#gender ideology harms lesbians

[newbieecosocalistboy]

This will lead to a massive number of poor LGB teens to make transitionings because of the harmful sexist stereotypes labeled as "gender." In the long run, it will also erode women's safe spaces in so-called liberal democracies for an entire generation. Later, they will shift the blame onto women, attempting to make everyone believe that women—especially lesbians—were the ones who started this ideology in the first place, using them as scapegoats.

[mrfunnyinthebank]

as i've been coming to realize that i probably do experience having a special interest at different points in my life, i was kind of confused because i couldn't recall what i was into in early adolescence, what filled the gap between twilight and one direction. and then i remembered what the percy jackson series meant to me and i had a brain blast of unlocked memories. so that was one of them

[werebear-butch]

Seriously you can't shout do your own research but not actually do your own research. Because I researched what you were talking about and I found many pictures from the 70s of groups of lesbians that include bisexual women and trans men. Maybe you could actually do the research you claim to have done instead of pulling things out of your ass so you can pretend to be the ultimate authority on people's identity?

Wasn’t pretending to be the ultimate authority on anything really. I made one rant post on my private side blog and specifically didn’t tag it so it wouldn’t be targeting anyone. Y’all sought that post out to start a fight.

Bi lesbian was a term used in the 80s and 90s but has since fallen out of use because queer folks recognized the separation of the two identities. THAT is the historical context. Bisexual folks and trans men and lesbians have fought for equality side by side and form close friendships. There is some overlap in the way younger queer folks may cycle through all of those identities before finding who they really are. A lot of lesbians identified as bi before unpacking their comphet. A lot of bi folks identified as lesbians before eventually realizing they were attracted to men and bisexuality was a better fit. A lot of people who thought they were lesbians later came out as trans men. But at the same time, each of these identities also has things that make them very different lived experiences. That is something recognized on all sides of the fence.

Masculinity is historically important to lesbianism, yes! I recognize that! Hell, I am trans masc, I use primarily they/them pronouns and claim butch as an identity. I’m very aware of the gender fuckery that exists within the lesbian community, I’m very aware of masculine terms being commonly used among masc and butch lesbians. Butch boys are incredible! Butch husbands and boyfriends are great! Lesbians that use he/him pronouns rock! Nonbinary, gender-fluid, etc lesbians are to be celebrated! Trans masc lesbians are cool as fuck, as are trans women lesbians!

But lesbianism has still always excluded men. It is central to lesbianism as an identity. Lesbianism is attraction to non men. That doesn’t exclude masculine folks, and it doesn’t exclude trans women (because trans women, get this, aren’t men!), just men.

[genderqueerdykes]

prioritizing mentalities like "people who look like cishet men aren't allowed in queer spaces" means putting your mild discomfort before the safety of other queer people and as a result cutting them off from community and resources they desperately need. saying "never transition/boymoding/butch/masc trans women look too much like cishet men and scare the women and enbies" prioritizes your comfort and need to pathologically avoid men and mascs over transfeminine people being addressed correctly and given access to resources. this is transmisogyny. this also conflates nonbinaryhood with womanhood which is also transphobic. saying that "women and enbies" need to be "protected" from "cishet men" is taking a page right out of rad fem ideology and actively endangers transfemmes, trans women, intersex people, non binary people, and other queer people

this is putting your squicks before the genuine needs of someone else. this is you refusing to understand non binary identities. you are mildly uncomfortable- they are fighting for their lives to find safety and community. you are mildly inconvenienced, they are being cut off from things that can save their lives. these are 2 entirely different situations to be in. you're "uncomfy" around tall people with deep voices, broad chests and shoulders, narrow hips, facial and body hair, they're fighting to stay off the streets, find access to HRT and gender affirming surgery, meet other trans people to know they're not alone, and find safety among people who get them.

look beyond the scope of your lived experience. sometimes in life you will be uncomfortable. you must challenge and face that discomfort in order to grow. you being mildly uncomfortable around someone with a deep voice and a square jaw identifying as a lesbian woman is a non-issue, especially when that woman needs to be around other queer women. we all face discomfort throughout our lives. we have all had bad experiences with certain "types" of people. but we must grow and move past our own discomfort, especially when it starts taking away rights from people who have not and will continue to not harm you in any way shape or form by sharing a space with you.

[newbieecosocalistboy]

Exactly

Constantly seeing liberals dunk on women for wanting female-only spaces because “a predator isn’t going to be stopped by whether something is legal or not” as if the crux of the issue isn’t whether it’s acceptable for a woman to defend herself against a possible predator by yelling “get the fuck out, you don’t belong here” when a male enters her space. Is the law on her side?

[vintage-bentley]

David Tennant is a perfect example of how gender ideologists are their own worst enemy. Repeatedly, it’s their own awful behaviour that turns people against them. Look at JK Rowling: it wasn’t just what she said that got people siding with her, it was the reaction from gender ideologists. If they had just brushed her off and ignored her, I don’t think she’d be as relevant in the debate as she is now.

So now we have Tennant, hailed as an amazing trans ally to the point that he wins an ally award for textbook performative allyship. And he decided to call gender critical feminists “little whinging f------” (no idea what the f word is, this is from the Telegraph), continuing with “who’re on the wrong side of history and they’ll all go away soon”.

Women who are simply concerned about our sex-based rights. About the protection of women as a class in law. About the ability to organise together without the presence of male people, which is crucial for class consciousness and therefore feminist progress. Lesbians who are being told we’re bigoted for not being attracted to males, and that we need to change (who I mention because lesbians have been very vocal in this debate for this reason).

This is a heterosexual male who is looking at these women, and deciding that our very real concerns are just “whinging”. Because of course he is, our concerns don’t affect him. Of course he claims we’ll “go away soon”, presumably because men like him will silence us. This is the same shit that was being said about the suffragettes. About the Me Too movement. About any kind of feminist movement. That we just need to shut up and go away.

And we’re supposed to believe that this typical male view of women is super progressive this time, because it’s in the name of trans activism?

Less and less people are willing to believe that. More are starting to see the misogyny and homophobia that fuels gender ideology, all because the people who advocate for it are always so quick to let it show.

They are always so quick to claim that their biggest enemies are feminists, and not the violent men that actually wish them harm. They are always so quick to attack women first and foremost.

And people are noticing. They noticed when JK Rowling started to speak up, and they’re noticing now that a male celebrity has gone on record voicing hatred for feminists in the name of gender ideology. They’ll notice again when the next celebrity either speaks up or bashes women.

I hope Tennant enjoys his shiny ally award, all while his actions are causing women to turn against him and his cause.

[pocketsizedquasar-3]

didn’t want to rb this post directly partially bc i see/get the overall point and partially bc i don’t want ppl to be a dick to me if i say shit (n i def do not intend any ire/ill will to op; i am just adding my thoughts)

but anyway. while i again do see the point of the post (not all queer ppl are harmed the same way/amount by the govt & more specifically by the recent Executive Orders), i also with respect think that the assumption that they are only specifically about targeting trans women or protecting cis women from trans women is just untrue (smthn some ppl in the notes are also claiming).

the eo’s have language that is explicitly targeting / inciting violence towards trans women & this is undeniable. everything that mentions “protecting women from men” and keeping “males” out of “women’s spaces” is very deliberately about targeting and harming trans women. there is an entire section of one of the EO’s dedicated specifically to removing “males” (trans women) from women’s prisons, and this is horrific and violent. transfems also suffer from the effects of hypervisbility, making them very easy targets for enforcement of these laws and the language within them. all of that is true.

& also, it’s very untrue that these eo’s aren’t designed to harm other trans ppl and intersex ppl. i’m not even talking generally “oh these orders are about transphobia and so will harm all trans ppl”; there is specific language in them that is violent specifically towards intersex and transmasc ppl (in addition to the language that directly violently targets transfems) (none of which (transfem, transmasc, intersex) are mutually exclusive categories!).

the multiple eo’s concerning trans folks are rife with defining sex strictly as an immutable binary — the “immutable biological reality of sex” —“protecting sex-based distinctions,” (both quotes from the “defending women from gender ideology…” executive order) and deliberately codifying the erasure of any and all acknowledgment of sex outside of male/female is intentional, specific violence towards intersex people. this is deliberate targeting intersex people for violence and oppression (just as other parts of the same EO are deliberately targeting transfems).

there is also the entire EO for “protecting children from chemical and surgical mutilation”, which obviously is directed largely at any gender-affirming trans healthcare as a whole, but also very specifically names protecting against “female genital mutilation” — directly targeting transmascs, and ‘protecting’ cis women and girls from transmascs.

transmascs are very much also viewed as a threat to cis women and cis girls, painted as “corrupting,” “stealing,” and “mutilating” poor innocent young cis girls (or poor innocent cis lesbians, depending on the person wielding this rhetoric). transphobic rhetoric and anti trans laws are rife with this belief, deriding the “mutilation” of their idea of the “pure ideal female body,” the “hacking off healthy tissue” (re: top surgery), “testosterone poisoning” of girls, and the idea that trans men want to turn all young girls trans, want to turn all young lesbians trans — “i was a tomboy and if i were a kid today i would’ve been turned trans! they would’ve made me transition!” (this is also part of the driver of the incredibly high SA rates among transmasc ppl)

this EO is simply a codification of that view of transmascs as a threat to cis womanhood. this EO targets all trans people’s right to our own bodies and bodily autonomy, and this language specifically directly targets transmasc’s rights to their own bodies.

i do think it’s important to discuss that not all queer people are immediately impacted the same way by trump’s bigotry. i also think it’s incredibly disingenuous to ignore the parts of these laws which are deliberately targeting specific subsets of the trans and intersex community (including ignoring the parts that explicitly are about transfems!). all trans and intersex people are intentionally, directly, and explicitly targeted by the government’s bigotry and violence in different ways; none of it is incidental or unintentional. they are “protecting” cis women, or, the white supremacist status quo, from trans & intersex people — most especially nonwhite trans and intersex ppl.

anyway. those are my thoughts.

[butchpeace]

With respect, whatever experience you've had with detransitioning, you are valid, but your experience doesn't invalidate trans people's experience. The data show that social outcomes are more positive in accepting environments for people with gender dysphoria, and that informed trans people who decide for themselves what is best for their lives are happier and more fulfilled. Any consistent trans advocate would accept detrans people as well, so I'm sorry if trans advocates in the past have given you shit for your experience. You made your choice and changed you mind later, which is completely valid! But we trans people also should have the right to make our own choices without being excluded from our own communities.

Who’s excluding you from your own community? Are you talking about LGB people who disagree with gender ideology? Lesbians and gay men don’t need to agree with transition. We have damn good reasons not to. If you’re same-sex attracted, I understand why being excluded or judged would hurt. But that doesn’t mean we have to stay quiet and not speak up about the harm that’s being done to members of our demographic.

People love to say that detransitioner’s experiences don’t invalidate transitioned people’s experiences, but they do a little, don’t they? We poke holes in the idea that everything about transition and your community is fine and dandy. We poke holes in the idea that medical transition is okay for your physical and mental health. We poke holes in the belief that gender dysphoria will never go away, that it can never be healed. We poke holes in the belief that there is a trans soul somewhere in your body that needs drastic hormonal and surgical correction.

We poke holes in your concept of who you are, and in your sense of peace with your choices. That’s why I get this same message, almost word for word, all the time.

When detransitioners talk about our real opinions and feelings about what we personally went through, you feel uncomfortable. But it’s not on us to shut up, it’s on you to figure out why we make you feel that way.

[nonconformityhub]

Mspec Lesbian Misconceptions

I still get exclusionary comments and reblogs on my friend's mspec lesbian infographic so I thought I'd make a sort of 'addon post' that answers basically everything!

Please check the infographic out! It's much shorter and it looks pretty

🌺 "Mspec always means that you're attracted to men"

⤷ Mspec is short for the 'multisexual (or other multi- attraction type) spectrum', meaning the attraction to multiple genders. Most folks who experience attraction to women and non-binary genders don't consider themselves mspec, but that doesn't mean that nobody can

⤷ As we understand the complexities of gender more and move past the 'only two genders' way, what counts as being bi or otherwise mspec will change

🌺 "There's no reason to reclaim old uses for the word lesbian from before lesbian separatism"

⤷ Lesbian separatists tried to exclude anyone that associated themselves with men or masculinity from lesbianism. This included bi people, trans people, butches and mascs, lesbians still married to men, lesbians living with men, and more. Some went as far as considering butch-for-femme relationships to be harmful. Why wouldn't people want to reclaim lesbian from a time before this ideology spread? See more here

🌺 "But bi women wanted to make their own spaces and stop using lesbian spaces and the lesbian label" ⤷ Obviously, some bi sapphics of the time would've wanted to be distinctly and only viewed as bi, and have no affiliation with lesbians, but plenty didn't. Implying that the rise of radical feminism in the lesbian community was wanted by all of the people they excluded is ridiculous. It wasn't a consensus

🌺 "Mspec lesbians just want to feel included in lesbian spaces"

⤷ You've hit the nail on the head actually, this isn't the gotcha you think it is. Mspec sapphics were originally welcome to use the word lesbian and exist in the lesbian community, and then they weren't, so some of them would like to be included again yes

🌺 "It takes away spaces that are just for monosexual lesbians"

⤷ There have been attempts made to create terms for monosexual lesbians (though usually people just mean 'not attracted to men' rather than monosexual), but the lesbian community thrived with bisexuals in it for a long time. Lesbian spaces are heavily dominated by monosexual lesbians as well

⤷ The real question here is why are you so keen to know for definite that nobody in your space is attracted to men? And what are you counting as 'attracted to men'? Are you assuming it based on dating habits? What label they use? What you consider to be attraction? Everyone views this stuff differently, you can't police it properly

🌺 "Lesbian can't be used in the split attraction model, it means no attraction to men at all"

⤷ Insisting that someone has to use 'homoromantic' rather than lesbian just because they're bisexual or vice versa is pointless. Not only is lesbian a more open and functional label (it specifies attraction to women and doesn't imply that the user is also a woman), but defining it as an absence of attraction to men is very 1970s lesbian separatist of you

🌺 + "If you're fluid between mspec and lesbian just say abrosexual", "If you heavily prefer women just say homoflexible" and so on so forth

⤷ There are probably terms that technically apply to you that you don't use because you're not connected to the label or it doesn't fit quite right. The same applies here. Abrosexual is very broad, homoflexible implies 'same gender' attraction to women, and we've established that there's nothing stopping them from using mspec and lesbian instead

[hersoftembrace]

Hello. I have never really used tumblr before. I apologize if I have misused tags, or am doing something I shouldn't be, but I need help. I am reaching out to radical feminists / terfs because I need a different opinion for once in my life. I have always avoided these topics or opinions because I grew up with the side of the internet that say radfem ideology is harmful and bigoted, and I carelessly took those opinions. I am only now realizing I should be getting my own opinions, which should've been obvious, but it is difficult for me.

I am AFAB, diagnosed with autism and gender dysphoria, and have ID'ed as a trans man throughout most of my teen years, but now as an adult, I am questioning my transgender identity. I am terrified to admit this to my trans friends, who would likely despise me for even considering asking the opinion of radfems. I have no one to discuss this with in a healthy manner. I am worried my gender identity stems from wanting to escape womanhood, just wanting to start a new life, or to get rid of self-hatred. I notice I often 'wish' I could be a cis lesbian, as if I couldn't, because of the way I chose to identify. I am worried and I am scared I am making wrong decisions. I am worried I am not listening to enough different opinions and making my own. Is there anyone I could maybe talk to? Am I welcome here? I am very sorry.

[angy-grrr]

I need katsuki to be all "men arent shit, I hate all men, make them go to the military, im actually goin to turn straight" idk idk

its not even himiko telling ochako express her worries and herself to izuku, its just accept the chance HE IS GIVING YOU to talk more. What was the point of the togachako fight then?

1- It wasn't about making her have a separated arc with a villain and a different outcome, as she dies sacrificing herself similarly to Tomura.

2- It wasn't about making Ochako finally accept herself and her needs, as after the war she had to have Deku come after her to convince her to express herself, and 8 years laters she still kept things inside.

3- Her confession to Himiko is meaningless, bc we dont see her try to help any other actual villains nor actively remember her -she has the weird dreams, but they only happen to push her (literally) towards Deku; they arent about Himiko and Ochako, they are about "I love you so much, you should be happy with him".

4- It wasn't about making Ochako and Midoriya have a traumatic experience in common to bond over (god I hate this one, but still), besides 429 which ends with a platonic note, theres no mention about it affecting them both (or affecting Midoriya in general), and even tho Ochako is feeling weird in 431, 431!Midoriya doesnt even notice that and only focus in what interests him: talking more to her bc he heard about classmates dating a "inevitability".

Was it about Ochako needing Himiko's permission to be with him? Ochako cant have any form of agency in the actual story and in her actual arc, to the point that she does absolutely none of the things her character was supposed to resolve? She needs Himiko to give her permission to accept an offer Deku gives her, even tho the fight was about expressing her true feeling and not apologizing for being herself. What's the point? I dont understand at all... She cant even do that for herself? She needs a dude that JUST THAT NIGHT remembered she was his friend and helped him a lot and a DEAD GIRL in order to resolve the "romance arc"? Really?

Why the hell does she as a character and they as a pair need so much for such simple thing? They were friends, with the literal same values,

They could have used the little differences they have in order to give them some form of flavor -idk like ochako is fully against attacking and deku isnt opposed to it at all, they could have used this to make them seem more complex and establish their dynamic actually have something deeper to say about who they are separated and together. It would at least make it make sense that theres some tension and doubts about her feelings -like "oh, I really dont like the way he is treating villains but im falling for him... idk what to do about this I dont want to think about this conflict". Instead we got them never discussing anything beyond "you should ask for help!" and "hey I have the exact same perspective and values as you!" but with the drama of star-crossed lovers -they just arent, they are a pretty simple and plain pair, you cant give this kind of ship that level of intensity that 8 years later they just HAVE to get together. They have moments together, but they dont give off romance vibes as its mostly kept vague or completely unrelated to love, and the justification is "oh deku just realized now that she loves her like that!" Tf? That's not a good conclusion, he doesnt know her at this point -how can he STILL love her, when he didnt even try to reach out to her before? How can he feel that way, when he never, ever had thoughts about it beyond blushing the first few times he interacted with a girl?

Even tho I hate this perspective, it would make more sense if they were together but deku admitted he didnt write a lot about it as he was telling a hero story. Boom thats it, harmless canonization, no need to make me feel like I dont understand absolutely anything about anyone ever.

And wtf does Shigaraki have to do with this mess??? Leave him out of this, omfg he wasn't talking about midoriya starting to talk to his high school friends again nor pursue love, am I supposed to believe that was his message??? Wtf????? Am I crazy for thinking none of this makes sense??????

I love how he was perfectly able to just barely see ochako in 8 years, and in just one dinner he "realizes" he "loves" her. Fuck that, this isnt even the bare minimum, never date a man like this istg Midoriya makes me feel like a misandrist dont play with me you loser who cant even try to properly care for a friend and all of the sudden you love her??? And she has to accept????? Oh no, nonononono

[punkeropercyjackson]

Myths about tfems you'll often hear that're actually just anti-transfeminism

Egg jokes are just 'reinventing gender roles'(VERY out of pocket stock phrase to use when talking about transfems btw)and 'telling people you know their gender better than them'.Literally every transfem was an egg once and these jokes are good faith attempts at trying to reassure possible ones and help them crack and save them from possible mental health problems that can straight up escalate into suicide.I've yet to encounter a femme amab person who was actually bothered by egg jokes and if you're a transmasc or tme nonbinary person who feels targeted,then that's a you problem and you need to know when things aren't about you and i don't feel bad for you since you're hurting transfeminine people with harmful rethoric for your own comfort

Trans women don't get periods or can't get pregnant.With specific modes of physical transition,trans women can have biokids and estrogen gives transfems all the symptoms of a period except the blood

F*mboy isn't a slur against trans women and is actually a seperate trans identity.F*mboy dosen't mean femme transmasc or genderqueer,it's a transmisogynistic porn category catered to cis people and transfems are frequently called the fb slur before coming out to degrade their desire for femininity and girlhood as purely sexual and call them 'not real women and just feminine men faking it'.I get where the transmasc confusion comes from but please use another word and as a black trans man i feel no connection to this very white and orientalized asian aesthetic

Transfems don't care about trans men's issues and just hate us.This is a pretty classic spin on the 'hysterical woman' stereotype but with trans added to make it acceptable as 'not real misogyny' for bioessentialism-Tfems speak up for tmascs constantly and on the regular and simply have a backbone about it so it's seen as 'not enough' by transmascs who think they can't misogynistic based on bioessentialism too('i can't be a misogynist,i have a pussy!!!' is the guist).Transandrophobia as a term and concept was coined by a tboy with a corrective rape kink against lesbians so it can't be seperated from misogyny and by extension transmisogyny,especially with transbians in mind.Yes,trans men face a specific special discrimination but that's transmascphobia,not 'misandry',which isn't real and since it's not but transphobia and misogyny both are,transmisogyny is in fact worse than transmascphobia.'Please aknowledge that while we're in this together,you still have privilege over me and should use it to protect me' isn't an insult

Transfeminism and nonbinary identities can't co-exist in the same person.Nonbinary is agab neutral and transfems even coined their own semi-popular xenogender-'Girlthing'.Though it's important to note a lot transfems are uncomfortable with nonbinary labels and terms thanks to the transmisogyny forced onto them to deprive them of binary womanhood,actual nonbinary tfems are very real

Transfems are all rail thin and/or have 'mommy milkers'.While not universal,transfems are often mid-sized/fat and not often finished transitioning and i've seen and heard many of them complaining about how even transfem characters in art don't take the diversity of transfem bodies into account and place unrealistic standards onto them that're pretty reflective of misogynistic apperance standards in general yet treated as an exception somehow(the 'somehow' is these tme artists don't see trans women as a real kind of woman that exists).Not all your transfem depictions should be flatchested,that's a stereotype too and can come with the implication busty transfems are 'shameful' and big boobs on tfem characters is a trademark of tfem nsfw artists atp,but the reverse isn't the way to go

Trans women aren't the primary target of t*rfs.This one is flat-out gaslightning,t*rfs are more obsessed with tfems than anyone else they hate and their ideology may be anti-transgender in general but it has an emphasis on transgender women.This is why they specify 'trans exclusionary r*dical feminist' i.e their focus is women.They hurt trans men,nonbinary people and nonbinary trans men too and that should never be shoved aside but focusing on transfems and transmisogyny in anti-t*rf talk and action isn't doing that,it's simply tackling the biggest problem at hand and arguing against that is silencing transfems against a hate group created for them foremost and inevertedly opening up to give more power to t*rfs,not less

Trans women are largely white.This is racialized transmisogyny,transmisogynoir,erasure of twoc and plays into the idea being queer is 'white people shit',something baby gays of color are told constantly growing up to invalidate our heritage and discourage us from coming out.There's as many trans women of color and black trans women as there are white ones and you can't choose to not meet them and call yourself an ally

[leikeliscomet]

There's this cognitive dissonance where despite asexuals being such a tiny part of the population, 'justifying' compulsory sexuality because there aren't 'enough' of us to change the idea every human is a sexual being even when we're living proof that's not the case, there's a constant need to reinforce it even though it's the 'norm'.

I keep noticing the constant affirmations we have to keep telling non-ace people in conversations and spaces originally meant for ourselves, that asexual partners can fail to meet the sexual needs of non-ace people, that sex is a part of the human experience, that our needs aren't the same as most people, even though cisheterosexual society reaffirms this on the regular (for cishet people) and ace spaces are essentially the only spaces that exist to decentre this (and no, monasteries don't count). We have to keep distancing ourselves from sexual puritanism because it's assumed to be innate to us even though the lawmakers and politicians controlling sex in media, birth control, abortion, marriage rights and the idea of sexuality in society are not asexual. We have to remind people we're safe as if our little to no sexual attraction and/or activity is inherently a danger even though puritans harm us too because they don't support asexuality either. Whenever there's an ace of multiple identities there are instant calls to remind people not to desexualise, infantilise or sanitise marginalised people and remind people of the 'inherent' sexuality of these groups, that '[label here] fucks too!1' even though, representation for gay, lesbian, bi, pan, trans, disabled and POC on mass has rarely included asexuality in the first place. Despite being a teeny part of the human population, being 'abnormal', 'gender ideology' and a 'chronically online tumblr teen' phenomenon that has no real meaning in the real world, it's strong enough to cause this level of defensiveness. Some people are deeply threatened, disturbed and uncomfortable by a tiny minority solely on the basis that it's visible and existing.

And this is why I call asexuality queer and will keep doing so and idc who's pissed about it lol

[juliesque04]

Radfem and gender critical in the sense that I understand that within a society that has created a concept of gender, it IS understandable to "feel like a man/woman" because we subconsciously associate certain traits/behaviors/activities with male and female, however also being reasonable enough to conclude that these vague definitions of gender are social constructs, and complying with them harms everyone because it leads to perpetuating stereotypes associated with both sexes.

I'll use myself as an example. I identified with men/'nonbinary' people for multiple years because I did not "feel like a woman," and I was raised mainly by my father (who for whatever great reason lacks any sense of conservatism and raised me identically to my brother) and have very few female relatives, so I naturally shared more in common with men. Like, literally, I was raised with the stereotypical "crying is weak" father, except he extended that policy to both his children and didn't exempt me from it because he thought I was inherently weak due to being female.

I'm assertive, i'm ambitious, I'm competitive, i'm driven, i'm very literal and down to earth, I like working with my hands and am very physical, I dislike being given princess treatment and enjoy much more giving said treatment and serving others, i'm highly independent, i often struggle with reactive aggression and am very out of tune with any other emotions, and I often get along well with men before they discover i'm female.

I've also never experienced key markers of what society deems "womanhood." I have never worn makeup in my entire life. I still don't know how to do it, nor do I have a desire to. I've never regularly shaven, only my armpits. Ive worn "boy" clothes since childhood because I like their practicality. I've known I was sapphic since I was 10, and lesbian specifically since 14, and because much of what we deem "womanhood" revolves around men, I lack that aspect of "femininity." I've never had an emotional connection with children nor particularly maternal instincts; I feel the urge to protect children physically and keep them safe, but not much else. I've never felt particularly connected to other women besides our physical bodies.

It makes sense why I thought I was born as the wrong sex; internally, I am very similar to many men and cannot relate with what society deems "womanhood" to be. So obviously I fell for the idea that I wasn't a woman. I'd make a great man in the context of what society deems to be masculine.

But this only lasted until I was, like, 15 and realized that what society considers feminine and masculine is extremely culturally specific. There was nothing inherently masculine about me. I'm only "masculine" in the context of the society I live in. There is no objective definition of masculinity or femininity; they're merely the traits a given society associates with and expects out of males and females, but they're not inherent or sex-specific.

This can also be extended to gender in general. We've come to a point where "man" and "woman" have been stripped of their literal definitions and reduced to vague and ambiguous senses of identity that are extremely specific to every person, but generally follow the pattern of sex stereotypes that exist within the given society. When you comply with these stereotypes and identify as a different sex because of your traits not aligning with what society deems feminine/masculine, you are implying that these traits are inherent to male/female people (also known as bioessentialism.) If i were to identify as a man/male because of my traits and say i was "born the wrong sex," that would imply that these traits cannot be found in female people. That's obviously a ridiculous idea since I am myself a female person who has these traits, and every transmasc is also a female person who naturally has these traits. The ideology is inherently harmful because you continue to perpetuate the idea that certain behaviors/traits are inherent to females, and others to males.

Additionally, not my main point but worth mentioning, having to separate the use of men/women from "male human" and "female human" is linguistically a pain in the ass; we no longer have words to describe male and female humans because we can no longer correlate femaleness and maleness to the words due to the idea of gender. Man and woman (literally) are like stallion and mare: they tell you absolutely nothing about the individual besides their sex.

So yes, I am a woman, but not for any reason aside from my biological sex. I do not "identify" with being a woman, it is not a personality trait nor sense of self, it is merely a descriptor of my physical body. I do not feel discomfort being female, I feel discomfort with a misogynistic society. Gender isn't real.

However, this is also the reason I am not particularly hostile towards trans people. I do not think most trans people identify as such out of malice- their actions don't exist in a vacuum. It is perfectly logical to believe you're the other sex when you have traits that society continually tells you are inherent to the other sex. But to deny physical reality is delusional.

[eve-was-framed]

I’ve been seeing other people say this as well but it is truly disgusting to me how young detransitioners are being taken advantage of by homophobic right-wingers who are only reinforcing the harmful gender roles that are part of why they felt the need to transition in the first place.

imo detransitioners don’t owe their story or their activism to anybody - not to conservatives, and absolutely not to the trans community. I feel they have been failed greatly by both of these groups. both of these groups created the conditions which led to the obsession with gender and gender roles.

far too often I see detransitioners being policed in the way they speak about their experience. the trans community will say “I’m fine with detransitioners talking about their experience as long as they don’t say anything bad about the trans community and as long as they don’t try to make gender affirming care harder to get for minors.” they still feel they are owed a sense of loyalty from people who were greatly harmed by their ideology, the affirmation only model of care, and the “trans egg” culture they created where they pressure gender non-conforming people to transition. I’ve even seen them blame detransitioners for what happened to them even when they transitioned as children. they can be extremely cruel and overly defensive (one example is how they treated KC miller)

then you have conservatives only willing to uplift the detransitioners who aren’t gender non-conforming or gay or lesbian after detransitioning. they still see LGB and gender non-conforming people as degenerate and part of the problem, even though from what I’ve seen, most detransitioners fall into those categories. the right has zero interest in actually addressing the root causes, they don’t think misogyny and being seen as a subhuman sex object/baby making machine is a factor, and they don’t see internalized homophobia as a factor either. they also refer to detrans people as “mutilated” which sounds very dehumanizing.

detransitioners don’t owe any of us anything, they only owe themselves healing and hopefully eventually radical self-acceptance.

[velvetvexations]

These days people get so weird when you point out that TERFs do more than target trans women and it's as exhausting as it is confusing.

I've had people tell me it's wrong for me to bring up the fact that TERFs and radical feminists target bi women because it's wrong for me to not center trans women in literally *every single discussion* of TERFism despite the fact that it is well known by anyone paying attention that TERFs gleefully target other queer people too. TERFs openly admit that they use ace/aro exclusionism and transmedicalism as recruitment tactics because once you get a queer person to turn against one identity it's easier to get them to turn against another. And the first big wave of TERF ideology and radical feminism went so hard on getting bi women out of lesbian spaces that now people legit think butch/feme are lesbian exclusive terms when they never were. They intentionally destroyed all connection bisexuals had to their shared history and culture until basically everyone is parroting their words without realizing, and are still responsible for some of the most vile biphobia circulating today. Like hate to break it to the "bi women shouldn't bring their cishet bf to pride" types but idc how much you say you love trans people you are still walking and talking like a TERF and deserve to be called on it.

And ofc they absolutely target trans people of all genders, acknowledging they ways they harm trans men doesn't mean you think they don't target trans women.

This is legit why I'm always one of the first people to point out what TERFs and radfems actually believe and how their ideology works and what dogwhistles you need to look out for, because imo the current idea that trans women are legit the only queer people meaningfully harmed by TERFism is happening specifically because no one bothered to learn what a TERF actually is beyond "transphobe", which is also how we get entire movements of queer people parroting TERF, SWERF, and radfem talking points word for word and not seeing a problem because they aren't transphobic(or thinking all they need to do to fight TERFs is put a DNI banner up on their blog and talk about punching transphobes).

If people refuse to actually learn what TERFs are and why they believe what they do we will never be able to defeat them. They will always sneak in, every bar will turn into the proverbial nazi bar, you have to fully recognize them to weed them out before it's too late, and so many people are completely uninterested in doing that.

Love this ask anon. <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 I didn't know that at all about butch/femme having been used by bi women as well, thank you for telling me about it.