#gender theory

[typhlonectes]

[offsidenewsco]

Have you ever seen someone in online hockey communities say that Vancouver Canucks defenceman Quinn Hughes has “eldest daughter syndrome?” Or heard people call Toronto Maple Leafs forward Mitch Marner “the first male victim of misogyny?”

In this 3-part series, Avery Beaumont unpacks masculinity in #NHL hockey, how it's developed over the past decade, and how that has changed hockey fanbases forever.

Read Part I here.

[arielthedaydreamer]

The world would be a better place if cis people understood the concepts of gender euphoria and dysphoria as things that everyone experiences, not just trans people.

The woman is not wearing makeup and a short skirt for male attention. She is doing that because it gives her gender euphoria as a woman.

On a more serious note, if a man doesn't feel comfortable to wear a pink shirt; eat a pink ice cream; listen to a female singer who is popular; express his feelings; drink fruity juices; hold his girlfriend's purse; say certain words; act with kindness towards his loved ones; apologize; deescalate conflict; watch a movie enjoyed by women; play with a small and fluffy animal; because he thinks these things make him look girly, less manly or "nor a real man", that is no way to live. That man is experiencing intense levels of gender dysphoria and he needs help.

I feel like people only look at men like that and laugh and call them sexist. Some of them might be and they need to be called out for it, but I feel like gender dysphoria is very common in cis men and we should be calling it what it is.

A cis man doesn't "feel uncomfortable" when he paints his nails for the first time, he gets dysphoric. Just like the cis woman who wears jeans during summer because she forgot to shave her legs and is embarassed about it.

Dysphoria happens to cis people, All. The. Time. Pass the message on.

[spacenoirdetective]

I'm unimpressed

Whenever any leftist interacts with me, it's always the same. They posture and laugh at me for being a conservative. They look down on me. They cite false statistics or allegations fed to them by propaganda networks. They exhibit arrogance, smug superiority and overwhelming condescension without any knowledge, understanding or moral fortitude to back it up. When everything else fails, they resort to the New Communist slogan of "racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic".

To which I respond: My best friends include a black man from Trinidad, a Latina woman who immigrated to the US at the age of five, a man with Aspergers and severe anxiety disorder, a black lesbian, an Indian South African, a Chinese American woman, an octogenarian gay man, a Cameroonian man and a Saudi Arabian man who describes himself as pansexual. And a whole bunch of really awesome white people who are not racist, sexist, homophobic or transphobic.

I'm gay. I voted for Trump because i don't believe the Democrats love me. I don't need them to love me. I don't want their love. They love sin and the embrace of dark triad behavior as their paragon for leadership skills, totalitarian thought control, the destruction of society, and they seek to make atheism the norm. They love the denigration of any individual that defies them, disagrees with their tactics, calls out their lies...they hate truthtellers. They hate anyone that places God as an imperative and sacred texts as crucial to their ethical conduct. They hate anyone that threatens their power and they believe in encouraging public vitriol to meet their needs. They believe in the destruction of the nuclear family. They encourage the worship of and dependence on the state to replace the family. They believe in a direct pipeline between the White House and newly established propaganda networks that cater only to the Democrat Party and the CIA. They believe in reputation destruction using those propaganda networks. They believe they have the right to assassinate Trump and anyone else who they deem a threat to their power. They have initiated the single worst attack on children in the history of our country via human trafficking and institutionalized rape ordered by the CIA. They normalized embezzlement, money laundering and inflationary tax on an unheard of scale to further demoralize the populace and inflate their own bank accounts. They conduct constant psychological war against their own people, which extends to perverting the minds of their children without their knowledge via the trans cult, the gender theory cult, and the DEI/Critical Race Theory cult.

On the issue of transphobia, I certainly don't endorse violence. But it is not violence to state that all trans people are mentally ill and they must be stopped from mutilation of children and sterilizing minors with puberty blockers, from demanding forced speech regarding their delusions, from using public funds to procure trans surgeries and from public attaining positions of power such as the Secretary of Health where they may spread their perverse cult directives causing psychological and physiological arm to adults and children alike.

They believe in these things because they want to secure a future for an elite minority that takes everything for itself, enslaves the rest of the populace, and convinces the populace that their astronomical greed is justifiable and that their destructive policies that result in totalitarian hell should be embraced as godly, necessary, and protective measures. They mockingly wear a mask of sympathy, compassion and the moniker of "social justice" which is nothing more than a code for "thought police" whose sole purpose is to implant hatred for political opponents and self hatred amongst whites, any minorities with religious sensibilities, and the intelligentia at large.

The future that they desire is a constant hell of pervasive misery and support of a one party state, supported by thoughtless government worship, slogan repetition, dehumanization of political opposition, desensitization to violence to meet the ends of the party's plans, mentacide, hatred of the past and all the accomplishments of Western Civilization, physical degradation and obesity from technological addiction and slow chemical poisoning from tainted food and lastly lowering testosterone via pbthalates.

I'm a gay white male and that doesn't play into my vote. It shouldn't. The body you're born with shouldn't determine your vote. Your party has done absolutely nothing for me. You have never done anything to help me. I am happy to fight you to the bitter end in any way I can to stop you from the communist genocide you so lovingly long for.

[typhlonectes]

[whereserpentswalk]

You've been on a generational ship your entire life. There's about a million people on the ship, the population doesn't grow or shrink at all. Your entire life is and will be defined by a limited amount of room, a small space, barely large enough for everyone there to fit, that has become your entire world.

The humans that exist on generational ships are very alien to the humans that exist on planets. Your job is to maintain the ship and carry the culture of humanity but you don't need a human lifestyle to do it. Because reproduction needs to be done through artificial wombs all humans are neutered, with sterile sexless bodies. Everyone's job is determined by ship authority, and very dark things happen to those not able to perform some sort of duty. People spend the first fifteen years of their lives in virtual reality, learning about humanity in a simulation until they're ready to live as adults. Everything is so alien from the earth that you read about in books.

It wouldn't be so hard if society wasn't meant to resemble earth, meant to resemble the most conservative and traditional of earth. The American flags hanging up on the walls, despite everyone alive on board having never known America. The way the pods you live in have astroterf lawns, and fake blue skies painted above them, and the facades of American suburban homes. The way resources a distributed from things meant to look like family run stores, despite the monolithic power behind the economy. Even as monolithic as station authority is it still must dress as democracy, and must preach capitalism in a world with no markets, and patriotism in a world with no nations.

Despite your sexless body you're not free of performing gender. You wear dresses over your breastless neutered body, are expected to act feminine, to carry gender rolls into the planet you're going to. Your husband is expected to do the same for maleness. You love him but your situation feels like a performance with no audience. Despite having neither the instinctual desire nor the physical apparatus to you try to be physically intimate with him, it's what everyone does with their spouse, it would be weird not to.

Space isn't as empty as earth thought it would be. There are things that lurk in the void between stars. Nobody fully knows what they are, where they come from, even if they all come from the same place. Sometimes they put the ship in danger, sometimes the authorities make deals with them. But nobody is allowed to know. You're just all told to be afraid of them but not understand why you have to be afraid. The nightmares between stars aren't delt with with knowledge but with ignorance, they do seem creepy from the little you've seen of them but everyone kind of knows their power is being used for something by the station. Patriotism is always helped by having monsters beyond your borders.

Your entire you've dreamed of blue skies and stars and fields and forests and oceans and all those pretty things you've never seen, that you never will see. People always dream of being so high ranking they'll have access to suspended animation and life extension technology, but so few ever reach that rank. You've read all the classics they allow, read Dante, and Milton, and Homer, tried to let poetry bring you to earth but that planet is alien to you now. Sometimes you wonder what it would be like if you weren't raised in a world that copied earth, if you were accepted as a member of a race that lives on a ship, that exists so liminally. Would there still be such a longing. Mabye you shouldn't have been expected to meet a standard from another world. Mabye you weren't born to long for anything. Does it scare you to think you wouldn't want earth if they didn't tell you to?

[sapphosscribe]

Hey, hope you're having a good day!!! I don’t think you’ve brought this up in the fic, but I’m curious. Alex Hirsch has made some comments about Bill’s gender before, like that tweet where Bill said he doesn’t identify as male or female, just as a triangle. Even though he uses he/him pronouns. (Oh! Or that one saying he counts as a goth girl, but we know that was a joke... Wasn't it?)

Anyway, what do you think about his gender? I'm really curious, especially in your story where he’s human. Any headcan is valid! Personally, I see him as agender, and I think he might be some kind of transmasc or intersex in his human form.

Just headcanons

What do you think?

Hey there, anon! 💜

Bill’s gender is something I’ve actually put a lot of thought into, but haven’t had a chance to bring up in my story yet! So thanks for asking! 😁

My personal headcanon is, in Euclydia, whatever shape you have is equivalent to the human idea of gender and that’s why there’s “thousands of genders” for Euclydians because of slight differences in regards to angles and sides that create new polygons. So there’s hundreds of varieties in gender.

After seeing the multiverse, in my opinion, Bill probably adopted agender status or some form of genderfluidity and presents how he wants based on what he thinks will help him get ahead with other beings/cultures or how he’s feeling at any given time. Though, I think he’s still attached to his triangular form due his own superiority complex (and sentimentality though he’d rather die than admit it) and he tries to incorporate the shape in some way whenever he switches things up.

Now that he’s in human form, he’s still operating by those standards and is probably irritated that he can’t do more to alter his appearance like he could when he had shape-shifting abilities.

Hope this answers your question! There’ll be more later on in the story probably, but since it’s a little ways off I thought I’d go ahead and put this out!

I hope everyone out there is having a good day! 🥰❤️

[mallloryrowinski]

You're a transphobe!!! You should be embarrassed

Okay this is getting old now. I know you probably won’t read this reply as you’re clearly refusing to educate yourself on what I stand for, but I wanna have this on my blog regardless so here we go.

I’m a radical feminist, and I’m gender critical. Being gender critical means recognizing that gender is a social construct made to keep women, as a class, oppressed on the basis of their sex, and uphold the patriarchy. The sex you’re born with is a fixed set of characteristics and is immutable (this is a fact. Sex is binary, not fluid. before you try to pull the intersex card, @/not-your-intersex-pawn here on Tumblr has posts that will explain this to you in much greater detail than I can, like their response here).

Now, your sex doesn’t say anything about you! It doesn’t mean a single thing, it just recognizes which set of biological characteristics you were born with. It doesn’t indicate your personality, hobbies, likes and dislikes, whatever. You are a whole person and your sex is just your sex. Women are and have been historically oppressed on the basis of their sex. Not because they identified as anything connected to the female sphere, they were forced into this sphere of subordination and yada yada (gender roles!) on the basis of them being born female. 

Gender, on the other hand, is an identity. Even the gendies themselves have lost the plot a little in my opinion as everything regarding gender now is just so… vague? But basically gender is an identity. Some say it’s innate, some say it isn’t. Most agree that you can change your gender, or at least “reclaim” it, if you believe it’s innate and that you were "born in the wrong body". You can claim any gender, actually, and define it however you please. 

Calling me “cis” would be incorrect not because I’m not a woman, but because I’m not part of the gender craze, meaning that’s an ideology I don’t subscribe to altogether. I don’t believe in it. There’s no such thing as gender. I’m just a woman, neither cis nor trans. 

There’s also an additional note that I would like to make here: as long as we as a society recognize gender, we’re gonna have people either conforming to it or resisting it, or claiming a different gender identity. This is basically the same as “as long as catholicism exists, we’re gonna have catholics, atheists, and people either converting to catholicism or abandoning it”. This does not refer to the group of people who go through physical sex dysphoria. This group may choose to access what you would call “gender-affirming care”, which isn’t gender-affirming for them, because they do not have a problem with their gender to begin with, and most of the time don’t even recognize gender as important/real. Their voices have been unfortunately silenced by the “new wave” of TRAs over the past 5 to 10 or so years, and I do not wish to speak on their behalf, you can do your own research on this, or listen to amazing people such as @/buct-reidentified here on Tumblr. 

If you disagree with me and do believe that gender is an important part of oneself - I don’t have a problem with that! You’re entitled to your own opinions just like I am to my own. If you read all this and still think I’m transphobic, I’m afraid there’s nothing I can do to help you. 

The reason I don’t include trans women in my feminism isn’t because I don’t respect their identity. But their identity is irrelevant when it comes to a movement focusing on the liberation from sex based oppression. What matters is their sex, whether you like it or not, because women are oppressed on the basis of their sex. You can identify as a trans woman but I genuinely hope that you’ll see how being a trans woman is different than being born with a female body. These two will face radically different experiences and challenges, each unique to that group. 

I do believe that trans people, of any kind, do need their own protections, safe spaces, etc. because they clearly are discriminated against and no one should be able to attack or discriminate against anyone because they don’t agree with their identity/the way they present themselves/whatever. 

I do support the preservation of same-sex spaces for women, but this isn’t rooted in fear of trans women but in protecting women from predatory men who exploit gender theory to gain access to these spaces and harm women. I’m sure we can both agree that these cases have happened and I’m not fear-mongering. This is not because all trans women are predators. This has happened and continues to happen because when you give predators and abusers a chance to be predatory and abusive with little to no repercussion by hiding behind an ideology like the gender one, they are typically eager to take it. Women have a right to their same-sex spaces because of the sex-based oppression they’ve faced throughout centuries. Taking these away or reforming places that are specifically sex-exclusive into inclusive ones is not fair to women and results in a zero-sum game. 

So basically, if you identify as a trans man and want me to accommodate you by using he/him pronouns, I have no problem with that. The same goes for they/them or she/her. I’m happy to respect and use your preferred pronouns because I respect you as a person. However, this doesn’t change my understanding of your biological sex. I simply recognize that you identify as trans, which is part of who you are, and I respect that. You believe in gender and I don’t, that’s okay. If you take it to the “I should be able to access sex-exclusive spaces because I identify as trans”, I would politely explain to you why I disagree with that and what options I believe we should make available instead. 

There a ton of points I haven't touched but that are related to this topic, but this is the basics.

[loveerran]

Is it tiring for you to have to explain yourself to all the bigots in the world

One would think so, right? I really appreciate the empathy and allyship behind this question.

Surprisingly though, I am finding it very energizing to relate my story. Most of the people I talk to are admittedly not hard core bigots or threatening. But they may be people who don't understand. Speaking to them and working with them not only helps them understand and see the queer experience in a different light, but helps me feel I am doing some good in the world. Even when people disagree with me, but are willing to talk, I usually find there is a path forward and a positive impact to be had.

Last year I spent some time talking to the mom and dad of a trans kid at one of the conferences I attended. The mom is gay and was wearing a 'gays against groomers' t-shirt. Even though she is part of the LGBT community, she was having difficulty relating to her child's gender journey. She was concerned about affirming voices, including online friends and medical professionals. She was worried she was losing the child she had given birth to, and that 'giving in' to being trans would negatively affect her child's life. Her and her husband even did a youtube video with a conservative host to talk about the dangers and evils of gender ideology. We probably spent the better part of an hour together, and I had an opportunity to listen to their viewpoint, hear their concerns, and share a bit of my story. I am not sure any opinions were changed, but it was still good to trade ideas, learn from each other and take away some things to think about.

I spent most of my life in hiding, terrified and full of self-hatred. Finding opportunities to share, to promote understanding (particularly in spiritual contexts), is incredibly healing for me.

The principles of my faith encourage not only the ministering of others to me, but my ministry to them.

[dandelionjack]

if i won’t have lost the special interest by the time i’m back at uni and i’d have seen most of classic by then i want to write an academic paper on gender in doctor who. because there is SO MUCH to say about it. thinking about missy’s lampshading of the companion-as-gender in world enough and time. companion is a de facto gender, right? and the doctor is a gender. thirteen is not more feminine than ten or eleven, in fact, she’s emotionally distant and harsh in highly masculine-coded ways and the doctor will always find themselves taking on the masculine role re: the narrative, no matter what gender the actor that’s playing them is. of course amy pond as the ur-example of the companion without agency, treated by the story as a vessel and an object to pass between husband and doctor. then there’s subversion (ace, bill) and deconstruction (clara). martha’s character being simplified in the public consciousness as ten’s tragic rebound, ignoring her doctorification arc. doctorification itself as a transition of sorts. time lords’ gender-fluidity contrasted with their culture’s rigid social norms. cybermen and daleks turning themselves genderless as a marker of dystopian uniformity. the role of river song. rose noble and her magical mystery metacrisis transgenderism. charley sneaking onto the R101 dressed as a boy. ace dressing gwendoline in a man’s costume in ghost light as a symbol of evolution

i swear it could go on forever . i bet when i’ve watched the rest of classic the list of examples would be twice as long, the earlier you look

[foxfairy06]

Hi, only wanted to ask about xenogenders: why do exclusionists think they aren't valid? Just curious

Thanks for this blog btw, one of my favs now :)

First off, let's talk about their history. They were coined by a cis, neurotypical woman who posed as a trans woman online. She basically insinuates that neurodivergent people can't understand what gender is. Which, yikes. Throughout the entire history of them, it's been said that it's "for neurodivergent people who have a hard time understanding social constructs like gender" (which I'll address later in this post), or "for neurodivergent people who have a hard time understanding their feelings, so they describe the way their gender feels like light and fluffy like a cloud, or angry and soft like an angry cat.". The problem with this, it infantiles neurodivergent people.

Which is fine when it's coming from someone who actually is speaking for themself. Neurodivergent people who experience something that does cause them to not be able to do something are allowed to convey that they can't do those things, and they are not infantilising anyone, and they are not putting neurodivergent people down. Having a disability is having a disability, it isn't good or bad, and it's wrong to act like someone with a disability can do anything. It's wrong to place expectations on disabled people they can't live up to, and when a disabled person can't do something, don't act like they're making a biased judgement about disabled people because they aren't. I can't just stop ticking, and my tics extend to affect more of my life than just my tics. My ADHD "infantiles" me in some ways, and there is nothing wrong with that, and don't expect me to be able to exist in the same way as a neurotypical person.

HOWEVER, the majority of people who label themselves with xenogenders are neurotypical or self diagnosed. They do not have the ability to speak on neurodivergence correctly. They just don't. They don't have the tools. They don't have the experiences. They don't have the time in therapy. They don't have the education. They are using neurodivergents as a scapegoat and in the process insisting that there is something so fundamental that we simply cannot understand. They are speaking for us, and have created false information about a group they can't speak for.

Now for the science.

Gender isn't a social construct. At least not in any way that is compatible with the concept of xenogenders.

• Gender in the terms of *gender studies* which was formed in the soft science of *sociology*, describes the expectations, performances, and roles associated with being a male, and a female. In this theory, a social man is someone who is masculine and a social woman is someone who is feminine. In this theory, these are learned behaviors enforced by society. Men are masculine, they're strong. They hunt, they have no feelings other than anger. Women are caring and nice and they cross their legs when they sit. Obviously this is not applicable to individuals. Because obviously most people don't fit into these definitions. This concept of social gender is useless for labeling an individual as a man or a woman. It's bunk. It's accurate for how society treats people though. Xenogenders do not have any socially ascribed behaviors, expectations, or roles. Therefore under the tucute definition of gender "gender is a social construct", aka gender theory, xenogenders are not genders. Some people could argue that "well my learned behaviors are light and fluffy like a cloud", that still doesn't mean that society perceives you as cloud-like or that your learned behaviors are similar to that of a cloud. It also doesn't have anything to do with the sexes, and therefore isn't compatible with this theory.

• Gender in terms of what we identify with is a different thing entirely, and is a neurological and psychological map of your sex characteristics. Someone who individually is a man identifies with a body that is entirely categorizable within male range, and someone that is a woman is someone with an identified body that is entirely categorizable within female range. Someone who is nonbinary, (nullsex or on the duosex spectrum), is someone who's identified body doesn't fit within those ranges. Gender is different from the "gender" represented in gender theory. This is because a man can look, act, sound, think, and express in the ways typically associated with women and still be a man. Even if he's trans. The social ascriptions to gender are meaningless, and gender itself is not. Xenogenders do not reflect any gender identity. They are not correspondent to an individuals understanding of their own body, and not equatable to transness or nonbinarism. They're a self-chosen label that bares no meaning. They represent nothing real.

Ultimately if someone wants to call themselves catgender, ok i guess I can't stop them and I'm not going to be a dick about it but I'm also not going to sit around and pretend like it holds any water or means anything.

[poetofdiana]

Romantic vs Platonic Love

What is the difference between 'romantic' love and 'platonic' love? I don't think there is any innate difference between these 'types' of love. Aromantic/asexual philosophies argue that the centrality of romantic relationships in society devalues friendships and defines them as less important than romantic relationships. Phrases like "we're just friends" and "friends with benefits" support this idea. What do relationships look like that don't center romance above friendship?

One of the big differences that people will argue exists between romantic and platonic love is the intensity of the connection. However, I'd like to assert that the cultural devaluation of friendship is what facilitates this belief rather than an actual difference in potential intensity. As someone who is currently and has in the past been involved in emotionally and physically intense friendships, I have first-hand experience with how intense these relationships can become. I have cuddled, slept overnight with, shared feelings that I've shared with no one else, discussed relationship boundaries, bickered, and much more with my friends. When society centers romantic relationships, we define friendship as any important connections that are 'less than' romance. This puts limitations on expressions of love between friends that have tangible consequences. When asked to define cheating, many people will name 'excessive' physical or emotional intimacy between friends as something that they are uncomfortable with their romantic partner engaging in. In the absence of these cultural limitations, friendships could be equally or even more intense than romantic relationships.

[ASIDE: This is also tied to the relatively new cultural idea (based in the development of the nuclear family) that a romantic partner should be the sole source of all emotional, physical, and mental comfort/support. This limits social networks and allows for the perpetuation of domestic violence by romantic partners. It is also simply a less sustainable relationship model than the diffusion of support/care needs into a robust social network.]

Once people begin to conceptualize romantic and platonic love as equally important (as is often the case in poly and aroace spaces), they sometimes argue that there is an innate ineffable difference between what romantic and platonic attraction feels like. I do not intend to argue against the idea that people feel different ways towards different people. Instead, I'd like to argue that the classification of these feelings into 'romantic' and 'platonic' is reductive and harmful in the pursuit of meaningful connections that don't fit neatly into the category of 'romance.' When attempting to make sense of our emotions, we strive to find patterns. Given the socially legible categories of 'romantic' and 'platonic' feelings, it makes sense for people to attempt to categorize each of their relationships into one of these boxes. However, this way of viewing the important relationships in our lives limits how we can experience them. 'Platonic' relationships are devalued and limited by romantic norms. Relationships that are not socially legible as either platonic or romantic are seen as weird and undesirable, encouraging limitations on these relationships in order to fit them into one of the categories. 'Romantic' relationships are grounded in a set of socially agreed upon norms that do not necessarily reflect the desires of the individuals in the relationship, but become expectations due to the categorization of the relationship as romantic.

So what do close relationships look like if 'romance' and 'friendship' are done away with entirely? Without a set of social norms governing each relationship, individuals must develop these norms within their relationships through communication, boundary-setting, and care. Different relationships will naturally have different value in an individual's life, but instead of conforming to the social expectations placed on each relationship because of its categorization (romantic vs platonic), that individual will be free to determine what the value of each relationship is for them.

In my pursuit of meaningful, healthy relationships, I have already begun this work of deconstructing relationship categories. Though it is hard work to set expectations for each individual relationship, it facilitates a much deeper emotional connection than simply allowing expectations to follow from a relationship label. I have been able to set boundaries in relationships that would violate traditional norms of romance or friendship (for example, I regularly cuddle and massage one of my partners, but we do not kiss). It is freeing to let go of social norms that pressure us to engage in specific behaviors or feel specific feelings about people simply because we have labeled them 'romantic' or 'platonic.' Though it is hard work, it has been incredibly beneficial to the quality of my relationships to deconstruct this norm.

[sixpossumsinaclownsuit]

Just remembered something:

In all the talk about "drag queens will make your kids trans!" Or "queer media will make your kids trans!" (All of which isn't true), those aren't the reason I became trans.

I was already icky with the idea of being a "girl" and growing up to be a "woman" and being bound to the concepts of "female." Then I watched Good Omens, saw Crowley exist as a man and a woman, saw Beelzebub be whatever tf they are (iconic), and my little high school brain said "that! I want to be that!!"

I had also by now read Neil Gaiman's Norse Mythology, and had read how (more than once) Loki shape-shifted into being a woman (technically one time he was a female horse but that's besides the point).

So remember, kids: drag queens and gay Disney characters won't make your kids trans, Neil Gaiman will.

[[Brief interlude: Obviously, I never 'became' trans, I simply found an identity that suited me more, and started making changes in my life that made me more comfortable with who I am. So, to make it very clear by being literal in a side note (I'm autistic), this is almost entirely satire, as a dramatization of how I identified with nonbinary]]

Honorable Mentions: Terry Pratchett, and Rick Riordan: who wrote the genderfluid child of Loki in Magnus Chase, and was the first ever time I'd heard of the concept.

[gender-jargon]

Gender-Jargon GIN Terms Masterlist

[pt: Gender-Jargon GIN Terms Masterlist ./. End PT]

I said I would do it, so I went ahead and did it.

[PT: I said I would do it, so I went ahead and did it. ./. End PT]

Tagging @imoga-pride and @in-nature-archive.

Here is a list of GIN ([Gender]-in-nature) terms that I used on my old blog (Gender-Resource) for tagging. I have also included more recent GIN terms that either I have coined or has been coined by others that I currently use or likely will use in the future for tagging.

If anyone has any questions about the terms here, just let me know and I would be happy to answer them :-)

Enjoy!

Fin: (Feminine-in-nature)

Unfin: (Unfeminine-in nature)

Troin: (Troinine-in-nature)

Min: (Masculine-in-nature)

Droin: (Droxinine-in-nature)

Unmin: (Unmasculine-in-nature)

Lin: (Androgynous-in-nature)

Unlin: (Unandrogynous-in-nature)

Femain: (Femasline-in-nature)

Ambiguin: (Ambiguine-in-nature)

Altrin: (Altraeninine-in-nature)

Nin: (Neutral-in-nature)

Unin: (Unneutral-in-nature)

Neuin: (Neutrine-in-nature)

Epin: (Epicene-in-nature)

Trinin: (Trinterine-in-nature)

Amin: (Ambiguous-in-nature)

Perin: (Peraine-in-nature)

Ilyin: (Ilyagine-in-nature)

Mvin: (Mavriquine-in-nature)

Auin: (Autonomous-in-nature)

Othin: (Other-in-nature)

Nuin: (Null-in-nature)

Vin: (Void-in-nature)

Agin: (Agender-in-nature)

Glin: (Genderless-in-nature)

Gein: (Generic-in-nature)

Kein: (Kenochoric-in-nature)

Luxin: (Luxine-in-nature)

Inbin: (Inbissiec-in-nature)

Enmin: (Enmitiec-in-nature)

Shocin: (Shocking-in-nature)

Uin: (Undescribable-in-nature)

Din: (Describable-in-nature)

Apin: (Apathetic-in-nature)

Usin: (Confused-in-nature)

Main: (Male-in-nature)

Fein: (Female-in-nature)

Lein: (Femache-in-nature)

Buin: (Butch-in-nature)

Sobin: (Soft Butch-in-nature)

Fuin: (Futch-in-nature)

Femin: (Femme-in-nature)

Bufin: (Butchy Femme-in-nature)

Genoin: (GNC-in-nature)

Qin: (Queer-in-nature)

Ain: (Aporine-in-nature)

Ouin: (Outherine-in-nature)

Diasin: (Diastine-in-nature)

Xin: (Xenine-in-nature)

Oriein: (Orientation-in-nature)

Lexin: (Lexcial-in-nature)

Gsrin: (Gesneriad-in-nature)

Aesin: (Aesthetic-in-nature)

Coriin: (Coric-in-nature)

Whilin: (Whilom-in-nature)

Roin: (Neuroine-in-nature)

Iin: (Intersex Exclusive-in-nature)

Altin: (Altersex-in-nature)

Yin: (Yonderine-in-nature)

Cuin: (Culturally Exclusive-in-nature)

2sin: (Twospirit-in-nature)

Amplin: (Amplusian-in-nature)

Chin: (Changing-in-nature)

Plasmin: (Genderplasmic-in-nature)

Cinn: (Choice-in-nature)

Idin: (Fluid-in-nature)

Uxin: (Flux-in-nature)

Flin: (Fluix-in-nature)

Aporin: (Nonspecific-in-nature)

Porin: (Specific-in-nature)

Unrelin: (Unrelated-in-nature)

Relin: (Related-in-nature)

Plin: (Partial-in-nature)

Poin: (Polygender/Omnigender/Pangender-in-nature)

Antin: (Antigender-in-nature)

Novin: (Novel/New-in-nature)

Infin: (infinite-in-nature)

Doxin (Paradoxical-in-nature)

Oposin (Opposite-in-nature)

Contrin (Contradictory-in-nature)

Vain: (Vague-in-nature)

Vasin: (Vast-in-nature)

Win: (Weak/Disconnected-in-nature)

Reclin: (Reclaimed-in-nature)

Rin: (Rejected/Repulsed-in-nature)

Contrin: (Contraversial-in-nature)

Polin: (Political-in-nature)

Sucuin: (Subcultural-in-nature)

Cocuin: (Countercultural-in-nature)

Quesin: (Questioning-in-nature)

Virin: (Virine-in-nature)

Lierin: (Eraine-in-nature)

Commin: (Commidine-in-nature)

Ithin: (Itherinine-in-nature)

Andin: (Anderine-in-nature)

Diphin: (Dipherine-in-nature)

Umbin: (Umbinine-in-nature)

Pretin: (Preterine-in-nature)

Bin: (Binarine-in-nature)

Nobin: (Nonbinarine-in-nature)

Enbin: (Enbinine-in-nature)

Midbin: (Midbinaraine-in-nature)

Nomidbin: (Nonmidbinarine-in-nature)

Abin: (Abinarine-in-nature)

Noabin: (Nonabinarine-in-nature)

Trin: (Trinarine-in-nature)

Midtrin: (Midtrinarine-in-nature)

Atrin: (Atrinarine-in-nature)

Noatrin: (Nonatrinarine-in-nature)

Tin: (Trans-in-nature)

Cin: (Cis-in-nature)

Trisin: (Tris-in-nature)

Ipsin: (Ipso-in-nature)

Ultin: (Ulter-in-nature)

Iptin: (Ipter-in-nature)

— Gent (link)

[PT: -- Gent (link) ./. End PT]

[the-apparatus]

i just to hear from ur dabi trans allegory please

Okay, I'm going to assume very minimal knowledge of trans theory just so I can give a very thorough explanation. First, I would recommend reading My Words To Victor Frankenstein above the village of Chamounix by Susan Stryker. I don't know if she was the first person to make the comparison between The Creature from Frankenstein and trans bodies, but she definitely does a very good job at explaining it. Key points are essentially that since the trans body is built from medical science, the experience of being trans can be compared to the experience of The Creature. The Creature is shunned from society because its body is a creation of technology, and this isolation and violence against it brings such a rage within them that they enact violence against the initial factor which abandoned it (Victor Frankenstein). Stryker says that living in a trans body (regardless of weather or not they have undergone any modification of their vessel, because the transgendered body is considered monstrous either way) fuels such a raw rage within an individual that can be turned against the oppressive and violent society.

Now how does Dabi come into this (spoilers ahead ig)?

Lets examine his backstory, although I find it less important than just the way his body is presented. In his childhood, he was pushed to fulfill a societal expectation of his body (quirks being a biological phenomenon and the social pressure that came with having a very powerful quirk) and his social upbringing (being the son of the #2 hero). He then becomes fixated on this idea, pushing himself further and further to fulfill this societal expectation on him until it breaks him. His body is destroyed by the very part of him that fueled the pressure: his quirk. His body is stitched back together, creating a miracle of medical technology. Dabi's body is stitched together in the same way The Creature is stitched together, in the same way that the transsexual body is stitched together and manufactured.

Dabi's backstory lends itself to a transfeminine reading of it: the factors of societal pressure to live up to one's father in hero work (masculinity) is one that makes sense within a transfeminine allegory. However, I think Dabi's body itself is what creates the trans allegory. The process of Dabi's body being built out of the burned chunks of his former self is the same as a trans person who builds themself and creates someone who is monstrous, but necessary for survival. Like the trans person, Dabi turns his rage toward the factors that pushed him to the breaking point, he enacts violence against Endeavor and Hero Society, in the same way that a trans person will feel rage towards the way they were raised and against the society that renders their body monstrous. This is why I don't say that Dabi is trans in the way I think Bakuguo is trans -- I think Dabi is an incarnate of the trans experience (or at least a section of it).