#the link is to serano's blog

[bitingfaggotry]

nobody is saying trans men aren't oppressed at all, just that we aren't oppressed for being men. we're oppressed for being transgender. it's true that trans men and trans women both have unique experiences but "transandrophobia" or "transmisandry" imply that men are oppressed for being men and exist to detract from transmisogyny. go into the tags of phraes like this and you'll be bombarded with trans men complaining that trans women have more privilege than them, that the wider trans community only cares about trans women, and refusing to acknowledge transmisogyny. we can talk about the issues trans men face without detracting from and contributing to transmisogyny. that's not being a pick me

it's true that trans men and trans women both have unique experiences but "transandrophobia" or "transmisandry" imply that men are oppressed for being men and exist to detract from transmisogyny

to start: trans men and trans women also have similar experiences, this is what i was referencing with the oppositional sexism mention in a previous response. it is a cissexist assumption that trans men and trans women have to be exact opposites in experiences like cis men and cis women. That is where this kind of detraction for the simple concept of defining the differences in experiences of the oppression transgender men face for being trans men, because people take *men* to mean *trans and cis men* or *only cis men* in this. we are talking about *trans men*

rest of my answer under cut

I just unprivated a post that talks about this oppositional sexism within cis black activist groups i've seen, in that unlike trans politics, there was no desperate attempt to separate other marginalizations (being black) from gender. I will never see someone be so desperate to say to a black man "you aren't oppressed for being a man, you are only oppressed for being black" or "you made it like that guys, you choose it, all of that is on you"

no one makes jokes about the ~those other black men~ who care about "antiblack misandry" (are you seeing how ridiculous this is?)

because for one its deeply insensitive, and two it doesn't need to be done to acknowledge that misogynoir exists, and vis versa! the subgroup theory (not even a popular or universally adopted concept) of antiblack misandry doesn't suddenly mean misogynoir doesn't exist

a blanket transfer of cis men/woman, oppressor/oppressed conceptualization of gender in trans spaces means that any acknowledgment of how being a trans man or trans masc impacts the kinds of transphobia one faces, supposedly deteriorates transmisogyny theory which should not happen because they are not binaries, they are *similar and/or different* experiences that do not cancel each other out

You're right, we can talk about anti-transmasculinity without detracting from trans women, yet as we see here, any mention of trans men's oppression gets a "and trans women?" and that can be fair! forgetting to talk about trans women leads to the cissexist assumption that men and women have to be exact opposites, which is why i mention that the experiences can overlap and be similar, here we are talking about defining and describing the differences of experiences

this reminds me so much of the reaction to the term "nonblack" by other poc acting as though acknowledging antiblack racism detracts from other kinds of racism. its defining differences, not what is worse/better or actually exists/doesn't exist. and I bet you can think of examples of how people do detract from other forms of racism, yet that doesn't mean these terms should stop being used

you can call anyone who wants to act like trans women are privileged and ignores transmisogyny a transmisogynist! they are being cissexist too, looking like t3rfs for a woman/man binary, oppressed/oppressor within trans spaces to blame trans women for everything, you should not take what they say seriously

overall this is misunderstanding of how transness impacts gendered oppression from the infiltration within trans spaces of second wave radfems (both the inclusive and exclusive philosophy) that ignore how marginalizations impact men: who are always privileged (not the case for trans men), always never oppressed (ask any cis white woman if they think they oppress trans men or men of color, see what their reaction is)

tldr: cis men do not experience anti-transmasculinity, gendered oppression for trans people is informed by being transgender unlike cis people. also transmisogyny will always exist regardless of whether or not "anti-transmasculinity" is used by a subsection trans men

[vaspider]

youve got a lot of really great thoughts on a transphobia and homophobia, tbh more critical thinking than most people on here, and i was wondering how much you knew about the theory of rapid onset gender dysphoria/if youd be comfortable sharing your thoughts on the ridiculous idea

It was explicitly invented by transphobes as a means of delegitimizing trans identity, and that invention was backed up by a "study" in which the person running the study never spoke to any trans people or to any professionals providing care for trans people, only spoke to the parents of trans minors, and those parents were specifically recruited from forums for anti-trans parents.

The paper which supposedly coined ROGD was taken down for a while and corrected. Further studies have found no basis for ROGD.

What's really interesting is in the cache of emails which became public earlier this year from a former detransitioner there's a paper trail which pretty clearly indicates that the term was actually created on a very heinous website called 4th/wave/now (forgive my anti-search slashes, these people are awful) well prior to the study.

Hey, you want to guess where the parents for this study were recruited from? If you guessed "the one where the term was invented," you're right!

But wait, there's more!

It appears from the journalistic work done by Mother Jones, Jude Doyle, and Julia Serano, that this term was created by an anti-trans activist who works extensively with right-wing think tanks and who went to great lengths to hide that she invented the term.

Jude Doyle:

Finding anti-trans narratives that would “sell” to the general public was a constant concern for this crowd, and Shupe says it didn’t much matter if the narratives were based in fact or not. Marchiano, for instance, eagerly watched the spread of the ROGD theory — “[transfeminist writer and researcher Julia] Serano has already written a takedown,” she exulted in one August 2018 email. Shupe suspects Marchiano’s role is larger than the public knows: “Marchiano never explicitly said she is the inventor of ROGD, but the evidence points to her, and she’s listed as a contributor to the [Lisa Littman] study on PLOS One,” she writes to me. “My ‘opinion’ is that Marchiano and the 4thWaveNow folks are behind the ROGD study, and Littman merely fronted it for them to make it appear unbiased.”

Jude Doyle again:

On July 2, Shupe sent Marchiano a link to Jones’ blog post telling her “you’ve upset Zinnia again.” (Shupe had a tendency to send Marchiano news of ROGD, and to attribute the theory to “you” — that is, to Marchiano — whether Marchiano was explicitly named or not. In the communications I’ve reviewed, Marchiano does not reject the attribution.) Marchiano responded by saying that Jones had done something to “make her nervous” — namely, she’d dug up a blog post about ROGD that Marchiano had written under her own name.

Julia Serano:

If all of this is true — that Marchiano ran YCTP and invented ROGD — then it would follow that Marchiano was also likely skepticaltherapist, the supposed parent of a trans child who invented the idea of “transgender social contagion” in the first place.

Julia Serano again:

Also on March 15, 2016, at 6:07am (so very early in the day, likely before the aforementioned YTCP piece is published), skepticaltherapist posts her final comment on 4thwavenow before mysteriously disappearing. In a reply to someone named Starrymessenger, skepticaltherapist says: 'I wanted to mention that this month’s Psychotherapy Networker is focusing on trans youth issues, and the tone of each article is uncritically celebratory — lots of mentions of “courage,” and “bravery.” You may need a subscription or at least an account to comment, but I have so far.'

At the time of this comment, "Lisa" is the *only* person to have posted a comment on this particular Psychotherapy Networker article, as the 2nd comment doesn't appear until later that evening (7:30:15 PM on March 15th; both 4thwavenow & Psychotherapy Networker appear to be based in the U.S., so the should be only a few hours apart, if at all). Therefore, "Lisa" and skepticaltherapist must be the same person.

Did you catch all of that?

This is a fraudulent "diagnosis" explicitly invented by an anti-trans psychologist who at times has used sockpuppets to manipulate online conversations, claimed at times to be the mother of a trans child, or maybe it was her friend who had the trans child, or maybe she just knew somebody who just randomly decided he was a trans boy after going on tumblr. (Boy, does Lisa Marchiano hate Tumblr, lol.)

After inventing this diagnosis and pushing it on a forum for parents who don't like that they have trans kids, Marchiano then approaches a different researcher and uses this other researcher to launder this term, launching it into the verbal stratosphere, while explicitly working with right-wing groups who used this "evidence" to manufacture anti-trans bills. This list of right-wing groups and individuals includes the Alliance Defending Freedom, the "American College of Pediatricians," -- not to be confused with the American Academy of Pediatrics, the legitimate organization, ACPeds is a fringe right-wing group.

They literally made all of this up, this idea that transmasculine people specifically are being "infected" by online sources, and then they laundered it through a shitty study and tried to hide the laundering they did, so that shit like this can happen:

The president of the American Principles Project, a member of the coalition, recently told the New York Times that his group’s goal is to eliminate all transition care, starting with children because that’s “where the consensus is.”

This isn't about protecting children or any bullshit like that, and it's not about this fallacious "disorder" because it doesn't exist -- and they know it doesn't exist. They know it doesn't exist because they were the ones who made it up.

Like... what else is there to say? It's like if I made up Purple Big Toe Disease and claimed that all people taller than 5'10" and born on a Tuesday have Purple Big Toe Disease and should not be able to buy aspirin, because it's G-d's plan that people who have Purple Big Toe Disease should not prevent themselves from feeling the pain that G-d has planned for them, and then I asked someone to write a paper about PBTD and pretend I wasn't the one who made it up so I could point at the paper and be like le gasp, PBTD is the number one problem! We need to stop everyone over 5'10" and born on a Tuesday from being able to buy aspirin! And then some dude in South Dakota starts writing up bills in consultation with a bunch of Evangelical lawyers to deny basic health care to people over 5'10" and born on Tuesdays.

If it sounds fucking ridiculous, it's because it is.

[remidepointedulac]

remaking this post because I originally wrote it as a reply on someone’s post about how tme/tma are intersexist and I want to link to it without drawing attention to their blog.

The theory of trans-misogyny is actually already inclusive of intersex people. Julia Serano, the coiner of the term trans-misogyny, said this when going in depth about the term

As the term has caught on, transmisogyny has increasingly been used as shorthand for any prejudice expressed toward trans women, regardless of content. However, while trans women are certainly targets of transmisogyny, any person who is perceived as, or presumed to be, a feminine or feminized "male" may be subjected to these same derogatory, pathologizing, and sexualizing attitudes (albeit to varying extents). - (Source)

she also said

In the years since Whipping Girl was published, the term "trans-misogyny" has taken on a life of its own, and people now use it in ways that I never intended. Specifically, I used the term to describe how the existence of societal misogyny/traditional sexism greatly informs how people perceive, interpret, or treat gender-variant people who seemingly "want to be female" or "want to be feminine" (regardless of their actual identity). However, many people nowadays use the word "trans-misogyny" in an identity-based manner to refer to any and all forms of discrimination targeting trans women. According to this latter usage, some would argue that people who identify as men, or male crossdressers, or drag queens, cannot possibly experience trans-misogyny—a close reading of Whipping Girl will reveal that I very much disagree with this premise. (See Chapter 48 of this book for a detailed explanation regarding why identity-based views of marginalization tend to be inaccurate and exclusive.) - (Source)

Basically, the popular definition of the terms TMA and TME would be fully inclusive of intersex people if the definition of trans-misogyny TMA/TME went off of was the same as the original definition, instead of adding on the criteria that to experience transmisogyny you have to be AMAB and a trans woman/transfeminine person (although i’ve seen people say transfems who don’t ID as women are tme as well). I believe this is why Julia Serano herself doesn’t use the terms TME/TMA, the way most people use the terms are too different from her theory of trans-misogyny.

[velvetvexations]

I just want to rant about my least favourite Julia Serano post/passage/concept, because as a transmasc nonbinary person this genuinely raises my blood pressure. Sorry about how long this is lmao

Link: https ://juliaserano.blogspot.com/2014/02/what-is-subversivism.html

It's her concept of "subversivism": bigotry that posits trans people as non-subversive, and compliant with the social order of patriarchy. Essentially, it's the impossible expectation that trans people should always be subversive to gender norms in everything they do. TERFs do this a lot, by claiming that the existence of trans people who happen to fit a gender stereotype (e.g. a trans woman w/ feminine interests, a nonbinary person that dresses androgynously) mean they support gender roles.

This is a really good concept! It's very useful for explaining how anti-trans activists, particularly TERFs, talk about trans people.

The only problem is that instead of talking about her own experiences with subversivism, or using some kind of source as an example of how subversivism works, she spends most of the post/chapter making harmful assertions with no basis in reality. Specifically, she asserts that transmasculine people are seen as more subversive than transfeminine people, and that genderqueer or GNC people benefit from subversivism. And she doesn't even attempt to have a source for it, because if she talked to a single transmasculine or nonbinary person about subversivism, they would tell her that they've experienced it too. Hell, even if she just looked at how TERFs talk about transmasculine and nonbinary people, she'd see that subversivism is a common tactic. So the piece is filled with bigoted bullshit.

In one part she notes that masculinity is associated with power/boldness, but femininity is associated with weakness/timidness. And she suggests that may be why transfeminine people are seen as non-subversive, which is true! But that's also the exact reason why transmasculine people are also seen as non-subversive: in a TERF's eyes, transmascs want to go from weak femininity to powerful masculinity, which is seen as the "easy way out" of misogyny. Later, she mentions transmasculine people being supposedly welcomed into queer and feminist spaces, but fails to consider that often this "acceptance" is often contingent on being misgendered and treated as a woman. (I think some of your more recent reblogs have also talked about this). In her more recent book, she even refers to subversivism as "compulsory genderqueerness". This is clearly meant as a nod to the concept of compulsory heterosexuality. But genderqueer is not in any way a privileged identity like heterosexuality, and it's extremely offensive to suggest that it is! Some studies even indicate that nonbinary/genderqueer people have worse mental health than binary trans people. (Unlike her, I have a source for that: https ://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11930-017-0111-8).

And what's most frustrating to me is that she knows better! Like, it'd be one thing if this was just a tumblr post by a random trans person. But Julia Serano is a published academic, and very well respected in the trans community. She has done legitimately good work, too - her work on debunking AGP and ROGD is a genuinely good resource. So she knows full well that sweeping statements like the ones she makes in this piece need a source. In the blog post she magically remembers how to use sources when she talks about oppression of bi people, which makes it all the more frustrating. And the thing is, I'd also be fine with it if she didn't mention transmasculine or nonbinary people at all, and only talked about her own experiences. I'm not even asking to be included, just to be… not demonised, or gaslighted about my own experiences of transphobia!

Now, Whipping Girl was published over 15 years ago, and she might have changed her opinion since then. But she pretty clearly hasn't, since she was reposting her passage from Whipping Girl about it on Twitter a few months ago! That's how I found out about it in the first place. Honestly, it's a testament to how pervasive anti-transmasculinity and anti-nonbinary rhetoric are in the trans community that Whipping Girl is regarded as a core text for transfeminism, but I've barely seen anyone else talk about the blatant misinformation in it.

Anyway that's the end of my rant, sorry it's so long but I could write so much about this lmao

What is velvetvexations.tumblr.com if not a place to complain about Whipping Girl? You're valid, anon.

It's really not hard to tell why so many people who worship her do the same thing where they compulsively compare everything to how much better they very wrongly believe non-trans women have it. Even if she doesn't personally believe the exact same things her attitudes have bare minimum greatly influenced this bullshit and she needs to reign it in.

Like, is it bad to place responsibility on her like that? To say she needs to put in time and effort countering these things and educating herself where need be? I don't think so. She is, evidently, the Queen of Transfeminism, she, apparently, wrote the transfeminism Bible, as far as I'm concerned it's her job to climb back into the trenches when people start abusing her shit.

[transmultiphobia-discussion]

Hello, and welcome to transmultiphobia discussion!

I had the idea to create this blog for a while and now decided to put it into action. This blog centered around transmultiphobia, or alternatively monogenderism, the specific bigotry and oppression towards multigendered individuals- people who exist within multiple gendered categories (or simply, identify with more than one gender).

If you want to understand more of the basics of transmultiphobia and how it works, here is the coining post going over it.

Monogenderism is a term I will use that specifically focuses on the erasure, ignorance, and hostility towards multigender individuals while upholding monogender identity, but it may be used as a synonym to transmultiphobia. (EDIT: Expanding on this; I use it similarly to the idea of monogender normativity, that being the concept that monogender is the baseline expectation of all people, and how that idea shows in people's attitudes towards or lack of recognition of multigenders).

Multigender people (bigender, pangender, polygender, genderfluid, etc.) are often left out of discussions, seen as less important or too small to consider, had our identities attacked, accused of being predatory, invaders, had our genders otherized or seen as less real than monogenders (degendering), taken less seriously or as some punchline without actual care to us as people, forced to fit into binary categories/ideas, left out of discussions regarding nonbinary people or not acknowledged to be part of the nonbinary community at all, told to other ourselves from monogender people, told to pick a side, told we aren't real, told we all have interalized transphobia and can't accept we're either trans or cis, and many more. All for existing within the queer community as multigendered. I feel there is little acknowledgement of how we experience identity in people's conversations, when defining terms, and when they go to police who and who doesn't belong. I want to start up more discussions surrounding the way multigender people are treated both in and outside the queer community, and that having and using a word to describe that experience can help navigate it.

I view transmultiphobia as a subset of exorsexism (the belief in a strict gender binary, a form of bigotry against people who don't neatly fit the gender binary), rooted in (trans)misogyny, oppositional sexism (a term coined by Julia Serano based on the idea that man and woman are exclusive, opposing categories), beliefs found in biphobia, and of course transphobia. There can be other bigotries surrounding it, but I found these to be the most frequent culprits in what causes these attitudes towards multigender people.

I also want to say this blog is for all multigender people to talk about their oppression, no matter the genders they identify with- it doesn't have to be man+woman. Though I will say that there is a specific treatment that people who identify as both a man and a woman go through with navigating society existing in both those categories. Not that it's more important or worse than what other multigender people go through, just that it's unique to them and there is quite a lack of focus on their issues that deserves to be given voice to.

Important links:

The Similarities Between Biphobia and Transmultiphobia

You Can't Win

Transmasc Lesbianism

why have us queer people as a community normalized terms like "boygirl" or "girlboy" or other things like that but not like. the actual experience of being multigender

Yeah yeah, okay, we get it, male/female multigenders are “valid”. But move past the nonprofit infographic nonsense for a second

Chameleon

Chameleon (2)

Good Bigender

It's so wild to me that as a community we're still so hostile to multigender and genderfluid people existing in gay and lesbian spaces

Genderfucked

(I am absolutely open to being sent multigender focused posts and links/articles outside of tumblr, finding ones about discrimination multigender people face has been hard so anything will do! I actually plan to write and publish essays relating to multigender identity someday).

A quick FAQ just in case:

Is transmultiphobia really a necessary term? Isn't it just exorsexism/transphobia?

Transmultiphobia IS exorsexism and transphobia, but there are ways it's used against people who exist in multiple gender categories specifically that is often left out in discussions of exorsexism/transphobia. I see it perpetuated by trans and nonbinary allies often, and discussions/ideas that may support non-multigender trans and nonbinary people may not support us.

Does this mean trans people who aren't multigender have privilege over multigender people?

Nope! Not at all. No trans person is "preferred" over the other, and to say this would be measuring how bad each trans persons oppression really is in comparison to another, which is useless and doesn't do anything to help anyone. Trans people who aren't multigender are capable of being hateful towards and furthering anti-multigender narratives, but to say they have it "better" than multigenders would be untruthful and ignorant. Bigoted I would say.

I don't feel like the discrimination multigender people face is significant enough or unique from other forms of transphobia, so transmultiphobia shouldn't be a thing. Why do you feel the need to use this word?

Even if you don't feel like discrimination towards us is significant or 'unique,' there are quite a lot of us who feel the opposite and would like to have a word to talk about it. A lot of us feel alienated from both wider society and the queer community. If you think this way, I suggest you listen to multigender people when we talk about our experiences. On another note, this will not be a blog debating on this topic like so much of 'transandrophobia' discussions gets derailed about 95% of the time. I am frankly tired of seeing these debates and would rather focus on things more productive. I would also like to say that not every single thing we talk about on this blog that we face as multigender people is 100% exclusive to multigender people. That's not a definite line anyone can make and it's not saying other people don't face it too if multigender person talks about a particular thing they experience.

What is the goal of this blog?

I want to bring more awareness of multigender people's issues to the wider queer community and to consider us more in their activism, meanwhile giving multigenders a chance to speak about their experiences and to feel heard.

What's the deal with your banner?

My banner was made by @/bugbuoyx, the reason why I made it that was because tumblr decided to mark this blog as explicit without me ever having made a post or set anything for my blog theme. The reason why? Well the best I can go off of was because it has trans in it. haven't been given any other possibe explanation. But it has been resolved, lets just hope they don't do it again.

What's your opinion on XYZ???

I do want to keep the focus of this blog on multigender people first and foremost, and as such won't be bringing up any other "discourses" too much that may shift the focus and end up with fights on here. I am a person that aims for understanding and inclusivity first and foremost, so I am not against most things if it isn't truly harming anybody. I have self-identified in the past as a radical inclusionist, though I don't tend to use it much anymore as I don't think being accepting of all queer people should be any 'radical' stance and should just be decency.

I won't have any set dni yet, if it becomes a problem with some people then I'll set one, but I just don't want to divert attention away from the main purpose of this blog.

And so a little about me: I'm a member of a plural system, I don't talk too much about being plural and us being plural doesn't affect too much of my interactions. But we're working on communication and trying to share front space more recently (we presumably have pdid), so if I'm out of commission or not as active then that may be one of the reasons why. The other reason is that I won't always be in the mood to have discussions surrounding discrimination as it is a draining topic, so sometimes it'll take me a little longer to get to posting. You can refer to me by he/they pronouns :] feel free to ask off topic questions about my interests, plurality, etc.

I won't be adding on my main blog onto here, but I won't exactly keep it hidden by any means necessary and if you know it you know it. But I will say I also run @our-lesboy-experience

Sorry for the long intro post, sorry for how online I seem and am, and sorry if I possibly add onto it in the future!

EDIT: btw, you can filter "#examples of transmultiphobia" if you don't want to see actual hate

[autolenaphilia]

Transfem authors of fiction: a list

I wrote a version of this list in Swedish for a meatspace friend, figure I might redo it for a tumblr audience. The books recommended are usually novels, and in case of prolific authors, the one recommended is usually the most successful and acclaimed one. I haven't read all of these, but I'm working on it. The list is in alphabetical order after the author's last name. I added some notes to the list, to introduce the authors and their books.

Nota Bene this list is based on my personal research, and largely reflects my own tastes in fiction, as in what I've read and considered reading. And it is of course not at all complete. And it's a transfem authors list, so no transmasc authors no matter how worthy. And it's about authors of fiction, not memoirs or non-fiction. So no Christine Jorgensen, even if she wrote a book I want to read. And Jan Morris gets in based on her two Hav novels, not her more prolific non-fiction work. Links are to my reviews on this blog if they exist.

Anders, Charlie Jane - SF/F writer, debuted with Choir Boy (2005), but most famous for All The Birds in the Sky (which won a Nebula).

Aoki, Ryka - her latest sf/f novel Light from Uncommon Stars is her most popular, but she has published both fiction and poetry before.

Becker, Saga - Våra Tungor Smakar våld (Swedish author, her book is untranslated, although quite good)

Binnie, Imogen - Nevada

Daniels, April - Dreadnought and its sequel Sovereign. Novels about a teenage trans girl superhero.

Deane, Maya - Wrath Goddess Sing

Felker-Martin, Gretchen - Manhunt (horror novel)

Kaveney, Roz - Tiny Pieces of Skull (also wrote the Rhapsody of Blood fantasy series, plus numerous poetry collections and non-fiction)

Kiernan, Caitlin R. - Usually categorized as a horror author, written numerous novels and short stories since her debut novel SIlk in 1998. The most acclaimed are probably her novels The Red Tree and The Drowning Girl (which won the Bram Stoker Award)

Leitz, May - Fluids and Girlflesh (review forthcoming)

Morris, Jan - Hav (mostly wrote non-fiction, history books and travel literature, Hav is an omnibus of her two novels about Hav, both "imagined travelogues" about a fictitious country)

Peters, Torrey - Detransition Baby

Plett, Casey - Little Fish (Lambda award winner)

Pollack, Rachel - Prolific writer of several kinds of books, including a pioneering career as a sf/f writer. Did her fictional debut with a short story in a 1971 anthology (credited under her deadname) and published her first novel Golden Vanity in 1980, which are literally the earliest pieces of fiction by an out trans person (not memoir or non-ficton) I've been able to find. So very much a pioneer. Her most acclaimed book is probably Godmother Night (1996) which won the World Fantasy Award. Also wrote comics, most notably Doom Patrol.

Rumfitt, Alison - Tell me I'm Worthless

Serano, Julia - 99 Erics (her debut as a novelist after years of pioneering transfeminist writing and poetry)

Thornton, Jeanne - Summer Fun (Lambda award winner)

[sweeterboylove]

🍒 soft faggotry 🍒

(18+ space; minors please do not interact)

Emil/Anthony, 24 year old aromantic homosexual. I'm a trans man (post top surgery, on T pellets, saving up for phallo) and as close to a hopeless romantic as an aro person can be. I use he/him and rot/rots. I do not use they/them. Big fan of lip gloss and skater skirts, and love a man in tight levis. My gayness and transness are intrinsically linked. This blog occassionally has soft-core nsft. I don't toss around slurs willy-nilly, but I do use fag often enough and am unlikely to tag it. however, I always tag slurs when used in a negative context.

If you want to talk real world problems, come see my old gay-blog-turned-something-political blog @pansyboybloom. Transmisogyny is rampant in this community, and (trans)misandery/androphobia is not possible in a patriarchal society. Free Palestine, no conditions.

this is a safe space for all mlm and nlm, not just male ones. fem/women mlm, fem/women nblm, bigender, multigender, genderfluid, etc. if you id as mlm or nblm, you are wanted. that being said, as an aro binary trans gay man, this content will focus more on my lived experience

non mlm and nblm queer ppl are appreciated and welcome! my main is @transskywardsword

Slowly trying to read more, so I occasionally liveblog books. Read so far:

- Cruising: An Intimate History of a Radical Pastime (Alex Espinoza) - Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and Scapegoating of Femininity; 2nd Edition (Julia Serano) - Real Queer America: LGBT Stories from Red States (Samantha Allen)

(disclaimer: I am religious. I will never talk about it here and am fully against evangelicalism and missionary conversion work, but if my spirituality makes you uncomfortable, feel free to leave, absolutely no hard feelings!)

how to use rot/rots pronouns:

Subject Pronoun - rot

Object Pronoun - rot

Possessive Determiner - rots

Possessive Pronoun - rots

Reflexive Pronoun - rotself

[idiot-txt]

Don't just pay lipservice and say how much you support transfemmes without actually doing the work to understand transmisogyny and stop participating in it. Use your guilt that's fueling you to reblog meaningless messages of support to do some learning and stop participating in things like the mass harassment and reporting of predestrogen's blog that kicked all this shit off.

https://www.tumblr.com/marxism-transgenderism/742855227112357888/back-in-2021-a-callout-post-for-a-trans-woman?source=share

Here's the resources I'm starting with, that I found through @civilization-deactivated2030

https://www.tumblr.com/civilization-deactivated2030/742858577209868288/what-can-tme-people-like-myself-do-to-make-trans?source=share

"On Transmisogyny Exempt Privilege Dynamics" by Cat Harsis

This is a great essay for people who are affected by trans-antagonism but not transmisogyny to understand what privileges that grants which also helps better understand transmisogyny.

"Hot Allostatic Load" by Porpentine

An essay about the personal experience by a trans fem on how transmisogyny was used against her and ruined her life. It's the kind of thing that happens to trans femmes daily and is a clear example of transmisogyny that you may be inadvertently participating in.

https://thenewinquiry.com/hot-allostatic-load/

"Whipping Girl" by Julia Serano

I haven't read this book yet but I have read some of Serano's essays on Medium which I will be linking to.

Here is my own recommendation of Julia Serano's work

"Penises, Privilege, and Feminist & LGBTQ+ Purity Politics"

This essay looks at transmisogyny not through a lens of privilege but through "corruptor/corrupted" dynamics. It may be easier to digest for transmisogyny exempt (TME) people who are new to the concept of transmisogyny.

Right, considering the current state of corporate politics on this site, and that it seems that only those affected seem to be actively speaking on the matter, it is up to I, the only fucking cishet on tumblr, to drag this out to a wider audience.

REBLOG IF YOUR ACCOUNT IS A TRANSFEM SAFE SPACE.

We need to show these higher ups how much we truly value them.

[monriatitans]

June 2024 Wrap-Up

Artist Shout-Outs Shared

Current AI ‘art’ is created on the backs of hundreds of thousands of artists and photographers who made billions of images and spend time, love and dedication to have their work soullessly stolen and used by selfish people for profit without the slightest concept of ethics. – Alexander Nanitchkov

June’s Artist Shout-Outs

Adam Miller

Dora Holloway

Ralph Key

gawako

TIVANIX

Tricia Pathy

Olesya Umantsiva

Varsha Vasudevan

Claudio Fabietti

Jordan Lucchino

Emi Kitori

—

Books Read in June

Instagram Mini-Review Posts

Jun. 23rd: The Affinity Between Us

—

June’s Opinions

Blog Mini-Review Posts

Jun. 23rd: Finished a Book! Mini-Review: The Affinity Between Us

—

June’s Announcements, VODs, and Videos

Blog Posts

Jun. 8th: Let’s Discuss Some $#!7: Big Changes!

Jun. 9th: Let’s Play Some $#!7!: Super Lesbian Animal RPG Stream – Part 1

Jun. 12th: Let’s Discuss Some $#!7: May Wrap-Up & Behind-the-Scenes!

Jun. 16th: STREAM ANNOUNCEMENT

Jun. 23rd: Let’s Play Some $#!7!: Super Lesbian Animal RPG Stream – Part 2

—

Cause of the Month: The Trevor Project

Pride Month Quotes of 2024

QUOTE 1: Abhijit Naskar

QUOTE 2: DaShanne Stokes

QUOTE 3: Ella Braidwood

QUOTE 4: Ban Ki-Moon

QUOTE 5: Ellen Wittlinger

QUOTE 6: Julia Serano

QUOTE 7: Christina Engela

QUOTE 8: Ivan Coyote

QUOTE 9: Ian Thomas Malone

QUOTE 10: Alok Vaid-Menon

QUOTE 11: Alison Goodman

QUOTE 12: Alex Gino

QUOTE 13: Mia Violet

QUOTE 14: James Kirchick

QUOTE 15: Diriye Osman

Check out The Trevor Project, whose “mission is to end suicide among LGBTQ+ young people.”

—

June’s Neverending Reading List Shares

Jun. 13th: The Affinity Between Us

Jun. 13th: The Bonds We Share

Jun. 13th: Our Divine Ruin

Jun. 21st: The Secret of Clouds

—

Crowdfunded Projects Received

June 10th: Our Divine Ruin by Melissa Sweeney!

June 17th: The Tome of Fey Lore by Fable Spinners 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To expand the Opinions & Truth (O&T) blog, MonriaTitans started The Weekend Game Show (WGS) to educate on and discuss different aspects of game development, and to show why video games can take years to make, to prevent another Cyberpunk 2077 launch scenario. Watch MonriaTitans on Twitch, YouTube, and Rumble!

In addition, she shares educational quotes to promote literacy, the legitimacy of video games as an artistic medium, and regarding a Cause of the Month to raise awareness, while giving Artist Shout-Outs to human artists to combat AI art theft. Want to learn more about the Artist Shout-Outs? Click here! #createdontscrape

The Artists Shout-Out posts can be seen here, Discord, and more!

She is also an artist under the handle TitansMonriArt.

—

Like what you see and want to know when there’s more? Click here to subscribe for updates and/or hit the Follow button! Enjoy what I do? Please consider supporting via Buy Me a Coffee! Lastly, posts may contain affiliate links.

[tulipsinthedas]

❥ Introductions and stuff

About me ❣

Tulip │ she/her │ queer │ 19

multi-fandom blog but specifically Dragon Age

this is not an 18+ account at the moment, though that may change in the future. If it does, all minors will be removed

Either very active or not active at all

despite that, my ask box and dms are both open!

OC information is under the divider!

Dragon Age ❣

Theneras :: DAI │ Dalish elf │ dual-wield rogue │ neutral good │ Solas

Camilia :: DA2 │ human │ blood mage │ chaotic neutral │ Fenris

Rosalinde :: DAO │ human │ dual-wield rogue │ queen │ lawful good │ Alistair

Baldurs Gate 3 ❣

Xunthrae :: lolth sworn drow │ war cleric │ noble │ neutral evil │ Astarion

Lyssa :: zariel tiefling │ durge │ rogue assassin │ chaotic evil │ Gortash

TES Skyrim ❣

Lireliene :: breton │ nightblade │ dark brotherhood │ empire │ chaotic neutral │Val Serano

Elije :: nord │ warrior │ companion │ stormcloak │ lawful neutral │ Bjorn

and more! just not important enough to be mentioned here, but worry not because they are mentioned here!

If you're curious, here is a link which leads to my Pinterest board dedicated to my ocs, though fair warning it is a WIP and very messy

Also, all of my ocs go by she/her which is why their pronouns aren't listed in the entries

all the modded companions I use are linked. I highly recommend that you check them out!

and here is a link to where I got my dividers. If you're on my blog and the music player isn't working for you, here is a link to fix it

[icaruskey]

Yeah this is a surprising take to kinda wake up to tbh, especially after yesterday I was talking to some people, white and not, about wanting to properly dissect Whipping Girl once I graduate, especially regarding how she treats non-white trans identities, and the first thing Greyson said was that if I were to do that, I need to make sure I look at how white academics have created terrible spaces for indigenous interviewees and basically read up and create guidelines for myself on how to create a safe environment for protecting the autonomy of marginalized people and not just use them as some sort of gotcha against Serano's shoddy research.

I'm not saying anyone is perfect (especially not me, though I'm not anywhere near a big name in this game), but I do know two out of three of these people and have seen how false accusations have been twisted, very much like how the "drama" around Saint is used to demonize hymn and transandrophobia as a whole.

Anyway, I decided to poke into miinaneendeg's blog to see if there's anything with like screenshots, etc. The most I see is some stuff from spacelazarwolf, which I kinda have complex feelings about anyway because there was the whole thing with Narvin that happened and (well) it's not the time or place to try and unpack that and that exacerbated the issue all around.

There's no links with anything else though and it makes it hard to sift through and find the facts and idk

I'm very tired.

I'm tired of the black men, indigenous men, and men of colour that are continually erased when people try to frame transandrophobia theory as a white theory. the concept was coined by a trans masc of colour and a lot of us that continue to talk about it are not white. stop using "white people bad" as a bludgeon to silence trans men and mascs. (many of whom aren't even white.)

not to mention the absolute fucking double standard. if you were tagging your anger towards white trans women as transmisogyny specifically to bait trans women to get mad at you and "prove your point" it would be recognized for the absolute clown behaviour that it is.

[pro-abortion-rights]

Do you have any essays about abortion rights from the perspective of trans women? I have what Julia Serrano wrote about feminism leaving her behind as a trans women when we focus too much on birth control inaccessibility and maternal mortality, and I'd like to write a paper on this, especially if anyone knows if abortion rights have been discussed for trans women getting uterus transplants? Thank you!

This article seems to have a good overview of trans women in the abortion rights movement, and feminism in general. Also, to be clear, what Julia Serano said was that she is pro-contraception and pro-choice, but that feminism should be inclusive of infertile and transgender women as well. Here’s a link to a blog post that quotes her and isn’t actively trying to smear her, though I don’t agree with everything in the post.

As far as I know abortion rights for transgender women who get uterus transplants are speculative at this point, except that such abortions are unlikely to be elective after the immense cost and effort of a transplant, but are likelier to be for unforeseen medical situations. Obviously pregnant transgender women should be afforded the same abortion rights as any other pregnant person.

[gcintheme-blog]

Debunking Serano’s “Debunking”

Julia Serano believes he has “debunked” radical feminists in this article published on his blog yesterday. I would like to take some time to deconstruct Serano’s arguments and debunk trans activism’s “debunking.” Because of all the fallacies and straw men in the article, this post will be a long one. Grab a snack and join me. Serano, this is rhetorically addressed to you.

Your second sentence in this article:

From pre-interview conversations we shared, I knew that my interviewer planned to ask me about Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s comments from earlier this year wherein she claimed that trans women are not women.

And in the article you link to for a source:

Adichie, who is not transgender, responded: “So when people talk about, you know, ‘Are trans women women?’ — my feeling is trans women are trans women.”

Notice how you’re dishonest in the second sentence of this article? You begin by touting yourself and your interview for the New York Times, and then immediately, falsely, cast skeptical feminists like Adichie as the villains. While I wouldn’t disagree with Adichie if she had said trans women aren’t women, she didn’t say that and you begin your piece by framing “popular” feminists (Adichie and women like her) as a natural enemy.

Moving on, you talk about your own book for a while, and then:

Women who insist that trans women are not women often object to being called “cis women” under the false assumption that it somehow undermines their femaleness — this is not at all the purpose of this language....In other words, referring to someone as “cisgender” simply means that they have not had a transgender experience.

You do not get to determine other people's analysis of your writing, especially if you want to falsely put words in Adichie's mouth. If you are going to claim that trans feelings are what matter over other people speaking, then you cannot simultaneously tell anyone who feels undermined by putting a prefix on our oppression that we are wrong.

I could say "In other words, referring to someone as 'he' simply means he was born with a penis and has been treated accordingly by society" and you'd call me a bigot. You cannot support, for instance, the idea that misgendering a trans person is violence if the alleged offender meant no harm because according to your logic, the intent of words matters more than the effect.

How many times have women heard men tell us not to take their words negatively? “Calm down!” “Relax!” “It’s a compliment!” This is tired.

While some cisgender people refuse to take our experiences seriously, the fact of the matter is that transgender people can be found in virtually every culture and throughout history.

This is not an argument. Sexism has occurred in virtually every culture and throughout history. So has rape, murder, and child abuse. Longevity is not relevant. You cannot argue that it lends legitimacy or validates your claims.

While cis feminists who claim that trans women are not women obsess over questions of identity (“How can a ‘man’ possibly call ‘himself’ a woman?”), they purposefully overlook or play down the fact that we have very real life experiences as women.

Actually, we don't obsess over your identity. You do. Radical feminists are focused on material problems whereas you are the one constantly blowing about identity validation. I have never asked how a man can call himself a woman because society allows men to call themselves anything they want, including the biologically impossible.

You do not have experiences as a woman. You have experiences as a man masquerading as a woman. They will never be the same as our experiences.

Forcing trans women into a separate group that is distinct from cis women does not in any way help achieve feminism’s central goal of ending sexism.

Spaces free from men does help our goal by allowing us to organize women like you to come and tell us who we are and what our goals should be. Men forcing themselves into women's spaces is sexism.

Other common appeals to biology center on reproduction — e.g., stating that trans women have not experienced menstruation, or cannot become pregnant. This ignores the fact that some cisgender women never menstruate and/or are unable to become pregnant.

A man has never become pregnant. Where are women who do not menstruate or are unable to become pregnant complaining like you are? I have never become pregnant and never once did I doubt that I'm a woman. Society has treated me from birth as a female with the potential to become pregnant. You do not have that potential.

Women’s genitals vary greatly, and as with chromosomes and reproductive capabilities, we cannot readily see other people’s genitals in everyday encounters.

Women do not have penises. Diversity in vulvas and vaginas is not a penis. We can evaluate the sex of 99% of the people we come across at first glance. I PROMISE you that men know I have a vagina when they sexually harass me on the street even though they can't see it.

When I lived in Spain as an Iraqi girl, I was sometimes mistaken for a person of Romani heritage and treated as such. (One specific incident comes to mind where I was patiently waiting to use a cash machine and the current user tried to shoo me away, believing I would try to rob her.) While my phenotype might appear to be that of a Roma girl to some people and I have had “real experiences” of being an Iraqi mistaken for a Roma person, that doesn’t make me Romani. It doesn’t give me the history of the Romani people or the struggle of their daily lives and common discrimination.

And frankly, what could possibly be more sexist than reducing a woman to what’s between her legs? Isn’t that precisely what sexist men have been doing to women for centuries on end?

Possibly the idea that a woman is a collection of stereotypes rather than a biologically oppressed class? Acknowledging I have a vagina and my life has been a certain way because of it is not reductive. I never said it defines me; it makes my life significantly different from yours and as a radical feminist I am trying to fight against that. You're the only one using that argument.

So it is hypocritical for any self-identified feminist to use “biology” and “body parts” arguments in their attempts to dismiss trans women.

Biology is directly tied to our oppression. We need to point that out to fight the oppression. Is it a black person playing into racism by pointing out that she is black? Is a Jew hypocritical for pointing out that antisemitism happens to her because she is Jewish? During the Holocaust, people with Jewish heritage who self-identified as atheists were STILL murdered along with practicing Jews. They couldn't identify themselves out of the ghettos or the concentration camps because your identifarianism is made up.

The main thrust of this assertion is that women are women because of socialization and/or their experiences with sexism. But what about me then?

It's NOT ALWAYS ABOUT YOU.

You're not a woman. There is your answer.

Or what about young trans girls who socially transition early in life, and who never have the experience of being perceived or treated as a man?

Socialization literally starts in the uterus. There are cultures with superstitions that doing certain things will "curse" a pregnant woman with a female infant. I can see you don't spend a lot of time with children (alhamdulillah--thank god) because you would see how early that socialization begins and reflects in their behavior. I’ve already written about how society disadvantages female infants.

A young girl is forced against her will to live as a boy. Upon reaching adulthood, after years of male socialization and privilege, she comes out about identifying as female and begins to live as a woman. Do you accept her as a woman?

Children are not forced against their will to live as their biological sex because biological sex is natural trait for human beings . Children are forced to conform to gender roles but your insistence that womanhood is just a collection of those roles is actually upholding the problem.

Saying "you are a boy" is not the same as being told what “boy” socially entails, or that you cannot do feminine-labeled things because you are a boy. You were NEVER a young girl so don't act like a victim in that sense. I'm sorry society forces children to uphold gender roles but radical feminists are the ones out here fighting them.

More often than not, people who claim that trans women aren’t women make both the biology and socialization arguments simultaneously, even though they are seemingly contradictory (i.e., if biology is the predominant criteria, then one’s socialization shouldn’t matter, and vice versa).

Biology is the basis of that socialization. Radical feminists are not arguing conflicting ideologies. We acknowledge that socialization is assigned to us based on our material and unchangeable biological sex. This is not contradictory in any way.

Much like their homophobic counterparts who make appeals to biology (“God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve”)

Creationism is not biology. You're trying to undermine biology and evolution with an example that you know is religious and not scientific at all.

The trans-women-aren’t-women crowd desperately throws the entire kitchen sink at us rather than attempting to make a coherent argument.

I think I've made a very coherent argument but trans activists ignore that argument and set up straw men, like you just did in the sentence immediately before this one. You're the one who has it wrong.

While gender socialization is quite real, all of us are capable of overcoming or transcending the socialization that we experienced as children.

So now you're acknowledging gender socialization but saying we can overcome it. This is blaming women for our own oppression because we cannot socialize or identify ourselves out of it. Even trans men cannot escape their socialization and the attacks against their female biology like anti-abortion laws.

If I could transcend my socialization, I wouldn't wear makeup, but my job requires me to look "presentable" and this means wearing makeup in my society. If I could transcend my socialization, I would be much firmer with men who interrupt me but I know they will likely react with more hostility and I have to prioritize my safety over shedding stereotypes. It's hardly an option really.

The "Male Energy" and "Male Privilege" Fallacies

The way you've put "male privilege" in quotation marks and followed with the word "fallacies" makes me extremely nervous for this next section because it sounds like you don't believe male privilege exists. But I will read and judge fairly...

In my many years of being perceived by the world as a cisgender woman, I have never once had anyone claim to detect “male privilege” or “male energy” in me.

This is because your male socialization means you are more likely to react with hostility or violence when being criticized, and our female socialization makes us less likely to criticize men, out of fear or concern for your feelings over ours.

Do you think male-identified males have these conversations with women or with each other all the time? I have never told a man he exudes "male energy." I've never even heard of this. It's bizarre. It’s also unrealistic to believe people tell you every thought they have about you. I’m sure people have thought things about me—both flattering and unflattering—that they’ve kept to themselves.

Male privilege is a very real thing. In my booking Whipping Girl, I talk at length about my own personal experiences of having it, and subsequently losing it post-transition.

Why do you have male privilege in quotation marks in every previous line? It's very obvious you don't think it applies to you as you've stated this directly. That's the same line of thinking I've heard from most male self-identified "feminists" who really just want to deny their own culpability. We've all heard it.

The fact that the trans-women-aren’t-women crowd constantly harp about trans women’s real or imagined male privilege, yet refuse to acknowledge or examine their own cisgender privilege, demonstrates that their concerns about privilege are disingenuous.

"Trans women's real or imagined male privilege." So which is it then? You aren't putting forth a coherent argument.

Cisgender privilege is not real. Women are not privileged more than men in the world, and accepting the reality of your body and how it means you are treated in the world is not a privilege unless you argue that being transgender is a mental illness, in which case those without that mental illness do have some advantages. But the trans lobby takes offense to that.

There are numerous problems with this line of reasoning [that trans males are caricatures of women]:

1) It relies on a highly negative view of feminine gender expression (that I have debunked in my writings) and implies that conventionally feminine cisgender women are also behaving superficially and/or reinforcing stereotypes.

If you do believe that women are an oppressed group, then naturally if follows the oppressed group cannot be blamed for their participation in that system to the same extent as the oppressors.

I have been socialized from birth to act feminine according to my culture’s standards. You haven’t. When you imply that acting out my oppression make you oppressed too, it’s insulting. First, it makes a joke of what I am forced to do to live safely, and second, it implies if I acted differently, I wouldn’t be oppressed as a woman, which isn’t true.

2) It ignores the many trans women who are outspoken feminists and/or not conventionally feminine.

Lots of men call themselves feminists but it doesn't make them feminists or make them women. Calling yourself a feminist doesn’t make you a feminist any more than calling yourself a woman makes you a woman. (It doesn’t make you those things at all.)

3) Trans women do not transition out of a desire to be feminine; we transition out of a self-understanding that we are or should be female (commonly referred to as gender identity).

If there is no discernible biological condition that defines someone as a woman, as you argue before, then what are you transitioning to?

You are just adopting feminine stereotypes (but picking and choosing, mind you) and saying that makes you a woman. It doesn’t. Womanhood isn’t a feeling or an inner identity and to imply this is anti-woman because it sets the foundation for blaming us for our own position within an oppressed class.

4) Trans women who are conventionally feminine are not in any way asserting or insinuating that all women should be conventionally feminine, or that femininity is all there is to being a woman. Like cis women, trans women dress the way we do in order to express ourselves, not to critique or caricature other women.

You are asserting that feminine stereotypes make you a woman instead of what you are: a feminine man. And, by your language “[imply that] femininity is all there is to being a woman” you are implying that femininity (which is a set of cultural stereotypes) is at least part of being a woman. This is in conflict with your “identification only” mantra and it is proven false by every proud gender non-conforming woman and man out there.

5) This line of reasoning accuses trans women of arrogantly presuming to know what cis women experience, when we do no such thing. In reality, it’s the cis women who forward this accusation that are the ones arrogantly presuming to know what trans women experience and what motivates us.

You literally said in your last point: “Like cis women, trans women dress the way we do in order to express ourselves.” I do not dress the way I do in order to express myself; I dress this way in order to avoid violence in an extremely patriarchal society where women are expected to be covered or attacked. You just claimed to know my experience and motivations and you got it completely wrong.

As a trans woman, I will be the first to admit that I cannot possibly know what any other woman experiences or feels on the inside.

Then why have you spent this entire article constructing straw man arguments and insisting radical feminists believe things that we simply don’t? Your second sentence was a lie about something feminist and woman Chimimanda Ngozi Adichie said. How could you assume you have anything in common with us?

But the thing is, the trans-women-aren’t-women crowd cannot possibly know what any other woman experiences or feels either!

Actually, I do know what other women experience and feel because I am a woman. We have a shared experience as an oppressed class that you are not a part of. I’m glad you are acknowledging that you don’t know how we feel, but women around the world have the common experience of our biology and our socialization as the lesser sex according to that biology.

It’s the cis women who attempt to exclude us who seem to have a singular superficial stereotypical notion of what constitutes a woman, or of what women experience.

When you call the shared experiences of women under patriarchy “a singular superficial notion” you are arguing that sexism does not exist. Sexism has to have a definition in order to fight against it and that definition is the oppression of women as a class of people based on our reproductive biology.

Some cis feminists will extrapolate from this [trans people’s claims of sexed brains] that all trans people must hold highly essentialist beliefs about female-versus-male brains, and therefore that we are an affront to feminism. Often, they will make this case while simultaneously making essentialist claims themselves (e.g., regarding reproductive capacities) in order to undermine our identities.

The idea of different male and female brains is an affront to feminism because we know scientifically that our brains house our personality traits, intelligence, and memory and thus significantly affects how we act within society. Arguing that women have fundamentally different brains from men supports sexism by allowing men to argue our social circumstances are actually brought about by biological determination and that our lower place within society is valid because we are less intelligent or naturally drawn to certain tasks.

As a biologist, you should know that genitals serve a completely different purpose than the brain and does lead to different lived experiences for men and women. Even without the social construct of gender, women have pregnancies and men do not. To point out that male and female genitals are different is acknowledging material reality, whereas you are trying to construct your arguments upon subjective “identities.”

Radical feminists argue this material reality should not place women at a lower position within society or designate certain roles for us that have nothing to do with biology. Radical feminists accept our realities as people with vaginas and uteruses and the biological consequences of those things. What we do not accept is the unnecessary and oppressive social roles that have been created based upon them.

But here’s the thing: Rachel Dolezal is one person. In sharp contrast (as I alluded to earlier), transgender people are a pan-cultural and trans-historical phenomenon, and comprise approximately 0.2 – 0.3% of the population.

Prevalence does not make something good or healthy. A lot more than 0.3% of the population is sexist and that doesn’t mean sexism should be accepted in society. Since you can’t undermine that Rachel Dolezal acted out stereotypes and then called herself a black person and how this is directly linked to the trans phenomenon, you’re trying to argue that the problem is small.

According to the American news networks, white people “identify” as people of color to check those boxes on university and job applications to take advantage of affirmative action all the time. People confess to doing it. So the problem of people moving into spaces designated for certain marginalized groups—including people of color and women—is not small like you make it out to be.

I am Iraqi and I plan to study in the United States which means I have to require a special visa and still face possible rejection as a result of Trump’s travel ban on my country. (I’m not a Muslim, but the ban targets Muslim-majority countries and I live in one.) Still, I checked “white” on my university applications because it clearly states Middle Eastern people are white during that process. Marginalized Americans worked hard for those distinctions and I will not undermine their work by claiming to be someone I’m not. Maybe we can discuss a separate Middle Eastern category in the future, but I’m not going to claim to be black or Pacific Islander.

I have never once in my life heard a trans woman claim that our experiences are 100 percent identical to those of cis women.

Then what is your article even about? Why does the idea of women having our own spaces without trans women bother you? What is under threat here? Your “identity,” as you state above?

The problem isn’t that we (i.e., trans women) refuse to acknowledge any differences, but rather that the trans-women-aren’t-women crowd refuses to acknowledge our many similarities.

Feminism doesn’t focus on similarities because sexism doesn’t. “Why don’t we just all come together because we aren’t that different” says the person in a position of institutional power. Society tells people we are different and then as soon as you want something we have (that you have relegated us to) you claim to be just like us. Please.

There was a time in the 1960s and 1970s when many heterosexual feminists wanted to similarly exclude lesbians from women’s organizations and from feminism. The justifications that they forwarded were eerily similarly to trans-women-aren’t-women arguments: They accused lesbians of being “oppressively male” and of “reinforcing the sex class system.”

Lesbians are women and feminism is the movement to liberate women from sexism. Lesbians are biologically female and therefore women, whereas you are not. Many previous “feminists” have been racist and antisemitic as well, but people with common sense know black women and Jewish women are adult human females and therefore included in feminism. Biological males do not belong in feminism. Do not appropriate the struggles of lesbians.

Trans women are women. We may not be “exactly like” cis women, but then again, cis women are not all “exactly like” one another either. But what we do share is that we all identify and move through the world as women.

No, you are not women. You are biologically male and socialized as boys and then men. Not all women are exactly alike but we all have the shared experience of being biologically female and being treated accordingly. You do not have that experience. You do not move through the world as a woman, but as a man pretending he is a woman.

I said at the outset, forcing trans women into a separate group that is distinct from cis women does not in any way help achieve feminism’s central goal of ending sexism. In fact, it only serves to undermine our collective cause.

Sexism is rooted in biological sex. You are a biological male and in this way you are distinct from biological females and we do not have to include you in our mission to liberation ourselves from oppression by men.

What is our collective cause? What are your goals and how do you hope to achieve them? What are you doing to help women other than writing about how we exclude you because you are a man? How do you define sexism?

Your piece is riddled with incoherent arguments and you attempt to paint radical feminism as illogical when, in fact, radical feminism can be used to logically dismantle all your arguments and point to a clear foundation for women’s oppression.

This work starts with a falsehood and ends with a vague assertion that feminists, by asking for our own spaces free from men, are hurting ourselves when actually, you have only argued how these actions hurt you and men like you. You have blamed women for our own oppression throughout this article and yet you expect us to take you in with open arms and validate your identity because that is the only thing that you believe ties you to womanhood.

It doesn’t, and we’re not here to entertain you.

[knowledgepowerandiamheretoteach]

Huh...I can’t belive this, did you read: the https://www.transgendermap.com/politics/psychology/ray-blanchard/

Like here is some more:

Peer-reviewed critique

Very good paper by Julia Serano

Paper proving most cis women would be considered autogynephilic under Blanchard's model

I hope you don’t actually think anime makes you trans. He is also very misinformed and homophobic.

I am always baffled about comments like this one. Let us leave the fact that his two type model has been debunked over and over again for the moment and focus on the context.

If you, as a researcher, let yourself be interviewed by a transphobic white supremacist you link your credibility to his credibility. It can only be understood as an implicit support as far as views on transgender issues go. This is not the same as being interviewed by a reputable newspaper radio station. He has accepted this invite for a reason. He is doing this because he finds it meaningful to supply anti-trans activists with ammunition.

This is not the first time he has done this. He and his friend Bailey have written blog posts for one of the leading transphobic TERF sites, providing them with new invalidating terms in the process. The "gender critical" transphobes have embraced Blanchard because his "autogynehilia" pseudo-science gives them a powerful weapon in their attacks on trans women.

As we know TERFs and right wing transphobes are now coordinating their attacks on trans people, and they make use of the same arguments. Blanchard is actively, deliberately and willingly helping both of these tribes in their attacks on trans kids and trans women. This is an undeniable fact. He would not have done so if his intention was truly to help.

As for Blanchard "defending transgender women". Arguing that transgender women are sexually perverted men does not count as "defending trans women". Yes, Blanchard has argued that "AGP trans men" should be allowed surgery, but anyone who are able to read the context in which this statement is made, will see that it is not an affirmation of their identity or their right to be seen as women. If Blanchard was truly right in saying that trans women are mentally ill, giving them surgery would be completely irresponsible. But the argument gives Blanchard the cover he needs. "I am not a racist, but...".

In this interview he even argues that it is OK for "normies"(seriously... normies????) to ask trans people about their genitals. The reason trans women do not want this is because they have "a fragile story that they want maintained". The fragile story is, of course, the idea that they are women. So it is, according to Blanchard, OK for cis people to ask trans people about their genitalia so that they can invalidate them.

The great thing about Blanchard being interviewed is that he is completely unable to stick to the "I am serious scientist making up cool scientific terms" script. The true man hidden under the science papers peeps through, and it is not a pretty sight.

It is dangerously naive to think that you can disconnect the transphobic theory from the transphobic man. I will say that anyone who continue to defend Blanchard after all of this is contributing to the current persecution and harassment of trans kids and trans people. People are dying because of what Blanchard is doing. Hiding behind the debunked "science" does not work anymore.

If one more idiot talks about nonexistent stuff like AGP or the outed term of penis envy I will genuinely loss it. I am so sick of pseudoscience.

https://www.dailydot.com/irl/transphobic-doctor-twitter-anime-makes-people-trans/

https://www.transgendermap.com/politics/psychology/ray-blanchard/

https://www.healthline.com/health/penis-envy

[autolenaphilia]

I don't have much of a stance on baeddels, because i'm not good enough at tumblr archaeology to have one. I have actually done research, because trans women are interesting to me. It seems to have been a small tumblr clique of trans women in the early 2010s? And they had some particular transmisogyny analysis? They imploded around 2014, after only getting started around 2013, as these culty cliques tend to do due to sexual abuse and personal conflicts.

But i can't get any firm grip on who they were and what they believed. It seems lost to time. There is not much evidence as blogs are deleted and are not archived well. Like this post tries to be a comprehensive explanation of who baeddels were, but if you check the sources it's mainly links to non-baeddels explaining what baeddels believed. There is like one archive link that doesn't fully work. The post is essentially third-hand hearsay. Of course I suspect the primary sources are mostly gone at this point. Because the baeddels mainly existed on social media, so much is erased or lost, they are mostly a memory at this point. It does feel like tumblr archaeology, this feels like trying to understand some early christian sect who we only know from accounts of people who opposed them.

Like the baeddels didn't publish books to my knowledge, or seem to have been in the habit of writing manifestos or explanations of what they believed. Like it's not with radfems where you can easily read Shulamith Firestone's The Dialectic of Sex or Ti-Grace Atkinson or Janice Raymond to find out what kind of bullshit they were on.

I'm not convinced the baeddels were like a distinct movement with a well-defined ideology, as that post linked above seems to argue. That they explicitly believed that gender is a choice and choosing to be a man is bad. There is just not enough evidence to do that. Like the primary sources the post have is screenshots of self-described baeddels making mean-spirited posts about transmascs. A lot of it is pretty bad, but doesn't create a picture of a well-defined ideology. I'm not convinced there was really a "baeddelism".

Like I haven't been convinced the baeddels were anything but a specific clique of tumblr trans lesbians who found out about the word baeddel and reclaimed it, believing it to be root of the english word "bad", had a transmisogyny analysis and had some bad, hateful rhetoric directed towards transmascs. Like none of that makes for a distinct ideology, no matter how incoherent.

Part of it that it seems that the baeddels were a relatively small group, that probably had an outsized impact on tumblr discourse. Like I've heard assessments that are like the core baeddel group was like 8-10 people.

The closest thing I found to a baeddel manifesto is this medium post which was published years after the baeddel clique seems to have imploded, and I don't know the connection the person who wrote it had to the original baeddels. I don't know if they thought this is a good summary of their thinking or not. Most of the text is defensive and presents what is basic transfeminist analysis as baeddel theory, which I don't think they can claim? It's not a reliable guide, especially being from 2017.

If you argue that baeddelism is something like "Transmisogyny exists, it's a real systematic oppression that transfems face, and yes, even TME trans people can perpetrate it", I guess I'm a baeddel? This strikes me as basic transfeminist theory, a basic transmisogyny theory as Julia Serano put it. If this is baeddelism, most transfeminists are baeddels.

And here I think the problem lies with "baeddel" as it's used today. They were probably never a well-defined ideological group, but tied together more by personal relationships (which is why they imploded when those relationships turned abusive) and some shared rhetoric. And a lot of what they actually believed is lost to time, due to them only being online and on tumblr specifically.

So "baeddel" has become such a loose word that it can be removed from the context of the tumblr baeddel clique and applied as an insult to practically anyone. The way I seen it used it often means "transfem who writes mean things about transmascs". But more worrying is that basic transfeminist analysis/transmisogyny theory or criticism of transmisogyny perpetrated by tme trans people are labeled as "baeddel".

It seems similar to how people don't have a good handle on who radfems/terfs actually are and what they are, so they label basic feminist analysis as "terfy" or define terf as "self-proclaimed feminist who hates men". I have written extensively about radfems here.

The post about baeddels I linked above actually does this kind of thing to the baeddels. It calls them "transinclusive radical feminists" and describe their ideology as radfem. Which I strongly doubt is true. That's because radfem ideology defines womanhood through biological essentialism and believes cis women's biology is why misogyny and patriarchy exists. It's hard to have a strong transmisogyny analysis with that kind of theoretical grounding. Trans women are neither women or targets of misogyny when you define womanhood that way.

This is why "trans-inclusive" radfems are so often not really trans-inclusive. You can't really take the biological essentialism and transmisogyny out of radfemism, and have it still be radfemism. So accusing the baeddels of doing that doesn't really hold water. Baeddels seem to have had a lot of man-hating rhetoric and separatist ideology, but that is not what defines radfem ideology.

And I do mean it seems to be applied to trans women doing basic transfeminist analysis or using transmisogyny theory. Turns out I was wrong about baeddels not publishing books, because apparently Julia Serano was basically a proto-baeddel and Whipping Girl is the tap-root of baeddelism.

Like look at these two posts.

Calling Serano a radfem is hilarious. Like she is not even remotely that. But I'm actually worried about how transandrophobia/misandry people have this view that Serano and Whipping Girl are this fountainhead of evil "transandrophobia", based mostly on some bad quotes. Because if you cancel Serano and Whipping Girl, it's a way of canceling transmisogyny theory, because Whipping Girl basically created the concept. I'm not saying that criticism and disagreement of Serano and her ideas are bad, but there is this attempt at canceling her. Due to transmisogyny, any mistakes a trans woman make are magnified and used as part as an attempt to destroy her career and isolate her from community. And Serano being such a major transfeminist that it would be a major loss.

And trying to describe her as baeddel-ascent is especially telling. The word is then entirely disconnected from the tumblr clique who claimed the word and whose crimes (which i do not necessarily deny) gave the word its modern power as an insult.

Two more screenshots:

The term is so vaguely defined that this kind of paranoia worries me. Like if you believe that there is this evil cabal of "transmisandrist" trans women still around, and not calling yourself a baeddel is no defense, I don't see this ending happily due to transmisogyny. The transmisogynistic current of call-out culture will practically get people hurt by this. Especially if it seems that critcizing transmisogyny, especially from transmascs seem to be enough to be labeled a baeddel.

The original baeddel clique might have done some horrible crimes. But I doubt they represented some distinct ideology that we need to root out of trans spaces, especially as no one can define and primary sources on what the baeddels believed is scarce.

And that's because of how online they were. I do not want to minimize any abusive content they might have sent, but it strikes me how insignificant the baeddels were. LIke they seem to have existed largely online and wielded their influence mainly on tumblr. They never seemed to have wielded any kind of institutional power. And that's not surprising, if you are a trans lesbian you don't have much power.

The actions of self-described baeddels might have been a problem, but unlike say radfems they seem to have been a very minor problem Like Janice Raymond was working with the Reagan adminstration to deny trans people healthcare, and in my country radfem groups today provide the Swedish government a feminist alibi for not taking action to improve trans rights. Radfems have had a very demonstrable effect on institutional transphobia.

You can't say that about the baeddels. And they probably were nasty to transmascs, but i suspect their greatest victim was the poor trans woman who was one of them, but who was raped by a leading member.

It's kinda insane how they, a small internet sect, have become this boogeywoman to wield against trans woman talking about transmisogyny, including major figures like Julia Serano.

[genderblenderpodcast-blog]

(Gender Blender Podcast)

cw: nonconsensual medically unnecessary surgeries, suicide, medical trauma

Tai talks to Pidgeon Pagonis about the interactions of intersex people with the medical industrial complex, their new film “The Son I Never Had,” the place of intersex people in the LGBTQI umbrella, and the need for support systems for intersex folks. Dr. Cary Costello from the University of Milwaukee also joins to talk about the words endo sex and ipso gender, and the opportunities for coalition building between trans and intersex communities.

Pidgeon (Chicago, IL) is an intersex activist, educator, and filmmaker. They are a leader in the intersex movement’s fight for bodily autonomy and justice. Their goal is to deconstruct the dangerous myths that lead to violations of intersex people’s human rights, including common, irreversible medical procedures performed without consent to make bodies conform to binary sex stereotypes. Pidgeon has a decade’s worth of experience giving talks and facilitating intersex workshops around the globe. In 2015, they received the LGBT Champion of Change Award from the White House. They can be seen on the cover of National Geographic’s January issue titled, Gender Revolution. This past Spring, they instructed Introduction to LGBTQI Studies at DePaul University.

Dr. Cary Costello is an academic and scaler of boundary walls, intersex by birth, female-reared, legally transitioned to male status, and pleased with zir trajectory.

Links:

- Writing by Julia Serano http://www.juliaserano.com/writings.html

-Pidgeon’s Everyday Feminism article: http://everydayfeminism.com/2016/06/intersex-lgbtq-misses-the-point/

-I Want to Be Like Nature Made Me, Human Rights Watch Report: https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/07/25/i-want-be-nature-made-me/medically-unnecessary-surgeries-intersex-children-us

-Dr. Cary Costello blog post on the Ideology of Natural Sex: http://intersexroadshow.blogspot.ca/2016/08/the-problematic-ideology-of-natural-sex.html