#i dont mean to distance myself from whiteness by pointing out how white serano's takes are

[genderkoolaid]

sorry for more julia serano talk but this quote just really shows how so much of her theory is based solely off of her experiences as a white trans woman:

"While trans men experience cissexism, their desire to be male/masculine is typically not mocked or derided in the same way—to do so would bring maleness/masculinity itself into question."

She assumes that any critique of minority masculinity would be a critique of privileged masculinity itself: this is clearly untrue to anyone who had an understanding of racism towards men of color, who's masculinity is constantly derided and viewed as lesser, just as trans men's is. Not only will pretty much any transmasc tell you that transmasculinity is constantly mocked and derided, but any marginalized man will tell you that his masculinity is viewed as lesser and made fun of. It doesn't "bring maleness/masculinity into question" because masculinity is only privileged when it's attached to a very specific form of man.

And then there's her exorsexism:

"A recognition of trans-misogyny/trans-masculinism—both within queer and feminist settings, and in society at large—has led many trans women and trans male/masculine allies to critique the growing numbers of trans men who, despite their physical transitions and the fact that they now live as men, still feel entitled to inhabit lesbian and women’s spaces. Such individuals will often justify their continued presence in such spaces by citing their female history, or claiming that they don’t feel “100 percent like a man” (even though they move through the world and are treated as men). Such claims reinforce the popular misconception that transsexual gender identities should not be taken seriously, and thus has had a direct negative impact on trans women’s inclusion in these same spaces. In a sense, these trans men seem to want to have it both ways: being men in the male-centered mainstream and then being “not-men” in queer/feminist/women’s spaces."

I don't think I should have to explain to a trans woman why "this person says they aren't fully a man, but they exist in cis society as one, so they shouldn't be let into our spaces!" is bad for closeted trans women. It's also exorsexist, as she specifically makes it seem like trans men are just doing this an excuse (again, she's assigning an underhanded malevolence to trans men's experiences) so these people's complex gender identities don't exist. Or if they do, they are canceled out by the fact that they pass as men. Additionally, I'm not sure she ever mentions transfems who stay in the gay community. I don't know if there weren't as many when she wrote this, but it feels like she is assuming trans men are unique in feeling connected to their old communities from pre-transition because she is a binary, monogender, gender conforming woman with no desire to be in the gay community. She portrays trans men feeling connected to past (or current) lesbianism as something uniquely shitty instead of something that trans people of all kinds do. And, again, she decides that it is trans men who are the cause of cis women's transmisogyny. The inclusion of trans men in the lesbian community must be responsible for how cis women treat trans women.

And, back to her views on masculinity:

"First, in her historical analysis of transsexuality, Meyerowitz makes the case that, as the media’s (and the public’s) interest in trans women became increasingly sexualizing and sexually explicit, their interest in trans men declined reciprocally.[37] Thus, the relative invisibility of trans men in the media is a direct result of media’s inability to sexualize them—a difficulty that no doubt stems from the fact that maleness and masculinity are not typically sexualized or objectified in our culture."

This is actually what I believe this post was referencing, @transmascrage @happysadyoyo. And if so, it's, uh... not the slam dunk to own the TMRAs they clearly thought it was.

Once again, this is a painfully privileged take. There are porn categories full of fetishizing material of Black men being seen as sexually dominant animals, same with Indigenous men, and (although she won't admit it) so do trans men. Again, maybe this was different when she wrote this, but the idea of "cuntboys" as a fetish is alive and well. We all remember the cursed transmasc Captain America art that had crazy fucking curves? Maybe it was true in the 2000s, but it is clear to me that the fetishizing of transmasculinity has only grown as we've been brought further into the spotlight.

This just... isn't intersectional. I don't know how people can read this and then turn around and act like allies to men of color, as if this view of sexism doesn't erase them & all other marginalized men.

Honestly, the transandrophobia deniers were right. You should read Julia Serano's work, because when you do, suddenly the way people have been viewing sexism, transphobia and trans men makes a lot of sense. And it's not like she has any excuse, because Emi Koyama was able to make multiple statements in later editions of the Transfeminist Manifesto taking responsibility for the erasure of transmasculine, nonbinary, and non-white experiences with transphobia in her work.