#i don't want to talk about non-dysphoric trans people like i know what it's like because that isn't my story...

[wandering-mage]

Something important that I think allies really need to start doing to be good allies to the trans community is stop assuming anyone's gender.

Now that sounds easy, and I think most allies wouldn't blink at that statement, but I think in practice a lot of allies balk at what this actually means.

It's easy enough to say trans women are welcome in the women's restroom and that you are comfortable with that. But are you going to be comfortable with a trans woman with copious body hair and a full beard, and not dressing "traditionally feminine"? If so, why not? How is this different from a cis woman with these traits? (And if you are uncomfortable with that, why?) This person is a woman, regardless of their appearance. Either of these women should be treated with respect, and regardless of whether they are embracing the appearance or dysphoric about it.

Cis women (relatively speaking) are allowed to present more masculine and still be women. Whereas when trans women that want to do the same get accused of being fake, not trans, not trying hard enough etc. Non-binary people that don't meet some nebulous standard of androgyny get accused of wanting to be special, subsets of other genders, or not trying hard enough, if they don't have the idea of anyone being non-binary dismissed entirely. Trans men are often treated as invisible, and anything "feminine" is used to undernine their gender.

Not assuming people's genders means not looking at a person you know nothing about and deciding they are X gender, and picking what pronouns and other words to use for them. I may like when some stranger uses she/her for me or calls me ma'am, but the using either of those is a larger issue that needs to change. If you don't know someone's pronouns, use they/them. That means no assumptions. It doesn't matter how sure you think that random person you see is a cis man that uses he/him pronouns, unless you have had that communicated to you, you don't know (and a reminder, pronouns =/= gender, any gender could use any set(s) of pronouns).

I'm not sure how much I can stress how critically important all this can be for the safety of trans and gender non-conforming people. And I'm aware this isn't easy. It's a very ingrained social behavior, and trans people will struggle through this too. I have to keep reminding myself to not assume pronouns for people. It's going to be a messy process.

I know I'm far from the first to talk about this, but it needs to be talked about more and it was bouncing around my brain. I doubt everything I said here is perfect and possibly have left out some things.

(For context, I'm a binary trans woman.)

(Note: I'm aware there are situations where people have to make some assumptions for their own safety, such as women needing to be wary of people that look like how men are traditionally identified. I'm not talking about those situations, safety is important, and unfortunately all you can really go by is appearance in deciding how to respond there.)

[uh-velkommen]

At some point in the past couple of months I have concluded/accepted that I am transgender. It's been a constant back and forth from being agender to gender queer to non binary to agender again, surprisingly NEVER gender fluid but at the end of the day, I am transmasc. And I still say that instead of saying I'm a boy or a man because even if I ever transition I think I'd play around a bit with femininity still and that could just be due to the fact that I was socialized as a girl and I've been treated and perceived as such all my life and to let it all go, at least for the time being, feels like I'd be letting go of or giving up who I am. I don't know who I'll be or how I'll act and feel years in the future when I've physically and socially transitioned. As of right now, I don't know if I ever actually will transition. I reckon my life would end before I ever even get the chance to utilize America's beautiful(🙄) healthcare system.

I resigned myself to being one of those people who just never comes out. Where history will be like "she had masculine tendencies and preferred outdoor activities" only for those who know to be like, "yeah she was probably trans." I planned to and accepted that I'd live the rest of my life in misery because the misery I feel doesn't outweigh the fear I have about how the world will treat me if I start transitioning. All my life I've been picked on for being different. I can't bear it, thinking that coming out would be GIVING people a reason to hate me. But lately I've felt soooo unmanageably wrong and dysphoric. I can't handle it anymore. I didn't know things could get worse. I didn't think it could get this bad. If I don't start taking the steps to feel like myself, I don't think I'll last very long. But I'm also nervous that if I ever do start to feel comfortable in myself, I'll want to live for too long. And I can't do that in this world. I can't envision it.

So this is my official coming out post. You guys are getting it first because I dont have anyone in my life I trust enough to tell and its eating me up inside not talking about it. I still don't know what to do about pronouns. I've always hated telling people "she/her is fine" in the most devastated voice. I hate hate hate so much that society has gotten comfortable with asking people their pronouns because it was the catalyst for me no longer being able to ignore my feelings. But I think I should at least try telling people to use they/them pronouns. Maybe then I won't be so afraid of transitioning.

[transmascpetewentz]

Moving The Goalposts: Infighting, Exorsexism, and Transandrophobia

I want to start this off not by getting directly into the meat of my theory, but instead by showing all of you a post that I came across today that illustrates exactly what I am talking about when I say that transandrophobes, and specifically TEHMs in this case, move the goalposts in a way that causes infighting within the trans(masc) community. This is a post by a pretty well-known TEHM whose blog I've been watching for a while.

What Jackson is doing here seems pretty obvious on the surface. He's making fun of nonbinary people who were AFAB because he perceives them as fakers and/or trenders. However, when you take a look at some of the other things that he believes, you realize that it just isn't that simple.

This is a post by one of Jackson's mutuals on here. If you don't know what some of these phrases mean, "trans heterosexual" refers to gay trans people (in this case, it's likely focusing on transmascs, but this rhetoric harms transfem lesbians too), and "trans homosexual" refers to straight trans people. What lavenderlad is trying to do is infantilize non-straight trans people, acting like we are complaining about nothing (maybe hysterical, even) for pointing out the oppression that we face from cishets and cis queers alike.

But it goes even deeper.

This right here is a very interesting post, specifically because lavenderlad seems to have changed his tune completely. As opposed to infantilizing us like in the previous post, he has now switched to transandrophobic conspiracy theories about how we are apparently some sort of dominant societal force despite being less than 2% of the population. My antisemitism radar is going off right now, too, because this sounds suspiciously like your average antisemite talking about Jews. He went very quickly from treating us like we're little girls who can't do anything to treating us like evil, scary men who are trying to invade his space.

He moved the goalposts because it was convenient for him at this moment to contribute to the oppression of gay trans men.

To elaborate, there's a specific type of transandrophobia seen in these circles that Jackson and lavenderlad are using. They are applying both maleness and femaleness to us. They infantilize us like we are women, and use our perceived femininity to justify gatekeeping us out of their spaces, while also using very common anti-gay male and generally anti-marginalized male stereotypes such as us being inherently aggressive, invaders, our bodies disgusting, etc. It's exorsexism, plain and simple.

And I feel like these posts show us how transandrophobes and transphobes in general can cause infighting within the trans community. A feminine nonbinary person might look at Jackson's first post and go "see! trans men have so much better than me!" but in fact, trans men, both binary and nonbinary, aren't actually treated any better. The grass is not greener. Trans men who try to conceal our birth sex and/or transness are considered liars, trying to invade spaces we don't belong, and more; but trans men and transmascs who do not try to pass, who don't try to conceal our transness, are accused of being "not really dysphoric."

Do not be fooled into thinking that transandrophobes would like you better if your gender expression was different. They don't want trans men to be displaying our transness, they don't want us to go stealth, and they don't want anything in between. They want us to be cis. Do not argue with your trans brothers about who society hates more; because society will see you as whatever will prove a transandrophobe's point. Address the root problems of patriarchy and transandrophobia instead of letting infighting eat us alive.

[desistancejourney]

This was before it all really *clicked* for me but one of my first "oh there might be something a little bit wrong with this" moments was when I was following a butch lesbian tiktoker and when I looked at her or thought about her I would use they/them pronouns in my head, even though she was very clear about being a cis woman and used she/her pronouns. I saw the way she presented herself and defaulted to they/them without consciously trying to. And while yeah, she was very masculine, she didn't look like a guy. Like, only being surrounded with images of trans and especially non-binary people constantly for many years would make someone see this person and think that they weren't a woman. It's like I had been brainwashed into "not assuming people's gender" and I started unconsciously ignoring people's physical characteristics whenever their gender presentation *seemed* to contradict them so I wouldn't be "transphobic". And like, if you had asked me if being gnc and being trans/non-binary were the same thing I would have obviously said no, and if you asked if I thought they could co-exist, I would have definitely said yes. (I want to say that this is not an attack or a put down on genuinely dysphoric trans people who have trouble passing, I get how difficult that must be and I think that's a different situation.) At the end of the day, though, my brain couldn't actually accept genuine gender non-confirmity. And if I couldn't do that, then I had to start facing the possibility that a lot of this ideology is based on stereotypes. And I don't think this is happening to like, normal people who are supportive of their trans or non-binary friends or something and are just being nice people, ya know? I'm talking about people like me who were deep within trans spaces online and off line and started to see the world in a completely different way that didn't reflect what I was seeing with my own eyes.

[adhbabey]

Happy Trans Day of Visibility!!!

[plaintext: Happy trans day of visibility!!!]

I suppose I'll talk about my gender here, being a part of the white stripe on the trans flag. And why I don't really like calling myself trans, but I feel like this is an important story to share.

I'm nonbinary, but I didn't first feel that way, and as a kid, I thought I was cis. I questioned my gender like others, and said I didn't mind being a boy, I even made several male versions of myself just for fun. I felt like they wouldn't mind being a girl either. And that just continued until I reached my twenties, and had left for college.

I never felt dysphoric in the same way other people do. And I never felt like I can align myself with "human" gender. That those binaries just don't apply to me, because I don't really seem to fit into how humans socially define their gender. I confessed to my trans sibling that "my gender is vampire", or "my gender is a cat". Maybe I should have realized other things sooner.

So when I found out that I had a system in early 2019, due to issues I had in college, and deeply relating to a DID youtuber discussing systemhood, it kind of made sense to me that I didn't align with gender in the way that normal people do. That I didn't mind being a guy sometimes, even though the "me" that I am, enjoys presenting femininely. I wasn't one person anymore. I was always a system. And I had people of many different genders and identities within me.

I decided the best gender for everyone to collectively identify with, was nonbinary. I am nonbinary.

The philosophies that I don't fit into normal human binary was there, and the idea that I was okay with being more than one gender was proven to be true. And I wasn't just nonbinary, I was systemfluid* and multigender**.

*systemfluid means that my gender and identity changes depending on whose fronting. **multigender means that I'm multiple genders at once, depending on whatever I'm currently identifying as, but also if multiple parts of me are here at once.

And there's some things that feel like gender but aren't gender, just diverse identity from what is the norm. So that feels like gender, but isn't. Some people refer to it as otherkin, I refer to it as "supernatural", but I fall under the identity of non-human as well. I'm nonhuman because of my system and also my spiritual beliefs. Of course I'm not a cis human woman, I'm not even a human. I don't feel that way at all.

But it also should have made sense to me long ago that I'm autistic between all of this. I mean, heck, despite everything, I don't feel normal because I don't have a normal brain to begin with. I feel like other autistic trans and nonbinary people can relate. It's just funny how things like that work out.

However, I've never felt fully comfortable with the trans label. I know I'm supposed to accept it just like other nonbinary trans people do, but I feel ashamed that I don't have the same exact experiences as many trans people. I don't want to transition, I like that I have long hair and a high pitched voice. Even if I want to change my body, some ways are just impossible. I can't make my eyes glow gold, or have my fangs come out, I can't have floating bat wings, I can't have forever pointed ears. I've just accepted my body will never look like the way it's supposed to be. I don't even experience dysphoria the same way other trans people do. I have plenty of body dysmorphia and otherwise, but unless a male alter is fronting, my body is just acceptable to have. Even if I were to have dysphoria for my gender, it would be partial anyway.

I just don't feel like I align with most definitions of gender identity and it's crazy that I exist at all. But my story deserves to be here too. So happy trans day of visibility, and an extra happy trans day to trans and nonbinary people like me. <333

[spiderfreedom]

Overlap between the radical feminist and rationalist world today.

If you don't know what Rationalists are, it's a Silicon Valley-centric subculture/ideology about trying to be more rational, in theory. In practice, it means you've read either everything posted by Eliezer Yudkowsky on LessWrong, or (more commonly today) everything posted by Scott Alexander on SlateStarCodex/AstralCodexTen.

Scott Alexander is well known for his, uh, interesting ideas on feminism and women. He is a proponent of the idea that women are just naturally not inclined towards STEM fields and that this is a better explanation for their underrepresentation. He is especially famous for having written 'Untitled', where he argues that pop feminists who talk about nerd entitlement are cruel character assassins and that hating fedoras is a dogwhistle for hating Jewish men.

You may think a subculture like this would be primed for sceptical, non-mainstream thinking about transition science, at least, but Rationalism has a very high rate of trans women (MTFs) participating in it, and a very high rate of defending the interpretation that the 'best thing we can do' is to just go along with the idea that trans {gender} are {gender}, in a sort of utilitarian "it causes the least harm" sort of way.

(There are some people in the subculture strongly against this, including sex dysphoric men, but they are a small minority.)

With all this in mind, I think of this part as exemplary:

Scott: This is going to sound insensitive, but as far as “bad US medical policies” go, 2,500 children having their lives low-key ruined is nothing. I can think of a dozen US medical policies that are much worse than that!

It is certainly the case that the actual, objective number of kids going on puberty blockers or youth transition is pretty small. Even as doctors try to make these treatments accessible, there simply aren't enough treatment centers to meet what they see as rising demand.

Now if you want to say "I'd rather focus my energies on an issue that objectively affects more people," I get that. But I don't trust Scott on this issue, for the reason that he is a noted anti-feminist (as in, he thinks feminists and feminist activism is untrustworthy) and a noted apologist for current levels of female representation in fields (it's 'inherent interest' after all).

For me, I see the misuse of youth transition as a way to turn gender non-conforming kids and gay kids into gender conforming straight kids who are more attractive. (The end goal of making youth transitioners into more sexually attractive partners is stated everywhere.) I also see that the ideology behind youth transition is used to pathologize gender non-conforming and gay kids into thinking that there is something horribly wrong with them and that they are "really" the opposite gender. Even if only a small number of kids actually get to take the puberty blockers, the ideology supporting the puberty blockers - that gender non-conforming behavior and dissatisfaction with one's birth body are incontrovertible signs of permanent cross-gender identity - is harmful and pathologizing to gnc/gay kids. This ideology has effects beyond the number of kids with access to clinics and "supportive" parents, and I'm seeing it in how every slightly gender non-conforming teenage girl I meet is calling herself non-binary or transmasc. The erasure of gnc women is a tragedy and a false salvation to the pains of misogyny.

I don't expect any of this to matter to Scott, though, because he has shown multiple times on his blog that he is really not that interested in women or outcomes for women. He thinks if someone is distressed and wants to transition and shows signs that transition would help, then they should be medicalized. I doubt he cares about what this means for gender non-conforming women or gay women. It is possible he thinks gender non-conforming women are on some spectrum of transness anyway, and that we'd have been happier transitioned than not.

I'm mostly just surprised at the lack of curiosity. One of the things I like about Rationalists is the sense of curiosity. It's a group that really attracts strange people who like to think very deeply. Scott is a psychiatrist. He suspects something weird is going on with youth transition, yet he's utterly uncurious about what it is, or why. Is he afraid of seeming 'obsessed' with gender? Does he think that gnc girls being medicalized and pathologized at a young age is no big loss, because they can just rebuild identities as 'trans men', so it's not worth spending time on?

Having read the accounts of detransitioners, I know that they are constantly minimized and silenced on account of being a 'small number.' I also know that detransitioners, whether youth or adult, have valuable things to add to the conversation. Even if it's a small population that we're helping, I want to help them, because I know most people's response will probably be like Scott's - "oh, there's so few of them, that's not a big deal." It is a big deal to the people affected, and it's a big deal to everyone who is told in some way that something is wrong with them because they are gnc/gay/autistic females.

[not-poignant]

This is the anon the said 'safe'. Your tags hit me hard, since I'm actually starting a transition but am avoiding hrt. I've been getting pushback on it, and been told I'm not really trans without it. I know what I want to change to feel like myself. Also what I don't want to change. That's probably why 'safe' was my choice. It sucks when you think you should belong, but still feel like you aren't good enough. It helped to hear you have felt the same. I just want to give you a big virtual hug.

Ahhh I have a similar story, anon <333 I'm so sorry you went through it too.

Under a read more because it contains transphobia towards a nonbinary person from a binary trans person. My experiences are from a nonbinary lens, anon, so take the bits that are useful to you and ignore the rest, depending on where you sit on the trans spectrum <333

When I started realising I was transmasc (I'd known I was non-binary for a while) I remember that I talked to a trans man about it, he'd been going through the process for a couple of years at that point and we'd talked about that too at different points.

And I remember mentioning that I'd thought about hormones, but I was still on the fence because I'm nonbinary, not like 'binary trans' (i.e. I'm not going from point A to point B, where you move from AFAB to man or AMAB to woman), and I was talking about wanting they/them pronouns and maybe he/him pronouns at that point.

And he said: 'Oh cool, yeah, hopefully that helps until you decide for sure with testosterone and surgery.' I had this moment of like ??? and he was like 'when you realise and can be brave enough to commit to being a guy, I hope that goes really well for you.'

It was one of the most transphobic things I'd ever heard, not because it was said from a hateful place (it really wasn't, I'm still friends with this guy), but because it came from a friend, I was being very vulnerable during the conversation and it left me feeling like I didn't have a right to consider myself trans at all for about two years after that. It pushed me into this space where I'd been defined by a fellow trans person as a 'coward until I decided to be officially a man.' And then for two years I kept looking for that inside of myself, denying my non-binary-ness in favour of looking for a very clear and decisive 'I'm a man!' moment. It was a horrible period of time, gender-wise. Because being identified exclusively only as a man or a woman is dysphoric to me, so trying to do it to myself was like cutting at myself with an axe.

It's also very much like when gay and lesbian folk would say to me - back when I identified as bisexual - 'get back to me when you pick a side / become a real queer.' There's a real phobic bent among folks who are 'one or the other' (sighs) towards people who are in the liminal with this stuff and that's where they belong. And it hadn't occurred to me that I'd hear a version of that from a fellow trans person. You'd think I'd have learned, right?

He and I are still friends, but I stopped talking to him about all of my experiences as a trans and nonbinary person. It was clear to me, in that moment, he saw me as a much lesser version of an identity he'd embraced and was living. You know, how so many people think of nonbinary transmascs. (It's also frustrating, because trans men also don't need to have hormones or surgery to be trans men, and it makes me furious when people take this attitude with binary trans folk too, but I'm mostly focusing on my own experience here, of the myriad ways we encounter transphobia in the trans community).

I never heard anything quite like that again, but I've had one other trans guy be like 'when you're ready for testosterone, I'll support you' like he was waiting in the wings for me to 'fully make a decision to be 100% a man' which isn't a decision I can make, because I'm not 100% a man, lmao, I'm like 80% of one, and 20% something else, and 0% woman, lmao, which is why I call myself nonbinary transmasc.

I was lucky that through research and listening to voices in nonbinary transmasc spaces and more open-minded trans spaces that I realised that I'd encountered transphobia, and that this specific kind of transphobia is particularly common in the trans community, especially in cases where a trans man or woman has a period of being nonbinary as an experiment to see what transitioning feels like before they fully commit to the surgery and/or hormones and name etc. that they often wanted all along. So they often project this onto other people, because for them being nonbinary was a midway point, or the middle of an evolution. But being nonbinary isn't an experiment for most nonbinary people, it's literally our identity and it always will be. (And any binary trans person reading this, don't ever use this rhetoric with your nonbinary friends, or your fellow binary trans friends who have elected not to use hormones or surgery - it's transphobic.)

These days, I'm proudly trans and proudly part of the trans community, but I'm also aware that there are a lot of binary trans people who will treat me and other trans folk as 'other' because I haven't suffered through the same surgeries or adjustments that they have. That's...their transphobia, and it's not me expressing my identity wrongly, or being 'lesser', it's just straight up transphobia. It belongs to them, not to me. I don't believe we have a unique word for nonbinary transphobia, it all comes under the same umbrella, but that's definitely what it is.

When you start to feel like you don't belong, anon, remind yourself that this is internalised transphobia, not to punish yourself, but to remind yourself that it's not true. Those feelings belong to the people who gave them to you, but they're not innately or inherently true, they actually have nothing to do with how valid you are at every stage of your transition.

You're fully a trans man if you don't take hormones, and you're fully nonbinary if you do. Whatever you need (or don't need) to affirm or express your gender for you, is what you need, and that deserves to be respected and fully validated no matter what, at any time. Whether it's binding or not binding, hormones or not hormones, hormones and then 'not for the next few years' and then hormones again, surgery or not surgery, etc. Whether you're a trans man, woman, nonbinary, agender etc.

People have this idea of what it is to be a 'proper' trans, bi, gay, lesbian person (like the 'gold star lesbian' which is horrendously disgusting as a term and concept), but all you need - literally all you need - re: these things, is to just... know you're these things. That's it. That's how a gay person can know they're gay without having sex. That's how a bi person can know they're bi without sleeping with someone of the same sex. And it's how a trans person knows they're trans without looking perfectly androgynous or perfectly binary trans (depending on what they desire) on the outside. (Don't get me started on fatphobia in androgynous and nonbinary spaces, and the equation of true 'nonbinary androgyny' with thinness, because that's a whole other rant for another day, lol).

I'm sorry you've experienced that pressure to be 'more' of something from society / particular people. I can specifically relate on the hormones front because I actually went quite far into looking into taking T, to the point where my doctor was ready to sign off with an endocrinologist, before I realised that it wasn't the right decision for me. It might be one day, but right now I know I'm transmasc without it, and I'm concerned about some of the side effects with my neuroendocrine tumours. There are other ways I affirm my gender that work great for me. But I did have a moment of knowing that would impact how other people see me, and it's one thing when it comes from all the cis people, but it's another thing when it comes from the trans community as well. :( Thankfully most people are really validating now, use the right pronouns, and I just don't confide nonbinary vulnerabilities with folks who saw being nonbinary as a midpoint of their own evolution/journey, just to be safe, lmao.

Wishing you fortune and strength and much validation, anon <3 You are amazing as you are, whatever you decide to do or not do in the future. :) *hugs*

[trans-wojak]

Hello! I find your posts interesting and I'm a transmed myself, so I wanted to bring up something I've noticed about tucutes and the non-binary labels.

As we all know, cisgender transphobes claim being trans is a choice. But what happened to more people being offended by this statement?

Due to new mainstream media with tucutes and non-binary labels populating and taking over actual trans spaces, more people now think gender is a choice, because of tucutes. If people can acknowledge that transphobes think gender is a choice, then why can't people see past the non-binary façade and the tucute ideology spitting the same theme? Tucutes have the same beliefs as the oppressors, and their appearance in mainstream media lures cis people into thinking they're trans and stretching the 'being trans is a choice' theme, while also bringing more hate to the community because of their appearance.

Tucutes are our oppressors in disguise as the oppressed. Their whole non-binary scheme is to keep them in the community to try fitting in while breaking off actual transsexuals. They're on a mission to make LGBT labels infinite and meaningless, taking over certain spaces- trans, lesbian, etc. All the while indoctrinating people that don't have a mind of their own and guilt tripping people into believing them. They're confused, and they're confusing others. The future is headed in the wrong direction with their plotting.

I as a Gen Z notice how the ideology of tucutes is to rebel and express their spite for social norms while feeling unique. They 'reclaim' slurs that aren't meant for them to feel like they're winning against their enemies. And they take over on TikTok and act like they were victims of their past transmed ideology. Saying transmed ideology made them dysphoric. If they need certain ideology to be dysphoric and another ideology makes them not feel dysphoric, then visibly they're contradictory, and therefore trenders.

Yes this exactly true, nonbinary and transphobes share the same belief system; that trans healthcare is just cosmetic body modification and not a medical need, they just believe in diff results: one believes it should be banned indefinitely, the other thinks it should be freely handed out to anyone who wants it.

They think gender dysphoria is socially created, just like transphobes. That you can just use mental gymnastics to ignore the male gender is associated with having male sexual characteristics in biology, it’s not a made up social concept and no amount of “you are valid as a man even if you are entirely female!” will magically change the fact the human brain sees sexual characteristics as either male or female even without socialisation.

Fence sitters now accuse transsexuals of being wrong for wanting to alter our sex and NOT just using stupid terms like “I identify as”. Like, non binary isn’t even gender non conforming majority of the time.

It’s confused many transsexual men and women into thinking if they don’t fit gender roles, they aren’t real men or women. It’s confused butch lesbians into thinking because they aren’t subscribing to gender roles and like the same sex, they mustn’t be real women. Like talk about non binary being the new third sexist gender role lmao.

[chaifootsteps]

The femboy trans man back at it again,

The whole arcee/ship nonsense situation kinda weirdly reminded me of another situation I personally got into.

So like ok.

Cuphead, the creators said that cup head and mug man were kidults when asked. So I, being a teen at the time, liked Cuphead and King dice (not being romantic or in an open relationship, I liked the idea of them having a one night stand or secret relationship)

But then someone on Twitter was like “if you ship this, you’re a pedophile.”

It was years after I stopped checking in on cuphead (when the Netflix show started showing up) so I asked like, an obvious question.

“Wait I thought the creators said they were canonically adults???” (They’re kids in the Netflix show, I meant more for the game version)

I got LAMBASTED as a pro shipper, a pedophile, as the worst ever who just wanted to ship a child with an adult (I had stopped shipping dicecup around the time the Netflix show came around, and they didn’t even know I shipped it at one point. They just made the assumption because I questioned a thing.) it took one.

One person

To sit me down like “yes they used to be but in this media and the current show they’re kids, so there was a possible change.”

It made me scared to ever voice my opinions on Twitter ever again.

So to bring it around to the Arcee situation to end this ramble, I can see em as non-binary or bi-gender if the writers desperately wanted to keep the fem part but like they can’t go “we wanted to write a trans woman!” And then make said trans woman dysphoric as all shit, that’s practically forceful gender bending.

You and my friend would get along really well, Anon. Same ship, same deal, and now they feel like they can't talk about it because people will assume they're a pedophile. But no, they just came into this whole thing when Cuphead and Mugman were dubiously defined little cartoon characters old enough to shoot craps. To quote my friend, "I was hoping they were just freaks from society!"

What makes me want to tear my hair out is that M. Scott did such a beautiful, effortless job handling Arcee's backstory in that one panel..."I don't believe bots should be changed against their will." Boom, done. The problem isn't that Arcee was made female, the problem isn't trans people transitioning, the problem is that it was an act of violence. Another thing that's often overlooked? Combiner Hunters is the only piece of IDW media, albeit briefly, to refer to Arcee as "them."

I had this for a wonderful minute, and lost it. And now I can't even talk about a character that meant everything to me without getting embroiled in something like this.

[sophieinwonderland]

genuine question, are you white? if not, ok. if so, what makes you think you have the right to discuss what does and does not hurt poc in terms of rcta/trace things? obviously white voices are important, but poc voices matter most in this discussion. and i know poc arent a monolith and everyone has different opinions, but every poc ive talked to who knows about the community is deeply hurt by it. i’m a poc myself, and the community just isnt healthy. trace/rcta is based almost completely on fetishization and aestheticization(idk if that’s a word but i hope you get my meaning) of race and culture and is incredibly gross. i don’t want to say completely based on those due to the possibility of other reasonings, but that’s what it seems to mostly consist of. i dont expect to change your opinion with this one anon, i just hope you think about what you’re saying and promoting to your audience. thanks if you even read or respond to this, and this isn’t meant to be hateful i just want you to take a moment and think about this /gen

if so, what makes you think you have the right to discuss what does and does not hurt poc in terms of rcta/trace things?

Would you be saying this about a white-bodied individuals who is saying that it's harmful for POC-bodied people to transition to other races?

Because I always see this used to shutdown dissenting opinions from the anti-trace side but never against white anti-trace people. Just makes the whole thing feel less like "you can't talk about this if you're white" and more like "you can't disagree with me if you're white."

I think the vast majority of the trace community would disagree that their identities are based on fetishization and aestheticization.

And I also feel there's a sort of... familiarity... to these sorts of generalizations. Are these not the same types of generalizations launched against the trans community from TERFs? "Fetishization" seemed to be a popular argument from them. And for aestheticization... that's pretty much the whole justification for transmeds labeling people who support non-dysphoric transgenders as "ToCutes." I've even seen anti-endos use similar language when attacking endogenic systems.

It seems like communities keep falling into these same exact traps.

But you're right.

We are white, and on top of that, we aren't trace or diarace. This isn't an issue that personally affects us.

So don't listen to our opinion on this.

Reach out. Listen to the trace/diarace community. Listen to the people there and ask them why they identify how they do. Ask how they experience their race and be willing to understand.

I don't know if it would change your mind about them completely, but it might at least make you reconsider the generalizations you've made about them which I assume are based mostly on what you've heard from second hand sources.

[hiiragi7]

as a trans person in a system who understands how the sysmed/transmed connection works (especially with the fact both are seen as a mental illness that needs to be eradicated and that is harmful to Vulnerable UWU Teenagers on the internet and people experiencing them are dangerous and people who use rare labels are faking and making "real systems/trans people look bad" and so on), i want to understand why you believe the trans comparison is bad. can you explain your perspective?

About the comparison between being trans and being a system generally, I feel it is repetitive and really just gets us nowhere. I also do not find the same systemic, legal, and social implications in syscourse as I do with trans identity. I also don't find the same risk of widespread and systemic violent physical/sexual abuse and death in syscourse regarding non-medical systems as I do with trans identity.

That does not mean that one is necessarily worse than the other or that one doesn't matter, but instead that they are different enough that to compare them feels like it disrespects nuance and the bigger picture of all of this.

Regarding the word sysmed - I think it's moreso just... Well, unhelpful?

I have less issues with the specific terminology or the roots of the word than others, I feel - I find it to be maybe poor taste at most, but I do not think it is transphobic.

My issue is moreso that I feel it no longer really has a consistent definition (I have seen it applied to anti-endo systems who are not necessarily sysmedical, and I have seen singlet syscringers called sysmeds even though they were 100% anti-plural/anti-system, including anti-CDD systems) and I feel that discussions where the word sysmed is used very quickly get muddied because I feel that in a discourse setting the word is very emotionally charged even if that isn't always the intention.

Many well-known syscourse figures most commonly labelled sysmeds do not even fall under the traditional definition of sysmed - They believe non-medical systems and endos exist, but have different ideas about how this should be approached community-wise.

In my experience being in these spaces, it feels like sysmed has, functionally, just become another synonym for anti-endo or even anti-system and isn't used with specifically the stance of "all systems must be medical" in mind.

For me, it's a lot easier just to use anti-endo if that is what I mean instead of using a word with so much controversy - Using that word means nobody will listen to what you are saying because it is such an emotionally charged word, and in my opinion that emotional charge does come from a reasonable place, which I will talk about in the next few paragraphs.

I honestly just don't find it helpful to draw comparisons between online discourse and those which have extremely severe external impacts regarding discrimination - Such as being trans.

I don't really know of any legal consequences for being specifically a non-medical system - Not for being perceived as mentally ill or laws regarding general religious practices and restrictions, but very specifically being a non-medical system.

Yet I do see this in the vast difference in treatment and resources for medical binary transgender people vs. non-dysphoric trans people as well as trans people that are not 100% binary.

In many places, only dysphoric transgender people get help or official acknowledgement. You have to jump through many hoops to access treatment and that often involves documentation of "long-term, severe gender identity disorder/gender dysphoria".

Nonbinary people often have to "pick a side" in order to access hormone treatment, they still cannot pick "X" in many places as a gender marker legally, nonbinary people who do not medically transition go unacknowledged, so on.

There is also systemic erasure of these groups which transmeds feed into.

This is not, at all, to say that the issues of non-medical systems or endogenic systems are not important or that their issues are "lesser-than" or to play any kind of pain olympics (I do not believe there is any kind of "discrimination threshold" that necessarily needs to be met for it to matter) - Just that it feels like a different area of conversation which invites many messy implications.

Specifically, it is comparing a group of individuals who themselves have extremely high rates of identifying as transgender to their oppressors, and many of these systems themselves have been heavily and violently discriminated against for being transgender. So, yes, comparing them to a transphobic group such as transmeds is likely to shut down any conversation and potentially bring up very hurt feelings and memories of trauma.

And I am just... Not interested in doing that. I want to have discussions, not give someone an identity crisis or flashback.

I feel that when used publicly, the word sysmed is just used to villainize and seperate certain groups and concepts rather than as a genuine, good-faith communication tool - I cannot express the amount of times I have seen things such as fusion, the ToSD, parts language, dormancy, all language more traditionally associated with being a more medical-leaning system, called a "sysmed concept".

I find that unhelpful not only in general, but also as a pro-endo traumagenic DID system. I feel often I cannot describe how my system functions as a disordered system without adding many disclaimers about me speaking only on our personal experience because suspicion about us will be raised solely on the basis of being a medical system using medical language.

I have often found myself asked to censor discussion of my system's very natural functions or language for the comfort of others because it reminded them of sysmeds, and I have come across many people associating traumagenic inherently with sysmedical.

"Traumagenics are cool until they start being sysmeds."

"I wish traumagenics would just leave us endos alone."

"Most traumagenics are sysmeds."

So on.

When the phrase "sysmed" is associated with hatred, especially the level of hatred and violence transmeds perform, and when many people within the system community begin to call "sysmeds" a hate group, when the concept of being a system and medical becomes tied to connotations of such strong ideas about discourse and identity, well... It really is only the expected fallout of that to be that anyone who is a system and medical would be caught in the crossfire.

Long post, but that's my reasoning for not using it personally. I don't have strong enough feelings on its usage to actively strongly discourage others from using it completely, but to me, language is primarily a communication tool and if it is not helping me to communicate or get ideas across effectively then I don't really see a point in me using the word.

[internalself]

i read your piece on transdisability and trace, and it explained things well for me- you are good at explaining things in depth. however, i have a question on the topic of trans race (as a black person who also uses a transid label). please don't take this in bad faith. i hold no hatred for those who id as trace. i'm just curious about things regarding it, and how to understand! sorry if anything is worded oddly.

how would a person trans race (whether poc2white, poc2poc, white2poc) go about expressing their incongruence in a way that Doesn't come off as/is.... racist? for example, as someone who partially identifies as an animal, sometimes i express this by wearing animal ears or talking about things that relate them back to how i am an animal, or how ive experienced these things that animals do. but how nonhuman animals and animals cultures exist are wildly different.

however, if a transrace person wanted to express their racial incongruence by wearing things closed off to members not apart of that culture (like certain native american items such as the headdress being closed off to non natives, or in the black community it being looked down upon for nonblacks/whites to wear braids in the way we do as them having ties to slavery & tribes across the sub saharan as well as nonblacks being able to face less repercussions wearing our hair vs us facing them) would that not be.... wildly inappropriate to do? or be racist if they were doing things related to the race they see themself as, such as emulating closed cultural things or speaking of the experiences of (bodily) x race folks as if it were their own, or even wishing they had experienced them?

im aware race is a social construct and its function is to oppress and separate, but it can come off as odd when people aren't that race try to take claim of those cultures and races, whenever (in the case of poc2poc/white2poc, or even otherace2 white ethnic groups such as the sami) these people tend to have already had so much of that culture taken away from them, typically by the dominant racial group. from what i see i feel like it'd veer less into possibly racist territory for trace folks to context with other cultures that aren't theirs without taking claim to them, or even making desires to have different features like a different skin type or hair type known without trying to take claim to an ethnic grouping or other race. but then again... i don't know trace people, only vaguely observed. I'm just wondering how in these circumstances would People who identify as trace not just be racist. I'm sorry that this got super wordy! I'm just curious and went off on a tangent on how i viewed it and all. have a nice day!

This ask has taken me a while. Because it's very long, at least on mobile. In the future, I'd really appreciate asks with multiple questions to be cut into smaller asks, or things that can be condensed to be condensed at least with a TLDR. this has been making my executive dysfunction... do what it does best.

(Not mad)

Further, when I mention race in here (and all my posts) I mean cisrace unless I specify trace people specifically. If you get triggered or dysphoric by talking very bluntly about race like I will be, this may not be the post to read.

I also want to note I'm always a little hesitant to touch on the topic of trace & similar race & ethnicity inconcruence. It's probably the most controversial and it's easy to troll and target, and it forces me to release more information about myself than I'm super comfortable with? If that makes sense.

Race is also a very... subjective and touchy topic generally that many people have different experiences with unlike age and species. So a LARGE part of this is just me bouncing ideas off the wall to hope they break some bricks. There's no right or wrong answer. My opinion on this subjective topic is not the one truth. Especially because not every trace person is the same, and will navigate their identity differently.

I want to start answering this with a correction real quick. You mention war bonnets, i assume when talking abt an ambiguous headress.

1. Clarify next time. "Headdress" is not a n8v only word, it generally is a word for any head-dress... in other words, ordimental hats.

2. There's no "Native American culture" we have MANY cultures. War bonnets are plains tribes pieces. Further, they're so closed that not just anyone can wear one. I wouldn't. It would be like saying any Christian can just walk up to the pope and steal and wear his hat. Like, most wouldn't do that because they understand that's a hat that is specific to someone's job connected to spirituality. (I only use this comparison because it's an easy thing to invision.)

3. Appropriation does not necessarily come from the action done, but benefits gained. Non native people can own spiders web charms! They're not closed to specific people who earn them, or a part of sensitive ceremonies. It's a baby's thing. The issue comes when non native companies start selling dreamcatchers and outcompeteting native sellers. The issue of appropriation happens here because native people are hated for having our cultures, and suffer for that- but what is seen as "consumable" and "marketable" from us can be sold while we continue to face an ongoing genocide. That's the issue.

4. I'm not black, so correct me here if I'm wrong. But the way appropriation fits in here is explained similar. White people wearing black styled braids or dreads often do so because it's "trendy" or to fill some other kind of social niche they will benefit from- while black people wearing the hairstyles will be still discriminated against for it. A white woman with cornrows has a better chance to be picked up for a job than a black woman with cornrows because of racism at play, but when like so commonly these days, random pieces of mostly black American culture is scraped for trends for mostly white people, the white woman may benefit online from the "trend"- and at the end of the day she can just go back to her natural hair styles, while the black woman wears it to protect her hair and keep it healthy, and can't just have "white hair" any day. The white person can safely benefit from the trend and kick it to the curb to be "outdated" whenever, which the black people who had it scraped from is now forced to deal with the fallout of- and usually face MORE lash back from people now that it's "outdated."

The differences here and a few things I want to point out are...

The trace person isn't doing this by trend we can assume. (While I can't encourage styling your hair in ways that aren't meant for your texture and may damage your hair and scalp) this person is also likely to face social knockback.

Not all trace people choose to take /any/ steps to transition. I'm not shaming those who do things to validate themselves, but many choose not to, this kind of interaction is not necessary and therefore shouldn't be held to trace people as a whole, but rather to the individual depending on your personal feelings on the topic. I am trans species and I don't personally clothe myself in any way that validates that... it does nothing for my dysphoria. Many trace people are similar. Ask yourself if you think transgender people are controversial to yourself if they choose to transition physically because the patriarchy exists.

Not all trace people are white, so we can't really approach these with this binary "white people vs everyone else" view.

Not all trace people are trace to an existing or any race. Many people consider themselves raceless in different ways or not having a human race, or a race from a fictional setting, etc. Hard to appropriate when your race is "wolf."

I really can't speak much on the idea of white 2 poc trace people- its not my experience and I don't know much about it.

I feel like a lot of this can be summed up with the help of asking yourself if you see them as valid or not. Because if you see a trace w2poc person as still white and don't validate them, you're gonna see a lot of these issues the same way people claim transgender people are "appropriating being a woman." Even if they claim to be understanding they'll still insist a trans woman as a man. Would it be tone deaf for a trans woman to say she wished she experienced more misogyny? Yeah it could probably feel that way. It's all ill say on that, because I have not ever been nor am I a woman, and I've never wished my experiences with race was worse. While I can understand how someone may find it validating (even negative attention is attention, and after being starved of attention towards a silent facet of yourself, you may crave anything), it can be upsetting to see though. It's less of a real wish from what I've seen, and more a cry of "anyone, anything, can anyone see me? Even if you hate me?"

I absolutely do believe that all trans identities should be treated softly and with an understanding about the violence of the walls we've put up in the past. But just like how being transgender has intersections with sexism... I feel like we need to talk about a controversial statement I'm about to make.

I believe there's an intersection of transness and race. (And disability but this is not the topic/time for that.)

Let's look at the way people react to well known trace people. Oftentimes, immediate disgust. The transphobia, same as ever exists in this intersection to say, "look at this crazy person! They think they can change the way they are! They're wrong and deviant!" But racism is also present. Almost always, especially from white crowds, there's a surge of racism flung at the individual- under the guise of "gross I hate transness!"

I've seen people describe the intersection of transphobia and misogyny as "transphobes treat trans people they way they wish they could treat cis women. Because they see them as women just enough to be misogynistic and violent, and trans enough to justify that." And I want to say I think similarly, many people treat trace people poorly the way they wish they could treat other races, or even their own. It's an excuse to be racist. A trans->black person will be seen as black enough to be hated for their blackness, and trans enough to be considered a joke.

I will also finish off here by saying I am not uncritical of the actions of much of the community. I've vented to people before about how it can be frustrating to see people waltz in and act in ways that put a bad taste in my mouth. But I've also interacted with lots of very good faith trace people who are very mindful and understanding of their identity. The loudest voices are trolls, and it concerns me moving into a time where transid is becoming slightly more visible that people are almost entirely unable to ignore bait or recognize trolling. I have seen genuine people who are... interesting in the way they choose to interact with race.. but I chalk them up to being uneducated and kids most of the time.

For the most part I see this with transjapanese people who's only exposure to the idea of being Japanese is anime, usually children's anime as well, which gives them a really skewed perspective on the racial experience. I've also met people who have a very in depth knowledge they've gathered from respectfully asking others, reading articles and stories by others, etc. It's usually just a victim of misinformation, lack of information and confusion of the topic.

I also want to point out how in different countries, different experiences can exist. Going back to the idea of transjapanese people, a lot of people begin to pull comparisons to the experiences of asian americans.. but we live in a world where Japanese people in Japan /are/ the majority, and /are/ the preferred race of many in the country when it comes to race based bigotry. A white person absolutely could suddenly find themselves treated poorly for their race in japan as soon as they're anything other than a tourist. It's worth noting the way race works outside of America. A lot of discussions tend to focus here, but the American experience with race is not a universal one. A Japanese person in Japan is not likely to be called an English slur for Asian people. In other countries, that may change.

The topic of nativeness and blackness are both very unique in their foundation in America and that American foundation being about suffering. But I also feel like they're special in their lack of very clear cut borders.

While it's a hot topic, nativeness is hard to define. Blood quantum is a twisted tool of white supremacy, there is no "percentage when you stop being native." Lacking identity with your nativeness, losing your care for your ancestor(s) is, to many, where it starts/ends. This is unique because of how many, still to this day, native kids are kidnapped and unable to connect to their cultures. They're placed in white religious families and essentally wiped of their "nativeness." These kids do not stop being native, until they choose to stop being native. A mixed child is not less native if their skin is lighter or darker than their native parent. They stop being native when they choose to stop being native. A mixed child's child, listening to oral stories from their native grandparent is not less native in this moment. They're not ever. They're not white until they decide to be. It's hard to describe to you. In a world that wants to genocide us, physically, culturally, you can't judge it based on physical build, you cannot judge it on cultural connection. If you uphold being native in spirit, you are native, to an extent. Many native nations have a long history of accepting members of other tribes, other counties, other races. If you fight alongside us, in a world against us, to the oppressor you become my sibling. To me, you become my sibling. Does that make sense? It's why so many have to reconnect. It's why reconnecting is so hard. No blood quantum is required to join the Cherokee nation, for lots of us, what makes someone native is a very... heavily debated topic. Some n8vs have a very hard line, saying as soon as you disconnect culturally you're gone forever, or if you didn't grow up on a reservation. Some are very loose, saying anyone can reconnect. I'm looser on it, and it makes me happy (though, anxious) to see transnative people. We're in a cultural(+) genocide. I don't think you can afford to be picky with who keeps that culture alive, so long as they're respectful.

Like I said earlier, I'm not black. But I want to, with my understanding, go further from here by saying "black" is a vague word that means different things in different places. A lot of the time here in America it means specifically black Americans with a history connected to American slavery and segregation, etc, hence 'black culture' but in different parts of the world it may mean anyone dark skinned. It could mean anyone of African decent, it could include people from south America, I know there was a discourse a few years ago about if native Australians could call themselves black. If someone in America fit the bill, many people would consider them black, not asking or caring if they're a first generation immigrant or if they're a tourist or even African at all. Many mixed people are considered black regardless of if they self identify as being black or mixed. Etc.

So similarly I think there's a sort of... I don't know, food for thought about these 2 ideas of race especially in an American context that are especially flexible and poorly defined with the socal contrast of race.

Sorry if I missed anything, I tried to comb through the text block multiple times to catch every point but I'm very, very dyslexic. I may have missed things, feel free to send them more condensed. Further, I'd like if you'd read this post on race as a social construct if you haven't already, reader. Seeya! And of course, thank you for the question I hope I answered it as well as you'd like.

All of our culture and idea of race is a construct- but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. [Link]

[vyachki]

Jk rowling was not "cancelled on the spot" shes been spouting crap for years that pisses people off and naturally collected a large amount of haters. Her amateur writing and many strange plots in her books have been heavily scrutinized by critics. Extreme stereotyping, racism, homophobia, writing weird shit about children on twitter, the whole thing with the elves who loved being slaves is weird as fuck, aids metaphors etc. Everyone knows she's annoying. She's hated by transphobes ands trans people alike. Young people hate her and old people hate her. Harry potter fans hate her. Even many of the movie cast hate her. She's a bigot. She doesn't care about people like you. why are u falling over yourself to defend her honestly its so pathetic and we can see right through you. I'm sure you never really gave a crap about the books or who wrote them until you became a radical bitch. You just love her because she hates trans as much as you. That's all you have in common. Shes not a feminist, shes not fighting for anyones rights, she doesnt spread any important information or have any educated opinions. Her new books and movies suck. All she does is sit writing drivel and spreading hate which sounds a lot like you. No wonder you admire her so much. Honestly i bet if Kim Yo Jong or someone came out as a terf and a radical feminist u would all start fanning over her and convert to her ideologies bc u have no back bone or brain and the only thing u care about is worshipping ur chronically online terf cult, making up shit and hating trans people who have nothing to do with you. News flash! Your radical feminism isn't any more radical than what normal ass women have been talking about for generations. All the issues are already included in normal feminism, it's just the same except: you ignore big issues (especially those involving minorities and women of colour), act horrible and rude to everyone, isolate yourself and most of all, devote your existence to being transphobic. It's like a cry for help or something. You're ruining your life by being a bitch. and noone is going to feel sorry for you. Mental illness innit. 🤣 - Sincerely a happily married cis white woman. Get a life.

Oh my god this is so funny, did you copy and paste this from somewhere or did you really type all of this out for me?? I am blushing🤭

People will always have a lot to say about JKR and that's okay, she's a famous female author who owns a billion dollar franchise—people are going to talk shit on her name and some of it may be true, and some of it may not. With the way now that people deliberately skew what other people say (e.g. "JKR wants trans people deaaaaad!!!"), take a lot of shit you see from non-sources with a grain of a salt.

Regardless of the discourse & semantics you want to engage in, biological sex will still be real, women will still face sex-based oppression, and same-sex attracted people are still being erased in favour of "queer" activism. It is not hate to call that out. But it is very condescending to say all this to a detransitioned trans woman / homosexual man since I am still dysphoric, but I am not a victim nor will act like one because of it.

I made this blog to support detransitioners & same-sex attracted people, and to call out lies I was told by the trans cult during & after my transition. I really don't need "happily married cis white women" lecturing me about gender ideology that you never lived. Thanks though!

Sincerely, a "radical b*tch"

[bi-kisses]

please touch grass. sincerely, someone with gender dysphoria who would also have gender dysphoria as the other sex. having any sexual parts makes me dysphoric. there's no way you can argue around non-binary people existing, even if we're going by the whole weird dysphoria-required-to-be-trans argument.

Idk how many times I have to point to my discourse shortcut, just repeatedly gesture frantically to the many times I've explained myself and my arguments.

I don't argue against personal anecdotes. I don't care how you feel about yourself. Okay? The research done will always be my #1 priority. I don't use people's experiences as evidence. I'm sorry. There are tons of things that seem like gender dysphoria. Do I suddenly deny you your experiences? No, I don't know you, you know you, it's none of my business and I hope you find all the comfort and happiness in the world.

I've touched grass, believe it or not! Gone to university, worked professionally, been in LGBTQ+ groups, and I know a hell of a lot more about "real life" as well as socializing than many want to believe.

I'm tired of the talking in circles with people who engage without actually caring what I have to say, just wanting to let off steam by yelling in my face. If that's not you, great, feel free to read my pre-written explanations and get back to me.

I wish you well.

EDIT: and stop insulting me with this "assimilate" or "throwing under the bus" rhetoric. Sometimes, people have worldviews that don't mesh with your own. If you look a little closer, those views don't actually appeal to the "cishet overlords" who aren't already ok with LGBT people, so at the end of the day, it's just one LGBT against another. Don't try to twist it.

[fantastic-mr-corvid]

fuck it Cecio is a trans man. Celia 'acquired' some Anderos salve for him, and then when he was sent to his father, his father bought him a potion of sex shifting to finish of his transition.

more detail under the cut [+ bonus wtf is Celias gender. well she don't know either] warning for talk of dysphoria

As a kid Cecio wasn't particularly fussed about gender, he was his mothers precious little Cecio and his sisters little Ceci, and it wasn't like they could be picky with their clothes [not to mention Celia being masc as fuck] but once he was older [like 7] and started interacting with other kids, he realized he was uncomfortable being a seen as a girl and jealous of his male peers, so he told Celia and she asked him if he wanted to be a boy, and boom. trans. she asked around about it, and was pointed towards the salve, so just before puberty, she made sure to get enough money for sixth months of the salve, so he didn't have to go thru the wrong one. [his name was Cecio & he kept it bc its was kinda masculine anyway.]

once Cecio was in andoran, everything had said son [his father wasn't around for the birth & Cecio quickly socially transitioned] so his dad just went 'okay! ig i better but a sex shift potion' and boom. hes fully transitioned

Celia is gender queer herself, and while she normally uses she/her to self refer, she is more than comfortable with being referred to using he/him & they/them, and has spent many undercover missions as a man, and many non-undercover missions going along with what people assume. she has a complicated relationship with femininity, but its much more bc of how practical shes forced to be, and how the role of 'mother' was forced onto her.

Unlike Cecio, who was dysphoric even before puberty, Celia is fine with her body, even once she stops viewing it mainly as a tool. she just doesn't think about her gender that much, and deems it irrelevant. if she used technical labels [and cared enough to think about them] she would be some flavor of Agender and very slightly gender fluid [she sometimes does prefer to be him, but he doesn't get very dysphoric about it, and he has more to worry about.]

Cecio isn't loud about being trans, its just something that happened, and hes very secure in his identity as a gay man. if he hadn't had the potion he would not be having sex nearly as much as he does, bc of dysphoria. Luckily for him, even without the potion, his mothers face is very masculine, and he eventually is a stupidly tall 6 foot two. [the truly self indulgent character trait] & his father did one good thing and bankrolled the potion

while he did/does have dysphoria, hes now secure in himself due to his full transition, and is fine with being seen as a very pretty man. he could cut his hair, but he likes it long, and he now likes being just as beautiful as he is handsome. No-one has mistaken him for a woman in a long time, and if some of the guys make comments that are to close, well they can fuck off. he wont tell people, but if they ask, he will confirm, and then ask them if they have an issue with that? if not its chill.

and no matter how much anderos salve or sex change potions, Celia is still taller than him. L. hey at least hes 6 foot 2 even if he will never be taller than his sister!

also just celia being like 'fuck my lil sibling says gender dont fit. guess ill ask around' and learning all about it. and still being like 'im a woman ig' i love her/him/them<33 'im fine with all pronouns but i forget to use the others for myself' ass bitch. worlds worst agender. [its not misgendering to use she/her mainly at all! she does it herself]

[dykeotomy]

i was reading your post and i'm just wondering now, genuinely with no strings attached:

when you mentioned "maybe transition is the only solution for some—but i have a hard time believing that transition is the solution for ALL.", what about people who are sex dysphoric and not gender dysphoric? people who wish they had been born with the opposite sex characteristics, and the mental pain of what they see in their own bodies is so agonizing that they need surgery to feel comfortable?

it seemed more like you were talking about gendies who call themselves some conceptual label to describe their personality and/or non-conformity, which made me want to know your thoughts on actual trans people who suffer like that.

i figure you'll stick with the "some, not all" answer, but i just don't see how gender abolition will solve their problems when it would always be related to innate biological traits.

i believe that sex dysphoria is a legitimate mental disorder. i’m not a medical professional so i’m not going to sit here and spew solutions for it but i do believe therapy can be a helpful resource, just the same as it is for people with body dysmorphia. in other extreme cases, transition IS the only thing that can help and i do support it. i think radfems who view transitioning in very black and white terms (ALL transition is bad, ALL trans people are bad, etc) are ignoring nuance and have zero empathy for people who struggle with self image, trauma, and mental illness