#well they do hate all trans people but its more specifically targeted to trans women i should say

[yamat0]

regarding my last reblog something ive noticed is once someone is convinced they don't want to listen or think critically about a post (that's usually made by a lesbian) they'll just loudly announce the op is a terf even when the poster isn't a terf/clearly states they aren't a terf/the post doesn't have anything to do with terfs like is it really that much easier to stick your head in the sand instead of just idk moving on? especially if you're already convinced everyone you disagree with or hurts your feelings is a terf (which in and of itself is extremely detrimental to feminism and society as a whole and what terfs are clamoring to have happen! they want everyone to stop talking about feminism! and you're falling right into their playbook by doing their dirty work for them!)

[thyfleshc0nsumed]

Much has already been said by other transfeminists on the "they hate us all equally" idea that many TME trans people fall back on when trans women speak on the specific ways in which we are targeted, and within the last few days, I've received a number of messages similar to this:

Frankly, I'm not even sure what has spurred this on--and this is the least aggressive and most direct of them--but many of them are not just the standard affair of transmisogynistic slurs and threats, rather they are posed as a defense of not just women, but trans men as well.

I don't believe that it is trans men or transmasculine people sending me these--though of course I could be wrong--so why do they highlight trans men within these messages?

The answer to me is obvious: within the trans man, the transmisogynist sees (correctly) the potential of an ally to their ends. Does the average radicalized transmisogynist look highly upon trans men and treat them with love and respect? I do not think so; these people are driven by disgust and indignation and view transsexuality and self-determination of gender and sex as degenerate, after all.

But motivated reactionaries know, if not understand, the mechanisms through which systems of power operate. For an ideology to be made manifest or maintain its reign, it does not require large segments of a population to be committed ideologues; that segment only needs to be amenable to the ideology and closed off from opposition.

So, while the radicalized transmisogynist is also a general transphobe, they know well that there exists stratification within their out-group and will happily incorporate sub-groups they also see as impure if it benefits their fundamental goal more than it damages it.

I think about early developments of whiteness. Did the 17th century propertied English of Virginia view their European-descended underclass as equals? Of course not. But when it became clear that material solidarity between the European underclass and Black slaves threatened their minority rule and their monopoly over expansion further into Siouan and Algonquin land, the propertied minority identified the essential components of their rule (chattel slavery and displacement of Indians) and became willing to grant privileges to the non-English Europeans so long as it solidified that rule. They codified this stratification into law over the course of the century. The European underclass, though still an underclass, now had a stake in this system. The propertied English had to give something up, but in exchange, they received new allies that allowed their fundamental aims and methods to remain unchanged.

So yes, perhaps the radicalized transmisogynist views the trans man as degenerate, but they understand that trans men have a stake in keeping trans women below them--denying this stratification helps uphold it.

Men who refuse to acknowledge that patriarchy exists still benefit from it and further its existence, regardless of whatever marginalizations they may face. Does patriarchy harm men too? Supposedly so, but only really in some psychic, damage-to-the-soul sort of way. The fundamentals of patriarchy is the positioning of women below men, even within a shared oppression. So to the transmisogynist, an allyship with trans men does not harm their essential aim: running trans women off of the earth.

[biologusputrifier777-blog]

One of the things I really like about the modern TERF movement is how its "rejection" of choice feminism doesn't actually manifest in anything but an utterly unhinged belief that they get to determine what choices women are allowed to make. It's never actually about rejecting things which enable capital to co-opt women's liberation in order to defend itself, they love that and openly celebrate the existence of wealthy women and get hyper-defensive about how certain billionaires are oppressed helpless victims. It's all just repackaged purity culture which somehow manages to place countless restrictions on what women are allowed to do and gives men free reign to do literally anything. Women dressing in a way that's considered too sexually provocative are condemned with the same fervour one would find from a Southern minister on the same topic, women who refuse to remain celibate are running afoul of their blessed "4B" movement. Women who refuse to leave their partners in pursuit of this purity are the constant targets of terf posts where elaborate fanfic is written about how evil their partners must be. Women who hold to the wrong faith, women who hold the wrong political beliefs (ie women who aren't transphobic), women who enjoy the feeling of shaved legs rubbing together (I know that's an enjoyable feeling since I shave my legs and body lol), etc, are all constantly treated as dehumanizable golems that have no will and are animated by patriarchy. They must either be saved by the paternalistic, powerful rad femme movement that terfs like to pretend exists, or they are the arch enemies of the movement, who must be defeated and are to be blamed for the existence of all evil. Now it's worth noting that terfs basically have no social capital in most circumstances (which is why they function almost entirely as a lackey to the much more powerful far right movements that share almost all of their political goals), and thus can't enforce any of this, because they utterly lack the power to actually determine what feminism is. Most feminists wouldn't even consider them worthy of the label. Thus, this is not a critique of them for doing harm to cis women with these specific views, they harm cis women by allying with the Heritage Foundation and anti-abortion activists, not by whining that happy couples won't break up in service to all 300 people who are part of the American 4B movement.

It's a critique of how nonsensical this idiocy is even in theory, how terfs ultimately contain none of the radical feminist animus they claim to be the sole arbiters of. Are attempting to manifest a deeply reactionary ideology which serves only to regulate the bodies of all women, and this post purposefully left out the ways they seek to do that which manifests explicitly because of their transphobia, which is even worse. Terfs champion the idea of male medical inspectors being allowed to strip underage girls naked in order to examine their genitals, want to force women who look too masculine out of sports, etc, but in theory, all that could be papered over for gullible or ill-informed people by more savvy terfs pretending that they aren't transphobic, that they don't actually hate trans people. Thus it's important to note that as it stands, they might as well just hate all women equally, as they even without the transphobia, make constant demands of women and their bodies which mirror that of virulent misogynists.

[milkweedman]

some more feedback on the glittery terf repellant... I like the concept but i think that it reads a bit like an anti-misandry thing rather than an anti-transphobia thing. specifically bc of the "the existence of men" one - terfs don't have a problem with men, they're a hate group targeting specifically trans women. so it sounds as tho ur saying trans women = men, or that it's not even about terfs, but rather a statement from a "men's rights activist". hope that makes sense!

it is an anti-misandry thing.

if you think its impossible to be anti-misandry without being an MRA then im not sure i can help you. do you think that the mere existence of men DOES threaten people ? do you believe that the world would be a safer place if it was only women ? interesting. where have we heard that before...

this isn't directed at you specifically but rather at everybody who keeps misreading things, but:

Yes, radfems absolutely do hate men. The statement above is something they say, it's part of the propaganda they spread. If terfs specifically are somehow pro-men but anti trans-women (they're not, but lets pretend) then fine--I've never been talking about terfs, I've been talking about radfems. This entire time I've said radfems and nearly everyone talking to me has said terfs back. They're not the same thing--all terfs are radfems but not all radfems are terfs.

Radfems do hate men. I have no idea where you got the concept that they're fine with them. I've read a lot of their rhetoric over the years, both as research and as poison that seeped into popular culture and queer culture as well.

That is why my initial attempt at radfem proofing a post was to write: WARNING OP LOVES COCK THIS POST IS ABOUT COCK. ITS SO GOOD AND BEAUTIFUL ❤️ GOOD MORNING TO PENISES EVERYWHERE

Frankly, I have seen radfems still reblog things that are trans-positive, because they don't fucking care. I have never seen them reblog something praising how beautiful cock is though--presumably because it just disgusts them, but who knows why.

Anyway. Who exactly do you think "the existence of men does not threaten anybody" is for ? Who do you think would disagree with that statement, and why do you think I have been using it ?

I can give you some hints--anybody who is a gender separatist, or who believes men are inherently dangerous, is going to strongly disagree with that statement. Please look into what type of person that is, and what other things they believe, and then we can continue this discussion if you want. But certainly not until then.

Additionally, I fully intend to keep using my main banners, and just adding in one trans related banner due to the feedback that it could be misconstrued. Im not switching to just trans banners. This is both a space that is safe for men, and for trans people.

[gepperl]

TRANS MALE PASSING PROTIPS

Targeted specifically at trans men who have not begun medical transition, but for anyone. Of course, this is just what works for me and everyone is different.

Shorts that fall mid thigh and are baggy can work really well to make a more masculine figure. This is a trendy style with cis men, and if they are looser on your thighs you can look more rectangular. Basketball shorts are always fine, but for bigger people can end up sticking to your thighs and making you look like a masc lesbian. Looking like a masc lesbian is so so common guys this is what we are trying to avoid. See here for reference

2. WALK WITH YOUR SHOULDERS. Walk like your shoulders are the widest part of your body. Move them kinda forward and backward. Watch a video of a man walking next to a woman for context on what I mean. Women walk with their hips, and it makes all the difference for you in someone's head. Practice in the mirror before doing it so you don't look like a fool.

3. Hair!!!! I know you guys don't want to let go of the 2020 fluffy boi haircut and that is ok. If you don't want a skin fade short haircut, there are other options. Also, if you belong to a subculture, like punk/emo/whatever else there is, look at male styles as it can be very different than what is normally accepted ( for example, men have long hair in metal subculture, you can style it like them). In general, hair is very meticulous, as for some people too short is masc lesbian and too long is woman.

This kind of hair can do wonders. For men of color/curly hair people, if you are not out locs are a very good option as they are typically read as masculine but are gender neutral. Afros, braids, even skin fades with a lot of hair at the top can read feminine. Another style option could be short cornrows that end at the neck, twists, or a fade with less hair at the top like this.

I am not black, so I cannot speak for how this would be read in a black community, but this is how, from my experience, I would view the hairstyles. Sorry if this is not appropriate. Also, I am not here to tell you not to dye your hair. It can work if you style it with masculine clothes and are dressed in a specific style like emo or scene or something. Do what you will with that.

4. If there is ANY peach fuzz on your face, make the most of it. I know I have high testosterone levels naturally, so I grow facial hair a little, but if there is enough to dye it, dye it. If there is like barely any, if its not visible in the mirror if you're really looking (not INSPECTING), it's probably not worth it, and that is fine. use your judgement, and if it is not enough, just shave it. It's better to look clean shaven than desperate for face hair. Eyebrows, mustache hair, sideburns can all be darkened with eyeshadow, brow brushes, and just for men beard dye.

5. LAYERS. I know you guys have seen this one before. Flannels, button ups over black t-shirts, zip up hoodies. It might get a little hot, but it covers your sweat stains anyways. I promise guys it helps so much with shoulders, hips, boobs, it makes you look more masculine. Don't get that ugly ass red and black checkered one though. Think if you would see a masc lesbian wearing it and use your best judgement. I heart layers.

6. Pants. Woah. Pants. I HATE pants I know you fat trans men get me. Old navy women's jeans...and you guys won't like this one...are actually pretty good. SPECIFICALLY the sky high wide leg ones. Get those a size up and cuff them, wear them low on your waist, perfect. Other than that, jeans are shit. I don't really waste my time with men's pants anymore because of my hips but cargos are great, baggy sweats with the band at the bottom are great, PJ pants good, dress pants are a struggle but I've heard dickies work well for people with a smaller body. Not sure though. My tactic is I go to a thrift store for hours and try on all their pants, then find similar ones online or take pictures of the brand for the ones I like and find more.

7. Accessories and jewelry. Iffy. Anything you could describe as dainty, if it's not a family thing or important to you, probably not. Friendship bracelets are good, pendants are good, earrings depends on where you are and what you are wearing. Studs in men are common where I am, so I wear them. Observe the cis men at your disposal. Accessories, bags don't really matter unless they're like the strawberry hot topic mini bags. Don't get those at all those are fugly. Mini bags are not great in general, just better to get something else. Watches are heavily loved here they look very male and also you have the time always even a cheap watch is fine just not a woman's watch. It has to be a men's watch. You can tell when it is a woman's watch don't get those. Nail polish is fine no one cares, it's more popular now with boys. Especially if you're a little girly pop already. Of course that also depends on your environment.

8. Stance. Sitting with your ankle on your knee is comfortable and way more masculine than crossing your legs. Confidence. Fake it until you make it because cis men are so arrogant guys. This is what I mean btw

9. Don't be afraid of being feminine. Don't give up being yourself in order to be masculine. Your happiness matters the most. Love you bye, I'll update this if I think of anything else.

[villainessbian]

Hello. Sorry if this question will be too controversial for you, I understand.

You seem like a well studied person, so I wanted to ask if you could help me research something I don't know where to start with.

Recently I've seen a growing discourse on twitter about... Whether trans women or trans men are more oppressed. And in my opinion, measuring the degree of oppression is very easy! But no-one in this discourse is doing that. You can do so by looking at the rate of poverty among different genders of trans people, and which group experiences more crime directed at them, and which group is more happy.

But I'm not sure how to find the research for that. I'm not an academic. Do you think you could help me?

Thank you 💗

Measuring the degree of oppression is not easy, I don't think these stats exist at all (because who would pay for them? no one with that kind of money wants us alive), and oppression is not the olympics.

Discourse-y things under the cut.

In my experience transfems seem to be "more oppressed" in the sense that the pressure to oppress transfems is stronger. Everyone agrees transfems are the ones that the overwhelming majority of discourse targets, even the people who disagree with the conclusion and say that this is proof of invisibility of non-transfem trans people. Find a random act of transphobic hate, and the likelihood that the person who did it even knows transmasc people exist to be a target isn't very high. Look at the "accidental ally" posts and 99.9% of them is bigots trying to be transmisogynistic at transmascs because they're used to transmisogyny.

And the final point - transmisogyny exists as a separate thing. Transphobia targeted at transfems, transphobia targeted at transmascs, generic transphobia targeted at everyone are three different expressions of the same thing. Transmisogyny is a separate thing on the side, and the attemps to mirror it with "transmisandry" or "transandrophobia" all just point to the aforementioned "transphobia targeted at transmascs" and nothing different, nothing specific. Transmisogyny stands "on its own" in a way, though it is specifically the interplay of transphobia and misogyny into creating something new. The way trans women (and transfems in general) are simultaneously not believable victims, easy victims, and "no, actually perpetrators" of interpersonal violence, especially sexual violence. It coexists *all at the same time* in people's minds that trans women are not women, and that desires that target women can and do target trans women. That trans women hold less power than other women to stop you doing whatever, but also that they hold more power than you on what you do so they're responsible for what you do to them. That trans women are dangerous, and that they're the easiest demographic to focus on for an attack. The theory that they're part of a secret cabal to control the world ("cabal" used on purpose - this theory HEAVILY overlaps with anti-semitism) coexists with the knowledge you can call cops on trans women and endanger their lives instantly even if you were aggressing them. When KJK/posie parker had her rally and Nazis showed up sieg heiling with a "destroy pedo freaks" poster, "pedo freaks" was aimed at trans women specifically. Hell, the terf rhetoric that does target transmascs specifically (all the lost lesbian/brainwashed autist/permanent damage to sweet kids/etc bullshit) assumes more often than not - if not always - that transmascs are passive victims of the horribleterrible "trans ideology" spearheaded by public enemy number one, the predatory "man in women's clothes/womanface."

In the purest senses of "who has the most kinds of oppression" and "who is targeted the most directly by oppression," transfems are "more oppressed" than transmascs, but just saying that accomplishes nothing and serves little purpose. You can't predict how easy someone's life is because of that. Is it also shit for transmascs dealing with all this? Definitely. And transmascs dealing with transphobia also have to deal with misogyny - this time not as an interplay, but as something that inevitably happens as a second step. When transphobia is aimed at transmascs, a huge part of it leads back to some "you should have been a woman and become an objectified baby oven" horror scenario.

The social pressure to hate transfems is stronger, there is a special social construct/social dynamic that materialised specifically out of trying to destroy transfems, but that's like comparing losing two fingers to losing a hand - we want no one to lose anything, not discourse about which one is worse. Recognising that transmisogyny exists doesn't serve the purpose of being a gotcha to transmascs, it serves the purpose of fighting transmisogyny. Fighting transmisogyny doesn't happen without fighting all transphobia. (It is possible to fight transphobia without going the "extra mile" to fight transmisogyny, which kinda leaves transfems behind to deal with their issues, but for all the internet discourse I've seen I've literally never met someone who did that. I've heard of bad people doing that because they don't care, but I haven't even heard of them on my continent).

Plus, everyone's situation is different. You can lose two fingers and die to gangrene, you can lose the entire arm and heal well. I don't see how stats would be able to accurately reflect the diversity of factors. You'd need to check for so many things. Weigh against time. There is no unbiased sample that doesn't figure in the millions at the very least with such a diverse group.

[eleanorfenyxwrites]

FTH 2024

Fandom Trumps Hate bidding is live as of today and this feels like a good time to tell y'all that I'm offering two gift works this year! I had to skip last year as I had just way too much going on, and while I guess technically I'm still just as busy I really missed writing as much last year so I'm prioritizing it now. But anyway - my offerings! Here's the link to my offering page itself if you'd like to look there or think about donating, but for the full breakdown (and a bit of explanation) click the readmore 😌

So as I said I'm offering two works this year, one 5-10k words and the other 10-20k words. The minimum bid for the smaller fic is $5 and for the longer one it's $15. My ships/tags/special interests/etc. are the same for both, and for those of you who are familiar with what I write I'm sure you can guess what they are lol but I'll put it all here anyway!

Ships I will write (and they are listed in order of personal preference for writing): 3zun (or any pairing within it), Wangxian, Chengqing, Xuanli, Junior Quartet

Especially interested in: Fix-its, AU's (specifics can be discussed), Canon Divergence, Slice of Life, Fluff, Angst with Comfort, Smut, Gender Fuckery™, Rule 63/Cisswap

Ships I don't want to write: SongXueXiao or any pairing involving Su She, Wen Chao, Wen Xu, or Jin Guangshan.

Unwilling to address: Angst with No Comfort, Bathroom Kinks, Underage, Rape (I can make exceptions at my discretion depending on context)

Other notes: I can be fairly flexible! I've worked before with a bidder who wanted an extra written for one of their own stories, I can write requested extras or missing scenes for any of my existing stories/universes, or we can come up with something completely new. I prefer specific prompts, but please allow me some wiggle-room for my own interpretations, we're working on this as a team!

Special interests: F/F ships, Poly ships, Genderswap/genderbending, Canonically trans or nonbinary characters, Trans or nonbinary interpretations of canon characters

This year I've chosen to select specific charities I'd like donations to go towards, and I chose ones that take international donations and that focus their efforts on people of color, children/youths, and LGBTQ+ issues.

Organizations this auction benefits:

In Our Own Voice ["...lifting up the voices of Black women leaders at the national and regional levels in our fight to secure Reproductive Justice for all women, girls, and gender-expansive individuals..."]

Middle East Children's Alliance ["...organization working for the rights and the well-being of children in the Middle East...They are currently responding to the Gaza crisis with medical supplies and emergency assistance for displaced families."]

Never Again Action ["A Jewish-led mobilization against the persecution, detention, and deportation of immigrants in the United States, NAA takes on campaigns against detention centers and ICE training programs, and organizes mutual aid and deportation defense."]

Sherlock's Homes Foundation ["...provides housing, employment opportunities, and a loving support system for homeless LGBTQ+ young adults so that they can live fearlessly as their authentic selves..."]

And that's it really! I'm really excited to be doing FTH again, I loved it the first time and I love feeling like this ridiculous hobby does some material good in the world in a way that's a bit more targeted and magnified than the writing usually does on its own. Financial contributions to good causes isn't something I've been capable of managing in a very long time, but I can spend my time writing a thank you gift for those who can and do ❤

[big-gay-bird]

As someone who has dealt a lot with literal radical feminism like as a well defined coordinated political movement with its own history, principles, and so on. I need y’all to understand that “trans inclusive radical feminism” does not work in their frameworks. Radical feminism is too rooted in ideas related to biology and bodies. This is why cis and TME “trans inclusive radical feminists” quickly either become full TERFs or get kicked out. The one trans woman I know who fell into the movement ended up detransitioning, and I know for a fact she was not treated well even before that.

Do radical feminists have talking points about “men” as inherently violent and “women” as inherently victims? Yeah that’s a manifestation of their beliefs in many instances, but to simplify the entire movement is obscuring decades of harm and violence done by an organized collective force.

Radical feminists are an insular community, I would argue they’re a genuine cult in a lot of contexts based on specific patterns of behavior. I promise you the social circles of actual rad fems and the trans women you’re calling rad fems are miles apart.

Even if there is a trans feminine separatist movement (which I have not seen actual political organizing around), just because the lesbian separatist movement fell tripped into the rad fem mud does not mean every LGBTQ+ separatist movement is going to do the same. In fact I would say it’s inaccurate to assume they all *can* do the same.

Stop. Calling. Random. Trans. Women. Rad. Fems.

It’s not a fucking buzzword that you can gleaned the meaning of after a few bad interactions on social media. Separatist does not equal rad fem, nor does man hating.

(For the record I think accusations of people being separatist or man-hating are generally largely unfounded and based more on trans women prioritizing other TMA people and talking about transmisogyny. Which like gee, I wonder why trans women feel like they need to stand up for each other.)

Lastly, I need y’all to listen to the impact that calling a trans Women radical feminist has on a community that is the primary target of actual self ID’ed radical feminists. Trying to weaponized that historic violence with so much flippant disregard is truly an upsetting and a transparent show of power.

[vtori73]

You know what I find a tad confusing? When groups more oppressed hate another group like... you do realize if they don't like us it's VERY likely they don't like y'all?

This happens kind of often but in this case this is about trans people who are biphobic and honestly it makes NO sense. Like are y'all really THAT desperate to be like and assimilate with the LG✂️BT groups/individuals that y'all will stoop to hating other queer people for no real reason (yes, bigoted reasons aren't real reasons). Sort of similar to when poc are bigoted towards LGBT people, like do you think this will make white Christians/bigots like you? More often than not these people are racist, and the extreme kind and will hate you no matter what.

Also, I'm going to say it despite it probably being controversial but biphobia is NOT just some minor issue, it should be treated on the same level as homophobia and lesbophobia (but as it's OWN thing). Anyone who says otherwise is just ignorant on what our actual issues are and are just full on biphobes. No one wants to admit it though because then they have to reckon with how entrenched LGBT communities are in perpetuating and encouraging biphobia and they don't want that they need easy targets they can punch at to relieve their anger at the allocishetero patriarchy and its MUCH easier to do that at an oppressed group then at the dominate ones actually in power.

"Well bi people ARE privileged," no, they aren't only straight people get privilege for their sexuality and no, passing privilege isn't a real or valid concept and only is used to excuse people's bigoted treatment of an oppressed group. Sure white bi people hold privilege but that's because of their RACE which means none of you other white LGBTQIA+ people are exempt. If you are white you have more privilege than most, but considering these online spaces are mostly made of white people they will always try to divert attention away from that fact and instead find ways to talk about privilege in ANY other capacity to the point of applying in ways that don't make sense at all (basically almost to the point of appropriating the term like they do often with other terms/word like medical ones or aave) and because they REALLY want to believe (or want YOU to believe) they cant oppress others.

Passing privilege, even if a valid concept, would only really benefit white people (or benefit them the most). Same thing for when (usually) white people try to apply it to trans people the only ones who can obtain that privilege are middle class or up white people because gender affects poc much more differently because the standards our society seems out and upholds on us are influenced by whiteness. Like when white trans people & allies gang up on trans poc by calling them transphobic or something they accuse the POC of even though all they did was call out their racism and how much what they said/do is influenced by whiteness.

It is interesting to note also how most of this "privilege" talk only ever is selectively wielded at one specific group even though it doesn't make any sense to do so. Bi women are ALWAYS brought up as being henchmen to the patriarchy even though more often than not white cishet women the ones who are actually the lackies to the patriarchy but also literally everyone has the capacity to be, yes, even Lesbians because doing so isn't dependent on what type of sexual/romantic relationships you are in (shocker I know)!

Also the fact that bi men are never considered in these conversations, by that I mean why is it no one ever stops to think the man in the relationship is the queer one and not the woman or is also queer? It's always "bi woman and their het boyfriends," never the other way around or both and its because this response isnt just based on biphobia but misogynistic biphobia. The boyfriend due to biphobia is assumed straight for being in a relationship with a woman (or maybe more precisely his possible queerness is erased because people assume bi men are just gay & so when a man is with a woman they aren't willing to believe he could possibly be queer). Bi women though deal with that and misogyny on top and because of that are targeted more because yes misogyny adds on to the bigotry we face.

"But bi women are only targeted because het men are dangerous," I won't argue that a lot of cishet men are dangerous but a LOT of these conversations always hinge on assumptions made on people's LOOKS which is bad, you can't assume someone isn't queer based on looks and doing so only feeds into binary thinking on presentation of gender and sexuality. How exactly do you know for sure the man in question is a cishet man and not a closed trans woman, or bi man, or nonbinary person or trans masc/ man or combo of these identities? Or the woman, how do you exactly know she is a cis bi woman?

And also, not going to lie but this really just seems like nothing more than the continued rhetoric that came from political lesbianism. Also ALSO, not to mention if these cishet men are dangerous their first victim isn't going to be a stranger they don't know, that type of thing is in general a pretty rare occurrence, because even if they are homophobic statically speaking their victim is going to be people closest to the cishet man aka THE BI WOMAN, the PARTNER! If he is homophobic there is no way in hell he isn't biphobic, and it makes sense considering how high our rates of abuse are, straight women don't even have as high of levels which just helps prove we face this amount of abuse BECAUSE of biphobia + misogyny & not just because of our "proximity" towards men.

Which moves me to my last point in which this supposed panic and concern for others in the LGBT community over these hypothetical cishet boyfriends let in by bi woman seems nothing more than a lie to openly attack bi woman for what on the surface seems like a reasonable concern and at best performative because if there REALLY was a concern the person you should all be most concerned for is the bi woman but instead they get ridiculed, attacked, and accused of being enablers of homophobic predators.

And again, this all just comes down to ideas and beliefs that came from political lesbianism but let's also take a moment to realize just how eerily similar this is to the trans panic rhetoric of evil men (the cishets boyfriend) pretending to be woman (bi woman pretending to be queer while in a "straight passing" relationship) to get into safe but public spaces designed for cis women (queer public spaces like pride). Both the conservatives and queer people even shift the blame onto the marginalized person instead of the actual person at fault (cishetero predators)!

It honestly goes to show just how much our society will whether intentionally or not protect predators first and foremost over anything else and would rather shit on marginalized people who are often more times than not victims themselves. But it makes sense because our society REALLY hates victims.

[olenoidedserratuspilled]

Those tags and your tone led me to believe you were implying because TERFs use hating men as an excuse, you should not do it and women saying they hate men is wrong.

Yeah I'm aware you believed that. This is why I said you were putting words in my mouth.

Though again, if this conversation doesn't matter, why apologize for it? I never said it bothered me. Do it more, call me names, say my dad's a reprobate and my mom drank while she was pregnant (if it needs clarifying, I'm not saying you did that, I'm jokingly telling you to do it). If this conversation really doesn't matter, your behavior in it doesn't either. If you don't care act like you don't care, it'll at least be more fun for you.

The tags I copied when I originally responded to your comment blamed people like OP—me—for trans mascs experiencing transphobia on tumblr.

Those were my tags and I did mean to say that. The specific transphobic posts I was referring to and that I posted screenshots for are doing exactly what I described: using man-hating to excuse transphobic behavior towards trans men. I blame people like you - not you specifically - because this is a direct outcome of applying the same attitude towards trans men that one would towards cis ones - something you advocated for pretty explicitly.

To be 100% honest about my stance:

"Calling men demons doesn't matter" is a fine take to have.

"Talking about trans men the same way you talk about cis men is okay" is questionable, but not outright dangerous on its own.

Only and exclusively when the two overlap, like they do in your post, do I take grievance with it.

First, because I think no trans person, male or female, deserves to be called a demon. Not even the bad ones.

Second, because when those two overlap it creates an opportunity to justify transphobia directed at trans men by painting it as only man-hating. This isn't theoretical, it actually happened. I provided examples. By saying it doesn't happen or that it does not matter when it does, you are making it easier for people who do this to keep doing it.

And if it really doesn't matter, why would you care who I blame for it happening? If I blame people like you for my bus being late, are you going to make a wall of text responding to that, too? If I'm the only one who cares, let me keep being the only one.

I guess I can agree that TERFs trying to excuse bigoted statements as just being anti-men sometimes happens so if you really only care about that as an observation okay but I don’t really see why it matters.

Because excusing bigoted statements is never acceptable, no matter what the excuse is. If all of the other ways they justify bigotry warrant criticism, why not this one? It is not the content of the excuse that I am criticizing, but the act of making excuses in the first place.

A post joking about all transmascs being genocided was made, well over a hundred people reblogged it showing approval, and excusing this blatantly bigoted behavior as justified because it solely targeted men. This matters to me because I don't believe trans men deserve this sort of treatment- if it does not matter to you, whatever, but this is my blog and I post about the things that matter to me.

And if it genuinely matters so little, why do you care that I blame people like you (not even you personally!) for it happening? If you don't care, why acknowledge me doing it in the first place?

I'm not forcing you to respond to me. On the contrary, I fully expected you to ignore me and advised you to do it, because you don't think this conversation matters. If it really doesn't, why give it the time of day?

As for being people say what they mean, sometimes people say things and believe they mean them but their actions say otherwise

And sometimes people say something because they meant to say it. Even when they lie, it is because they meant to lie. And again, if it doesn't matter that rhey say it and it doesn't matter whether or not they meant it, why do you care what I think they did or didn't mean?

I don’t know how I’d keep putting word in your mouth if I didn’t read the post, but you seem sure I’ll do both.

I'm sure you'll keep putting words in my mouth because you've done it before in this thread already. I'm sure you won't read the post because you seem so adamant that my point doesn't matter, which means there is *no reason* for you to read it. I may have been wrong about the latter, but you still seem firm in the stance my point doesn't matter. If there's no reason for you to read my post, why would you?

If you don't care about any of this, good, I'm not telling you to. But if it doesn't matter then act like it doesn't matter. I'm not going to stop caring about this, no matter how much you tell me you don't. This is because I'm not you and neither of us have any bearing on each others' lives.

This is why I think it's best if we stop talking here.

Something I want this website specifically to reflect on! Are you mad at women for talking about men the same way you talk about cishets or neurotypicals? Why?

[bi-lesbian]

Not trying to be rude, I’m genuinely curious, but what would you call a non men who’s only attracted to non men then, doesn’t that kind of erase our identity? And there’s nothing wrong with liking men but a big part of the reason why people hate lesbians or at least from what I’ve gotten is for not being attracted to men, so although similar, we don’t face the same type of oppression.

yalld just be using lesbian- something being an umbrella term doesnt erase anybodys identity. gay being an umbrella label for the entire community doesnt erase gay men. if you really want to be sure and specific about it you can use modifiers like mono lesbian or the like (mono lesbian probably wouldnt be good for including enbies though), or perhaps even coin a new term, bc lesbian has historical significance to bi people as well and is often still used by many of them, and ppl taking it just bc they want a term for themselves doesnt sit well with me- especially when its usually put alongside biphobic rhetoric (claiming theyre untrustworthy, theyre the reason men prey on lesbians, theyre aiding in their own oppression by associating with men, etc), and the exclusionism of bi people from the lesbian label was mostly started by radfems around the 70s.

bi women using lesbian isnt the reason why predatory men prey on queer women. its bc men are often taught theyre entitled to womens bodies, and changing the defintion of lesbian (which isnt universally agreed upon, mind you) to exclude men isnt really doing anything to tell predatory men to stop preying on mono lesbians, because they dont. Care. and it usually just ends up pointing fingers at bi people instead bc theyre an easier target, in an aggressive "relating to yall is putting us in danger, youre the enemy" way, its clear how thats biphobic, yes? bi women have always used lesbian since it existed, but then radfems deem them the enemy, blame them for predatory men who often also prey on bi women as well, and try to take the label and thus also bi womens own history away from them, its why im not okay with whatever reasoning people use to try to keep that mindset in place.

and oppression is a messy thing, its not neat and strict across labels. talking about oppression that are typically identity-specific is fine, but people need to realize that queerphobes dont really care about peoples specific identities, if they perceive them as a thing then theyll treat them as such, so saying its expressly different oppression for different labels just doesnt really hold up. straight trans ppl can be treated like gays or lesbians, a gnc person can be treated like theyre trans, a bi woman with her feminine enby partner can be treated as two mono lesbian women, and various other things. and people refering to it as "misdirected" i think is frankly kinda gross.. its not misdirected, our oppression is intrinsically linked, and thus will overlap and mix- bc its all about how society views us. and someone not experiencing the """right""" oppression doesnt mean theyre not still suffering from it.

and remember, not all bi lesbians like men either, bc many use bi to mean liking 2 or more genders, which doesnt necessarily include men. this is another reason why a lot of people see overlap in lesbian and bi, even aside from using lesbian as an umbrella label.

[raayllum]

no actually please explain how not supporting pedophilla and incest ships is the same as american conservative christianity

not wasting my breath but i will provide links if you're willing to prove you can read

the article tdp's head writer retweeted with the connection in bold

Beyond betraying simple art illiteracy, though, these intensely personal, emotional complaints and appeals to public safety have a clear antecedent: religious and conservative opposition to “obscenity.” The centering of individual values and pain, the assumption that a universal moral standard exists which should guide all public or quasi-public art and behavior, and the belief that art can do material harm to both people and culture as a whole unite the two at first apparently disparate groups of angry indie gamers and religious fundamentalists.

The deployment of victimhood as an unimpeachable defense is an old tactic frequently used by hate groups like One Million Moms and its parent organization, the American Family Association, whose rallying cry “think of the children” now echoes through everything from intra-community Gay Pride discourse to the drearily predictable “there’s too much sex on TV” tweets that seem to sweep across the platform on a weekly basis.

consumption / creation of media not being a short cut to morality (the same way that proving you go to church is not lmao)

history, literature, and the impact of morality on media in north america / the united states (probably too long for u so again, here's a snippet)

Examples of this are the panic over comic books in the 50s (an emblematic case, the book Seduction Of The Innocent, arguing that comic books were a direct cause of juvenile delinquency), the satanic panic of the 80s, the panic over violent video games in the 90s, the panic over the “trans agenda” of the past few years, together with “punching-up” conspiracies like Pizzagate and QAnon. They are all deeply concerned for the youth and the vulnerable, all have a very specific target supposedly responsible for the child abuse they are perceiving, and all are characterized by an impressive amount of disinterest toward more empirically accurate assessments of types of child abuse and how to prevent them.

The level of disinterest and plain detachment from the work that should be put in to actually make a change even suggests that the child victim is really just a symbol in a social phenomenon that, at closer inspection, is not about them. It’s not about the child. It’s about the idea of the perfect childhood 

and my own words just last month when another teen tried to pull this shit on me. newsflash, i've held the exact same opinion on this when i was a teen in fandom (both a decade ago, and just three years ago!! i was a teenager just three years ago)

Another thing grammarians and writers have been concerned with since before is what is Okay to be portrayed in art. Plato’s The Republic thinks that art is immoral because it may give people unrealistic or unsafe ideas because people are 'unable’ to distinguish fiction from reality. He later retracted this, although Aristotle’s Poetics was a text where Aristotle disagreed with Plato’s prior established opinion.

Fandom is entrenched in cultural Christianity and the conservative mindsets that come with it. Aphobia in fandom was rampant from 2014-2017; truscum and tucute discourse as well; how prevalent TERF rhetoric can be (women are inherently good, attraction to men is shameful, etc). I’ve seen all of these things in fandom. All hinge an idea on being able to decode a person’s intent (somehow), the rising attachment of morality to genres of entertainment (antis), and how many antis I’ve seen that are TERFs or Aphobes or guzzling down that rhetoric without even realizing.

Terfs and the Conservative far-right have a long history of working together. Both frame concerns of gay people as pedophiles, being anti sex work (because sex is nasty and a sin), that we must Protect the Children who cannot monitor or make any decisions for themselves at any age. The anti vs pro ship dynamic online is a microism of larger public discussions regarding purity culture - and that includes how queerness is overly sexualized, how queer sex is seen as especially dirty, the “should kink be at pride?” discourse, and issues with respectability politics.

Antis who say we have to harass people to control what exists in fandom to “protect minors” on a moral basis are ideologically adjacent to parents who decry earlier Sex Education for children

hate to break it to you bub but if you've ever consumed anything based off greek myth (hades/persephone, percy jackson, lore olympus, hadestown, etc.) you've consumed things that have incest in 'em. hades and persphone are niece and uncle on both sides, because her parents are also siblings to hades, and his parents / her grandparents were also siblings. just the way the myth works.

something being ideologically similar, adjacent, or parallel is also not the same as supporting - but clearly you believe in orwellian thought crime, too, don't you? you know, the idea that your just your thoughts can be Morally Wrong and Impure and any expression of them (like fic) can get you in trouble if you don't repress every urge that goes against the societal grain, even in a fictional / fantasy space, and-

like, tell me u can hear this

[roboticutie]

Literally nothing that kaeyacvnts added actually contradicted what OP was saying or talking about at all. The only thing that actually clashed here was when they put words into trans men's mouths. NO WHERE did gay-otic insinuate letalone actually claim "transmisogyny doesn't exist in our communities or accounts for anything".

Having different relationships and experiences to varying expressions and actions of hatred towards us is just. True. And in no way contradicts the fact that systemic transphobia, including its specific facets of transmisogyny and transmisandry, hurts every trans person even if in different ways. That doesn't negate the fact that All trans people are at risk of being attacked in bathrooms, pushed out of public spaces, and threatened over simply existing.

Wringing your hands and making it out to be Ultimate Victimhood Battle Royale doesn't actually add anything new to the conversation, it only makes you look like an asshole for using people's actual experiences, lived traumas, and loved one's deaths as points to use against other people that have gone through those exact things to say they didn't or it doesn't hurt the same or as bad just because they're going through a different transition. The fact that trans women are often on the minds of those hurting all trans people regardless of actual gender is something to take up with the hateful people, not to be used to shame trans folks that have been victims of violence for talking about their experiences. Especially when they're even acknowledging the role transmisogyny played in their injuries. You're not "correcting" anything here you're just being cruel. You're not even a trans woman. Why the fuck do you think this is appropriate behavior?

This anon came into a trans person's ask box, used trans women's trauma against this trans person to claim he didn't actually have it as bad as they do, and then anon was corrected in the false idea that trans men are not specifically targeted as well (NOT INSTEAD OF); and another person jumps to try to argue with facts that there are transphobic people who are aware trans men exist and hate them, too, not for being trans women but for being trans men. And then you didn't even manage to do that, you just restated the facts that trans men ARE hurt but tried to downplay it and frame this person as being transphobic with absolutely no reason to here.

This post is a shitshow and you both (kaeyacvnts and anon) suck. Examine your cruelty and learn how to do better. Stop using transmisogyny as a pawn to Own The Men, stop reducing real life transphobia down to worse-than-better-than pissing contest without actually doing anything to help or further the conversations we have with each other, and start taking your brothers, sisters, AND siblings seriously. This shit isn't cute and I'm tired of it. People who keep doing this are freelance Fed Ops sowing dissident and until they change and actually take other members of community seriously without using people's trauma against each other, beating the words we have to help understand where hate is coming from into the ground, you won't change my mind. You're not even getting paid for this shit.

Oh also, there are self-ID'd trans women (or "dysphoric men") TERFs. Don't imply trans men are the only ones who are vulnerable enough to get pressured and sucked into that Hell. "You are not immune to propaganda" and all that, neither trans women nor trans men are inherently better or more immune to internalized transphobia and the insinuation through omission otherwise is a crock of shit, too. Experiences with it ARE different, but don't think no one noticed you only tacking on the transmasc victims to TERF indoctrination among your general rude tone here. That was fucking dirty.

the people harmed by the 'save the poor confused daughters' rhetoric are trans WOMEN who are seen as the predators. if you are TME maybe shut the fuck about oppression you benefit from? 'oh no i am seen as the people who need to be protected from the evil bad transfems :(' you are the villain here

While trans women are seen as predators and the "save the poor daughters" rhetoric affects them in things like sports and bathroom bills, this ideology is specifically wielded against trans men & mascs. Because- and this may come as a shock to you- transphobes hate all of us and we are all harmed by their bigotry.

Specifically, in the post you're likely referencing, I was referring to the way TERFs are upset about people who were assigned female at birth, discovered they were attracted to women and identified as lesbians, and then transitioned into straight trans men. This isn't a made up thing. This is actually very common rhetoric.

They see trans men & mascs as lost butches. They see transmasculinity as the lesbian holocaust (which, in addition to being transandrophobic, is antisemetic as FUCK. but i won't get into that)

And this rhetoric is seen in trying to "protect" all afab children, not just lesbians. Conservatives have recently become outraged that an American Girls book marketed towards young girls, or young children perceived as girls, explained gender identity and advised readers to talk to a trusted adult if they were experiencing gender dysphoria, because a doctor could help them be more comfortable in their bodies (namely puberty blockers.)

Here are screenshots. This shit is real.

I am not seen as someone who needs to be protected from the "evil bad transfems." I am seen as a traitor to womanhood, a violent misogynist, a nazi in the so-called lesbian holocaust, a stupid girl who wants to mutilate her body and trick other girls into mutilating their bodies too.

And even if I was seen as a victim, if I was seen as a little girl who needed to be saved- that would be misgendering me. I'm not a fucking girl. It's not a privilege to be misgendered, and quite honestly it's transphobic to claim I should feel grateful that I'm getting misgendered.

Also, that's bullshit to say that I'm TME and I benefit from transmisogyny. I am not transmisogyny exempt. I have been harassed for going into a women's bathroom because I looked too masculine and the women in there thought I was an evil bad predator. So yeah, not sure how I benefited from that, considering it left me with nowhere safe to use the fucking bathroom.

You have no right to tell me I'm not harmed by transphobia. Go fuck yourself.

[alleycat4eva]

I figured I would chime in with my two cents. TERF (Trans Exclusive Radical Feminist) is kind of a branch of radfem ideology. Radical Feminism is also fairly trans-unfriendly, but is broadly less targeted at trans people specifically. Radical feminism is generally anchored that the belief that misogyny is the ultimate, central oppression, and as such all men are oppressors, and are actors of such in all situations, even when a man might genuinely be a feminist or faces other oppressions like racism, queerphobia, ableism, or classism.

As such you can see this is the start of a big radfem -> terf pipeline (also radfem -> white supremacy pipeline, but thats a bit off topic), where transphobia becomes a central motivator and trans women are specifically targeted as predatory men seeking to enter women-only spaces (hence the Bathroom Panic). Trans men only factor into this as innocent "women" and "wayward daughters" tricked into thinking that thousands in medical bills and hormone therapies and the immense social stigma are easier then just not associating with men to escape misogyny. Tracing back to radfem this is really just a natural conclusion of the ideology as its so rooted in assigning morality to gender, thus already establishing the bioessentialist groundwork that is also so prevalent in transphobia.

Specifically regarding the reproductive and medical rights aspect, that is still be misogyny but kind of... redirected to affect trans people by virtue of the degree to which they choose to medically transition. Also transphobia in that our society largely just... doesn't consider transgender people outside of transition treatments. For example a trans man who chose to and already had his tubes tied could be argued to have no stake in the current reproductive rights either. Infertile cisgender women, or intersex women as well. As the cisgender white man is historically- and thus generally today as well- medical default this does ultimately leave blind spots in the lack of information of those outside that demographic- so vaginal health and wellness is understudied. That could affect a cisgender woman yes, but just as much if not more than a transgender woman who had a vaginoplasty and suffers from lack of diverse study of the vagina. If needed you can specify "oh those affected by cervical cancer" or "those with their reproductive rights at stake". Really when discussing an issue its best to specify what the issue is rather that who you first think is affected.

I hope this cleared somethings up for you, and that i managed to be as factual and unbiased as possible. As another long-time follower, I would hate to see you choose that path. This might sound sheltered but OTRAS was actually an eyeopener for me regarding the existence of the trans community, as theres a one-off line about Haku being DFAB and I wasn't familiar with the acronym. I think you're asking these questions in good faith but tagging "trans" "radfem" "terf" all together comes off as aggression on your part considering the vitriol trans people usually get from radfems and terfs, and radfems definitely want to flock to assure someone they think they can sway. Terms like "gender critical" "sex-based oppression" sound like neat and tidy clinical terms but they are ultimately considered transphobic dogwhistles, as they were created specifically to the exclusion of genderqueer perspectives.

It does clear some of the thing up for sure. And I appreciate you taking the time to talk about these things.

I can also see that trans issues and trans people aren't addressed outside of medical transition. But, and by God I do not mean this in offense even though I realize it might be improper to say, I see a lot of GNC activities shuffled into trans issues when it's like. Just a nontraditional activity or role.

I do see these opinions on transgender men in radfem posts, which seems somewhat infatilizing, but moreso? I... don't see transmen addressed in media and most all the posts. A lot of what I have seen is focused on transwomen? Like I just don't see many transmen in media at all. Which, when I looked into the assault numbers, it seemed like transmen were the majority in cases. And maybe that's because I don't have a huge window or wide enough lense or else it is literally observer effect. I very well could be wrong. (I also feel weird about self reporting in studies but I honestly see that that is a separate issue and am admittedly understudied in that area.)

As for the medical field, yes. I thing reproductive and sex specific issues are understudied in a specific sex. And so are symptoms as they pertain to that sex. And I see how that could pertain to people with vaginoplasty and effect them, but I am unsure if moreso. And then on that side, the failure to recognize that there are inherent (imo base) secondary sex characteristics that occur and give advantageous aspects in many areas is just. Like. Consistently unacknowledged or outright rejected, then laid at the feet of a certain group as not trying hard enough.

I also can see the need for more specific language in places but I also think that at times, instead of adding to the conversation, it detracts from it? Like, people with uteruses, yes, which are widely recognized as a certain word, but even those who identify as male and have a uterus should also check for or be aware of x, like . Almost creates a divide that is unessiscary in the contexts. Like I believe there is uniquely sex based oppression that has to be acknowledged and addressed, and those people empowered to be able to escape it, but it isn't because they are gnc and it would not be applicable to q trans in the same situation?

Like. Let say the church as an example (because I live life in areas where Baptist and evangelical churches reign). Now the church isn't jiving with almost all queers. But even if you were a transgirl growing up with church parents it would be a different discrimination than a girl growing up under heavily religious parents? Like, as a uterus owner a lot of the values and traits that made women less were sex linked. Not gender based.

And I had no idea the tags would be taken that way. I was trying to include tags that would be blocked so those that would be adversely affected by the issues of GC and terf stuff wouldn't have to see it. Is there a tag that I could add in there that would be better suited?

[trans-advice]

Excerpt from “Transgender History” (2017) by Susan Stryker (“Chapter 3: Trans Liberation”)

[...]

Stonewall:

Meanwhile, across the continent [from San Francisco, California, USA], another important center of transgender activism was taking shape in New York City [New York, USA], where, not coincidentally, Harry Benjamin maintained his primary medical practice. In 1968, Mario Martino, a female-to-male transsexual, founded Labyrinth, the first organization in the United States devoted specifically to the needs of transgender men. Martino and his wife, who both worked in the health care field, helped other transsexual men navigate their way through the often-confusing maze of transgender-oriented medical services just then beginning to emerge, which (despite being funded primarily by Reed Erickson) were geared more toward the needs of transgenderwomen than transgender men. Labyrinth was not a political organization but rather one that aimed to help individuals make the often-difficult transition from one social gender to another.

Far overshadowing the quiet work of Martino’s Labyrinth Foundation, however, were the dramatic events of June 1969 at the Stonewall Inn, a bar in New York’s Greenwich Village. The “Stonewall Riots” have been mythologized as the origin of the gay liberation movement, and there is a great deal of truth in that characterization, but—as we have seen—gay, transgender, and gender-nonconforming people had been engaging in militant protest and collective actions against social oppression for at least a decade by that time. Stonewall stands out as the biggest and most consequential example of a kind of event that was becoming increasingly common, rather than as a unique occurrence. By 1969, as a result of many years of social upheaval and political agitation, large numbers of people who were socially marginalized because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, especially younger people who were part of the Baby Boomer generation, were drawn to the idea of “gay revolution” and were primed for any event that would set such a movement off. The Stonewall Riots provided that very spark, and they inspired the formation of Gay Liberation Front groups in big cities, progressive towns, and college campuses all across the United States. Ever since the summer of 1969, various groups of people who identify with the people who participated in the rioting have argued about what actually happened, what the riot’s underlying causes were, who participated in it, and what the movements that point back to Stonewall as an important part of their own history have in common with one another.

Although Greenwich Village was not as economically down-and-out as San Francisco’s Tenderloin, it was nevertheless a part of the city that appealed to the same sorts of people who resisted at Cooper Do-Nut, Dewey’s, and Compton’s Cafeteria: drag queens, hustlers, gender nonconformists of many varieties, gay men, lesbians, and countercultural types who simply “dug the scene.” The Stonewall Inn was a small, shabby, Mafia-run bar (as were many of the gay-oriented bars in New York back in the days when being gay or cross-dressing were crimes). It drew a racially mixed crowd and was popular mainly for its location on Christopher Street near Sheridan Square, where many gay men “cruised” for casual sex, and because it featured go-go boys, cheap beer, a good jukebox, and a crowded dance floor. Then as now, there was a lively street scene in the bar’s vicinity, one that drew young and racially mixed queer folk from through the region most weekend nights. Police raids were relatively frequent (usually when the bar was slow to make its payoffs to corrupt cops) and relatively routine and uneventful. Once the bribes were sorted out, the bar would reopen, often on the same night. But in the muggy, early morning hours of Saturday, June 28, 1969, events departed from the familiar script when the squad cars pulled up outside the Stonewall Inn.

[Source text Inserts “Sidebar: Radical Transsexual” here]

A large crowd of people gathered on the street as police began arresting workers and patrons and escorting them out of the bar and into the waiting police wagons. Some people in the crowd started throwing coins at the police officers, taunting them for taking “payola.” Eyewitness accounts of what happened next differ in their particulars, but some witnesses claim a transmasculine person resisted police attempts to put them in the police wagon, while others noted that African American and Puerto Rican members of the crowd—many of them street queens, feminine gay men, transgender women, or gender-nonconforming youth—grew increasingly angry as they watched their “sisters” being arrested and escalated the level of opposition to the police. Both stories might well be true. Sylvia Rivera, a transgender woman who came to play an important role in subsequent transgender political history, long maintained that, after she was jabbed by a police baton, she threw the beer bottle that tipped the crowd’s mood from mockery to collective resistance. In any case, the targeting of gender-nonconforming people, people of color, and poor people during a police action fits the usual patterns of police behavior in such situations.

Bottles, rocks, and other heavy objects were soon being hurled at the police, who, in retaliation, began grabbing people from the crowd and beating them.Weekend partiers and residents in the heavily gay neighborhood quickly swelledthe ranks of the crowd to more than two thousand people, and the outnumberedpolice barricaded themselves inside the Stonewall Inn and called for reinforcements. Outside, rioters used an uprooted parking meter as a batteringram to try to break down the bar’s door, while other members of the crowdattempted to throw a Molotov cocktail inside to drive the police back into the streets. Tactical Patrol Force officers arrived on the scene in an attempt to contain the growing disturbance, which nevertheless continued for hours until dissipating before dawn. That night, thousands of people regrouped at the Stonewall Inn to protest. When the police arrived to break up the assembled crowd, street fighting even more violent than that of the night before ensued. One particularly memorable sight amid the melee was a line of drag queens, arms linked, dancing a can-can and singing campy, improvised songs that mocked the police and their inability to regain control of the situation: “We are the Stonewall girls / We wear our hair in curls / We always dress with flair / We wear clean underwear / We wear our dungarees / Above our nellie knees.” Minor skirmishes and protest rallies continued throughout the next few days before finally dying down. By that time, however, untold thousands of people had been galvanized into political action.

Sidebar: Radical Transsexual

Suzy Cooke was a young hippie from upstate New York who lived in a commune in Berkeley, California, when she started transitioning from male to female in 1969. She came out as a bisexual transsexual in the context of the radical counterculture.

I was facing being called back up for the draft. I had already been called up once and had just gone in and played crazy with them the year before. But that was just an excuse. I had also been doing a lot of acid and really working things out. And then December 31, 1968, I took something—I don’t really know what it was—but everything just collapsed. I said, “This simply cannot go on.” To the people that I lived with, I said, “I don’t care if you hate me, but I’m just going to have to do something. I’m going to have to work it out over the next couple of months, and that it doesn’t matter if you reject me, I just have to do it.”

As it was, the people in my commune took it very well. I introduced the cross-dressing a few days later as a way of avoiding the draft. And they were just taken aback at how much just putting on the clothes made me into a girl. I mean, hardly any makeup. A little blush, a little shadow, some gloss, the right clothes, padding. I passed. I passed really easily in public. This is like a few months before Stonewall. And by this point I was dressing up often enough that people were used to seeing it.

I was wallowing in the happiness of having a lot of friends. Here I was being accepted, this kinda cool/sorta goofy hippie kid. I was being accepted by all these heavy radicals. I had been rejected by my parental family, and I had never found a family at college, and now here I was with this family of like eight people all surrounding me. And as it turned out, even some of the girls that I had slept with were thinking that this was really cool. All the girls would donate clothes to me. I really had not been expecting this. I had been expecting rejection, I really had been. And I was really very pleased and surprised. Because I thought that if I did this then I was going to have to go off and live with the queens. And I didn’t.

Stonewall’s Transgender Legacy:

Within a month of the Stonewall Riots, gay activists inspired by the events in Greenwich Village formed the Gay Liberation Front (GLF), which modeled itself on radical Third World liberation and anti-imperialist movements. The GLF spread quickly through activist networks in the student and antiwar movements, primarily among white young people of middle-class origin. Almost as quickly as it formed, however, divisions appeared within the GLF, primarily taking aim at the movement’s domination by white men and its perceived marginalization of women, working-class people, people of color, and trans people. People with more liberal, less radical politics soon organized as the Gay Activists Alliance (GAA), which aimed to reform laws rather than foment revolution. Many lesbians redirected their energy toward radical feminism and the women’s movement. And trans people, after early involvement in the GLF (and being explicitly excluded from the GAA’s agenda), quickly came to feel that they did not have a welcome place in the movement they had done much to inspire. As a consequence, they soon formed their own organizations.

In 1970, Sylvia Rivera and another Stonewall regular, Marsha P. Johnson, established STAR—Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries. Their primary goal was to help street kids stay out of jail, or get out of jail, and to find food, clothing, and a place to live. They opened STAR House, an overtly politicized version of the “house” culture that already characterized black and Latino queer kinship networks, where dozens of trans youth could count on a free and safe place to sleep. Rivera and Johnson, as “house mothers,” would hustle to pay the rent, while their “children” would scrounge for food. Their goal was to educate and protect the younger people who were coming into the kind of life they themselves led—they even dreamed of establishing a school for kids who’d never learned to read and write because their formal education was interrupted by discrimination and bullying. Some STAR members, particularly Rivera, were also active in the Young Lords, a revolutionary Puerto Rican youth organization. One of the first times the STAR banner was flown in public was at a mass demonstration against police repression organized by the Young Lords in East Harlem in 1970, in which STAR participated as a group. STAR House lasted for only two or three years and inspired a few short-lived imitators in other cities, but its legacy lives on even now.

A few other transgender groups formed in New York in the early 1970s. A trans woman named Judy Bowen organized two extremely short-lived groups: Transvestites and Transsexuals (TAT) in 1970 and Transsexuals Anonymous in 1971. More significant was the Queens’ Liberation Front (QLF), founded by drag queen Lee Brewster and heterosexual transvestite Bunny Eisenhower. The QLF formed in part to resist the erasure of drag and trans visibility in the first Christopher Street Liberation Day march, which commemorated the Stonewall Riots and is now an annual event held in New York on the last Sunday in June. In many other cities, this weekend has become the traditional date to celebrate LGBTQ Pride. The formation of the QLF demonstrates how quickly the gay liberation movement started to push aside some of the very people who had the greatest stake in militant resistance at Stonewall. QLF members participated in that first Christopher Street Liberation Day march and were involved in several other political campaigns through the next few years—including wearing drag while lobbying state legislators in Albany. QLF’s most lasting contribution, however, was the publication of Drag Queen magazine (later simply Drag), which had the best coverage of transgender news and politics in the United States, and which offered fascinating glimpses of trans life and activism outside the major coastal cities. In New York, QLF founder Lee Brewster’s private business, Lee’s Mardi Gras Boutique, was a gathering place for segments of the city’s transgender community well into the 1990s.

[system-of-a-feather]

Have you considered that the whole Super straight/bi/lesbian/gay thing came about specifically because y'all are so quick to call people transphobic? I don't understand why supporters of trans rights are so interested in whether or not people are willing to date trans people.

Like, if that's your biggest problem, you're doing well. Genuinely, what is this oppression trans ppl face if the biggest concern is getting a date? And if someone doesn't want to date a trans person, why, WHY would y'all wanna pressure them into it? What does that do for you? Isn't it dangerous for the trans person to pursue the issue once they've been turned down? Why are you encouraging them to be in a place of danger? Who cares if some people don't want to date trans people? If they're as oppressed as y'all say, that is literally the least of their concern.

I absolutely fully agree with that. It absolutely isn’t an okay thing to do and people aren’t transphobic for not wanting to date or be with a trans person. I have absolutely nothing against that.

What *does* bother me is how people go about using the “trans people are mad that we won’t date them” to straw man that most people that say that follow it up with saying “trans men aren’t real men” or combine it with “I only want to date real and natural men” which is inherently transphobic.

I fully support anyone who is just not interested in dating trans people. That’s fine, and I really don’t care. We are a blog of people who have been traumatized, abused, and sexually abused and forced upon. We would never put that upon anyone else. Our blog is first and foremost about trauma and consent and harassments is absolute big “N-O”s for us

If the majority of the people who said they didn’t want to date trans people didn’t start using “real” women and men lines, then I would have no issue with being “super straight” or “super lesbian”.

Similarly to you assuming everyone who is against it cares about if you can get a date or not and is upset about it, we are forced to assume everyone who thinks it is about that is going to use and talk like a transphobe / TERF and de-legitimize their gender identity. Most of the shit talking and memes in the Super Straight tags are dissing “new” gender labels like nonbinary or whatever and trans identities and all that, so don’t act as if this is all about predatory trans behavior and not about people being disgustingly transphobic.

If your tag and movement was solely about addressing toxic behavior in the trans community that is predatory, I would be standing with you and in support, but instead a large majority of the people in your “movement” take it as an opportunity to diss, disrespect, and let blatant transphobic / TERF rhetoric spew disgustingly on your floor and I just can’t stand for that.

As for the Trans community, our largest issue **isnt** getting a fucking date. It has never fucking been getting a date and if you really think that is the largest issue, god are you blind and deaf. 

I think the largest issue would be the overall stigma hatred and disgust many people in society hold towards people who are trans. There are also all the people who regularly threaten violence and state that they would kick the head in of anyone who they saw if they were trans or saw “a man in a dress.” There are people thinking people who are trans are secretly just pedophiles that want to fondle children. There are people who murder people for being trans. There are people who just regularly bully and make fun of people or completely cut ties with people because they are trans. There are people assaulting - physically and sexually - people who are trans just for being trans.

“In 2009, 17 percent of all reported violent hate crimes against LGBTQ people were directed against those who identified themselves as transgender, with most (11 percent of all hate crimes) identifying as transgender women.8 The remainder identified as transgender men, genderqueer, gender questioning, or intersex.” - x

“People may assume that being visibly transgender or having a transgender history is a direct cause of sexual assault. There is some truth to this: A number of murders of transgender people (particularly transgender women of color) have taken place when new sexual partners "discover" their sexual partners were assigned male at birth and/or have a penis. “ - x

I promise you, almost any of the bigotry and exclusion that people who are lesbian, bi, and/or gay experience, people who are trans also experience, but they also get it from people who are lesbian, bi, and gay.

If you want to have a discussion about the predatory nature of some people who use being trans as a means to attack and pressure people into sex or a relationship, we would be more than glad to sit down and talk about that. It is a huge problem and a disgusting one. 

If you are trans and you get rejected and then use your trans identity to try to pity and victim cry yourself a date or sex, then you are scum and worse than any transphobe out there. You don’t deserve to look at this blog or group yourself with us. Don’t be a fucking predator.

If you are one of those people, lick my boot and cry because fuck you. 

I’m not against “supers” because I think they have a right to your body. I’m against “supers” because they parade behind “I don’t like the predatory behavior!!” to be transphobic.

I understand that if some of your have been pressured into shit like this, it might be a trauma response and I understand that. I’m not actually mad at you for that because I very much understand how that works. We have been there before and have generalized horribly, but please do know a large majority of the community is not just about sexuality and who they will date. We aren’t predators. We are just people and most of us just will handle rejection like a normal god damn person. Please don’t generalize us with abusers because of a negative experience you or someone you know might have experienced.

A lot of people who are trans are far more busy and concerned with how having to choose between who they actually are and living in a constant lie to themselves and others, and being their true self and risking to upturn their entire life, loose many acquaintances, and naturally have a target on your back if you aren’t living in an area that is considerably tolerant and even then its still a risk. I don’t know where you got that getting a date is the largest issue about being trans because it never was and never is.

Please, take some time to really try to listen to us and our experiences and please don’t immediately group all trans people in with abusive people. A lot of us really don’t care about getting in people’s pants and most of it is really just about trying to live and be ourselves.

I understand the experiences are horrible and anyone who puts that pressure is horrible, but don’t let that be an excuse to spread rhetoric and hate on a group that already has an insanely high suicide rate. 

People aren’t killing themselves because they aren’t getting dates. They are killing themselves because being trans is hard and insanely difficult. Dating someone is a speck of sand in a desert.

Please don’t use that straw man on us and please don’t use it to paint all trans people as bad and worthy of hate.

Thank you.

-Ray (Gatekeeper)