#anti transfeminism

[gremlingirlsmell]

hey just so y'all know, rhetoric like this:

is anti-transfeminist dogwhistling.

the "radfems" they're talking about are transfems trying to define and use language about our own opression like "transmisogyny" and who is targeted by it.

"gender essentialism" is used to mean different things. for one it's meant to denounce tme/tma language, saying that everyone is targeted by transmisogyny the same, and depraving us of standpoint epistemology. a second meaning i often see is: it's "gender essentialism" to say "we live in a patriarchy that benefits men over women"

this tactic is used mainly to paint transfeminists as dangerous and transmasc-hating, for applying intersectionality and materialism to feminist theory. it's to shun us by calling us terfs (a hate group primarily centered against transfems) which will immediately mark us as unsafe for other transfems and trans people in general. this is done instead of calling us baeddels, because calling us medieval slurs has fallen out of fashion and has become too obviously transmisogynistic

[pretty-kitten-paw]

The UK government headed and run by many transphobes has decided to make the Trans Panic defense legal. If a trans person does not disclose their gender and the other party presses charges due to this, they can be convicted with sexual assault crime.

Furthermore any trans person, (tho particularly trans women), who has obtained a Gender Reassignment Certificate (GRC) will be put into prison of their birth sex if the matter is a sex crime

With these two bits of legislation Labour have made it not only legal but easy for trans people to be jailed and sexually assaulted by members of their birth sex. We know for a fact that sexual assault in prisons happen esp to trans women. We know that placing them in female prisons, whilst not eliminating sexual assault, does make it less common.

Labour are defining a movement based on fear. Based on the fact that any cis person disgusted by their own internalised transphobia at sleeping with a trans person will have the full backing of the law to punish them. Even if sexual consent was given. Even if you both got inebriated and fucked and the "victim" found out your transness later. This puts every stealth trans woman at risk. This puts every trans woman who enjoys hook ups at risk. This puts everyone at risk.

And yet people wonder why trans women overwhelmingly date their sisters and friends.

[taliabhattwrites]

I don't think there is a significant or notable number of people who believe transmascs are not oppressed.

I feel slightly insane just having to type this out, but this is rhetoric you inevitably come across if you discuss transfeminism on Tumblr.

The mainstream, cissexist understanding of transmasculine people is the Irreversible Damage narrative (one that's old enough to show up in Transsexual Empire as well) of transmascs as "misguided little girls", "tricked" into "mutilating themselves". It is a deliberately emasculating and transphobic narrative that very explicitly centers on oppression, even if the fevered imaginings misattribute the cause. As anyone who's dealt with the gatekeeping medical establishment knows, they are far from giving away HRT or even consults with both hands, and most transfems I know have a hard enough time convincing people to take DIY T advice, leave alone "tricking" anyone into top surgery.

Arguably, the misogyny that transmasculine folks experience is the defining narrative surrounding their existence, as transmasculinity is frequently and erroneously attributed to "tomboyish women" who resent their position in the patriarchy so much they seek to transition out of it. This rhetoric is an invisiblization of transmasculinity, constructed deliberately to preserve gendered verticality, for if it were possible to "gain status" under the sexed regime, its entire basis, its ideological naturalization, would fall apart.

Honestly, the actual discussions I see are centered around whether "transmisogyny" is a term that should apply to transmascs and transfems alike. While I understand the impetus for that discussion, I feel like the assertion that transmisogyny is a specific oppression that transfems experience for our perceived abandonment of the "male sex" is often conflated with the incorrect idea that we believe transmasculine people are not oppressed at all. This is not true, and we understand, rather acutely, that our society is entirely organized around reproductive exploitation. That is, in fact, the source of transfeminine disposability!

I know I'm someone who "just got here" and there is a history here that I'm not a part of, but so much of that history is speckled with hearsay and fabrication that I can't even attempt to make sense of it. All I know is that I, in 2024, have been called a revived medieval slur for effeminate men by people who attribute certain beliefs to me based on my being a trans woman who is also a feminist, and I simply do not hold those views, nor do I know anyone who sincerely does.

If you're going to attempt to discredit a transfeminist, or transfeminism in general, then please at least do us the courtesy of responding to things we actually say and have actually argued instead of ascribing to us phantom ideologies in a frankly conspiratorial fashion. I also implore people to pay attention to how transphobic rhetoric operates out in the wider world, how actual reactionaries talk about and think of trans people, instead of fixating so hard on internecine social media clique drama that one enters an alternate reality--a phantasm, as Judith Butler would put it.

Speaking of which--do y'all have any idea how overrepresented transmascs are in trans studies and queer theory? Can we like, stop and reckon with reality-as-it-is, instead of hallucinating a transfeminine hegemony where it doesn't exist? I'm aware a lot of their output isn't particularly explicative on the material realities of transmasculine oppression despite their prominence in the academy, but that is ... not the fault of trans women, who face extremely harsh epistemic injustice even in trans studies.

The actual issue is how invisiblized transmasculine oppression is and how the epistemicide that transmasculine people face manifests as a refusal to differentiate between the misogyny all women face, reproductive exploitation in particular, and the contours of violence, erasure, and oppression directed at specifically transmasculine people.

You will notice that is a society-wide problem, motivated by a desire to erase the possibilities of transmasculinity, to the point of not even being willing to name it. You will notice that I am quite familiar with how this works, and how it's completely compatible with a materialist transfeminist framework that analyzes how our oppression is--while distinct--interlinked and stems from the same root.

I sincerely hope that whoever needs to see this post sees it, and that something productive--more productive dialogue, at least--can arise from it.

[agendercryptidlev]

There's this weird disconnect I see from people against transandrophobia theory where they seem to think people speaking about transandrophobia are anti-feminist, even going as far as to say "You dumb boys just need feminism!" as if transandrophobia theory isn't part of feminism, the same way transmisogyny or misogynoir theory are part of feminism. Feminism has always been necessary for the liberation all trans people, yes even trans men!

I've talked with a LOT of people about transandrophobia theory, and you'll find most people talking about it are doing so through the lens of trans feminism first and foremost.

[shamebats]

It's perfectly fine to be uncomfortable with femininity especially if you had it forced upon you, especially as a trans person, btw. Some of us will never be comfortable wearing makeup, having long hair, wearing skirts or being called "girl" and it's not only perfectly ok, it adds to the beautiful rainbow of diversity that is queerness.

It's not toxic masculinity if it's gendered trauma from having been a trans person in a cissexist society all your life — and besides, the whole point of transitioning is figuring out who you are and what brings you joy! You don't need to repent for your personal discomfort with femininity. You don't need to force yourself into another box that doesn't feel right. I spent 27 long years trying to do just that & guess what, it didn't work!

There are plenty of flamboyant gay men out there who wear earrings and heels but hate women. Feminism isn't what's in your closet or on your face and misogyny isn't a type of gender expression either. Don't let people make you feel that way. Here's your free license to do whatever you want forever.

[knightsbestowedbeauty]

On the Topic of Misgendering from "Allies"

Anti-transmasculine "allies" (both cisgender and transgender) will accuse transgender men of having "penis envy" (a misogynistic Freudian concept on WOMEN), accuse transmasculine people of weaponising their AGAB and ironically insult them through derogatory terms based on their AGAB (e.g., theyFAB), accuse white transgender men of weaponising white WOMEN tears, tell transgender men to "man up if they WANT to be men", etc...

BUT the moment a transmasculine person talks about their experiences with misogyny, they have to walk on eggshells and cannot acknowledge they were raised as girls and are forced into womanhood by society, because then, they "MUST" be implying transfeminine people do not experience misogyny*.

So, it "IS" acceptable to misgender (and malgender, another topic) transmasculine people when someone is doing it in the name of "feminism" ("calling transmasculine people out for their alleged (trans)misogyny"), yet a transmasculine person saying they were AFAB or explaining the reality of how society treats them as "failed women" is them "misgendering themselves for malicious reasons"?

To anti-transmasculine people, the context of transmasculine people's gender identity depends entirely on whether depicting them as women or men is more convenient than the other.

*Misogyny is far more complex than, "I identify as a woman, therefore I am affected by misogyny". It is also not exclusively, "Society views me as a woman, therefore I am affected by misogyny". You do not have to play René Descartes here. Misogyny affects all marginalised gender identities, including transfeminine people, and entails many, many experiences.

[corvid-on-the-rock]

look im sorry but im sick to fucking death of people who were raised & socialised as boys and men never taking a fucking second to analyize the lens they view the world through like. half of the younger amabs, and yes i mean that, ive met never learned how to stop seeing afabs, and yes I mean that, as little girls who need to shut up. you just havent taken the time to unlearn that. it's fucking infuriating. im tired of not saying it. transitioning into womanhood doesn't baptise you of the patriarchy you've been taught to perpetuate your whole life, especially if you're white, or the behaviors you learned to do that. you have to actually look that in the eyes and deal with it and stop treating the LGBTQ+ community as a whole like it's our job to deal with the "complexities" of intersectionality while you just get to focus on yeah pretty much JUST white transmisogyny. Y'all are still fucking sexist deep down.

[remma-demma]

I’m actually scared of alienating some of my followers and moots with all the trans discourse I’ve been steeping quietly in and contemplating, but… I’m trying to not let being scared shut me up about this. That, in and of itself, is erasure and silencing.

Fuck staying quiet. Trans men and mascs deserve a voice, and we, as a group, are not oppressing or invalidating anyone else by using that voice. (Obviously there are shithead exceptions!! Anyone can be an asshole.)

I really hope that if I ever speak about any of this in the future, that people recognize that it’s not ever, ever trans femininity as a concept I have an issue with. It’s people who

- try to divide the community

- are reinventing gender essentialism from the ground up but make it trans

-police other people’s identities and decide for them what oppression they must face because of a tiny set of superficial traits

- simply. Don’t understand what intersectionality means.

- disregard and invalidate anyone who doesn’t fit a very specific (binary, rich, white, abled, flawlessly passing) idea of what it means to be trans.

None of those things are specific or exclusive to one identity. There just happens to be a community of transfems who are currently espousing many of these ideas as gospel. They are understandably defensive because of real actual transmisogyny they face. But other trans people are not your enemy. Accusing anyone and everyone who tries to point these flaws out as radical transmisogynists is simply not true. Pointing out bigotry is not bigotry in itself.

I don’t want the trans community to constantly be at each other’s throats. We each have to sit down and think if we ever catch ourselves blaming an entire other marginalized group for our issues. That’s just fascism babes.

[anqueerism]

Seeing so-called transfeminists use the word "hysterical" in all fucking seriousness, completely dead fucking ass, in relation to trans men talking about their problems is.... Hilarious. Yes girl, you go! Such a feminist, calling trans men hysterical for being upset about being oppressed! You definitely don't sound like a misogynistic doctor from the 1840s!

Pathetic, honestly. Spines like fucking lawn chairs.

[intersexcat-tboy]

⚠️Reminder⚠️

⚠️Women are not the only marginalized gender ⚠️

[anarcho-catboyism]

Hey so it's actually wild that the two responses I'm seeing to the trans man who debated Ben Shapiro are

Transphobes: You can obviously tell that's a woman bc only women talk that much!

Trans "allies": You can obviously tell that's a man bc only men talk that much!

Wild how the response to transphobia / misogyny is repackaged transphobia / misogyny! Us trans guys would like it if you stopped that.

[rabid-catboy]

For the people saying wearing men's clothing has never been revolutionary or being a trans man just affirms the patriarchy, here's an example showing the exact opposite attitude ^

This too

PS: also look up Amelia Bloomer

[madmanbear]

Trans rights and access to women’s shelters

I was thinking about female domestic violence shelters, and how they’re a hot button issue for feminists and trans feminists alike.

Trans men often want access and trans women often want access. They’ll go back and forth, arguing over who needs access the most based on their proximity to cis womanhood, accusing one another of male privilege. Trans men were born female and thus need access more, trans women live as female and thus need access more, and so on.

Cis radfems will sometimes claim that trans men are technically welcome in women’s shelters. Some shelters run by radfems will even include a transmasc-inclusive policy on their shelter’s website or in literature. In practice, though, it’s often the case that only trans masculine people who are noticeably female-born and who carry female documentation are accepted in these shelters. If a trans man is too masculine, or if he passes for male, women staying at the shelter will sometimes complain about “feeling unsafe” because a man is there. It’s not uncommon for passing trans men to be unable to even get in the door.

Women’s shelters which have a policy to include trans women but not trans men often have similar issues. Trans women who pass as female, who do not look as if they were born male and who carry female documentation are allowed to stay unbothered. Trans women who do not pass are often harassed, hazed, bullied or asked to leave.

It would be great if we could have our own shelters, however we are a small minority of people. It does indeed make more sense both financially and logistically for us to share an existing space with another group than form our own. Mixed sex shelters serving the LGBT community specifically are a possible solution, and these spaces exist, just not in every city.

Why not use men’s shelters? Trans women and trans men both face danger, sexual vulnerability and the possibility of gendered violence due to our proximity to cis womanhood and due to transphobia. Maleness is the reason we cannot use men’s shelters, yet maleness is also the reason we are excluded from women’s shelters.

[taliabhattwrites]

The Sexed Regime, or: You Probably Have the Wrong Critiques of "TME/TMA" Terminology

Let's begin by looking at an interesting dichotomy.

There's an oddly pervasive idea in queer spaces that a truly progressive trans or post-gender politic underscores the irrelevance of sex. In contrast to patriarchal society's utter fixation on "natal sex", queer existence must be transcendent, a space in which one's bodily configuration is understood to be entirely under one's purview, where presentation is simply something we inhabit and implies nothing about our sexualities or embodiments. It is an idea of emancipation rooted in agnosticism, an anti-patriarchal revolution spurred by the lack of belief in our cissexist society's deranged emphasis on knowing what's in our pants at all times.

It's a very appealing idea, I'll admit.

Here's the thing, though.

The naturalization of sex is the foundation of patriarchy, as well as the basis of the heterosexual regime it instantiates. Humanity is cleft in twain, with one sex marked for reproductive-sexual exploitation by the other. Like most other regimes, this one is also powered by belief--belief in the superiority of the 'male sex', the unfitness of the 'female sex', and most of all: absolute belief that sex is immutable, exhaustively binary, and non-overlapping.

What this also means, ultimately, is that those of us who dare to desert the sex we were conscripted into face different pressures and violence. It is obvious that many trans people are also subject to reproductive injustice, as cis women are, and consequently the transphobia they face is very acutely a regendering impulse, a patriarchal desire to drag them back to the confines of womanhood to fulfill their patriarchal purpose. There is, understandably, a certain amount of solidarity between cis women and trans people who have suffered these aspects of the heterosexual regime.

This is in fact the understanding that gives rise to even liberal-progressive uses of 'male socialization' directed at transfems. Trans women are understood to have been spared certain excesses of misogynistic violence and therefore expected to see and approach the world differently. It is simply a neutral observation, of course, no judgment behind it ... well, until it comes time to deny trans women epistemic authority over experiences of misogyny or womanhood, even their own. After all, can transfems really be said to have a full understanding of patriarchy? They weren't 'raised AFAB'!

Oftentimes, this becomes a double bind of proving that transfems did experience trauma, feminization, and abuse even pretransition, often as children, which is then usually dismissed as "trauma dumping" or "equating womanhood to being abused"--despite the minimization of our experiences being predicated on our "lesser" understanding of the trauma of being "misogyny-affected". So let's not retread that.

Instead, I'll point out that people assume a symmetry, a complementarian equivalence, almost, between the experiences of trans people. What I would like to stress is that there is no such thing as a coherent "AMAB" class or a shared "AMAB solidarity" based on shared experiences of oppression, because I have some shocking news that readers may wish to sit down for:

Trans women are oppressed by cis men.

Cis men are overwhelmingly the ones who rape us, beat us, kill us, and seek to abuse us. When we were children, we were bullied and violated for our perceived effeminacy, largely by the cis boys we were most proximate to. Most of us have been around cis men when they've voiced their most dehumanizing, misogynistic thoughts about women, and have been punished for not participating in these rituals of misogynistic rhetoric, too. The trauma of our upbringing involves being locked into spaces with those who sniffed out our differences, our non-conformance, and routinely punished us for being deviant. When we grow up, they are the ones who largely continue to prey on us.

The chief characteristic of transmisogyny is the presumed artificiality of trans womanhood, the idea that we are mimetics, and our womanhood is a farce, a costume whose only purpose is sexual. This dovetails with our disposability--our inability to be women who can bear children, further patrilineality, and secure what minuscule respectability is afforded to the domestically-confined women who continue the male line. As such, our hyperfetishization marks us for extreme violence, as sexual objects that can be freely used and discarded, guilt-free, because after all ... We asked for it.

Why would we "choose" womanhood if we did not want this?

Which, ultimately, brings me to my point: Sex is a social regime of difference imposed on us, but it is, unfortunately, a regime still in existence. My sex is the basis upon which my womanhood is denied and my disposability justified, because the transfeminized are degendered--we are not, as a rule, provided a path "back" to manhood. Our "effeminacy" ensures that we are 'failed' men, because gender is ultimately hierarchal. Losing status, being unmanned, is frankly trivial, and is what underlies the oppression of queer men--trans men included. Most of us are ultimately subject to some kind of degendering, largely due to how a patriarchal society regards those who defy the reproductive mandate, but transmisogyny is a specific manifestation of degendering that trans women experience.

"TME/TMA" may well be an imperfect categorization--all undertakings in boundary formation are imprecise, though not always violent, given that we need descriptive terms to communicate--but the real issue with it is that it's an overly-ponderous and ultimately clunky terminology for the frank reality that the binary sex imposed on us shapes the contours of the violence we experience. I have never experienced the specific kind of misogyny that sees me as nothing but a broodmare, because I'm a filthy troon, that dehumanized abject thing whose only purpose is absorbing (sexual) violence. Yet the acknowledgment that transfems experience forms of violence that others do not--or sometimes, even the acknowledgment that transfems face violent misogyny at all--is much less forthcoming.

Our struggles are indelibly connected, of course, stemming from the same source and promulgated by the same regime that seeks to define us as nothing more than male property. The shape of each is distinct, however, and because people frequently misunderstand the shape of mine, the idea that my struggles are even connected to theirs, that I experience misogynistic violence homoousian with that which they experience, is frequently dismissed, or considered outright offensive.

This is why I talk and write about transmisogyny, and why more people need to become more familiar with how the naturalization of sex and the regime of heterosexuality under patriarchy necessitates our common struggle.

And unfortunately, in order to properly express these ideas, we do need to talk about the regime of sex.

[agendercryptidlev]

Saying trans men have male privilege "because they're men" is actually in itself cissexism, it is based on the assumption that because cis men have male privilege that having male privilege is a requirement to being a man. Trans men are men but that doesn't mean they're rewarded for their gender identity by society, because trans identity is never awarded under the patriarchy.

[k0rnym0thafucka]

If y’all can call TERFs “TWERFs” and completely ignore their transandrophobia, then I can call TIRFs “TWIRFs” bc they actually only include trans women in their shit radical feminism