#That’s what people mean when they say “men are oppressed under the patriarchy” but the thing is if gender norms changed and

[ciderjacks]

Hey FYI killing or assaulting or raping a woman due to misogyny is a hate crime. It is as much of a hate crime as killing or assaulting or raping any other marginalized group due to bigotry and I’d appreciate if we stopped downplaying misogyny and misogynistic violence when literally every single woman I have met has at some point been a victim of misogynistic hate crime. No, men are not “also oppressed by the patriarchy”, if I see one more person make that claim I’m going to kill them. What the hell do you guys even think the patriarchy is. like. Ok. The patriarchy isn’t a gender norm system, that’s it’s own issue that tends to form under the patriarchy. The patriarchy is a system designed to serve men and oppress women, it’s designed so that men are able to obtain power but women aren’t. That’s literally all it is.

[needle-thread-thimble-spear]

I think that comparing the TERF and TMRA movements on this website often misses something important. While these two ideologies are both centered in reactionary transmisogyny, the underlying goal is quite different. Trans exclusive radical feminism is an ideology of extermination, ultimately, or failing that elimination. When TERFs take control of some institution or community, their express goal is always to cast the transfeminine out (be that through "official" means such as firing someone under false pretenses or unofficial means such as harassing someone until they leave). In contrast, TMR activists as a rule seem quite interested in having transfems around. Trans Mens Rights Activism, while it may appear to be just a reactionary discomfort with the idea of possibly having power over someone else, is very much centered on exploiting transfems.

It is not so very unusual, I think, to experience some discomfort when you realize that other people may be afraid or uncomfortable around you because you have some social power over them. Most people do not like to think of themselves as exploiters, taskmasters, or bigots. Its easy to slip into a defensive stance when a trans woman says something like "i dont feel safe around men" or even "i dont feel safe around trans men". But once one gets over that initial defensiveness, and looks at the other persons position, why she might feel that way, usually one can get over that reaction. However, if one stands to gain from the exploitation of trans women, its not nearly so easy! If your transfem friend is always the one to clean up after hanging out, if you're using your trans girlfriend for sex and validation without any concern for her, if you are so extremely enamored with the transgressive potential of transfemininity that you feel compelled to keep a trophy or two around as tokens, all of a sudden you are confronted not just with the idea you might have power, but that you might want power. And very few people conciously want to be a chaser or a tokenizer or an abuser!* So it must be that the transfem made a mistake and you should explain to her why that is. Maybe you should remind her that trans men and trans women should be having crazy t4t sex actually (nevermind if shes a lesbian, or that this is corrective sexual harrasment). Perhaps she is delusional and these problems are entirely in her hysterical head, or maybe she is in fact a bigot, and so can be safely ignored/harassed/discarded. The stubborn transfem who wont back down remains disposable, and is at risk of being run out of town- but this is just a means to an end. The true goal is to keep the other transfems in line. Submissive, but not so much she loses that transgressive edge. Obediant, but not cloying. Not too clocky but she shouldnt be trying too hard to pass either. Follows each and every order but in a way that makes you completely unaware that you are, in fact, giving her orders. Or maybe she isn't even there, but the idea she could be is very important. Patriarchy, reproduced in the places it supposedly cannot exist.

These movements bleed into one another sometimes but i think this distinction is important because the way it impacts transfem people is distinct. It should also be noted that this process of exploitation (just like the process of elimination) does not in any way require some Official Ideological Movement. These are just natural courses for transmisogyny to take based on whether one can stomach their own discomforts with us.

*This pattern reproduces itself along other axes of oppression- what's outlined here may be particular to tranmisogyny, but similar patterns certainly occur with racism and ableism to name a few.

[velvetvexations]

"Women do traditionally feminine stuff because they are afraid of the men in their lives." Hilarious, because for me growing up all of the worst misogyny I faced was at the hands of other women, usually family and friends, and whenever I caved into the pressure to do feminine things I didn't want to it was specifically because I was seeking the approval of other women. None of the men in my life have ever forced femininity on me the way the cis women have. The people who made fun of me for dressing "badly" and not shaving and spread rumors I was secretly a boy were all girls. I kept trying to get into makeup, not because I wanted boys to think I was cute(all the guys who've shown interest in me have actually liked me just fine the way I am), but because I wanted the women around me to see me as one of them and I never felt like I was.

Even when women aren't pressuring me to do girly things I still feel the pressure because I'm the only woman I know who doesn't and it makes me feel like a freak. I don't care what the men around me think, a guy getting weird about my not shaving or wearing makeup would be instantly disqualified from my dating pool without a second thought, being raised a feminist very quickly inoculated me against giving a shit what men think, but the women? My whole life I have been trying so hard to be one of them and it's still hard work to ignore the annoying internalized patriarchal cisheteronormative bullshit in my head making me think I need to be more like them and less like me. And I genuinely don't know if there will ever come a day when I can hang out in a group of women and not feel like an imposter just waiting to be discovered and killed.

And I know that my experiences aren't universal any more than the person who originally said that's are, but like. It's just wild to me that trans people especially will chalk all of the pressure to conform to gender roles up to shitty men and completely ignore how heavily the patriarchy incentivizes women to not only violently police each other's femininity but also destroy ourselves seeking the approval of the very women who are violently policing our femininity.

EXACTLY.

I love cis women who our allies with all my heart and soul, but we need to stop being desperate for their approval. The cis women who DO care about us would be the first to admit they as a category need to do a lot better, so why do we pussyfoot around them being just as horrible to us as cis men can be?

With trans women it feels like we're just trying to link arms under the exact same oppressive patriarchy because it feels like that's what being a woman is, haha yeah, men hate us, I mean they hate us in different ways and you hate us too but what matters above all else is that we're the exact same thing right? Oh, sorry, like seventy percent of you don't believe that and are violently disgusted by the thought of coming anywhere near me? But I also fear men!

And trans men...

"Women are soooo scared of me, yeah you better cover your drink around trans men too, I mean not that I would do anything personally, but I could, because I'm a man, and that means I could oppress and hurt you, theoretically!"

Listen, bro, most cis women aren't scared of you, they're laughing at you, and frankly so am I, not because it's impossible for a trans man to be a person who's intimidating, but because you're so needy for validation that you've developed a patriarchy fetish you can't turn off.

None of this is to say we should ignore the crimes of cis men or that cis women aren't also another marginalized class, and again, I love cis women who're trans allies, they're amazing, wonderful people and I would never want to leave them behind or seem ungrateful.

[aishabellasbigblogofeverything]

Everytime I see one of those “oh don’t say you hate all men because that includes x minority men so you’re being a bigot!” genres of posts I feel like slamming my face or someone else’s face into the nearest wall. Like do you not realize the difference between being bigoted against a certain minority group and women having a justified rational logical hatred towards the gender/group that as a whole oppresses and mistreats us and sees us as less than??? Like it’s like if someone said that poc aren’t allowed to say that they hate white people because white gay people exist and therefore you’re being homophobic against white gay people. Like shut the fuck up, dumbass. This is clearly just a tactic to silence women for speaking out against misogyny in a way that doesn’t coddle or center men’s feelings like…if you can’t tell the difference between a woman saying that she hates men as a whole and bigotry towards a specific group of marginalized men then you’re a fucking disgraceful idiot and a misogynist lemme be the first one to tell you, don’t even pretend to be a feminist or anti-terf if you think a woman saying she hates men is saying that all men are bad or that she hates minority men in particular. Like

These two posts are the exact fucking same despite being written by two separate people. It’s like you can’t even conceive of the existence of marginalized WOMEN because your view of oppression starts and ends with men and “misandry is real you guys i swear 🥺” like do you think all the women who hate men are white cishet able-bodied perisex thin women and no one else lol do Black women brown women trans women lesbian/bisexual women fat women intersex women disabled women etc. even cross your damn mind? Are you completely fucking ignorant to the fact that all men have male privilege and are capable of using it against women and being misogynistic even if they don’t all have equal access to it/don’t hold systemic power against all groups of women or do you think that somehow only the most privileged echelons of white men can ever do anything wrong or sexist ever? “When you say all men you mean ALL men” yes I do, so? What’s your point? You gonna stop talking now or what? Like it or not there is no marginalized identity that shields a man from male privilege/misogyny or him being able to be called out for it lol there just isn’t and if you try to pretend that it is or that some men are above criticism(like how some people used to say that gay men can’t be misogynistic because they’re not sexually attracted to women) then you’re ignoring the women in those communities who are also oppressed not just by society at large but by the men in those communities who hold systemic institutional and social power over them. ALL men have hating women in common! Read that sentence again!!! Hating men as an oppressive class(which, let’s face it, is what they are) because the majority of them DO hurt or act sexist towards women in some way shape or form is not the same as hating men for their marginalized status because I can guarantee you that women with those marginalized statuses have it WAY way worse and hate men as well and are the vast majority of the people making these complaints about men to begin with, lol, so shut your damn mouths if you don’t have anything important or valuable to say.

They just hate to hear women talking about hating men because it upsets their fragile feelings so they look for any excuse to tell us that we’re the bad guys actually and dress it up under progressive thought when really they’re just the patriarchy’s asskissers, because before long they’re gonna start saying that you’re not allowed to hate white cishet men who are the most privileged in society. It’s just “not all men” in diverse dressing:

Like it never even occurs to these idiots that the women making these statements are also trans or poc or whatever other group and may very well have experienced misogyny and oppression from these groups and now they’re calling us “bioessentialist” and terfs for it as if we say we hate men because we think that they’re innately evil when really we KNOW they aren’t biologically hardwired to be that way! But the vast majority of them ARE that way because they choose to be, because of the social benefits they get from treating women as lesser, them being oppressed too doesn’t change that lol. These people don’t actually care about trans men or Black men or disabled men or queer men or whatever men they just want to pretend men as a whole are a victimized oppressed class just because some girl wrote “I hate men I wish they’d all kill themselves” in a Tumblr post once and they somehow think that’s the same as getting your rights violently stripped away but they want to look “progressive” about their Mra ideology so here you go. If you say you hate men then you’re a terf and gender essentialist! ‘Nuff said! I am very smart! 🤓

And one more thing, like…nobody who makes “I think all men should die” posts is like 100% serious about it lol. Like we all know that men aren’t going to all drop down dead because posts like these are being made lol. If they did then it would’ve happened a long time ago, and not just on Tumblr but on other social media sites too. These posts ultimately do nothing and have no power to hurt any man anywhere whatsoever. You’re all just angsting over literally fucking nothing. NOTHING, my darlings! Women are ALLOWED to vent about their anger they feel at the patriarchy because of what MEN(and it IS men) put them through without someone trying to make them feel guilty with some sort of gotcha to prove to them that they were secretly a hateful bigot all this time. Like I’m sorry if these posts offend you…grow up, maybe? Breathe some fresh air? Touch some grass? Interact with friends and family off the ‘net? You’ll realize pretty quickly how little some angry tumblr posts about how all men should be swept up in a storm cloud actually matter and effect people in the real world. Maybe instead of defending men and policing the way women complain about their oppression because it’s not nice enough for you you could instead work on combatting misogyny(you know, an actual real world problem??? 🙃🙃🙃) and making the women around you feel safe and treat them as equals so that they don’t feel annoyed at men enough to the point of complaining about how horrible men are to them. These posts aren’t made just for funsies they’re an actual legit response to the hostility men unleash upon women in every section of our lives every single goddamn day and I’ve had enough with a lot of you bitches trying to find any excuse to silence women when we talk about these things. Just scroll away or block us if it bothers you so much. It is so so free to do and takes very little effort, far less effort than actually getting up from your computer and taking a good long stretch which is what some of you fuckers actually need. That’s it I’m done here. Gonna go drink some water and eat a cookie.

[walks-the-ages]

let's play a game.

Biological Essentialism/Determinism can be summed up as, in the most simplified way, "what you are born as intrinsically determines your behavior and destiny".

"Gender Essentialism" uses the exact same framework but with a thin veneer of "trans inclusivity" slapped on top, to say that while your biology does not determine who you are, your gender identity does. Even before you realize you are trans or come out of the closet.

Under the framework of "Gender Essentialism" you're viewed as being X gender and somehow getting all of those 'benefits' from society even before you realize or come out as X gender.

So, some examples:

W is a member of a sentient Fantasy Race who is created to be Ontologically Evil. W being born into this Fantasy Race means that W is destined to be Evil and cruel no matter what and W and the rest of W's race will never ever be able to change their Evil ways.

X is assigned Female at birth. X is expected to be subservient, loyal to a single husband, and want to have children. X is expected to want these things from an early age and can and will be ostracized if X expressed any disinterest in these things or opposite behavior to the things expected of X's gender. (not wanting kids, not being interested in men, etc)

Y is assigned Male at birth. Y is expected to be fierce, strong, and to father many strong sons. Y is expected to want these things from an early age and can and will be ostracized if Y expresses any disinterest in these things or opposite behavior to the things expected of Y's gender. (being physically weak, not minding having daughters instead of sons, not being interested in women, etc)

Z is born into a strict caste system, and is born in the lowest caste. Z is expected to spend Z's whole life serving those 'better' than Z without recompense or complaint, with *no* possible avenue to advance in society due to the caste system.

This is inspired both by the wave of trans inclusive radical feminists who say that

"because trans men are of course men, that means they are inherently evil and oppressive and part of the patriarchy that seeks to tear trans women down."

and also because I've seen too many fantasy and scifi series way too comfortable with making Ontologically Evil Species and strictly enforced Caste Systems where everything is fine and dandy and everyone's happy with their lot in life as long as the ones with a caste system are the

"Beautiful, Pure and Good Elves, because as we all know, Happy Slaves aren't really Slaves, right? And if the Ruler has the Divine Right of Kings and all the little people think that's good, that makes it good, right?" (sarcasm).

If you've ever considering giving your fantasy or scifi race as 'caste' system that determins who does what based on their lineage or their body type and its apparently 'good and natural and everyone loves being their caste and wouldn't have it any other way'

....have you considered that Caste Systems have always been used as tools of oppression and discrimination and this is something real people face, and that we should not be writing "good caste systems" from the comfort of Western Society and perhaps consider the harm in romanticing these very real frameworks of systemic oppression?

Anyways, both in literature and real life:

do you agree that Biological Essentialism, Biological Determinism, and yes, "Trans-Inslusive Gender Essentialism" are ever correct and a good framework for viewing other people?

Or do you agree that this is an absolutely bullshit way to view individuals and that all it does is uphold systems of oppression, especially when it comes to queer people, people of color, disabled people, intersex people and more?

anyways just gonna leave you with this gif.

[ID: a gif from Pokemon the Movie 2000, showing Mew and Mewtwo floating over a battlefield, with Mewtwo having the realization "I see now that the circumstances of one's birth are irrelevant. It is what you do with the gift of life that determines who you are." End ID]

[babsaros]

hey. when cis society is oppressing a trans man, what he is experiencing is. In Fact. misogyny. i'm sorry i know none of us like to be reminded of our agab, and it hurts whenever people perceive you as the wrong gender. but a cis person hate-criming, assaulting, verbally abusing, etc, a trans man is not doing "transandrophobia" because they do not perceive him as a man.

they perceive him as a woman failing at her gender, as a woman who has been seduced and lied to and manipulated because women are so easily led astray, just like it says in the bible. they perceive him as a woman who has been mutilated. they perceive him as a dyke that needs to be fixed. if they are hate-criming him because they *do* perceive him as a man, because he passes well enough they aren't thinking he could be trans, then they're doing so out of homophobia, perceiving him as a gay man, a pervert, a sissy, a danger to children. OR, they are being transphobic but specifically because they think he might be transfeminine instead. when cis society oppresses a trans woman, they are able to do it on multiple levels at once. She's a woman failing at her gender, a dyke that needs to be fixed. Or she's an evil and grotesque crossdressing pervert, a rude caricature, a danger to polite society. she will never be doing enough to escape oppression entirely, no matter if she gets every surgery she can and wears makeup every day and passes perfectly, because she lives under a patriarchy, and she's a woman, so she lives in a panopticon, and HAVING to get surgery and wear make-up to be respected IS oppression, especially if the alternative is being hate-crimed.

trans women (and trans men who pass) are not experiencing "transandrophobia" when a 'queer women and nbs" event turns them away at the door for being too masculine. they are. IN FACT!! experiencing the byproducts of misogyny in a patriarchy!!! where the terfs and coward cis women running those events and occupying those spaces have been taught (sometimes through experience, sometimes by men, sometimes by women) throughout life that men = stronger and more dangerous than women ALWAYS. That they need to protect themselves at all times and always be vigilant. That men and women can't be friends without sexual tension (and so as queer women the mere existence of what they perceive as a "man" is a threat). That women need a separate sports league because they can't possibly compete with someone who has even a little bit "extra" (an unquantifiable amount actually because there isn't a standard range) testosterone. That women should cook and men should fix cars. i promise you, i promise i promise i promise. it's misogyny. like!!! you don't say cis gay men experiences "androphobia", bc that's not a thing!! you sound like fucking mens rights activists guys please! you don't say a black man experiences "misandrynoir"!! because living in a patriarchy fundamentally means men do not experience oppression based on their gender. its not happening. shut the fuck up. stop walking us back to 2014 can we please take a step forward and stop bitching about this. there are genuine issues in the world and i'm frankly sick of people who should be smarter than that needing to be gently hand-held through this fucking explanation for the millionth time and still stomping their feet.

[nothorses]

this isn't @ anyone or any particular post, but. I do find myself questioning whether it's useful to distinguish "anti-masculism" from like... misogyny and patriarchy.

maybe it's just me, but narrowing the definition of "misogyny" to just describe contempt for women, specifically, has never felt super accurate to me; the overall system of oppression being described here isn't just about a dislike of women, it's a functioning system (patriarchy) relying on, and as a product of, systemitized misogyny. It's misogyny in a dominant role of power.

And that system (as it currently exists) also requires that gender roles are strictly followed and fulfilled, including by men. It requires no deviance; no queerness and no transness. It requires that women be babymakers and caretakers and sexual gratifiers, and it requires that men be protectors and dominant breadwinners, and seek out sex. (Among other things)

I think it's helpful to expand our understanding of misogyny to include the aspects of it that necessarily impact men; it's not just the toxic masculinity that hurts others, but the system that rewards and punishes conformity to misogynistic gender roles.

"Anti-masculism" feels like it's trying to describe an aspect of this; the way this system views masculinity as brutal and violent and monstrous, especially in relation to men of color, and as a corrupting force- particularly when in contact with (whoever patriarchy views as) women.

And these things exist, and happen, but (obv) so does a mirrored phenomena for femininity; are we calling that "misogyny", to the exclusion of attitudes toward masculinity? Because I don't think it's accurate- and tbh I think it's actively counterproductive- to define that by gendered expression rather than perceived gender.

I honestly think it does more to say that these are all a part of misogyny, and to identify contempt for certain expressions of masculinity as being inherently, necessarily intertwined with other parts of misogyny. Patriarchy relies on all of these things to function, and we need to get folks to understand that challenging these attitudes toward masculinity is, in fact, a crucial part of the fight against patriarchy.

I don't think it works to say "misogyny" is an umbrella term that enconpasses all of this, and that "anti-masculism" just falls under it, either; just practically speaking, I don't think it's helpful to differentiate this particular thing as separate from similar attitudes toward femininity. It's super easy to separate the word from that context (esp without a counterpart for femininity), and while I hate having to factor in optics, I do think there's a parallel here to "transmisandry" in the possible interpretation of the word to mean that men are oppressed/misogyny doesn't exist. Even if we know that's not the intent.

And I don't think it accounts for differences between how either of these manifest for cis vs. trans people, gender-conforming vs. GNC people, straight vs. queer people, white people vs. people of color, etc.; how and why it shows up is gonna be wildly different based on whether you're being presumed more masculine or feminine because of your race, size, or disability status, or whether you're being punished for not conforming to gender expectations one way or another- which will also look different for trans people who present more in line with what's expected of their AGAB vs. their actual gender.

Also- I'm saying this here because I'm open to discussion. I feel like I've read enough about it by this point to have an opinion, but I could absolutely be lacking some crucial info, insight, or perspective, and I want folks to engage with this as a mutual conversation.

[goodgirlsdoithisway]

The danger of friends and family.

Coming into my place as a woman has been difficult. I've been a feminist most of my life, believing I need to be free and do as I please. I surrounded myself with like-minded people, and kept pushing on even though I was suffering. These people had me convinced that I was unhappy because women have been "oppressed" by the patriarchy, and I just needed to rise above.

Here's the problem with this train of thought. Not everyone is capable or has the correct tools to survive alone in this world. Some people need structure and guidance to live. Most women fall into this category. Sure, we can do it, but it's incredibly hard, incredibly stressful, and it's a lifelong investment to work hard instead of smart.

Then, I looked into tradwife material. I started looking at how happy these women were. Sure, you occasionally see the sad ones living this life, but they are just full of resistance, like I was. These women made life look fun. What girl doesn't want to have a life where they don't have to worry about money, or politics, or drama? No internal struggles, just the calm acceptance of giving yourself to something bigger. A man.

My friends and family all called me out on this, saying I'm being red pilled. I told them I'm still committed to diversity and I love everybody, and I know I have the option to chase whatever dream I want, and that this was my dream. Not a single one believed in me. A few stopped talking to me altogether. I mean, I'm fucking trans for fucks sake. It's not like accepting my place under men means I'm all of a sudden A Trump supporter. No thank you, although I do hope to see some things revolving around women to pass, either way. We shouldn't be allowed to vote, hold jobs, or go anywhere without a man. Hell, Afghanistan just passed a law where no woman is allowed to speak in public, or to another woman at all. This would be great. No more toxicity spreading like wildfire, hurting our true place.

It's crazy how, when you go against the grain, you get demonized. It took its toll. I started thinking it was just a stupid fantasy I was grabbing onto because I wasn't working hard enough to make my life mine.

Then, with those few friends gone now, I started to realize I was feeling great in those moments I was embodying serving men. And without those extra comments, I was starting to be able to ignore the others saying those things. And as I cut more people off, I felt so much better. I felt deep inside that this was the right path. I knew that serving men was what I was created to do. It was like a certainty.

So I started reading more about it, embodying it, envisioning it. I set those feminist views aside and really devoted myself...I'm never going back.

Friends are toxic to a trad relationship. Family are toxic to a trad relationship. Even other trad wives can be turned, and in turn, turn you. Feminism is powerful because it promises unattainable visions of freedom. Friends and family can exacerbate that and poison your mind. When you devote yourself to this lifestyle, which I believe all women should, the adjustment is rough because there's so much propaganda out there, manipulating you into giving up the biggest, best, most fulfilling life a woman can have, a life of dedicated servitude.

It would be perfect to have a man who lives off grid with no electricity, no phone, no outside communication. To be taken by him, to his home, never allowed to leave or have visitors so that I may focus solely on Him would be the perfect life. Imagine forgetting people exist outside of Him. The only person you'll ever see again is the one you serve. No jealous friends to try to take you away or poison your mind. No family to pretend they know what's best for you. No. Only Him.

[skele-doll]

At its very core, communism cannot be trans inclusive. Communism wants to dismantle sex stereotypes and embrace reality while also dismantling capitalism and helping to bring equality. However, the trans ideology supports sex stereotypes and profits off of making the vulnerable hurt even more than they already do. Let me explain; gender dysphoria is a product of the patriarchy, it tells women they need to look a certain way in order to date men and be accepted into society. They pump insecurity into little girls heads and sell them products that promise to fix that insecurity which creates unethical profit. But what happens when women and girls grow tired of having to go to surgical extents to be "womanly"? What happens when they realize that this idea of "woman" was created by a man? They try to opt out of it by of course 'becoming' a man because feminism is said to make you "bitter", "masculine", "evil", and they see the way feminists get treated for being feminist. When you identify as trans, you immediately get told that you will feel as horrible as you already do forever if you don't get the surgeries and go on to take testosterone to also look the part. Those who dont get the surgeries and dress it constantly get 'misgendered' and treated like a normal woman which further fucks with their mood. What they dont tell you is to seek out therapy. Why? Because the surgeries, pills, topicals, shots, new wardrobe and binders, makeup to look like a man, voice training, and treatments for the side effects all cost hella money and spending hella money makes the rich get richer. you could argue; "but anon! under communism wont the people take up making those things themselves?" and i'd say yes, but not everything human made is a good thing. just because you can make it doesn't mean you should as that wont get rid of its impact and history within capitalism. "reclaiming" it wont take back the health complications and dead de-trans people, it wont erase the fact that gender affirming surgeries were an invention by a Nazi and transness is built on oppressive stereotypes either.

[kittyit]

This is a long and loaded ask so feel free to delete but it's completely earnest

I've been a radfem for about 3-4 years now (radfemhagen but I got termed) and honestly I still struggle w genuine dysphoria. All the reading, critical thinking, talking w detrans women is definitely eye opening and helped me but it hasn't healed me of my ~gender feels~ if you know what I mean. I remember trying to get tips from other blogs but all I remember was something about doing physical labor with other women or just being around other women but that isn't helping either, I'm so disgusted by my female body and how I'm seen (especially by men and especially as a lesbian) and it's just getting worse. I've been thinking about going on a low dose of T even but I know there's other options to coping, like there HAS to be SOMETHING. I can't just will it out anymore.

Help a gyn out

this and it's probably better saved for an essay but i felt moved to respond to you straight up. i'm going to explain three really important parts of my journey to a place where i almost never experience the intense and life-disrupting distress around my sex (diagnosed as dysphoria) except in times of extreme stress, and even then it's fleeting.

one essential thing i did was stop thinking of transition as an option for myself. this is something i see a lot of detrans/desisted women struggle with. i think this is a mental trap. "if i don't feel better in x amount of time or when i do x, i'll transition" removes the urgency and necessary nature of working through the distress around your sex. i've written in a few pieces about when my girlfriend max asked me to not do it 3 days before my first t shot, it genuinely felt like the last light in a dark harbor going out. i felt utterly hopeless. i felt like my last solution had been taken from me and i would never feel better.

i came to my decision to never pursue transitional medicine first through listening from my girlfriend and other detrans women. to take seriously the pain & trauma detrans women go through. to listen when they said this did not help me, this was not help, it did not fix these feelings of distress. to listen to detrans women is to understand that transitional medicine is an unethical practice being done by unethical practitioners. it's also to understand that this solution is not what it's presented as. taking these women's experiences and analysis seriously meant ruling it out as a coping mechanism for myself, ever. but there are so many reasons to make the decision not to participate in transition medicine - political & practical. not giving money to surgeons who traffic in literal female flesh. not wanting to risk all of the under-studied, ignored negative long-term health effects. not wanting to signal to the women around you that there is no way to survive as a woman like you without transitional medicine. defiance of new patriarchal expectations for women like you. defiance of the pressures that tell you that this is the thing that will make you feel better - like makeup, like labiaplasty, like breast implants, like an elective double mastectomy. defiance in general.

so the first thing was to stop thinking of transitioning as an option. i said no. the second thing was to stop thinking of my distress as dysphoria. to un-diagnose myself with this word that means i need to take T and get a mastectomy and undergo phalloplasty to have a chance of ever being happy. you mention disgust for your body, you mention disgust for how you're seen by men and as a lesbian. disgust for yourself on these points is anger at patriarchy, lesbian-hating society & men turned inward on yourself instead of the people who deserve it. it's an impulse of someone dealing with oppression to blame one's self for it and think there are things we can do to escape it. it's no different than a woman trapped in domestic violence obsessing over what she could have done differently to not set him off this time - the right dinner, place setting, clothing & tone. the idea that woman- and lesbian-hating can be escaped as easily as transitional medicine claims it can is simply not true. the experiece of a woman who passes as a man is another exerperience of womanhood, still under the bell jar of misogyny.

what helped me with these feelings of distress was pinpointing exactly where they came from and what they meant. i know this isn't helpful for everyone. but it's almost like going deeper and deeper on the feeling make it more and more clear what needed to be addressed. here's one spiral to the center: i want to chop off my tits → why? → i hate my breasts → why? → they feel ugly and disgusting → why? → i got them so young, they're so large and people stare → why does that bother you? → i feel so ugly and out of place → why does that bother you? → i feel so alone and worthless → how do you feel? → i feel lonely → what do you need? → i need connection.

"i want to chop off my tits" is not a coherent feeling - every human alive has complex reasons for the things they say, think and do. if you can get to the bottom of where these sensations and feelings and disturbances diangosed as dysphoria are coming from, you can figure out how to address them. what is the feeling at the bottom, what is going unaddressed? and quite honestly a lot of the time it's not an easy answer. sometimes the answers are super hard to grapple with. sometimes the need cannot be fulfilled or are very difficult to fulfill. but once you've decided that transition is not on the table, the quest to find those answers becomes a lot more essential.

this isn't something anyone is really meant to do alone. when i hear you say you hate being seen as a lesbian and how men treat you, i hear an inherent isolation in that. i could be wrong, i know a lot of people can still feel lonely when they have a strong support system, but i would say the majority of women do not have the kind of friend group and number of connections they need to be socially supported. so another big part of this is breaking out of isolation and being around other women who "get it" - whether virutally or in real life. humans are a pack animal and this is an isolating age.

so that's my three parter to your question

1. say no to transitional medicine

2. undiagnose yourself with dysphoria and instead figure out why you're feeling what you're feeling

3. seek out friendship, community, and ways of thought that can help you address those feelings

[redditreceipts]

This is actually a TIM explaining why it's legitimate to be anti-feminist because feminism has done nothing for TIMs/trans and has even been hostile towards them

https://www.tumblr.com/havenofcybele/744684220115566592/some-thoughts-on-feminism-from-a-trans-perspective?source=share

well feminism has given half of the trans population human rights, the right to vote, and legal recognition as a person lol. (of course you wouldn't bother to think about trans men, because you're a male and all you care about is yourself, but well)

it has admittedly not done anything done for trans women, because feminism is for women and trans women are not women lmao

yah, interesting thing to think about, right? That the people who stand in for women's rights continue to do so, even when those women don't identify as women anymore.

Also, the question is so stupid. Like, even if I thought that trans women are women, asking what feminists have done for trans people is like asking what anti-racist activists have done for disabled people. And when they struggle to find an answer, I then as a disabled person tell them that I won't be participating in anti-racist struggles anymore because they don't focus on ME (the most important person in the world)

also, I think it's kinda smart for those "trans feminists" (like Julia Serano) to act as if trans activism and feminism were compatible. you can of course come out and tell the world that you dislike feminism as a trans woman, because feminism is about protecting women and you as a man feel neglected, but it will really not help your cause in the public opinion lmao

I mean he's kinda right in his assessment though. Feminism is a movement to liberate women, and his bullshit ideology is not compatible with that. Feminism will always be about women, and as a man who wants to retain his privileges, being an anti-feminist is a logical conclusion. If you live in a patriarchy long enough, your privileges will appear to you as "rights", and taking away your privilege to define women as a man will seem to you as oppression. I guess it will be harder to convince your ftm brothers, because they actually know what it's like to live as a woman under patriarchy, but well, you're just proving the femininists' point by your post. Men as a class primarily care about retaining their privilege to oppress women, and this guy accurately recognised that and wants to stand in for men's rights instead. I guess normal people would have empathy for the struggle of a marginalised people that they're not a part of and not throw a tantrum when these people's emancipation means making themselves uncomfortable, but what do you expect of people socialised as male? this kind of rhetoric is like a plantation owner who lets their palm oil get picked by people in the global south and pays them $0.10 per hour, and then he turns around and says "What has the anti-imperialist movement ever done for plantation owners??? why should i support them when they want to take away my rights to exploit people?" like yeah, of course you shouldn't support them if all you care about is your own gain. but the people getting angry with you for not supporting a movement for the liberation of a marginalised people you are not a part of expect you to have the tiniest shred of empathy and not only care about yourself, but that's apparently too much asked of a man lol

[gwenllian-in-the-abbey]

"Yet you toil still in service to men. Your father, your husband, and your son. You desire not to be free but to make a window in the wall of your prison."

Episodes 9

What's your opinion on the speech?

Rhaenys' speech here is a bit silly. What woman doesn't "toil in service to men" in this world? Medieval women were not even allowed to own property or sign contracts. Part of this show's problem is that some of the writers seem to be under the impression that Westeros is undergoing a feminist movement and Alicent is "team patriarchy" while Rhaenyra is "team feminism," as if Rhaenyra's own "right" to rule doesn't derive specifically from a man, her father, granting her that right, as if that same man couldn't snatch it from her on a whim. She has to toil in service to her own father, and even if she becomes queen, she will find herself surrounded by and beholden to men who will very quickly remove their support if she does not dance to their tune, and in fact we see this in the Dance, where Rhaenyra has terrible advisors but she's not really able to remove them because she can't risk them going over to the other side. And when she does attempt to assert herself against them, this is precisely what they do.

I think many people don't understand that the idea of women as an oppressed group, with solidarity across class lines, religious lines, and ethnic lines, that is, intersectional feminism, is extremely modern. Rhaenys cannot separate herself from her class interests, she lacks even the most basic framework necessary to do so. She might see her sex as a prison, but her greater allegiance would be to the Targaryen royalty that she was born into. Breaking free from the prison of patriarchy would mean also being metaphorically exiled from her own royal privilege. When it came to the council of 101, Rhaenys did not risk alienating herself from her grandfather the king in order to assert her right to the throne, instead she put forward her son Laenor as an alternative. In her marriage with Lord Corlys, she deferred to him rather than risk her status as Lady of Driftmark. Rhaenys did not pit herself against the might of the patriarchy because it would mean pitting herself against the might of the monarchy itself.

This isn't a criticism of Rhaenys. She only did what most women in her position would have done. She did not have what Rhaenyra had, the mandate of a king who had thrown the might of the monarchy behind her cause, declaring her an exception. Viserys did not sign a decree asserting absolute primogeniture because he could not pit the monarchy against the patriarchy when the monarchy itself relied on the patriarchy to uphold it. And in our world, knowing that monarchy and patriarchy waled hand in hand, many medieval/early modern queens regnant very much avoided overly associating themselves with womenhood, instead leaning into the rhetoric that they were female in body, but male in spirit. They believed that as exceptional women, they might claim a sort of honorary male status. Think of Elizabeth I's speech to the troops at Tilbury as they prepared to face the Spanish Armada, when she said:

"I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a king of England too..."

Notice how she concedes the point about her "weak and feeble" woman's body? She then goes on to say that she has the heart and stomach not of a man, but of a king, aligning herself not only with manhood, but with royalty, which is the source of her exceptional status. And this is echoed in the idea of Rhaenyra seeing herself as an exception, when Lord Corlys reminds her that if she allows women to inherit the seats of Stokeworth and Rosby, she may lose the support of lords who took her side. They were siding not with a woman because they believed in smashing the patriarchy, but rather they were siding with monarchy, believing Rhaenyra had the mandate of the old king. However that mandate could be revoked if Rhaenyra were to turn against the patriarchy and attempt to divorce it from the monarchy.

So the ironic thing is, Rhaenyra is doing very nearly the same thing Rhaenys is accusing Alicent of doing, except if womanhood is a prison, then perhaps rather than building a window in the prison, Rhaenyra has secured parole for good behavior. She could be put back into the prison at any time and is keenly aware of that. The prison of patriarchy, after all, still exists within the walled confines of feudal monarchy, and neither Rhaenys nor Rhaenyra are attempting to climb those walls.

[emaistome]

Alicent and her "liberation"

I wholeheartedly believe that to tell a feminist story, you have to at least tell a story that make sense, this is unfortunately not what Ryan Condal and his team did with Alicent Hightower, in season two of HOTD.

I kept defending them and their choices, until that last scene of season two, and although it breaks my heart that Alicent “sacrificed” Aegon, I have to admit that the things she said around it bother me a bit more.

Before anything, I want to point out that the patriarchy is not some fable, some story that they tell women to make them be submissive; it’s a setting that affects the lives of every living woman in the world (both the real world and asoif). It restricts the freedom of women, and put their very lives at stakes all the time. It manifests itself everywhere, so much that it’s easy to make people believe that “It’s just the order of things”. Sure, women can try to fight against these rules, like Rhaenyra (to a certain extent) who did not care about the prejudice against women and their sexuality, and vied for the throne despite having bastards. Or like Rhaenys, Visenya and Alyssane who despite all of their faults, did try to make the lives of women in the seven kingdoms better.

Alicent did believe that men were more fit to rule, while she thought that women were supposed to “guide them gently”. Although she believed that Rhaenyra should sit the Iron Throne, and she also tried to be named regent, so it’s inconsistent, but I digress. However, I don’t blame her for that. Alicent did not make these rules; these rules existed long before she was born, and that’s what she has been taught since she was a child. Alicent suffered a lot from them. In fact all her life, all she did was trying to make a better life for herself and her children under these rules. For the entire season one, Alicent was shown as the person who suffered more from gendered oppression in the show. Her reasoning for taking the throne was valid her actions were understandable and motivated by self preservation. If they Rhaenyra took it, she would need to kill all of Alicent’s children.

Somehow, season two episode height, had her apologizing for all the actions she made out of self-preservation. And you can smell that some 21st century writer was the mind behind her reasoning, but I’ll say more on that later.

Multiple people in charge of the show, talked about Alicent needing to be humbled. Why does she need to be humbled and apologize for her sins? While a man like Viserys, who cut his wife to take a child out of her and raped Alicent is glorified. They had her recite all the misogynistic criticism the general audience had against her, and apologize for it.

Alicent tried to be the perfect friend for Rhaenyra, more than she should have. For some reason people still find ways to blame her. She was groomed since she was 14 by Viserys and Otto; she is blamed for that, as if she had any agency in the situation.

Alicent should betray her family, disobey her father to protect Rhaenyra, do the opposite of what she was told since she was a child. And it would still not mean anything because neither her, nor Rhaenyra have power in the situation.

She was raped by Viserys as a 15/16 years old girl, again it must be her fault as a 15 years old girl, and she manipulated poor old Viserys who had no idea that he was grooming a young girl. And they always use the argument that it was fine at the time. The discourse around it resembles the discourse around Lolita when it was first published more than 50 years ago, and people still haven’t moved from blaming young girls for the actions of the men around them.

If they have a little bit of conscience, they will tell you that they feel bad for Alicent when she was a child, but not for the adult she became. But the adult is the direct result of the abuse that she suffered when she was a child. And again she fears that her children could be killed, a valid fear. Why would I blame her for doing what she could to save her family? Apparently Ryan Condal and Sara Heiss, think that she should apologize for that. “I lost my way; or rather it was taken away from me.” Implies that she realizes that getting married and having babies was never what she wanted, but something that was forced on her. But in the same scene (just like in the entire season), she praises Viserys even thought he was the main person who took her agency away from her. And I understand that victims can cope by idealizing their abusers, but viserys did not abuse only her, he abused her and her children, and clearly didn’t value her sacrifices. I think it came to that point where she didn’t even need a “liberation arc” to realize that, yet she still praises him.

Let’s talk about her plans to run away. This is where the writing started to feel the most like a 21st century pseudo-feminist was in charge of this writing and was more attached to the idea of Alicent being free, instead of real freedom. Alicent planned to runaway with her daughter and her granddaughter to “breathe the open air, and finally be free”, but she doesn’t plan any money? It’s as if they were trying to make her sound dumb because Aegon and Larys were also planning to runaway but somehow they knew they had money somewhere. But Alicent? Nothing. I’m actually not nitpicking. The patriarchy actively refuses to grant women power or money, so that they could stay bound to the men around them, to their family. And she doesn’t have any skill to survive when she “wanders in the wilderness” she was raised a highborn lady in a castle life in the wilderness, without any family to protect her would kill her and her autistic daughter and granddaughter. Women usually stay in abusive environments not only because they were brainwashed, but also because they feared that the world outside might be less kinder to them. It takes a minimum of logic to understand that the patriarchy can’t be kinder to a lowborn unknown woman than Alicent who sat in the royal small council, where only her and Rhaenyra sat as women in the seven kingdoms. She is still top two, of the most privileged women in Westeros, running away would not make her situation better.

We have a a history of women actually running away from Westeros and not being free from the patriarchy. Saerra was sold to a brothel, Jorah’s wife was some man’s concubine and Daenerys, had all her money being stolen and was sold as a child bride to Khal Drogo.

There is not a single way to make that scene work, it’s not feminist, as it realizes nothing but making one of the most intelligent characters appear very dumb. And I’d rather have Alicent be misogynistic and intelligent than having her be liberated and dumb. Women in real life can be misogynistic and perpetuate the system that made them suffer because that the only way they can survive. But also how can I blame her for her own oppression, how can I ask her to apologize for her actions as a victim.

[nekropsii]

i think theres a really big issue in the community specifically surrounding the people who headcanon dave as some sort of trans where both sides of the coin seem to hate each other? like both sides are at fault here, ive seen blogs demeaning people who like transmasc dave and then like you said other people just completely disregarding transfem dave. guys. can we stop. let people headcanon what they want without blatantly attacking them, this goes for all parties in this issue. i dont get why people act like this. the fuck happened to all trans people being equal and then we get both transmisoginy and harassment of people liking either of the trans headcanons?

jesus man. im tired of it

Respectfully, I do not think this is a “Both Sides” situation.

The concept of transmasc Dave is objectively one of the most popular headcanons in the Homestuck fandom, and it has been for years. I think I can excuse people who headcanon transfem Dave for “hating it”, because as I have been trying to fucking say this entire time, people keep correcting me on my own posts about transfem Dave on my own blog, and belittling me for thinking this way. And since I’ve asked people to maybe interrogate why they feel the need to correct me and patronize me and to stop fucking doing that, I’ve been getting inundated with people trying to mansplain and traumadump to me how me saying to not correct me and patronize me for having a transfem headcanon is oppressing them and that trans men also have it bad, as if I literally ever insinuated that they do not have it tough.

You do not get to “Both Sides” me on a discussion about my experience when I have never - and I mean NEVER - received this level of heat for headcanoning a character as literally anything else. I have NEVER gotten “corrected” for headcanoning a character as gay, or transmasculine, or black, or a lesbian - only now, when I headcanon a character as a trans woman, am I getting people correcting me, condescending me, telling me some really fucking personal traumas to explain to me I’m “in the wrong” for being upset about the correction and condescension, very obviously making assumptions about my sex, gender, and what I’ve been through in my life, making negative assumptions about my intelligence, and putting a fuck ton of words in my mouth.

I am speaking from my own experience here. I am sorry if that hurts anyone’s feelings, but that much cannot be taken from me. From my experience, this is not “Both Sides”, this is very clearly one side with far greater numbers giving another flack for not assimilating, and when that other side tries to say what’s going on, they’re treated as an aggressor, and treated like a petulant idiot child.

Before anyone puts any more words in my god damn mouth:

I literally never said no one could HC Dave as transmasculine, or that they were wrong for thinking that way. I have outright said the opposite, that it is fine and that I do not care. HOWEVER, I sure as hell am experiencing people telling me that I am wrong for HCing her as a woman.

I literally never, and I mean NEVER, said or insinuated that trans men do not suffer, especially under the patriarchy. I am not an idiot, I know how the patriarchy works, it hurts literally everyone that doesn’t conform to an incredibly, incredibly narrow white non-queer cishetero male ideal. I am also not an idiot, I know that transphobia will exist no matter what you identify as, and it will suck absolute horseshit. Neither “side” has it “easy”, every type of transphobia has an uncomfortably, terrifyingly high body count. I never fucking said trans men do not have it hard. Stop putting those words in my mouth.

Literally all I said was that it’s fucking weird that I’ve never been treated this way until I headcanoned a character as a trans woman, and maybe to interrogate that because people sure seem comfortable acting this way, and that-

This is Transmisogyny.

And if there’s anything else I’ve learned from this, it’s that-

HIT DOGS HOLLER.

[daenerysstormreborn]

Also something that drives me fucking wild is seeing people refer to Dany and Arya’s roles as patriarchal or wish-fulfillment for men. Just yesterday I saw the phrase “patriarchal power fantasy” used. I need everyone to sit down and think about what “patriarchy” means.

For the purpose of this post, and any other post I make, please know that when I say “masculine” I am referring to stereotypes associated with the male sex and when I say “feminine” I am referring to stereotypes associated with the female sex. Masculine =/= male and feminine =/= female.

Patriarchy does not refer to masculinity. It does not mean that masculine people are in power (I wouldn’t go as far as to call Dany or Arya masculine, but bear with me). Patriarchy refers to systems where MEN are the sex caste in power. Men. Not masculine people. Under a patriarchal system, women are oppressed regardless of whether or not they conform to femininity, although the less a woman conforms, the more she is punished for it. Dany and Arya’s arcs are inherently ANTI patriarchal on the simple basis that they are female and they defy what is expected of women in Westeros. They can never represent male power fantasies because they are not men. Referring to their arcs as male power fantasies is telling on yourself. You are revealing that your view of women and what we want and fantasize about is narrow. Why would you assume that only men would desire to travel across the sea and learn the ways of a secret society of assassins? Why would you assume that only men would want to wield the power of dragons and amass loyal supporters?

You are part of the problem by assuming that the desire for power is a male trait. Yes, we stereotypically associate that with men. That stereotype, and what we consider masculine and feminine as a whole, almost exclusively exist to uphold the patriarchy. Women are expected to be peaceful pacifists, complacent, quiet, because that keeps us under the boot of the male caste. Consider why so many “strong” female characters are less feminine. Is it because people feel the need to make them more like men in order to be “strong?” I say no. At least, not most of the time. If this is what you think, you’ve got the order mixed up. Skirts, dresses, and heels are impractical for fighting and limit movement a lot. Thus, it wouldn’t make sense for a competent female fighter to be wearing them. These things have been forced upon women BECAUSE they are impractical. A woman who keeps her hair short and wears no makeup and wears pants and no heels is not trying to emulate men. She is shedding femininity because femininity is impractical and time consuming. Consider WHY so many traits associated with power, leadership, and combat are considered masculine. It’s the enforcement of the patriarchy. Female characters who chase down these things and embody these qualities and do not conform to femininity are not basically men. They are women who are rejecting the system. This is antithetical to the patriarchy and to male power fantasies.

In summary: a female character who has an arc typically associated with male characters can never be a male power fantasy BECAUSE she is female.

Obligatory note that women who do conform are not lesser and their stories are not less important—they just do not challenge the patriarchy.

[doberbutts]

Vent/rant but I hate it when people go "well transandrophobia is just a word for misogyny that trans men experience (because trans men are female so it's misogyny!1!1!), it doesn't mean that androphobia exists"

Because, it does, men are also oppressed under the patriarchy and that carries over to trans men as well, and the intersection of this is trans men not being seen as "real men" (transphobia), men being seen as inherently bad/predatory (androphobia)

Honestly I think a significant amount of the problem is that trans men begin to transition having internalized the concept of men being treated better and having privilege, experience what it's like to be treated as a man, and go "hey uh. This also sucks." Especially trans men who are under multiple marginalizations- race, ability status, religion...

I've said it before many times but it bears repeating: almost all of the trans guys I know will acknowledge they have "listened to more at work" privilege and "not catcalled" privilege. But they also begin being affected by things that didn't affect them as much when they were read as women, and that makes it so the grass doesn't feel many shades greener on the other side.

I noticed a distinct change in the way coworkers and strangers and especially police began treating me as I pass more and more frequently with less and less effort. I'm passing like 90% of the time at this point and I can tell you it is an incredibly noticeable difference. I'm not saying it was safe to exist as a black GNC woman. I *am* saying that existing as a black man is also pretty unsafe.