form of activism is crying about TMEs stealing kinks and liking a children's toy too much. I feel strongly that should be countered. Even if they aren't the majority, they sure as hell act like it and repeat how great it is that every single trans woman except velvetvexations alone agrees with them.

To be absolutely clear, I do not think I'm the only non-weird trans woman! That is just literally what they say about me! They may be the minority now but that frog is boiling.

IRL transmascs are forced out of spaces and talked over when they're let in because mascuwinity is scawy, No doubt transfems have similar problems because some spaces are TERF-y, but that problem is exacerbated when social media is filled with TRF rhetoric because it gets drilled into people's heads they need to be worried about that, and I don't think "touch grass" is a good response to that.

Hell, what if someone touches grass and then they do happen to end up having people be transandrophobic/exorsexist/intersexist/etc. to them? "Oh, well, that didn't count, try again somewhere else, I prommy that's not Normal."

It's all about volume. I feel very, very strongly that volume is necessary here, to combat the feeling that that radical feminism is around every corner and help people feel at ease and know trans women are with them.

[genderqueerdykes]

your post makes no sense? all of the identities that you named are NOT cis men??? and quite frankly it feels transphobic for you to consider them that

i'm a trans woman so i'm part of the group i'm commenting on. you do realize that a bigender trans woman who identifies as a trans woman and a cis man is still partially a cis man and that's not transphobic and it doesn't invalidate their trans womanhood, right? you do realize that a transfemme cis man is still a cis man and that doesn't invalidate their femmehood, right? you do realize a transfemme genderfluid person who identifies as a cis man is still partially a cis man and it doesn't invalidate their other genders, right? being bigender doesn't completely erase 1/2 of the identity. being a woman doesn't cancel out being a man. are you seriously saying that because that person has a queer identity means that it totally erases the fact that they are literally also identifying in plain english that they are also a cis man?

immersing yourself in the transfeminine community will help with this drastically. i don't know you or your history, but most of my IRL friends are transfeminine, myself included. there are many of my transfem friends who never want to be considered a man, and that's perfectly fine. however, i would say a good 1/3rd of the trans women i've met have also still identified as a cis gay man on some level. without shame, without it taking away their womanhood. existing alongside each other; parallel. if you meet and befriend a good number of transfeminine people you will find out that a lot of transfems identify as cis men and trans women at the same time. that's not new. many trans women identify as cis gay men and trans women at the same time. like, it's an extremely common thing. bigender means having two genders- one is trans woman, the other is cis man for people who identify this way. this person is a trans woman, a cis man, and a bigender person.

this doesn't make that person a bigender person, and a trans woman only. why do you think it's okay to completely erase that person's male identity? why do you think it's okay to completely ignore someone's manhood for the sake of their other identity? cis manhood isn't "icky". it doesn't get cancelled out by queerness. them partially being a cis man does not invalidate their trans womanhood. wake the fuck up, you're being transmisogynstic as hell right now and it's embarrassing.

a question you must ask yourself: why are you insinuating that it is transphobic to refer to someone correctly? my post specifically referred to trans women who also identify as cis men in their own words. why, in your mind, is this a bad thing? you MUST ask yourself why it's "transphobic" to acknowledge these identities and refer to these individuals correctly. you must ask yourself why you're putting your comfort before someone else's representation. there are transfemme cis men. there are transfeminine genderfluid people who identify as cis men when they are men. there are non binary cis men. why do you think that cis men cannot be queer, or trans? why are you assuming that a trans woman being a cis man at the same time is transphobic? why

this reeks of "woman cannot be man at the same time or else woman get cancelled out"

what is confusing about trans women having multiple genders? what's wrong with a bigender, multigender, genderfluid, genderqueer, genderfuck, gender non conforming, and/or intersex trans woman having a male identity that's also cis? what's wrong with that? how does that erase or "conflict" with the rest of their identity in any capacity?

there are bigender trans men who are cis women and trans men at the same time. there are bigender trans women who are cis men and trans women at the time. literally how does that not make sense. please explain to me how it doesn't make sense. every single person who has told me i'm not making sense hasn't told me why. please explain to me why you proudly and loudly saying that bi/multigender trans women don't exist is okay, but me fighting for people to understand that they do is transphobic.

stop virtue signalling and shoot the cop in your mind dead. in your attempt to look like a hero and earn brownie points all you did was show that you literally don't understand multigender, genderqueer, non binary, and other gender vast experiences. trans women won't magically like you more now because you decided to show everyone that you think it's transphobic to call someone who overtly in their own words identifies as a cis man, a cis man.

cis men aren't the devil. calm down and stop freaking the hell out over the fact that you can in fact be a cis man and a trans woman at the same time. the sun will still rise. the world will keep turning. it's not transphobic to refer to someone by the terms they ask you to use. get over yourself on this one, anon. that's your cross to bear: you are the transphobe. do yourself a favor and look into multigenderism before you decide to comment on trans theory again

you thought yourself into a corner and you can't find your way out.

[nothorses]

Hello there, I found on my tl this post presenting a different view on "baeddelism" from the perspective of a trans woman that claims that she was actually there when the og group existed and explains why the word has become somewhat of a transmisogynistic slur. And I wanted to ask you If you might have any thoughs on this reading of the subject matter?

www.tumblr.com/euniexenoblade/741692501713387520/anyways-baeddel-is-a-slur-against-trans-women

I mean, I think there's merit to the idea that calling people "baeddels" when they don't actually claim to be one themselves is at best counterproductive. The term refers less to A General Ideology, and more to a very specific movement- or, more accurately, two unrelated-but-similar movements that happened in the early/mid 2010's.

There's a term for what folks are usually talking about when they call some random trans woman a "baeddel" when she says she believes trans men oppress trans women: "TIRF", or trans-inclusionary radical feminist. It's a term that was coined by people who call themselves by it, and it's a lot more broad & generally useful here. It doesn't come with ties to a group that dissolved because of sexual assault allegations & rape apologism, and it isn't rooted in an Old English slur, which means it's a lot less charged. It's less likely to get people to shut down or laugh your whole point off because of how clear it is that you aren't listening to or engaging in anything they have to say with good faith.

So yes, I agree, calling random people "baeddels" is not in good taste. Don't do it. "TIRF" exists, it's more accurate, and it's less likely to hurt your argument anyway.

That said.

I take issue with the implication that:

a) Baeddels were tiny and utterly non-influential (therefore all references to them at this point are malicious exaggerations and bogeymen), and

b) Everyone self-describing as a "baeddel" today is actually just reclaiming a slur, exactly like people do with "tranny" and "faggot".

Baeddels (on Tumblr; again, there was a "baeddel" movement on Facebook at the time as well, but it was unrelated and ideologically distinct) were not so small that they had no impact, and to characterize them as widely unpopular- or, worse, influential only in that everyone hated them so much that alt-right bigots immediately revived "baeddel"s original meaning as a slur to in order to victimize all trans women- should immediately ping some alarm bells.

Baeddelism's core ideology centered around the idea that trans women are the most oppressed group, that transmisogyny is the root of all oppression, that trans women are always victimized, never safe, never understood, except around and by exclusively other trans women. This sucks, because there is very real oppression and trauma being preyed on here; trans women are encouraged to be paranoid and distrustful of anyone different from them, and their own experiences with oppression are weaponized against them in order to do so. This should remind you of the recruitment tactics cis radfems use.

That aside, there are some places where baeddelism's influence has been documented: @baeddel-txt is one example. Note that a lot of the posts archived there are recent. Here's one of the original crew, still active and spewing the same shit. Baeddelism has been experiencing something of a renaissance in recent years, too. Here's one of the original (ex-)baeddels talking about it as recently as 2021.

This is not "reclaiming a slur", these people are referring very explicitly to the original ideology & the desire, or observed desire, for that same movement to be brought back in the present day.

Does that make every TIRF-y trans woman a baeddel?

No!

But it is incredibly, and suspiciously disingenuous to deny the harm they caused, the influence they had, and the admiration people still hold for their ideology. And it is downright ahistorical to claim that the term is now, or was at the time that the group was most popular, used genuinely as a slur (sources, I am begging you).

Do not call people "baeddels" unless they're claiming the word for themselves. Do not allow anyone to make you think, even for a moment, that transfeminine people are The Enemy; they do not oppress us, they do not benefit from our oppression, and the vast majority of them are not interested in any kind of lateral violence against us in the first place. They are our allies. Do not forget that they are our allies.

Forgetting that trans people are each other's best allies is what lead to baeddelism in the first place. We need each other. Things can only improve for any of us if we fight for each other. Don't let resentment sabotage you- or hurt our trans siblings.

[transmascpetewentz]

i meant wrapped not trapped, I do not blame you for misunderstanding me, thats entirely my fault

I think you seem to believe that my issue with transandrophobia as a label is the idea that trans men face oppression (which they do), when instead its the idea that the oppression transmasculine people face is something completely unique to them, instead of being the underlying current of tranphobia

I literally spent the first paragraph explaining my issues with the *concept* of it before segawaying into my issue with it as a conterpart to transmisogyny due to them not sharing an underlying ideological framework

And to touch on some of doberbutts points, trans women are also correctively raped and have suicide rates, and the issue of access to abortion is for every person with a vagina, not just trans men

A frustrating thing that he does there is that instead of giving a counterargument to one of my points (what i personally believe to be a misnomer about the purpose of the label of transmisogyny, were you (nonspecific) view it as a threat to the validity of the trauma we face, and not as a way to describe their own, and what others believe to be just attention seeking) is to bring up severe (often sexual) trauma as a way to put a landmine on that specific point, because any attempt to explain why they are wrong becomes a personal attack on the traumatized parties

this got quite long, so response under the cut. @doberbutts this is the same anon you responded to (by reblogging my post) earlier.

ok

no form of violence experienced under an oppressive system is truly "unique" in that i don't think there are any experiences of violence or oppression that apply to only one specific group, but the motivations behind the violence can differ depending on the demographic it's being done to. i do not think that any specific example of transandrophobia is something that no one who isn't transmasc has experienced, but transandrophobia is the oppression specifically targeting transmascs. i and doberbutts have already pointed out how this works, so i don't feel the need to reiterate that.

you do not understand the concept of transandrophobia, and you regularly demonstrate that your understanding is surface-level and comes from people who have an interest in making it seem less credible. instead of asking people who theorize about anti-transmasculinity (including me and doberbutts!!!) you immediately become hostile and make many incorrect assumptions about our beliefs. i find this highly disrespectful and encourage you to stop getting all of your information about transandrophobia from people who misrepresent it to argue against the concept of anti-transmasculinity.

yes, abortion access is something that everyone who can get pregnant has to deal with, but trans men face unique discrimination wrt abortion access and access to reproductive healthcare that trans women do not. this is because there is a fundamental misogyny component to anti-transmasculinity that you and others who deny it because "it's transmisogynistic!!!" seem to have a failure to grasp. transandrophobia is transphobia, misogyny, homophobia, and the specific modifier of maleness on this oppression all at once. i wish there was a better word for how maleness adds to and modifies oppression in an intersectional way that wasn't associated with mras, but alas there is none that i am aware of. also: anti-transmasculinity never says or implies that trans women don't face some of the issues that trans men do! you are treating this like a pissing contest for who has it worse and that is an attitude i'll need you to drop.

denying transandrophobia is a sentiment that is directly hostile to transmasc survivors of sexual assault, abuse, hate crimes and other things that arise from living under a patriarchy that systemically excludes you from both the male and female classes. the reason why we use this rhetoric is because these types of things arise from the specific intersection that trans men face, and how that can further intersect with sexuality. you are simply making up what we believe on the spot and not actually listening. if you want to come off anon and have a conversation in dms, i'd be willing.

talking to people like you is frustrating because you make these claims about what transandrophobia theory is as if we're a monolith or a homogenous group instead of hundreds of trans men on tumblr dot com all contributing to a larger conversation. no matter how much you claim to be in good faith, you continue to disregard actual transandrophobia theory in favor of some bastardized version you got from someone with "white tme/tma" in their bio. i hope you take this criticism and reflect on how you may be wrong.

[euniexenoblade]

re: egg discourse

i thought it was just people saying that specifically making jokes about someone being trans but not knowing it yet can be kinda invalidating and sometimes traumatic. are people actually saying you should never tell someone that they might be trans?

i dont really have a side in the debate it just feels like people are willfully misunderstanding eachother and its making my brain hurt

"making jokes about someone being trans but not knowing it yet can be kinda invalidating and sometimes traumatic"

Sure, but it also isn't for a lot of people. And, a lot of people I talk to say egg jokes helped them realize who they were. Though I do think part of this resistance to an egg joke is actually internalized transphobia at points (the idea of being compared to trans people is being treated as degrading in a lot of these people's arguments) the truth of the matter is different people need and want different things. Me making eggs jokes with my friends is not your friend group.

This is why the recurring complaint of our side is it's never egg jokes can make people uncomfortable, 'make sure your friends are cool with them before just doing them,' it's always complaining about trans women forcing cis men to be women or trans women being "transvestigators" or "similar to Christian missionaries." People who are uncomfortable with egg jokes are always projecting their discomfort onto other people, other friend groups, and portray harmless fun between friends as something abusive.

Like for example,

this is a projection. the egg jokes people are talking about happen among friends and stuff, but this person is doing a whole "never make egg jokes because people did it about me and made me feel bad" (oh woe is you, people thought you might be transgender, how disgusting to be a tranny). The majority of egg jokes are not about random ass people, it's within friend groups. And, if you don't like your friends saying them, tell them to stop. If they don't? Then stop being their friends. Also from that post

The underwater filter butchered that. I know you can't read it but I wanted to post it cuz fucking look at that. What the hell. Anyways,

This opposition to egg joke people always talk about strangers. As if we're walking up to random people on the street and making egg jokes about them. It's mostly contained to friend groups. This is just an inaccurate portrayal of what's actually being discussed, and I'm sure the op will be like "I'm talking about my experience!" but OP openly admitted that this rant was relevant to a random blogger complaining about an egg tweet a woman made about her own friend group that neither this OP or that blogger are part of. They are actually dictating how strangers are allowed to act and identify with this, not the egg jokesters.

Yeah, once and a while you get shit like "Aaron Bushnell seems transfem" which was a completely innocuous convo that no one would have seen if well known transmisogynists who accuse random trans women of pedophilia like three times a year hadn't found the post. It was a trans woman seeing herself in someone important in history, and even if someone said something inappropriate, the backlash was undeserved. Yall say embarrassing shit all the time and no one's running you off the web site for it.

I'm sorry this person and others seem to have a bad time with egg jokes (though most of the time, what they describe isn't egg jokes but that's a whole other thing), but their few experiences can not be used to determine a blanket response to something so many people actually do enjoy and find useful. I'm especially not gonna take a cis person's opinions on egg jokes seriously (since so many have seemed to gotten involved and think their opinion on this matters).

"are people actually saying you should never tell someone that they might be trans?"

Yes! That's like, the entire underlying premise of this! Like, 100% this is the backbone of every anti-egg joke argument. That's the entire concept of "egg prime directive." And, it's overwhelmingly weaponized against trying to help transfems realize themselves sooner than they would. From the aforementioned Bushnell drama, to the polls where a shit ton of transmascs voted it was ok to tell an eggy friend they might be a trans man but NOT ok to tell an eggy friend they might be a trans woman, to the newest drama where chongoblog whined about a random trans woman on twitter making egg jokes about her friend (which it was later revealed chongoblog misrepresented the tweet), the anti egg joke committee / "You can't tell anyone they're trans!!!" crew are always wielding this ideology against transfems / trans women but practically never against transmascs.

This is why it's constantly said that these posts and arguments are transmisogynistic in nature. "I'm a trans woman and I say eggs jokes are bad, so it can't be transmisogynistic you're just using that as a shield!" That's great but 1) maybe read between the lines, or read the criticisms you're clearly ignoring and maybe you'll see these people don't respect you 2) the whole "using transmisogyny as a shield" is like, classic transmisogyny at this point. We've been hearing that from anti-feminists, cryptoterfs, and trans woman hating google doc writers for a few years now and 3) you being complicit doesn't mean we gotta care about what you say.

"it just feels like people are willfully misunderstanding eachother and its making my brain hurt"

Oh, I'm sure this is absolutely the case. The problem is a bunch of transphobes are really who spurred a lot of this drama up earlier this year and instead of people thinking "oh these people have bad intentions I shouldn't boost this" they instead were like "Yeah! I don't like egg jokes!" and now we have to deal with trans women making egg jokes (normal, harmless, pro-trans and literally want to help trans people) being compared to transvestigators (a literal anti-trans hate group thing). The issue is people aren't treating us as people, and thus it gets returned in kind.

What's the answer to this? Mutual understanding that "some people need to be told they're trans," "some people don't respond well to being told who they are," "egg jokes can help people and be a fun joke for friends," and "some people are uncomfortable with egg jokes" can all coexist. But, honestly, I don't think we'll ever get there.

[catboybiologist]

If there is no difference biologically between males and women, what is the point of hormone replacement therapy and top/bottom surgeries? Why don’t males get periods but women do? Why transition medically if there is no difference? Why don’t they have uteruses and periods?

I'm going to assume this isn't bait, and isn't from a terf (which it likely is but I'm giving the benefit of doubt), bc it still is a launching point for discussion. But the tldr is that this is a huge misrepresentation of my thinking, and the language of "males and women" makes me think that misrepresentation is intentional.

"no difference between male and female" is not what I was saying at all. It is somewhat subtle, but this is a crucially different point than I have maintained.

There are traits that we describe as male, and traits we describe as female. They are correlated with each other: eg, someone with a female reproductive system is more likely to have a female hormonal system.

However, using the words as categories that completely, unilaterally define the entire biology of each individual human is why the terms "biological women" and "biological man" don't make sense.

And yes, this applies to cis, perisex people as well! If you're a cis man, it's incredibly likely that you have a couple of traits that are "female", even though most of your traits are male. Vice versa for cis women. Even when people aren't categorically intersex, you still see cis women with body hair, occasional unknown male reproductive cells that can go completely unnoticed, and more! This isn't fringe cases or incidental happenings, this is the reality of human variation.

Every aspect of medical transition is essentially identifying a set of traits that a trans person possesses of their predominate natal sex, and making them the other sex. This is one reason why transition is also not "one size fits all"- not everyone needs to fully adjust every trait to be "male" or "female", whether it's bc some of their traits already are male or female, or bc you don't need all of your traits to be male or female overall.

The problem with saying "biological man" or "biological woman" is not that it acknowledges that male and female traits exist- its that they're overgeneralized categorizations that break down and become useless to address the biology and medical considerations of the individual. Even in genetics and lineage tracing, saying "male" and "female" holds an implicit, additional description that those individuals are reproductively female or male.

If you don't have a biology background, or are entrenched in gender binaries, I understand that this can seem like the same point as "men and women are biologically the same" but it's not. It's just precision in language, which is extremely important when we're specifically talking about medical care and science that centers around these exact concepts.

So to recap: saying that certain, specific aspects of someone's body are "male" or "female" is not biologically inaccurate. Generalizing this to sweeping, overly simplistic categories IS inaccurate.

And I'm about to fuck off to the mountains, so imma turn reblogs off on this post so shit doesn't get out of control while I have inconsistent or no internet access. But I def will explain more of this biology and language in the future.

[cuntess-carmilla]

Alright, let's try a thought exercise!

This thought exercise requires us to start by agreeing that women are an oppressed class (cis women, trans women, non-binary people who at least partially id as women or woman-adjacent).

If you can't concede that as a basis, then keep scrolling, this post isn't for you. I'm not here to convince MRAs that systemic misogyny – aka the patriarchy – is real. Alright? Alright.

I think we can all agree that, besides the institutional oppression faced by oppressed groups, they all also face acts of individualized concrete violence (which are then vindicated by institutions and/or sociocultural disinterest or even active acceptance).

You know, that thing we call hate crimes? Acts of violence committed against an individual by mere reason of an aspect of who they are which makes them oppressed and/or marginalized.

We discuss women as an oppressed class as well, but, save for specific feminist factions (largely, non-liberal feminists from the global south), no one really talks about misogynistic hate crimes.

Even though misogynistic men murder women and girls for no reason other than their own misogyny every day. There are exceptions, of course, but most of the time, when a man kills a woman it's not to steal from us, not as revenge for something shitty we did to them, not because we were in an altercation and it simply happened. No.

It's because "if I can't have her, then nobody can have her" (women as property), "she rejected me" (woman denied sex or romance to a man who wanted it), "she was trying to leave" (culmination of domestic violence), "she made me feel emasculated" (reaffirming masculinity through violence).

We're raped and otherwise sexually abused ALL the time as well, and our perpetrators are by far mostly cis men. I hope I don't have to go into detail on how that's related to misogyny.

Chile has pretty progressive femicide legislation as of somewhat recently. The legal definition of femicide went from being "male partner or ex-partner who murders his female partner or ex-partner" to "any killing of a woman for reason of her gender", which explicitly includes:

Women killed by men they were never involved with but who acted out of jealousy/possessivenes or as revenge because they were rejected.

Women being killed by men for being gender non-conforming.

Women being killed for being trans, lesbian or bisexual.

Women killed by men because they were sex workers.

(So, no, before the MRAs who kept reading get their panties in a twist, femicides in Chile are not defined as every single time a man kills any random woman. The motive for the murder has to be patriarchal bigotry in some form and that has to stand to scrutiny in court.)

If we accept that, like in the Chilean legislation of femicide, any act of violence committed by a man against a woman due to patriarchal bigotry is a misogynistic hate crime, shouldn't we be more alarmed with how astoundingly common and NORMALIZED hate crimes against women are?

How many women and girls do you know who have been sexually abused by a man or boy? How many which have been beaten? How many women do you know who have controlling and violent boyfriends or husbands or fathers or older brothers? How often do you hear about a woman who made it out alive by the skin of her teeth from the hands of a man who was absolutely going to kill her? And the ones that didn't make it? How about when misogyny intersects with race, disability, transness, gayness, socioeconomic class, religious minorities, and so on?

I firmly believe that the only reason we don't talk about these things as misogynistic hate crimes is because, despite being oppressed, women aren't a numerical minority. But, rather than that giving visibility to the violence we face, it invisibilizes it even more. It became society's normal to have approximately half of its population constantly subjected to hate crimes, to the point that there's whole TikTok trends dedicated to turning it into a joke (the "joke" where men pretend they're trying to suffocate their girlfriends with a pillow for being annoying) and until very recently it was perfectly ok for standup comedians to joke about it too. Precisely, because women are an oppressed class and violence against us is both socially sanctioned and encouraged, when it's hyper-visible, it becomes at best a fact of life that deserves no one's attention, and at worst it becomes a recurrent joke.

I, personally, believe that femicides and the largest portion of rapes suffered by women are misogynistic hate crimes, as are many other instances of violence women are used to now and that we deal with as a natural(ized) aspect of living as a woman. Which I know will get me called all sorts of names and slurs, but I can't see where my logic is failing.

[cosmic-vanity]

What a lot of people don't get is that "transmisandry" is actually also the intersection of transphobia and misogyny but in the specific way that it affects trans men. Because it's not the same way that it affects trans women.

I don't think anyone actually believes systemic misandry in modern human society is a real thing. And if they do, I'm certainly not one of them.

A lot of trans women experience misogyny, usually but not always in the way that every other woman does, in the form of Gender Essentialism. Of course, there are way more intricate ways that transmisogyny exists within, but as a person who isn't a trans woman I am not qualified to even try to explain them. I recommend you look up posts by transfems on the topic :) AND, t-women also suffer from radical feminist's extreme Bio-Essentialism, because despite the fact that they are not cisgendered men, the victimising narrative of every RadFem on the planet tells them that "every person who was assigned male at birth is evil and out to get me and my sisters, then kill us or worse."

Trans men experience misogyny in that the patriarchy views us as women regardless no matter what we identify as or how much we alter our bodies to look just like them, and therefore, they view us as weak due to their Bio-Essentialism. Because we are not cisgendered men. They're the ones on the top. Again, our intersection of identifying as male and being transgender is really really complicated but I am sure there are more people out there who are better qualified to explain it than I am. AND, along with the aforementioned Gender Essentialism that RadFems also love to perpetuate (get this, most TERFs just use repackaged misogyny with a "trans" label slapped on it so they can pretend to be woke about their hatred) and their and self-victimisation, makes them view t-men as "evil gender-traitor monsters who hate us and are secretly out to get us".

Trans women and trans men both experience G.E and B.E on a regular basis.

Trans women usually get misogyny, USUALLY BUT NOT ALWAYS in the form of G.E, from patriarchy and B.E from TERFs; while trans men get misogyny, USUALLY BUT NOT ALWAYS in the form of B.E, from the patriarchy and G.E from TERFs. Both suck ass. Both forms of essentialism and both forms of oppression are equally bad, and both need to go.

But we will never get to that point if transfems and transmascs on Tumblr keep targeting eachother with transmascs going "Wellllll ermmmmmm I experience more oppression than you because society views you as male" or transfems going "Ermmmm ackshually your label for your experiences is invalid because-"

Quit the infighting. We have to stand together if we ever want this to end.

[genderkoolaid]

i’ve been seeing that “nooo tboy mutual don’t reblog that transandrophobia post, there are so many other non-reactionary frameworks that you can use to understand your experiences” post go around (unfortunately from. a lot of my mutuals.)

and it’s really frustrating to me bc like. i would love to hear them!!! i would love to discuss different lenses of viewing the specific kind of oppression that transmascs face, i would love to learn about different perspectives!!

but so much of what’s out there either 1) doesn’t include us at all or 2) insists that our oppression isn’t anything more than transphobia, or that it’s just misdirected transmisogyny, or that it’s just transphobia and misogyny, but no discussion of how transphobia and misogyny interact to specifically impact transmascs. it just feels so disingenuous and dismissive because whenever we talk about our experiences, no matter what language we use, we’re shut down over and over and over again.

Godddd I saw that post the other day and could not help but roll my eyes. Saying there's "so many other frameworks" to use disregards a fundamental reason why this framework is being created in the first place: transmascs, across different ages and races and other variables, feeling silenced and absent in other models of society, even those claiming to be for trans-feminist. Like if you are trying to convince trans guys to not use the term transandrophobia maybe start by acknowledging the absence of proper frameworks to discuss the unique position of trans men & mascs. & you know damn well none of these people will acknowledge how every other iteration of "transandrophobia" ALSO got shut down for being Problematic™, including "isomisogyny" which was literally just misogyny with a prefix attached to assure cis women that we would never DARE to imply that transmascs might be oppressed by the same social force as them!

But that's the problem with people trying to make the discussion of anti transmasculinity palatable! They want to have a version of this discussion that isn't threatening at all to the deeply ingrained anti (trans)masculinity in queer spaces. Literally any criticism, no matter how lukewarm or carefully handled, is labeled "reactionary." After you get rid of everything that people hate about transandrophobia theory you are left with none of the things that make it valuable to transmascs + everyone else who benefits from this discussion.

[dalekofchaos]

Chloe Price is a lesbian

Every now and then I see people headcanon Chloe as Bi or pan. While that isn't bad, I just have to strongly disagree and I would just ignore people's opinions I disagree with. Then I see some disgusting people shipping Chloe with David, Nathan, Frank and Damon and....I just have to make this post.

Chloe Price is a lesbian. There is no evidence of her being interested in men. People can experiment and then realize they are gay and only interested in one specific gender. Just like Willow Rosenberg is a lesbian.

“But Joyce said Chloe had a boytoy phase and had condoms” Joyce is an idiot. Also, that really confirms that it was nothing ever really serious for Chloe. most lesbians dated/kissed/fucked guys before realizing they had no REAL attraction to guys or accepting that. Compulsory heterosexuality guys. If she really feels attraction to guys than yes she is bi but there is a possibility she was with guys because she didn’t realized she had no attraction to them or didn’t accept that.

As for condoms. Condoms aren’t used just on guy’s dicks, they can be used on sex toys to have safe sex with cis girls too (btw yes you can get stds by sharing sex toys in sex without using condoms or sharing the same condom while doing it). and also consider this: trans girls

Before you say Chloe said Jeffershit is “hot for a teacher” gay people can say someone of the opposite sex is attractive, that doesn’t make them Bi or straight. They can see beauty but know they aren’t really attracted, also she was just fucking with Max. You do realize Chloe was fucking with Max, right?

In the scene “boys are so gross”, calls her boy toy phase hella stupid and when max mentions that she couldn’t see Chloe with any of the boys there she says “that’s because you have a good eye” and that she was glad that Rachel had rescued her which to me sounds like a “I thought a had thing for boys and had boy toy phase (as she calls it) but then Rachel made me realize I actually like girls only”

There is literally enough evidence in BTS and LIS to deduce that Chloe Price is interested in girls only. 

in 2015 Ashly Burch said “I think Chloe is sexually fluid. I don’t think she really likes to label herself in any particular way” buuuuuuut

in 2018 in the farewell stream:

“When they read over their predictions Ashly said (in reference to the thing about them each being on their 2nd boyfriend) ‘clearly Chloe hadn’t realized some stuff yet’ lol” (as in she didn’t realized yet that she didn’t like boys and liked girls aka lesbian)

Then in LIS:TC Wavelengths. Chloe says this in Steph's flashback

"Check out all these booths pretending they give a shit about us for one month out of the year."

Vocal confirmation about Chloe's sexuality.

Also Chloe's concept art, you literally couldn't get a more queer answer if Ann Bony rose from the grave and slapped you with a pride flag

I blame DONTNOD/Deck 9 and Square Enix for not allowing Chloe to be more overtly forward with her queerness. To me, Chloe is a butch lesbian and Zak Garriss can go to hell with his "probably gay" bullshit.

Say it with me kids. Chloe Price is a lesbian.

[olderthannetfic]

Whenever someone tries to go on about how misogyny directed at trans men isn't really misogyny, I think about the time on a forum when someone treated me, a white man, to some extremely hateful and violent racism and misogyny in DMs.

A woman had made a post on the forum lamenting her lack of a romantic relationship and voicing her concern that no one would ever want to date her, and the thread was several pages of people giving her both advice and sympathy. Some guys chimed in to let her know that they'd love to date someone like her, and few got a little uncomfortably forward with that, but overall the thread was supportive and wholesome, until Asshole Bob showed up to rage about how terribe it was that people were.... treating her like a human???? It didnt make any sense, but it was extremely hateful troll garbage and the guy was banned within seconds. The thread carried on with the advice, support, and [attempts at] validating horniness, but Asshole Bob came back on another account and starting DMing everyone who had contributed to the thread. Mine was was racist rant where he called me the N-word, threatened me physically several times, and had some choice things to say about men who consider their partners' sexual needs in a relationship (which seems to be a trait he specifically associated with Black men). It was bad, folks. Talking with other forum members later, it seemed that most got the misogyny, but the racism was primarily directed at forum members who open about not being white. He also seemed to have directed fewer threats of physical violence towards memebers he knew were (or headcanond as) white. I was open about my gender on the forum, but had never said anything about my ethnicity, so my guess is he saw a lack of racial "tells" and decided that meant Black.

So what happened is this raging asshole randomly decided that some internet person was Black and let loose a firehose of horrific racism about it. I was targeted with antiblack racism, despite being white. The fact that this guy had guessed my skin color wrong didn't make him any less racist for threatening me because he headcanoned me as Black. His misogyny was also no less misogynistic because he was unleashing it at a man for the high crime of caring about women instead of at a women for being a woman.

Asshole Bob was racist and misogynistic, plain and simple. He was IP banned for (amongst other things) being racist in DMs, and what he said to me was just as much part of his ban as what he said to the forum members who actually were Black.

Bigotry is about who the bigot hates, not about how accurate they are when they pick targets.

So yes, trans men experience misogyny every time misogynists mistake them for women or deliberately misgender them. Reciving a detailed violent threat is only a little bit less upsetting because it's based on a violently hateful person's assumptions instead of your actual identity.

--

[inthestarsme]

Astro Notes pt. 7

These pictures are not mine! I have taken them from pinterest, the second one seems to be from "Rachel Home and Life" on Pinterest.

‼️Don't repost my Observations without consent and mentioning my page‼️

I very much respect non-binary or trans people. If i'm talking about man or woman, i'm talking about cis-men or woman i know, because often, due to societal coding/standards, there can be differences depending on the gender. But it could very much apply to you if you are non-binary or trans. Just take what resonates and leave what doesn't, as spiritual people like to say.🫶🏻

If you don't agree with my observations, please don't send any hate. They're only my personal observations that i'm posting just for fun. Especialy the specific ones can only apply to certain people. So don't take anything you read too seriously. It's not a science, just pop-astrology!😎

I'm back again! Hope y'all had a great start into the year and some beautiful or at least peaceful holidays. I'm not going to explain to much about my absence (i feel like me not posting regularely or as it works is just a thing now) and just jump right into it.

So, here we go! Ready.... Set..... Okay i'm kidding. But yes, let's go!

Moon in the 3rd house: I always need to talk to a friend about my feelings when i feel overwhelmed, sad, angry, etc. If i try dealing with it just in my head, it feels like a hurricane up there. Sometimes i like writing things down too, but i prefer talking it through and getting a second, reflective opinion and reaction. This kind of fits this placement, so maybe this could help you, if you haven't figured this out about yourself yet.

Chiron in the Solar Return-Chart: I feel like Chiron here shows you a wound that developes over the year, that you might only start seeing at the very end or in the next year.

Leo Risings: You guys really are these confident, radiant, extroverted, even loud types of people. Very social and outgoing. You "shine" and are quite populare. As i am an Aquarius rising (so my rising falls into their 7th house) i tend to attract these kinds of people (as friends and also partners/ love interests, but love interests more so sun in leo as the sun is the heart) even though you wouldn't think so because i tend to be more shy and reserved. But it really doesn't mean that is how you truly feel inside. It is one of the most prominent parts of your personality and how people know you, but you can still hold a lot of insecurities inside yourself. Also: blond hair tends to be typical for these people, also the darker blond shades. But it isn't a must, i've just noticed this. Maybe also just hair that "shines" or somehow stands out.

North Node in the 12th house: Learning how to deal with addictions and any kind of mental health problems, that could've or did get you into any kind of facility (prison, etc.) is a big and important part of your life and souls journey. You need to learn how to take care of your physical health and get a healthy routine and sorted out everyday life, so you can deal with your mental health problems, and not use drugs etc. as a way to deal with your every day life/ to run away from your everyday life/ to make your addiction, mental health struggles, etc. your everyday life and make it mess up your health. You may naturally have always been so focused on work, routines and everyday life, etc., that you always have tended to forget about your mental health and anything to do with that.

Jupiter in the 9th house: Things like religion, philosophy, higher (college) education and traveling can be a source of great happiness and success in your life. In which way really depends on other placements and if you are religious or not, etc.

Moon in the 9th house: You might really need religion or certain philosophical theories placed in your life to feel emptionaly secure and stable. They don't need to necessarily be a typical kind of religion or a academicaly accepted philosophy, but just something that exists inside yourself that fits into these categories.

Empty houses: I think a house being empty just means that in this life there isn't really a focus on this area in your life, or it tends to sort itself out naturaly through other areas in your life that are more in focus. As you have your ruling planet of the house sitting in another house and do not have anything putting more of an emphasis on this house, i think the energy of the house plays itself out through other areas in your life or are influenced by other areas. It still exists in your life, but it isn't in focuse just for itself (i know this isn't necessarily how this is interpreted in general, this is just how i see it).

Scorpio MC: I feel like, as Scorpio and Pluto have a lot to do with ego deaths, a lot of people tend to see me in a bad light and as problematic because i kind of go against their ego, because i trigger something in them they don't want to face and they are hiding with their ego. Also, I'm not necessairly the secretive type of person, but if i stay more secretive, people tend to be more interested and intrigued by me. I also get peoples attention if i present in a "shocking" way (as would many), but i like it honestly (my aquarius rising just loved being weird), and i feel like often people just silently watch me and even admire (or at least noone has ever complained or said anything negative).

I hope you enjoyed this one again. Please leave certain aspects you want me to get into in another post in the comments or just any kind of post you would like to see from me.

I wish you a wonderful year! Byee🫶🏻

[walrus150915]

Happy pride, Nimona fandom :3

I gotcha some sketches! Gotta place them in different parts of the post so that you read everything

It's not just drawings I got HEADCANONS for you too!

Off topic but I love Nimona's design SO MUCH it's so AMAZING TO DRAW AGHHH

So

⚧Nimona LGBTQ+ specific headcanons of mine🏳‍🌈

• I've made a conclusion that if queer flags exist in Nimona universe, as well as gay drag bars (so was confirmed in the artbook), then labels DO exist. As well as good old homophobia??? I suppose????

• Nimona doesn't have a specific label because she thinks they are sorta restrictive. Also she just doesn't need one lol, if somebody asked her about her gender she'd say "Nimona"

• She'd wear the heck out of a "protect trans kids" shirt she bought no she ain't feeding into the capitalist machine she stole it

• There was something between Nimona and Gloreth but Nimona can't exactly say what for sure. Not exactly romantic but not strictly platonic. Homegirl had that toxic doomed kindergarten yuri going on😭

• Nimona doesn't look for romantic relationships. She explains it as "romance is for sappy dumb-dumbs" but in reality she just doesn't want to date and romantically love somebody who'll. Eventually die and leave her all by herself again yk (oh this got angsty real fast)

• Maybe one day Ballister tried to help her find her label (because he still tries to put things in boxes) and she just waved it off

Speaking of Ballister

• My man is transgender. Do I even have to explain. Read one of those posts that explain his transness better LMAO

• He started his medical transition as a teenager and had to fit right in not to disrupt the Institute's function. If he's a man then he has to transition QUICKLY so that others don't notice

• Because of that he's a transmedicalist and probably an enbyphobe at the start of the movie, thinking only one type of valid transness exists, and it's the one that is very binary and restrictive

• At the end he realizes the wrong of his ways and works on the internalized transphobia

• He came to terms with his homosexuality a bit easier. "It's always been boys" yk the drill

A couple of words about his boy lol

• Ambrosius is a painfully cisgender gay man. I genuinely apologize to all Transbrosius believers but he gives off STRONG cis vibes can't have a character with this surname dickless

• He's a trans ally but his opinions on trans issues were like. Very closed-minded. He supported but didn't entirely understand. Of course it changed as he went through ✨character development✨

• He was fully supportive of Ballister on his trans journey. Reassured him when Ballister felt like he wasn't enough, tried to make his boyfriend as secure as possible, loving every part of him

There should be a bunch of rather suggestive headcanons but this isn't that type of post LOL

No but think about Ambrosius kissing down Ballister's body and across his chest scars. This is my ultimate dream as a trans man

• Ambrosius also rocks a "protect trans kids" shirt that's for SURE

• He came to terms with his queerness as a teenager and had a whole crisis about it. As a Goldenloin he had the expectations of ✨continuing Gloreth's bloodline✨ thrown at him back in childhood so he sorta internalized that. Then boom, my boy is g a y and oh how gay he is!

• Click here to read about my headcanons on goldenheart when they had only started falling in love :D

• Ambrosius made inoffensive jokes about Ballister's transness. Like yk those goofy puns like "baby you put men in MENstruation", "omg does this make your parents transparent". Ballister smiled at them and rolled his eyes but also silently appreciated his bf's support, although expressed so stupidly

• He also made sure Ballister took proper care of his body because you know Ballister would not bind safely, being a dumb teen

Anyway yeah gay people

Unpopular opinion but we as a fandom should start drawing Bal with a disability queer pride flag

Side characters headcanons, anyone? XD

• Diego came out as nonbinary after the events of the movie. He got that he/they swag going on

• Also Ballister was his queer awakening FIGHT ME ABOUT IT. He had the stupidest, most childish celebrity crush on Bal. Maybe Bal formed Diego's type in men fjfhhx I like to think Diego got a boyfriend whose attitude is similar to Bal's

• Remember those news anchors? (they are so underrated omg) Well Nate Knight has a husband and Alanzapam Davis is a bi queen🙏

• Speaking of queens. Valerin is a straight ally💪💪 I imagine her being quite iconic on the Kingdom's queer side of the internet. They call her "mother" and stuff aajjaj

• the Director is homophobic, need I say more? So is Todd but I actually imagine him being a type of guy to reject his queerness

Haha mailman *winks at yrrtyrrtwhenihrrthrrt*

• Todd had NO idea Ballister was trans. NONE

• The Kingdom has pride events!! Ambrosius and Ballister were very happy and excited to attend those as an official couple once they were out :}

• Nimona attended them every year, ofc she had to hide her true nature but it was fun for her to march along! And it was even more fun when everyone accepted her!!

Anyway yeah this was very fun to make!! Happy pride y'all, lmk what you think ;D