#youre just saying you view trans men as lesser men or just not men at all .

[nightfallsystem]

idk am i the only one who hates "i hate men! except trans men ofc theyre fine" please just include trans men too if you hate men otherwise youre just othering us and implying we arent actually men. im sorry.

[stormsbourne]

alright listen

I know we're all having an evaluation of how eagerly we believe people who present with even the slightest air of authority and frankly good! we all need to be less credulous of people on the internet who tell lies.

but I think there are also other lessons to learn from james somerton. namely about his raging and blatant misogyny, which I've often seen similar forms of in fandom and on this specific site. to paraphrase bombs himself in the ctrl alt del video, if you see shitty behavior within your sphere, it's important to recognize it and try to fix it instead of rejecting it and asserting that no REAL members of the ingroup are like that. and nerds have a misogyny problem. including tumblr. so let's reckon with it.

do you append "white" or "straight" to your comments about women even when those things have little to do with the topic being discussed, just to make your comments seem more legit? (and no, m/m shipping discourse does not give you a ticket to say it's all straight women -- it's fictional characters, james.) do you often theorize about how (hurriedly appended "straight/white/cis") women are responsible for a problem in fandom, nay, all problems in fandom? have you made up a guy based on a single post that annoyed you and extrapolated to say that all (appended signifier to make it ok) women in fandom are like that? do you see women as uniquely fetishizing, uniquely stupid about politics or social issues, uniquely annoying to talk to? do you assume when there's an issue, even a real one and not the fake ones james made up, that a woman is probably at the root of it?

all of this still applies to you if you're a woman. it also applies if you're gay or a person of color or trans. being an oppressed group doesn't mean you are immune from sexism, and sexism is still rampant in everyday life for pretty much everyone.

your shipping and fandom discourse isn't immune from this. no, I'm not talking about how not enough people like yuri. I'm talking about how women who like "bad" ships like r*ylo or whatever are seen as open targets for harassment. how women who are into "bad/problematic" fandoms are seen as idiots and enablers who deserve what they get. how there's an attitude that women who like shitty bad porn must think it's good, must be too stupid to know better, and must need to be handheld and taught about good, acceptable fiction. I've already talked a lot about tumblr's complete refusal to admit that fujoshi wasn't a term coined by delicate japanese mlm to complain about evil women (and I wonder if james contributed to that idiotic concept), but the way I've seen people assert that women into m/m must be straight, must be stupid, must be lying about their identities, must be hurting gay men in real life in addition to wanting some anime boys to kiss ...

I've seen how some of you people talk about amb*r h*ard, is all I'm saying, and I've seen what you've tried to do to dozens of female creatives that, for some reason, you've decided deserve to be taken down or taught a lesson. I've seen the descriptions you use. shrieking, bitchy, whiny, uppity, shrewish, karen (don't get me started on how karen has been turned into an easy excuse for misogyny). you're not bystanders to what james did and is doing, you're a part of it. sure, you might not have the nazi fetish, but you've said things about women that put somerton to shame.

just a thing to keep in mind while the plagiarism discourse is ongoing. somerton is a shithead for many reasons but this is one that's important to remember because I think people often treat misogyny like a lesser crime, a smaller concern, and it's not. just think of what laws are passing and what views popular movements have of women and then, for one moment, consider that maybe your reflexive need to blame women or pick them apart might have been influenced by the Society In Which We Live.

[felixfeliccis]

hiii so english isn't my first language and i'm learning more about gender and trans stuff and if i might be trans or something (i've been told i sound agender?? but that feels wrong), and something that confuses me, so i'm asking around abt it… "woman" used to simply denote afab, right? like a body type of ppl with a biological (not surgical) vagina & estrogen puberty. like a female dog. ppl say that it reduces women to their genitals, but what about with other animals? like female cat, female horse, etc, just bc we say "oh she's a girl" or "oh i have a male dog" doesn't mean we're saying they're only their genitals in that case, right…? a bitch is just a female dog, that's why it's a misogynistic word. misogyny is based on how ppl see someone without a penis as lesser, bc they don't have the power to forcibly penetrate and feel genital pleasure for it, they can't impregnate, they're "just a hole" etc. like so much of misogyny is just body-specific. the misogyny transfems experience seems terrible but also conditional? bc if they're found out to be amab they're treated as creepy men, so they then stop experiencing misogyny, they just face usually homophobia. meanwhile bio women (and transmascs who don't transition) have no exit door to the misogyny unless they transition and pass perfectly as male or something, and historically that wasn't an option. to me man & woman have always been neutral body types until i came across trans stuff, and i think the idea of gendered brains sounds sexist af. like gender seems like bullshit, i see me being a woman as just like being a female cat, i don't have ~womanly~ vibes in my brain, i was just born female and that's the least important thing about me, but male society made it weird. why should gender continue to be a thing? what does gender actually mean, if sexism was to be eradicated? is it bad if i view my womanhood as just a body type? most cis people i've talked to view their "gender" like this, as just a body type, like any other animal. they don't "feel" like one, they just have the body and aren't dysphoric about it. they might not always like it, but they don't have dysphoria about it, so they just… are. is that transphobic? i've heard mixed thoughts about it from trans ppl & activists, i'm just curious. feel free to ignore this lol ;;

first of all you, can define your gender however you want and there's no need to put a label on yourself, you can just be you and thats enough. You can view yourself however you desire, there's no thought police.

second of all, gender identity was made up by humans and I doubt animals give a damn, call them whatever you want for all I care.

Also I don't think im qualified to speak out about misogyny and transphobia tbh. I have experienced both but I doubt it was to the same extent as others. Also I know nothing about the transfem experience as you can guess

[boreal-sea]

hiii so english isn't my first language and i'm learning more about gender and trans stuff and if i might be trans or something (i've been told i sound agender?? but that feels wrong), and something that confuses me, so i'm asking around abt it… "woman" used to simply denote afab, right? like a body type of ppl with a biological (not surgical) vagina & estrogen puberty. like a female dog. ppl say that it reduces women to their genitals, but what about with other animals? like female cat, female horse, etc, just bc we say "oh she's a girl" or "oh i have a male dog" doesn't mean we're saying they're only their genitals in that case, right…? a bitch is just a female dog, that's why it's a misogynistic word. misogyny is based on how ppl see someone without a penis as lesser, bc they don't have the power to forcibly penetrate and feel genital pleasure for it, they can't impregnate, they're "just a hole" etc. like so much of misogyny is just body-specific. the misogyny transfems experience seems terrible but also conditional? bc if they're found out to be amab they're treated as creepy men, so they then stop experiencing misogyny, they just face usually homophobia. meanwhile bio women (and transmascs who don't transition) have no exit door to the misogyny unless they transition and pass perfectly as male or something, and historically that wasn't an option. to me man & woman have always been neutral body types until i came across trans stuff, and i think the idea of gendered brains sounds sexist af. like gender seems like bullshit, i see me being a woman as just like being a female cat, i don't have ~womanly~ vibes in my brain, i was just born female and that's the least important thing about me, but male society made it weird. why should gender continue to be a thing? what does gender actually mean, if sexism was to be eradicated? is it bad if i view my womanhood as just a body type? most cis people i've talked to view their "gender" like this, as just a body type, like any other animal. they don't "feel" like one, they just have the body and aren't dysphoric about it. they might not always like it, but they don't have dysphoria about it, so they just… are. is that transphobic? i've heard mixed thoughts about it from trans ppl & activists, i'm just curious. feel free to ignore this lol ;;

If the term woman does not feel right for you, but your body being female feels fine, that's ok!! There are many genders that are not man or woman: agender, gender neutral, and nonbinary are options. You could also just say "I do not have a gender, please just use female". That's ok to use for yourself. However, most people do not like to be called "female" or "male" in English. It is considered dehumanizing to call someone male or female if they are a person, because as you said, it treats them like an animal. So we just don't do it.

In English, "woman" is a gender. "Woman" is not attached to the female sex. If a person identifies as a woman, then she is a woman, even if she is not female. We usually say "cis woman" for a woman who was assigned female at birth (afab), and "trans woman" for a woman who was assigned male at birth (amab). We do not say "biologically female".

For example, I am afab, but I am not a woman. I am a trans man, and I am nonbinary. Meanwhile my friend from college, she IS a woman, even though she is amab. She is a trans woman.

As for misogyny: what you described as misogyny is actually sexism. Sexism is based on sex, misogyny is based on gender. They are separate.

Trans women experience both misogyny and sexism, and it is not "conditional". A trans woman does not stop experiencing misogyny if she is discovered to be a trans woman. That is not how this works. She will continue to face misogyny, and it will be misogyny mixed with transphobia against trans women. This is called transmisogyny.

"Being treated like creepy men" is a major part of transmisogyny. It is hatred towards trans women. When a trans woman is called a "creepy man", she is being misgendered (which is transphobia) and treated like a sexual deviant even though she is not. She is experiencing this misogyny because she is a trans woman. If you hate a person for being a woman, that is misogyny.

We don't say "bio women". What you mean is a "cis woman". Yes, cis women also experience misogyny, and they cannot escape it - but neither can trans women.

"Man" and "Woman" are not body types, they are genders. When you say "body type", you are meaning someone's sex, but body types can be changed. A trans woman can have a vagina and breasts, just like a cis woman. A trans man can have a penis and a flat chest, just like a cis man. There are surgeries for all of this, and hormones trans people can take to change their sex from male to female, or from female to male.

There is currently mixed science about the idea of gendered brains. You can find scientific research that supports the idea brains have gender, and you can find scientific research that supports the idea that brains do NOT have gender. Right now, no one knows. But it is not something we get to have an opinion about, it is something science must learn.

The idea of gender is a social construct, just like sex. The idea of man and woman was invented by society. I agree that it is bullshit to assign qualities to man and woman. Women do not have to be nice, men do not have to be aggressive. These are called gender roles, and they are indeed bad. Trans people agree that gender roles are bad, and we are loudly yelling that no one should have to act a certain way just because they are a man or a woman. I want to free gender from gender roles, so genders do not have assigned roles, and so anyone can do anything they want.

If we got rid of sexism, that would be great, but that would not make genders disappear. There would still be people who identify with "woman" or "man" - it would be their own personal feeling of what that means to them. Maybe you do not have "womanly" feelings inside your head, but maybe someone else does! It is not your right to tell her she cannot be a woman.

Many people have very strong feelings about their gender. It is ok if you do not, and it is ok if you don't understand people who like their gender! But you have to let other people live freely. If a cis woman wants to be a woman, let her. If a trans woman wants to be a woman, let her.

A cis woman fits the body she has. She doesn't have to think about her body or her sex or her gender - she may never think about it at all!! Her body doesn't give her a big feeling. It is boring. She may say "I am a woman, and I have a body that was assigned female at birth, and I have breasts and a vagina and a uterus, and all of that feels correct to me". That is what it means to "feel like a woman" for a woman who is cisgender - it doesn't feel like much!! It's not a big feeling, it's just "Yeah, all of this matches, and I don't have to think about it".

Meanwhile, a trans man might say "I was told I am a woman, but that does not sound right to me. I have a body with breasts and a vagina and a uterus, and that feels wrong, too. I do not fit this body, and I am not a woman." That can be dysphoria, and that is how some trans people feel. Many trans people think about their body and their sex and their gender a lot because those things do not match, so it causes discomfort all the time.

Imagine you go buy a pair of shoes at the store. You put them on, and they fit perfectly. You go home, and wear the shoes every day. You probably do not think about your shoes all day long; you probably don't even feel them on your feet. You don't notice your shoes at all, because they fit right and are comfortable. They do what they need to do; they are boring.

When a cis woman says she doesn't feel much about her body, that means her body fits like a good pair of shoes.

Now imagine you are given a pair of shoes, and they do not fit right. They are too tight, but you are told you have to wear them anyway. All day long, your feet hurt. Your toes are being pinched and the shoes are giving you blisters all over your feet. You think about your shoes and how much they make your feet hurt all day long, because you cannot stop thinking about them. The pain is still there even when you get home and take the shoes off. And you dread that tomorrow, you have to put those bad shoes back on and walk around, again and again.

That is how gender and the body can feel for a trans person. It is constantly on their mind, it is something they pay attention to all the time because it does not fit right.

[st-dionysus]

Genuinely don't mean this in a negative sense, I'm actually just curious. Stating this first as I have trouble with written tone and like making my intent clear-

Why do you acknowledge/have conversations with transandrophobic people who reply to your posts? From my understanding it seems to make you quite angry(?) and I don't understand the goal of doing so, especially when the difference between your irl and online community interactions seems to be so stark regarding the levels of bigotry you face (from what you've shared on your blog).

No worries if you don't want to respond for whatever reason either

Hello!

I don't understand what made you come to the conclusion that the levels of bigotry I face in real life are lesser than that of the ones I face online, it is the opposite - in real life I have to face the material consequences of transphobia, transandrophobia, bioessentialism, misogyny, racism, capitalism, and a wide variety of other intersecting issues.

Online I have to face mean words (which are sometimes death/rape threats, triggering content, and pedojacketing or other types of "callout posts" - but ultimately, they are just words).

What I do have Irl, is a healthy support group and community through found family and friends that make the levels of bigotry I face worth facing. Having the privilege of a strong community of trans friends in real life is also what allows for the online harassment to be "just words" - I have a community offline, which not everyone does (Which is why online harrasment can be deadly, I do not want to dismiss the amount of harm online harassment can cause).

I do however, talk more about the support and community I have in my personal life, then I do about how I'm personally facing a lot of discrimination and difficulties on a daily basis, because it's important to share with people that community, intersection, and love is always possible and worth living and fighting for. I'm a firm believer that love and community are among the most important parts of life.

(I do also talk about the material effects of transandrophobia pretty frequently, since it's a pretty important aspect of discussing it.)

As for why I interact with the people who say mean words online, there are a few reasons;

I think they might genuinely be confused or do not have malicious intent. (I am often incorrect.) Sometimes when people don't understand something, they lash out this is even easier to do online when you don't have another human being standing in front of you, but instead have a wall of text. Sometimes, I interact with people to try and explain my point of view and sometimes I'm an asshole when I do that, because it's easy to be an asshole when you're facing a wall of text and not another person. That being said, often I'm just trying to get a point across. I've have a lot of friends who've been assholes to me and then helped me learn and grow.

I am documenting arguments, fallacies, and harrasment directed at trans men. A very common argument against aknowledging transandrophobia and the harm it does is "I don't believe you, I've never seen someone do or say that about a trans man, you're lying for attention". I can direct those people to proof that says otherwise. I can also use this documentation when discussing transandrophobia and the shapes that it can take in activist and academic settings or when discussing with friends and found family or younger trans men who reach out to me online, I can use it to educate how these arguments form and how to cope with them, when they are directed at you. It's a "know your enemy" situation, and in this case it's "Know the arguments that will be used against you and prepare for them cause they won't always be online"

Some of them are really stupid, it's funny to point at them and go "wow, that's really stupid" and it gives other people the chance to go "God, that is really stupid, I am going to block this person before they can be really stupid in my notes or inbox".

I typically block people after one or two interactions if it's clear that they are being malicious on purpose, cause I'm not actually interested in wasting time, I just want to put their ass on blast first. They said something publicly, and I'm sharing what they said with the context they said it to me in, so other people can block them. This means I can avoid perpetuating the flaws in callout posts and block lists that are just a list of urls followed by "trust me bro, these are bad people!!!".

Thank you for the ask and I hope I was able to answer your question.

[velvetvexations]

ik mosts of ur asks are on the topic of transphobia anyways but I still wanted to give you a !!content warning!! anyways bc i will be repeating some trans misogynistic rhetoric as an example:

Hey! So I was just wondering what your opinion is on misandry potentially affecting trans women and fems. I ask because in a lot of spaces where this transfem vs. transmasc infighting is happening, I will see transmascs say something along the lines of how trans women and fems are also negatively affected by “misandry” or the hatred/fear of men. As an example cis transphobes want to ban trans women from using the womens restroom in the name of “protecting women from perverted men dressing up to prey on ‘real’ women.” But ive found that in most spaces this is an opinion that is immediately shot down, and usually some trans fems will jump in to say that misandry doesn’t affect transwomen and that its simply transmisogyny bc transphobes dont view trans women as men, but instead, as “lesser” women. Personally I think both statements can be true but I am not trans fem and I don’t have that experience, so I was wondering what your opinion on the matter is.

Sorry if I worded anything offensively or if my example was triggering or anything.

People who assert that trans women are perceived not as men but as "failed women" are being disingenuous or witless, they can choose which.

Whether or not you call it misandry or misogyny or whatever is ultimately semantics, but to deny we're seen as men is just...blatantly not engaging with reality because it's more polite. Like, sorry, talking about oppression means discussing impolite things, including the fact that people don't consider you the gender you identify as.

[thequeerwizardcouncil]

hiii so english isn't my first language and i'm learning more about gender and trans stuff and if i might be trans or something (i've been told i sound agender?? but that feels wrong), and something that confuses me, so i'm asking around abt it… "woman" used to simply denote afab, right? like a body type of ppl with a biological (not surgical) vagina & estrogen puberty. like a female dog. ppl say that it reduces women to their genitals, but what about with other animals? like female cat, female horse, etc, just bc we say "oh she's a girl" or "oh i have a male dog" doesn't mean we're saying they're only their genitals in that case, right…? a bitch is just a female dog, that's why it's a misogynistic word. misogyny is based on how ppl see someone without a penis as lesser, bc they don't have the power to forcibly penetrate and feel genital pleasure for it, they can't impregnate, they're "just a hole" etc. like so much of misogyny is just body-specific. the misogyny transfems experience seems terrible but also conditional? bc if they're found out to be amab they're treated as creepy men, so they then stop experiencing misogyny, they just face usually homophobia. meanwhile bio women (and transmascs who don't transition) have no exit door to the misogyny unless they transition and pass perfectly as male or something, and historically that wasn't an option. to me man & woman have always been neutral body types until i came across trans stuff, and i think the idea of gendered brains sounds sexist af. like gender seems like bullshit, i see me being a woman as just like being a female cat, i don't have ~womanly~ vibes in my brain, i was just born female and that's the least important thing about me, but male society made it weird. why should gender continue to be a thing? what does gender actually mean, if sexism was to be eradicated? is it bad if i view my womanhood as just a body type? most cis people i've talked to view their "gender" like this, as just a body type, like any other animal. they don't "feel" like one, they just have the body and aren't dysphoric about it. they might not always like it, but they don't have dysphoria about it, so they just… are. is that transphobic? i've heard mixed thoughts about it from trans ppl & activists, i'm just curious. feel free to ignore this lol ;;

Okay, the head of the council also has English as ser second language, so bare with us as we try to dissect this ask.

From what we can piece together, you're asking whether associating gender with a body type is transphobic? If yes, then yes. Gender is a strange thing, differs from being to being. A body can be an accessory to gender, affirming gender or causing dysphoria, but is not the gender itself.

There are many GNC beings who are what gender they say they are. It doesn't matter the body or presentation, your gender is valid.

You may inquire our transgender, xenogender, voidpunk, or intersex representatives on further queries

[femconstellation]

I know how you feel about trans women (I’m not here to debate upon that, you’re entitled to your opinions) but how do you feel about trans men? Asking because while I don’t agree with terf ideology I want to know more about it (I like knowing the opinions of people I disagree with because being informed is important!)

Feel free to delete/not interact with this ask, i don’t mind!

Hi, thank you for the v respectful ask!

I actually am of the opinion that a lot of the trans children are mistaking/having their feelings of not fitting into gender stereotypes as being trans, and that quite a few trans adults are the same way. And while I usually do refer to trans-identified males in general when im talking about the fetishizing of lesbianism/being a woman, i dont think every TiM is doing it to fetish being female or a lesbian (…but there’s quite a lot and every TiM adult I’ve met is like that). I have sympathy for young trans people who were convinced that disliking their sex = changing their gender. But I don’t have sympathy for the TiMs that say that ‘feeling like a lesbian’ or ‘feeling like they like women the way lesbians do’ is the reason they transitioned. Or say that their whole gender identity is based on VERY sexist stereotypes about women. Or the ones who straight up admit to transitioning because they think being a woman is a feeling and not something I am literally oppressed for being.

And trans men specifically - I say this as someone who former identified as nonbinary for a while, and dipped into transmasc territory. And I also have many currently-trans men or formerly-trans men friends, so it’s something I’ve witnessed as well. A lot of the things they describe as gender dysphoria — literally the effects of misogyny or fatphobia or racism. (but mostly misogyny since it directly relates to sex — but i think it is very important to mention that fatphobia and racism are both things i have witnessed being part of the reason.)

I thought i was nonbinary because I was uncomfortable with how I was viewed as a woman. The way my friends treated me for being a woman despite them mostly being female. The way any male friends I had acted towards me. And while I knew being nonbinary didn’t change how society acted towards me, I felt like I distanced myself from that misogyny. In my head, they were now silly for calling me misogynistic things because haha, I’m not a woman!

And I’ve seen this with my friends too. Friends who go through sexual trauma, discomfort with the constant sexualization of their body, male harassment, etc. tend to lean into identifying away from being a woman because they’re at least partially aware that being a woman is related to the shit that happened to them and the treatment they get.

What’s crazy is how online, if you say you like being ‘masculine’ or ‘gnc’. Or if you say you hate your breasts. Or if you say you hate being a woman. You’re called an egg and THAT side of the internet convinces you you’re trans when 99% of the time, you’re just dealing with the effects of misogyny.

So in short I think most trans men are just females who are dealing with the effects of misogyny and shit in their life and think being a man is the solution when a LOT of them would do better if they had a mental health support system that went through trying to sort out that internalized misogyny before immediately jumping to hormones. But also I don’t think lesser of TiF for that; I just think they’re better off getting support that isn’t hormones first.

Idek. I worked 14 hours today and I am tired. 😭😭 I hope this makes sense.

Also irl I don’t ‘misgender’ (use he/him pronouns for TiMs, she/her for TiF) trans people. I don’t harass trans people irl. I keep my opinions to myself irl. I just let them out on here 🌝

[qweerhet]

there's something deeply annoying to me about the "misogyny isn't just diet oppression" crowd (tbc: a statement i agree with, there is no such thing as "diet oppression" and anyone positing any particular form of oppression as "lesser" or "not important" is wrong and also annoying) supporting their arguments with statements about material effects of gender essentialism and the patriarchy and attributing them to misogyny.

like... idk it's just bad argumentation to be like. misogyny is a real form of oppression. to prove it, let's talk about how abortion is policed. that's not misogyny, that's something that affects men and every single other gender equally to women, it stems from patriarchal ideas that are very difficult to pick apart but basically boil down to:

capitalist white supremacist patriarchy relies on control over white reproduction to maintain itself

it also uses reproduction to punitively harm poor people, particularly people of color, for existing

conservative dogma views sex outside of reproduction as something to be punished, and pregnancy/children as objectified methods of punishment

the key factor in oppressive policing of abortion and access thereof isn't gender, it's biology. it affects people who are capable of becoming pregnant completely regardless of their gender, and its implementations in the real, material world are not affected by gender. men who need abortions have absolutely no institutional access to abortions or privilege within the reproductive realm by virtue of their gender, and "not being a woman" has absolutely no effect on a class of people's abortion access so long as they are capable of becoming pregnant.

if i get into the weeds of this discussion with people who are really defensive over abortion access being an issue of misogyny, they usually tend to default to "rule of majority": if the majority of people who need abortions are women, then it's misogyny, regardless of if other people get lumped into that category or not.

that's, to me, missing the point: misogyny is a word about societal attitudes and dogmas about women, which oppress and disadvantage women. the patriarchy is the phrase for the oppressive structures that harm classes of people on the basis of biological essentialism and rigid gender roles, which feeds misogyny, transphobia, misandry (speaking particularly to "misandry" as a form of white supremacy, ableism, and transphobia targeted towards men in a targeted gendered way, not whatever the fuck MRAs mean when they say it), exorsexism, and all other forms of gendered oppression.

like... it's not feminist to erase an entire marginalized group from the issue that affects them in a targeted way because there's more of another marginalized group that it also targets! it is not feminist to insist on calling gendered issues that do not specifically target women on the basis of their gender "misogyny." people other than women who have uteruses are not outliers, they are normal, common, and intended targets of restricting abortion access. when you decide that trans and intersex people are acceptable collateral damage in prioritizing cisnormative views of bodies, you have already lost your attempts at feminism. relying on this fallacy to prove to people that misogyny is real is only going to lose you trans, intersex, and otherwise gender-non-normative people who should be a part of your movement and listening to what you have to say, because you are contradicting their lived experiences and saying that's okay because they're a minority.

(especially when there are actual misogynistic standards and ideas currently prevalent that you could be using to prove your point, which absolutely affect women regardless of birth assignment and conformity to the sex binary!)

[curieklei]

hiii so english isn't my first language and i'm learning more about gender and trans stuff and if i might be trans or something (i've been told i sound agender?? but that feels wrong), and something that confuses me, so i'm asking around abt it… "woman" used to simply denote afab, right? like a body type of ppl with a biological (not surgical) vagina & estrogen puberty. like a female dog. ppl say that it reduces women to their genitals, but what about with other animals? like female cat, female horse, etc, just bc we say "oh she's a girl" or "oh i have a male dog" doesn't mean we're saying they're only their genitals in that case, right…? a bitch is just a female dog, that's why it's a misogynistic word. misogyny is based on how ppl see someone without a penis as lesser, bc they don't have the power to forcibly penetrate and feel genital pleasure for it, they can't impregnate, they're "just a hole" etc. like so much of misogyny is just body-specific. the misogyny transfems experience seems terrible but also conditional? bc if they're found out to be amab they're treated as creepy men, so they then stop experiencing misogyny, they just face usually homophobia. meanwhile bio women (and transmascs who don't transition) have no exit door to the misogyny unless they transition and pass perfectly as male or something, and historically that wasn't an option. to me man & woman have always been neutral body types until i came across trans stuff, and i think the idea of gendered brains sounds sexist af. like gender seems like bullshit, i see me being a woman as just like being a female cat, i don't have ~womanly~ vibes in my brain, i was just born female and that's the least important thing about me, but male society made it weird. why should gender continue to be a thing? what does gender actually mean, if sexism was to be eradicated? is it bad if i view my womanhood as just a body type? most cis people i've talked to view their "gender" like this, as just a body type, like any other animal. they don't "feel" like one, they just have the body and aren't dysphoric about it. they might not always like it, but they don't have dysphoria about it, so they just… are. is that transphobic? i've heard mixed thoughts about it from trans ppl & activists, i'm just curious. feel free to ignore this lol ;;

Edit: A person in the replies has informed me that those may be are terf talking points disguised as questions to avoid suspicion so take this anon with a grain of salt. I'm keeping this post just in case anon is genuinely curious or something.

From what I see, reducing the societal importance of biological sex is indeed what's slowly happening, but it's definitely not in the same stage everywhere. It takes years for a person to unlearn something they were told their whole life, it takes generations for biological sex to lose importance.

I'll go over your questions:

Why should gender continue to be a thing?

I think you meant biological sex here. It's important to keep a little bit of it for medical purposes. Also imo it's possible for a culture to give it importance without ending up with a system that makes people feel awful sometimes.

What does gender actually mean, if sexism is to be eradicated?

I guess it'll just be a trait of a person in a similar way skin color is a trait of someone's body but like, with way more dimensions. It's kinda hard to put rules around this. Maybe it's just an answer to the question "What am I?".

Is it bad I view my womanhood as just a body type?

Lol do what you want it's your womanhood, your body and your you. There's nothing bad here and you're free to decide for yourself.

Is [not feeling much gender about your body] transphobic?

Doesn't feel transphobic to me, but anyone reading this is free to give their own take on this and the rest of what you said.

Idk what else to say so thanks for the ask and have a safe self discovery journey! Feel free to dm me or send another ask if you want to talk or me to add something to this.

[transzilla]

tgirl user on this site like last december who calls herself a baeddal: i cant believe were getting villified for making jokes about force fem, let trans people live

the same tgirl seeing a few tboys experiment with a similar kink in the same way: uh dont you know the term autoandrophile was once used by PSYCHOLOGISTS to god forbid CALL WOMEN CRAZY? do you think women are CRAZY? also since we All Know being feminine can only ever be lesser and humiliating by liking forcemasc youre basically a woman hating sexist for not only viewing gender roles as black and white. Oh and since youre a trans man you clearly have not matured at all mentally or sexually beyond that one annoying 14 year old trans boy i still hold a gurdge over. Over theres butch lesbians in the forcemasc community? Well theyre okay because theyre women.

Alright well don't take what I said like that hahaha like idk who tf you're talking abt and I do see a lot of trans men bitching abt forcemasc. And cis women which is umm kind of special.

I understand what you're saying and inter community transphobia pisses me the fuck off but I mostly see the "men are evil and transitioning to male is evil" from cis women and these neofeminist environments mostly like i really dont think the heat youre experiencing is a tgirl invention. Like thats a cis pioneer lol

I do see a lot of trans women that are transphobic toward men and don't trust transmasc circles and like I understand some trans male circles have UNIQUE issues but like baeddel shit from tgirls... if I get tired of it I just turn my phone off LMAOO like this shit just does not fly or exist in real life

My whole thing is if you're gonna do the baeddel thing and hate men and say being a man is unethical whatever at least take care of your girls. Like I think I've experienced maybe one "baeddel" circle irl and it was in like a sheltered city bubble and it was just pretty normal transgender female drama like all these liberated queer people say they hate men and dickride them anyway. theyd just be dicks to trans men and dickride cis dudes. And they were even awful to other tgirls like you couldn't do anything and anger the fucking clique without somebody being like oh my god she was such a bitch like it really is ur own people LMAO but like I understand it just blew trying to hack it in those tboy and cis people spaces cus everyone was horrible to u for being transfem. Like they werent any less misogynistic. But then even in the transfem circle they also were not less misogynistic even if tgey talked all this shit abt men. transgender people are awful mostly because they're neurotic, it was rejection from other trans people that had these girls reacting with bullshit like that, I just don't want you responding to these wolf notes with more anger. Like let the fire die out. Please. Lol.

Dont read too much into internet drama especially, like this shit isnt real I think it gets so cutthroat cause a lot of people arent really trans or have trans communities outside of the internet unfortunately like the real world resources are not there and people are too eager to subsitute with tumblr. And I'm the same way like I'm a hick like my closest trans friend is a half hour away. Like just calm down cus if ur not calm ur not thinking.

[redley-of-many-noodles]

Content Warning: Transphobia, Radical Feminism, etc.

Please do not interact with any of the tags mentioned here, or their sibling tags that fall within the same community. Just add them to your filter. It’ll be better for your mental health.

So, I just fell down an unfortunate rabbit hole.

Found a blog using Sylveon (the Pokémon) to represent anti-LGBTQ ideals. (Because the “For You” page thought I needed variety, I guess.) The logic was so fucked that I didn’t even understand it was meant as hate at first. I looked at their blog to try and understand, and quickly did. Started blocking them and the people who had interacted with them. A lot of pro-Israel stuff in their orbit too, unsurprisingly.

Then I noticed some of the tags. “Terfblr.” “Proud radfem.”

A TERF is a Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist, for anyone who doesn’t know what the acronym means.

It confused me that people used these tags. Why would someone want to make exclusion a part of their identity? Why would anyone call themselves a radical feminist? Definitions 2-4 on Dictionary.com explicitly describe the word as being used in regards to extreme beliefs:

Not “extreme” like LGBTQIA+ people wanting to have basic human rights and self-determination, but “extreme” like Trump’s views on the place of blacks and immigrants in society. “Extreme” like toxic masculine views on where women belong. “Extreme” like the feminists who indiscriminately hate men. “Extreme” like Nazi Germany’s views on the place of the ‘lesser races’ in society.

Those are the kind of “extreme” views that the word ‘radical’ describes. Not the “extreme” of Palestinians wanting Israel to stop committing genocide against them. Not the “extreme” of black Americans that took measures to defend themselves from police brutality like the Black Panther Party. Not the “extreme” of the USSR’s satellite states wanting their autonomy.

It makes me think they’re of the mindset that they’re being called “extremists” as an attack on feminism and not that they’re being called extremists because the beliefs they propagate are actively harmful and inherently hateful in nature.

There were tons of posts like this I found. Where transgender people were being demonized as men seeking to prey on women — largely ignoring that transmascs even existed (probably seen as “traitors” or some other bs logic). Demonizing them as people trying to use self identification as a means to invade safe spaces. And they always referred to us exclusively as “transsexual” from what I saw. Because ‘my gender is not your costume,’ and everybody seemed to be firmly rooted in a gender-binary mindset. That our identity was irrevocably determined by the circumstances of our birth. I even saw one post saying how disgusted they were by drag, because it was “a man’s mockery of a woman’s image.”

They called us monsters. For existing. For trying to be happy. For occasionally finding happiness.

They made it out as though transgenders could only be happy at the expense of the safety of women and children.

I don’t have a “point” to make with this. I just… wanted to express this.

This hate.

Because I have discovered what it feels like to truly hate someone, having seen what these disgusting humans consider “progressive.”

I hate it.

I hate you.

I hate that I understand this feeling now.

TERFs, for teaching me hate, I will never forgive you.

I will never forgive how I have been warped by you.

How you have twisted me.

I HATE YOU.

And I’m getting off this hellsite for the day, for my own good.

Goodbye.

[bylertruther]

I think ppl mix up gnc with androgynous too! Its pretty easy to confuse in this era but the distinction is important

you're absolutely right, mal! i drafted a long post about this earlier this morning, but i'll copy and paste it below now that you gave me the opportunity to stand on my soap box again hehe. :p

gender nonconformity is not just a man painting his nails, a woman refusing to shave, or someone being transgender. gender expression and variance do not start and end at one's physical presentation, nor is it directly tied to your gender identity itself. cis people can be gnc, trans people can be gnc. you can be a man that dresses like a lumberjack and still be gnc. you can be a woman that wears makeup and still be gnc. you can transition and still be gnc after. gender nonconformity encompasses behavior, interests, and appearance, and it has to do with how an individual interacts with gender roles, which we know are based on stereotypes held at large by society—stereotypes that are still largely common today. and this is a modern definition, by the way, not one plucked from an eighties textbook. not everything is about physical appearances and just because people associate gender nonconformity with one rigid and specific thing does not mean that it is that thing. the same way that androgynous does not only mean a skinny white person that is either a butch woman or a man with long hair, gnc does not only mean said skinny white man painting his nails or said skinny white woman getting an undercut and letting her pits grow out. gnc does not HAVE to be ONLY how you groom or dress yourself. gnc has A LOT to do with behaviors and interests, and the world is not nearly as liberal as it is on tumblr.com lol. some people know better, especially as many millennials start to rear newer generations, but we're still not at an at-large cultural shift, and the gender norms discussed in psychology and psychosexual textbooks have not changed too much as a result. high levels of sensitivity and empathy are still presently seen as being aspects of male gender nonconformity. it is still something that many gay and nonconforming men, as well as their parents, state in studies and surveys about this. sensitive men still face homophobia and misogyny. american men are still expected to not show emotion, work hard, and be the big bad protectors. many people are starting to see that it's a load of bullshit, but it's still considered the norm! gender roles are culturally specific and i think it's just unrealistic to act like western culture, specifically and especially mainstream traditional american culture, doesn't promote the idea of the aggressive, red-blooded alpha male lol. i don't agree with gender norms bc i'm a dirty leftist but that doesn't mean that they don't exist and that society does not push them on everyone and punish those who dare to say no. some things have changed, but not nearly as many as people think and taking a look at how people vote or just talking to people outside of your immediate bubble will show you that pretty quickly. we're unfortunately set to wait a good while before the tides start to really change and we start seeing these less conservative views prevail. and until then... yeah, sensitive men are still assumed to be lesser men and gay and feminine and so on and so forth by young and old people alike in 2023. literally just look at the knee-jerk reaction that so many people have on here and twitter when you talk about how will actually acts on the show. i just. hewwo. gnc is not just looks 😔 and it doesn't automatically make you trans either. 😔 and unless some of you were raised in a literal bubble on a leftist commune somewhere, i know that you know that the world is not as kind and open-minded as you're acting like it is.

[awarmbowlofhomemadesoup]

So my father in his early 60s (whom I no longer talk to) has revealed himself as a creepy old man toward girls 18-24 years old. This is what he genuinely believes:

[ID: My father’s message telling, “Mature single guys 40 above prefer younger ADULT women not because they are creeps but because they make better wives for the following reasons BASED ON STATISTICAL DATA:

- lesser emotional baggage from past relationships

- respect men more and not potty mouths

- they tend to be more loyal to their husband

- higher percentage marriage lasts a lifetime

- she is more feminine and don’t have masculine traists

- more subservient to her husband

- stranger ability to bond with her husband”]

I’m putting it in here to tell you people like this exist. I know there are good men out there. But just be careful of “nice guys” like these.

I don’t even know their red flags. All I know is that my father acts like a harmless “nice guy.” He’s genial and agreeable and genuinely believes himself to be good compared to gay people whom he thinks are predatory. 

But he keeps his bigotry to himself because he feels misunderstood and undermined by feminists and trans people. I don’t think he’s even aware that he’s a bigot because he righteously thinks the latter should be invisible.

[ID: My father’s message saying, “You have distorted views from years of radical ballbashingmen feminist brainwashing. May God enlighten your mind and protect your from demonic feminist influences... and demonic trans influences”]

I don’t even know where he’s getting these ideas into his head. I can’t help him but all I can do is warn people of him. 

[the-feminist-philosopher]

Agreed about Serano; haven't read her work but I agree with the quotes of hers that I've seen (though I've also heard criticism of her from within the queer community, particularly from trans men, and I'd have to read her myself to see). On the topic of autogynephilia, I have heard radfems acknowledge that some cis women get turned on by their own sex appeal, but that tends to get interpreted as self-objectification based in internalized misogyny. So those cis women tend to get pity from radfems, instead of the hostility that trans women get.

The double standard is wild, innit?

Autogynephilia- which is a very flawed theory- is considered self-objectification among cis women but... not among trans women? The fact that they assume wanting to be feminine is just a fetish or sexual perversion says all you need to know about how they view femininity. They see femininity as inherently inferior rather than something they've been taught as 1.) being inherently feminine (nothing is inherently "feminine," only socially regarded as so), and 2.) being inherently a lesser form of self-expression (there's no "lesser" form of presentation as there's no issue with elaborate or beautiful presentation because the issue is the way we make it a requirement of one single sex for the [supposed] desires of the other sex).

Then the fact they also treat wanting to be a woman as a sexual perversion tells you that they view "woman" as a sexual object because they are tying any desire to be a woman to a woman's sexualization and fetishization. Wanting to be your lived identity is not a fetish, but they assume that the only reason someone would want to be a woman is because the only value people have for women is as an object for men's desire.

It's a very unfortunate way to look at femininity and womanhood, in my opinion.

Trans women don't get turned on by being a woman because they don't only value women for the desire they provide men. Is there a problem in society of women being reduced to mere sexual objects? Yes. Is that the fault of trans women? No.

But what really gets me about the anti-trans activist's analysis is that they will say that "woman" is defined by men/society as a sexual object; that her value is placed in the sexual desire her body can provide men. And they and I would agree with that. We'd disagree with the idea that this is why trans women transition, but we'd agree that a woman's value (and, for me, this includes a trans woman's value) is placed in the desire and attention her body can provide for men.

I'm thinking about such analyses as the following:

“Woman is not born: she is made. In the making, her humanity is destroyed. She becomes symbol of this, symbol of that: mother of the earth, slut of the universe; but she never becomes herself because it is forbidden for her to do so.” ― Andrea Dworkin

"Women and men are divided by gender, made into the sexes as we know them, by the social requirements of heterosexuality, which institutionalizes male sexual dominance and female sexual submission." ― Catharine MacKinnon

“The normal fuck by a normal man is taken to be an act of invasion and ownership undertaken in a mode of predation. Woman have been chattels to man as wives, as prostitutes, as sexual and reproductive servants. Being owned and being fucked are or have been virtually synonymous experiences in the lives of woman. He owns you - he fucks you. The fucking conveys the quality of ownership - he owns you inside out.” ― Andrea Dworkin

“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.' (Leviticus 18:22). That means simply that it is foul to do to other men what men habitually, proudly, manfully do to women: use them as inanimate, empty, concave things; fuck them into submission; subordinate them through sex.” ― Andrea Dworkin

I can recognize that the patriarchy socializes cis men- *the* primary group with consistent and reliable access to the patriarchal power structure- to sexually subordinate and dominate women. And the anti-trans activists like to try and take this route when arguing against allowing trans women to live in their identity. They try to argue that trans women see cis women as an object to conquer, and that they do this by being women and "stealing" the cis woman's identity and spirit. They see it as a "violation" of the cis body. And they firmly believe that trans women do this because they see women as a sexual object; one which "becoming" turns them on. It's, well, incredibly transphobic.

But, in order to do this, they would need to admit that "woman" is something socially created, right? That's what Dworkin and MacKinnon were arguing: that woman is a socially-made category and that this category is socially constructed to be a sex object; to be something to be fucked by the patriarchy and the paterfamilias. And these feminists also saw that trans women are also seen within this patriarchal dichotomy of the fucked and fuckers with how fetishized and coveted trans bodies are.

However, the anti-trans activist is adamantly opposed to the idea that "woman" is a social category, insisting, instead, that "woman" is defined by a single, fixed biological attribute; that "woman" is biological; an "adult, human female." They're opposed to the social definition of "woman" and "female" because they think that defining "woman" as a discrete sexed caste will keep trans women out of the Sacred Land of the Woman. They're adamant that "woman" is a discrete sex; that the sexes are polar opposites; that the sexes are "naturally" differentiated.

(Sex differentiation *is* a feature of the patriarchy that posits that “men are men” and “women are women” and the two ought be and fundamentally are separate from each other. It is responsible for the social prescription that each group must stay within certain bounds of public and private life as well as certain bounds of behavior and certain bounds of presentation. Male dominant society must see to it that "female" is a woman and "clearly" a woman, opposite that of "man." This is also known as the polarity of sex.)

So, when it's politically convenient, they'll argue that the patriarchy creates (socializes) women to be sex objects; to be fetishes; to be fucked. And when that's no longer convenient for their argument, they'll argue that women and men are discrete; that there are separate biological classifications for humans; that there is one self-evident sex (to be fucked) as well as a polar opposite sex (to fuck).

“Male dominant society has defined women as a discrete biological group forever. If this was going to produce liberation, we’d be free.”― Catharine MacKinnon

“…while the system of gender polarity is real, it is not true. It is not true that there are two sexes which are discrete and opposite, which are polar, which unite naturally and self-evidently into a harmonious whole.” ― Andrea Dworkin, “The Root Cause” in Our Blood (1976)

"The ideology of sexual difference functions as censorship in our culture by masking, on the ground of nature, the social opposition between men and women. Masculine/feminine, male/female are the categories which serve to conceal the fact that social differences always belong to an economic, political, ideological order. Every system of domination establishes divisions at the material and economic level... It is oppression that creates sex and not the contrary. The contrary would be to say that sex creates oppression, or to say that the cause (origin) of oppression is to be found in sex itself, in a natural division of the sexes preexisting (or outside of) society." ― Monique Wittig, French author, philosopher, and feminist theorist who wrote about abolition of the sex-class system

But I always wonder... if our sex is self-evident and if our separation is self-evident and if this separation and differentiation and conscious recognition of there being two sexed classes is as old as our species, then how does one fight against patriarchal institutions which base their legitimacy in the "naturalness" of our divisions and justify oppression with "biolog-ics"?

[dykeulous]

i think the problem is that most people don’t understand, and, quite frankly, don’t care to understand feminist theory of gendered socialization.

“male socialization” is not a binary. it is not a clear-fit box. it is not something that can never vary, change & depend on multiple complex factors. feminists are not using it to declare homosexual males & those perceived as homosexual males “privileged”. homosexual men & those perceived to be, doubly so if gender nonconforming, are heavily persecuted & discriminated against. feminists aren’t denying that. the problem is that so many lgbt activists just aren’t willing to listen to & learn from feminists. they aren’t willing to listen to what we actually believe & are rather declaring all of our meaningful analysis as “unproductive” & “bigoted”.

one of the most important aspects of transmisogyny is that it forms on the basis of homophobia against male people– firstly, it starts with gncphobia, that is heavily intertwined with homophobia, then it escalates into transphobia & creates transmisogyny; the highest stage of transmisogyny being conditional misogyny (which passing trans women & transfems go through). we aren’t saying that non-passing transfems are highly privileged. we are aware that, since they most of the time experienced a childhood of high-level homophobia & lived the childhood of a gnc boy, they definitely, undoubtedly were ostracized, othered, isolated, and even abused by the upperclass of the system. we are aware that the patriarchy oppresses & marginalizes against them in a very specific & unique way. however, a lot of you people simply refuse to acknowledge that homophobia is born out of misogyny. the system & the patriarchal upperclass oppresses against them on the basis of viewing them as lesser beings & traitors of the superior male sex– which creates a perfect foundation & patriarchal justification for transmisogyny. yes, transfems, even non-passing ones, a lot of the time experience a very different childhood & have much, much different life experiences than cis men do, and they are not the upperclass under the gender hierarchy. however, we also must understand that this is a uniquely male experience– making it, in fact, male socialization. this is the kind of experience only transfems (& gnc men & gay men) will understand, hence the term “transmisogyny”. male socialization can hurt & harm those who went through it– and in some cultures, the levels of transmisogyny are so high the abusive segregation becomes even more stark & oppressive; which i believe can form what i call third socialization.

we aren’t trying to say you are highly privileged over us on the basis of having been socialized male. we understand & empathize that male socialization can harm those affected by it just as much as female socialization harms us. we are aware that you have a unique perspective, and we find it very valuable & worth listening to: but we will not tolerate outright dismissals of our activist terminology. intersectionality matters. we are all privileged & disprivileged in some ways. i believe transfems have a very unique voice in feminist spaces; but their voice shouldn’t cancel out the voice of those directly & systemically oppressed by female-specific misogyny. we are united in the very fact that we are all seen as subhuman under the gender hierarchy, and the violence of the patriarchy won’t spare us if we spend time blaming each other for the problems we face by the hand of the patriarchal upperclass. while our issues can intersect, they also do differ– and we need to have discussions about this. we aren’t saying your oppression is less valid & less damaging. we are just saying it is different. i believe it is important to have meaningful discussions about how the ways we are marginalized on the basis of gender differ, and that there is time & place to speak about the unique experiences & situations of each & every gender-marginalized group. we should be spending time discussing at length & acknowledging intersectionality, and the ways we might hold power over one another, despite both of us being disadvantaged on the same axis. so, i might hold power over you in some areas, but you also might hold power over me in other areas. this shouldn’t be hard to digest, and it is about the most lukewarm activist statement i could have made.

the theory of gender socialization was not made to oppress against you. it was coined to explain the sociological aspects of misogyny & debunk bio-essentialist explanations for it. you can critique the people using it maliciously (& i’m not going to claim that doesn’t happen, because it absolutely does & i’ve seen it happen) without trying to debunk the existence of gender socialization itself. do better.

Here's a key part of the transfemme experience that is very overlooked: when you don't pass, people don't actually see you as a man, or treat you like a man.