#trans men are allowed to have a word to describe their discrimination

[drop-dead-dropout]

op of this post dmed me and condescended to me about how I "didn't understand" what she meant. proceeded to tell me transandrophobia is made up. i'm just not interacting idc anymore rant in the tags if anyone wants to hear it

haha yeah girldick! awesome! hey quick question how do you feel about trans women and transfems when you're not talking about fucking them or them fucking you or just using them as the buttend of your sex jokes. no don't run away internet transmasc speak into the mic boy. 🎤

[transmisogyny-explained]

Making my own post because apparently this still needs to be said:

GNC cis men are not TMA, regardless of what specific words they use to describe themselves.

Yes, some TMA people do not self-identify as women or fem/mes, and some of their identities have overlap with those of GNC cis men’s.

These two things are unrelated because the specific words you use to describe yourself is not what makes you TMA. As transfeminists have been saying for years: yes, everyone is “affected” by transmisogyny to some extent. But proximity to transfemininity, being mistaken for a trans woman, does not a transfeminized subject make. GNC cis men being interpersonally discriminated against for their proximity to transfemininity does not make them TMA — does not make their identities inherently confined by the entire system of oppression that is transmisogyny — any more than TME trans people’s proximity to trans women makes them TMA.

What does make someone TMA is that they reject their male assignment and transition toward womanhood/femininity. It is both of these things in tandem that create the intersection between oppositional sexism (transitioning from one gender to another) and traditional sexism (rejecting the concept of male supremacy) that we know as transmisogyny.

Furthermore, it’s absurd to continually insist, no matter what new excuse you come up with, that feminism needs to start centering men and prioritizing their needs above those of women. We have had this exact conversation a thousand different times over a thousand different things.

Also, it is frankly bizarre to claim that GNC cis men can be TMA but then completely ignore the existence of GNC trans men. If rejecting male assignment is not, in some part, required to be TMA, then how exactly are GNC trans men not TMA too…?

The possibility that some or even all self-identified GNC cis men/femboys/sissies/drag queens/etc. are actually eggs or closeted trans women (insane thing to assume, btw!) doesn’t suddenly give them a pass for the rampant transmisogyny within their communities. Transfeminists have never just given a pass to TMA people for being transmisogynistic and putting other TMA people down in order to prop themselves up and gain favor with TME people. It’s a wild double standard to give self-identified cis men who might be eggs leniency but not extend the same to self-identified transfems.

And pointing out that GNC cis men are not TMA is in no way comparable to claiming that closeted trans women have male privilege? Closeted trans women aren’t TMA because they’re perceived as feminine men, they are literally women who have been forced to hide their identities. That, in itself, is transmisogyny.

Closeted trans women are still trans women, even if they call themselves men. TME people are still TME, even if they call themselves transfems. GNC cis men are still cis men, even if they call themselves femboys or sissies. What you choose to label yourself is more or less arbitrary, but the category into which a stratified society forcibly places you based on certain immutable characteristics like gender does, in fact, affect how you relate to conversations about privilege and oppression. “Identity” is made up, but Identity is not.

For the last time, trans women are not treated like feminine men (see: third-gendering/degendering); they’re treated like “failed women,” women denied their womanhood, women you’re allowed to abuse. To act like their treatment by society is the same as GNC cis men’s is to give credence to the theories transandrobros have been pushing about how transmisogyny is actually derived from “misandry.” Frankly, if you seriously can’t tell the difference at this point, then I don’t know what to tell you, you might just not be a transfeminist.

And, lastly, I will always be wary of any argument about how “x group is TMA too!” when nine times out of ten, it’s just TMEs trying to assert that they have the authority to speak over transfems about our own oppression.

[unb1nding-t-b0y]

Transphobia is a word we use to describe the discrimination trans people face. It can be used to talk about any facet of the trans community.

Transmisogyny is a term trans women and fem aligned individuals use to talk about the systematic oppression and micro aggressive behaviors they are subject to. The term is exclusively used to describe the trans fem experience.

Transandrophobia is a term trans men and masc aligned individuals use to discuss the systematic oppression and micro aggressive behaviors they face. The term is exclusively used to describe the trans masc experience.

All of these terms are valid and important for people to use. Transphobia is an umbrella term. Transmisogyny and and transandrophobia are exclusive terms that allow femme and masc individuals to talk about the specific discrimination they face. Personally I think it's a good thing that our communities have put words to these things. Because yeah while every trans person deals with transphobia we also are often subject to transphobia that is specific to our identities and articulating what we go through is important to understanding other facets of our communities outside of our experiences. -if you feel like any of these terms shouldn't exist maybe examine why you're opposed to trans men + women talking about the specific struggles they face.

[owo-writing-man]

I think what online discourse around the LGBT community lack to understand. I could give simply less of a fuck about other people.

I DON'T CARE. As long as it doesn't hurt anybody, why tf would I care?

I could give two shits about who's allowed to call themselves trans or about if someone is actually bi or pan. Or about lesboys.

I DON'T CARE. It doesn't affect my life. It doesn't affect yours.

The only time I do care is when someone is being actively hateful to another group. So as much as I don't want to care about if someone is bi or pan when you start fucking arguing about another persons identity. I GOTTA FUCKING CARE. CAUSE YOU'RE BEING A POS. And sorta discriminating. I don't care if you think someone labeled as bi is better suited for pan. YOU DON'T GET TO LABEL THEM. They already chose. Leave it alone.

Same thing with lesboys. What's a lesboy? I don't know. I dont care to know. But I know it doesn't hurt you and misgendering them or like threatening them is batshit and now I gotta care. CAUSE YOU'RE A POS.

And the newest one I gotta care about. CAN WE PLEASE LEAVE TRANS MEN ALONE. they can have a word describing the specific type of transphobia they experience. BECAUSE THEY EXPERIENCE TRANSPHOBIA. BECAUSE THEY ARE TRANS. AND YOU'RE TRANS PHOBIC FOR SAYING OTHERWISE.

Stop having stupid fucking discourse that wouldn't exist if you took a step back and went "does this actually affect my life in any way? And if it does does it affect it negatively? " a lot of times the answer will be no to both of them. I'm serious. Like take a step back and care less.

Also if it does affect your life in a negative away. Is it negative because they're bad or is because they are challenging a system you have privilege in? You'll be surprised how many time it's the second option.

Because if you stop caring about things that don't actually involve you. I wouldn't need to defend these communities anymore. And there wouldn't be discourse over them. Cause they'd just be existing in peace. That's all I want.

Because I truly don't care about them. But I do think everyone gets to live a life free of harassment and discrimination. And until that happens I care.

This also isn't a post advocating not to care about people and things. I think there are plenty of things to care about. Defending people being discriminated against being one of the things to care about. Caring so much you have to BASH the way people exist is NOT one of the things you should care about.

I just think you should care less about things that don't harm you or other people and people would have to do less defending against discrimination. Stop being such judgemental pricks. Stop yucking someone's yum.

-sonic.

[talisidekick]

@curiositycryptid

Two Spirit is an identity in some indigenous cultures in North America that describes a person who has both feminine and masculine spirits living in the same body. It's a non-binary gender identity that exists in First Nations cultures. In Canada, my country, a good example of this is Blake Desjarlais, a New Democrat Party Member who in 2021 became the first openly Two-Spirit member of Parliament.

For a long time the gender identity of Two Spirit individuals was largely unrecognized by Canada's Federal and Provincial Governments, and in many cases remains unrecognized today, but Canada is making strides to recognize the diverse gender identities it's citizens possess. In an ongoing battle to give recognition and make reparations to the First Nations communities past instances of our government have willfully attempted to harm and destroy, the recognition of Two Spirit identities in Canada has been a good step (note, a step) in the right direction after years of negligence and harm our government has both participated in, and allowed to happen under it's governance. They're a minority identity group that has faced, and does face, very real discrimination from Canada's government and Canadian Citizens.

For me personally, I've been writing the acronym 2SLGBTQIA+ deliberately for a few years now to highlight the systemic racism and casual abuse those who are Two Spirit face, and honour their struggle and commitment to the wider 2SLGBTQIA+ community that has largely gone underappreciated, much how the 'L' in LGBT was moved to the front from the original GLBT acronym, to highlight and honour the Lesbians who donated blood during the AIDs crisis to try and save the lives of suffering Gay and Bisexual men. Canada has begun doing the same but I'm unsure of the reasoning, though I hope it's the same as mine.

You can look up more, but please be aware that any news or journalistic coverage regarding anything that has to do with First Nations peoples and their culture is always compressed down to an easy to read article, which in effect, can and does white-wash and erase context. Additionally, no two First Nations communities are the same so what might be true for one, very well might not be the same for another. The First Nations and Indigenous peoples of Canada and North America are not a monolith, so if you're honestly looking to learn more, don't take the words of a white trans girl like me on this, reach out and let someone from the culture educate you on it if they're willing.

[b-lysia]

If a lesbian* is a Woman who likes Women

Then a lesbian does not exist. It is a nonsense word, and patriarchy treats it as such.

The gender "Woman"- the social role "Woman" of Patriarchy, necessitates an attraction to or at least a subservience to the sexual attraction of Men. That is the standard that anyone deemed sexually desirable to Men, under Patriarchy, is expected to adhere to under such a system. A Woman cannot be attracted to another Woman under Patriarchy in the same way flower cannot bloom and wilt at the same time, in the same way a boolean cannot be both true and false at once. A lesbian is a nonsense concept.

So of course when "the lesbian" persists anyway, Patriarchy must shift its language to accommodate the human behavior it cannot seem to stamp out.

A lesbian must be like a man. Or at least one of the two lesbians must be "the Man" of the relationship. But that means that a Woman is a Man. For a while, this is almost fine. The butch is not yet named, the word dyke does not yet bite, the trans sexual is allowed to exist as ftm or mtf under patriarchy for a time, and then patriarchy recognizes the existential threat such beings pose to its existence. So it doubles back.

But today we know a little better, and trans people are still discriminated against, but at least we collectively know that's a shit thing to do on a personal level. There's some shame in being a transphobe, even if many people are. It's at least something worth either hiding, or making into your personality's cornerstone, so you can adamantly refuse ridicule.

But the question remains, "what is a lesbian?"

Patriarchy required a lesbian to be; a person who fits all the criteria of Woman, but exclusively lusts for other Women; because Patriarchy demands that the definition, "Woman," describe people who can give birth as most desirable, and then sexually arousing after. The utility of "Woman: Madonna" is just as relevant to Patriarchy as the utility of "Woman: Whore" after all. Patriarchy requires the flattening of gender and sexuality into one another.

The word, "lesbian" I think, is something of a vestigial consequence of that. Because; what is "the lesbian" today?

We are dismantling Patriarchy brick by brick. We are destroying the "Woman," and rightfully so. It is a cruel and evil expectation to place upon a child, and expect they never deviate from, under penalty of suffering and death. We understand today, that a human is not defined by the assumptions we place upon the expression of their genes and sexual organs. These have nothing to do with desires and needs, with interests, and sexualities, or the value of one's personhood. We know better. But "Lesbian," is a word borne from the flattened understanding of gender and sexuality, a oppressive melding of physical utility to the machine with personhood, is... Useless.

Lesbian/Gay, is a nonsense word again. Two, almost three definitions, fighting for dominance.

What does the word woman mean, in the definition "lesbian?"

Is it the physical body? Do barren people not count? Which physical traits contribute to being a woman? Does a butch or femme even count?

Is it the social role? Does that transphobe RuPaul count, as long as they're on stage? Which clothes, voices, aesthetics count as womanly?

Neither of these questions can be adequately answered without either reinforcing the gendered oppression Patriarchy/gender places upon humanity in some fashion. Each answer one could give both invalidates a slew of candidates most would find ridiculous to exclude, and belies a dehumanizing strain of abuse.

What then do we do with these words; Lesbian/Gay/Bi/Pan/etc?

They are borne out of a fumbled response to existences that Patriarchy/Gender does not want to accommodate, just as much as trans/cis. And the confusion that these words carry is inherent to their core, they cannot be distilled to their essence, and made clear because Patriarchy allowed them to exist only as nonsense words. As a stopgap for further transgressions against its hegemony, the trans sexual and the trans gender.

We need better, new language.

Addendum: Don't be a fucking dumbass. Everything said here applies to the other descriptive label, "Gay" as well. We don't have a phrase for the dichotomies within the "Man" gender afaik, so let them be; "Soldier,*" "Slave,*" to "Woman's;" "Whore," "Madonna."

[bilesproblems]

The problem is that you're queerphobic asf and then call anyone who disagrees with you a TERF even if they are transfemme or just in general trans themselves.

You're queerphobic, actually.

A massive part of what queerphobia is, is not understanding someone's identity and choosing to be reactionary and fight someone over your assumptions on what that means rather than ask them why they feel that way. Which you are demonstrating right now by saying whatever word vomit this shit was rather than "can you please explain how being a bi lesbian works?" Queerphobia also heavily involves not being willing to understand someone and their identity. If you were willing to understand, you would, because there is no good reason to not support mspec lesbians that exists, and the only way a person could be unsupportive of bi lesbians is if they're ignorant and don't understand yet, or if they're going out of their way to be gold stars by excluding SAM-using lesbians. The lack of understanding you are demonstrating now simply by saying we're queerphobic for being queer in a way you do not yet understand.

You see the label of bi lesbian. You do not care to inquire. You do not seek to understand. You assume "mspec/bi always includes attraction to men" and forget your history that proves lesbian wasn't ever intended to be exclusive, and sappho of lesbos herself was fucking bi, and so you attack us and call us lesbophobic based on your assumptions when all we did was understand our history better than you and not misgender every nonbinary person who doesn't identify whatsoever as a woman.

Not to mention, you aren't allowed to call yourself queer if you think the rules of labels are strict. They're not. They're loose and they're meant to overlap. That's the point of being queer, to break the rules. You are queerphobic because you are going against the fundamental principles of queerness itself. You have no right to use th word of the weirdos if you shun us. You have no claim to the label for the rule breakers if you think lesbians can't be men or like men because that's "breaking the rules."

It is also horribly queerphobic to be bilesbophobic because bilesbophobia overlaps with many flavors of queerphobia; biphobia, transphobia and enbyphobia, specifically, as well as broader queerphobia (the hatred of and discrimination against identities that are queer. Even those who support SOME queer people can be queerphobic.)

The TERF/Transphobia claims come from several facts

1. The ONE and ONLY reason that the lesbian label currently tends to describe EXCLUSIVE attraction to women and elsegender people is because of TERFS. TERFS decided women who liked men couldn't be lesbians. TERFS decided men were evil. They also tried to get rid of you, dear transfem anon, and both nonbinary lesbians and butches, for being too close to manhood. They didn't succeed, but they did manage to push mspec lesbians and transmasc/trans man lesbians out, and make the label exclusive. These TERFS also tried to separate lesbians from the rest of the queer community. They failed, thankfully.

You are not being called a TERF, but you are being told you are using TERF rhetoric and falling for things TERFS say and TERFS created.

2. Being anti mspec lesbians is the same as hating non-binary people. Even if you are nonbinary yourself, you are hurting yourself and your community. I am a lesbian, exclusively. I have no attraction to men. I am attracted to women and I am attracted to elsegender people. My boyfriend is androgyne, in fact. That is lesbian, but it is bi. You must either say nonbinary people are not included in the lesbian label, making people like me just bi, or that all nonbinary people are women, making me just a lesbian, to not support mspec lesbians. There is no other way to go about it.

3. Multigender people fucking exist. An exclusive lesbian can be attracted to a man if that man is a woman. And if they date, the lesbian could call herself bi or even pan because she's capable of being attracted to all genders, but only if the gender of woman is present.

I am dead certain all your information on bi lesbians is not from bi lesbians. Perhaps you were told it's for lesbians who like trans women. It's not. Or maybe it's because you think we don't accept trans men as real men? We do, we just also accept that sometimes trans men can feel disconnected from cis men and still feel connected to the lesbian label because of their AGAB. It doesn't mean trans men can't be straight. It just means we won't decide for them what label they want to use, if they wanna say that they're straight because they're men who like women or lesbian because historically, transmascs and trans men were accepted in the lesbian community and people who's experiences keep them connected to their AGAB, even if they don't identify with it, will have a different relationship with their labels.

Pipe down. You don't know what you're talking about. I only dignified you with a response to show off my writing abilities to my followers. I don't think you will even read this. I do not care. If you've seen how foolish and queerphobic you were, I'll forgive you, but until then, stay quiet and don't try to tell people things about their identity when you don't understand it and we do. You're arguing with a strawman that you made up and won't listen.

There is nothing queerphobic about acknowledging that you historically belonged in a label. There is nothing queerphobic about using 2 labels because you feel you are in between the two. There is nothing queerphobic about using the split attraction model. There is nothing queerphobic about not misgendering nonbinary people while still not excluding them from the lesbian label. There is nothing queerphobic about breaking rules. There is, however something deeply and inherently queerphobic about not accepting someone's identity simply because it doesn't make sense to you right off the bat. It's not wrong to want to understand before you just accept it, because at least you are open to understanding it, but to call someone queerphobic because you don't understand is exactly what homophobes do, it's exactly what transphobes do, and it's exactly what all queerphobes do.

[saintkevorkian]

NB:

trans theory presupposes male and female personalities. Some might consider this most basic premise rather dubious

trans women say trans women are women

many cis women say trans women are not women

per trans theory, this difference of opinion amounts to a zero sum game: that is to say, choosing to align with one group silences the other.

if one entertains the possibility that trans women might be men, then one has according to neoliberal orthodoxy done the expected thing and silenced the oppressed group, on the order of the oppressor, for speaking out against their oppression. (of course it is also possible the reverse phenomenon has taken place; if one is unwilling or unable to entertain possibilities however unpalatable they might at first seem--no, sorry; these are weasel words. if going against the grain is too difficult, then what are you doing philosophising honestly)

(in parentheses because it isn't a fact, but a likelihood relevant to the coherence of the argument -- the purpose of philosophy is not to while away the hours but to use all available mental strategies to answer difficult questions.)

there isn't any sort of net material advantage to be gained from becoming a woman

worldwide, the female body is seen as an object into which men implant pregnancies. There is a strong culture of disadvantage and disrespect that comes with this perception, and forms an ineluctable part of womanhood for all but the luckiest women. This is tied to simply having a uterus and being seen through the lens of farming and husbandry (next bullet point). It isn't clear how someone's personal feelings about their preferred social or sexual roles opts them into this reality

women have been oppressed since the stone age, in which the oldest known written document describes gifting a male ruler with a child bride. the possibly sudden and apparently worldwide oppression of women correlated with civilisation and settlement and may not have much applicability to nomadic groups as recently as a few hundred years ago (nomadic groups require a more maverick mindset than agrarian societies, particularly established ones -- as such nomads possibly cannot afford to oppress half the population).

women were the last group to be allowed to own property in most countries, and (this isn't a fact but most people would agree--) in a non-collective society, if you cannot own, you are liable yourself to be owned.

the different treatment of women (which as far as science can tell might be the only thing to account for any large-scale personality variations between women and men) most likely arose from the time it takes a woman vs a man to produce children, the strong, almost causal connection between wellbeing of mother and child in early life, and some amount of physical disability in the last months before childbirth

just like 'wiggers' aren't black despite feeling theyve had 'the black experience', it's not clear that any marked group contains an opt-in. an indicator of being marked is to find oneself without options, and to opt into not having options contains not only an element of absurdity but also, in fact, an apodictic prerogative. (if one chooses to burn all bridges and complain of the isolation... one still had a choice*)

(trans men are men, at least in english. it's mankind; we are all men. the extent to which those who do not fit neatly into one category or could pass as another but may have traits of both suffer discrimination and possibly violence is determined both by how each individual is perceived and by the authoritarian inclinations of the surrounding population. NB, strictly policed language and attempts at policing thought indicate increased authoritarian sentiment)

*Obviously, some choices are so cursed and miserable that there's not really anything to choose between the available options. But in cases where a certain path appears preferable, one assumes upon calculating the odds of certain outcomes it has been assessed as the optimal course for the group or ~representative subgroup. Alternatively, if the subgroup are acting against their own interests, one begins to suspect they might have been subjected to organised persuasion.

[panics-side-blog]

Yeah but being mistaken as a trans women isn't exactly the same thing as being a trans women, tma refers to the people who transmisogny is aimed at, which is trans fem people, it's a good frame work for trans fem people to discuss issues that are targeted specifically at them. For example the bathroom thing that transphobes are fixated on is targeted at trans women first with the rhetoric of "predatorary men entering women's spaces" with the existence of trans men forgotten

of course it's complicated when it comes to say intersex identity but i think most of "discourse" comes from people who think it's a way of just knowing what's in your pants, when in reality it's entirely about someone's relationship with being a direct target of transmisogny. i would say that tma/tme only really identifies trans women/trans fem people, as anyone else is labeled tme, including cis people

it's similar in a way to the concept of misogynoir, which is the intersection of misogyny and racism used to describe the unique experiences that black women face( and with how black trans women are very vulnerable to targeted transphobic harrasment and murder, the word transmisognoir is apt)

i hope my explanation clears things up!

It definitely does clear things up a bit, and I thank you for the explanation!

The only issue I have with it is that, while yes it isn't directly aimed at me I still faced this certain type of transphobia because they thought I was a trans woman.

They didn't care if I was or was not one, so I am affected by transmisogyny indirectly. My AGAB is completely unimportant in such situations to the people who have treated me like shit because they where transmisogynistic and believed I was MTF.

I am very much aware that I probably won't ever face transmisogyny in any way a trans woman does. I remember in the past i had read quite a few posts and positive discussion about how transmisogyny can affect other people even if they're not trans women/ the main target. And how not fighting for trans women and their liberation can affect others (since everything is more or less connected). But since I saw this acronym pop up it died down/ became very restrictive to talk about such nuance.

With that in mind my main, main issue with this is that I had seen people being extremely strict about this lable to the point that any sort of intersectionality is completely forgotten. That if you point the issue at hand how this sort of labeling can be very much faulty from the start(or better said how it is handled) makes other mad or they get shut down.

Which, with your very important example, intersex people could get issues with.

As you said yourself the main discourse comes from there, I believe TME/TMA in itself shouldn't be an indicator of your AGAB and I honestly have seen it used to this way more often if not always. It feels like others who are out of the binary get left out/silenced, which is really frustrating for a genderqueer person like me.

It should be an indicator how people treat you/what type of discrimination you go through because of your identity. To open up a bigger audience who can talk about their experiences with others (including others who aren't trans women/fem) while trans women are still the main focus since they're the main target.

I'm not sure if I word it right but I hope I do.

In itself I don't really hate the usage or label, but more so how people use it and become more close minded to intersectionality.(Or with what I have seen at least, other people very much could have a much more positive experience with it)

Either way I am affected by transmisogyny but that doesn't mean I'm the main focus of it. More so my experience is an extra by-product of it and such experiences should be allowed to be discussed.

The TME/TMA label by itself for me, doesn't work. Because saying I'm not affected by it is a lie as long as I look this way, how people think and how trans women/fem are oppressed, my experience with it will always exist.

(like how transphobia also affects cis people and in my opinion cis people very much so should be allowed to speak about the transphobia they faced. They should just be respectful and listen about the issue from the main source and not drown out trans people, just how others who are affected by transmisogyny but aren't trans women/fem should.)

(I think by this point I'm only talking in circles I'm sorry if I did and thank you again for your explanation.)

[manlarp]

I've stopped hating the term queer solely because it's a slur, and have now moved onto the fact that it's a catch-all term allowing completely heterosexual individuals who have never had a slur directed at them in their life into the community. But not just the community. Legislation, academia, and history, too.

The T was originally included in the LGBT acronym because there was intersection between homosexual people, and transvestites/transsexuals/GNC people. Many transsexuals were also homosexual, many transvestites were gay men, many GNC women were lesbian, etc. That's why the T was originally there. Nowadays, a lot of people argue that the painful mental illness of gender dysphoria doesn't tie in to harmless and healthy homosexuality. But that's another matter.

The word queer doesn't just include gay, lesbian, bisexual, and trans people, or even heterosexual GNC people. Tongue in cheek, it appears to include:

'Aromantic asexuals', 'non binary' people, 'genderfluid/genderqueer' people, 'pansexuals', 'demisexuals', 'mlm', 'wlw', 'achillean' and 'sapphic' people, 'gay trans boys' (heterosexuals), 'transbians' (heterosexuals), drag queens, drag kings, girls with 'she/they' in their bio who are not GNC in any way, men wearing skirts, women with short hairstyles, 'non-binary lesbians', 'nb transmascs', people who use neopronouns, people who wear pronoun pins and rainbow flags, allies...

The problem with this is that it's actually impossible to gatekeep who is queer and who isn't. Now, "why is that a bad thing?" you ask. "Gatekeeping sucks!"

Consider this. When someone says, "I'm LGBT", that's a useful way of hinting that they're homosexual, bisexual, and/or transsexual, groups which have faced discrimination, oppression, violence, and ostracisation in every society for centuries. Identifying as "LGBT" means you don't have to disclose which specific part of the acronym you are, but you're pointing out that you know what it's like to face homophobia or transphobia (the latter, in my opinion, is usually borne of the former), and pressures both internal and external. This kind of discrimination can be deadly, and affect your human rights even to this day.

So if someone says they're LGBT, you can immediately identify their struggle. But if they say they're queer...

They could be a gay man who was hospitalised for injuries caused by homophobic violence. They could be a lesbian married to a woman whose entire family disowned her for liking women. They could be a homosexual transsexual who spent their entire childhood being bullied and mocked for not conforming to gender roles, to the point where transition felt like the only way to fit in.

Or... they could be a 13-year-old who hasn't had sex yet, and identifies as asexual. They could be a straight girl who uses they pronouns, but only on tumblr. They could be a 'trans lesbian' who has no barriers to marriage or having children, and never grew up experiencing internalised homophobia. They could be a 'genderqueer demiboy' whose identity consists of wearing a dress on Monday, and a pair of shorts on Tuesday.

This is why I abhor the word 'queer', because it's meaningless. Anyone can be 'queer', even people who hate being labelled as such. You don't need any kind of definable characteristic, such as same sex attraction, to be 'queer'.

That word doesn't indicate a shared struggle or history. It doesn't indicate a sense of belonging because there's so much discourse as to who belongs there, instead of a set definition as to what exactly makes you LGBT. And once again, it is a slur, with a terrible history, one steeped in violence and hatred. I don't like it, I don't use it, and I revile anyone who uses it to describe me.

[voltaicdragon]

It feels like Anon has things the wrong way round. Anon is suggesting that transandrophobia can not exist, the term should not be used, because they recognize that androphobia does not exist. Because to them it's trans-androphobia, i.e. a subset of androphobia. And if androphobia does not exist, then neither can transandrophobia.

When really, it's the other way round. Transandro-phobia. Transandrophobia isn't a subsection of androphobia, it's a subsection of transphobia. The specific instance of it that is limited to trans men, and is not experienced by trans women.

Attempts to forge a new word aren't really going to stick in a meaningful way I feel because we already have a perfectly usable word for that shade of transphobia. Which is transandrophobia.

And yeah, trying to bully this appropriate term into nonexistence is reductive and silencing. It takes away the ability of trans men to talk about their unique struggles. It takes away the tools needed to describe their own shade of discrimination that they NEED to be allowed to talk about and accuse and accurately identify.

transandrophobia isnt real the way transmisogyny is real because thats not how intersectionality works. transmisogyny is specifically the intersection of oppression transfemmes face of transphobia and misogyny. for transandrophobia to be real, androphobia itself would have to be real. men are not an oppressed class. there is no systemic disenfranchisement men face for being men when living in a patriarchal society. transmascs absolutely face transphobia, and there are certain aspects of transphobia that may be different between transmascs and transfemmes, but that is not transandrophobia.

This is a fantastic explanation for why the term faces skepticism and I appreciate it because it's finally made the argument against it click for me

The remaining issue is, I don't have a different word to use when I specifically reference "transphobia that is distinctly directed towards trans men in ways that combine transphobia bioessentialism and mysoginy, that is similar to but also slightly different from that which is directed towards trans women" that still acknowleges that trans men are not women

IE, "You're not a man, you just hate facing oppression as a woman", "You're not trans, you just have internalized mysoginy", "You don't have to be a man to accomplish your goals, You're just pretending to be one so you don't have to face female gender discrimination", "Transitioning to male means you're eager to oppress women", "Now that you're a man you don't have to deal with mysoginy or gender-based violence", etc

I think the men's rights movement is bullshit, don't get me wrong, but walking around being an openly trans man, emphasis on trans man and not just man, seems to read to a lot of people as "female gender-traitor pervert", and I don't have the VOCABULARY for that experience

[a-polite-melody]

Anyway.

Transandrophobia is a term that, among other things, is used to describe the intersection of misogyny and transandrophobia as it affects trans men and transmascs.

No it isn’t trying to play on there being true “androphobia” or “misandry” on a systemic level. It’s also a term meant to deal with, systemically, transphobia and misogyny.

Transmascs aren’t allowed to use the word transmisogyny to talk about the intersection of transphobia and misogyny as it applies to us. Trans women and transfems aren’t the only people who experience an intersection of those two structures of oppression, and so new word.

If I hear one more person being like “but there’s no structural androphobia” or “but words about discrimination need to reflect real systems” one more time I’m going even more feral than I already have about this issue. Because we know, and it does. Stop.

[uncloseted]

I'd like you to think about the deliberately othering words that you and your followers are using to describe me (the anon who is debating with you about transgender issues). TERF. Transphobe. I do not wish violence on trans people. I do not wish for them to be discriminated against. But I do not wish to engage in the delusion that a man can ever "become" a woman. I gave you a definition of woman: those who are born with the chromosomes, gametes and secondary sex characteristics of women.

Despite what you incorrectly stated, infertile women and women with PCOS do fit that definition; it does not need to be changed. It is intellectually dishonest to insist that you truly cannot tell the difference between a trans woman and a woman, or that trans women did not grow up with, and still to some extent retain, the same privileges that all men have across the world. There is simply a fundamental incapability with women’s rights and trans rights.

I'd like you to think about the deliberately othering words that you and your followers are using to describe me (the anon who is debating with you about transgender issues). TERF. Transphobe. I do not wish violence on trans people. I do not wish for them to be discriminated against. But I do not wish to engage in the delusion that a man can ever "become" a woman. I gave you a definition of woman: those who are born with the chromosomes, gametes and secondary sex characteristics of women.

Despite what you incorrectly stated, infertile women and women with PCOS do fit that definition; it does not need to be changed. It is intellectually dishonest to insist that you truly cannot tell the difference between a trans woman and a woman, or that trans women did not grow up with, and still to some extent retain, the same privileges that all men have across the world. There is simply a fundamental incapability with women’s rights and trans rights.

One of the first acts Biden did was to partially repeal Title IX, which protected biological sex characteristics – so yes, there is in fact a threat to the idea of sex as a protected characteristic. Here in the UK, where I work in schools, I see posters about protected characteristics replacing ‘sex’ with ‘gender identity’; so yes, that is a threat, and that is what people are calling for.

I am not a TERF; I am a feminist, the same as any feminist in past generations, who would see the obvious issues with allowing men into women’s spaces. Why do you think they were created in the first place? Trans women are not inherently different from men. That is where I stand, and if you do not stand in that same place, then that is a sticking point we can’t move past.

I am not ignorant. I used to be a trans rights activist, loud and proud. I am not anymore because I am a feminist, first and foremost. Women’s rights come first. That has never been the case in society, and trans activism is just the latest excuse as to why not.

Given the fact that this is the message you've chosen to send me, it seems like you're more interested in telling me that you think I'm wrong than actually considering any of the points I've made over the last few weeks. I don't think this conversation is particularly useful to either of us, because, as you say, there is a sticking point that we can't move past; I do think trans women are inherently different from men, and they should be treated as such. To believe otherwise is, frankly, ignorant, regardless of whether you believe yourself to be ignorant or not.

All that said, against my better judgement I'm going to give this one more go. Let's take a look at the points you brought up here.

"I'd like you to think about the deliberately othering words that you and your followers are using to describe me". We are. You are literally a TERF: a trans exclusionary radical feminist. You are... excluding trans people... from radical feminist spaces. You othered yourself by choosing to be a TERF.  It's not an insult or a slur. It's a fact. If you don't like being called a TERF, maybe take a step back and consider why. Like other people who are part of discriminatory groups, TERFs don't have to wish violence against trans people or wish for them to be intentionally discriminated against. By participating in TERF circles and perpetuating TERF ideas of what it means to be a trans person, you're contributing to the systemic oppression of and discrimination against trans people. You can't have it both ways here. Either you "do not wish for [trans people] to be discriminated against" or you "do not wish to engage in the delusion that a man can ever "become" a woman". It can't be both, because that belief is what causes discrimination against trans people.

"I gave you a definition of woman: those who are born with the chromosomes, gametes and secondary sex characteristics of women". Your definition is bad, babe. Infertile women and people with PCOS do not have a secondary sex characteristic of women (menstruation). But clearly you consider them women, as do I. Your definition needs to change or expand to be more inclusive of the people you think belong in your group. But obviously you're not interested in considering what being a "woman" actually means because it complicates your black and white view of gender and biological sex.

"It is intellectually dishonest to insist that you truly cannot tell the difference between a trans woman and a woman". I don't think this is the core of what anyone is saying. We're saying that trans women are part of the larger umbrella category "women", and that they have their own experiences, appearances, and histories that are "women's experiences". I do think some trans women look indistinguishable from cis women, but I also think it's intellectually dishonest to claim that trans women don't have a different experience than cis men or cis women. Many trans women did grow up with the privileges of being men, although many of them also face discrimination throughout their childhood for being feminine, girly, or "seeming gay". But whatever privilege they had is something they choose to sacrifice because living as a man feels so unbearably wrong for them. Trans women don't retain the privileges that men have around the world. They just don't. They face an incredible amount of violence and discrimination, as we've spoken about and fact checked previously. Protecting trans women is a fundamental part of women's rights because trans women face discrimination for being women and presenting femininely.

"One of the first acts Biden did was to partially repeal Title IX". No. No he didn't. He rolled back restrictive Trump-era Title IX regulations and expanded victim protections. Title IX now includes protections for people who are discriminated against for their sexual orientation or gender identity, for people who are discriminated against based on sex stereotypes, and for people who are discriminated against for being pregnant. I would really think about whether you want to align yourself with the Trump White House on this issue. Regardless, these changes to Title IX aren't "threatening the idea of sex as a protected characteristic." They're expanding protections to include gender identity alongside biological sex. Title IX's purpose is to "prohibit sex-based discrimination in any school or any other education program that receives funding from the federal government." It's important that these protections include gender identity and gender presentation. Very few people are doing a thorough inspection of a student's "chromosomes, gametes, and secondary sex characteristics" before they make a decision to discriminate against them. They discriminate based on how a person appears... their "gender identity" or "gender presentation". People aren't calling to get rid of "biological sex" as a protected characteristic. They're saying that it's important to view both biological sex and gender identity as protected characteristics.

"I am not a TERF". You literally are. See above.

"I am a feminist, the same as any feminist in past generations, who would see the obvious issues with allowing men into women’s spaces." It's important to me that you understand similar arguments were made against the inclusion of lesbians, bisexuals, gender nonconforming individuals, and POC in feminist spaces. Intersectionality is an important part of feminism, trans women included.

"Trans women are not inherently different from men." You are wrong, this is dumb, and I think you know that somewhere deep down.

"I am not ignorant." Yes, you are.

"I used to be a trans rights activist, loud and proud. I am not anymore because I am a feminist, first and foremost. Women’s rights come first." Those two things do not need to be at odds! Trans rights are women's rights. Trans women are feminists, too, and they support cis women in their fight for liberation. Cis feminists should do the same for trans women. Liberation for any women is liberation for all women, and the less power the patriarchy has, the better. Trans people are not your enemy here. Cis men are. Trans women aren't like, spies for cis men who are infiltrating the feminist movement and reporting back to the cis men so they can oppress us more effectively. Trans women are literally on your side. Quit punching down and focus on the issues that actually matter.

[librarycards]

I just don't see how "heterophobia" and transandrophobia are the same? Trans masculine people, as a group, are not privileged. They are oppressed by transphobia, cissexism and misogyny. They are privileged in the sense that they do not experience transmisogyny, but that does not make them an oppressor group. Sure, not all concepts discussed under transandrophobia are going to apply to all trans men, trans mascs, and others. But we all have different experiences. Again, I don't see how having a word to describe common experiences among these groups harms TMA people. It doesn't have to imply they have privilege over us, it's simply a word to describe certain unique experiences of oppression, that's all it is. Trans masculine people do often experience a unique type of discrimination that's specifically targeted at them for the specific reason of being trans masculine. That's all it is, and again I don't see how it hurts TMA people to have a word for it. Like, how does it materially cause harm to others to use the term transandrophobia?

please read about what transmisogyny actually is. it's a structure of hyper/desexualization and/as systemic dehumanization tied innately to white supremacy & colonialism and animated by "commonsense" politics of desirability. it allows perceived "grossness", ugliness, or impurity to exile TMA people from communities, including trans ones, and in so doing vilify those who dare declare their womanhood in a way which challenges white cisheteropatriarchy. read Susan Stryker, Julia Serano, Florence Ashley, Jules Gill-Peterson, Riki Wilchins, Emi Koyama, Joy Ladin, ++++. they explain this shit better than I ever could.

claiming "transandrophobia" as counterpart to transmisogyny draws a false equivalence. transmisogyny is a structurally oppressive system. transandrophobia isn't - what we as tme people experience is readily classifiable as cissexism or transphobia. let's highlight the particularity of TMA peoples' oppression without running around trying to claim there's a TME equivalent.

tbh i'm sick of engaging with you & am especially sick of your implication that i am some "traitor" to transmascness –– and i'm going to be real, i'm TME, but do not and never have identified as "transmasc" –– by being realistic about what we do and do not experience. i'm not going to answer any more of your messages. just do the readings.

[genderkoolaid]

tags for context:

#im agender btw so dont come at me with terf or fucking whatever#im agender AND I say that Im a woman bc Im treated AS a woman by society which makes my experience the experience of a woman#its so important to NAME this hierarchy stop acting like sb is discriminated as a person with a uterus???#nobody sees if you have one or not when theyre disctiminating you bc they view you AS A WOMAN

I cannot imagine how you think trans activists think society is genderblind, other than thinking that if you don't say the word "woman" you magically cannot discuss misogyny.

If you feel comfortable calling yourself a woman because you are treated as such, that's fine. How you relate to your experiences is your choice. But you seem to have a rather fatalistic view of gender identity & misogyny that, I am sorry to say, sounds quite radical feminist. Even if it's technically trans-inclusive.

"Person with X" is preferred terminology, not because we think society is genderblind, but because it is good for trans people. For one, some people don't look just like a cis woman (or cis men), and they experience discrimination even at places like OB/GYNs because of that. People might insist they must not belong there, doctors may be grossed out by their bodies or claim they don't know enough about trans people to treat them. Additionally, while you may be comfortable being called a woman, for some people it is extremely upsetting. When you combine misgendering with potential dysphoria around their body and doctors who do not care or understand these issues, it can make it extremely hard to get care. While these issues are not all directly solved a change in language, it does set up that in medical situations, the focus should be on the body part being examined, not the assumption that everyone with that body part looks and identifies a certain way, and that Trans People Are Our Patients Too. "People with X" language is not describing how society sees people, its trying to change that. On top of trying to normalize words like "vulva" "menstruation" in common language rather than hiding behind "women's health" "feminine products" that make the feminized body too taboo to talk about blatantly.

This terminology is also not the extent of how trans people talk about gender and sex. "People with X" is really best for medical language, not necessarily discussions of oppression. But even then, the word "woman" does not have any magical power where saying it allows you to discuss misogyny where you could not before. You have assumed that, by not using "woman" as a blanket statement, people are saying the world is genderblind and misogyny doesn't exist. That is simply not accurate. Trans activism acknowledges, as you seem to, that gender and sex are more complicated than "two sexes which directly correlate to two genders." Following that, it makes sense to decouple identity-as-woman from discussions of misogyny.

I don't mean that in the sense that being seen as a woman has nothing to do with misogyny. It obviously does. The problem is the idea that it is identifying as a woman that leads to misogynistic oppression, or that acknowledging misogynistic oppression requires identification as a woman. I find that this mindset (very connected to radical feminism) places far too much emphasis on individuals' identity as a woman, and whether or not they are identifying in the Most Feminist Way Possible. It also obviously makes trans experiences illegible, and obscures the way that misogyny can affect even cisgender men because of how dynamic gendered oppression can be. We have terms like "perceived-women" for people treated a certain way based on the perception that they are women, or "feminized people" for people treated a certain way based on their association with femininity/femaleness. But even going back to "person with X," when it comes to sexism, that is also important to bring up, because it points to the exact parts of the body which are targeted by misogynistic sexism.

Agender as you might be, you also seem to be very detached from how trans activists understand patriarchy and how we discuss misogyny in light of the complexities of gender and sex. If you think trans people using "people with X" language think the world is genderblind and don't discuss misogyny in relation to having those body parts, it doesn't sound like you really understand trans activism at all.

the importance of inclusive language isn't just making sure trans people's feelings don't get hurt. like dysphoria can be life ruining yes & it's important to keep in mind. but trans inclusive language is vital because otherwise we WILL be forgotten. we will be overlooked by research and resources that are desperately needed. we cannot afford to be shuffled off into assumed-cisness because it's convenient

[cloudbxrry]

hello, and welcome to my blog! You can see some of my info in the blog description, but this is for rules and additional information. If you do not agree with the rules here, you can leave.

ALSO, I am cynophobic (scared of dogs) so do NOT try to send me pics of dogs. Cute puppies are ok, but just don’t send your fearbeastpics. Also, please do not come onto my blog to just send hate abt how I’m scared of your “little fluff muffin who can do no harm”. I am not sending hate to your dog, or any dog. Only putting this here just in case. Idk why anyone would send dog pics, but I guess I want to be sure idk lmao. • Black Lives Matter

• I believe that many cops are kind, but DO NOT support police brutality or racist cops.

• Stop Asian Hate

• Fuck Donald Trump

• All lives matter

• Pedophiles are NOT part of the lgbt+ community

Trans men are men and trans women are women

Non binary and Agender people are valid, including those who use neopronouns

You do not need dysphoria to be trans

Terfs and any other people who exclude/gatekeep trans people are not welcome to interact with me, my blog, or my content

Queer is not a slur. It is perfectly acceptable to identify as queer

I support ace and aro people, who are queer and part of the queer community

Love is not inherently romantic. I support platonic and queerplatonic relationships, as well as those who do not wish to be in any relationship • Lgbt+ rights

A relationship does not need to be monogamous. I fully support people in polyamorous relationships

I support bi, pan, and multisexual people, who are queer and part of the queer community

Pedophiles are not part of the queer community and are disgusting humans that are not welcome on my blog

Incest is never okay in any circumstance, even if it’s between foster or adopted family members

All religions are valid and welcome on my blog

Indigenous lives matter

Free Palestine

All races are valid. Racists are not supported by me in any regard

Nazis, white supremacists, alt-right members, zionists, and any other members of discriminatory groups are not welcome here whatsoever

Disabled lives matter, and this includes both mental and physical disabilities

Women’s rights are extremely important and I support feminist movements

Sex workers deserve respect, safety, and security

Wearing a mask is extremely important. Everyone should be wearing masks in public no matter what

• Your mental illness does not give you the right to be an asshole

• Do not use harmful slurs

• Do not post/talk about nsfw content on this blog please. I am a minor and am not comfortable with those types of jokes

These things are not up for debate. If you don’t agree with all of these, my blog is not for you and I am asking you to not interact with my blog. Unfollow me, block me, do whatever you must.

If you do agree with all of these, you are welcome and accepted here with open arms. My blog is a safe place for all people. I will not tolerate discrimination of any kind. Thank you.

(credit to mayflowers07 for some of the rules on here, I am not very good at wording things and I didn’t want to offend anyone/forget anything

These were already said, but If you are racist, queerphobic, transphobic, homophobic, biphobic, a “battle-ax Bisexual” (as in being a Bi that does not supporting omni, pan, or other multisexual people), Aphobic, or bigoted in any way then you are not allowed on this blog. It is a safe place for people of any race, religon, neurodivergant, cynophobic, and mentally ill people.

A BIT ABOUT ME:

(most of this is in the blog description)

Name(s): Ari or Nova

Pronouns: She/They/He/Void

Hobbies: Reading, writing fanfic, sports, drawing, memeing, stalking tumblr /lh

I do Grit Ninja (look it up on google if your interested, it’s a gymnastic/parkour thing lmao idk how to describe things)

My favorite ship is Cremini/Alyssa (my and my friends OC’s, they are dryad cottagecore lesbians ❤️) I have adhd (undiagnosed), depression, anxiety (getting diagnosed), and am a Bisexual Agender person.

MY (CURRENT) FANDOMS:

• Dream SMP (only the fandom. I have never watched the streams and my attention span wouldn’t allow it. I have been lurking in the fandom for a while tho)

• Hermitcraft

• 3rd Life

• Evo SMP

• Percy Jackson (especially TOA)

• Warrior Cats (kinda)

OTHER TOPICS I WILL POST ABOUT:

• ADHD/Neurodivergant stuff

• Depression

• Anxiety

• Therapy

• Abuse/Child Abuse (and Ptsd/C-Ptsd)

• School

HOW THINGS WILL BE TAGGED ON THIS BLOG:

Answering questions will be tagged #Ari Q&A

My Art will be tagged #myart

Picrews will be tagged with #Aricrew

Things with my and my friends OC’s will be tagged #AriOCs

Updates on therapy (starting in 9 days!!!) will be tagged #Ari therapy

My rants (I rant A LOT) will be tagged #Ari rants

Serious content (s3lf h4rm, depression, anxiety, gender dysphoria, suicidal thoughts) will be tagged #Ari srs

Random, more lighthearted things will be tagged #Ari speaks

MumboJumbo angst things will be tagged #Mumbo Angst Society

(Will use tags to tag this post to demonstrate)

Backround info to the Mumbo Angst Society:

I had noticed there wasn’t a lot of mumbo angst, and I was confused because he has just so many angst options! So I posted abt that and @ mayflowers07 in the post, and they responded (small fanenby noises bc fanfic writers are awesome) and said “Well this is a pleasant surprise! Thank you op, I am honoured to be the sole provider of the Mumbo Angst Society.” So now im calling it the Mumbo Angst Society ok.

Will add more to this over time :) have a good day!