#also if any trans women feel similarly about transfem

[stunfiskz]

dae dislike using the word “transmasc” when talking about their gender/when other people refer to you as it? like to me whenever i hear it it feels kind of like… dancing around actually calling me a man.

[officialspec]

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

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

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

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

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

- [ ]

first off i hate this ask and i think youre a freak. in any other world i wouldve blocked you for this but unfortunately for both of us i actually like this type of philosophy. dont send this shit to anyone else though

i dont think its right to compare human sexuality to the same thing in animals, to get that out of the way. im sure until a certain point it comes from the same biological impulses, but human beings have way more complicated social structures and reasons for coupling that just do not exist in other animals. our social behaviours are what make us unique in the animal kingdom and that definitely extends to gender and sexuality. so theres that

people love to tout 'gender is a social construct' around like its a criticism in and of itself, which i think betrays a misunderstanding about social constructs in general. theyre the foundations we build language on to better understand each other, and affected by a whole host of cultural and historical factors. just because theyre subjective and complicated doesnt mean they arent real. in terms of the effect they have on peoples lives they may be the most real thing that exists

for example, 'kindness' is a social construct. the definition and ways it is enacted differ greatly across personal and cultural lines. but no one would ever suggest a world where kindness doesnt exist or loses meaning, because its an essential part of the way we interact with each other (in the same way i dont really see a world where gender entirely ceases to exist, mainly just one where people have more fun with it. im not a psychic though so who knows)

similarly, sexuality in humans is another social construct. i think the driving biological forces behind it are very real, but the labels people attach to those impulses are subjective attempts to express their inner world to the people around them if that makes sense. and those same biological impulses are ALSO subject to social ideas of gender, because those ideas are established at birth and reinforced over a persons entire lifetime

to use myself as an example, im a gay trans man. ive identified as other things in the past, because i was trying to pick apart feelings i had and express them to others in an attempt to find community. my identity might change as i get older and experience new things, or it might not. i identify as gay because im not attracted to the social concept of women, and someone i would otherwise be attracted to might lose all appeal after i find out they fall under that concept (this has happened before w transfems pre and post coming out lol)

of course, the real REAL answer to this is that trying to give queer identities rigid and objective definitions is a fools errand, and also lame as fuck. someone might identify as gay and be more attracted to general masculinity than men as a social category, maybe they fool around with a couple of butch women without considering themself any less gay. two otherwise identical people might be a butch lesbian and a gay trans man without either of those identities coming into conflict. they might even be the same person at different times of the week

the labels people choose to use are communication tools, not objective signifiers. if you dont understand them, they probably arent talking to you

social constructs are everything. we as humans have the unique ability to interpret our own messy desires and impulses into words that other people can use to form an idea of someone else in their mind. its how we build connections, and of course it isnt perfect because trying to squeeze someones entire personal history and the centuries of context that defined it into a handful of syllables is going to leave some room for error. but its all we have, yknow? so we keep trying. and i think thats much more human than any imposed objective 'truth' could ever be

tldr we live in a society dipshit. get with it

[genderqueerdykes]

So im transmasc and the word I like best to describe my gender and sexuality is boydyke. but sometimes feel like I don’t deserve to use it because the labels lesbian, sapphic, and even butch don’t really feel like they fit me. Especially butch, like my gender is mostly Masc, but I present and express myself in a kind of more feminine way. I want most people who look at me to see that I’m a guy, but I still feel such a strong connection to lesbian culture in a way that I feel like people won’t understand. I’m kind of scared to be myself, especially around other queer people

im here to say it's okay to let go of that fear because there are so many other people just like you

i get a lot of asks from people who identify in ways very similarly to you. the thing about the slur dyke is it affects transmascs who arent lesbians, sapphic, etc. it affects trans men who aren't lesbians, transmascs, non binary people, gnc people, genderfluid people, and many others who are not lesbians. dyke also heavily affects transfems and trans women who aren't lesbians too. its targeted against a lot of people. it really heavily affects transmascs & men and transfemmes & women

you're not in the wrong for using that term! boydyke is a very popular label that a lot of people use, transmascs especially! you're right at home where you belong. you don't have to feel afraid to step on anyone's toes, you've got plenty of family right nearby. there's a reason you found the term boydyke, and it's not only because it's a good one, but it's a popular one. a lot of queer people identify as dykes for a variety of reasons. if that word fits you, if that's the community and the history that you like and feel you belong to, you don't have to be afraid.

good luck, if you need any help feel free to send another ask! you're on the right track

[velvetvexations]

I keep seeing transradfems say that "tme" trans people have the "privilege" of being seen as female-aligned over them because "they have access to women's spaces which are denied to trans women". And I'm like In What World is having to misgender yourself and erase your transness a privilege? Also anyone whom perisex cisgender feminine women view as "too manly" is excluded from those spaces, regardless of agab. Many "theyfabs/cuntboys" don't get any access to those spaces just like trans women who don't pass, butch transfems etc. Sometimes trans women who pass and are stealth do in fact get access whereas a masc nonbinary person is excluded. That particular claim is literally denial of "tme" people's lived reality. And I also hate how some people use tme/tma for nonbinary people when they actually mean "theyfab" and "theymab". Get a fucking grip

That really pisses me off because like. This is something that's already stuck in my brain and regardless I don't want to discuss it beyond this response, but I'm often reminded of the trans man who was attacked after being told to use the women's bathroom.

Like, you can say that's because he was misidentified as a trans woman - so fucking what? Who cares? What difference does it make? He was a man forced to misgender himself because his masculinity was seen as invalid and then his existence as a masculine person invited hostility. Similarly, look at the passing transmasc high school wrestler who was forced to wrestle with girls and got headlines with him holding a cis girl in a headlock. It's the exact same situation.

These people may have assumed those two were AMAB, but hey, guess what, they don't see trans women as women! They hate trans women because they think we're men and they hated those trans men because they are men.

I'm putting this in the tag because I feel it could be useful, though I want to reiterate I don't want to talk about these incidents more. You didn't trigger me or anything anon, I'm perfectly fine, this is just the limit with which I can engage grave incidents of IRL oppression.

[pokegyns]

Reclaiming “TIRF”

now i won’t say i personally call myself a tirf, and i absolutely respect the choice of any radfems who refuse to call themselves tirfs because that sounds like radfeminism centers trans people, i believe transmascs deserve to feel safe & respected within feminist spaces, as radfeminism (despite being heavily misrepresented) does have a tendency to mistreat transmascs & dismiss their struggles, as well as pretend dysphoria isn’t real/cannot ever be neurological. gender critical transmascs & their allies should have the right to reclaim the term tirf, similarly to how radfems who aren’t actual transphobes but have been called terfs have the right to reclaim the term terf. true nuancefems, who can be critical of gender whilst still not being discriminatory to trans people.

i understand that a lot of radfems who aren’t close-minded on trans topics call themselves terfs in an ironic way, to mock tras when they start with the harassment. but we also have to keep in mind that there has been a slow, but rising trend of conservative women co-opting our terms. they are downright right-wing & bigoted. they often tend to also target intersex women, detrans women, black & brown women– and generally everyone who they can call a “dirty male invading (white) women’s spaces”. their ideology is built on vulgar materialism, eurocentrism & white supremacy. they support transvestigating, and they want to achieve their goals of “total female protection” through invasive measures such as inspection of genitals. we shouldn’t jump to say “this never happens”– it does. mainstream tras often protect horrible people within their community, fearing that even simple criticism of “their own” will destroy their reputation, when it would actually improve it. they refuse to outcast those people, while outcasting others who merely disagree with them on an ideological level. this proves their corrupt immaturity & inability to conversate with understanding & nuance. we shouldn’t be like them. we need to outcast the genuinely hateful people, and show that they have no place in our community. they aren’t our allies. while i don’t believe that women can systemically harm trans women (i do, however, believe they can systemically harm trans men, though in a very very limited way, but the focus should be directed at cis men & not at them when talking about antitransmasculinity), women can definitely be hateful & still perpetuate & uphold bigotry & discrimination. these people also often use ableist slurs & call disabled people sensitive when they call them out, as well as using fetishistic slurs against trans people, especially against transfems. they often use conservative talking points & portray trans people in a weird & derogatory manner, mocking surgeries & bodies.

on the other hand, there are a lot of women who aren’t intersexist, racist, or otherwise bigoted– but they still tend to be close-minded on trans issues. they are often 100% anti-transition under every circumstance. i don’t believe ostracizing & outcasting them would be productive, as they often are detrans women who empathize with dysphoric people, but because the affirming-model harmed them, they harbor a lot of pent-up anger & express it in an extremist way. we should be conversating with them & exchanging opinions, but we still should be very careful not to harm the trans people in our own community & we shouldn’t force one-on-one conversation if the trans people in our community feel uncomfortable with that. i myself used to call myself a terf, but i feel quite uncomfortable with that, being trans myself– although i’ve been called one on multiple occasions. nowadays, simple things such as acknowledging biology & sexuality are considered terfy, it’s laughable.

i felt aversion to the term “tirf” for a little while, as there has been a recent boom of liberal feminists realizing that militant feminists are starting to mock them, so they started co-opting feminist branches. some of them call themselves intersectional feminists, although intersectional feminism is not its’ own school of theory. others call themselves marxist feminists without reading any theory, as they believe it’s simply the trans-inclusive alternative to radfeminism. some of them are starting to call themselves radfems, but they are always extra careful to preface that they are trans-inclusive. of course, libfems don’t give a damn about dysphoric people– they just weaponize our pain & scream “choice!” at everything they encounter. they are simply afraid of being mocked by feminists. there is, however, a portion of tirfs who are generally just afraid of being judged by tras. i do not think they can be considered real radfems (even if they express otherwise radfem views; anti-porn, anti-sw, anti-beauty industry, etc.), as radfeminism is inherently gender abolitionist, but we need to be welcoming to them, as they are usually nicefems whose fears should be understood. a lot of us were once in their position. being mean to them is counterproductive, we should let them go through their own journey of peaking.

i still personally feel levels of aversion to the term tirf, but if more actual nuanced radfems start using the term, maybe it will boom into some unexpected rising branch of nuanced radfeminism. radfems who, despite not actually being transphobic, can feel free to call themselves “terfs” in a mocking sense, as i believe it’s harmless. we shouldn’t mimic mainstream tra behavior & lock ourselves up in another echo-chamber, except this time instead of it being a tra echo-chamber it would be a magical tirf echo-chamber or whatever. shouting “op is a terf!” would just bring about unnecessary alienation. it would just remind me once again of the times i felt pressured to repress my beliefs & add a “terfs dni!” disclaimer every time before making a slightly-more-than-mainstream feminist point. but we should still be careful of making the trans people within our own community feel safe, and not letting actual genuine transphobes (so, not gender criticals & gender abolitionists & homosexuals, geez, i mean the actual hateful transphobes) in our spaces. i feel the term “terf” is not a good enough descriptor anyway, since the people who co-opt our terms to make bad faith (often conservative) points are not only discriminatory against trans people, but also people of color, intersex people, disabled people, detrans people & often also gay people. we can call out hate & bad faith points without alienating ourselves from our community, and we can outcast horrible people within our community without using meaningless terms to throw at them, the very same terms that are used against us 24/7 anyway as well.

– mod zoroark

[powerpuff2003]

Continuing the critique of online white transfem culture. Many trans women, especially trans women of color, have this critique.

The reason people talk about the "nazi white trans girl" isn't necessarily transmisogyny. For some god damn reason 4chan holds a huge place in online trans culture and that's what irks people out. Obviously any white queer person can be racist and often are racist but for some reason its specifically white transfems with this subculture. Racism is too often tolerated by white queer people but extreme alt right behavior usually is not, which 4chan culture is associated with. It's not singling out white trans women's racism, it's pointing out the obvious.

This isn't my trying to misgender white trans women (I am one myself, after all), but do you guys not question why that WW2 strategy game is part of "online trans culture"? Which country do you think they choose to play with? I have a guess lol. Sorry but I never see this behavior from cis queer women.

I don't see white cis queer women online posting pics with Wehrmacht uniforms nor do I see them making memes about the Fourteen Words nor do I see their pages filled with Pepe the frog. Either I'm uninformed about cis queer women and enlighten me or don't call it transmisogynistic when people call this weird behavior of online white trans women out. I have to say this phenomenon is largely online and I haven't heard white trans women behaving similarly irl, but someone has to explain what the hell is going on here.

My guess is that pre-transition trans women pick up these behaviors from cis het white male peers (because some trans women are gender conforming pre-transition, whereas I was feminine and had mostly female friends) and then just never realize these behaviors are problematic or drop them later on.

These are the kinds of behaviors and fandoms I see active in the r/196 and r/traaaa subcultures which is why I am not at all sad about them being shut down.

Another thing that I've also noticed, is that this specific subculture also seems creepily fixated on these lolicon-esque characters i.e. Felix/Ferris, Astolfo, Bridget. Particularly the "trap" aesthetic aka what a cis chaser thinks a trans woman is. Not to make any accusations but I do get the vague feeling that at least SOME of these people are former chasers who transitioned. I don't want to misgender anybody but this specific subculture undeniably does have a cis man's idea of trans women ingrained into them and its harmful. The fact that anyone thinks these characters are GOOD representation and aesthetics for trans people shows how low the bar is, honestly. These characters being trans is often played for shock value (especially Ferris), these characters are the animated equivalent of Jerry Springer trans woman scenes.

Again I don't wanna be an asshole but its just.....I expect fellow trans women to be better than this. I think its totally valid that me and many of the other trans women I know are deeply uncomfortable with this subculture and want no part of it.

Edited at 11:30 PM 6/14/2023 to be written in my own words as my friend didn't want her tweets shown.

[the-one-eyed-seer]

I also have mixed feelings about the term “trans-feminized”, and I think it’s the same thing I don’t like about TMA/TME, where people have this idea that because our oppressors dehumanize us and remove our agency, we have to dehumanize people and remove their agency in these conversations and we just don’t. It does, however, serve as a very straightforward way of describing said issue though. I say this because TME isn’t a beingness, it’s a thing that happens to you, except not even because it’s a thing that doesn’t. Similarly, transfeminized is closer to a beingness, but is still being done to you rather than being.

For people who like the term “trans-femininized”, I guess that’s neat, but I don’t like the idea of just labeling people trans-feminized as a prerequisite to entering the conversation any more than I like the idea of TMA/TME being prerequisites. What’s actually happening here is there’s a distrust in the entire trans community, across the board, towards the rest of the community, across the board. (Trans women not trusting trans men, trans men not trusting trans women, neither trusting nonbinary people and/or claiming them as part of them wether they like it or not), and it can’t be addressed by continuing to add prerequisites. That is a path which branches off indefinitely.

The utility these terms serve are identifying the amount of experience you have with the topic at best, and designating yourself as ingroup/outgroup at worst. The thing about that though is there’s already enough tools to do that. Like I can just tell you “I’m transfem and this is a thing I experience a lot” or “oh yeah I’m a trans man but I present extremely fem and I relate extremely heavily to what you just said”. And then we can talk about why that is and why there might be subtle differences between them. We may miss nuances of people’s experiences by making this prerequisite because they’ll be less inclined to say anything that deviates from a popular understanding of what that is/means.

I think the heart of it is that right now, the community is using these terms as a proxy for actually having those conversations instead of just.. having them. What we actually need is to trust our community members, believe them about their life experiences, and believe that, wether it’s a little or a lot of experience in a given thing, it matters and it can help us understand a bigger picture. (And also to not force people to give their agab or assume a standard set of body parts and experiences associated with it, which I thought was basic trans rights stuff but here we are)

If you’re looking for language to discuss those targeted by transmisogyny without the use of the transmisogyny-affected/transmisogyny-exempt binary, trans feminist Jules Gill-Peterson’s “A Short History of Trans Misogyny” may be of use to you. In it, she describes many groups who have been targeted by transmisogyny whether they considered themselves transfem or not, like “street queens,” “faeries,” Indian hijras, and two-spirit individuals from Native American tribes. She refers to these people as “trans-feminized.” I find this a very useful term.

Groups like women of color, intersex people, and men who regularly express femininity often but not always get trans-feminized. I think it’s fair that they and other folks with unique relationships with transmisogyny should have access to that language if it lines up with their experiences. That doesn’t mean they have to personally identify as trans-feminized if it isn’t a constant experience for them, but I feel like saying “I’m not transfem, but I am treated in a trans-feminized way by transmisogynists” is an appropriate thing to say in conversations about transmisogyny. Trans women and transfems who are constantly trans-feminized can still identify that way if they want to, and even have an acronym like tfz if they feel the need. And someone who doesn’t have those experiences can consider themselves non trans-feminized like I am. Just a perspective to consider.

[transmisogyny-explained]

Hey, i'm transmasc and i've been trying to educate myself on transmisogynism for just a week so i don't know a lot, sorry if some things i ask are evident. Hm about your last reblog, i've got questions about the word "femboy", i went through your carrd and what you already posted about that, as well as other sources but i still don't get it fully. Outside of tumblr nothing states anything about it being transmis but then i've never heard of transmisogynism before coming on tumblr so maybe that's why. Anyways, i've been identifying as such because well, i'm a feminine masc-aligned individual, the same way a masculine fem-aligned person would identify as tomboy. So first question, should i switch for tomgirl? Would that label be ok (or do you know any other, cause tbh having "girl" in a label is not very comfy)? Second question is just the origine of the word, it was created to mock cis feminine men (from what i understand), trans women have nothing to do with that, so why would it be transmis? I don't undersand that ^^' Thank you for your time, and your blog in general, it's really helpful!

Sorry for taking so long. I feel like I’m struggling with answering this ask because I want to give you a substantive answer, but much of what I have to say has already been said before. I’ll give it my best anyway, but I hope you don’t mind me referencing other posts you’ve probably already read.

1. Yes, there are of other ways to describe yourself as a feminine boy. You could use femme or GNC or lavender boy. Some people have created new gender terms altogether for describing feminine boyhood such as rosboy or feminec.

2. It was not created to mock cis feminine men. It has been historically used derisively against people who are perceived as effeminate. While this includes cis feminine men, it also includes transfems because we are also seen as effeminate, having “failed at being men.” People who are bigoted towards GNC men are very unlikely to be accepting and respectful towards trans people in general.

3. Even if the word was created specifically to mock GNC men, it would still be partially rooted in transmisogyny (though misdirected) because transmisogyny is a manifestation of patriarchy. Maleness and masculinity are seen as superior to femaleness and femininity under patriarchy, so transmisogyny is one way in which patriarchy punishes those who transgress this paradigm. The stigma against GNC men is a part of how this system reinforces itself.

4. Regardless of where the term actually originates from, it is currently used online in porn as a way to demean, fetishize, and misgender transfems, very similarly to how “tr*nny” and “sh*male” are used. That alone gives it a transmisogynistic connotation.

6. Furthermore, the way the word has been turned into a meme also shows a pattern of transmisogynistic fetishism. In particular, the characters which the word is often applied to are seen as sexually enticing (particularly by cis men) for the perceived “discordance” between a feminine appearance/expression and the possession of a penis, very similar to how “tr*ps” and “f*ta” are viewed. Again, this alone gives it a transmisogynistic connotation.

6. Obviously, Tumblr shouldn’t be the only place where you learn about transmisogyny or interact with trans women, etc. But the thing that’s kind of great about social media is that it gives us, transfems, a platform of our own, a space to talk about our experiences. And, really, that is the best way of learning about transmisogyny, just by listening to us when we talk about these sorts of things.

7. Personally, I really don’t care if you identify with the term. All I ask is that you be aware of its transmisogynistic roots.

[7clubs]

i have never thought of franseb before but i've got to say you definitely have my attention now! do elaborate

(CLAPS HANDS TOGETHER) OKAY. THE YUMIMEI AGENDA.

TL;DR: You have two similarly aged youth with so much room to grow, who have a lot in common in terms of family trauma and are mirrors but are simultaneously very different personality-wise, which is SUPER SUPER fun. Similar base appeal here as Fran/maya: silly and serious. Opposites attract, except they're also the same.

Franziska's view of Seb quickly grew from disrespect to seeing them as a mirror of her and perhaps an equal. There is so much opportunity for that to develop into a deep friendship during the 7 year gap, and for them to do a lot of healing together as two who would relate to each other a lot but crucially have different perspectives.

Sebastian is imperfection, is becoming stronger from making mistakes and learning from them. Franziska is perfection, and becoming stronger in realizing it isn't everything.

(Gender stuff and more details under the cut whee)

First of all to get this out of the way. I think most of this part of the fandom agrees that Fran is a huge lesbian and I've hc'd her such pretty much as long as I known I've been into women (2013?) I think this is a big reason why people don't even consider sebfran within the blip of possibility.

It just so happened that a few years ago, before I ever once thought about the parallels between the two of them, before i even had a single thought about them being friends, I started HC'ing seb as a non-binary trans girl. Seb is a magnet for trans HCs, because literally any story about defying your parent's expectations is really really fucking good for that and also they're incredibly Gender.

But I think most people go with transmasc (where they're already presenting as such in canon) which is really understandable and still an epic hc, but I've always found it really compelling for her to realize she's trans after the events of AAI2. Blooming beyond the shadow of her father.

Basically I accidentally put myself into a position where I (big lesbian) could become really, really invested in these two once the dominos fell and I connected the dots. And I did, once I really got into AA again last year, since these two have always been really high up in my favs list and AAI2 is my absolute favorite game. I realized how much they had in common.

(Obviously you don't have to hc Fran as a lesbian and Seb as transfem and you can still ship these two. It's just that I'm a big lesbian and I like weird women in love, so snooty mean girl x ALSO snooty silly girl is a really. really good combination and boosts this ship up for me, especially once you make them sapphics in cool law suits. soooo gnc so true <33)

I THINK if you like Fran/Maya then you're gonna understand a lot of what I like in YumiMei already: they have a lot in common in terms of twisted family histories and expectations, but their actual personalities are VERY different. Which is a really awesome tried and tested recipe for a REALLY GOOD dynamic.

There's a really solid foundation at the end of AAI2 for these two to become amazing friends. Franziska outright makes a comparison to her experiences with MVK with Sebastian's experience with Blaise. She was very impatient and rude to them at first, yes, but quickly realized that they're mirrors.

At the end of AAI2, Franziska establishes the respect she has for Seb by returning care of Roland's trial to them and watching them on. Same with the credits: she knows they'll be tested, just like her.

They're not necessarily at the same stage of their law career, yeah, Seb is a rookie and Franziska is a freak who has been doing this since 13. But I feel that they stand as equals. (That said, yeah, I'm not super comfortable with them getting together until late 7yg and beyond, when Seb's already an established professional and Also, you know, Knows She's A Girl Now.)

Both of them are grieving the fallen images of their fathers. Both of them have felt that there was a time when they had no one else on their side, with Sebastian being disowned and Franziska dealing with both her father's death and her brother's disappearance. Both of them, for a time, struggled wondering whether they should keep doing the work they do. Throwing away the whip, running from the prosecutor's path.

Veering more into headcanon territory; since they're both closely tied to Edgeworth, it's very easy for them to keep in touch after AAI2/during the 7yg. Franziska puts up a facade of being mean and aloof, but she's an inherently caring person and I think she'd look out for Seb. I think from there they could start talking.

I feel like Franziska is a very guarded and emotionally constipated person and she struggles a lot opening up to someone who's known her her whole life, like Edgeworth. (in general, the vk siblings are just Very Bad at being open with eachother.) I think it's important to remember at this point, despite her accomplishments, that she's barely an adult and I think it helps a lot to have someone close to her age as a new friend and peer without all that baggage.

Sebastian on the other hand is someone who just... has their heart on their sleeve. an Open book. emotional and gutsy if they have to be. And in that final logic chess you can see that they understand the importance of listening to someone.

Anyway yeah. they become rant buddies. they talk about their messed up fathers with each other and the complicated relationship they have with the work they've both devoted their lives to and they just get it and are a shoulder to lean on. they develop a rich, deep friendship over the 7yg and teach each other what they know. and this is important to me: yes, Franziska teaches Seb some of the tools of the trade, how to be a better prosecutor, just as a courtesy bc they're friends. but Sebastian also teaches her a lot in turn, about life. About picking yourself up after all your mistakes. I like genuinely think because of more connections and openness, Seb winds up with a bit more emotional maturity. Franziska doesn't need to be perfect in front of them. So they both can be their truer selves.

And that's the main thing really. I think they just become the best of friends. Before romance, before anything else. Seven years of contemplative nights at the office and mutual support. From there, love is just like breathing.

[themaveriqueagenda]

some definitions of "neutral":

not engaged on either side

i may not be engaged in either side of the gender binary, but this definition implies that there are only two sides to begin with, which is incorrect. gender-wise, i am on my own side separately from the other two, and i'm very engaged on it. it also sounds like neutral would be "from the outside looking in", which is also very much not me.

not decided or pronounced as to characteristics

i very much am. characteristics of my gender include autonomy & the unorthodox, the unconventional and all of those are very pronounced. in fact, this conviction itself is part of my gender.

having features or characteristics that are not easily noticed

no. my gender is big and loud.

having no personal preference

i very much have a preference when it comes to my gender. according to western society it's just for the wrong thing. this definition is why "neutral" gives me "meh" vibes, which is very much not true for my gender.

lacking distinguishing quality or characteristics

i feel my gender and it is very distinguished from the two accepted genders in western society.

not expressing strong opinions or feelings

couldn't be me. my gendered feelings are so strong, and personally i consider that to be part of my maveriquehood.

nonaligned

no. i'm aligned with my own gender and people like me. this is why i take issue with calling everyone who isn't masc- or fem-aligned "unaligned". because i am aligned, but what i'm aligned with is simply not considered a valid option, even by lots of non-binary people.

some synonyms of "neutral":

disinterested, detached, uninvolved, indifferent, uncommitted, objective

these again, when applied to gender, sound like someone with a neutral gender doesn't really care much about gender and is more outside observers than actually involved with it, which couldn't be more incorrect for me. i am the walking stereotype of the non-binary person who's involved with vis gender so much and thinks about it a lot. my gender wants to be noticed.

another way that "(gender-)neutral" is used is "universally applicable", for example, they/them being considered a "neutral pronoun" because it can be applied to anyone whose pronouns you don't know, or similarly using inclusive language that can apply to any gender ("people who menstruate" vs "women") and in general, stuff like "gender-neutral clothing" and what not. i guess this kinda sorta would tie in with neutral being a middle ground between all genders. but i don't really vibe with that either. my gender is very much not universally applicable to any gender, because it's specifically defined as existing independently from binary genders. this is also why i stopped using they/them pronouns. the consistent labelling of singular they as "gender-neutral" bothered me so much that i don't want them used. to me personally, it either feels degendering or neutralising, and i'm not agender or neutrois, so i don't want those used if you know what my pronouns are.

and while it wasn't implied by any definition or synonym, one thing i also think of when i hear "neutral" in terms of gender is kind of a mix of all genders, all balancing each other out in a way. a neutral gender would be the middle ground between all existing genders (which is how i've seen it portrayed on one gender spectrum graph). and that is also very much not me.

while i haven't really seen people confuse maverique with neutrois (honestly, neither gender is really well-known enough to have any significant discourse about it), there is the issue of an intracommunity trinary of sorts, where everyone who isn't male, female, masc or fem is put in a "neutral" box. the most common examples is labelling every trans/non-binary person who isn't transmasc or transfem as transneutral or labelling everyone who isn't masc-/male-aligned or fem-/female-aligned as neutral-aligned. this is incorrect for so many non-binary people, not just maveriques. and i guess this post is just me saying how much i relate to Vesper's reasons for coining maverique, and how much it bothers me as a maverique to still be put in a neutral box. but who knows! this may still help someone determine whether the term maverique or neutrois fits them better, or something else entirely.

maverique: why i coined the word

Keep reading

[yvesdot]

Do you know any bald trans women? I feel really alone in this. My hair started falling out in clumps recently. I'm not sure how to fight dysphoria anymore. I used to be confident, but now I don't feel like 'one of the girls'.

Awww I'm no expert in trans things I just posted the quote... I will do my best to assist.

One thing I will say is that there are a lot of women, cis and trans, who have hair loss or thin hair. It doesn't really strike me so much-- it's probably the last factor I could imagine being legitimately indicative of transness. Off the top of my head, I know Cindy of PleasantSims has PCOS and has posted a lot about wearing wigs, not wearing them, being comfortable with hair loss, and so on. And honestly? I really would not look twice at her, or any other balding or more thinly-haired woman, in the street. I think we all worry so much more about our physical appearance than anybody else does.

My #1 suggestion is to find communities for women dealing with balding. There are so many women balding for so many reasons, and I am confident there is advice for you there. You ARE a woman, so those spaces are for you, trans or cis. Similarly, I know a lot of trans guys will look at subreddits aimed at (implicitly cis) men to see what the cis guys are doing to look taller or hairier or more muscular. I have probably looked at the subreddit of every gender in existence for a million different reasons. Heck, I peeped at that deranged Fight Club for Moms server, and felt no qualms about being possibly the furthest thing from a mother thus far invented by God.

And finally my beloved friend @3by7 was the big head-shaver in our group in freshman year of college and it seemed very womanly (read: gay) to me. You know, the Alison Bechdel of it all. And then everybody else also shaved their heads, so: equality. Not the same as balding, but seemed relevant. If any transfems who are bald or have hair loss want to chime in this is the spot for sure.

[frostops]

I have some thoughts about how FGO has handled trans and trans-adjacent characters, and I’m frustrated how many people talk about the mishandlings without discussing the transmisogyny in it, but this is long as fuck, so its under the cut.

Its a good thing that FGO is having more characters with the genderless trait who aren’t given that trait for shitty reasons, but framing this as FGO being better at handling nonbinary characters, while technically true, ignores what caused many of the early issues. That cause is often transmisogyny.

Transmisogyny has been an issue in the game since Da Vinci’s introduction. Da Vinci doesn’t have the genderless trait, but she’s still important to discuss to understand FGO’s mishandling of trans characters. Mash and Romani are both angry at the idea of Leonardo Da Vinci not being a man, and call her a pervert, among other things. This is immediately after both find out King Arthur was actually a woman, but neither seemed to care then. Its understood by the writing that some believed to be a man turning out to actually be a cis woman isn’t deserving of malice, but that person turning out to be a trans woman is. The writing surrounding Da Vinci slowly got better, with characters being less shitty about and eventually respecting her gender. While Da Vinci initially describes herself as beyond gender, she says so in response to Roman and Mash’s reaction to her gender, where as whenever she is referred to as a woman (Lancelot saying he couldn’t hurt a beautiful women in Camelot, Napoleon calling her mademoiselle in LB2), she eats it up. Her early description of being beyond gender feels more like a tongue-in-cheek way of degendering a trans woman. While overall the writing treats Da Vinci better now, there are still times where it gets shitty, even as recent as the event where Van Gogh was introduced, where Hokusai talks about both Da Vinci and Van Gogh having an inherent maleness that bleeds into their art. This event did have a guest writer, but it was still allowed into the game.

The first character to have the genderless trait is D’Eon. Historically, D’Eon was intersex and trans feminine, and very likely a trans woman, but the fate version is introduced saying they were crazy in life, intended to be in reference to how they presented their gender. They are also presented as caring more about loyalty to France than what gender they are seen as, when the real D’Eon blackmailed the king into legally recognizing them as a woman. Transmisogyny, as well as intersexism, is pretty obviously what made Type-Moon take reduce D’Eon to just jokes about gender. D’Eon feels degendered in way similar to how Da Vinci is at time, though D’Eon gets it worse

Astolfo debuted in Apocrypha, where their presentation is used for a joke where Jeanne, believing Astolfo to be a girl, freaks out when she sees that Astolfo has a penis. The joke is that it is such a horrible thing to find a penis on some you think is a girl. I shouldn’t need to explain the transmisogyny behind that, or that Astolfo ostensibly not being a trans woman doesn’t make the joke less transmisogynistic. There are other, better things about Astolfo in Apocrypha, but most of their writing in FGO is in the same vein as the joke with Jeanne. This is crystalized in Agartha, where both Astolfo and D’Eon were used for many transmisogynistic, intersexist, and homophobic jokes. 

The third, and for a long time last, character to have the genderless trait was Enkidu. They are given this trait due to changes to their myth. In Fate, Enkidu is made of clay, and had a nonhuman appearance until meeting Shamhat, and modeling their appearance after her. They don’t have a physical sex, but, due to originally being a male character and appearing feminine in fate, the writers and fans alike treat them similarly to how they treat Astolfo and D’Eon, though less aggressively. Usually when Enkidu appears in a fate work, one character has to talk about how they can’t tell whether Enkidu is a man or a woman, before settling on neither, but only reach that conclusion because they don’t have a physical sex. The transmisogyny isn’t as strong in Enkidu’s writing, but its still there.

Until LB3, no other character would be given the genderless trait, and what all 3 of them have in common is being AMAB or originally male characters who present femininely. Technically Da Vinci fits this description as well, but her body is considered female by Type-Moon’s standards, so she gets the female trait. Also, with the exception of Astolfo, have bodies that wouldn’t considered male of female by most people. In Deon’s case, this is the result of intersexism, and even more frustrating when you remember that D’Eon blackmailed the king to be seen as a woman. I’d wager the reason Astolfo is grouped with the other two is itself a continuation of the joke from Apocrypha. It’s a coy “We all know what Astolfo’s ‘real’ gender is, but we’ll play along with the joke.” 

I think this also explains other characters who, arguably, could be included in the genderless trait, but were not. Nezha, like Da Vinci, only got a “female” body after dying, so they get the female trait too, despite not really being comfortable with any gender labels. Mordred, who consistently gets violently angry at being called a woman, and whose bio states that they don’t like being referred to as a man either (though this wouldn’t be implemented into writing until LB3, where they are clearly far less bothered by being referred to as man) also  has the female trait. King Hassan’s bio has his gender listed as “?????” but he is treated as male by the game and has the male trait.

None of the newer genderless servants fit the same description of amab/originally male and presenting femininely, which does show a more nuanced understanding of gender identity and expression, but it doesn’t show anymore respect towards trans women and transfems. Both Shi Huang Di and Douman have somewhat androgynous presentations, but we still don’t really have trans fem character whose gender and presentation is treated respectfully other than Da Vinci, and that’s frustrating. For the most part, though, these characters are all pretty well handled. 

Two of them, Mao Nobu and Romulus-Quirinus, are new versions of characters who already had the female and male trait respectively, meaning the game has at least someone moved away from equating the genderless trait to a character’s physical sex, but not entirely since part of the reason Shi Huang Di has the trait is their inability to reproduce.

There is some disagreement about how Caenis is handled, and I do have thoughts on that topic, but if I talked about that this would be twice as long. The short version is that the necessity to make characters fit into fanservice, something which negatively affects all of the characters I mention here, limits the ways in which Caenis’s relationship to their gender can be explored. Its also why we have Caenis and not Caenus, and why Caenis is rarely allowed to where a shirt.

There is also Dioscuri, who is two characters, one man and one woman, who are collectively on servant, so even though they have the genderless trait, they're not really relevant.

We do have more originally male characters now in female bodies. Vritra and Van Gogh, who were added recently (Vritra’s bio says she was originally male and now has a female vessel and Van Gogh is Vincent Van Gogh in Clytie’s body), Kama, an originally male deity possessing Sakura’s body, is being added to NA this year, and even back in part 1 we had Quetzalcoatl, another male god in a female vessel. All of them are given the female trait, and Quetz in particular seems to be very comfortable being a woman, but this still feels like what happened with Nezha, where the “physically female” body matters more than the identity of the character, especially with Van Gogh, who had no choice in being put in Clytie’s body. 

Mechanically, the gender traits only affect certain skills and nps, having extra or stronger effects. The genderless servants are exempt from the extra effects, with one exception. Once of Blackbeard’s skills has an effect for female servants, but D’Eon and Astolfo (And maybe also Enkidu, but I don’t remember) were included in this effect as well. The joke here was that Blackbeard is written to be reflective of  the worst qualities of weebs and otakus. many of whom would refer to those two as traps, a transmisogynistic slur, so Blackbeard is into them in the same way. Servants with the genderless trait added afterwards weren’t included in this effect, even though some of them (the ones who transphobic fate fans consider to be women) would still be seen as attractive by Blackbeard. So rather than coding each one individually to be included, they added a new trait, the female looking trait, for Blackbeard’s skill. The genderless servants included in this one all present feminine, but the inclusion of this trait is to make continuing a transphobic joke easier, which almost feels like a step back from some of the previous progress in handling trans characters.

I also think some people are a little too eager to give FGO credit when it may not deserve. For instance, a lot of people liked Douman being included in the genderless trait, and on its own it fine, but the my room line where Sei talks about trying to check under Douman’s robes concerns me. Many people took it as Sei just being horny for Douman, but it could easily be intended as Sei trying to check what’s really in his pants, especially since the canon reason Douman has the genderless trait is that he combined himself with some spirits and deities, one of which is female.

None of this is to say its wrong to view any of these characters as nonbinary (I do view most of them as nonbinary), but I don’t think we should view the genderless trait as equivalent to nonbinary. Not only are there characters included in it who probably shouldn’t be (like D’Eon) and characters who don’t have it who probably should (like Nezha), doing so treat nonbinary as a third and wholly separate gender. And if you’re going to talk about the transphobia of FGO, please be willing to use the word transmisogyny.

[mogaimom]

Disclaimer: I am not a lesbian. Please tell me if I’ve said anything lesbophobic.

I’ve noticed how a lot of cis lesbians will talk about how they have to fight to be able to label themselves properly and people are constantly trying to steal their terms and what have you, and they’ll frame this as a struggle unique to lesbians. But what they seem to forget is that gay men and trans people have also had to fight not to be called slurs or medicalized, pathologizing terminology. Or that mspec people are constantly erased and have our labels misdefined and misrepresented.

And I feel like the general attitude of gatekeep-y-ness within cis lesbian circles — the attitude that only specific people with specific experiences are “allowed” to identify as lesbians/butches/femmes/etc. because they’ve had to fight so hard for their own terms — is largely left over from the influence of TERFs. Exactly how much harder (than everyone else in the community) have they had to fight that their labels must be guarded so strictly?

Now, I will be the first to say that comparing every person you don’t like to a TERF is transmisogynistic; trans women’s suffering should not be used as a measuring tool for how bad someone is. This is not an invitation to start using the term “BLERF” or call anyone who tries to invalidate nonb/mspec/ace lesbians a TERF. REGs are bad regardless of how “TERF-adjacent” they are.

But when I look at this overall trend of “preserving the purity of the lesbian label,” I can’t help but be reminded that that is exactly how TERFs talk about trans women (“preserving” lesbianism, “preserving” womanhood); and I can’t help but wonder where exactly it comes from.

I feel like the idea, that this term specifically has to be “protected from outsiders,” is the legacy that TERFs have left behind within cis lesbian communities and activism. I’ve seen a lot of cis lesbians calling out transmisogyny within transmasc and TME nonbinary communities, but I never see cis lesbians talk about the transmisogyny within their own communities. I see so many cis lesbians rebut accusations of transmisogyny with “How can the lesbian community be hostile to trans women when trans lesbians exist?” As if even the trans community isn’t hostile to us.

And I think this is just another facet of the overall goal that TERFs imprinted onto cis lesbian activism: “Continually narrow down the definition of lesbian and draw strict lines in the sand between us and the rest of the LGBT+ community.” Whether it’s “woman exclusively attracted to other women,” “binary woman exclusively attracted to other binary women,” or “cis woman exclusively attracted to other cis women,” it all comes from the same historical desire to exclude trans lesbians and their allies.

And I don’t think every cis lesbian who excludes nonbinary/mspec/aspec lesbians knows that it’s rooted in transmisogyny. But what other goal is being accomplished by distancing the lesbian community so much from other LGBTQ+ people? Why are they so afraid of (or disgusted by) even the thought of other people using a term that they feel describes their experiences in a different way? Why do they think they have the right to define other lesbians out of existence? It’s the skeleton of transmisogynistic rhetoric left over from when TERFs dominated the discourse (and which TERFs still widely work to uphold) that has thoroughly permeated lesbian-centric activism. It’s the attitude of lesbian separatism without any clear purpose or direction.

The only term I know of which is policed in a way at all similarly is “transfem,” and that’s only because many transfems feel it should only be claimable by those who are affected by transmisogyny (with the exception of transfem alters in TME systems). Transfem “separatism” and the desire for terminology specific to us comes from the fact that all TMEs oppress us; we need the language to talk about ourselves (as the transmisogyny-affected class) and about our oppressors. But binary/mono/allo/cis lesbian separatism (from other wlw) doesn’t come from that same need, as nonb/mspec/aspec/trans wlw (obviously) don’t oppress them. If anything, it comes from the desire to not recognize the struggles which other wlw deal with, whether that be exorsexism, monosexism, aphobia, or transmisogyny.

I am not a lesbian, so it’s not my place to tell people what it “really” means to be a lesbian. But it’s not my place to tell self-identified lesbians that they’re wrong about their identities either. No one gets to decide someone else’s identity for them.

(Btw, if you’re a TME nonb/mspec/aspec lesbian, feel free to share about your experiences with exclusionism, but please don’t mistake this for me saying that you’re transmisogyny-affected, that you have a place to speak about transmisogynistic oppression, or that exclusionists are the same as TERFs.)