#if your argument is one's sex is based of genitals then what about intersex?

[child-of-leviathan]

Can't wait for the day where more people realise gender ≠ sex, and sex was never binary to begin with. It was never simply male or female, intersex exists and so does a huuuge variation of sex chromosomes. Just admit you're uneducated

[iwannayellmyopinons]

So- I recently found out that the Buttress: a pretty popular music artist is a terf, and the shit she had been spewing is so mind-boggling it hurts.

Here are a few tweets of hers outright showing this along with her response once they were brought up.

The tweets:

The responses:

Obviously, I hate all of this. And since she wants a 'proper' argument, I'll share it here.

For one, it isn't just about playing pretend like yoj thinks it is. It is a mental battle for trans people. It isn't just 'feeling' like one sex or another. It's the physical and mental distress of feeling that your body is inherently wrong the way it is originally. Something that has caused many people to end their lives over due to how insufferable it is, with this, it's something that is only helped once the person starts to transition. So no, it isn't just pretend. It's a real struggle that you somehow claim as sexist when it honestly isn't. It doesn't fall under the definition at all. So why are you trying to undermind transpeople for trying to make it so they can look themselves in the mirror and finally feel relieved at the reflection they see?

Secondly, your definition that gender is a social concept is correct - it is, that's why non-binary/genderqueer and other genders that do not fit into either male or female exist, but your definition of actual sex is completely off the mark. You're not taking into account that a part of gender dysmorphia is in part caused by hormones, y'know- the same things you claimed help determine the biological sex of a person. That's why people who are trans need to go through hormonal treatments. To fix the physical chemical imbalances they experience. You're also not taking into account intersex people. Who are BIOLOGICALLY either both male and female or neither based on their outward genitals and reproductive organs. Hell, you aren't even taking in the fact that some women can be born with XY chromosomes, and men can be born with X chromosomes without showing any outward biogical appearances. Meaning yes, you can be STRUCTURALLY a different sex to the biogical sex you have. Granted - this is rare, but it still happens, and we have records to prove it. Meaning the only thing you're able to stand on at that point is the period thing, and even then that's fucking stupid. What about women with menopause? Are they not real women because they can't bleed between their legs anymore? What about women who take birth control and have stopped experiencing their periods thanks to it? Are they not real women?

Thirdly, your idea that since no one is being respectful towards you means you are somehow right is not proof at all, it just proves that what you're saying is so ridiculous that no one wants to take you seriously. All you're doing is spreading hate about a certain minority, and yes- being transgender is considered a minority. Just not the minority you're thinking of given your tweets. It's infact something you are very lucky enough to never experience. But let me ask you a question: What if one day - out of the blue - you suddenly gained a dick. You would still have a feminine appearance, but biogically, you were a guy. Would you be able to call yourself a man? Even if it made you physically uncomfortable/ill to be called such or even look at the new dick you had. Think long and hard about this question, hell- try to even image yourself in such a state. Then maybe, just maybe you'll share a little more respect for the people who had or are currently living like this.

Now, good day to anyone who is reading this. I'm gonna go like nice pictures.

[catgirl-kaiju]

How is tme/tma more inclusive than afab/amab? They both equate something to a binary that makes an assumption about someone’s genitalia. In a personal level, I dislike either set of labels, which makes it hard for me to see how one is more inclusive. I have Klinefelter syndrome and consider myself leaning toward a more feminine nonbinary identity. But because of living circumstances, I can’t change anything about my presentation. This to me makes it seem like I’d be labeled as tme and amab under those labeling systems because I’m not in a position where people clock me as trans fem. I have been mistaken as trans masc a couple times because of my gynecomastia, but im not. This is just a personal opinion but the labeling systems seem reductive to me and don’t seem to do much good. Not to mention how many times I’ve seen labels used to drive a wedge between the trans community. Not trying to be rude here, I am genuinely curious as to why you think the one set is more inclusive than the other? Sorry for this chunk of text, have a good day or night

-Dee

hi there, Dee

you're welcome to disagree with me, but here's my thoughts:

firstly, the agab model is still a pretty decent way of talking about trans identities, but it certainly has some problems for intersex folks. overtly, there's nothing actually tying amab or afab labels to genitals as we're just talking about the arbitrary gender label some doctor slapped on you at birth. and the ways that your experiences were shaped by that labeling are important in discussing the dynamics of gender even in the realm of cisgender people. i'm intersex, but i'm also amab. my body was close enough to the arbitrary grouping of "male" when i was born that some doctor saw fit to assign that label to me. the reality is that people are expected to fit in one of two boxes and if your body deviates from that, usually doctors will try and squeeze you into the box that's "closest enough" in hopes that you'll eventually fit in there.

however, since all of us have grown up in a society where intersex people are stigmatized and the perisex sex binary is normalized, the terms "female" and "male" are pretty loaded and carry a lot of assumptions about people's bodies. someone who is afab wasn't necessarily born with a uterus, and someone who is amab might not at all resemble a "male" as an adult. the complexities of biological sex therefore make the agab model useful in some contexts, but not in others. it can be useful when talking about gender, but it is less useful when talking about biology.

and here's the thing about tma/tme: it's not at all about your genitals in any way. it's barely even about your body. i really don't understand where this notion that tme/tma are "just another binary grouping based on genitalia" comes from, as there's nothing in the language to indicate that. all the tme/tma system is meant to describe is whether you are affected by transmisogyny or not. that's it. you can absolutely make an argument that some people might be affected by transmisogyny more, or less, or in different ways, or in some contexts but not others. but none of that has anything to do with genitals. i have seen no convincing argument that these labels reinforce sex binaries or gender binaries, as these are labels intended purely for the purposes of discussing the dynamics of transmisogyny and how different groups of people are and aren't affected by it.

like the only thing we're talking abt here is if your experiences are in any way affected by transmisogyny or not. that's it. what exactly does that have to do with what genitals someone has or was born with??? i'm intersex, i have a micropenis and have since birth, and i think you'd be fighting an uphill battle to try and argue that i am not affected by transmisogyny. if you want to critique the system's utility in discussing transmisogyny, i'm perfectly willing to engage with you on that. if you're arguing that whether or not someone is tme or tma is sometimes contextual, i'm totally willing to hear you out. if you want to talk about the possibility of an afab intersex person being tma, we can talk about that. but trying to claim that tme and tma are just a reproduction of the binary sex and/or binary gender paradigms is just not backed up by anything, imo.

i hope you're also having a good day or night, genuinely. i don't want you to think i have anything against you personally, but it's also very important to me to voice my honest disagreement here.

[doberbutts]

Thank you so much for including PCOS under the intersex umbrella, I know some people with it don't identify as intersex and that's Okay, but despite the fact that my pcos is so severe it affected my genital presentation and has given me a mustache and beard all my life (which, fine with me, I identify as male so), so the discourse about whether PCOS 'counts' as intersex stresses me out when it feels like the correct label for how it affected my body personally, and it genuinely helps reassure me when I see others casually include it

I'm just going based off what various intersex advocacy groups have said which is more or less "Is there more variation than considered 'normal' or 'standard' in your hormones, sex organs, genitals, secondary sexual characteristics, or chromosomes? Do you find the intersex label comforting as a result? Then you're intersex"

Which tbh I think is a good way of going about it- there are plenty of people with PCOS who do not feel it causes intersex in their own bodies and right or wrong they have the right to decide that. But that also means you have the right to decide if that narrative fits your experience or not. And, if it doesn't, to find one that does.

We know PCOS can cause the masculinization of the female body [speaking in scientific terms only] and we know such masculinization can include changes in genital presentation, body and facial hair, breast development... as well as being highly correlated with gender dysphoria, gender nonconformity, and homosexuality. Sounds an awful lot like other intersex conditions which cause changes in genital presentation, body and facial hair, and secondary sex characteristics as well as highly gendered behavior.

Some people are very adamant that PCOS is not an intersex condition, but I find a lot of these people are incredibly transphobic and intersexist, and are not willing to understand spectrums of gender and sex. Many times the argument is phrased as though calling people with PCOS intersex makes them "less than" women, "not" women, or "other" than women... when all that it would make them is intersex. As though stating that someone is intersex somehow makes them a lower and lesser version of the gender they are. I think honestly that is more telling of what these peoples' politics are than a comment on whether or not PCOS is or is not intersex.

[harrypotterfuryroad]

fjakdsfjkl they're checking children's genitals in Ohio & florida and y'all radfems totally sided with them to get it done, much like your calls for censorship silenced lesbian authors in the nineties (see the feminist sex wars/porn wars and/or struggles of the little sisters canadian bookshop).

wow, amazing. you STILL, even after fucking LINKING it, very obviously failed to read the whole thing. she absolutely described radical feminist ideology. and being well-read is something you guys pride yourselves on...that's pretty sad. i'm not even saying this is a premier source against your crock of shit ideology; i frequently cite many others. yet you failed--multiple times, now--to properly read the one single tumblr post i brought to your attention.

by far the most obnoxious conversation to have with you people is the "sex is binary" conversation. it's so eerily like talking to the scientologist freaks i grew up around, it's like a deja vu nightmare. biology is complex. also, it doesn't care. not "it doesn't care and that's why women are fucked by it!" no, it just doesn't fucking care. period. it's neutral. why in hell are you treating biological sex like it's spiritual...oh, that's right, because of your incessant and childish need to feel like a victim, which matters more than other people and certainly more than the truth. intersex people exist. you guys deny it alot, but they do. they're about as common as redheads. are redheads fucking fictitious, "harrypotterfuryroad"?

i am a cis woman, and i'm annoyed with what influence (feeble though it is, it's still important because you quite literally endanger lives) you've managed to have over the very important, real conversation about systemic misogyny. the irony is that you have made it harder to talk about. you have hindered progress. by oppressing women you have *omg you'll never guess, cue drumroll* fucking oppressed women.

as that post said, you don't own the definition of womanhood. society does. and it and i (hello, a cis woman born with your same genitals and born into the same oppression you've faced, not that it matters!) don't agree with you. get the fuck over yourself and grow up.

name one radfem that supported genital checks and follow that up by explaining why men belong in women's sports in the first place

and am i supposed to be shocked that anti-porn feminists were anti-porn regardless of who was producing it? are you shocked? did you think you had some kind of gotcha by saying that anti-porn arguments were coopted by homophobes? that horse is long past dead

she described it, sure, but she didn't define it. and a lot of those descriptive statements were total asspulls anyway. like, imagine you ask me what a square is, and i give you "it isn't a circle," "sometimes they're blue," and "they're related to trapezoids" as descriptive statements. all of these can be true, but they're not useful in gauging if i actually know what makes a square a square. so yeah i'm gonna go ahead and reject a pile of descriptive and spuriously ascriptive statements as a coherent definition, thanks. throwing out things like "TERFs think they're leftists" and "TERFs are inherently fascist" doesn't give any clear picture of what (again) a radfem is, especially with the implicit split between radfems and "TERFs"

and likewise i'll breeze right past your attention-grabbing link to scientology, i posted a few weeks ago about why that isn't productive without much more detail. i'm not treating biology like it's spiritual; i'm treating sex like it's binary. you're the one taking that spiritually by acting like i'm making some kind of individual moral judgment based on it. the redhead frequency thing is fucking stupid, because just like redheads still have hair, intersex people are still male or female (and they're also not there to be used as pawns by you)

also please tell me how it's been made harder to talk about systemic misogyny with specific examples because i'm curious about that

and finally the womanhood thing was the exact line that made it clear that the writer of that post had no idea what she was talking about. the boundaries that feminists have drawn around womanhood are really lenient and really broad. nothing about behavior or dress or class or race disqualifies you from "womanhood." there's no wrong way to be a woman except by being male, and there's no point in taking that personally

[bullshit-tqia]

Transandrophobia and transmisogyny go hand in hand, as does exorsexism and intersexism. Gender in these discussions is not an identity/state of being, but a system. We are all equally subjugate to those systems. It is a system which distinguishes between people along a binary, establishes exclusive and universal expectations for both, then enacts violence to reinforce those expectations. The terminology we use to describe specific dynamics of oppression enacted by the system of gender (distinct from patriarchy, as gender still has the capacity to be institutionalized in non-patriarchal societies) are all tools it uses to keep people “in line”, cis, trans, and everyone else. You cannot engineer an understanding of how we come to internalize ideas about gender by placing the burden of agency onto identity, then superimposing structural forces over the identity to conflate the two. In extremely simplified terms, all trans people should be assumed to hold the same biases as cis people because the system has conditioned them to understand themselves in a specific way. If we lived in a world where everyone was sexless and androgynous, there would still be avenues of social construction which realizes gender as a system, because sex assigned at birth is just one of many tools the system manages to wield, not the arbiter of the system itself. Hence, to imply any group is simply predispositioned to certain ideas and behaviors by the nature of their biology IS, in fact, an idea perpetuated by the system of genders, regardless of what context or nuance may composite the argument. There are ways to acknowledge differences in positionalities without implying the CAUSE to be IDENTITY.

True to some extent, false in others.

We are equally subjugated to the system but in different ways, with a physical barrier between them, the sexes. You cannot use violence to keep a vagina to stay a vagina for cis women. You are making transness sound as if it is a metaphysical condition of the self, meaning, you are ascribing a level of consciousness to it versus seeing it as a condition. If it can be conscious, then I can just choose to not be trans. Then I can choose to get rid of dysphoria even without transitioning. But it doesn't work like that.

There are too many different kinds of intersex to be whittled down into something as explicit as male or female, X or Y. Some forms of intersex are as simple as a human with XY chromosomes producing too many anti-androgens with no external genital variance. In every way this human can have the exact same experiences as cis men, just on a physical level he is different through having too many anti-androgens. He takes testosterone and he "becomes normal" through having the same level of testosterone as cis men.

You are treated based on how you are visibly perceived. Your internal thoughts or your hormones do not manipulate your outside world. You are treated like a woman because you look like one, through having a feminine facial structure or in more personal scenarios, because of your vagina. This does not happen to men with masculine facial features with a penis, because he does not have feminine facial features or a vagina. It cannot happen. You either have a XY penis with no abnormalities or you do not. This is why the "abnormalities" of the past were "corrected." No in-between was understood.

If X, Y. If no Y, no X.

Not if Y, no X. No if no X, Y. There is only the positive or contrapositive. This is the basics of logical reasoning and understanding the sufficient and necessary condition. To have masculine facial features is sufficient to be seen as a man while having a penis is necessary in being seen as a man by cisnormative society. Meaning that you can have a penis but not be seen as a man because you have feminine facial features, or, outwardly you look like a woman. This is how trans women who pass perfectly are still misgendered, because they have a penis, and to cisnormative society, having a penis is a necessary condition for being a man. Once that information is known to cisnormative society, nothing else matters.

What makes things complicated is that the human body itself has so many variances to it that nobody meets all qualities in becoming the epitome of the male or female sex. In archeology, there are 8 indicators that show whether someone is male or female. No human on this planet has 8 out of 8 indicators. We all express some level of variance, so in reality we are treated differently based on observed patterns.

If you are tall, have narrow hips, have long hair, have feminine facial features, have a soft voice, and have narrow shoulders, you will be seen as a woman despite height and narrow hips being commonly attributed to men. It is because of the other traits this person has that makes her be seen as a woman. But vaginas and penises are end-all be-alls, Once you make this woman have a penis, everything else is ignored, she is seen as a man. That is what I mean when I say the genitals are a necessary condition.

Yes, all trans people should be seen as having the same biases as all other trans people, it is just the identity (or physical characteristics of a person if closeted) that attributes the behavior as transmisogyny or internalized transphobia, or transandrophobia or internalized transphobia. At the end of the day, transmisogyny isn't a force of nature, IT IS AN ADJECTIVE OR ADVERB.

IT DESCRIBES BEHAVIOR, IT IS NOT BEHAVIOR. Someone can do the exact action labeled as transmisogynistic and it could not be labeled as transmisogynistic.

Compare this with gravity, if I drop an apple and it falls, it will always be gravity that is making it fall. That is a force of nature, that is what I mean by force of nature, it is always X. It can never not be X. Gravity ALWAYS makes the apple fall, it cannot be anything else that makes it fall.

But transmisogyny cannot always be the source behind someone's thinking. It can almost always be anything else.

What this is called...is called the correlation does not equal causation fallacy. This is the necessary end point you must reach if you want to understand queer theory...you must realize that it is all bullshit.

"Male socialization" and "female socialization" only refers to common patterns in the childhoods in the people identified as male or female. It is not a force of nature, it is a description of nature, it cannot guide anything. That's why once you have an early transitioning child, they can acquire female or male socialization because it describes their childhood. Something being "a result of male socialization" can easily become not a result of male socialization by that person not having been part of the pattern, the pattern of childhoods men typically have. I can be assertive now, not have it be the result of female or male socialization, then in another reality where everything is the same except I'm a transgender woman, become the result of male socialization.

IT'S ALL BS!! IT'S ALL FAKE!!

[calicoradfem]

found on Instagram at @very.gay.teens

From the caption:

Edit: "I don't want to date trans people because I want biological children" →The reason its still transphobic is because this does not only exclude trans people. Plenty cis people are infertile. So it's still not about transness specifically (as well as some trans men for example do choose to get pregnant). So the appropriate thing to say would be "I don't want to be with someone I can't have biological children with."

Let’s talk about this.

Is it transphobic to not want to date trans people? No. Your dating life does not need to be inclusive. Full stop. Any reason you don’t want to date someone is a valid reason. But let’s break down these arguments anyway.

Reason 1: “Because they have this set of genitals.”

Argument: “Not all trans people have the same genitals. Bottom surgeries exist.”

Refutal: People know that bottom surgeries exist. A surgically created penis or vulva is not the same as a natural one. Here’s some information on SRS options:

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/326590

https://www.verywellhealth.com/different-types-of-vaginoplasty-4171503

Reason 2: “Because they are too feminine/masculine/ambiguous.”

Argument: Trans people express gender differently. Everyone has different body types.

Refutal: I’ve never heard anyone gender expression as a reason not to date a trans person, and I agree, it does vary from person to person, especially since “gender expression” is essentially clothes and makeup. However, in regards to body type, there is a consistent biological pattern. While humans have a relatively low level of sexual dimorphism compared to other species, it’s still observable and patterns can be recognized easily. Trans women still have traits of biological men and trans men have those of biological women. Of course these can sometimes change with hormones. Regardless, if someone isn't attracted to traditionally masculine or feminine features, like height, breasts, body/facial hair, or bone structure, it doesn’t matter how the person with those traits identifies. You can’t identify into someone’s dating pool.

Reason 3: “Because they aren’t really their gender, they are their sex because they have these chromosomes.”

Argument: Intersex people exist. You may be intersex and unaware of it. You’re not attracted to chromosomes and can’t be sure of someone’s chromosomes by looking at them.

Refutal: Intersex people have nothing to do with this situation unless the trans person in question is intersex. Either way, intersex conditions aren’t examples of more sexes beyond male and female. They are medical conditions, many of which can have potentially harmful side effects. These conditions involve variations in sex characteristics, but are largely sex specific. That is, they either affect biological males or females. For example, only women can have Turner syndrome, and only men can have Klinefelter syndrome. Intersex conditions are irrelevant to this argument and most trans issues. To use them as a “gotcha!” to get people to date you shows that you neither understand nor respect these conditions or the people who have them.

As for people having intersex conditions and being unaware of it, this is very unlikely. Intersex individuals only comprise 0.018% of the American population. Most intersex conditions have side effects that would have presented themselves. Any healthy person with typical genitalia of their sex can reasonably assume that they are not intersex.

https://www.leonardsax.com/how-common-is-intersex-a-response-to-anne-fausto-sterling/

Of course no one is attracted to chromosomes. They are, however, attracted to the physical sex characteristics that those chromosomes govern. As stated above, very few people have differences in these chromosomes, so chromosome analysis is unnecessary because someone’s sex can typically be determined by their phenotype. Chromosomes have everything to do with sex and physical appearance.

Reason 4: “Because they are trans”

Argument: This just makes you transphobic.

Refutal: Even if this does make you transphobic, it doesn’t matter. As I stated before, your dating life doesn’t need to be inclusive. Let’s talk about why it isn’t transphobic anyway.

Transphobia is defined by the Oxford dictionary as “dislike of or prejudice against transsexual or transgender people.”

Not finding someone attractive is not dislike or prejudice.

Not wanting to date someone is not dislike or prejudice.

It doesn’t matter what the specific reason is because dating is inherently exclusionary. 

Reason 5 (from the edit): "I don't want to date trans people because I want biological children"

Argument: This isn’t about transness specifically because some trans people can have children and some cis people can’t

Refutal: This situation varies based on the sex of the partner. However, most people who undergo HRT or SRS are infertile. This is a valid reason! And if both partners are the same sex, it’s definitely impossible for them to conceive. Yes, some cis people are also infertile. It’s not something you know immediately upon meeting someone, but it can still be a dealbreaker for some people. Just because they’re specifically talking about trans people, where the likelihood of infertility is higher, doesn’t mean they’re transphobic, or using it as an excuse not to date trans people. A straight man who wants biological children automatically knows he doesn’t want to date a trans woman because not being able to have kids is a dealbreaker.

Overall, all these arguments are nonsense because no one is obligated to date you or even consider dating you. The reason doesn’t matter. Dating is not a systemic problem or a social justice issue. Sex is not a human right.

[nothorses]

Alright I want to ask you this because I have thoughts but you're significantly more well read than me so maybe you'll have better insight and explanation:

I was going on a terf blocking spree, and lots of them are currently dealing with the idea that trans people are trying to say genital attraction isn't real. Now, I have heard this a few times on Tumblr, and I've heard people call it "genital preferences" and similar things, and I've seen the posts about people trying to get others cancelled for not dating them because they're trans. But for the most part I would say this is the minority of trans people?

Most of my experience with these sorts of conversations is from Reddit and not Tumblr, in these discussions people all agreed genital attraction was a real thing. Also, people (generally) agreed that sometimes trans people need to accept someone won't date them because of their genitalia (in reference to their agab genitals), yet some people will and it's not okay to be angry with someone who won't. There was also the idea that if they won't date someone with their agab genitals or after grs then there's an argument for ableism but not necessarily transphobia (although it's sometimes transphobia, not always).

I don't really know how to word the question, but basically do you have any thoughts you're willing to share on this issue? You always seem to have well thought out and historically referenced analysis of issues and provide nuance as needed, so I thought maybe you'd be a good person to ask. Of course if you don't want to answer this that's completely fine as well, it's just I can see the issue a bit from both sides and I just don't think I know enough on this subject to arrive to a conclusion yet personally, I also hope this is worded in a way where you understand what I'm trying to say

I think there’s two sides to this issue- the people making these decisions, and the people impacted by them- and my opinion really differs depending on what side you’re talking about. 

When we’re talking about “genital preference” and the people making these decisions, I honestly have to say that I don’t think this is a Thing the way these folks talk about it. I understand comfort levels with different types of genitalia, I understand having different sexual relationships with different types of genitalia, I understand finding different qualities attractive in different types of genitalia (penis size/hair/labia/etc.). But that isn’t the same as your entire sense of attraction to someone or your entire orientation being based on genitalia.

If you’re uncomfortable with one genital configuration, there are plenty of ways to have sex with someone who has it that do not involve interacting with that genital configuration in ways that make you uncomfortable. If you prefer the role you default to with one genital configuration, you can talk to a partner with a different configuration about how to accommodate that. If you find certain qualities unattractive in someone’s genitals, well, why is that so different from something like hair length?

Ultimately, “genital preference” isn’t about that. It’s just a reason for refusing to consider dating or having sex with certain people- and lo and behold, it just so happens that it’s always trans people that “genital preferences” exclude. (Ask these people if they’d consider trans people who’ve had bottom surgery & watch them scramble.)

It’s a transphobic dogwhistle used by cis people to excuse their transphobic dating habits. It’s the “socially acceptable” way of saying they don’t want to deal with their internalized transphobia, that they don’t find trans people “fuckable”. Not to mention the rampant, blatant exclusion of intersex people with conditions affecting their genitals.

Which is why, on the side of those impacted, responses are usually based on the assumption that this is about transphobia.

If someone tells me they don’t want to be with me because they have a “genital preference”, I also, in fact, have zero interest in them. I don’t want to be with someone who’s transphobic, and I don’t want to be with someone who doesn’t see me as a man.

I don’t think it’s safe or healthy for trans people to push that issue with individuals. I also don’t think it’s okay, in any capacity, to force yourself on someone because you (rightfully, in this case) disagree with the reasons behind their rejection. I also think it’s perfectly fair to point out and be upset about the transphobia inherent in the situation.

The closest thing to a legitimate “genital preference” is one founded in trauma, and as I’ve said before, these are intensely personal situations. I believe folks who’s trauma has caused this association between Danger and a certain genital configuration have a lot of healing and growing to do. They should understand that trans people may feel uncomfortable and unsafe around them until then. And they should have their boundaries respected, regardless of the reasons behind them, in the meantime.

[phoenixfire-thewizardgoddess]

What is your opinion on straight passing privilege? I (bi) don’t think it exists, but a close (lesbian) friend of mine insists that it does bc “You can hold hands with your SO (nb cis passing man) in public without risking being the victim of a hate crime.” I have been researching but keep seeing this same argument coming up, and I’m unsure and don’t want to be making anyone upset if I’m being ignorant here.

I think that there's a lot of fucked up internet politics around who is and isn't allowed in the community. Which is ridiculous.

Gay, Lesbian, Bi, Pan, Poly, Ace, Aro, Trans, Intersex, etc.

The only people who shouldn't be in the community are cishets, and pedos, none of that 'it's a sexuality' nonsense, it's predation.

The concept of straight-passing is ridiculous, primarily because it's all based on assumptions. If you're in an m/f relationship, and you are both cis and heterosexual, it's straight.

But here's the catch, if you identify as any LGBPT+ then it's not straight.

Two trans people in an m/f relationship is not straight passing.

Two bi people in an m/f is not straight passing, it's queer babes, it's in the name. If you're bi and your partner is like, straight, it's still queer from your side of the fence.

It's the 'pick a side' argument from another direction, this straight passing nonsense. Where you are villified by the straights if you have a same-sex relationship (or fetishised, let's be real, every part of the acronymn has it's own p*rn category aimed at straight people with a kink), and if you have a relationship with the opposite gendered person, the queer community gets cranky.

Two things:

1) Is this friend between 13 and 25? Bc they could still be working this out or being mentored by t*rfs, or had some bad info. IT could be jealousy or fear of being open where you live. Perhaps you could question what makes her say that; has she had a bad experience, or did someone say this to her. where are you Are you in america? are there snake wielding jesus warriors near you? Blink SOS if you need an escape route, child

2) Who wins when everyone in the queer community is divided and policing one another? Telling everyone off for dating this person or that person or not at all

I didn't get an invite to the big queer conference to make these decisions, so like, they're not valid. It's some pocket of internet active idiots who think they can speak for everyone.

What we need to do is stop pulling this bullshit on one another and get back to asking just why the fuck it's not okay for people who are perceived as not-straight or cis etc to hold hands in public.

There's a problem for every facet of the acronym, babes and dudes and theys. Lesbians are heavily sexualised by straight cis dudes. Gays are heavly fetisihed by straight cis women. to the point where even saying 'I'm gay' is considered to be an obscene, sexual act that you should not let children be exposed to.

And there's always someone from the opposite gender who thinks they 'are confused' or 'haven't met the right (gender) person yet', or 'they could fix them with their magic genitals' or mumbled religious nonsense. There's such intense stereotypes that people can't stand women who look butch, but also you can't 'really' be a lesbian unless you are' or gay men can't just be, like, a normal dude, instead of some flamboyant in-your-face charicature.

Of course people who match the stereotype exist, too. And they get no respect for fitting into the stereptypes either, it's just another reason for disrespect. There's no winning.

Bi's can't talk to anyone without hearing a question of a threesome come up or being attacked from either side for coice of partner.

Pans, same, but also kitchenware jokes. Both Bi and Pan are considered sluts and whores and can't decide or are going to cheat, etc. Or the 'you're being special snowflakes', 'choose a side', 'you're secretly gay and won't admit / you're secretly straight and want attention' etc.

Ace/Aro - everyone under this banner gets the whole 'you just haen't found the right person' or 'when you're older/you're a late bloomer' or 'how do you know?' or 'maybe you're straight/gay and haven't worked it out yet?' invalidating them completely and trying to push sex onto them. The queer community has always let Ace and Aro in under the Bi banner, and they are welcome. But the internet community, usually young people, are tearing each other to shreds over it lmao.

Chill.

Non-binary, trans, intersex. They have been here for ages, but people from one community try to destroy their credibility, despite them existing since humanity has. It's big on p*rn and fetish sites too, lot of straight dudes think these things are hot and sexy, but would spit on trans people in the street. Hypocrites (I mean, every second low-brow comedy movie out there makes a thai-l*dyb*y joke, and how it 'doesn't count' like yikes).

Nb has only just been recognised, which is funny bc society literally made up gender and the rules and pretended that was how its encoded in DNA lmao.

Transpeople have it bad though. Between the cis straights, the cis queer community (primarily t*rfs and those who fall for misinformation) and the fetishists, and the medical community who treats them like an illness rather than people. Like, they are afforded respect if they 'pass', but even then it's still an EW factor.

Transwomen are seen as 'men in dresses who want to break into women's spaces' and treated horrifically; assaults are very high. Transmen are seen as butch women, and 'gender tr*itors' by the Crazy Motherfuckers we mentioned before; their assaults are high. They're not considered Real People unless they meet the ridiculously high standards for each gender; unless they perform Right.

I remember, but did not understand at the time bc I recall i was little, that there was a gameshpw bachelorette style and there was a big twist. You know what the twist was? That the bachelorette they'd been dating and trying to win over... was trans. I don't think that she knew it would be the big twist, either; of the two men remaining, bother were angry and one might have been sick. Might be on youtube.

But like, that's funny to the non-queer community. They put a huge fucking target on this woman's back, put her in danger of being hurt, abused, killed, by anyone who watched it. By the men who she had 'lied to' as they chose to frame it, of their weird white american families who could have sought revenge. Like yikes.

And intersex people (called h*rmaphrodites for a long time even by medical personnel) were also a p*rn category and/or medical curiosity for centuries. Not to mention all the cases of parents who just went with 'make them a (specific gender)' if there was mixed presentation, at birth, and got mad at the kids for being like "Hey so, you flipped the coin wrong and I'm ___" even thought the potential for this was always on the cards.

And the parents often make a big messa bout how their baby ___ is dead and gone, even if they DO accept the person/child as who they really are. It's like, I get it they have changed but you didn't mourn their first haircut or lost baby tooth like this and that was change too, chill.

-

Straight-passing is a projection and a weapon. Like, is it the people in the relationship's fault that society looks at the pair and decides they are m/f, straight and cis? Nah, it's what people are conditioned assume and that's on them.

We can't bring it into the queer spaces and keep perpetuating that shit, because it's nonsense. Queer people are dying in other countries and your friend wants to being smart-assed about the fact you hold hands with your nb datemate in public?

-

Nonsense. That's right up there with t*rfs and the gold-star bullshit that was going on for a few years there. Probs still is among the younger people lmaoooo.

'Passing priviledge' is a myth, and it is used to hurt people. Vulnerable people and those who need support / guidance and assistance from their queer communities more than ever. So try to talk to your friend or try The Whole Friend disposal services, either way, chill.

The real issue here is that any of us are at risk of a hate crime for daring to even show affection in public. That even in safe spaces, 'allies' and those wise enough not to be openly homo/trans/bi/pan/ace/aro/other phobic are still side-eyeing you and wanting to talk 'for you' without listening to the community itself.

We have bigger issues than this, and your friend (and some others on the internet) need to get a grip and prioritise.

[Insert strained analogy about being pro-child but childfree in a suburb where everyone got married out of high school and anticipates you and your partner will too, no matter how often you remind them No Thanks. But you babysat the other day and people thought you and your partner looked like 'naturals' when you took child to the park and played with them. And you remind them, hey, chill, we like kids too but it's not for us. And they get pissy and pushy.]

---------

I can only point it out from my perspective, I'm certain there other queer people from the above acronymn community who can present their thoughts on the matter to and what it means to them.

Thanks for the question, good-bi.

[waller-bridge]

Yes “this I agree with”, simply because it’s the truth, not a simple judgement of values. Trans women are trans women, they are born male (something that cannot change) but try to appear as women (whatever that means) usually to appease dysphoria. That however does not take in account sexual orientation, which is based on sex, except for bi people, who do not care what genitals a person has. Not sorry to say but us lesbians are same-sex attracted, I don’t need a drawing is necessary for this one. I’ve seen young lesbians (teenagers) being pushed to end their blog because they’re lesbians and it wasn’t considered inclusive enough, not trans women inclusive enough. The worst is that each time they quit their blogs and said “I’m sorry, I’ll examine why I have genital preference and work this through” as if lesbians hadn’t tried to “work this through” already in hetero land. We’re certainly not the ones to blame it the bigots in that whole story.

As for US lgbt history it’s interesting you talk about that because everytime the subject is talked about it nowadays it erases the mixed raced butch lesbian who started it all at Stonewall, Stormé Delarverie, who because she was so visibly gnc was taken by the police in front of a gay bar and she resisted and plenty of the gay ppl outside that bar saw it and attacked back the police. There was actually quite a division between gay ppl and trans ppl (who went to a bar in another street in town) thought they were still in the same scene. If you look up closely to the testimonies back then Marsha P Johnson didn’t arrive when this whole thing happened and was sleeping on a bench, as for the other trans ppl they arrived later on as well because they weren’t in the same street. This doesn’t say they never defended us, it would be incorrect + trans ppl back then were for the most part also identified as gay (understanding that sexual orientation doesn’t have anything to do with gender presentation). Nowadays though ? Trans activism are lesbophobic and generally homophobic, idk how someone from the community could not see it, it’s sadly all over the place 😐

trans activism are homophobic where..... show me

“I’ve seen young lesbians (teenagers) being pushed to end their blog because they’re lesbians and it wasn’t considered inclusive enough, not trans women inclusive enough. The worst is that each time they quit their blogs and said “I’m sorry, I’ll examine why I have genital preference and work this through” as if lesbians hadn’t tried to “work this through” already in hetero land. We’re certainly not the ones to blame it the bigots in that whole story.” see i think y’all fail to see the point where the main problem was that: was the said preference influenced by prejudice against trans women or nah and it gets overlooked and most people come after the preference, not the prejudice

the genital argument.... *sigh* as a biologist..... intersex people says hi

anyways if any of the trans activism makes u think it’s lesbophobic maybe you should assert your own transphobic mindset first

[residentofthedisc]

An Open Letter From an Autistic Transgender Man to J.K. Rowling

Dear Ms. Rowling.

This is a response to your comment made on the 10th of June 2020 on your blog about autistic transgender men being victims of manipulation by transgender activists and misogynistic beliefs. My name for this scenario is Unsigned. I am a twenty-one-year-old autistic transgender man and I feel compelled to write this open letter addressing your statement. As in any essay, academic or otherwise, the introduction must serve to provide the reader with the basics of the essay’s intentions.

I believe that I can sum up the heart of my argument in three simple sentences.

1.     I am not your tragedy.

2.     I am not your prop.

3.     I am certainly not your weapon.

Firstly, before I go into this properly, as you can imagine, I was disgusted and grieved to wake up that morning and find that my existence had been filed into a weapon to harm and discredit those within my own community. I was especially sickened by your decision to release said statement – and your earlier one about an article describing menstruation with gender neutral terminology – during Pride Month, and amidst a historical and important Black Lives Matter movement. This seems to be an underhanded and inflammatory choice, of which, I must say, I do not approve.

Now, statement number one. Autistic people have long been mischaracterised as being – for lack of a better word – infantile. We are treated, regardless of our support needs (which is hardly an indicator of age), as eternal children. Our existence is spoken of in hushed tones, people deny their own children lifesaving medicine in fear of them becoming us, and we are spoken over and silenced by those around us. Being on the spectrum does not mean that we are something lesser. It does not mean that we are sick or broken. It does not even mean that we are something other. We simply are what we are.

We have been needlessly abused, mistreated, and not believed. If you, Ms. Rowling, wish to assist autistic people in the advancements of our rights and human dignity, you would turn your immense influence towards providing a more accurate understanding of autism, amplifying autistic voices (non, semi, and fully verbal and every gender and race), and supporting autistic-lead organisations such as the National Autistic Society. You do not help us, Ms. Rowling, by attacking and belittling members of our community who are already disadvantaged by transphobic attitudes. Our existence is not a tragedy, Ms. Rowling, we are simply human beings with differing needs and worldly understandings, and we do not need you to defend us against imaginary evil when there is real evil being done to us.

Statement number two. Autistic people are not props to be moved around the theatre of your performative prejudice. As difficult as it may be to believe, we are people with the capabilities to make up our own minds and make our own decisions. We are capable of understanding who we are. That is our decision to make. Not yours.

Your statement that autistic transgender men has increased is… true. But only to a point. We have not increased in number because of people pushing us down this path. We have increased because now we have access to the vocabulary to name what we are feeling, there is increased understanding and acceptance, and autistic assigned-female-at-birth people are now having their voices heard and being officially diagnosed. We are not being manipulated. We are coming to conclusions based on new information, which is how you grow as a person and understand more about the world. You change your opinions. You grow. That is what these autistic transgender men have done. It takes an extortionate amount of time and courage to gather help and have your feelings believed by doctors and parents. We are not running off and slicing off our breasts and genitals on a whim. We fight for our right to transition. It takes years and the negotiation of a circus-full of hoops. It is not a spur of the moment decision. We are not doing to look cool or fit in. We have realised something monumental about ourselves and we are acting on it. And if it appears that we change our minds again? Good. We are learning more and more about ourselves. You are not part of that process.

Lastly, I am not a weapon. My autism is not a weapon. It has been used as such, many times. It means I struggle with high levels of sensory input. I struggle with social situations and social cues. I have special interests and obsessions over little things. But I am not stupid. I am not alone. I have different views of the world. I am not something for you to hone against your transphobic whetstone. Let me explain myself.

I believe that gender and sex are two different things. Sex is to do with your genitals, your chromosomes. It has nothing to do with your brain. Gender is how you present yourself – it is a construct which you form about your own personality and likes. My genitals have nothing to do with how I present myself. And I feel male so that is what I am. This is not a moral statement, but a factual one. I am male. Gender is a social idea – our views on what makes someone male or female or intersex or non-binary have changed with the times and seasons. A man today would not be an ideal man back in ancient Greece.

Funny thing about autistic people? We tend not to pick up or agree with social ideas. Our autism does affect how we view the world and – personally – gender just seems to be a bit… simple. I have no idea why my genitalia should dictate which pronouns I use because someone else decided that that was fine. Or the idea that having a penis or a vagina or any combination of the above changes my personality.  Rather like someone deciding that electroshock therapy for gay people was fine. It feels disingenuous to try and stuff a massive spectrum of personal enlightenment into two little boxes which we cannot move from. I knew I was transgender long, long before I knew I was autistic. There were no sinister transgender women creeping into my room when I was seven and whispering insidious transgender messages into my little ear. I was not even aware of what transgender was until I was around twelve. I did not have an accurate understanding of autism until I was fourteen. And not knowing the words did not change what I was. I was merely given the lexicon of my struggles and a voice with which to speak the language.

Additionally, if it is sex-based problems you say transgender people get in the way of, then why not speak purely on sex? ‘Menstruators’ or ‘people who menstruate’ gets to the intended audience far more accurately than ‘women’. Some cis women do not have wombs. And the first wave of feminism was about separating women’s rights from their biology. Why circle back around to that?

So, trans men are men because they feel male. Transgender women are women for the same reasons. And believe me, there are a negligible amount of predatory men (because that is who you are truly angry with, transgender women are your scapegoats), if any, who would subject themselves to the dangers transgender women face to circumnavigate an obstacle such as a door which says women only. They can just open the door and get inside to do their evil without this ridiculous rigmarole which you suggest they do. Really. And autistic transgender men are men. We are not confused.

Unlike you, Ms. Rowling, I do not pretend to speak for all autistic people. But I can speak for those within my own community. We do not want to speak these lines you’ve forced down our throats. I stand with my transgender siblings, especially my sisters, and I will not be used against my friends. Not by you and not by anyone.

[crossdreamers]

What is the difference between sex and gender?

Very often discussions about what it means to be transgender ends up in a quarrel about the difference between sex and gender. Some argue that there is no difference. Others that you cannot understand human beings without distinguishing between the two.  Here follows a pretty clear explanation.

Some days ago I got the following anonymous tumblr-question:

Hi! I don’t know if you answer this kind of questions, but my friend just came out as trans to his family and I really want to support him, and I feel like I should start by understanding him and the trans community as a whole better, as well as being more familiar with concepts of gender and sex, etc. So I wanted to ask if you have anything I could start with to begin understanding all of this better ?(literally keywords to google can work or books/articles,anything works!) 💜💜

The map versus the world

I think that much of the confusion found in online discussions about sex and gender is that many people think the map is exactly like the world itself. But when you think about a map of Times Square in New York, as this one...

... it is very easy to see that this 2D rendering is nothing like what Times Square looks like, feels like, sounds like and smells like in the real world. 

The map is a very simplified abstraction containing symbols that are there to help us navigate the real Times Square.

The same applies to language, including scientific concepts. The world itself is so insanely complex and “messy” that there is no way simple, human made, words and concepts can capture it all. 

The five dimensions of sex and gender

Originally English had one word, one sign,  to capture the complexity of what it means to be a man or a woman, namely “sex”. That  word was used  to capture at least five very different phenomena:

1. BIOLOGICAL SEX

Ultimately biological sex is  about gametes: sperm and eggs. In biology males are those who  produce sperm and females are those who produce eggs. Sperm meets egg and viola, you have a baby.  This is a fact. We would not be here without them.

Hormones decide whether a fetus ends up as a human being producing eggs or sperm, and most often – but not always – this hormone production correlates with  relevant chromosomes, XY in males and XX in females.

2. SEXUAL CHARACTERISTICS

Hormones also trigger the development of sexual characteristics. The primary sexual characteristics (genitalia) develop early on. The secondary sexual characteristics (facial hair growth, breasts etc.) appear during puberty.

Most often the development of secondary sexual characteristics follows from the biological sex, but there is a lot of variation and no absolute clear boundaries between the two sexes as regards looks.

3. GENDER EXPRESSIONS

While the development of sexual characteristics is triggered by hormones, the development of gender expressions are (for the most part) not. 

Among gender expressions we find clothing (skirts vs. trousers), mannerisms (crossing or not crossing your legs when sitting) and even interests (knitting versus wrestling). 

We know that these gender expressions are cultural and not biological for two important reasons: They differ from culture to culture (Roman men wearing togas and Scotchmen wearing kilts) and from individual to individual. Where I live (in Norway) most men are not afraid to cross their legs when seated, and women do love jeans.

4. GENDER ROLES

Gender roles refers to the way cultures divide tasks between the two genders, informally and even legally. 19th century European and North American had no right to vote. The majority of nurses world wide are women, even today.

Few of these gender roles have a firm biological basis, as the political and cultural changes that took place during the previous century has shown us. 19th century women in “the West” were supposed to be emotional, irrational and inferior to men in most ways. They were therefore not fitted to a life of leadership, the men said. They were, on the other hand, considered more nurturing than men, which made them the obvious choice for child rearing. 

Since then women have proven themselves capable in all strands of life, and many men are very good at taking care of kids.

5. GENDER IDENTITY

Gender identity is your deep felt sense of being a man or a woman (or neither or both). Most people (non-transgender cis people) never reflect on their gender identity, because no one is challenging it. 

Transgender people, on the other hand, as well as some intersex people, are forced to reflect on the difference between biological sex and gender identity, because they strongly, continuously and persistently feel that their sense of being a man or a woman (or some other category) does not match their legally assigned gender. 

People may disagree as to what causes this dissonance between biological sex and gender, but there is no denying that the mismatch exists. 

The sense of being a gendered being is undeniable

Gender dysphoria is real. The sense of being forced to live as the wrong gender is real. This means that the sense of being a gendered person is real. Gender identity is not the same as sex.

Anti-trans activists will often talk about transgender and intersex people being statistical outliers, saying that they do not in any way represent normalcy. There are actually as many intersex people as there are redheads in the world, but let us, for the sake of argument, say that they are right about this. This still does not change the fact that for many people several of these five variables do not match. 

If you have not done so already, you should take a look at the TED Talk of Emily Quinn, an intersex woman with XY chromosomes and “balls”, as she puts it. She looks like a woman, expresses herself as a woman and clearly thinks of herself as a woman. She is real, and through her very existence she provides clear proof of gender identity not being the same as biological sex.

I love the following photo of her, because it makes it so clear that she is using feminine gender expressions to express her real gender, XY chromosomes be damned.

Intersex or transgender

One important difference between intersex people like Emily Quinn and transgender people is that it is relatively easy to track down the biological roots of an intersex condition, being those chromosome variation (XO, XXX, XXY, XYY) or hormonal variation during the development of the fetus.

The transgender gender mismatch might also have roots in genes and hormonal variation (most medical experts seem to think so), but most often it becomes visible as an intense conviction of being “another” gender.

This has led some anti-trans activists to dismiss feelings in general as not being “real”. I remember discussing all of this with one such person, who desperately demanded a clear and unambiguous definition of what it means to be a man and woman, and it had to be based in visible biology. My attempts at telling him that emotions are real too had no effect.

But they are. Emotions are as real as genitals and chromosomes, and if someone continuously and persistently tell us that they are a man or a woman – in spite of all the harassment and social exclusion – you’d better believe there is something real causing that experience.

Mental illness

At this point in gender discussions I have often noticed that those who want to harm transgender people reach for the “mental illness” card. Sure, the feelings might be “real”, they say, but trans people are wrong. 

The map tells these people that Times Square is square. There is no room for circles. So trans people are delusional or perverted. Because science!

The consensus in medical circles is that this is not the case. Trans people are not mentally ill. They are as well equipped to navigate the complexities of life as cis people. They are more likely to be stressed out and depressed, for sure, but that is because they find themselves invalidated and harassed on a regular basis, not because they are mentally ill. 

The American psychiatric manual, the DSM-5, and the international health manual, the ICD-11 are both very clear: Being trans is not a mental illness. 

It is not all about gender expression

Some lesbian trans-exclusionary “radical feminists” (TERFs) try to use their own life experience to explain away the gender variance of trans people. 

Queer culture is full of people who identify as their assigned gender, they argue, but who nevertheless violate the norms of gender stereotypes. There are gay men with feminine gender expressions and lesbian, masculine, butch women.

The argument is that trans people are basically cis people who mistake the desire to express  masculinity and femininity through clothes, mannerism and musical taste for a different gender identity.  When people who used to think of themselves as masculine lesbian women come out as transgender men, they are simply dismissed as deluded women by the TERFs.

They have clearly no idea of how gender dysphoria affects a transgender person’s life. The suffering can be tremendous. You do not think about transitioning on a whim.

And here’s the thing: There is as much variation as regards masculine and feminine expressions and interests among trans people as there is among cis people. 

For sure, great many trans women make use of feminine gender expressions to celebrate their womanhood and get affirmation from those around them. But in this they are no different than cis women, which the flourishing fashion and cosmetic industries can attest to. 

There are butch trans women, in the same way that there are masculine cis women. There are femme trans men, in the same there are feminine cis men.

In other words: Gender expression does not always parallel gender identity.

A postscript on the term biological sex

Some transgender people do not like to talk about “biological sex.” They argue that a transgender woman is and has always been a “biological woman” even if she has not undergone hormone replacement therapy and/or surgery. It is the cultural assignment of a gender after birth that makes the difference, they say.

I understand the argument. They are not wrong.

But keep in mind that biologists use the words “sex” and “gender”, “male” and “female” differently than we do in everyday speech.  To use the map metaphor: Similar symbols can refer to different things.

We need to be able to compare biological sex with experienced gender. It is the only way you can make sense of gender dysphoria and the way many trans people feel alienated from their own bodies. This is why I have used the term “biological sex” throughout this article.

Conclusion

The gender mismatch of transgender people is as real as the sex/gender match of cis people. The very existence of transgender people proves that sex is not the same as gender.

Photo: Alexandr Screaghin

See also this Scientific American article on sex and gender, and my own article: “Sorry, gender cannot be reduced to biological sex.”

[tervenish]

I think maybe in the (far) future, I may be able to comfortably share some women's spaces with most transwomen simply because many of the issues we have are because of male pattern violence and, y'know, the entire history of male behavior in history. if by some miracle sexism were solved, we could theoretically share many spaces. particularly casual ones.

however I will never concede to the definition of homosexuality being erased to fit people who identify as the opposite sex. this is a reality that cannot be casually given fuzzy edges, not like a women's hobby group. even if homophobia were to disappear, the coherent definition of our lives as homosexual people is still important.

I ask how you would define "lesbian." nowadays, you get something like "a woman or woman-aligned person who is attracted to only women and other woman-aligned people" AT BEST. I won't even go into the worse answers.

so then you ask what "woman" (or "woman-aligned" 🙄) means and, again, at best you get something like "someone who identifies as a woman." circular definitions. so you ask again, what does "woman" mean? if you can "identify" as a woman then you must have an idea of what that means. and then... well you never know what you'll get. "someone who feels like a woman." "someone who feels feminine." or even "someone with a female brain" or something.

I am so tired. they spend ages going in circles with ridiculously nondescript, subjective words. so I give them this: a lesbian is a female homosexual human being, or a woman who is exclusively attracted to her same sex. and if you're seriously going to ask what "female" means, then go back to elementary school.

don't even try to say there is no such thing as male or female, or that the sex binary doesn't exist, and DEFINITELY do not use intersex people as your pawns in an argument about IDENTITIES. they are people with disorders of SEX DEVELOPMENT, and these conditions do not disprove the human sex binary.

we have already proven sexual orientations are innate. we already know they are based on the sex you are attracted to, one or both, and they don't have anything to do with identities or appearances. I will not stop fighting against the idea that we can break down our "sexual boundaries," or fucking "genital preferences" when all it is is repackaged conversion therapy.

and finally: saying these things IS NOT HATE SPEECH. criticizing gender theory IS NOT wishing harm upon trans-identified people. it is not "attacking your existence." it is not violence. if you can't understand why having coherent definitions to describe human realities and experiences is important, then you need to seriously take some time to reflect and listen to more people, especially those who disagree with you. I came upon these ideas by questioning what I was told about trans ideology. I'm not the one in an echo chamber. not anymore.

[thecourtneychronicles]

“Courtney Act says she’s enjoying an endless “hot girl summer”. Which, for those not initiated into American rap memes, basically means she’s having a damn good time.

“I’m kind of lubed up and ready for Mardi Gras, so to speak,” she says. As Australia’s most famous drag queen, active since the turn of the century, Courtney helped lead the mainstreaming of queer culture in this country along with figures such as Carlotta and Bob Downe.

But being a leader or pioneer doesn’t guarantee being comfortable in your own skin. Courtney says that until recently her understanding of sexuality and gender was actually quite limited. When she was performing, she was a woman, but when she stripped off her make-up, she went back to being Shane Jenek, a man.

“Although I did drag, my masculinity and femininity were compartmentalised in the binary,” Courtney says.

But over the past few years, as public discussion of gender, sexuality and identity has grown, she has discovered things are more complex than your genitals, clothes and hair.

“I think sometimes people think identity has something to do with the wrapping, but really it’s the gift underneath,” she says. “It’s about how you feel. For me, I definitely feel like I occupy masculine and feminine qualities.”

Courtney explores this journey in her pop-cabaret show, Fluid, showing this week at the Eternity Playhouse in Darlinghurst as part of the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras festival. It’s a change of pace for her after focusing on television in recent years; first by winning Britain’s Celebrity Big Brother in 2018, then as the runner-up (with Joshua Keefe) on last year’s Australian Dancing with the Stars.

It’s also a far cry from her humble beginnings in the DIY world of drag, which has never been regarded as high art but remains a staple of gay bars and culture worldwide.

“There’s a lot less hot glue and sticky tape in this show, which makes it feel a lot more professional,” Courtney says of Fluid. “I don’t know if that will hold until opening night.”

Set to original music, Fluid was written by Shane and American comedian Brad Loekle. For the most part it’s a one-woman show, with some help from a ballroom dancer in the second half. (“It’d be weird doing a ballroom dance by yourself,” she says.)

The show acknowledges that, more than ever, people are being flooded with “ever-changing and flowing ideas of who we are, what we are and what we might become”.

This is something we should embrace, says Courtney. “We change our clothes every day – we change  our hairstyles, we change our jobs. Everything is constantly in motion and constantly fluid. But we have this idea that our identities are fixed. When we look at our lives they’re actually a lot more fluid than we think.”

Courtney, or Shane, doesn’t identify as trans but has said that seeing more transgender people represented in the media was liberating and allowed her to explore her own doubts about gender. She’s previously been described as “gender fluid, pansexual and polyamorous”, although she no longer embraces those labels as she once did.

“They all work,” says Courtney, who prefers to identify as “just generally queer” these days. “It’s funny … so many of our groups identify so strongly with labels and they’re so important to us. I kind of feel less attached to those labels.”

She also understands why some people might feel confused, or even confronted, by the politics of queer identification. The acronym LGBTQIA+, which stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual and others, has expanded over the years to the point that some critics deride it as “alphabet soup”. Even those who are part of the community can be intolerant.

“I get that LGBTIQA+ is a little cumbersome from a marketing standpoint,” says Courtney. “But if you find yourself with the time to complain and be confused by a few extra letters, then you’re one of the lucky ones. If there are people that get to understand themselves more because of a letter in an acronym, I’m all for it.”

“I definitely feel like I occupy masculine and feminine qualities.”

Courtney casts a sceptical eye over everything, including the rise of cancel culture, a predominantly left-wing phenomenon which argues that anyone who says or does something deemed to be racist, sexist, homophobic or in any way offensive should be called out, shamed and, preferably, silenced.

Lamenting the state of political discourse while appearing on the ABC’s Matter of Fact program last year, she said: “The volume’s too loud now and everybody’s yelling.” While history showed that people sometimes need to raise their voices, “when you actually sit down opposite someone and have a conversation with them, you get so much further”.

How, then, does Courtney view the debate over religious freedom that has raged ever since Australians voted to legalise same-sex marriage in 2017? She says it’s clear that sometimes people, especially older white males, perceive other people gaining rights as a threat to their own. She says religion can be a lost cause because it is, by definition, about faith rather than rational argument. Still, queer people have to make the effort to engage.

“The way to do that is to get people to picture themselves in other people’s experiences. That’s the only way you can foster that empathy.

“Rather than yelling aggressively back at the people trying to oppress us, I think the most important thing to do is to share our stories.”

Another thing you can do, of course, is march. This weekend, Mardi Gras culminates in the annual parade up Oxford Street, which will feature more than 200 floats and 10,000 marchers. For the first time, Courtney will co-host the coverage on SBS with comedians Joel Creasey and Zoe Coombs Marr, and Studio 10 presenter Narelda Jacobs.

She had something of a practice run hosting the coverage on Foxtel some years ago. “I saw a clip of it the other day,” she says. “And I’m definitely hoping to redeem myself.”

As a character, Courtney has been on the gay scene for about 20 years. The person behind the facade, Shane, turned 38 last week. He grew up in Brisbane and remembers watching the parade on television as a teenager in the 1990s, huddled up close to the TV so he could quickly switch it off if his parents came downstairs.

Shane came to Sydney when he was 18 and attended his first Mardi Gras. “I just remember it was such a melting pot of people,” he says. “It was the first time I really understood what a community was: that there were all these different parts, and we all faced different challenges and struggles.”

But even then, Shane says he failed to really comprehend about what Mardi Gras was all about. Just like many heterosexual critics over the years, as a young man he gawked at the giant dancing penises, fetish-wear and nudity and wondered: why?

“I remember thinking: why can’t they just be normal?” Shane says. “Have your parade, but why does it have to be about sex and penises? Because I had shame about all of those things. I realise now that the parade’s brash display of sexuality liberates the shame … it’s a really radical way to shake people and say there’s nothing wrong with sexuality – not just homosexuality but sexuality in general.”

The queer community has given Shane a lot: acceptance, identity, a career and fame. It has taken him to Los Angeles, where he was based for some years until 2018, and now to his new home in London.

Love, on the other hand, remains elusive. He is “on the rebound” at the moment, though eternally optimistic. “It’s Mardi Gras time, it’s summer in Sydney, I think this is the perfect time to be single. Maybe I’ll find love under a disco ball at the after-party.”

Incredibly, at 38, Shane is about to attend his first ever wedding, straight or gay – his friend Tim is marrying his partner Ben. It is set to be a baptism of fire. “They have asked my ex-boyfriend and me to give the best man’s speech together, which could be slightly sadistic,” he says.

Shane is still adjusting to the relatively new world of same-sex marriage. It’s not for everyone – many queers still think of it as a conservative and unnecessary institution – but it’s growing on him. “Weirdly, seeing all these people get married, I feel like my cold heart has melted a bit,” he says. “I think there’s something really beautiful about marriage.”

It’s a reminder of why events like the Mardi Gras are still so important – a celebration of diversity at the same time as the old divisions between straight and gay are knocked down. As well as marriage, this can manifest in small shifts, like the politics of Bondi Beach.

“I was at North Bondi on Saturday [and] it was surprisingly unlike North Bondi,” Shane says. “It was all families and those banana umbrella things. I was like, ‘Oh, I remember when this used to be [gay nightclub] ARQ, but with more light.’"

“I guess that’s the progress we fought for – the families are happy occupying the gay beaches now.”

Fashion director Penny McCarthy. Photographer Steven Chee. Hair Benjamin Moir at Wigs By Vanity.

SBS’s Mardi Gras broadcast airs live from 7.30pm on February 29. Fluid will return for a tour of Australia and NZ in spring.

This article appears in Sunday Life magazine within the Sun-Herald and the Sunday Age on sale February 23.”

Courtney’s interview for The Sydney Morning Herald - February 21, 2020

[toastycabbage]

cis people show their fundamental misunderstanding of being trans when they say things like "You can't just deny your biology! Science says aksjdkdjf etc etc" like ya we know dumpass? whats ur point? just cause some guy with a coat said something about chromosomes and peepees doesn't mean i can't change my name, social identity, body, and the words i use for myself as i see fit. plus human sexes aren't even restricted to a binary and just because people with intersex traits are an """outlier""" doesnt mean they don't exist or shouldn't be given protections/attention.. 🤷‍♂️ like yeah should we just start taking away ALL minorities' rights or harass them for raising public awareness just because they belong to an "outlier" group? Wait....this sounds familiar....

They also like to act like we don't belong in discussions about our own anatomy/identities because it's "making it about us." (ex, abortion for trans men, womens rights for trans women, etc)

We have the same body parts/genders as yall and your opinions arent inherently more valid just because you're cis. foh with the elitism and gatekeeping bls 👌 and stop using the words of a random trans person to talk over another one "well my trans friend said he hates this and it makes him dysphoric and no trans people would ever enjoy that etc etc so you're wrong and you shouldn't talk about this" bc u arent being remotely slick.

We aren't a big delusional self hating overdramatic man-in-dress dyed-hair screeching overly sensitive 300 gender monolith like yall like to portray us. We're literally just human beings with our own interests, preferences, and subgroup culture....like all of you are. 🤷‍♂️

being trans isnt all about genitals, surgery and hormones even though it's a big part of the process for a lot of us. We don't just constantly think about our genitals. And face it, most of you are obsessed with your bodies just as much if not moreso. We don't reduce cis women down to the ones who get plastic surgery, and it isn't our business to generalize them based on that or ask every single one we meet if they have titty implants or designer vaginas. We understand that it can affirm confidence, especially in a world where appearances are heavily criticised and women get objectified relentlessly. Yet, we recognize that it's still their CHOICE. Plus, some women have medical reasons for certain surgeries deemed "aesthetic". So..why do we do that to trans people??? Before you jump to justify it in your head, consider that you're falling back into the web of stereotypes that make you fail to understand in the first place. Look at trans people the same way you look at yourself and all your preferences and insecurities. There is literally no difference.

The only reason it is shocking to you is because you aren't used to it and have a profound gender binary full of stereotypes instilled in you since babyhood, plus you're used to seeing outrage, propoganda and politics. That mental image of a creepy, hairy, mentally unstable, fetishistic old man in a dress, that fragile androgynous autistic nonbinary teen with colorful hair who identifies as a plant, the "screaming entitled liberals"..you might not be thinking about them consciously, but some part of you feels disgusted when you hear about trans people because you associate them with these cringe tropes. Honestly, those two things aren't even that bad or shame-worthy as long as someone isn't being harmed or harassed, but you're used to cringe culture telling you they are. You don't think we should be focused on because we aren't a part of your personal agenda and you think whatever you find important should be a part of ours. We know. We see through it. We don't have to all believe the same things to have our voice respected.

also, just because the tone of this is sarcastic doesn't mean it should be dismissed. There is a point here, but I'm sure a lot of yall want to find reasons to discredit and tone police us before thinking critically about what we're actually saying. I know, crazy. I've written too many thorough, polite yet completely worthless arguments to cis people to care about my tone at this point. This is a visual approximation of how much you exhaust us!

Yall are indeed the ones making it about our genitals more than even we do. In reality, you don't truly understand us, and don't consider us as quite the same as you........n well, unless you make an effort to understand without intentionally using dehumanizing and inflammatory language to dogwhistle us, its called transphobia babes

[ievani-e]

Gender Identity: A Very Loose Metaphor

Part 1:

A Hypothetical Conundrum

What’s your favourite colour?

I want you to think about that for a moment before you continue reading. Think about the name of your chosen colour, or visualise it if you prefer.

Do you have the answer in your head?

Good.

What’s your favourite colour: black, or white?

If you were already thinking of either black or white specifically, then you’re in luck. You can answer the question without any hesitation. But if you had been thinking of another colour instead, you might now find yourself thrown for a bit of a loop. It’s a lot harder to commit to whether your favourite colour is black or white when your favourite colour isn’t either of those at all. Nevertheless, those are the two choices with which you are now presented.

You could interpret the question as meaning, “which colour do you prefer out of black or white?” In that case, you could answer, “Out of the two, I prefer [black/white].” And that wouldn’t be lying. But it would still feel a bit disingenuous, because the question wasn’t, “What colour do you prefer?” The question was, “What colour is your favourite?”

Imagine the person asking you the question expects a simple answer. They expect it to be one of the two. The thought that there might be more than just those two options hasn’t even crossed their mind; it needs to be one of the two. And if your answer isn’t one of the two given, it’s impossible to answer without feeling insincere.

So you shift uncomfortably in your skin and you say either “black” or “white.” You keep it simple, like they want you to. Nobody wants to hear you going off on a tangent about how those choices are extremely limited, and how your favourite colour is actually <insert shade or hue here>, when you know that you’d only be talking about things nobody else understands. Nobody wants to hear you critiquing why it needs to be either black or white in the first place; that there are many more colours out there, and we don’t need to restrict ourselves to just two. As far as anyone else is concerned, there are just two. Two colours: black and white. That’s the way it is.

Now let’s imagine that you look out at the world, and everybody is wearing only one of two colours. Everyone else wears only black, or only white. You, on the other hand, are clutching a shirt (or dress, if you prefer) of your favourite colour to your chest.

Do you dare to wear it? Do you dare to put it on, and step out into the world at large?

If your favourite colour is black or is white, there’s no problem. You’ll fit right in. No-one will look at you strangely; you’ll blend in with the crowd and won’t draw any special attention. But if your favourite colour is literally any of the other hundreds (or potentially tens of thousands, depending on how you define it) of options out there, then maybe you’re not so sure. Wearing anything but black or white would draw attention to you.

And sure, maybe you’re proud to be different; maybe you’re proud to be who you are, and don’t care who knows it. But for many, that is a daunting thought. It can even be dangerous. And in either case, you still feel alone. It seems like everyone else is fine with black or white. Nobody else is wearing colour. It seems like no-one else is struggling with what should be so simple of a concept except for you. It seems you are the only one who hesitates.

Let’s extend this metaphor of a black-and-white world one step further. Not only does everyone wear either black or white; everyone is expected to. For the sake of argument, let’s say that all girls/women wear black, and all boys/men wear white. If you are born female, you are expected to be a girl/woman, and thus are expected to wear black. If you are born male, you are expected to be a boy/man, and thus are expected to wear white. In this way, everyone wears colours “appropriate” for their sex, marking them as either male or female. You, as a denizen of this hypothetical world, might not even think of it this way; you might not be aware of this association that “black=female” and “white=male”. Your mind may not necessarily go as far as to think about a person’s biological sex, or what their sex “must be” depending on their clothes. But nevertheless, intrinsically you know that if you see a person wearing black, they must be a girl/woman. If you see a person wearing white, they must be a boy/man. You just accept that as truth.

If you had been born into this black-and-white world, you would have been told what to wear since your birth. Your doctor would have told your parents whether you were male or female (or, in rare cases, intersex), based on your genitals. That also would have determined what colour to assign to you; the colour that you will go on to wear for the rest of your life. If you are intersex, your doctors and parents would have had to make a decision about what colour they ought to assign to you when neither colour was readily apparent. If you aren’t intersex, they just use the colour that matches your associated sex.

In any case, after that, your genitals themselves aren’t mentioned very much. Instead, everyone references the conclusion drawn from your genitals and treats it as an immutable and independent truth. Your sex becomes self-evident at any moment, even without seeing your genitals, based on how you are dressed or how you were raised to behave. Conveniently, no-one acknowledges that those things are often based on your assigned sex at birth, and that the different sexes are treated differently, leading to many of those perceived differences; they’ll just take those things as proof in their own right that you are, in fact, the sex they thought you were.

In this way, your parents are told whether you are male or female, and they raise you accordingly. Your parents will have, in turn, told you; and they tell you again every time they call you “boy” or “girl” or refer to you as “he” or “she”. Every time they buy you toys or clothes is also a reminder, because they will buy either white clothes and white toys from the white section, or they will buy black clothes and black toys from the black section. Nobody thinks to look at the other section. It’s all very simple and straight forward: black for a girl, white for a boy.

If you were born female, then you’ll have worn black all your life. That’s what the norm is. You look out, and you see every other girl and woman wearing black. That’s what they are doing. There might be a wide range of apparel; some might be wearing T-shirts and shorts; some might be wearing suits; some might be wearing sundresses — but regardless of the style of the apparel, they are all wearing black.

Maybe you like black. Maybe it’s your favourite colour; maybe it’s something you love, or perhaps it suits you well. If you love it anyway, then maybe it feels perfectly natural to you to go out into the world, wearing black every day. Maybe you wouldn’t want it any other way.

Likewise, if you were born male, then you’ll have worn white all your life. That’s what the norm is. You look out, and you see every other boy and man wearing white. That’s what they are doing. There might be a wide range of apparel; some might be wearing T-shirts and shorts; some might be wearing suits; some might be wearing sundresses — but regardless of the style of the apparel, they are all wearing white.

Maybe you like white. Maybe it’s your favourite colour; maybe it’s something you love, or perhaps it suits you well. If you love it anyway, then maybe it feels perfectly natural to you to go out into the world, wearing white every day. Maybe you wouldn’t want it any other way.

But it’s also possible that, maybe — just maybe — you question it. Maybe you don’t like black or white — whichever colour has been assigned to you. Maybe you go so far as to hate it; or maybe you just love another colour more. Maybe you don’t understand why you have to wear it, even though it makes you miserable, just because every other member of your sex wears it. Maybe you look across at all the boys and men wearing white, or the girls and the women wearing black, and maybe that appeals to you more. Maybe you have always felt an affinity for white more than you have for black, or for black more than you have for white. Or, maybe you are drawn to another colour altogether.

Imagine that you try to have a conversation about how you are feeling; about how the assigned colour doesn’t seem to really fit you. Maybe the conversation will go something like this:

You: Are there any, you know, other colours? Maybe I could wear something else?

Others: Why? What’s wrong with [black/white]?

You: Nothing’s wrong with it. It’s just… I don’t really like it, is all. [Black seems a bit depressing/white seems a bit boring/literally any other reason] to me.

Others: Oh, so now we’re all [depressing/boring/whatever other adjective], is that it?

You: No, no, that’s not what I meant! I’m just talking about me. I don’t really like it for myself, is all. It doesn’t really seem to suit me.

Others: What are you talking about? You look really good in [black/white]! Do you just have low self-esteem, maybe? Do you think you’re ugly? Because you aren’t, you know. Is it that you think you aren’t good enough? You should really just learn to embrace yourself and accept yourself the way you are.

You: No, it’s not that, either. I just think I would feel more comfortable in something else. I think I’d feel more comfortable if I wore [white, like the men do/ black, like the women do/ another colour entirely].

Others: Oh, so is this about feeling like you don’t fit in with other [women/men]? Is this about not feeling [feminine/masculine] enough? Because, you know, you don’t have to be [feminine/masculine] to be a [woman/man]! Plenty of [women/men] aren’t [feminine/masculine]! Maybe what you’re taking issue with is the style of dress. But there is a wide range of clothing options out there! If you don’t like one thing, try another! If you don’t like dresses, try wearing trousers! If you don’t like shorts, try wearing skirts, or vice versa! It’s perfectly fine to experiment with different styles and find something that feels more “you”.

You: Yeah, I know; I know there are lots of different ways to be a [woman/man], and lots of different ways to express it. But even if I changed the type of clothes I wear, I’d still be wearing the same colour as always, wouldn’t I? What I want is to change the colour.

Others: Oh, so we’re back to this again… I thought you said there was nothing wrong with [black/white]?

You: There isn’t. Not for other people. If they want to wear it and like wearing it, that’s fine. I’m not telling anyone else not to wear what they want to wear. But I personally don’t like it, is all. I personally don’t think it suits me. I want to try wearing another colour instead.

Others: But you’re a [woman/man]! You have to wear [black/white]!

You: Well, why do I have to?

Others: Because you’re [female/male] and that is the norm!

You: Yeah, but why? What does it matter if I’m [female/male]? If I like [white/black], why can’t I wear that, too? Why do you need to be [male/female]? Can’t I just wear the colour that I prefer?

This is the question that transgender people struggle with, in a way that cisgender people do not. Cisgender people like the colour that was assigned to them. The colour that they wear is the colour that suits them and matches them perfectly.

If you’re cisgender, even though you, too, were just arbitrarily handed one of only two choices at your birth and expected to live up to it, you don’t really notice it as much because that choice aligns with your own preference. For transgender people, that is not the case.

Part 2:

Gender Identities in a Black-and-White World

Using the above metaphor, I shall now attempt to explain and describe a few common gender identities as they would present or fit into this imagined world.

Cisgender:

In this hypothetical world, cisgender women wear black clothes and cisgender men wear white clothes. Those clothes might be of any style, fit or cut; they can be dresses, gowns, dungarees, polo-shirts, shorts, sportswear, etc. They can lean more towards the masculine side or the feminine side, or anything in between. But nevertheless, while cis women and cis men may experiment with their femininity or masculinity, and express it in ways unique to them, they still feel perfectly comfortable wearing clothes of the assigned colour, and feel like they fit in with other people wearing the same colour as them.

Experimentation with one’s gender expression (whether you present yourself as masculine, feminine, etc) may manifest itself as being gender non-conforming. Gender non-conformity is where a person feels comfortable with the colour assigned to them at birth, and considers themselves as belonging to the group which wears the same colour; but they do not abide by all the rules for the group, or may challenge them or question them. A gender non-conforming person may present more “feminine” (if male) or “masculine” (if female); but being “feminine” or “masculine” is not the same as being a “woman” or a “man”. You can be a feminine man; a masculine woman; anything in between; or any combination thereof.

Gender non-conformity is not by necessity the same as feeling as though you are (or should be) a member of the other group; it is more about exploring the boundaries of your own group, and questioning and challenging what can and cannot be done.

In keeping with the established metaphor, gender non-conforming cis women would still wear black; just maybe they’ll wear what are typically considered “men’s clothes”, or a “masculine style of dress”. Gender non-conforming cis men would still wear white; just maybe they’ll wear what are typically considered “women’s clothes”, or a “feminine style of dress”.

Trans binary:

Someone with a trans binary identity would have been born female or male, but feel more of an affinity towards the other colour more than their own assigned colour. Males who were expected to wear white may feel more at home wearing black. Females who were expected to wear black may feel more at home wearing white. They may feel like they belong with the other group more than their own.

They still fit into the binary of wearing either “black or white”: it’s just that their preferred colour is the one “across” from or “opposite” the one assigned to them based on their biological sex. Trans men will seek to wear white and assimilate themselves within the existing group of men, while trans women will seek to wear black and assimilate themselves within the existing group of women.

It is also possible to be both trans and gender non-conforming, in the same way it is possible to be both cis and gender non-conforming. Non-conforming trans people may know themselves to be a trans man or trans woman, but want to explore their gender in a wider range of options than traditional gender roles allow, even within their preferred gender.

The same applies as before: gender non-conforming trans women would still wear black; just maybe they’ll wear what are typically considered “men’s clothes”, or a “masculine style of dress”. Gender non-conforming trans men would still wear white; just maybe they’ll wear what are typically considered “women’s clothes”, or a “feminine style of dress”.

Non-binary:

Non-binary individuals won’t feel comfortable in either black or white. They will seek out a different colour; one that speaks personally to them. Alternatively, they might want to wear a mix of black and white, or black on some days and white on others. There are many different variations and presentations when it comes to identifying as non-binary, just as there are many different colours that exist other than just black or white.

For example, some non-binary individuals may identify as agender; neither “man” nor “woman”, but not any other gender, either. For this metaphor, let’s say that they choose to wear grey, as that is not “black” or “white” but also isn’t a colour of another kind. It is what feels the most neutral.

Other individuals may pick out a specific colour for themselves; something that feels like “them”. Some may wear yellow; some might wear green; or purple; or blue; or pink. Whatever it is, each individual will express and manifest their own identity in a way that feels right for them, and it will be different and mean different things for each individual. It is a very subjective thing. Such individuals may identify as genderqueer.

If a person identifies as gender-fluid, what this might mean is that, instead of wearing their chosen colour every single day, they might have some days where they feel like wearing one colour and some where they feel like wearing another. They’ll wear a mix of different colours, depending on what speaks to them at the moment. They might shift between black and white; maybe grey as well; or a range of other colours.

What every non-binary individual has in common is that they do not fit exclusively into black or exclusively into white. It might be both, or neither.

Part 3:

Conclusion

If you are cisgender, you proudly wear the colour that was assigned to you, and you see that most other people in the world do, too. If you are transgender, however, it can be really scary to look out at the world and see only black and white; or, more specifically, that only females wear black, and only males wear white. Even if you want to wear black or white, it can feel discouraging if even when wearing black or white, which is the norm, your preferred colour nevertheless seems unavailable to you just because of your sex.

Females should be able to wear white if they want to. Males should be able to wear black. Theoretically, nothing is physically stopping you from putting on the clothes or the colour of clothes you want. And yet, subtly and not-so-subtly — directly or indirectly — our society still reinforces the idea of what is “proper” for a person based on whether they are male or female. It may feel like “female=black” and “male=white” is the only option. Even more generally than that, it may feel like “black or white” is the only option. It isn’t until we challenge these norms, and provide more options, that things will change.

In the meantime, the onus is on the transgender person to figure out that they don’t have to be penned in by traditional social roles, even while those social roles continue to exist. It’s up to the individual to figure out that, despite the pressure to conform, they don’t have to; that there is another way. Even though all they see is females wearing black and males wearing white, it’s still up to them to think, “Hey! Maybe I could wear [black/white] anyway! Maybe I’ll be happier in [black/white] than I am in [white/black]!”

For non-binary individuals, it can be even harder. We are used to seeing the world in black and white. Even when we are told things like, “The world isn’t just black and white”, we still nevertheless tend towards trying to see things in black and white, and only adopt other, more complex outlooks if we fail. Even if we accept that black and white are not be-all and end-all — even if we accept they are more like two opposite ends of a gradient, and think of it like a sliding scale — we still tend to think that all that is in between is grey.

It can be extremely challenging (and terrifying) to find your colour in a world that only understands black and white; especially when the world, even as it comes to understand transitioning a little better, nevertheless can only understand it as transitioning from black to white, or vice versa.

That’s why it is so incredibly important to support LGBTQ+ communities in general and especially transgender people you personally know in particular, and to listen to and believe the people you love when they tell you they are questioning their role in society or wondering if they might feel happier/ less miserable another way instead. Even if you yourself find it hard to understand, strive to listen to them with an open ear, an open mind, and an open heart. Trust that, while what they say might not be true for you, it is true for them. Even if you cannot decide their path for them, you can still be there and hold their hand. That will already make an enormous difference to the individuals who have most likely struggled in silence for a long, long time before daring to voice their thoughts aloud.

We don’t all fit neatly into boxes; but eventually, we might all realise that we don’t have to. There is a whole wide beautiful world out there, and a whole wide beautiful spectrum of colours.

That is why, in a sea of people wearing black and white, you’ll see me wearing rainbow.