#believing that even every transphobes conception of trans men is “actually just a woman” & in no way includes ��improper man to be punished”

[bisexualgenderfemme]

In many many ways I agree with this post, including the most important thrust of it, but I have to strongly disagree on one small point.

full out saying this:

"when someone knows we're trans we're treated like a woman no matter what." (emphasis mine)

IS NOT TRUE!

maybe this is nitpicky, maybe this is just bad phrasing, but as this is? this is self defeatist, basically doomerism, & honestly makes me really dysphoric. like apparently everyone all the time is thinking about how I'm a woman just bc they know I'm trans? that's not true, plenty of people gender me correctly & actively think of me as a man, even when they know I'm trans.

YES! trans men face abuse & assault & job discrimination & all the other /specific examples/ listed, but this isn't it. Trans men are not doomed to be judged first as a woman in every situation they're in. there are absolutely times when, even though someone knows you (the general 3rd person you) are trans, you are still a man to them.

in fact, this is /part of/ why trans men face unique oppression, to some people you are not a woman, you are a trans man, and /that/ is what is being oppressed. that's part of why anti transmasculinity is its own thing & not just a copy of what cis women face.

This idea that everyone treats me like a woman "no matter what" upon learning I'm trans is directly contradictory to my lived experience. I am personally beyond the point of being viewed as a woman by most transphobic peoples standard bc I've 'ruined' my body so much that the judgement on my being trans I get the most is a third gendering/degendering/monsterizing experience. This is a reality many trans men, myself included, face & saying that everyone always views us as women actually prevents us from seeing our selves represented or getting the help we need.

again! maybe op meant something more like "often times when someone finds out you're trans they treat you like a woman after that no matter what" or "when someone is transphobic & they find out you're trans you often are reduced back to woman." which are both definitely true things I have experienced (tho more earlier in my transition) & I want to give that the benefit of the doubt, but I also don't want trans mascs/trans men to see this, read it as I did, & internalize the idea that everyone is secretly thinking "woman."

You can be viewed as a man! there are many people who will view you as a man whether they know you are trans or not, they will treat you like a man, (though unfortunately that sometimes means some of them treating you like a TRANS man) they will allow you to move through the world as a man. That doesn't mean everyone always will, or that passing isn't context dependent, or that passing privilege is real, or that passing isn't conditional: those are also all true! this is a complicated & nuanced subject where many things are true at once, that's why the finality, the totality, of

"when someone knows we're trans we're treated like a woman no matter what."

rubs me wrong. I don't want other trans men to give up hope.

im not sorry the truth of the transmasculine experience is ugly. i'm not sorry that we have to frequently discuss sexual and physical violence and abuse. i'm not sorry that we have to discuss violent physical abuse and death. i'm not sorry that we have to discuss homelessness, mental illness, addiction, disabilities, and other challenges in life.

we struggle. we do not instantly gain male privilege the second we come out. even if we pass. when someone knows we're trans we're treated like a woman no matter what. we can sometimes get lucky and pass with strangers but eventually people around us find out because people tell each other without our consent.

we face all kinds of abuse due to the fact that people feel entitlement to our bodies, regardless of what our AGAB is. they feel entitled to our faces, our hair, our entire appearance. they focus on the face that we're ruining something "pretty". they threaten corrective sexual violence to remind us that we're "just women". it happens constantly. this is not an isolated incident and virtually nobody wants people to talk about it when it comes to transmasculine people.

trans men often get injured for one reason or another. usually because someone wants to make them "prove" they're a man, to "toughen them up" or to "prove to them that they're a woman". sometimes this results in sexual assault. other times it results in physical assault. and sometimes people just kill trans men. all because they hate that a "woman" can transition into a man.

it's an ugly part of our reality but it needs to be discussed because otherwise people use the lack of that conversation as ammunition to say transmascs don't struggle.

transmasculine people struggle to stay housed. transmasculine people get kicked out of their living situations very often for many reasons. it's hard for transmascs to get jobs because often times people want either a man or a woman for a specific position and fuss over what they think the transmasc's gender is. misgendering is a huge issue at work. going stealth at work can be painful. being in the closet at work can be painful

transmascs are often disabled and struggle to get care due to people not taking AFAB patients' pain and symptoms seriously. this is a huge issue with any kind of AFAB person or any woman. all woman and AFAB people struggle with having their symptoms taken seriously when seeking serious medical attention to the point of possibly being undiagnosed for life, thus being unable to get on disability. trans women face this just as much as AFAB cis women, it's a huge issue in the medical industry

transmasculine people struggle to say on their hormones (or access them at all). testosterone is a controlled substance in many countries which means that you need a prior authorization to get the medication and need to consistently see a provider to get blood tests and check ups. it can be difficult to do so if you are low income and sometimes certain pharmacists will intentionally find ways to withhold hormones due to their own prejudices

transmasculine people struggle to get pregnancy support and care. it is very difficult for transmasculine people to figure out how to navigate their pregnancy, either due to their HRT provider not knowing much about pregnancy, or having a gynecologist who's not familiar with transmasculine health.

transmascs get denied from spaces made for men constantly. even if they pass, if word gets around that they're trans they can easily be kicked out of a space. transmasculine lesbians are often removed from lesbian, transmasc and/or non binary spaces. transmasc butches are often ostracized from all communities their identities correlate to. trans men and transmasc enbies are seen as a threat to women.

there is ugliness in every pocket of the queer community when it comes to how cisheteronormative society treats us. we all face disgusting treatment that needs to be addressed. it's important to consider how this system affects everyone underneath it. we need to talk about the positive things, it's good to help those are questioning, but we also must discuss what struggles we face in order to humanize ourselves and show that we people, too. none of us have it easy.

[molsno]

hii so im kind of confused about the general inner workings of transmisogyny as an extension of transphobia and was hoping you could clarify. basically, transphobes & terfs in particular say that trans women are men, however they treat trans women differently than men, dehumanizing them on the basis of their gender. i always interpreted this as a form of gender discrimination that aims to define trans women as a lower or subhuman class, a third gender of “not quite men but undeserving of the title of woman”. does this conflict with the concept of bioessentialism, i.e. that trans women are fundamentally men? i see people say that “transphobes see trans women as men” but from experience that’s not quite true. men receive privilege and rewards for being men that trans women don’t. sorry if this is incoherent im just trying to get a better understanding of it

your understanding is pretty good to be honest. trans women are a separate gender class - an underclass to be specific - and transmisogynists are aware of this, even if they claim to see us as men. does this conflict with bioessentialism? not necessarily, but in some ways it does.

the thing is, though, logical consistency doesn't particularly matter to bigots. that's why basically all of the laws designed to oppress trans women, despite all of the fearmongering about how some technicality in how they're worded will result in them targeting cis women and other tme people, are ultimately only going to be enforced to the fullest extent against trans women. for example, tme people would rightfully be furious if a teenage cis girl was subjected to a genital examination due to the suspicion that she's trans and playing in a high school girls' sport. this would unambiguously be sexual assault, after all. but ultimately, she would be allowed to continue playing (not that she'd likely want to after something so traumatizing, but I digress), and she would probably (not certainly though) have some kind of recourse available to her due to the backlash this incident would cause. if this happened to a teenage trans girl, though, would anyone care? would there be outrage about this? she would have gone through the exact same kind of sexual assault, but the law in that scenario would be functioning exactly as intended. no form of recourse would be available to her. sure, you could make the case that a cis girl might not be able to sue the school district due to financial or other barriers, but a trans girl would have no ground to stand on, legally speaking; she would have broken the law, no matter how unjust and discriminatory the law is.

so violence against trans women broadly isn't recognized as violence against women because we aren't viewed as women. but we're not viewed as men, either. for another example, let's work through the lens of sexual assault again. if a tme person of any gender accuses a trans woman of sexual assault, there is little to no doubt that she will be viewed as guilty automatically, both by other tme people and by the law (the trans panic defense is still legally admissible in many places). in the best case, this will lead to her ostracization and isolation, putting her at higher risk for instability and suicide. in the worst case, this will lead to her imprisonment or death - REGARDLESS of if the accusation is actually true or not. the justification for this is that trans women are secretly perverted men who are trying to prey on innocent cishet people, but the basic idea underlying that premise isn't even something tme people truly believe! if they actually viewed trans women as men, then her guilt wouldn't be quite so certain. men can commit sexual assault every day and face no consequences for it, even when brought to trial with clear and damning evidence, because patriarchy ensures that men won't be held accountable for their actions. of course, this isn't always the case, marginalized men often do face intense scrutiny, many times involving violence. but even adjusting this analysis to account for additional factors such as racism, trans women still receive absolutely none of the same solidarity, leniency, or respect that men of the same demographics as them do.

fundamentally, trans women aren't treated like women or men in society. we're treated as a disposable and undesirable underclass of women that everyone else is free to abuse without consequence. any claims by transmisogynists about what gender they see us as is posturing. we are treated in unique ways as a result of our status as transfeminine. that's exactly what we mean when we talk about how transmisogyny is a unique form of oppression. bioessentialism certainly plays a part, but its contradictions are so obvious that it can only be understood as one piece of a much larger puzzle.

[velvetvexations]

I'm putting these asks in as text because my inbox is so packed rn lol. Love you Velvet Nation!

i swear to god cisfeminist spaces are the worst. a lesbian was asking why straight people have such bad sex (for the woman in the relationship, regarding the orgasm gap) and everyone jumped onto how testosterone is the reason for it (as in testosterone makes you want to orgasm in 3 minutes with no regard for extending sex outside of wanting to orgasm), even a trans woman saying the sex is so much better with oestrogen in her system. and me and a few other transmascs pointed out to this trans woman that it was probably because she was running on the wrong hormones, and any of us transmascs that dared to say we have extremely fulfilling sex that is infinitely better than the sex we had before we started T was absolutely shat on and berated for “speaking over women” even though we were just sharing our experiences, it’s just that those opinions went against the bioessentialism held deeply by the community

Yo, that's fucked? What the hell? Do people seriously earnestly not get how they come off here?

aside from OOP ignoring all of the black transmascs and other transmascs of colour in the discussion around transandrophobia (including a trans man of colour coining the term), i wonder if they believe we’re making up black transmascs because the transradfems i’ve seen so far have been overwhelmingly white. maybe because radfeminism is inherently racist or something… and their bible is written by a middle-class white woman with no perspective on transmisogynoir and this reflects upon a lot of the discussions of transmisogyny to this day…

Radical feminism is inherently Karenesque. They cross the street when they see the PoC transmascs they spend every waking hour slagging off approach on the sidewalk.

I just really want to chill and watch anime together with you some time, your taste is based as fuck

It sure is!

most bizarre thing i have seen today: a transradfem who clearly believes 100% closeted and non-passing transmascs have privilege over cis women but dancing around actually saying it because they know deep down it might get them backlash from the less radical transradfems

I don't even think it would.

I am still very "read another fucking author" at all the transfeminists who only ever quote Julia Serrano, but finding out she *also* hates the terms TMA/TME made my fucking week. Like, the transradfems' hero doesn't even agree with them!

A lot of them didn't even read Whipping Girl.

Can confirm male/female socialization is not actually a consistent thing because I was literally too autistic to internalize any gender roles, at least in relation to myself. Just. Never learned! Like water off a ducks back

High five!

Really if you take a character who presents as one gender and transition them some trans person is going to be mad about it cause they saw themselves in the original conception of the character. It's inevitable.

Yeah, that is the unfortunate truth of the matter.

That second paragraph is literally what terfs say about trans women. Turning that on trans men doesn't make you any more feminist it just makes you transphobic. (This is directed at the op of that post not you velvet)

Radical feminism is so fucking easy to recognize no matter how repackaged it is.

Racist feminism anon here: see this is the reason I feel like shit for having any critiques of feminism whatsoever. Like hashtag Not All Women obviously but literally these specific women aren't listening to marginalized men. We're not talking about whatever cis white able-bodied Elon Musk fan they think stands in for "men" in this situation. They put "valid concerns" in scare asterisks as though the very idea we have any is laughable. And no actually racism is not a "secondary manifestation" of misogyny and while transphobia stems from misogyny it shouldn't be treated as secondary for any trans person. How the fuck are we supposed to point out that white woman separatism leaves behind men who actually do suffer under patriarchy when it gets telephoned into "you stupid fucking bitch shut up I'll fucking kill you"

The point is making it so you can't.

BTW, I didn't get to edit it into the post before they blocked me, but they were reblogging Actual Nazi shit, like, the OP of the post was progressive but our dumbass here didn't notice that "if there was no hope their propaganda would be unnecessary" is (a) a popular Nazi thing and (b) added to the post by a literal Nazi.

It never does, they're fully removed from this plane of existence.

Note: At this point I kinna forgot I wasn't screenshotting these

<3 <3 <3 <3 <3

I can't believe someone who's BFFs with a tankie is a hypocrite.

You're the second person to apologize for using that format and it always makes me think of the clown-names drama every time.

[moonshine-aqua]

wait how are you actually gonna recommend "i am a transwoman. i am in the closet. i am not coming out" as like a useful pro-trans guide?

the author of that piece is very clearly extremely misogynistic, and recommending that cis women read it is probably not a good idea, because if they are told that this is how trans women think of them they will likely start to distrust trans women. and frankly i couldn't blame them for it lol.

did you actually read the piece? if not you should, it's very dehumanizing towards women while very empathetic towards men. it essentially confirms every transphobic woman's fears of what trans women really think of them. it's not a good idea to recommend cis women read it, or to imply that it accurately demonstrates how trans women think

Reply:

I would have loved to be able to reply to you personally because I think we got some really different things out of that 'article' and I don't think broadcasting your ask is the best way to respond.

But I do feel like I should respond in case this was in good faith.

I didn't consider the (less of an article, more of a diary entry) as a guide at all. It's an experience. I think it's important to read people's experiences even (or especially) when they don't match up with a general consensus. Especially this one, because it exposed flaws in the way I've thought and acted in the past, which is why I recommended it. I'm unsure where you read it as being dehumanizing towards women since I didn't get that at all. I'd love to hear your perspective because without getting to engage with you in dialogue there is just no knowing.

The general sentiment of the post rings true to me. Things like 'men and boys are not inherently Bad, actually'. Or 'the writer's statements and ideas wouldn't be more true if she came out as a trans woman'. But because they present as male they do not get to be taken seriously or listened to and I think that's wrong. I think it's a fine line because many men do speak over people without engaging deep enough and/or are trolls (which the writer admits and discusses as well). But in close friendships I think it's important to let men speak, to listen to them and challenge when (you believe) they are wrong- but in a way that is compassionate and not dismissive. In a way where they get to question you, too. I also agree with the writer that putting masculinity and femininity as opposite forces that cannot support one another and instead cancel each other out is a really damaging idea that the writer of the post rightfully pushes back on. I agree with them also that making fun of and shaming people for any physical trait is wrong and it doesn't suddenly become okay because the target is a man or the feature is generally found in men specifically.

To me the post reads as a perspective of what it's like to be on the 'other side'. It's a peek into the problems with telling men they need to shut up and listen. That's not to say that it can't be necessary to do sometimes, but I think it's important to keep the nuance in mind. Not all people you view as men actually are. Not all women telling men to shut up and listen actually care whether they are a closeted queer person because they wouldn't welcome them anyway. Besides- men also live in this world and thus have experiences with and opinions on concepts connected to the human experience like 'femininity' and those thoughts and opinions are not inherently bad or not worth listening to, in my opinion. The post struck me as a very personal story of someone sharing what it's like to be lectured about your own lived experience because the other person doesn't even consider it might be yours. In a way that got to me and I felt it was worth sharing.

I'm very curious which parts of the article gave you such a different impression than me. Genuinely. Maybe I missed something. Maybe I interpreted things differently. It's hard to reply to you since you sent me this ask anonymously and I'm not sure what you expected me to do. Re-reading my tags I also don't think I implied this single post is 'how trans women think'. I would be very uncomfortable doing so because, like any group of people, they are not a monolith. I kindof trust that people reading the post can remember that for themselves.

If the blog post makes anyone distrust trans women then I don't think the post is the problem. If any single person's experience makes anyone dismiss a whole group of people I would argue that maybe they need to take a step back. Being empathetic towards men is not bad. Sharing a negative experience with cis women (women this person cares about and is close friends with) is not misogynist in and of itself.

Implying otherwise is a bit of a red flag to me. And assuming you're genuine I'd ask you why you are so preoccupied with whether or not transphobes will get more transphobic from reading a single trans woman's experience. Just because- what? it doesn't fall into a narrow definition of what a trans person is allowed to be? That doesn't sound right to me, either.

Link to the post in question, if anyone is curious.

[velvetvexations]

trans women wouldn't be sexually assaulted at disproportionately higher rates

When I was around thirteen my grandmother tried to dissuade me from being queer by telling a story about how a gay man in the area was raped to drive him from town. Rape is not inherently about attraction or even sexual release, and when it is, there's no guarantee a rapist will reconcile their worldview with the fact that they would not be straight by their own standards, nor does it preclude they're simply in denial of it - indeed, famous homophobes being caught with male prostitutes is a trope. Self-loathing, denial, hatred, power, and sadism are major factors in incidents of rape that cannot be ignored with the handwave that someone who claims to be attracted to women must view trans women as such if they sexually assault them.

incarcerated trans women wouldn't be forced to act as comfort women for male inmates in prisons

Okay, this is legitimately one of the most baffling sentences I've ever read in my life. This is not knowing the most basic facts about sexual assault in prison, because men have famously been raped in prison since the existence of prison as a concept. Near literally every work of fiction about prison in the last 20-30 years has touched on male-on-male sexual violence, including the fact that men are forced into ongoing roles akin to "comfort women" and any preference for trans women has precedent in the well-known preference for "pretty" male victims of prison rape, which is to say that there's a preference for whoever's available that most approaches a conventionally feminine appearance.

trans women wouldn't be discriminated against in many of the same ways women are

Not everyone at the source of all discrimination a trans woman might experience are also the same transphobes that don't consider them women, and indeed, it's more than possible to treat trans people like shit specifically because you so readily accept their gender identity, but beyond that it's important to understand that transphobes are stupid bigots and are not logically consistent androids carrying out transphobia.exe to perfection.

Then there's malgendering, which is when people intentionally try and twist someone's gender identity against them - but with malgendering, that doesn't mean they actually believe it, they're just twisting the idea around to be cruel, like a cis man making threats of violence against a trans man because it's "allowed" now, a sentiment dripping with sarcasm to put a joking justification over wanting to hurt someone they see as a woman stepping out of place.

trans women would be treated by society the same as effeminate men, not as a whole other category of threat to the presumed superiority of maleness and masculinity

Trans women are seen as an escalation, taking deviance from patriarchal standards even further. Until very recently trans women and gay men were in fact treated identically, but now the latter are seen as slightly more tolerable, and even then any LGB Without the T folk who actually buy into that "you guys are fine because at least you aren't trans" bullshit are idiots digging their own graves.

it frustrates me so much whenever people (cough cough, r/curatedtumblr) attribute transmisogyny to misandry. like, when a transmisogynist calls a trans woman a "man in a dress", they're not targeting her masculinity or "maleness"; they're explicitly targeting her femininity. when a trans woman is SA'd by a chaser, it 's not her "maleness" that makes her a target, but rather the objectification and fetishization of her female body. in media, it is always the trans woman's femininity that is mocked, sexualized, degraded.

people really need to read whipping girl julia serano. grr

[watermelinoe]

Can I get some weebfem thoughts on genderswap/genderbend fanfic and fanart? It really should be called sexswap, but you know what I mean. Personally, I enjoy it when it’s done well and doesn’t resort to gender stereotypes, and I noticed it used to be a lot more popular pre-2012, but now all I see are fanworks where the characters have been transed, and it just seems like such a pathetic cop-out to me. I think stereotypical shounen protagonist personalities like Naruto or Luffy (big eaters, ambitious dreamers, shameless, gross, loud, honest, dimwitted, fights everyone, wears heart on sleeve) become a hundred times more interesting and endearing when they’re written as female characters. It’s disappointing when art depicts Fem Naruto or Fem Luffy wearing skimpier versions of their iconic outfits or with their hair long, or when their canon personalities are switched to more submissive or “feminine” ones in fic, or when they’re written to be blatant self-inserts, but when I encounter the rare art or fic that leaves their canon outfits and personalities intact with the only difference being that they were born female and are indifferent about being female, it makes me so happy and I wish more fans created content like that. I think if we had more (or any) shounen manga with well-written tomboy protagonists, especially hetero tomboy protagonists, there would be less genderwoo in fandom. Being weird, gross, and unfeminine is considered unremarkable in a man but repulsive in a woman, so I think one reason for all the straight TIFs in fandom is that they’ve never seen a man—real or fictional—show any love towards a weird, gross, unfeminine woman (whereas lesbians love women like that) so straight TIFs who are weird, gross, or unfeminine believe that identifying as gay men is the only thing that will make their natural personalities acceptable, thereby making them worthy of a man’s love. But a boisterous GNC straight woman will always be cooler and more subversive to me than a “gay trans man”. And why are there no sweet, joyful tomboys? I can’t think of the last time I saw a tomboy character who wasn’t angry, depressed, or alone. They make it seem like turning your back on femininity means giving up all your positive emotions and relationships. It’d be nice to see a tomboy actually having fun and being loved for once. It’s exactly why characters like Naruto or Luffy would be so much better as females.

no but everything you said is spot-on. i remember when i still had my fandom tumblr in high school seeing the first debates about genderswapping being ""transphobic"" and thinking literally who cares. they're not real. i was a ~trans ally~ in that i defended trans people's pronouns irl but i thought most fandom gender discourse was stupid bc there were like, actual problems in the world lol. but now that you mention it yeah, genderswapping quietly went away after that for the most part and was replaced with trans headcanons :/

but that's my big problem with shounen anyway. i don't care about male narratives and male characters. if a manga goes too long without a girl doing something meaningful, i get bored. couldn't keep up with naruto, one piece, or fairy tail bc of that. whereas like you said, these protagonists would be totally compelling if they were female.

maka albarn from soul eater was an incredible shounen protagonist imo, but every single solid concept from that manga was ultimately overshadowed by the mangaka's degeneracy and misogyny (seriously do not even talk to me abt "boob madness"). if a woman had written soul eater it would've become a classic (and if u read soul eater fanfic like i did in high school, u can see average women writing circles around that basement-dweller ohkubo hfsjkgkg) bc men just cannot write! their work only encompasses the male half of the human experience, and reading it is like trying to enjoy a 3D movie with only one eye.

shounen does an incredible disservice to boys and girls by refusing to show female characters as classic shounen protagonists. loud, gross, a little thick, nonsexualized, single-minded, everything you described abt naruto and luffy. if they made female characters like that i would actually read shounen. lol.

[tyrannuspitch]

Jumping off @kidrat​ ’s recent post on JKR, British transphobia, and transphobia against transmasculine people, after getting a bit carried away and too long to add as a comment:

A major, relatively undiscussed event in JKR’s descent into full terfery was this tweet:

[image id: a screenshot of a tweet from JK Rowling reading: “’People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?”

Rowling attaches a link to an article titled: “Opinion: Creating a more equal post-COVID-19 world for people who menstruate” /end id]

This can seem like a pretty mundane TERF talking point, just quibbling over language for the sake of it, but I think it’s worth discussing, especially in combination with the idea that cis women like JKR see transmasculine transition as a threat to their womanhood. (Recite it with horror: ”If I were young now, I might’ve transitioned...”)

A lot of people, pro- or anti-transphobe, will make this discussion about whether the term “woman” should include trans women or not, and how cis women are hostile to the inclusion of trans women. And that’s absolutely true. But the actual language cis women target is very frequently being changed for the benefit of trans men, not trans women, and most of them know this.

Cis people are used to having their identities constantly reaffirmed and grounded in their bodies. A lot of cis women, specifically, understand their social and physical identities as women as being defined by pain: misogynistic oppression is equated to the pains of menstruation or childbirth, and both are seen as the domain of cis women. They’re something cis women can bond over and build a “sisterhood” around, and the more socially aware among them can recognise that cis women’s pain being taken less seriously by medicine is not unrelated to their oppression. However, in the absence of any trans perspectives, these conversations can also easily become very territorial and very bioessentialist.

Therefore... for many cis women, seeing “female bodies” described in gender neutral language feels like stripping their pain of its meaning, and they can become very defensive and angry.

And the consequences for transmasculine people can be extremely dangerous.

Not only do transmasculine people have an equal right to cis women to define our bodies as our own... Using inclusive language in healthcare is about more than just emotional validation.

The status quo in healthcare is already non-inclusive. When seeking medical help, trans people can expect to be misgendered and to have to explain how our bodies work to the doctors. We risk harassment, pressure to detransition, pressure to sterilise ourselves, or just being outright turned away. And the conversation around pregnancy and abortion in particular is heaving with cisnormativity - both feminist and anti-feminist cis women constantly talk about pregnancy as a quintessentially female experience which men could never understand.

Using gender-neutral language is the most basic step possible to try and make transmasculine people safer in healthcare, by removing the idea that these are “women’s spaces”, that men needing these services is impossible, and that safety depends on ideas like “we’re all women here”. Not institutionally subjecting us to misgendering and removing the excuse to outright deny us treatment is, again, one of the most basic steps that can be taken. It doesn’t mean we’re allowed comfort, dignity or full autonomy, just that one major threat is being addressed. The backlash against this from cis women is defending their poorly developed senses of self... at the cost of most basic dignity and safety for transmasculine people.

Ironically, though transphobic cis women feel like decoupling “women’s experiences” from womanhood is decoupling them from gendered oppression, transmasculine people experience even more marginalisation than cis women. Our rates of suicide and assault are even higher. Our health is even less researched than cis women’s. Our bodies are even more strictly controlled. Cis women wanting to define our bodies on their terms is a significant part of that. They hold the things we need hostage as “women’s rights”, “women’s health”, “women’s discussions” and “support for violence against women”, and demand we (re-)closet ourselves or lose all of their solidarity.

Fundamentally, the problem is that transphobic cis women are possessive over their experiences and anyone who shares them. Because of their binary understanding of gender, they’re uncomfortable with another group sharing many of their experiences but defining themselves differently. They’re uncomfortable with transmasculine people identifying “with the enemy” instead of “with their sisters”, and they’re even more uncomfortable with the idea that there are men in the world who they oppress, and not the other way around. “Oppression is for women; you can’t call yourself a man and still claim women’s experiences. Pregnancy is for women; if you want to be a man so badly why haven’t already you done something about having a woman’s body? How dare you abandon the sisterhood while inhabiting one of our bodies?”

Which brings me back to the TERF line about how “If I were young now, I might have transitioned.”

I’m not saying Rowling doesn’t actually feel any personal connection to that narrative - but it is a standard line, and it’s standard for a reason. Transphobic cis women really believe that there is nothing trans men go through that cis women don’t. They equate our dysphoria to internalised misogyny, eating disorders, sexual abuse or other things they see as “female trauma”. They equate our desire to transition to a desire to escape. They want to “help us accept ourselves” and “save us” from threats to their sense of identity. The fact is, this is all projection. They refuse to consider that we really have a different internal experience from them.

There’s also a marked tendency among less overtly transphobic cis women, even self-proclaimed trans allies, to make transphobia towards trans men about cis women.

Violence against trans men is chronically misreported and redefined as “violence against women”. In activist spaces, we’re frequently told that any trauma we have with misogyny is “misdirected” and therefore “not really about us”. If we were women, we would’ve been “experiencing misogyny”, but men can’t do that, so we should shut up and stop “talking over women”. (Despite the surface difference of whether they claim to affirm our gender, this is extremely similar to how TERFs tell us that everything we experience is “just misogyny”, but that transmasculine identity is a delusion that strips us of the ability to understand gender or the right to talk about it.)

I have personally witnessed an actual N*zi writing an article about how trans men are “destroying the white race” by transitioning and therefore becoming unfit to carry children, and because the N*zi had misgendered trans men in his article, every response I saw to it was about “men controlling women’s bodies”.

All a transphobe has to do is misgender us, and the conversation about our own oppression is once again about someone else.

Transphobes will misgender us as a form of violence, and cis feminist “allies” will perpetuate our misgendering for rhetorical convenience. Yes, there is room to analyse how trans men are treated by people who see us as women - but applying a simple “men oppressing women” dynamic that erases our maleness while refusing to even name transphobia or cissexism is not that. Trans men’s oppression is not identical to cis women’s, and forcing us to articulate it in ways that would include cis women in it means we cannot discuss the differences.

It may seem like I’ve strayed a long way from the original topic, and I kind of have, but the central reason for all of these things is the same:

Trans men challenge cis women’s self-concept. We force them to actually consider what manhood and womanhood are and to re-analyse their relationship to oppression, beyond a simple binary patriarchy. 

TERFs will tell you themselves that the acknowledgement of trans people, including trans men, is an “existential threat” that is “erasing womanhood” - not just our own, but cis women’s too. They hate the idea that biology doesn’t determine gender, and that gender does not have a strict binary relationship to oppression. They’re resentful of the idea that they could just “become men”, threatened by the assertion that doing so is not an escape, and completely indignant at the idea that their cis womanhood could give them any kind of power. They are, fundamentally, desperate not to have to face the questions we force them to consider, so they erase us, deflect from us, and talk over us at every opportunity.

Trans men are constantly redefined against our wills for the benefit of cis womanhood.

TL;DR:

Cis women find transmasculine identity threatening, because we share experiences that they see as foundational to their womanhood

The fact that transphobes target inclusive language in healthcare specifically is not a mistake - They do not want us to be able to transition safely

Cis women are uncomfortable acknowledging transphobia, so they make discussion of trans men’s oppression about “womanhood” instead

This can manifest as fully denying that trans men experience our own oppression, or as pretending trans men’s experiences are identical to cis women’s in every way

[sapphia]

An unfortunate side effect of terf-ism is that feminism has, for quite some time, reached a stalling point where you must either be mainstream feminist or you must be a radical feminist - except in this day and age, being a radical feminist means that you believe 100% in sex or gender essentialism and therefore are inherently transphobic.

And that's true now. But it wasn't always. I know because I saw it happen. I watched radical feminism become terfism. I watched the discourse go from "violence against women is perpetuated by the patriarchy" (reasonable; some good points to be had) to "trans people are the greatest enemy we face" (which just... what the fuck).

Radical feminism was once a useful extension of mainstream feminism. it asked important questions and followed them to interesting conclusions. If women are oppressed in all walks of life, don't men benefit from that oppression? Example, if a woman is socialised to be demure in a workplace, is her male colleague not benefitting from that socialisation? And if a woman fears violence from a man because of the prevalence of violence in our society, then do men not benefit from the violence committed by other men? Whether or not a woman has been raped, it is something she has been taught to fear - might all men not benefit in some ways from that threat that hangs over every woman?

And those are all interesting questions that entire books could and have been written on. But the issue that we now face is that radical feminism took these arguments and streamlined them all into one particular direction: that men are violent/aggressive as biological imperative and benefit from the oppression that they perpetuate against women. That men are the enemy. That they must be overthrown.

One half of the problem is that the exclusionary nature of their new direction is directly hostile to trans people; that this flawed ideology has been used to focus all their resources against a fight against a group who, even if they were an enemy to feminism (which they're not), it just would not be worth fighting against. The idea that trans women are men trying to hustle in on women's spaces is incorrect, but combatting it is also a huge waste of resources given the much more serious problems that women and feminism actually faces.

Which leads us to the other half of the problem: the resources. Because for about 5 years (in the public eye - about 15 years in feminist circles) feminism has been at war with itself. Rad fems are wasting so much time and energy arguing that trans people aren't real, and of course feminists have to argue back. There's so much less room for discourse when half your discourse is just asserting the fact that transwomen are women and transmen are men. It pulls focus away from the radical right, and it waters down discussions of other feminist issues. And it's correct that we do argue this, and trans people deserve their time in the spotlight, of course, but it's so incredibly frustrating that the attack on trans people is coming from within feminism, from the very people who should be allies to the cause. In fact, I would argue that a large part of mainstream awareness of trans issues comes from radical feminism; I don't think radical feminism has helped trans people or their acceptance, but it's certainly brought the issue to the forefront and into the sphere of public debate.

And while we're busy arguing over the right of trans people to exist, extreme rightwingism and fascism are gaining in popularity, and actual radical discourse of feminist ideals are being left in the dust. WHERE is the mainstream discussion of the predatory beauty industry and how it's disguised itself as feminist when actually it's anything but? WHERE is the shift away from the non-tradition, non-nuclear families and relationships? WHERE is the push within radical leftism to marry radical gender ideals with those on race, sexuality, disability, etc? There are a lot of "formerly radical" racial discourses that have made their way into the mainstream in recent years, especially regarding colonialism and it's lingering effects, and feminism is lagging behind because without radical sects exploring new ideals, it is very hard for new concepts to trickle into the mainstream!

I've seen some stuff around tirfs and the tran inclusionary radfem movement, but so much of it is still gender essentialist and so much of it is still trans exclusionary in many ways - and the tirfs that aren't either of that are consumed with infighting just for their right to exist and be considered trans-inclusionary. so again, no extra resources to deal with non-trans issues. It's a hangup of the direction the discourse has gone recently, and I'm not surprised to see it. I think tirf ideals are flawed to begin with - they've been heading in a bad direction basically since germaine greer went mainstream - but there's some concepts there that could do with working their way into the general leftist consciousness because there's some nuggets of truth in there that I'd like to see debated by a wider audience. But I think radical feminism is now just always going to be too closely associated with transphobia, both in people's mind's and in the idealogical base on which their beliefs are founded. It's a poisoned chalice.

What I really want to see is a new near-mainstream movement of far-left extremist feminist discourse unassociated with radical feminism; not because I think I'll agree with them but because I think it's healthy and needed for feminism in general and for the progression of gender equality towards a better future.

[kuromichad]

different subject that’s heavy on my mind rn but since i’m already being harsh let’s get into it. i wish it wasn’t automatically presumed to be some kind of truscum attitude when someone tries to express that different parts of The Trans Community have like, different needs and different risk levels and different experiences and that we have the ability to talk over each other, harm each other, etc... like when i put it that way people generally are like ‘of course that’s true!’ but is it ever really understood in practice? a number of people (not a large enough number, but still) are able to loosely understand ‘you can be trans and transphobic’ when it’s applied to the matter of transmisogyny but when a trans person tries to express distrust of or frustration with afab nb people due to how common it is that that category of person will, despite being trans/nb, espouse bioessentialist, anti-medical-transition, radfem-adjacent if not outright cryptoterf rhetoric, suddenly ‘trans people can be transphobic’ gets applied to... the person with a complaint about transphobia. 

because he’s clearly an evil truscum man! regardless of if the person making the complaint is a trans man or trans woman, oops, lol. he’s a bad person who is attacking and invalidating and totally hatecriming the heckin’ valid, equally at-risk transgender identity of “an afab woman who isn’t a woman except when she pointedly categorizes themself as a woman because being afab makes them a woman who is ‘politically aligned’ with women but she’s not an icky unwoke cis woman because they don’t like being forced into womanhood although Really When You Think About It 🤔 all women are dysphoric because obviously the pathologized medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria in transgender people is something that equally applies to cis women just default existing under patriarchy 🤔, and no, equating these things totally does not imply anything reductive about or add a bizarre moral dimension to the idea of being transgender, whaaaaat, this woman who isn’t a woman doesn’t think there’s anything immoral or cowardly or misogynist or delusional about being transgender, they would never say that because THEY’RE transgender, except when she feels it’s important (constantly) to make clear that she’s Still A Woman Deep Down Inherently Despite Not Identifying As One, and none of this ever has any effect on how they treat the concept, socially and politically, of people who actually wholly identify with (and possibly medically transition to) a gender different from the one they were assigned at birth, be it ‘the opposite gender’ or abstaining from binary gender altogether or ‘politically aligning’ with the ‘opposite’ gender from their asab. never ever!”

and like maybe that sounds like a completely absurd and hateful strawman to you! but in that case you’re either like, lucky, or optimistic, or ignorant. i’m literally not looking at random nb people and declaring that in My Truscum Opinion they’re ‘really a woman’ just because they’re not medically transitioning or meeting some arbitrary standard of mine. i am looking at self-identified afab nb people, who most often use she/they because, y’know, words mean things, especially pronouns, so people who are willingly ‘aligned with womanhood’ typically intentionally use she/her (sorry that i guess that’s another truscum take now!!! that pronouns mean things!!! the bigender transmasc who deliberately uses exclusively he/him wants it to invoke a perception he’s comfortable with!), who actively say the things listed above (in a non-sarcastic manner). 

like, the line between a person who says “i don’t claim to really not be my asab because i know no one would ever perceive me as anything else” because theyve internalized a defeatist attitude due to societal transphobia, and a person who says that because they... genuinely believe it’s impossible/ridiculous/an imposition to truly be transgender (in the traditional trans sense, beyond a vague nb disidentification with gender) and are actively contributing to the former person’s self loathing... is hard to define from a distance! i think plenty of people who are, in a sense, ‘tentative’ or like ‘playing close to home’ so to speak in their identity are ‘genuinely trans’ (whatever that may mean) and just going through a process. they might arrive at a different identity or might just eventually stop saying/believing defeatist stuff, who knows. but there are enough people saying it for the latter reason, or at least not caring if they sound that way, that it’s like, dangerous. it is actively incredibly harmful to other trans people. and it’s fucking ridiculous that it’s so difficult to criticize because you’ll always get the defense of “umm but i’m literally trans” and/or “well i’m just talking about ME, this doesn’t apply to other trans people” when it’s an attitude that very clearly seeps into their politics and the way they discuss gender.

because it’s just incredibly common for afab nb people (most typically those that go by she/they! since i’m aware that uh, i am also afab nb, but we clearly are extremely different, so that’s the best categorization i’ve got) to discuss gender in moralized terms, with the excuse of patriarchy/misogyny existing, which of course adds another difficult dimension to trying to criticize this because it gets the response of “don’t act like misandry is real” (it’s not, but being a dick still is) and “boohoo, let women complain about their oppressors” (this goes beyond ‘complaining’). a deliberate revocation of empathy/sympathy/compassion from men and projection of inherently malicious/brutish/cruel intent onto men (not solely in the justified generalizations ‘men suck/are dangerous��, but in specific interactions too) underpin a whole fucking lot of popular posts/discussions online, whether they’re political or casual/social, and it absolutely influences how people conceptualize and feel about transness. 

because ‘maleness is evil’ is still shitty politics even when you’ve slightly reframed it from the terf ‘trans women are evil because they’re Really Men and can never escape being horrific soulless brutes just as women can never escape being fragile morally superior flowers’ to the tumblr shethey “trans women who are out to me/unclockable are tolerable i guess because they’re women and women are good; anyone i personally presume to be a cis man, though, is still automatically evil, and saying trans men are Just As Bad is progressive of me, and it’s totally unrelated and apolitical that i think we should expand the concept of afab lesbianism so broadly that you can now be basically indistinguishable from trans men on literally every single level except for a declaration of ‘but i would never claim to be a man because i’m secure in the Innate Womanhood of the body i was born into, even as i medically alter that body because it causes me great gendered discomfort.’ none of this at all indicates that i feel there’s an immense moral/political gap between being an afab nb lesbian vs a straight trans man! it says nothing at all about my concept of ‘maleness’ and there’s no way this rhetoric bleeds into my perception of trans women and no way loudly talking about all this could keep trans people around me self-loathing and closeted, because i’m Literally Trans and Not A Terf!”

again, if that sounds like a hateful strawman, sorry but it’s not. i guess i’m supposed to be like ‘all of the many people ive seen saying these shitty things is an evil outlier who Doesn’t Count, and it’s not fair to the broad identity of afab shethey to not believe that every person who doesn’t outright say terfy enough things is a perfectly earnest valid accepting trans person who’s beyond criticism’ but like. this cannot be about broad validation. this can’t be about discarding all the bad apples as not really part of the group. we can’t be walking on eggshells to coddle what are essentially, in the end, Cis Feelings, because in the best cases this kind of rhetoric comes from naive people who are early and uncertain in their gender journey or whatever and are in the process of unraveling internalized transphobia, and in the easily observable worst cases these people are very literally redefining shit so that ‘actually all afab women are trans, spiritually, all afabs have dysphoria, we are all Equally oppressed by Males uh i mean cis men <3’ because, let’s be honest, they know that the moment they call themselves trans they get to say whatever they want about gender no matter how harmful it is to the rest of us. and those ideas spread like wildfire through the afab shethey “woman that’s not a woman” community that frankly greatly outnumbers other types of trans people online, because many of those people just do not have the experiences that lead you to really understand this shit and have to push back against concepts of gender that actively harm you as a trans person.

like that’s all i want to be able to say, is Things Are Different For Different Groups. and a willful ignorance of these differences leads to bad rhetoric controlling the overall discourse which gets people hurt. and even when concepts arise from it that seem positive and helpful and inclusive, in practice or in origin those ideas can still be upholding shit that gets other people hurt. like, i don’t doubt that many people are very straightforwardly happy and comfortable with an identity like ‘afab nb lesbian on testosterone’ and it would be ridiculous and hypocritical for me, ‘afab nb who wants to pass as a guy so he can comfortably wear skirts again,’ to act like that’s something that can’t or shouldn’t exist. it’s not about the identity itself, it’s about the politics that are popular within its community, and how the use of identities as moral labels with like, fucking pokemon type interactions for oppression effectiveness which directly informs the moral correctness of your every opinion and your very existence, is a shitty practice that gets people hurt and leads us to revoke empathy from each other.

like. sorry this is all over the place and long and probably still sounds evil because i haven’t thought through and disclaimered every single statement. but i’m like exhausted from living with this self-conscious guilt that maybe i’ve turned into a horrible evil truscum misogynist etc etc due to feeling upset by this seemingly inescapable approach to gender in lgbt/online circles that like, actively harms me, because when i vent with my friends all the stuff i’ve tried to explain here gets condensed down to referencing ‘she/theys’ as a category and that feels mean and generalizing and i genuinely dislike generalizations but the dread i feel about that category gets proven right way too often. it’s just like. this is not truscum this is not misgendering this is not misogyny. this is not about me decreeing that all transmascs have to be manly enough or dysphoric enough and all nbs have to be neatly agender and androgynous or something, i’m especially not saying that nb gender isn’t real lmao or even that it’s automatically wrong to partially identify with your asab; this is not me saying you can only medically transition for specific traditional reasons or that you don’t get a say on anything if you aren’t medically transitioning for whatever reason, now or ever. i just. want to be allowed to be frank about how... when there’s different experiences in a community we should like. acknowledge those differences and be willing to say that sometimes people don’t know what they’re talking about or that what they’re saying is harmful. without the primary concern being whether people will feel invalidated by being told so. because these are like, real issues, that are more important than politely including everyone, because that method is just getting vulnerable people drowned out constantly.

[pinkchaosart]

On transphobia towards our Sisters (not just our cis-ters)

(TW: talk of transphobia, misogyny, gender and sex-based violence)

So I went and took a look at the post by @persistentlyfem that’s causing a major fuss, and I thought I’d address it as a lesbian femme myself. I see a lot of the common talking points that get thrown around and I’m seeing some truly toxic replies being thrown in her direction. Eight years ago I might have agreed with the replies, but I think it’s more useful to engage those talking points and maybe we can meet with some kind of understanding.

Now I want to get a few things out of the way first. Persistentlyfem says, if not in the main post then elsewhere on her blog, that she doesn’t identify as a radfem (radical feminist), so I won’t assume that she is one. I will however address the points she raises as being part of the trans-exclusionist radical feminist ideology, as that’s where the ideas seem to have come from.

One of the biggest misunderstanding between radical feminists and liberal feminists is the concept of gender vs. sex and their importance when speaking of identities. TERF ideology is rooted in second-wave feminism of the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s, which was a necessary step in the feminist school of thought and is the reason we have a lot of our modern rights. Most people who are trans-exclusionary would describe themselves as gender-critical, but in my opinion, I believe that being exclusionary towards trans women is rooted in the resistance to third-wave feminist ideas of individualism and diversity. But we’ll hold that thought for now.

The ideal of radical feminism is to liberate women by tearing down the concept of gender, abolishing it all together. The ideal of liberal feminism is to create equality by creating safe and inclusive spaces for everyone, regardless of gender, via social and legal reform. Basically the main difference between the two schools of thought is one seeks to destroy gender as a construct and the other seeks to expand it to be more inclusive. It’s important to note that being a radical feminist does not automatically mean that you must be trans-exclusionary.

So I’d like to talk about some specific talking points. I took a little stroll down Persistentlyfem’s blog to see what her experience has been and so that I can understand where she’s coming from. Normally I wouldn’t engage in this kind of conversation because I’m disabled so I have very little energy to spare, but as a fellow butch-attracted femme, I thought it might be useful to respond to her  thoughts. I won’t respond to all the points in her recent post, but I will try to talk about the core ideas.

I see that she’s concerned with misogyny in LGBTQ2S+ spaces. I agree it’s widespread, often in ways that are covert. I see it in how butches treat femmes, how gay men talk about women, and how we speak to fellow gay women who disagree with our opinions. And, If I understand correctly, it’s that internalized misogyny that she believes is responsible for trans women believing they should be included in women-only spaces. I argue that it’s quite the opposite, and that it’s actually misogyny that keeps trans-women from being fully accepted.

What I mean is that I find the argument for “female-only spaces” (assigned female at birth, cisgendered women) quite reductive. It implies that there is only one way to be a woman and it reduces us to our genitalia. I don’t think anyone would say they’re a woman because they have a vagina and mean it fully (maybe you would, I don’t really know you). They would also say that their experiences shape them as a woman as well. And I agree, what makes a woman involves quite a lot of factors, and no two women’s experiences are the same. Persistentlyfem has argued that trans women are raised and socialized as male, but I disagree. Setting aside that trans women aren’t a monolith and have completely different socializations between individuals, I would agree that most trans women are treated as male growing up, but for the most part, it doesn’t quite….fit them. More accurately I would say our culture attempts to socialize them as men.

When I think back to my own experience growing up, I, like a lot of girls, had a “not like other girls” period. Internalized misogyny, great right? Because the socialization of “girl” didn’t quite right, the definition being narrow and rigid. Based on stereotypes. So I found my femininity later in my teens. I argue that this is something that most women go through in some way or another. We find our socialization as women uncomfortable and constraining. Not quite right.

As I said, you can’t speak of trans women as a monolith, but from the stories and dialogue I’ve been involved in, countless stories sound exactly like that. Being socialized into a Gender Box that doesn’t suit you is like watching a video in a language you don’t speak. Internalized misogyny is a universal experience between girls growing up, cis and trans, and it is internalized misogyny that keeps trans women from accepting who they truly are. In fact, for them to run away from woman as their identity would inherently be internalized misogyny.

The idea that trans ideology is based in “regressive stereotypes about ‘boys and girls’” isn’t wholly incorrect. I think we all agree that gender is a social construct. But that doesn’t make my identity as a women more valid than someone who transitioned later in life. It doesn’t follow that a trans’ person’s gender is less real than a cis person’s gender. And while we live in our culture and our current society, gender is something that we interact with on a daily basis, which makes it real in a very real sense. We could argue whether it should be that way, but the situation is currently that gender is an important construct in our culture. Not to mention, the thought that all trans people fall in a strict “man” or “woman” binary is incorrect as there are plenty of people that embody other gender identities. Indeed, there are many wonderful trans people that we could argue are the radfem ideal of aegender and/or non binary.

Now the idea that “lesbians and straight men like vaginas. Gays and straight women like penises” is a bit of a stretch. Again, I think a statement like this is pretty oversimplified, but I don’t think that you’re inherently wrong. Generally speaking, sure. Although, again, I’ve met plenty of straight women dating trans men, and there are plenty of straight men that date trans women. But the inherent flaw in this argument isn’t that you’re wrong, but that it implies that attraction equals validity. Am I a woman because a man is attracted to my vagina? No. Am I less of a woman if men aren’t attracted to me? Again, no. My gender isn’t contingent on other’s attraction to me, and that is the same for trans individuals. I think this kind of argument comes from the pressure that is sometimes felt within our community, that if you’re not open to dating trans people then you’re inherently transphobic. I am not going to get into that argument, as this is a whole other can of worms. But what I am going to say is that nobody is going to force you to date a trans person. You don’t have to date someone if you don’t want to. You don’t have to tell everyone why you don’t want to date them, you can just politely decline. 

I’m going to be blatantly honest: I am predominantly attract to butch women and afab non binary masculine people. I have never dated someone who was amab, and generally speaking I don’t find myself attracted to them. But that doesn’t mean I think that trans women aren’t women just because I generally don’t find myself attracted to them. 

On top of this I’m going to agree with you: sex based oppression does exist. So does gender-based oppression. I know I have experienced bullying in my own time based on my own gender, my ability, my weight, all that good stuff. Maybe some of it was based around embarrassing period episodes (which I would file under sex-based bullying). But misogyny is not just sex-based, it is also inherently gendered. And if we know anything about trans women, it’s that they are overly targeted with violence based on their gender. Especially if they’re BIPOC. And it’s because their gender is feminine that they’re perceived as being targets; is that not the epitome of misogyny? To hate a person because they’re not perceived as the patriarchal male ideal?

Something else I would like to talk about is the concept that trans women are inherently misogynistic. I would argue that every woman, regardless of what they were assigned at birth, carries internalized misogyny. Cis women, however, have years to grapple with it before becoming women. Trans women tend to not have as much time to unlearn internalized misogyny before they become women. That doesn’t invalidate them as women, it just means that we should be more supportive of them, not less. All of this trans-exclusionary rhetoric only serves to increase their self-hatred and I argue that that kind of talk is a contributing factor to the poor mental health we see in the trans community. Instead of supporting some of the people with the greatest insight into the patriarchy, trans-exclusionists push women away and inflict them with even more gendered violence and gender-based discrimination. 

The other thing I want to address is the idea that trans women transitioning is rooted in homophobia. Which seems to make sense if you think of trans women being only attracted to men. The idea that a man decides to be a woman because he can’t deal with being gay doesn’t make a lot of sense, though. Homophobia tends to be rooted in misogyny too, a fear of being less of a man. So it doesn’t follow that the solution would be to “become a woman” much like the solution to put out a fire isn’t to light more things on fire. Piggybacking off of this point, a lot of trans exclusionists will accuse trans women of being predators. In fact, often, they’ll hold these two ideas at the same time. But the reality is that, if a man wants to prey on women, he doesn’t need to become a woman. The sign on the bathroom door isn’t actually a deterrent if a man wants to follow a woman in. And again, it’s a counter-intuitive idea, that a man who wants to prey on women would go through all the legal hurdles, all the social stigma, even some medical treatments just to gain access to women’s only spaces. Besides the fact that this type of behaviour is a myth created by conservative right-wing christian groups to stir up fear, it doesn’t happen and assault is still illegal regardless of what your gender marker is. 

I am not going to address anything about surgery or hormones. Those points are only ever brought up as enforcing points, they’re not the main issues. Most of the rhetoric is based in fear-mongering conservative right-wing christian groups drum up and it is, again, a whole other topic that requires nuance that most people don’t acknowledge.

The main point I see Persistantlyfem talk about, and something we can agree on, is the misogyny in LGBTQ2S+ spaces. We all like to think that, somehow through our journeys of discovering our true selves, we shed the misogyny along the way, that our spaces are truly accepting of all genders and presentations. That’s not the case. Misogyny is still a problem in every letter of our community and it will be for a long time. We see it when butches treat femmes as “high maintenance” or like property, we see it in how gay men talk about female bodies. We see it the self-hatred trans people of all gender identities feel towards themselves. We see it when lesbians reject bisexual women. 

Throwing around “terf” helps nobody. Calling each other stupid and pretentious is not useful. I know this is a painful topic to many on both sides, but the infighting in the queer community is toxic and needs to come down from a boil if we’re going to make any progress. Most people that sling insults are younger and therefor are more hot-headed. I used to be too, and still can be sometimes but like I said, limited energy means that you tend to focus it more consciously and I hope that this time I’ve spent here can help.

@Persistantlyfem, I see that you were hurt, and I respect and honour your experiences. I suspect that some of those that hurt you were trans women. I understand, I’ve had trans partners hurt me as well. But those experiences don’t allow us to revoke someone else’s right to their own interpretation of themselves. And I’m sorry about all of the toxicity you’ve experienced in these last few weeks, you don’t deserve it. I hope that we can have a conversation in a respectable way, worthy of two adult gays who’ve been through a lot.

[rivetgoth]

I had this friend I met in the Hetalia fandom in like 8th-9th grade who was like, a lot older than me (I was like 12-13 when we met and she was like 17 or so), and we were REALLY close for a really long time, we'd talk and call every day and it got to a point where she was really dependent on me in this awful way where she would like constantly threaten suicide if I didn't answer her texts fast enough and shit like that. She was really rich cuz her dad was a doctor and one time she bought me an entire fucking Xbox One (I did not ask for it like... I'd always been a PlayStation gamer LOL) because she didn't have anyone to play Halo with her. My family still has it and uses it as a DVD player/Netflix machine.

Anyway the really batshit thing about this person (BESIDES the fact that she was like, definitely a pedophile who loved shota and frequently sexted me after she'd turned 18+ and I was like 14 and she also had both a bestiality and incest fetish that she'd talk to me about constantly — I was a kid I had no moral concept of anything and just liked being edgy and feeling mature) was that she was like. A chronic liar who constantly faked identities. And for years after cutting off contact with her I would look back and realize that she had faked even more than I had noticed at the time. The thing is, I knew for sure she wasn't lying about her home life -- Her address, what she looked like, her dad's profession, her age, her house, her pets, etc, were all things I had proof of. But when I knew her she was constantly remaking her Tumblr to escape drama she'd start, and she would constantly make side blogs under pseudonyms and pretend it wasn't her (sometimes it would be random shit like aesthetic blogs under different names or ask blogs for characters or smthn, other times it was like, callout blogs for people she had gotten into drama with where she would pretend to be someone else defending her). I assumed back then that I was always going to be in on it, because she would always tell me whenever she made one of these fake accounts, and sometimes she would encourage me to make a new account too as a sort of roleplay thing where we both pretended to be people we weren't... Until I learned that she wasn't always telling me. Every so often, I would become mutuals with a new account who would start messaging me about my interests and strike a conversation with me. Then something would slip and my "new mutual" would admit that they had actually been my friend all along... Which should have made me immediately cut contact because that's weird as shit, but I was young and she was a close friend, so I would just sorta accept it.

She ended up being like, horrifically transphobic. She got run off her blog twice for being specifically transmisogynistic, first insisting that she was allowed to headcanon canon trans women as feminine men and then on her next blog insisting that lesbians couldn't be attracted to trans women. I was still young and closeted and she was one of my closest friends and was constantly messaging me that the situation was making her suicidal and she was just wording things wrong and totally supported trans people and people just weren’t giving her the benefit of the doubt and she was still learning so I tried to just stay out of it without losing her. Then... I came out as trans lol. She stopped replying to me when I first came out and then made a bunch of vents on her tumblr about how much it upset her and about how “using he/him pronouns for AFAB people is triggering” for whatever fucking reason. She told me her “best IRL friend” who she had introduced me to once on Skype but who never logged in again after and who refused to ever do a group call or anything (definitely another fake account) said that it was irrational for me to expect my friends to respect my pronouns so soon after coming out and that I shouldn’t be upset if I get misgendered. Then she apologized but told me my name and pronouns would never fit me. As you can imagine, as a little baby trans kid who was closeted from my family and terrified of even having come to terms with being trans, I didn’t really have a great defense.

Soon she started being really woke like 2014 style Tumblr SJW to save face, she came out as nonbinary and told me in private it was because she felt bad when people called her cis during discourse (she absolutely wasn't nonbinary) and she coined a "new sexuality" that was "attraction only to people you perceive as feminine, regardless of how they identify" -- what this actually meant was "attraction to cis women and not trans women." She ran an aroace help blog despite not being aroace? And made a bunch of pride flags that I still see around sometimes to this day. She would start fights a lot and try to out-woke people and got into a bunch of drama with other SJW types of the day, got into a bunch of drama with TumblrInAction and Mogai-Watch and shit like that, and she claimed for a short while that she had a headmate (FWIW I totally believe DID is a legitimate thing but like. Trust me on this one.) who was transphobic and that it made her so sad, she told me that it was actually that headmate that had been transphobic before, and every so often her headmate would front out of nowhere and misgender me and use really abusive language like calling me a cunt or a bitch or whatever. She started making these "intersex nonbinary" OCs who she would constantly make porn of under the guise that they were representation for LGBT people who were just like, extremely fetishistic cuntboys and dickgirls (they were “intersex” to explain why they could be “girls with natal penises” or “boys with natal vaginas”).

At that same time, she somehow always managed to have these random, very sporadically active trans women mutuals who were apparently amazing friends of hers, who shared some interests with her but also would defend her when people brought up her past, with these long-winded “Well, I’m a trans woman and I think what she said is perfectly justified and everyone makes mistakes and she’s always been a good ally!!” Then one day some trans woman received an ask from her account where she claimed to be a “black trans woman” (she was, of course, a white cis woman) and she freaked out and claimed she had “been hacked by TiA or 4Chan to make her look bad” — I realize now she had just been sending anon messages pretending to be things she wasn’t and forgot to hit anon LOL. Late in all of this she also got into a bunch of hot water for being really antisemitic and saying she didn’t trust Jewish people because they were just like Christians and like, 5 seconds later she came out as Jewish and wrote this whole long sad vent about how she had had internalized antisemitism and then started going by a random Hebrew name LMAO.

In the end the final breaking point was when I found her secret TERF blog, where she had been making posts for months about how trans men are just insecure women who are trying to escape misogyny by stepping on the backs of “fellow women” and using me as a fucking example, and also saying that me not coming out as a trans man had been “basically rape” since she had been SEXTING me when she was 18+ and I was 13-14+ and that it was traumatic to know someone she had trusted was secretly identifying as a man LMAO. She was also obviously saying all sorts of transmisogynistic things, but also had these really bizarre fetish posts about wanting trans women to fuck her...? I confronted her about it and she literally fucking out of nowhere told me that she was in the emergency room with a mysterious illness that might kill her and she was allowed to have her phone but due to privacy laws couldn’t send a picture as proof. While “in the hospital” she deleted the TERF blog and her personal blog. I had known her for literal YEARS at this point (we had met when I was 12-13 or so and by the time we no longer spoke I was a few months from 17), and I was completely stunned to fucking hear this person trying to pull “I’m in the hospital with a deadly disease” at being confronted for some shit like that LMAO. I made a post about it on my public and another “trans woman friend” of hers logged in to vehemently defend her by saying that there’s nothing wrong with AFAB women being untrusting of trans people because female oppression is uniquely traumatic and that there’s nothing wrong with women expressing their sexuality by sexting minors as long as the minor consents and that I was the real predator for “hiding that I was a man” (remember, I’d been a 13 year old closeted trans boy), before never logging in again... 😭 One of the last times we ever talked was when she demanded I refund her for the fucking Xbox and I refused.

Anyway, the long-term aftermath of that is that a few people online (in some random cringe areas of the internet) who archived some of her antics still think that I also wasn’t a real person, since they caught onto how much she lied about too, so they think I was also a sock puppet and I have no interest in clarifying and making myself known to those people LOL. I have no fucking idea where she is now, she deactivated everything after her being a TERF came out. There’s like, so much more to that I could say because I knew her for YEARS and, like I said, she was one of my “closest friends.” Her parents had wildly expensive pure bred designer dogs that she would make Vines of. She wrote Beatles real person fan fiction. For her birthday one year I made her a shirt on Zazzle with an inside joke about one of her OCs... does she still have that? Either way, she was easily the most batshit person I’ve ever known closely online and I will forever associate the Hetalia fandom with people like that.

[transfemininomenon]

Hey, i'm actually a "truscum" i found out recently, but im a little confused on the whole ordeal. Im not even sure if i actually am truscum or not- because some posts seem to tie up with me being one but others dont, but i saw you were really against them, so i wanted to ask if you're okay with a friendly calm conversation about it? I am very confused and i just want to learn a bit more or find out if i'm wrong about the whole ordeal. Are you open to it?

i'll be honest im not sure how friendly i can be with this kind of conversation because i really truly genuinely, and i don't use this word lightly, Hate truscum and its hard for me to really be civil about the discussion. but for the sake of this and me giving you a lot of benefit of the doubt that this ask is in good faith i'll explain why i do not like the entire truscum ideology

1. i guess i'll start off with the Big One - the claim that dysphoria is Required to be trans. i'll preface this by saying that i am someone who has experienced, and currently Experiences in wildly different degrees depending on what is happening in my life, dysphoria throughout my entire life. i had my entire teenage and young adult years stolen from me by it. i won't get into details about it because that is a Very Very Personal subject for me, but needless to say dysphoria is something that was a very prevalent part of my life.

anyway. the notion that dysphoria is a Trans Requirement™ is something that i hugely disagree with. i used to think that me figuring out i was a trans woman was because i experienced dysphoria, but frankly the opposite is true. dysphoria is what made me refuse to believe i was a woman or could ever be one. it made me believe i was a man and that was all i would ever be. it wasn't until i really started experimenting with my gender and unpacking a lot of stuff i felt about myself that i started to finally realize the woman i was. i first started trying our she/her pronouns nearing four years now, and started using the name Alice a few months after that. being referred to as a woman & experimenting with different feminine things gave me such incredible feelings of euphoria that i still experience to this day whenever i discover something new about my identity.

and that is something ive heard from SO many other trans people i know. or different things too - i know people who are completely fine with their bodies, just certain words and terms never felt Right to them. because the thing with dysphoria is that it, like all things gender related, is a product of society. dysphoria only exists because transphobia exists - people are told that there are these two rigid things that you are and HERE is what makes you one of those things, and those things are drilled into you literally since birth. everything from colors to jobs to hobbies to cars to entertainment to clothing to Literally Everything is gendered, and when that happens then of fucking course there are gonna be people who don't fall in line with that, and when it's so instilled into people and seen as such societal norms of COURSE people are going to have trouble with that.

and that's not even getting into the subject of gender on a biological level. the fact of the matter is that the two sex system Isn't True and that biological sex is very complicated. intersex people exist, people with all kinds of different chromosomes exist, people of certain body types that have higher levels of different hormones exist, SO much goes into that subject that frankly narrowing it down to two things just doesn't Work

and that's the real problem at the end of the day. dysphoria only exists because of a fucked up gender binary that clashes with both biology and sociology. people are complicated on both a biological and personal level and having set binaries for things is bound to cause confusion & doubt.

like, people's identities are SUCH personal things in so many different ways. there isn't any Right Way™ to be trans. i know trans women with beards, trans women who have no interest in starting hrt, trans men who wear dresses and makeup, non-binary people who make no effort to be androgynous, i know SO many different identities and different people. because the fact is that there's no right way to be trans because nothing is inherently gendered including people's very bodies. people are themselves and there is no Right way to be themselves.

that's on top of the lack of education when it comes to the subject of gender. such a huge part too of me figuring out i was trans was literally learning that it was even a fucking option. i genuinely didn't know just Being A Girl was an option. reading up on gender stuff and researching the different idea of transitioning was intrinsic in my figuring out who i was because oh shit turns out there are people like me and that is Okay.

like, dysphoria literally could've been a non-issue for me. i could've lived in a world where i could just Exist and enjoy whatever i wanted without it being weird. i could've decided so much sooner that i wasn't happy with the way my body was growing and not spent my entire teen years being so confused why i was so sad seeing my girl peers. i could have from the start just gotten to be a girl and never have had dysphoria be part of the equation.

im not trans being i experience dysphoria. im trans because being a woman is rad as hell and it's what i wanted. im trans because changing my name to Alice was the biggest moment of my entire life. im trans because rebelling against the societal restraints of gender is fucking metal. im trans because my friends can't even remember me ever not being me now. im trans because im a great older sister. im trans because god nerfed me and i said nah thanks man but im not feeling it.

my identity and my gender are very personal and complicated things, and narrowing it down to "i experience dysphoria" is frankly insulting to me.

anyway, that's the big point out of the way, so here's some shorter ones

2. this is kinda expanding on the last point, but truscum both insisting non-binary people aren't a thing and them insisting "transtrenders" exist is hmm Bad

the sheer fact of the matter is the concept of being non-binary has existed from the oldest known records of human history on TOP of that concept being prevalent in many different cultures so what do ya know there's a healthy dose of racism involved in the denial of non-binary people. the gender binary is such a western concept and there are SO many different cultures where different gender identities exist.

and, frankly, going back to the above point that gender is fucking Fake and is a societal concept - again, of fucking course there are going to be people who see a rigid set of rules on gender and are like "well wait that doesn't fit me" so of COURSE non-binary people exist

on the subject of "transtrenders" i feel like i shouldn't even HAVE to get into this subject because of how inherently transphobic it is. the concept doesn't exist. there are people who experiment with their gender and then decide their assigned one is fine. there are people who go through all kinds of different identities. there are people who come out as a different gender and then revert back due to backlash. there are people who get told the way they present their gender is the Wrong Way™ and get branded a trender. it's a dangerous thought process that literally does nothing but serve the cis status quo and make people afraid to experiment and think about their identities.

3. the idea that Those Evil Trenders™ are stealing resources from the Real Trans People™ is, frankly, fucking bullshit. issues when it comes to trans people finding difficulty accessing healthcare comes from a transphobic society hellbent on denying us care on top of fucked up healthcare systems in general. hormones aren't some limited quality hard to acquire thing - when i started hrt transferring my prescription from my clinic to my local pharmacy was a non-issue because it's something basically any pharmacy will have for ALL kinds of different purposes. it's an issue because healthcare in general is a god damn Mess on TOP of inherent transphobia

and, frankly, truscum are directly involved in that transphobia in the medical field. unless you find an informed consent clinic you're going to have to jump through all kinds of hoops to prove you're Actually Trans™ by getting referrals from other (almost always cis) people and then get put on ridiculous waitlists to make sure you're not about to change your mind. that kind of attitude is only encouraged by truscum and it is one of the biggest source of trans people having such difficulty accessing healthcare.

4. truscum as far as im concerned are no different than any other transphobe. two years ago before i started hrt i was harassed by truscum multiple times, each time having them tell me i wasn't trans, that i was just a trender, and it genuinely boggles my mind that anyone thinks misgendering me because i disagreed with their ideology is Woke, actually. I've seen so many fellow trans women getting called men by truscum who disagreed with them. i was actively told i shouldn't start hrt because i "wasn't really trans and was gonna ruin my life"

i really hope all of people live in anger every day knowing ive been on hrt over a year and a half and am fucking Thriving

anyway that's all i got to say on the matter i realize my points became less thought out as it went on but frankly the first point is enough for me to not like truscum

(please refrain from reblogging this i don't want any clowns in my inbox)

[lilithmedium]

On Spirits, Gender and Free Will

Many of my most recent asks and DMs have revolved around how Lilith relates to men and women, either trans or cis. I have mentioned before my experience of her preferences. This was condemned as “unfair” by some, as apparently I am supposed to be able to sway the opinions of an ancient supernatural force to modern concepts of sex and gender.

Lilith’s relationship with humanity was first defined when excruciatingly sexist men started telling stories of her as an originally equal being to man who suffered forced subordination, attempted rape, curses, exile and the mass murder of her children. This, as well as her subsequent demonization down through history, told her what male humans think of her. That was her first contact--a whole ton of slander told about her by men to serve patriarchal ends, first in Babylon and then among the Israelites. Her whole existence was turned into a cautionary tale for and about insubordinate women.

Because of this, she is skeptical of men, and she has the most sympathy for and connection with women who actually are oppressed on the basis of their biological sex. Trans women are not last in line in her eyes, but they’re not first in line either. Apparently not being first in line for everything makes a lot of trans women incredibly angry. But calling Lilith transphobic is about as dumb as calling Danto racist or Diana sexist. Not all spirits have a special connection with every population of people. That’s just how it is.

When a trans woman comes sailing in and says “I’m a woman on the inside, I qualify, I should get everything other women get”, she is in a lot of cases absolutely correct. Human rights, basic respect, medical care, the right to live in peace--her personhood is not predicated on the bits she was born with. But she is not “automatically entitled” to Lilith’s favor, because only Lilith decides who she gives favor to. And Lilith naturally tends to favor those whose life experiences parallel the specific hell that male human stories about her describe her being put through.

Lilith favors those who have suffered under sexism their whole lives. Trans women have not; they spent a significant chunk of that time being treated like a male by those around them. Probably a male abused for being “too feminine”, but a male nonetheless. That doesn’t invalidate who they are or what they have gone through, it just points it out as a different experience from that of people who grew up in sexism’s cage. It’s that simple, and it’s Lilith’s choice--not mine. (So you can stop with the death threats. They’re pointless).

It all boils down to this. Either you accept spirits as intelligent entities with power, agency, preferences, prejudices, cultural associations and a living history of interacting with humans, or you’re not going to be able to work with them with any real effectiveness. 

If you think that the Powers should answer to your expectations of what they should be instead of being what they are, you will fail in your relationships with them.

As an example, I as a white woman cannot approach a spirit from African diasporic tradition and expect the same automatic acceptance as one of their people. I will always have to work to prove myself harder to any spirit from another culture, I cannot automatically expect acceptance from them. Since my culture colonized theirs, I can fully expect, and have no right to complain, if those spirits are wary of me until my little white butt proves myself to their satisfaction--and they decide when that is, not I.

There is no appropriate, respectful way to gain a spirit’s favor unless you do things on their terms. I could stamp my foot and whine “But WHY doesn’t Ezili Danto accept me as Her child automatically? I know even her own people have to put in serious work to develop a relationship with her, but I’m special!” but it won’t get me anywhere. It may even piss her off. That’s...really bad.

If you approach a being like Lilith with some airy expectation of perfect benevolence and an embrace of twenty-first century egalitarianism of all souls, you’re making two mistakes. You are expecting automatic no-effort acceptance from a being who needs to be won over, and you’re expecting her to conform her attitudes and practices to what you think they should be. Which is ridiculous.

If you can’t figure out why this won’t fly with a powerful spirit who is well known for refusing to subordinate herself, you either don’t really believe in her as an independent entity with free will, or you’re a raging narcissist.

[thisdiscontentedwinter]

“I do see exclusion as an inherently bad thing, yes, and nothing will change my mind on that. Simply because women are not a monolith, and being born with a vagina does not mean we all share the same experiences of how being female relates to the world. I believe in intersectional feminism, and that transwomen are very much a part of that.” And this is the core thing, isn’t it. I actually held this same opinion until a couple of years ago. I started seeing a certain kind of rhetoric from trans activists online - some of whom, upon reflection, probably represent an extreme view that shouldn’t be taken too seriously - that had me doing double takes and started changing my mind. I’ll back up and try to explain how my mind changed and why I struggle with this topic. I agree with you that women are not a monolith and that women in general have different experiences. I also agree that being born with a vagina does not mean we all share the same experiences of how being female relates to the world, but I disagree with what that implies and how you’ve interpreted that - those different experiences are because of the different cultural takes on what that vagina means. The presence of the vagina is inherent and necessary. The fundamental principle of feminism that I grew up with is that the category of woman is given to people with the female reproductive system, and that category was seen and treated as inferior for no good reason in all cultures. What ‘woman’ actually is (gender roles, gender expectations, treatment by wider society etc ie “gender”) is culturally malleable and constructed and varies slightly from place to place; the universal consistency is that this category is placed upon people born with the female sex (distinct from gender) in order to control and oppress them. Like, it’s key to feminism that the sex provokes the ‘woman’ category, and females are socialised into the ‘woman’ role. The oppression women face isn’t due to a demonstrable lack of intelligence or capability or physiology, it’s because someone looked at our genitals as babies and went 'okay, this is what we call and how we treat people with this biology.’ So that’s my understanding. Women are historically oppressed due to abitrary negative stereotypes placed on them because of their biological sex. How that oppression manifests is different according to culture, geography, ethnicity, religion. Where intersectionality comes into it, for me, is acknowledging all those differences in experiences and including them in feminist progress in dismantling these stereotypes and the unequal treatment and discrimination resulting from them. (some) Trans women state that they are women because they essentially 'feel like it’. They claim an internal sense of 'womanhood’ and this means they are women. When I saw this I was like “:/ okaaay, but how do you measure that, what does that actually mean.” This internal sense seems to be explained in terms like “I preferred pink and playing with dolls as a child, and I always got along better with girls, I preferred doing girly things.” This is more of a call on gender stereotypes than a satisfactory explanation - identification with the performance of the arbitrary, cultural construction of gender, something which changes over time and with which many (cis) women do not identify (yet are still discriminated against - their feelings don’t matter to people who look at them and treat them differently). They have this idea of womanhood and identify with that. I know trans people say that cis people don’t understand that internal sense of 'manhood’ and 'womanhood’ because in them it’s all aligned with their sex - I disagree. If there’s this strong of an internal sense of being a woman or being a man, surely a reasonable proportion of all women and men would report experiencing it. Again, I’m falling prone to the anecdote thing, but in my case, I don’t 'feel’ like a woman. I’m a person in a meatsack who is treated unfairly because of stupid ideas about the meatsack that have nothing to do with my qualities as a person. My female and male friends report the same kind of feeling. If I woke up tomorrow in a male body, I’d probably miss some things about my female body, but I’d be able to go through life in a male body without too much concern. I would then be a man and not a woman, despite my previous few decades in a female body; the concept is a nothing concept so it doesn’t matter. I am open to the idea that people have an innate sense of womanhood or manhood, but it’s so subjective it’s not very useful as a key identification measure for a political group. This is a very different definition of 'woman’ and to me, it completely undermines the key principle underlying feminist discourse. What is also confusing to me is that the transgender community seems roughly split into two groups - those, like above, who *feel* aligned with the opposite sex; and those who say there is a physical miswiring somewhere that causes a mismatch between their internal sense of themselves and their sex, this is a medical condition called gender dysphoria, and the best treatment is transition. Ie you’re trans if you think you are, you’re a woman if you think you are, and you’re a man if you think you are, versus you are trans if you have gender dysphoria, you think you are a woman but biologically you’re a man and you can’t expect to be treated as a woman (or a man) until you physically transition, which will ease your dysphoria. These are two quite different experiences underpinning the definition of transgender. To me, all this confusion over what it even means to be transgender doesn’t represent a cohesive front or group to meaningfully discuss this stuff with. The big thing that got me criticising the issue of inclusion of trans woman is the above realisation, that that definition undermines the ideological foundation of feminism that has brought so much progress to women. It’s an ideological difference that’s fundamental. Other things that bolstered it was accompanying rhetoric I saw online. - eg it’s transphobic/exclusive to discuss things like uteruses (uteri?), menstruation, FGM in feminist spaces, if you do it, you’re a bigot. That doesn’t feel like progress to me, to tell women they can’t discuss the bodily stuff that is the basis of their oppression, and still is for girls and women around the world, in the context of their experiences as women and as people in the world. It feels like misogyny by another name. - eg it’s transphobic to have genital preferences. I think this is a horrible thing to say. Some people do not care what genitals are involved in the sex they’re having, that is fine. Some people do, and that is also fine. Dating and who you have sex with is inherently exclusionary - not everyone is attracted to every person in their identified pool - and it involves bodies, it involves hardwired preferences, and these things can’t be changed if you just think about it really really hard. 'Preferences’ is not a good word for the concept, it implies a choice that I don’t think is there. I really don’t think people choose what they’re attracted to and what turns them on in sex. Examining your sexual self to understand how you operate and what you like and don’t like is an excellent thing to do. I also agree that trans people find it hard to date people. But calling people transphobic - especially lesbians, this seems to happen more with lesbians and trans women than gay men and trans men - because of something innate is just shitty behaviour. I was really disgusted by this. No one is owed sex. - eg there are no real differences between trans women and cis women. Any differences noted in discourse are a result of the person stating them being transphobic. A person who says they’re a woman has female biology because of this statement. This is an attitude I see a lot - any criticism of things like the above, any reference to any differences between trans woman and cis women, and suddenly you’re a bigot, a terf, a transphobic asshole, wrongthink in action! This worries me. Because there ARE differences, and shouting them down is not the way to bring people to your way of thinking. - eg gender dysphoric children should be encouraged to transition or go on puberty blockers. There’s a study out there that states something like 70-90% of gender dysphoric children desist by the end of puberty. Telling them they’re trans and putting them on drugs is not the right way to treat these kids, sensitive and appropriate counselling is. This in particular really worries me. - eg detransitioners exist and have a lot to say, but because it’s critical of transgenderism, they’re ignored. This rubs me the wrong way - they have insight into the interplay between self-understanding, sex, gender and culture, that’s valuable to general understanding of the self, sex, gender, and culture. I could go on, but this is so long. So I was originally supportive - I really was. I’m now more critical, because I don’t see a clear cohesive movement that is, ironically, inclusive, or that supports feminist issues, I’m seeing something that aggressively undermines the one movement that has truly progressed women’s rights. It strikes me that women and feminists are arguing about this more than men are, that men aren’t saying 'trans men are men’ in the same way women are expected to say 'trans women are women’. That also says something to me about the overall issue, and it’s not a good thing. It’s entirely possible that I’m hanging out in the trans part of the internet that has the assholes in it. Every group has its assholes. I also acknowledge that radical feminist groups have their hateful assholes too - but the reason I went into radical feminist spaces was to see what those evil terfs are saying and why they’re so bad, and I didn’t find evil, I found them addressing the concerns I had. They’re talking about the above things, whereas in the supposedly inclusive spaces with trans people, those topics weren’t allowed to be discussed. But I haven’t seen many answers to some of the problems trans people face - violence and discrimination in employment and housing is a real thing, and that does need to be addressed. By feminists? I’m not sure. Trans people are more than capable of organising in their self-interests - if they could find a common ground and common interests. I do think trans women face violence in male spaces and can be accommodated in female spaces - within reason. The case of Karen White in the UK is a good example of how that’s not a good rule of thumb. There’s also a domestic violence shelter in Canada that’s being sued by the women who were in it for allowing a trans woman inside, because the trans women acted in a very predatory way that caused the women distress in a place where they expected safety. I also know of one trans woman in Vancouver who tried to have a rape crisis shelter defunded because it didn’t support sex workers - that’s a valid criticism, but defunding it isn’t the action I would hope to see from any woman; it’s pointedly aggressive coming from a trans woman. For me, I do wonder whether people such as yourself are seeing the same stuff I’m seeing. I guess not. I find it very difficult to go back to the whole 'oh yeah, trans women are women and share our oppression’ stance, because I just don’t see that in evidence. In our conversation I notice that we’ve got a really fundamental difference in how we interpret and approach the world, for example the exclusion thing. Perhaps it’s too fundamental a difference and we won’t find much to agree on. I don’t know if you’ll take the time to respond to this, because it’s so long, but if you could articulate why this inclusion makes sense to you, I would actually really appreciate it. If not, that’s fine, we’re both busy people. Thanks for reading anyway, and thanks again for the conversation and for engaging with me. I *am* sorry about the length :S

DW: 

For me, it’s not a matter of “transwomen are women and share our oppression.” 

It’s a matter of “transwomen are women and are oppressed because they are transwomen.” 

Their oppression might not be exactly the same as mine, but neither is the oppression of a 12 year old child bride on the other side of the world. 

Simply put, it intersectional feminism can make room for all the different types of experiences of women–cultural, and economic, and religious, and social, and geographical–then why not widen the umbrella to include transwomen? 

There’s also a domestic violence shelter in Canada that’s being sued by the women who were in it for allowing a trans woman inside, because the trans women acted in a very predatory way that caused the women distress in a place where they expected safety. I also know of one trans woman in Vancouver who tried to have a rape crisis shelter defunded because it didn’t support sex workers - that’s a valid criticism, but defunding it isn’t the action I would hope to see from any woman; it’s pointedly aggressive coming from a trans woman.

There will always be anecdotes, and there will always be assholes, but judging all transwomen by the actions of a few is not helpful to anyone. 

When it comes to women’s shelters, there are plenty of shelters who don’t allow boys to stay, forcing families out onto the streets in cases of domestic violence because a mother doesn’t want to be separated from her son–who is a child. I think that’s unfair and wrong, but I’m not going to claim from that that all feminists are anti-child. 

I’ve taken calls from women’s shelters before where women were being threatened by other women and the workers were requesting the police. The women there also had an expectation of safety, but gender doesn’t come into it, and the implication that the transwoman was predatory because she is trans is drawing a very long bow.   

In the case of the Vancouver rape crisis shelter, why aren’t sex workers supported? That seems discriminatory. Also, why it is more “pointedly aggressive” coming from a transwoman than from anyone else? Given that transwomen are over-represented in sex work, why wouldn’t a transwoman have every right to want to fight this?

And you can bring up Karen White if you like. And I can counter with articles about transwomen who have been raped in male prisons, which I hope you would agree is just as heinous. 

In the end, nothing is going to change my mind on this. I think that being a woman is more complicated than a biological function, and I think that transwomen, while not oppressed in the same way as ciswoman, still face oppression because of their gender. And I think that there is plenty of room to be inclusive. 

[braincoins]

La Mante

French serial killer drama on Netflix (it’s a Netflix Original, so I assume it’s on all countries’ versions). Review - with spoilers - under the cut.

TL;DR - misgendering, transphobic bullshit, bad interpersonal relationships, but an interesting story underneath all of that if you can put with all of that AND half-assed subtitles. Also, lots of blood.

First off, let’s get the trigger warnings out of the way: gore, blood, violence, sexual violence, child sexual abuse, misgendering, and transphobia.

THAT’S RIGHT, TUMBLRFOLK! Our serial killer is a trans woman! And not in the “Buffalo Bill from Silence of the Lambs” kind of way. You can make some vague and lame excuses for him because the movie says he’s not actually trans, he just thinks he is because he hates his own identity.

No, no, no, our killer this time has been presenting as a girl since her childhood, for which her father brutally beat her. She was denied sex change surgery when she was older (for reasons that aren’t explained - her violent tendencies?), so she went to a quack who so badly botched her vaginoplasty that she nearly died from internal bleeding. And now, every time a man rejects her sexually because of her... “peculiarity,” as she calls it, she kills them. BUT WAIT! IT GETS WORSE!

Because the police - our good guys, for whom we are supposed to be rooting - consistently misgender her, either outright using male pronouns or alternating between she and he. Now, this being said, I am willing to believe that it’s bad subtitles. Because the subtitles? Ain’t that great here.

British spellings, but those aren’t errors, just something to keep in mind if you watch (”tyre” isn’t an error when it’s British!). Numerous typos (”her” instead of “here”), dropping of entire words, either in the translation (there should be a “has” here or that sort of thing) or just not bothering to translate (I’ve heard characters’ names said without that name showing up in the line, which isn’t that critical, all things considered, but given the rest of the subtitle problems, it’s annoying). Also, at one point well before the killer’s gender/sex/identity is established, the subtitles use the female pronoun for her. Just once! And then they swap back to male pronouns while we’re still trying to figure out who this dastardly killer is. I dunno, maybe it’s just whoever’s doing the subtitles that’s misgendering her?

At one point, the concept of “the origin of all evil” is brought up by our killer, and it’s pretty obvious (or it was to me, anyway), that she’s referring to her father and Jeanne’s father. No, wait, let me back up.

You see, the plot here is that we have this copycat killer running around imitating the crimes of the famous Mantis (La Mante), Jeanne Carrot or, as most people know her, Jeanne Deber. (Her real surname is not pronounced like the orange vegetable bunnies nom, but I can’t help reading it that way.) You see, she was willing to plead guilty to her murders if they changed her name for court and the press, in order to spare her young son, Damien, the notoriety of being a murderer’s son. 

But she offers to help catch the killer so long as her son is leading the investigation because it’s been 25 years and he’s been telling everyone she died in a plane crash. Working this case digs up a lot of secrets and a lot of skeletons - some of them literal. Damien doesn’t want to have anything to do with this woman who killed 8 (or 9?) people. He doesn’t want to be related to her. He wants a normal life. (Though he picked the wrong job for that - working as an undercover cop for narcotics? How is that normal?)

Damien hates his mother. His mother hates her father. His mother’s copycat hated her father and hates any man who rejects her, etc. etc. Damien’s father turns out to have been a decent guy. 

I can’t help feeling like the moral here is “Evil fathers turn their daughters into monsters, but the most monstrous mother can still raise a good son.” Which... is not true at all? It seems more like smokescreen feminism than anything else. “Look, our evil females are actually doing good in the world because the justice of MEN have let them down!” Um. They’re killing people. 

Granted, Jeanne only killed men who abused their wives and/or children or raped women. But she still killed them, and took pleasure in it. She never, at any point, denies that she enjoyed it. She’s also very smart, very methodical, and she knows she belongs in prison for the rest of her life. Killing is just... one of the things she does with her time, like eating or sleeping. It’s just a reality of her life to her. 

And, granted, both Jeanne and Camille’s fathers are evil sons of bitches. We can argue forever about whether they deserved their fates. But their crimes against their wives’ and daughters’ bodies - one way or another - warp their fragile, beautiful daughters into murderous psychopaths. Meanwhile, Damien has had violent fits of rage since his mother was arrested, for which he requires medication. He is actively afraid of becoming a father because he doesn’t want to pass on his “murderous” genes. Because, clearly, his violence comes from his evil mom, right? We never get any resolution on Damien’s own psychiatric problems, so it sort of seems pointless to bring them up in the first place?

I also don’t understand how Damien came around to loving his mother. Sure, she willingly risks her own life to save his pregnant wife, but he wanted to protect her and save her from Camille during that whole exchange. Meanwhile, in the previous 5 episodes, he downgrades from violent hate to paranoid distrust. That’s it. And then suddenly a serial killer says, “Hey, I’ll take your mom in exchange for your wife,” and he’s conflicted? REALLY? Why? 

She’s a confessed and proud killer. She poisoned her guard and escaped. (Granted, she also told him what she poisoned him with so he could tell first responders when they arrived; she didn’t want the guard dead, she just wanted him out of her way.) She blatantly inserted herself into her son’s life against his wishes just to please herself. This investigation has rattled Damien’s entire world to its foundations, but suddenly, out of nowhere, he loves her again? There just doesn’t feel like enough time for that to have happened. 

If you can set aside the transphobia and the interpersonal bullshit, it’s a good, solid crime drama. They throw a couple of really good red herrings at you in the beginning. I figured out who the killer was pretty quickly after those, but it was interesting to watch it unfold. Damien’s wife, Lucie, and, of course, Jeanne are the two more compelling characters in the show. Too bad we spend most of our time with Damien, who’d rather keep the secret of who his mother and bully his team into doing what he says than fess up and work the case properly. I spent the first half of the show saying, “JUST. TELL THEM. ALL OF THEM. Tell Lucie, tell Szofia, tell Achille, tell EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO YOUR MOM IS FOR FUCK’S SAKE.”

Also, Szofia. I like Szofia. But she gets a LOT of shit from the show, and I don’t know why? She’s a female Damien, aside from the mommy issues. Oh wait, let me guess: only male characters can be driven and aggressive. Ugh. She’s pissed that she got passed over for team lead by someone outside of their precinct (Damien - because, again, she doesn’t know why he’s leading the investigation since no one will say “Hey we’re working with the original killer to help catch the copycat but she wants her son leading the team or else no dice”), she’s pissed that she’s constantly being lied to (again, by Damien, who won’t just ‘fess up), and she’s pissed when the first suspect suddenly seems to know everything about her personal life - including the existence of her son. 

Everyone treats this like, “Yeah, we get it, but settle down, Szofia, jeeze,” and I’m sitting here like, “No, you clearly don’t get it because you wouldn’t be acting like that if you did. IT’S FUCKING CREEPY.” I think it’s supposed to be because they’re cops and they’re all tough? But Damien flips out on a regular basis (but we can blame murder mommy for that, right?).

Also, cops who touch EVERY GODDAMN THING. Do they not take fingerprints in France?

Anyway, it’s a compelling story, the acting’s good, but the way the characters are portrayed is just SHIT.

(Oh wait, I also forgot the part where Damien finds out his childhood best friend is literally his brother (well, half-brother) and even though they’ve been separated for 25 years and even though he thought the guy was the copycat killer and EVEN THOUGH he found out the guy has been SPYING ON HIS HOME, he shares one beer with him and then is just a sobbing wreck when the guy is killed. Damien’s emotions spin on a goddamn dime.)

[demonfaggotfurry]

Yk not caring about what another person says in an argument and still being in the right are things I've so far only seen rapists or other bad people do... Like I hate to tell you this but that's not how people will think your beliefs are better...

I did not say women are inferior to men just yk people who think men are superior usually hold the belief it's that way because of those reasons and man all of what you want to say is that women are superior beings who can't do harm bc they've been treated as lesser... Which means you've SORT OF accepted the belief 'women are inferior' bc if women aren't inferior how could they be the oppressed people?

I did not at any point say that it's the same thing... Just that I can understand you can forget about your body parts... I think it's just hard for someone who isn't trans to understand what it's like being trans... I'm just trying to tell you not every person with a dick automatically wants to rape every person who doesn't have a dick but apparently you can't understand that and prefer to call them rapists bc they made a single mistake... Like you don't know the rest of that story or the side of the woman coming with home with them...

Like honestly even if they didn't forget they have a dick doesn't mean they raped someone or wanted to force them to have sex with them... Ik that's hard to understand for someone who thinks in binary concepts and has a lot of internalized misogyny but can't understand that...

I mean if this funny little meme would've been a story by that woman who would've said 'he raped me after pretending to be a woman so I'd trust him' then I'd be on your side here but yk that ain't at all what's happening here... They just shared a story in a meme format and if you don't have full context about what happened who are you to say they're a rapist? Like all of your points just make clear you hate men and you're a transphobe...

I'm more offended by the fact you don't care about what the actual topic of discussion is instead of obsessing over other people's genitals and telling them who they are based on that... Like yk you talk like your belief is 'men are inherently bad just bc they are male and have male genitalia' I'm not sure if you actually believe that or not but you do sound like it...

I mean I'm pretty sure one of your beliefs was 'men are bad bc they reduce women to just their genitalia' and now you're doing it to everyone? Like wouldn't that make you just as bad as them? Or do you genuinely believe yourself to be above all judgement bc you're a woman? Please feel free to correct me on this if I'm wrong but at least try to stay respectful and stop with this whole 'didn't read it bc it was too much' like that's not how discussions work and if that's how you want to have them then yeah honestly I feel very bad for you