#and EXcludes cis men trans men and male aligned nbs

[genderkoolaid]

I feel like you would get this, seeing this comment section kinda hurt. The OP they are responding to is a non-binary trans man who was talking about feeling uncomfortable because they still feel attraction to lesbians and have felt very excluded. He’s wary around certain lesbians because they center their ideology around hating men regardless of gender identity and has faced a lot of anti-transmasculinity and transmisogyny. While most lesbians are wonderful amazing people there’s no denying that some do hold an innate hatred for men, not saying they need to like men. I fully understand lesbians and predatory cis men but there’s definitely lesbians who would date trans men. It can be scary for a trans man to come out or start transitioning because at what point do they become too masculine or too much of a man for their friends. There were even people in the comments saying the same anti-man statements who identify as a he/him nonbinary lesbian. This topic is very hard to hear for me as a closeted genderfluid person because my best friend is a man hating lesbian and I dread the day I can actually begin transitioning and she turns her back on me like these people. Queer spaces in general can be hard to occupy as a multi gendered person because of those people as well as mlm/nblm spaces that say ‘fem aligned dni’. In general I don’t think we should police labels and everyone has their own interpretation and I think labels are just a suggestion anyway but I suppose that makes sense for a genderfluid bisexual person.

These people just straight up do not understand the gender diversity that has always existed in lesbian spaces (by which I mean spaces built & catering to queer women & those seen as women).

There have always been trans men in lesbian spaces. You aren't obligated to fuck them, but they have always been there. There are pages and pages of writing out there not only by trans male dykes, but by the lesbian cis women who love them and still identify as lesbians while in relationships with them. There are trans guys at dyke bars right now as we speak having a great time.

Its not surprising to me that there are he/him NB lesbians supporting this. There are a lot of people out there who, because they don't identify As Men, mentally distance themselves from those who do despite any similarities. It's okay for THEM to be lesbians, and it's transphobic to erase THEIR lesbianism because they are Non-Men™! but once you cross that line you become the enemy. It's very "no you gyns I'm TOTALLY different than those gross tbros i promise im not a man at all and i will never want to be one so im allowed in the club!" The same people also throw multigender people under the bus. Trying to figure out your nonbinary in this environment is hellish (I speak from experience) because people pretend like they are super accepting of nonbinary people, until you realize that if you ever think of yourself as even slightly male people will start seeing you as a predatory invader trying to Force Lesbians To Date Men! Very "complex gender for me but not for thee"

Anyways. Twitter is not a good place. Anon, I hope you find better friends. Not every queer space is this hostile to us, I promise. There are people out there who genuinely work to make our community better and I hope you find them.

[yesmissnyx]

just something to note from your last poll… personally as a binary trans person i find it uncomfortable to be grouped with nonbinary people as opposed to cis people. because to me as a binary trans man i am a man the same way a cis man is, but not necessarily in the same way a nb man is. idk how others feel about it but to me it just feels othering, saying that we’re any different gender-wise. it would probably just be safer to have two more options, just an fyi :) also not meant to be any hate towards the nb options!! sorry if this is worded weird lol its late

Okay so. As a disclaimer, this might come off as condescending or snappish, but as a queer (vagueness intentional) in my 30s who's seen all kinds of identity discourse rise and fall since the 00s...I have a lot of feelings about orthodox terminology.

So. Forgive me if I'm being needlessly spicy.

It's going behind a cut, since this isn't the kind of energy I want on this blog, and I'm likely going to delete this later because I don't need T//er/fs and Tr//usc//um crawling around here if they find it 😤

This might be controversial, but I meant the slash as an and/or.

Because for me, and a lot of others, transness (and nonbinariness) IS inextricable from our binary gender experience.

I've known (and know) multiple people who identify as trans, nonbinary, AND male/female. (Myself included, depending on the day, weather, how the stars are aligning, etc. FYI.)

And...I think it's important to remember that something like a simple, quick-and-dirty poll like the one I ran...just plain isn't going to encompass the tapestry of how everyone experiences gender. And like? I think that's fine.

Expecting everyone (trans or cis or otherwise) to always express Gender Stuff in a way that fits OUR personal needs is, IMO, unproductive at best. And invalidating/hurtful at worst.

Not to mention, it's impossible. I'm not saying we can't try to be nice and accommodating toward others, but there is no simple set of rules that everyone has agreed on.

We can make requests and enforce our own boundaries, but the uncomfortable fact is that we all have our own needs, and those needs often compete.

Something that causes euphoria in one person is going to cause dysphoria in another. We all experience our transness differently, especially including the words we use to describe our experiences.

I certainly don't think the added "trans" in front of man/woman makes someone less of a man/woman. The same way I don't think lumping oneself in with nonbinary men/women does either.

Like...if you ID as a man/woman, you're a man/woman. If you ID as trans...you're trans. I separated out an individual NB option specifically because it excludes the male/female aspect, rather than includes it. (And that's not to say it even includes all the myriad nonbinary options out there, as well as people who don't use NB as an umbrella, etc.)

It's complicated. Intersectionality is complicated. Far more complicated than I'm qualified to get into, save for citing my own experiences and the experiences that have been shared with it.

Aaaand, that's all I'm going to say! Because this is something I can get really heated about, and I'm not about to go off in my happy feel-good horny time space any more than I already have!

[baradyke]

trans women ARE affected, and i have seen it happen myself with both "bi lesbians" treating trans women as a separate gender from cis women, and terfs who call lesbians bi by being atrracted to both cis and trans women. claiming they're "not affected", especially as someone who ISN'T a trans woman, is ignorant at best and bigotry at worst. you are throwing trans women under the bus to protect an identity that does not exist or make sense, nor is it needed when proper labels already exist.

i am also nb and lesbianism does not exclude nb people, it DOES however, exclude men. non-men loving non-men. it is literally that simple.

you CAN be harmed when said label is used to promote harmful ideologies. this applies to other labels too, like pansexuality (literally based off the idea that bisexuality is not already trans inclusive) and any variation of contradictory labels that erase the meaning and history behind existing labels.

terfs exclude trans women and nb people from lesbianism. this is such an ignorant take. excluding men from lesbianism is NOT the same thing as being part of a violent hate group

bold ass claim to be making. how would YOU personally know that this currently widespread discourse has not made its way into irl spaces? pansexuality started out as a biphobic identity yet it's everywhere irl? and what about trans men? or do you not see them as men? (which mspec lesbians also do?)

aspec and nb identities do not contradict lesbianism. bisexuality does.

if someone has a blurry or vague sense of their gender identity and still identifies as a lesbian, that is completely different than identifying with a male or male-aligned gender identity. sure, there is a lot of nuance when it comes to people's personal gender identities and i'm not going to police that, but i'm talking about people who are just straight up saying you can be attracted to men as a lesbian (specifically trans men, which is wildly transphobic)

are we just going back to the "bi means two" mindset? all genders fall under bisexuality, period. what IS biphobic is acting like you need separate labels from bisexuality when you have certain gender preferences. it's treating bisexuality as if it's a restrictive and exclusive label when it's not.

no, actually! in fact, you DO have to give good reasons aside from "it's valid" or "let people do what they want" or "because i said so" when people tell you about real hurt that this is causing.

this is literally just a childish af "NUH UH" answer. you cannot tell people the personal offense they take is just straight up Wrong. you're purposely ignoring everyone who says them and their communities are affected by this (see point 1) because being seen as "invalid" is somehow the worst possible outcome and you think that just because you're queer you get a free pass to just do whatever you want.

your blog is not even dedicated to the personal problems you face as a queer person. it is literally just you arguing why mspec lesbians are "valid", and it should be telling to you when it has this much backlash against it. it is all so chronically online it hurts. please find real issues to worry about.

it is so fucking telling that people who are offended by mspec lesbians have countless reasons as to why the label is harmful to lesbians, bisexuals, trans women, nb people (and so on), and the only reason the other side ever seems to have is "let people id as whatever they want!!!" very telling indeed

[redheadbigshoes]

I'm curious as to whether or not something is lesbophobic and was wondering if you could give me your opinion...So I'm a bisexual bigender person, assigned female at birth, who mainly feels more aligned with the male gender, I also feel as though I'm female sometimes but about 90% I feel either as male or a mix of these two genders. It's rare for me to feel as tho I'm fully a woman (and even when I do I still sometimes go through dysphoria). The thing is even when I feel like a man, I'm a relatively feminine one (not too overly feminine presenting but somewhat) and when I don't present very feminine, it's usually kinda androgynous, never really full on masc. I usually refrain from pursuing anything romantic or sexual with a cishet guy or a lesbian (cis or nb) because as far as I know, tell me I'm wrong if that's the case, lesbianism as a sexual orientation excludes any kind of sexual attraction to *men*.

I know I'm not a cis guy or a trans guy, but most of the time I am a *man* even if it's a feminine one.

I don't know if I'll ever have top surgery, for now binding my chest seems to be enough for the dysphoria tho I definitely don't rule that out as a possibility someday. Point is even if my body is female sex, I'm not in terms of gender (most of the time) . I feel like a man most of the time and if a lesbian is attracted to me and wants to be with me does that mean they're attracted to my female presenting body or the real me who is a man (because lesbianism does not include sexual attraction to men so does she actually see me as I am or just my body that comes along with different pronouns??)

Being with someone and realizing that they may not see and want and love *me*, the real me, terrifies me!

Am I being lesbophobic for not wanting to pursue anything with a women/nb who is a lesbian? (nor also with a cishet guy - never have been with and never will be with cishet guy but that one I make no apology for!)

Am I reasonable for having these concerns or am I projecting my insecurities with my gender and my body on this whole thing?

Hi. From everything you said I really do understand why you wouldn’t want to pursue anything with a lesbian, because in your case it’s more about you than the person being a lesbian, it’s about feeling like your gender identity is invalidated if a lesbian wanted something with you, because you’d think they don’t see you as what you identify as. So no, I don’t think you’re being lesbophobic.

Non-binary people are included in lesbianism, but that doesn’t mean every non-binary person is included. Lesbians are not attracted to men and male-aligned identities. So if a lesbian is attracted to you I think it’s very much possible for that to happen because of your female presenting body, or maybe they don’t see you as a man/male-aligned identity.

I don’t think you’re being unreasonable at all, your concerns are valid.

[gettin-bi-bi-bi]

ok so I've read a bit about gender and sex and frok what I've learned it is that gender(man, woman, nb etc) is a social construct and it doesn't align with specific set of genitals or secondary sex characteristics

and sex(male, female, intersex)is based upon the genitals and secondary sex characteristics

so like if a person is afab and identifies as a man then their gender is man and sex is male(and female after transition)??

I'm sorry if this offensive in any way, I'm just reallly confused since from what i was taught was that gender and sex are the same thing

I'm not really sure I understand your question. But really all that's important is to accept people's self-identification. A trans woman is a woman and her body is a female body by virtue of her being a woman. It doesn't matter if a woman has a vagina or a penis - she's always a woman and her body is female.

The kind of language that instists that trans women are "biologically male" or that trans men are "biologically female" is considered transphobic by a large part of the trans community as far as I know.

Keep in mind that "biological sex" is just as much a construct as is "gender". At some point in history humans decided to catagorise people into "sexes" based on certain characteristics but where that line is drawn is 100% a human-made decision and the Western gender/sex binary plays into this big time. See also how cis women (often black women!) are excluded from sports and the Olympics because their naturally higher testosterone levels are considered "too high to be classified as a female athlete". That just goes to show how "biological sex" is also just a construct with arbitrary rules (a lot of which are racist!).

Maddie

[lesbianologist]

also i’m not gonna be out here specifying that i’m a homoromantic homosexual homoaesthetic homoplatonic homoeverything when i can just say lesbian because lesbian has always meant an exclusively gay women aka a woman attracted to other women.

See shit like this is why y’all need to shut up about bi lesbian discourse because it’s seeping into real life and straight men are co-opting wlw terms and pressuring lesbians into relationships/sex. I’m not about to tolerate men pursuing me ANYWAYS because they don’t know if I’m homoromantic or whatever. And yes , straight men were already self entitled enough as it is, but y’all don’t need to add fuel to the fire

[elementale]

According to your “logic” being non binary (which is made up) means you’re neither male of female (makes no sense) so how the fucking shite can lesbians date them and still be lesbians?

Well, if you’re genuinely curious to know I’ll be more than happy to explain if you’re willing to listen.

Let’s begin with context and transgenderism itself. I think if nothing else we probably can both agree that at the very least there are different contexts where it might make sense to distinguish people based on what they were assigned at birth. For example, medically speaking, you don’t offer abortions to cis men; likewise, you typically wouldn’t offer testosterone blockers to a trans man beginning his medical transition.

Socially speaking however, the same cut and dry approach dealing in scientific and objective absolutes cannot always be used regarding differentiation by gender. A person who looks and acts like a woman or man will be assumed to be one of the two by a society comprising of cisgendered individuals; if the person in question seems ambiguous in gender, cis society can be noted to have a notorious history of responding with the kind of ignorance and/or anger that no small number of people have had to pay for in blood. Regardless of what gender a trans person may have been assigned at birth, they will at some point realize that, at least psychologically speaking, that prescribed gender simply doesn’t align with their reality as a person in some significant manner that may vary from person to person. The ensuing discomfort that can potentially result from the dissonance between the person’s inner and outer reality as it pertains to their gender is known as gender dysphoria, and it can take on several forms. Some trans people (mainly the transmedicalist crowd) will insist that the discomfort is a necessary element and a person is not trans without the brand of discomfort that will compel them to take hormones and medically transition, but that tends to lead into another set of discussions altogether.

With that established, here’s the concept of nonbinary as an ism. You know how everything can fit your definition of binary gender and corresponding sex if you just dismiss all exemptions to your rule as inconvenient aberrations? Apply the XX vs. XY binary medically and you would be dismissing a lot of chromosomal variant and intersex individuals in the process (and make no mistake; 1.7% of the people in the population may sound small but that is effectively still hundreds of millions of people worldwide who do not neatly fit a “males=XY testes and females=XX ovaries” model of biological sex) if that binary were the only legitimate model. Biologically speaking, there’s already a grey enough region to establish that the most effective model of gender distinctions would have to include people who may not fit the pink and blue boxes. So if medically and biologically there’s already some undeniable ambiguities that bring the unwavering authority of a strict binary into question, where do you think that leaves us socially? Socially - where matters have layers of nuance to them and tend to be even less cut and dry? While there are social expectations on men and women that vary from culture to culture, a constant is that these rules and expectations are socially made and culturally imposed. When people say “gender is a social construct” it might be best understood that what makes the statement true isn’t that gender itself is inherently social in its construct, but rather that the social side of gender and the rules that come with it are socially changeable/pliable. GNC people are a great example of this in action: they break the rules prescribed by society regarding how they should be and express divergently. Non-binary identities are like GNC expression except unlike gender non-conformity in expression and practice, non-binary identities are more of an inner truth regarding gender identity itself. Since society at large has no place for the non-binary in its list of currently acceptable social genders, the rules to being non-binary are kind of non-existent right now; to express one such identity in a way that will register with a cisnormative society, individuals tend to choose gender non-conforming ways of expressing to get the memo across (this is not to say that NB people own GNC itself though). Medically speaking, NB people are as varied as they can be, and there are some for whom hormone therapy and surgery are part of their transition. Like with any other gender identity, there’s not much barrier to entry and the lack of any concrete way to go about being NB means people questioning their own gender are offered a conceptual space to explore being trans. For some folks, agender, genderfluid or demi-boy/girl fit like a glove; others realize it’s just not for them and either realize they’re trans binary later down the line, or realize they were cis all along - absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Non-binary identity does still remain a reality of a lot of people’s gender however whether or not you agree with that. I’m genderfluid myself and while being afab means I am medically recognized as female, I am genderfluid in every other relevant aspect of my life. It’s not a dysphorically-spurred thing for all NB people, but for me it actually is: for example, I have a gender confirmation class surgery I would like done at some point. Since I’m demi-ro and pan I personally don’t really have to think all that hard about any real gender-imposed limitations over what my orientation may entail, but here’s the thing regarding lesbianism as I currently understand it.. it’s not so much about wlw for the body as much as it is the lady in question. By including trans men as people who lesbians can be attracted to, there’s a gender ambiguous element one may inadvertently introduce in that if that were part of the definition. I’m going to assume you got here after having seen one of my responses to that one @empanado-feliz post, and the problem with restricting lesbian to afab people is, as I’d mentioned there in a later reply, that it is a definition that fails to account for and thereby excludes people like intersex lesbians and trans women who it should be accounting for (not to mention how transphobic it is to include trans men in that considering how most if not all of them are trying to reintegrate into society as men). Also expression in a femme fashion isn’t something exclusive to afab persons; women are not attracted to amab trans people because of their anatomy, they love the person and sometimes that person - binary or NB - carries themselves in a viscerally womanlike way. I’m not a lesbian so I’m not really someone who could explain it as effectively as a lesbian who’s had that as a lived experience, but I do know that it’s simultaneously more multifaceted and simpler than a lot make it out to be.

In conclusion, thanks to how ambiguous and multifaceted things regarding gender can be, gatekeeping the identities of lesbians who date non-binary individuals (regardless of whether they are afab, amab or intersex - something that is no one’s business but their own by the way) regardless of how they express helps no one. If nothing else I hope this does offer some food for thought at the very least.

[stonebutchgreens]

Mtt reduce womanhood to stereotypes and gender roles, and homosexuality to attraction to pronouns. They shout and shout about how real women are feminine, then don’t put any effort into trying to pass. Can’t get much more straight male than that. I’m not going to get into any argument with you. You can go actually look up what ‘terfs’ are saying for yourself. Instead of the lies others claim ‘terfs’ say. That’s all I wanted to say. Hopefully you go do some reading but I doubt it.

“You know what’s transparent? Straight men putting no effort, as is typical, into femininity while shouting about how femininity is womanhood. And there’s levels to this. Gay men who id as trans at least try to follow the feminine look, and it’s messed up they think that’s all women are, but it’s sad they’re struggling with themselves too. where as straight men who id as trans are just fetishist autogynephiles who of course don’t want to have surgery or try to pass.”

“What’s transparent is straight men who found a loophole to be allowed to harass lesbians doing the most typically male thing ever in calling themselves butch as a way to be ‘cis’ men while not having to change a single thing about their presentation. There’s so much transparent and awful there I could go on forever. educate yourself before saying mindless garbage straight manipulative disgusting men tell you to try and get in your pants.”

Ooooooh boy, okay. I am assuming that all three of these asks came from the same person. I considered not responding to this, because I don’t want to subject my trans followers to this shit, but I think it’s important to make it clear where I stand on this. I unconditionally support my trans friends and followers, even if I do not know them personally.

First of all, I would like to clarify that I know EXACTLY what TERFs are saying. I used to be aligned with the radfem community on Tumblr, although I never identified as a radical feminist myself. I was wrong and my beliefs were harmful. Being frustrated with the way liberal feminists discussed gender and feeling isolated because of my own experiences was no excuse for engaging with transphobic rhetoric. I did make a point of never following or interacting with people who singled out individual trans women or used slurs, but after awhile it became clear that even if individual radfems did not participate in this behavior, they condoned it from others, which is unacceptable.

So, I have done plenty of “reading” and have spent years considering and reconsidering my beliefs on gender. I have grappled with it theoretically but also very personally. You seem to think that I am making my ignorance clear in my tags. However, it is obvious that you know very little about trans women and have not taken the time to get to know GNC individuals who fall under the trans umbrella. The false dichotomy you create between “gay” and “straight” trans women in laughable at best. I know trans women who like men who present as masculine, as well as trans women who present as feminine who are interested in other women. (This is a ridiculous double standard anyway- cis women who like NB people and other women are also more likely to present as masculine than women who exclusively like men.)

Cherry-picking stories of a few bad apples in any given community does not prove that the entire community is malicious. Trans women who harm and harass other women do exist, but so do cis lesbians who harm and harass other women. Those “lists” of assault and harassment cases perpetuated by trans women that circulate on TERF blogs are fear-mongering and misleading. You could compile those for any group. Implying that trans women are just “pretending” for sexual reasons ignores the experiences of a vast majority of trans people. Sexualizing a group of people to dehumanize them is not a new technique lmao.

I think you would find that we actually agree on a lot of feminist issues, and could find some common ground in the way we view gender. In fact, I dislike much of queer theory and the way that some of my peers discuss gender, simply because it ignores the everyday reality of many GNC and gay people. But, you can’t say that gender is an oppressive and coercive system and then mock the people who try to exist outside of that framework. If you ask pretty much any sociologist or anthropologist, gender is and always has been a social status, and one that can change significantly and take on different meanings over time. Of course sex-based oppression exists, but modern sexism goes far beyond that, so there is never a reason to completely exclude of group of women from your feminism.

It is clear from the way that TERFs hyper-focus on harassing and excluding trans women over the other core tenants of actual radical feminism that you are more interested in bullying a group of downtrodden people than advancing the rights of women. Note that I do not use the term “TERF” liberally. TERFs are a specific group of people with a specific trans-exclusive ideology. If YOU are interested in doing more reading, I would recommend looking into trans authors and Marxist and/or Materialist feminism instead of Tumblr’s convoluted version of radical feminism.

[exorsexistbullshit]

Could you make a post on how diamoric relationships aren't straight OR gay? 'coz I feel like they're either called straight (and therefore privileged) or are swept into being "gay enough" when really they are their own unique thing? I feel like calling nb relationships gay is just misgendering and also using binary gay people as a standard for what is queer enough to not be straight

ok, let’s start with the definitions!

a diamoric person is someone who considers being non-binary relevant to their attractions;

a diamoric relationship is one that involves at least one nonbinary person;

a diamoric orientation is one that involves being nonbinary and being attracted to specific gender(s).

that being said, here are the problems diamoric people face:

because nonbinary people aren’t so common and frequently have their gender identity invalidated, few people know they are attracted to nonbinary people.

this makes nonbinary people insecure, because they don’t know if other’s attractions are to their gender identity or if they are just associating a binary gender to their body or presentation.

when straight people are insecure about relationships, it’s because they associate stereotypes or being m-spec with “being gay”: as in, they are afraid their partner’s attraction patterns are less mainstream, usually based on stereotypes.

when nonbinary people are insecure about their relationships, they usually don’t rely on stereotypes or on the assumption people can only be attracted to one gender, they are afraid people’s attractions are more mainstream, since few people talk about being attracted to nonbinary people.

which leads to:

many nonbinary people don’t reveal their identity to their partner(s), because they are afraid of losing them or of being misgendered within the relationship.

they can also be afraid of specific forms of exorsexism, since a lot of people have different ideas of what a nonbinary person’s identity can or can’t be.

nonbinary people may also hear within their relationship(s) that their gender doesn’t matter, which can lead to stress related to misgendering or to staying in the closet.

nonbinary people don’t have safe spaces where they can explore attraction.

attraction from men to women, and from women to men, is normalized enough, so men and women approaching each other with the possibility of a relationship is seen as natural in a way other approaches aren’t.

there are exceptions to this regarding intersectionality (a fat woman approaching a thin man will be seen as ridiculous, interracial relationships aren’t accepted everywhere, etc.), but in general, especially considering people who are more privileged, straight people don’t stop and try to consider whether their interest is really attracted to their gender (which sure, it’s a social problem, but even if the person is respectful they will usually wait until the person says they are incompatible).

men who want other men and women who want other women usually approach people only on private, on spaces considered “liberal” (like, say, certain universities) or on spaces which explicitly say those people are welcome. Sure, those spaces are restricted, and many times there are cases of people who aren’t cis or white getting excluded, not to mention many neurodivergent people don’t have access or don’t feel safe on those spaces, and so on, but technically there are spaces on which people can approach people who are perceived as the same gender as them.

now, many binary trans people also don’t feel safe on those spaces, because people will be cissexist and say only their genitals matter, or they will keep their distance because someone is visibly trans, or because they say they are trans and don’t ~pass~ well enough. But, at least I know of some spaces that are welcoming of trans people.

but what about nonbinary people?

we rarely get anything outside of the internet, and I’ve never seen any space that is meant to be for nonbinary people to approach each other for dating.

and, when we seek spaces where we can try to date, no matter if they are for the general population, “LGBT” or “gay friendly”, nonbinary people are frequently expected to leave their nonbinary identities aside, or at least expected to adopt identities like “socially male” or “socially female”.

sure, aligned people exist, as well as genderfluid/genderflux people who sometimes consider themselves to be 100% binary. But saying their nonbinary identity should be pushed aside and considered irrelevant if they want to participate of dating spaces is still bad.

orientations geared towards nonbinary people are constantly invalidated

if someone who is femgender (a nonbinary person whose gender is related to femininity) is attracted to other people who consider themselves feminine nonbinary people, they might be inclined to say they are proqua (an orientation that means you are a feminine person attracted to feminine people).

but they will meet people saying that’s a ridiculous label, just because it isn’t well known; they will meet people saying it’s the same thing as lesbian, even though proqua was created by someone who didn’t feel comfortable saying they were a lesbian for being nonbinary, and even though this femgender person might not be attracted to binary women; they will say this attraction experience is fake; they will say that’s forcing the label of femininity on people, even if this proqua person is not.

if a binary person says they are attracted to “women and some nonbinary people”, that person will be accused of “fetishizing nonbinary genders”, of “not considering trans women true women”, of “only being attracted to vaginas and trying to bury that under an inclusive statement”. If that person is a man, he’ll also be accused of being a “gross hetero”; if that person is a woman, she’ll be accused of being a self-hating lesbian.

this ignores that it’s possible to see nonbinary people as their own genders, and to see binary people as their own genders, no matter their bodies or presentations.

this ignores that many nonbinary people often prefer having partners that identify as bi/ply/penulti than partners that consider their attraction to them an exception and keep identifying as someone who is only attracted to men or to women.

so, let’s sum it up. NB people:

often have no idea of what their dating pool really is because people don’t express attraction to nonbinary people often

are often insecure because people don’t know about their gender identity while dating, and may actually hate them for having their identity or not respect their identity

have few to no spaces where they can date without fear of being misgendered or asked to push their identity aside and pretend being something they are not

are discouraged from having orientation labels for themselves

have to deal with other people being discouraged from having labels that include nonbinary people

remember how diamoric means being nonbinary has a place on attraction?

so yeah, this can’t be all dismissed because “there are nonbinary people who don’t care about being considered binary regarding relationships”.

[positive-lesbian-vibes]

I asked to address it as in permission to continue. You're trying to dictate how nb people identify. Nb sapphics can be male-aligned, I just wouldn't say WHEN they're male aligned. You're saying nonbinary people can't be sapphic if they're ever male-aligned, even if only part of the time. That's not true. You're equating nonbinary people who sometimes align as that full alignment. You're equating nb people to men. And, from that, it shows you equate non-male aligned nbs to women. See the issue?

the issue is that you literally cannot be a man in any capacity and be a lesbianim not saying nb people cant be lesbians im saying lesbian is an identity that excludes manhood because it literally isi didnt make this up and im not, like, discriminating against nb people, im talking about the historical definition of lesbianism, which has always excluded men of all types, whether they be binary cis men or nb trans guys or anything else.this is about the definitions of lesbian and sapphic, not nb identities

[mx-casket]

So I've been thinking a lot recently on what it is to be pansexual and I've run into a little mental bump.

Pansexuality is attraction regardless of gender right?

So what happens when someone says theyll date one part of a gender but not the other and claims to be pansexual?

Let's use Cis and Trans men as the example

They would technically be attracted to the Male gender but only one part of it. Excluding the cis part of the male gender in this example.

I should state before I go further that I'm not talking about people who have had a traumatic experience with someone and then actively avoid people of the same gender. I'm talking about people that say they are attracted to people regardless of gender but then say "but not [insert part of gender here]"

Now at first I was like "those people wouldnt be pansexual because they arent technically attracted to people regardless of gender" but in all actuality they are. That's kinda assuming that trans men and cis men arent the same gender which they are, they're both men.

This also wouldnt be about the sex of a person because for example if you'll date NB people of all types, trans men, trans women and cis women that will usually cover the other sexes as well.

Now my question and the conversation I wish to start with yall is would that person still be pansexual?

They are attracted to people regardless of gender because if you're attracted to trans men but not cis men it's not gender you arent attracted to. It's something else. It wouldnt be sex either. For the reasons listed above. So are these people pansexual? Am I missing something? Genuinely I want other people to weigh in on this.

Am I missing something with the idea that trans men and cis men are the same gender? I always thought that cis or trans referred to your current gender in relation to your birth sex. Trans being that you are the opposite of your birth sex and Cis being that you align with your birth sex.

I also dont want to come off as if I'm gating off my sexuality to others I'm just legitimately curious if someone like this would fall under pansexuality or not. Purely because I wish to understand the definition of pansexuality better not to exclude others.

Please if I'm missing something here let me know!

[thedeadflag]

I saw the post about lesbians using he/him pronouns and tbh I think it lacked nuance given every lesbian I've met who does that is a WOC who struggles with being involuntarily distanced from femininity due to racism and/or has linguistic difficulties with English being a colonialistic language that can't really truly convey their specific womanhood. That said, given this is a consequence of racialized misogyny this is a separate issue than white gay men using she/her and I won't defend that.

I mean, as I said in my notes, I’d never personally, individually call anyone out for it, and I get that gender can get complicated for folks, especially across the intersection of race given how femininity in women is positioned in alignment with whiteness, by and large. I won’t pretend to understand that sort of experience. 

I can only speak to my experiences with afab people who use he/him.

And in my experiences, the vast majority of afab folks who have a stable lesbian & woman identity, who also use he/him, have been major transmisogynists and cissexists, similar to the way transmisogynistic/cissexist transmasc folks and trans men in their approach to defining lesbian identity/women’s spaces/lesbian spaces/womanhood/femaleness/etc. (and there is a notable diff between that group’s handling of those concepts and your avg cis lesbian’s) They’re often the first to degender trans women and undermine our womanhood (often coincidentally narrowing womanhood and lesbianism to ‘female experiences’ in ways that almost always distance trans women and keep afab trans masc folks and trans men closer to lesbianism than us) in my experience, far more readily and easily than other lesbians in the community. Anecdotal? Absolutely, and I’m the first to admit that, but that does play a part in how I feel. A lot of the transmisogyny I faced in community spaces came from (or was directed through the community by) folks with he/him pronouns…mostly trans men and trans mascs, but a few butch lesbians, too. 

So that, on top of my own experiences with recognizing that he/him are primarily infused with maleness even if there’s some wiggle room, and that I fought tooth and nail for the she/her pronouns I use as a means of communicating my womanhood?

Yeah, I take some issue with it all. I think it’s a largely cis experience of being able to take up the pronouns of the opposite binary gender and still have a reasonable expectation of maintaining their core gender validity. I think afab nb woman-aligned folks by and large are able to leverage their proximity to their birth assignment in this way as well.  I think this particular form of expression is often cis privilege at play being wielded around often uncritically, with no thought to the existence of trans folks, particularly trans women, and no thought to how that usage impacts trans folks negatively. I think there’s an extensive history of trans dudes and trans mascs using this very reasoning to push trans women and transfem folks out of women’s spaces, out of wlw spaces, and being very successful in the process. I think there’s a link between the reasoning that approves of those pronouns for women and the essentialist bullshit that distances/excludes trans women from womanhood and lesbianism while holding up birth assignment and socialization as essential, and simply tagging on a “this is inclusive to trans butches” does nothing to erase that.  

I can wrap my head around why some would do it instead of opting for gender neutral pronouns given the right argument, and I can even respect some of those reasons well enough, while recognizing there are some reasons I will lack the experience to be able to understand. Still, unless it’s a language barrier issue of someone coming from an inherently gendered language, whose folks have their own way of navigating gender and sexuality through language that don’t translate to English…then yeah, I’m almost certainly going to be uncomfortable and wary around those folks until they prove they can be trusted. 

When the majority of afab non-men I’ve encountered who use he/him have reproduced transmisogyny at the same degree and fervor as trans men and trans mascs, I’m not going to give them the benefit of the doubt. They’d have to make it explicitly clear that they hold no transmisogyny or cissexism inside them before I stop expecting them to behave and think like male and male-aligned folks in the community.

It’s complicated stuff, and I have no doubt it causes a lot of heartbreak and pain and confusion for a hell of a lot of folks. However, I have to prioritize trans women above all others. And I know the impact this sort of thing has had on us, and it’s not good, so I have an obligation to be critical of it and boost the voices of those directly affected (trans butches). A solid chunk of lesbians of colour do use those pronouns (I’ve personally seen more white afab lesbians use them, but I do recognize it’s a more popular form of expression among woc in general), and as a white woman, it’s not my place to tell them they can’t ID certain ways, or can’t express themselves in ways that help them navigate the racialized misogyny they face. 

But any time transmisogyny or cissexism pops up, that’s going to affect me. And while I sincerely hope my past has been an outlier, and things will be much much better in the future within this context, I’ve come to expect a heavy dose of transmisogyny and trans male/trans masc-style bullshit from people in the wlw community using he/him pronouns. Such folks have very rarely managed to avoid sinking down to my expectations, so I’ll refrain from trusting them and will view them as a threat until proven otherwise. I think that’s about as fair a compromise as I could provide on that front.

[caesuralesbian]

My friend brought up a really good point about "femmephobia" We were talking about a mutual acquaintance who pushes femmephobia politics despite being a pretty androgynous person who admits to wanting to present more masculinely and generally being a person with complicated feelings towards their own femininity. This acquaintance had told me that their main reason for not presenting more masculine is that they're scared to bc they hate men and don't want to be isolated from women. They essentially felt that if they were too masculine they'd basically be a man. Or too close to a man for women to be comfortable around them. All I could think in response was well fuck. Masculinity =\= men and femininity =\= women. That's one of the underlying problems in this whole femmephobia idea. Being masculine doesn't make you unlike women or a threat to women like this acquaintance seems to believe. My friend pointed out that the acquaintance tends to use the term "femme" almost defensively: Always being sure to call themselves femme and loop themselves in with the other "femmes" (read: women. or on occasion anyone who's not a dangerous man). Making jokes about how they're super femme and love "femme things" like makeup and clothes (basically things that are loosely attached to femininity but not really part of the definition of "femme" or in opposition to other identities) I said I think it's weird how so many people whose experiences are clearly erased and ignored by femmephobia politics support them anyway (I've witnessed many butch and stud lesbians support it as well as GNC women and androgynous NB folks and I just couldn't understand) My friend suggested that femmephobia has gained traction with a number of these folks (folks who are androgynous or masculine to some degree/ not male aligned/ excluded from universal femininity and lumped in with universal masculinity) bc the politics of it feel the same as the homophobia and transphobia these folks have experienced particularly at the hands of straight women. Most of these people who are isolated by femmephobia but support it anyway are LGBT+ women or trans folks. People who have already been taught that they have to be careful not to be predatory and toxic. People whose attachments to masculinity or androgyny or disconnects from femininity have already been used to label them as unsafe and threatening. Most of the people I see talk about femmephobia are afab feminine presenting nonbinary people. Idk their motivation and I won't try to guess. But the next biggest group (and the one that pushes it the hardest and cheers the loudest behind it) is cishet women. Pushing the idea that feminine presenting women are under attack by some universal "masculine" force. (Including butch women and androgynous nonbinary folks and others.) Which sounds awfully familiar. Like straight women who acted like they were unsafe changing around me in the locker room. Or straight women who suddenly wanted more distance in our friendship after I came out. Straight women who felt threatened by me just bc I as a bi (at the time I came out) woman no longer fit their idea of womanhood. I was suddenly too much like a man. How much did this amplify when I stopped shaving and didn't wear makeup as often and started to dress more androgynously for my comfort and came out as a lesbian? When I distanced myself from this incorrect idea of universal femininity and rejected the label femme (not bc I'm opposed to it in any sense but bc it doesn't fit me) In straight women's eyes, femmephobia is just LGBT+ people catching up to what they've always believed: that LGBT+ women are predatory and creepy and scary. That straight women's own fragile femininity is more important than other women's safety and comfort. I do think femmephobia stemmed from a place of trying to describe the experiences of NB people who didn't fit our current model of gender dynamics. I think it had good intentions. But somewhere along the line, a bunch of people who experienced gender and gendered oppression very very differently tried to define all of their experiences the same way. And now we've got a word that implies that GNC men, trans men, all NB folks, gender conforming women, and actual femmes are all oppressed in exactly the same way-- by cis men and gender conforming men and studs and butches and GNC women. And now a bunch of straight women are co-opting the idea to reinforce their lesbophobic ideas of GNC womanhood. Anyway femininity vs masculinity is a really lazy and inaccurate way to talk about gender and privilege bc not everyone fits those descriptors and they mean different things to different people and we all experience gender differently based on our various intersecting identities and that is all thank you

[bisexual-lesbian-fox-blog]

"Pansexual means I can like men women and trans. That's why I like it more than bi. Hearts not parts. I believe in non binary people and I don't exclude them ir trans people. Do I find you identifying as bi to be problematic."

Okay well I'm femme aligned nb attracted to androgyny and femininity. I'm repulsed by masculinity or a male identity. Oh and I'm not transphobic. I like female and nb dick and dint just acknowledge cis people as their gender.

You come across as transphobic and highly ignorant. I don't need to be attracted to men to be attracted to unaligned, androgyny aligned, or femme aligned nb people tyvm. And I'm no less bi for not being attracted to men. Lesbian is a modifier and convenience when describing myself to those who aren't that familiar with the land of the queer.

[tm3feels]

Three years after the fact, I am still bitter about androsexual and gynesexual being warped into transphobic terms. So some asshats decided to turn them into genitalia focused terms. There are people who tried to warp bisexuality into being inherently transphobic but people still identify as bi and assert their own definitions (usually attraction to two or more genders). I am a nonbinary afab person. I know I'm also trans man now (nb men represent ✊🏾), so currently I'm gay, but before I knew I was a dude, it was more challenging. I wasn't straight anymore because I wasn't female anymore. But I didn't feel like I could say queer in any capacity because it wasn't attraction to the same or even my assigned gender. Diamoric didn't exist yet, and even then it doesn't say who I'm attracted to. If masexual was around at the time, I wouldn't have used it because I still hate how it sounds (but kudos to you if you identify as masexual and feel comfortable telling people that). All I had was androphile/androsexual. And I knew it wasn't about genitals. I knew I could be attracted to cis and trans men. And I was right because I'm dating a trans man right now. In 2014, I did not appreciate people telling me my identity was suddenly inherently transphobic simply because OTHER PEOPLE were misuing it. Bisexuality isn't transphobic just because a select handful are using it to exclude trans and nonbinary people. Lesbian isn't inherently transphobic just because of TERFs. Gay isn't inherently transphobic just because of cis men trying to push us trans men out. Nobody in the nonbinary community is trying to say that androgyne is a gender identity about genitals because of its root words. So I'm glad the discourse died down and nonbinary people will be able to use androsexual and gynesexual properly again, as attraction to men and women, respectively, regardless of genitals. As a side note, I'm seeing some people try to use these terms as attraction to masculinity and femininity? Honestly, if you're like "I'm androsexual because I'm attracted to men AND maybe masculine people in general", like, #relatable. Maaaaaaybe these terms can be used as less exclusively binary than gay/straight, especially if you're still questioning about it. But the foundation of the attraction should be attraction to a gender identity. In my experience, the associated gender expression stuff is like, collateral damage, potentially because I'm secretly hoping those masculine people I see around randomly are in fact male-aligned in their gender. But if you find your attraction dependent on gender expression instead of gender itself, you might need to step back and consider the possibility that you're instead pan or ply with a preference. Cuz I guarantee you that the gender expression you're looking for is found in more than one gender.