#and even if you *only* care about trans women

[siphonophoresupernumerary]

Very very very good points! I would say that the final point about trans men can very easily, and indeed necessarily, be extended to trans women and nonbinary people. Did they account for trans people at all? There is built in margin for error there with people in the closet or are not comfortable being out for survey purposes.

I grew up as a man in a christian family and I can see how potent the disdain conservatives, especially christians, have for college. It's a setting that christian ideals don't control that affords the students a lot of freedom and diversity. Diversity generally makes people lose faith in the variety of christianity they were raised in, skewing more progressive.

The increase of women in college can very well be seen as an increase of diversity, but because the paper doesn't explore race, doesn't clarify how or if trans people counted, and only barely touches on sexual orientation, we only GET to see her findings on gender.

Looking at it though I'm also inclined to agree that fewer men are going to college, or believe it when it is asserted. Apparently young college age men are more conservative as is evident from the last presidential election, which fits with my earlier point about christian's anti-college/diversity rhetoric. Though if that's true I might posit that certain political beliefs and religions are in flight, more than any given gender. This fits in with Davis' note about the prevalence of gay men in college, as gay men are less likely to be religious for homophobia reasons. Plus christian ideals are generally "men provide, women nurture" so christian women may well be flying too, but their numbers would be significantly smaller than christian men, and thereby it doesn't stick out when looking at gender alone.

I'm not 100% sure how substack works, but the article is on Matriarchal Blessing, a name which has certain Divine Feminine connotations. Looking up the author, Celeste Davis, I find that her substack is entirely about gender. Which leads me to believe that maybe the author cares mostly or only about gender. Explaining the lack of thurough research that explores each or any of the vectors uncle-fruity indicated. I'm inclined to say that Celeste Davis is biased. Additionally, even though I don't see overt christian themes in there, the presentation of and

Oh. She's an exmormon. I guess that explains the quasi-religious qualities to Matriarchal Blessing. Which include a "bless your wanting" ritual for paid subscription members. Mormons believe in a concept of the Divine Feminine; they believe in a Heavenly Mother, innate power in being a woman, and also the "1950s patriarchal dream" (Celeste Davis' words) which include strict gender roles. The value put into both roles are purportedly equal in policy, though by policy the vast majority of leaders are men. A lot of women find the role they are given restrictive and that looks like what drove Davis away from the mormon church.

Another note to flex my Mormon knowledge, Matriarchal Blessing is a twist on the Patriarchal Blessing. A Patriarch for a stake(geographical collection of church attendees) gives a member a blessing which is a mixture of a blessing, a pep talk, a testimony(or tiny church lesson), and a personal prophecy(fortune telling). The stake's Matriarch is his wife and her role is to record and transcribe the blessing.

Mormon gender roles are written in policy, as close to stone as you get in this modern age. The Family Proclamation says that marriage is between a man and a woman, that the only genders are man and woman, that everyone is supposed to get married (1 man, 1 woman. Explicitly no polygamy), and that men are supposed to provide and women are supposed to care for the household, and finally that sex is ok only within a marriage.

I got distracted and lost the thread I was following but yeah, I don't ascribe malicious intent to Celeste Davis or intentional bias, but I do think her bias is having an effect. For someone who blogged about leaving her religion, it's weird to me that she didn't point out any religious demographics in the article.

Actually. I'm shocked that tumblr passed around an article by an exmormon as Article Of The Day, though a piece of reactionary masculine-critical rhetoric doesn't surprise me in the slightest. There's so few sources in this article but who cares so long as it feels good to read. Which, honestly, I am guilty of too.

Why aren't we talking about the real reason male college enrollment is dropping? (Celeste Davis, Oct 6 2024)

"White flight is a term that describes how white people move out of neighborhoods when more people of color move in.

White flight is especially common when minority populations become the majority. That neighborhood then declines in value.

Male flight describes a similar phenomenon when large numbers of females enter a profession, group, hobby or industry—the men leave. That industry is then devalued.

Take veterinary school for example:

In 1969 almost all veterinary students were male at 89%.

By 1987, male enrollment was equal to female at 50%.

By 2009, male enrollment in veterinary schools had plummeted to 22.4%

A sociologist studying gender in veterinary schools, Dr. Anne Lincoln says that in an attempt to describe this drastic drop in male enrollment, many keep pointing to financial reasons like the debt-to-income ratio or the high cost of schooling.

But Lincoln’s research found that “men and women are equally affected by tuition and salaries.”

Her research shows that the reason fewer men are enrolling in veterinary school boils down to one factor: the number of women in the classroom.

For every 1% increase in the proportion of women in the student body, 1.7 fewer men applied.

One more woman applying was a greater deterrent than $1000 in extra tuition! (…)

Since males had dominated these professions for centuries, you would think they would leave slowly, hesitantly or maybe linger at 40%, 35%, 30%, but that’s not what happens.

Once the tipping point reaches majority female- the men flee. And boy do they flee!

It’s a slippery slope. When the number of women hits 60% the men who are there make a swift exit and other men stop joining.

Morty Schapiro, economist and former president of Northwestern University has noticed this trend when studying college enrollment numbers across universities:

“There’s a cliff you fall off once you become 60/40 female/male. It then becomes exponentially more difficult to recruit men.”

Now we’ve reached that 60% point of no return for colleges.

As we’ve seen with teachers, nurses and interior design, once an institution is majority female, the public perception of its value plummets.

Scanning through Reddit and Quora threads, many men seem to be in agreement - college is stupid and unnecessary.

A waste of time and money. You’re much better off going into the trades, a tech boot camp or becoming an entrepreneur. No need for college. (…)

When mostly men went to college? Prestigious. Aspirational. Important.

Now that mostly women go to college? Unnecessary. De-valued. A bad choice. (…)

School is now feminine. College is feminine. And rule #1 if you want to safely navigate this world as a man? Avoid the feminine.

But we don’t seem to want to talk about that."

[genderqueerdykes]

ive been reading a lot about transmascs/trans men throughout history (alexander durov, one eyed charley, albert cashier etc) and many of them from what ive seen were able to get pretty far without having their sex discovered and im just wondering how? i know you don't really need much to pass even in 'modern days' and that you don't need to medically transition to pass (i passed a lot before T in front of strangers)

does it really only come down to just not telling and the men around them not caring for their voice?

its a bit harder to research since so much of history involving transmascs are either scrubbed or they're deadnamed and misgendered once they're gone

idk maybe im just lowkey jealous because many of them rarely got questioned from what ive seen and they were generally respected while they were alive

you know, that's a good question

if i had to guess, i think part of the reason people are so focused on gender right now is because we have recorded media to refer back to. instead of referring to people in our real lives we know, people tend to refer to the highly scripted people they see on the television, tablet, etc. we are fixated on what women "should look, act and sound like" and the same for men because we have multiple industries pushing this narrative. the internet is probably also likely a huge problem.

instead of people pointing to someone they know in their life and going "oh yeah i knew a guy like that before, he just had a high pitched voice!" (<- is actually talking about a trans man who isn't publicly out) they refer to the sculpted, scripted, preened and airbrushed people they see in shows, movies, games and popular content on YouTube. i think we're becoming way less accepting of the diversity humanity offers by being continuously lambasted with what "conventional attractiveness" and gender roles should look like.

it may also have to do with the fact that trans rights and trans people only really became known to the general public within the last 100 years. cishet people really just did not know about or consider the idea of a trans person anywhere near as much as they do now. i have a feeling its a lot of backlash from the civil rights movements of the past and present. i think people may have just minded their business before they became painfully aware of the existence of trans people.

those are my guesses, anyway. i'd love to hear more from other people on this!

[velvetvexations]

--- somehow i don't think the trans radfem movement thinks aphobia is a fine word to exist

It's almost quaint. Almost.

Why is there a wave of trans radfems defending 4chan boards

I'm going to need to be pointed to this if only because I'm going to get dinged for spreading malicious lies about trans women being "Nazis" otherwise, but lmfao if true.

wtf kind of hill is txttletale dying on now?

I mean she's still a tankie fuck but apparently now she's also getting in on the transmisogynistic harassment campaign game.

isn't "doll" specifically a fetish term? that is really not something people should be applying to other people without making sure it's ok first.

No, it's a Black ballroom term that trans women started running with.

People on this site are taking pissing on the poor to a whole new goddamn level “telling people that this person is/has sexually harassed someone who was a minor is calling everyone with their identity a pedophile”, I’d blame the school system but that really was a choice not to actually read and relay

it's definitely malicious

joan jett in the mv for i hate myself for loving you is like, unbearably beautiful

so true

it’s so obvious that these people choose to isolate themselves in a dimension crafted out of their own self-hatred that they care more about hurting their oppressors (and people who don’t even oppress them) than uplifting people hurt by systems of oppression. sometimes i think i’m bad but then i come across people like that and realise i’m relatively well-adjusted

inspiring innit

post addressed to trans women from a trans woman about trans women –> trfs in the notes: “why are you telling me to be nice to trans men?”

they have their priorities

absolutely wild to say that transunitists are 2010-reddit-style mras and then say things like "afab privilege." yeah those afabs with their wielding of power. and i bet they get free drinks at every bar and their bosses promote them for being pretty, huh.

they get upset at having their logic compared to MRAs because it's implicit misgendering (never mind that they directly call random trans men MRAs and radfems as well) but I'm not sure what they expect when they talk at length about how all of those fucking evil AFAB bitches are just waiting for their chance to screw you over with a false rape accusation

"pick me" is AAVE, and, like all white girls, they're overusing and misusing it until it has no meaning left 🙄

I actually wasn't aware of that. Neat. Disputed? See replies.

a lot of this going on is just reminding me once again of the intense monogenderism that really never gets worked on. It’s super awkward as a multigendered individual and an intersex one

it also just really feels so fucking tone ignorant the way people talk.

society still calls traits of men or masc, some even actively choose to agree while still being a counter to it gender but obviously real trans women don’t so attacking those things would never hurt them, and multigender trans woman who are also men? Obviously fake.

the English language is so fucking insufficient

I honestly wish every asshole who seems to think the ability to mask as complete cis and definitely just your assigned gender is a privilege had to live in my head for the holiday season. I am entirely in the closet with my family because of bigotry I have no other choice than living with my family for multiple reasons I just spent the entire winter holiday pretending to be a woman answering to my deadname being called aunty and sister and daughter and not being able to say jack shit about it without even being able to retreat to the solace of my friends afterwards because they are all busy with their own families. I want those assholes to experience the emotions and thoughts I just went through and come out the otherside and see if they still think that this is a fucking privilege.

Love you anon. <3

that anon telling on themselves so hard saying transmisogynys "far deeper" than transphobia. literally why on earth would you phrase it like that if the point was anything besides "my *special* oppression is way more poignant and meaningful than your boring regular oppression"

lmao right though it's so obviously just trying to mark their thing as having more dramatic flair

do you keep a backup of your blog with a program like tumblthree? there's a lot of valuable posts on it, and tumblr is almost distressingly transitory.

I don't, but noted.

[valyrfia]

the only drivers who i would even think about supporting outside of racing are vettel and hamilton. and more vettel than hamilton because at least i know that he has publicly said the he wouldn’t vote for & doesn’t like trump.

other than that, both of them have supported various causes over the years - lgbtq+ shirts & helmets, taking the knee, enviromental causes. same with hamilton: misson 44, lgbtq+ helmets etc. their dedication to helping people & giving back in a public way has tended to be very good, and so they are the two drivers i’d be most prone to liking outside of racing - and even then i doubt our world views and morals would line up especially well.

(sorry to mr ‘i have gay friends & like elon musk’, mr ‘you have to respect donald & if you pretend listen to women you get them to have sex with you’ & mr ‘slurs & support of noted racist nelson piquet’. i’ll root for charles wdc, but i don’t think my morals and care and interest in the world would line up with his, and he seems the least problematic at the moment)

shoutout to yuki tsunoda & christian mansell, actually, for both recently(ish) doing relatively small but impactful statements - yuki helping the clean up during the imola floods was lovely, and telling of his character, and christian recently made a statement reassuring all of his trans fans & trans fans of racing as a sport that he saw them, accepted them & that they are “always welcome in his community” which has made me a fan of his quite frankly, even despite the fact that i’m not trans.

just saying - if you cannot support a driver purely concerning racing, then there are options, even though they are all still multi-millionaire men who have probably never given a thought to anyone not involved in racing. i’d still probably learn to separate your enjoyment of a sport/support of an athlete within a sport with support for them as a public figure.

^^^ couldn't put it better myself!

[olenoidedserratuspilled]

Those tags and your tone led me to believe you were implying because TERFs use hating men as an excuse, you should not do it and women saying they hate men is wrong.

Yeah I'm aware you believed that. This is why I said you were putting words in my mouth.

Though again, if this conversation doesn't matter, why apologize for it? I never said it bothered me. Do it more, call me names, say my dad's a reprobate and my mom drank while she was pregnant (if it needs clarifying, I'm not saying you did that, I'm jokingly telling you to do it). If this conversation really doesn't matter, your behavior in it doesn't either. If you don't care act like you don't care, it'll at least be more fun for you.

The tags I copied when I originally responded to your comment blamed people like OP—me—for trans mascs experiencing transphobia on tumblr.

Those were my tags and I did mean to say that. The specific transphobic posts I was referring to and that I posted screenshots for are doing exactly what I described: using man-hating to excuse transphobic behavior towards trans men. I blame people like you - not you specifically - because this is a direct outcome of applying the same attitude towards trans men that one would towards cis ones - something you advocated for pretty explicitly.

To be 100% honest about my stance:

"Calling men demons doesn't matter" is a fine take to have.

"Talking about trans men the same way you talk about cis men is okay" is questionable, but not outright dangerous on its own.

Only and exclusively when the two overlap, like they do in your post, do I take grievance with it.

First, because I think no trans person, male or female, deserves to be called a demon. Not even the bad ones.

Second, because when those two overlap it creates an opportunity to justify transphobia directed at trans men by painting it as only man-hating. This isn't theoretical, it actually happened. I provided examples. By saying it doesn't happen or that it does not matter when it does, you are making it easier for people who do this to keep doing it.

And if it really doesn't matter, why would you care who I blame for it happening? If I blame people like you for my bus being late, are you going to make a wall of text responding to that, too? If I'm the only one who cares, let me keep being the only one.

I guess I can agree that TERFs trying to excuse bigoted statements as just being anti-men sometimes happens so if you really only care about that as an observation okay but I don’t really see why it matters.

Because excusing bigoted statements is never acceptable, no matter what the excuse is. If all of the other ways they justify bigotry warrant criticism, why not this one? It is not the content of the excuse that I am criticizing, but the act of making excuses in the first place.

A post joking about all transmascs being genocided was made, well over a hundred people reblogged it showing approval, and excusing this blatantly bigoted behavior as justified because it solely targeted men. This matters to me because I don't believe trans men deserve this sort of treatment- if it does not matter to you, whatever, but this is my blog and I post about the things that matter to me.

And if it genuinely matters so little, why do you care that I blame people like you (not even you personally!) for it happening? If you don't care, why acknowledge me doing it in the first place?

I'm not forcing you to respond to me. On the contrary, I fully expected you to ignore me and advised you to do it, because you don't think this conversation matters. If it really doesn't, why give it the time of day?

As for being people say what they mean, sometimes people say things and believe they mean them but their actions say otherwise

And sometimes people say something because they meant to say it. Even when they lie, it is because they meant to lie. And again, if it doesn't matter that rhey say it and it doesn't matter whether or not they meant it, why do you care what I think they did or didn't mean?

I don’t know how I’d keep putting word in your mouth if I didn’t read the post, but you seem sure I’ll do both.

I'm sure you'll keep putting words in my mouth because you've done it before in this thread already. I'm sure you won't read the post because you seem so adamant that my point doesn't matter, which means there is *no reason* for you to read it. I may have been wrong about the latter, but you still seem firm in the stance my point doesn't matter. If there's no reason for you to read my post, why would you?

If you don't care about any of this, good, I'm not telling you to. But if it doesn't matter then act like it doesn't matter. I'm not going to stop caring about this, no matter how much you tell me you don't. This is because I'm not you and neither of us have any bearing on each others' lives.

This is why I think it's best if we stop talking here.

Something I want this website specifically to reflect on! Are you mad at women for talking about men the same way you talk about cishets or neurotypicals? Why?

[eroticcannibal]

Regarding that whole terf being like "I can totes tell which is a real vulva just by looking at it" thing, people are covering the transmisoginy but I've noticed no one is talking about how anti-porn views are playing into how this terf views bodies

Like, their is clearly a reactionary "only bigger inner labia are real, everything is surgical" thing going on here which obviously stems from the (legitimate!) Complaints about lack of genital diversity in porn (and inner labia size was a huge point of discussion a few years back). And like, radfems being radfems, decided at the time that the appropriate response was to decide anyone with this more favoured-by-mainstream-porn kind of vulva are evil and should be mocked and probably got surgery (even if they didnt) which makes them a traitor to women etc etc

And this is not to say that this specific instance is actually an attack on anyone but trans women (though the "real vs fake women" narrative *is* something also applied to sex workers of any gender, including cis women, by radfems) but rather I feel it is something to be aware of especially considering how anti-sex work sentiment affects overly sexualised groups (trans women) and groups who engage in sex work more frequently (also trans women)

[benveydraws]

i can't love you in this skin

[ot3]

this flavor of trans guy misogyny where they do rhetorical backflips to explain why them not caring about women is good, actually, and since cis men are also misogynists a lot of the time we should all just stop complaining about it.

[whereserpentswalk]

So, basically, Peridot is a compellingly written character, but that doesn't make her good autism rep. Something can be well written and still bigoted. I'd actually consider her a very bad stereotype of a neurodivergent person.

She begins as a villain, with all her autistic traits being things used to demonize her. She's written as cold, not caring about people, not understanding things about human culture and acting in an inhuman manner. Of all the gems in the early seasons she's the one who deviates most from humanity in appearance and behavior. And all of these things are shown to be villainous traits, flaws for her to overcome.

See, Steven Universe has this problem that a lot of fantasy stories have (lotr being another good example) where villains are textually fascists and imperialists but are charactered by traits of those fascists want to oppress. At least in the era of the show I'm most nostalgic for (and the era of the show where homeworld is introduced), our two examples of homeworld gems who follow homeworld's ideology are an extremely Nd coded character, and an extremely trans/gnc character. So, the text is telling us homeworld is a colonial eugenicist empire, but the fight against homeworld is largely shown through three able bodied gender conforming women and a whiteboy fighting a negative stereotype of autistic people (peridot) and a negative stereotype of trans/butch women (jasper).

Things get even worse when it comes to ablism during peridots redemption arc. Her limb enhancers are removed, giving her a more infantilized design, and also making it so our only disability rep has mobility aids taken away as part of her redemption arc. And she's treated entirely differently when she's redeemed, the other gems basically treat her as a pet. When she was a powerful villain, those autistic traits were used to villainize her, but once she's in the heroes' care those traits are used to infantilize her. When she's redeemed, she's not treated as an equal to the group, she's sequestered away in a barn where she's not really allowed to interact with anyone, and her skills and knowledge are never really as part of the main team. Like, it's very rare a character who's given a redemption arc doesn't start fighting for the good guys, but she's an exception. Like, it only makes sense that a character who's a technological genius, expert marksmen, and the person whose knows the most about the villains' society, doesn't join the good guy's team, and is treated like a child by them, if you understand that she's coded as something society doesn't believe should be given power.

Peridot's entire redemption arc is one of her being depowered, and infantilized by neurotypical characters, and learning to accept that as the correct order of things. We're told that the gem empire does space eugenics. But we're shown that in the gem empire our one disabled character is a respected member of the community, given autonomy, power and accommodations, while our protagonists force her to relinquish all of her autonomy and put her somewhere far away from society. A show about fighting space nazis should be one where redeeming a lower ranking member of the evil empire should mean giving them more power and treating them like more of an adult person deserving of respect, but it's the exact opposite.

[musical-chick-13]

Regarding the whole "Fandom Is An Escape, so why should I have to care this much about misogyny/racism/ableism/transphobia/etc." thing. Idk about the rest of you, but it gets kind of hard for me to "escape" when I keep seeing people say the same vile things about characters who share aspects of my identity that I hear all the time in real life.

[existingtm]

Wow

J. K. Rowling's response to the Trump campaign and his successful re-election is...wow. She really does not give a fuck as long as she can point to trans people as the number one problem in the world.

Y'all Rowling devotee, self-martyred "TERFS" really don't give a shit about women, do you? That's the worst part—using women as a fucking shield for your abuse toward trans people. You think you'll be safe because you're one of the good ones? As long as YOU feel safe, fuck everyone else, right?

Hope you U.S.—based cowards enjoy losing your reproductive rights because you couldn't stand sharing a world with trans people. Better hope you can get to a state with enough legislation to protect you. Oh, wait! Those are trans refuge states, so you probably won't feel safe there. Never mind! Best of luck on your own!

[carnage-cathedral]

I genuinely, wholeheartedly do not believe that women are statistically more likely to be rape victims. I think the numbers are probably pretty balanced but men just don't come forward about it because the reaction is always some variation of "well it was probably another man who did it to you so men are still the problem" or fucking whatever

[maybeicanbesaved]

got into yet another fight with my mom, again about voting/the election, she said that she’s only voted once in her life and never cares to again because she ‘doesn’t care about politics’, saying that shit almost proudly?? and it set me off for obvious reasons, then she got mad at me for saying it’s because she’s privileged and ‘most’ shit doesn’t affect her directly so she can afford ‘not to care’

[dragoninahumancostume]

My favorite part of being alive is that I've never felt welcome in any space except for that one year when I thought I was a non-binary bisexual asexual girl when I was 13 :)

[thedevotionaltour]

if i had a nickel for every time i had online friends and acquaintances that started off in the realm of not having many strong opinions then became anti porn then became radfems and reposting terf rhetoric well it wouldn't be a lot but it's a disappointing amount because it's not zero

[snekdood]

its so telling how terfs supposed fucks about women just kind devolves into bullying trans people, it’s almost like you use that as a guise for your desire to just be fuckin bullies, prolly bc you were bullied by girls who were better than you growing up :/// unfortunate