#that's not to say that people cannot identify as men and women lol

[nerevarbignaturals]

very controversial trans take; detransitioners are not our enemy. they're people who took the time to question their gender, to explore their identity inside and out, and came to the conclusion that their identity best aligns with what they were assigned at birth. i wish everybody could take the time to sit and think deeply about the identities they hold, particularly things like gender that are inherent, but also deeply socialized. the detransitioners who are spouting anti-trans rhetoric have been taught by the system we live in that even questioning your gender is wrong, so for many of them, that rhetoric is a survival tool for assimilating back into cis society. doesn't make it okay to hold anti-trans views, for certain, but it does expose the fact that the enforcement of a restrictive gender binary hurts everyone, even cis people.

#nobody is helped by the gender binary #that's not to say that people cannot identify as men and women lol #that tends to be the takeaway a lot of ppl get when i talk about this #it means that forcing everybody to identify within the categories of man and woman is harmful because not everybody is a man or a woman #also the gender binary enforces such strict roles for men and women that anybody who deviates from those is punished #this was inspired mostly by the fact that i had a really cool conversation today with a person who had detransitioned #i went to the food bank bc a bitch got medical bills ahaha #and had a neat conversation with a person who was on T for seven years and went through tons of deep identity processing #before realizing that they were actually a gender nonconforming cis person #they're also black so we talked a lot about the ways that the gender binary harms BIPOC folks #she's a masc lesbian so she doesn't present her gender in the same way as a femhet woman might #and much of the standards we hold in the western gender binary are racist bc they're based solely on white ideas of gender #everything from hair to clothes to eyes #beef speaks #beef's queer theory

[ms-demeanor]

i really liked OJST in the mid-2010s but i didn’t stop reading cause of the cuck comic - wasn’t there also a comic erika moen wrote about (functionally) harassing lesbians with her now-husband?

In the mid 2010s closet-keys criticized one of Erika Moen's early diary comics and described Erika Moen as "Reassuring a cishet partner that it’s totally okay to use hate speech towards wlw at Pride" and condoning the harassment and fetishization of lesbians because of a 2007 comic that she had made as part of a webcomic she had written about gender and her interactions with her queerness.

The hate speech in question is the partner asking "are you sure you want to hold my hand with all these dykes around?" while they are pretty clearly at a Dyke Day event during pride, and the reassurance that 'it's totally okay to use hate speech toward wlw' is Erika responding "sweetie, I'm proud to be with you."

The comic is still up with a disclaimer that it was written at a different time, and I know that's probably not going to fly with a lot of people but if you were a bi woman in the early to mid 2000s it was pretty common to use statements like "lol yeah i'm into women my boyfriend is fine with it as long as I take pictures" to diffuse the biphobia from straight people AND to say shit like "I'm not a party bi, I actually love pussy, thanks" to diffuse the biphobia from queer people. (if you were a bi guy in the early to mid 2000s i'm sorry and I'm sorry now because we got LUG but that mostly went away and you *still* have to deal with the "gay in waiting" bullshit).

That comic ends with Erika and her partner looking at a woman and saying "I'd totally do her" while the woman thinks "pigs" and if you think that means that they literally sat on the street and vocally commented about lesbians passing by them or that they condone harassing lesbians (in, I cannot stress this enough, a diary comic written by someone in their early twenties who is realizing they are occasionally interested in some men some of the time after identifying as a lesbian their whole life), then I'm gonna go ahead and recommend signing up for some variety or other of literary analysis class. Do we think that Erika is seriously implying that she is going to make her boyfriend gay if she fucks him in this comic from a year later?

If this comic bothers you and you see it as a straight-passing couple giving the go-ahead to harass lesbians, you do you, I'm not saying you have to read the comic or enjoy Erika Moen.

I am saying it's a bit of a stretch, though, and certainly the least charitable explanation possible, and that we should probably give people some space to say awkward things about their sexuality and to make missteps when discussing it in their early twenties and not call them lesbophobic fifteen years after the fact for a college comic.

Moen also gets called transphobic because she has described trans men as adorable/cute in a way that could be read as patronizing in one comic and because she made a comic about wearing a packer for fun and for sexual gratification with her cis male partner as a cis woman.

Appropriately, all of these things feel very "late twenty teens tumblr callout post."

If it bugs you, you don't have to read the comics but I've talked about Moen before and I've gotten the anons in my inbox calling me lesbophobic for recommending her comic when in 2007 she made a comic about catcalling lesbians and condoning street harassment.

Which is frustrating because Erika Moen writes a comic about sex toys that has incredible body and gender diversity and is interested in making sure that people of all sexualities are having safe, enjoyable sex and talking openly about it. This is Rebecca Sugar condones war crimes level discourse over a creator who makes a genuinely good comic and gets dismissed as cringe by people who hate open discussions of sex and gets dismissed as a bigot (in ways that I think are incredibly unfair given the vast majority of her work) among people who *claim* to love open discussions of sex but who *actually* love witch hunts.

[comradekatara]

I cannot perceive sokka as being cis after I read one of your posts abt him being dykey and playing gender chess?? It just makes so much sense in my head, for me sokka sees being a man as a duty of sorts because he wants to protect others

right like sokka internalizes patriarchal logic but is also able to detach bioessentialism from that logic no problem the second he puts on the kyoshi warrior outfit and realizes how good it feels…. like his relationship to gender is actually so difficult to define because on one hand he views men and women as ontologically equal very early on into the show, but on the other hand he still believes that it is his duty to perform a certain role, and he doesn’t really understand how that role is harmful or incorrect because he stakes it so entirely to his identity and, indeed, his raison d’être.

so sokka performs Manhood insofar as he associates it with being a protector and a provider, but that’s also kind of complicated by the knowledge that his idealized identity is also so closely staked to his desire to martyr himself like kya did. or like yue did. he wants to a protector and provider and warrior but that model is largely founded (concretely at least, not just within his imagination) on examples of the women and girls in his life. whereas he desperately attempts to live up to this vision hakoda provides him of manhood (“knowing where you’re needed the most”) but the irony there of course is that hakoda is gone. sokka is attempting to fill an absence but is also actively modeling his ideal embodiment off of the legacies of women.

so on hand he’s enmeshed in these patriarchal ideals of what it means to navigate a war, but he is also actively learning from women how to fight and die for your people. and one of the first things we see sokka actively realize is that women can embody that same role he has idealized his entire life, and he can embody “womanhood” and take pride and personal satisfaction in that (even if others don’t fully understand it). but that also isn’t to say that i think sokka is just straight up transfem (although im not against that reading either), but rather that his relationship to gender would be something he approaches pragmatically and conditionally because he sees it as a tool rather than a key piece of his identity.

the fact that he was “born a boy” and had to be “the last man” of his village and take on those specific roles all by himself is such a deep injustice (even if, as katara somewhat rightfully points out, it also afforded him a certain privilege) and even though he quickly understands those designations are arbitrary, he can’t just let go of how that role shapes his identity either, especially because he is actually needed to provide for and protect and fight, and he can’t just dismiss those roles as being purely trivial and constructed either. there is a need for people who can do those things, which is why the roles exist in the first place, and why they’re so valorized (especially during wartime).

but if he ever actually bothers to look inward (lol, as if) for even a single second, he’d probably realize that even if he takes pride in inhabiting those roles, he no longer feels as if it is something that is directly staked to his “manhood.” because he knows from people like suki that there isn’t a logical correlation. and so his gender is something he feels no personal attachment towards, but is rather externally constructed, a matter of social perception. and perhaps someone who is less resistant to exploring their own internal world would also come to realize that their gender nonconformity constitutes an “identity” in its own right, but i don’t think sokka is that thoughtful when it comes to who he is or how he identifies.

if anything suki is the one who bestows him dykehood and dictates the terms of his gender, and he’s just like “yeah that sounds right i guess.” because like, he’s definitely not cis. but does he know that?? unclear.

#nocturnal-notes #asks #sokka #analysis #his gender is dyke but his presentation is cis guy who gets way too excited over shopping #(and even then i don’t even see the shopping thing as correlative to his femininity it’s because he fucking loves having money #and exchanging it for goods and services)

[lavenderfeminist]

Do you ever worry about doing more harm than good? Feminism is one of the most important things for our society. However your viewpoints on feminism are quite different than a lot of people’s, including a handful of your friends. Do you ever feel like you’ll have any chance someday that your thoughts will change and you will be able to at least partially recognize MtF people as women, FtM people as men, etc., especially considering the medical studies on gender dysphoria? I’m curious. I am a non-binary individual (and because I just know there’s going to be assumptions otherwise, I was assigned female at birth), and I can genuinely empathize with the feminist aspects (not the trans exclusionary ones) of the TERF movement: women need more rights and protections, abortion is a human right, men oppress women (and people like me who don’t identify as women but still present fully as such for acceptance reasons) and this needs to change, etc. I just wish people in these circles would focus on that rather than painting trans women as this huge problem. I’ve met a trans woman when she was still identifying as a man, her dysphoria was extremely hard for her. She’s started transitioning now and has always been respectful and supportive of the other women in her life. I guess I’m just ever the optimist, that y’all will realize, yes there are a handful of shitty men out there who want to use the trans identity for something harmful, but there are shitty people from all walks of life, and overall even if our experiences with our birth sex are different, trans women shouldn’t be shunned more than they already are. I can’t believe I wrote this whole thing on a terf blog because ik it won’t change your mind but respond as you wish I guess lol

Yeah, I used to be what some would refer to as a "transmed"/"truscum". In other words, I viewed transgenderism/transexualism as a medical issue resulting from a discrepancy between someone's brain and their outward sex. I have not and will never consider being "nonbinary" a legitimate identity; there is no third sex. And before someone says "what about intersex people!", intersex conditions are sex specific and more accurately called disorders of sexual development (DSDs). Stop using them as pawns in your invalid arguments.

There is no chance of me ever reverting to that set of beliefs again in the case of today's evidence. If presented with evidence that it is physically possible for someone to have a female brain in a male body or vice-versa, and medically possible to verify this in a given individual, my beliefs would change again. But not only is the "brainsex" argument nonsensical when taken to its conclusion (a "female" brain in an otherwise-male body is simply a variation of a male brain...), but modern science very clearly demonstrates that there really are not significant enough biological differences between male and female brains for us to even make a distinction wide enough to sort tran people.

I once passionately believed what you do (to an extent), but I cannot anymore, for these reasons:

The modern trans movement is lying to you. They're telling you that the "transwomen in bathrooms" arguments are a lie, right? That transwomen just want to pee like everyone else? I believed them too, until I was confronted with undeniable evidence that trans women are just as predatory in women's bathrooms as men dressed as women (shocking, because there's no actual distinction being offered to allow the former while barring the latter from women's bathrooms). If anybody who says they're a woman is allowed in women's bathrooms, actual gender feelings are irrelevant, because any man can enter a female space so long as he says the right things.

"Woman" to me holds no more meaning than being a adult human being of the female sex. I have no other associations beyond that. So "trans women are women" is as false to me as "gingerbread women are women". If you say "trans women identify with the gender associated with women", I will agree with you, because femininity, the sex role (gender) assigned to women, is something a man can want to perform. But trans women are not women, because they are not female, and to claim that half of the population calls themself the word for "woman" in their language for any reason other than being female is to assert that half the population identifies with femininity, and that is regressive. I have nothing in common with a trans woman other than us both claiming the word "woman", and that is an absolutely meaningless similarity. I literally have more in common with every trans man on the planet by virtue of inhabiting a female body.

I still believe in sex dysphoria. I still believe that ADULTS with sex dysphoria are entitled to make decisions to modify their bodies, even if they are decisions I find confusing/dangerous/odd, so long as they are adequately informed about the medical risks and consequences of their decisions. I simply do not believe that this necessitates me remaining uncritical of the social and capitalistic factors that may motivate transition for reasons not covered by innate sex dysphoria.

I do not believe in gender identity, and I never will. I do not believe in gendered souls, gendered feelings, etc. I do not believe any sense of gender is innate. A man who feels like a woman is, to me, simply a man making assumptions about the way women feel. A man who wishes he was female is, to me, someone with the rights to make body modifications that mimic a female body, but not someone who will ever be female. I do not believe there is anything inherently different between men and women save for our sexes. Thus, there is no avenue through my worldview in which a transwoman could ever be a woman.

I support your right to believe in gender identity, the same way I support a Christian's right to believe in souls. But I am not obligated to participate in or validate your beliefs, the same way I do not need to participate in or validate a Christian belief in souls. That does not make me transphobic, in the same way that it does not make me Christianphobic. Stop reducing the actual, real hatred that some people have for gender nonconformity to a lack of religious beliefs.

#asks #jan 2024

[onecornerface]

The notion that the “root cause” of transphobia is the denial that trans people “really are” their self-identified genders is absurd. A statement like “trans women aren’t women” (or even “trans women are men,” which is distinct and more severe) is usually more a symptom of transphobia than its cause. Even when it is a contributing cause, it is far from a root cause. I’m so sick of this nonsense.

For instance, you can totally be a vicious transphobe even if you truly believe trans women are women, trans men are men, and nonbinary people are nonbinary. There are so many more layers to transphobia than a view about a murky and hard-to-interpret metaphysical thesis about gender category membership criteria.

Some trans-exclusionary feminists now say trans women may be women but aren’t female, and instead of “women only” spaces, there should really be “female only” spaces. Of course, the discourse on whether trans women are “female” is also largely a red herring too (on both sides), but still. It goes to show that affirming that trans women are women is far from sufficient to secure trans rights.

Affirming that trans women are women is also not necessary to secure at least most key aspects of trans rights (even if it is still important in other ways). For instance, some transfem nonbinary (perhaps among others) people are not women, but they obviously should not be forcibly removed from women’s spaces-- for many reasons. So we should recognize that being a woman is not strictly necessary for legitimate access to women’s spaces.

When determining that trans women should not be kicked out of women’s spaces, the important facts are that exclusion would harm trans women and some cis women (e.g. GNC cis women who “pass” for men) and trans women-- whereas inclusion would in fact not harm cis women. These are the main morally important facts. The discrediting quality of anti-trans stereotypes also factor in. But does an obscure metaphysical claim like “trans women meet such-and-such criteria for membership in the social kind ‘woman’“ also really matter in this discussion? Not really! Or not that much, if at all.

Some people even claim “science” proves trans people “really are” their self-identified genders. This is as nonsensical and irrelevant as the notion that “science” proves trans people “really aren’t” their self-identified genders. See this post for discussion on bogus neuroscience arguments in particular.

Utilitarianism is arguably false, but utilitarian-style considerations will help you un-break your brain on this topic. Would a utilitarian care if a new study somehow proved trans women were men (which, lol, fat chance)? No, of course not. And neither should any sensible deontologist.

And also, on both utilitarian and deontological grounds, I’d argue that disrespect toward people’s reasons for their gender self-identification is much morally worse and more important than agreement or disagreement with some claim about whether someone “really is” a given gender (whatever the fuck gender is). For a discussion of topics in this ballpark that I partially (not entirely) endorse, see trans philosopher Talia Bettcher’s article “Trans Identities and First Person Authority” (although she still considers the validation of self-identification important).

Only a few aspects of transphobia can plausibly be construed as boiling down to denial of self-identification claims, whereas most aspects of transphobia cannot.

#transphobia

[fatsmyname]

for so long i did not think i could be a lesbian because ive known i am transmasc. but now i am thinking and i am like. hm.. HOW DO YOU KNOW. because i feel like i am attracted to other mascs but not men. like i would not date a cis man. i just want to date butches. ive always identified as bisexual, i know i am attracted to women.... i feel like the issue is that im mostly t4t and i just cannot tell what that means anymore. also i am worried im just questioning this bc i have a crush on a butch nonbinary lesbian rn so i am worried i am just like trying to make shit up so we can relate more. but also my ex is a butch nonbinary lesbain and i always related to them so much. I DONT KNOW. I ALWAYS thought i was into men and most of my OCs are men who are into men but maybe i am just a butch into butches and i did not know how to express that other than like being a transmasc who wanted to be in a mlm relationship. but man never felt right and ive always felt an attachment to lesbianism even tho i thought i was into men but maybe im just into mascs. ANYWAY I DONT KNOW WHY IM SENDING THIS TO YOU I AM JUST TRYING TO FIGURE MY SHIT OUT

hehe hi anon first i just wanna say i did laugh a little at the desperation in this message its very endearing to see lol. secondly!! there's no pressure to have an answer to these questions! you don't have to know the ins and outs of ur attraction to other folks nor do you ever have to explain urself to other peoples/prove yourself to others. sometimes attraction is just odd and something you can't control.

i will say to just focus on whats comfortable for you. if you find yourself leaning towards butches, then go for it! butch4butch romance/dynamics can look a lot like mlm ones, so maybe that's why you've always gravitated towards those. i mean, half the characters in media that im attracted to are men! because i see parts of my masculinity in them and love to see masculine people with other masculine people. lesbianism has got tons of gender fuckery, so you are fully welcome within the world of lesbians no matter what! if the word lesbian resonates with you for whatever reason, then more power to you if you decide to take on the label :3

ur always welcome to pm me to talk more about this tho! i understand your confusion haha, it took me a couple years to take on the lesbian label, and i've since come out twice (as butch and now transmasculine). you never stop learning new stuff about urself lol

#anon #theres nothing wrong with gravitating towards men/masculinity in media and stuff #i know sooo many butches who love male characters #i mean historically butches have loved typical hypermasculine men like james dean and etc #but yea! you can be transmasc and a lesbian! and butch if you so desire! theres no pressure to take a label or stick with it #you can always keep exploring #embrace the genderfuckery and inherent queerness to it all lol

[grackles-hoard]

Men pretending to be women for autogynephilia or mental illness reasons is absurd and biologically impossible and also harmful. Lol. Echo chamber much?

https://www.lawsociety.ie/gazette/top-stories/2021/12-december/ex-inmate-gives-account-of-sex-assault-by-trans-prisoner

https://www.kxii.com/content/news/Transgender-woman-allegedly-sexually-assaults-teen-in-walmart-505820451.html

https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2021/jul/02/trans-women-with-sex-offence-convictions-in-female-jails-lawful-rules-judge

https://nypost.com/2022/04/25/transgender-rikers-inmate-gets-7-years-for-raping-female-prisoner/amp/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11458335/Male-female-Trans-inmates-drive-rising-numbers-rapes-abuse-womens-prisons.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-63785679.amp

https://wset.com/amp/news/nation-world/la-da-blasted-for-charging-26-year-old-trans-women-as-juvenile-in-sex-assault-of-minor-los-angeles-california-george-gascon

https://www.womensforumaustralia.org/rape_victim_fights_back_after_a_trans_identified_male_was_given

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2021/10/29/trans-bathroom-policy-sexual-assault/8568005002/

Hi! I see you are continuing to try to excuse your hateful behavior!

The argument you made (and I responded to) was that natal sex and gender cannot be changed, thus trans people are invalid.

Let's dive into the links you sent me and examine each article and their content!

The first link you sent me is from the news website 'Law Society Gazette Ireland', and the article is titled 'Female inmate tells of sex assault by trans prisoner' published January 18, 2022. The article is about sex predator Karen White being sent to an all female prison based on self identification as a woman, despite never having undergone surgery or HRT. White was convicted for grievous bodily harm, multiple rape, and other sexual offences against women. In the case to place White into a female prison, the previous crimes were not taken into account. The Ministry of Justice even says they did not take the previous crimes into account.

One of the offended women, Cheryle Kempton, tells the reporter that she believes White faked being transgender to prey on vulnerable women.

Now that we have touched on the articles content, let's go through why this is not a credible source for your argument.

This article is about a sex predator; which does not connect to the argument you are making.

The article states that the previous crimes of White were not taken into consideration when placing the criminal in a female prison. This could be used for the argument of prison safety, but that is not the argument you are making.

The article uses a survivor of the assault in the report, who makes no action to condemn trans people. Kempton tells the reporter that she believes that White faked being trans to prey on fellow inmates and took advantage of the laws allowing those who identify as trans women to serve time in female prisons. Kempton does not go on to say anything supporting your original argument.

2. The second link is to another news website 'kxii.com', and the article is titled 'Transgender woman arrested accused of sexually assaulting teen in Walmart bathroom' published February 13, 2019. The article is about a 31 y/o Ojeda sexually assaulting a 16 y/o in a Walmart bathroom. Ojeda is facing sexual battery charge, and may face a charge of obstruction for withholding possible evidence, should Ojeda be convicted.

Now that we have touched on the articles content, let's go through why this is not a credible source for your argument.

This article's URL ends in a '.com'. This stands for commercial, and thus, does not meet the criteria for being a credible source for any argument.

This article has no links to verifiable, current evidence. Reputable news articles usually link their sources within the paragraphs and the links should take the reader to the main source of information, which itself should also be a reliable source.

This article talks about sexual assault, and does not support your original argument.

3. The third link is to another news website 'The Guardian', and the article is titled 'Lawful to imprison trans women sex offenders in female jails, judge rules', amended July 2, 2021. The article is very much like the first article you sent me, which talks about sexual assault by MTF peoples in female prisons. It discusses the fine line of safety and respect for both MTF inmates and ciswomen inmates. Lord Justice Holroyde reports in the article; " said the statistics were too low and had insufficient detail to provide a safe basis for conclusions, adding: “I can accept, at any rate for present purposes, that the unconditional introduction of a transgender woman into the general population of a women’s prison carries a statistically greater risk of sexual assault upon non-transgender prisoners than would be the case if a non-transgender woman were introduced. But that statistical conclusion takes no account of the risk assessment which the policies require.”"

Now that we have touched on the articles content, let's go through why this is not a credible source for your argument.

This article talks about sexual assault, and does not support your original argument. This could be used for the argument of prison safety, but that is not the argument you are making.

The article's website 'The Guardian' is not peer reviewed, and ends in a commercial web address, and thus, does not meet the criteria for being a credible source for any argument.

The article's website 'The Guardian', is held in high regards to providing well informed news, however, 'The Guardian' tends to leans to a left-wing bias, and thus, without you providing a counter bias, makes this uncredible.

4.-9. These next articles you have sent me link more news websites, all with commercial web addresses. I have read over each of them, and to save us some time, I will go through why these are not credible sources for your argument.

Many (if not all) of these articles talk about sexual assault, and does not support your original argument. This could be used for the argument of prison safety, but that is not the argument you are making.

Many (if not all) of these articles does not provide a creditable source/link for their articles.

The last link has 'opinion' in its URL, making is not factual information, liable to bias, and not creditable.

Again, you are in no position to tell someone (who is not harming you or others) that their experiences are incorrect. It is not a burden to be kind, I can assure you.

I am in no control of you or your displeasure for any trans person, I never claimed to be. I am, however, in control of myself, unlike you. Your frustration and hate towards me is not deserved, I have said nothing to slight you or to berate you.

Once again, I hope you learn kindness :)

#informative #tw sa #tw trans discourse #tw transphobes #lgbtq positivity #lgbt representation #lgbtq #tw rape #nongrackle art

[redheadbigshoes]

after reading some more "rad inclus" posts it seems like a popular argument is to say we are spreading terf rhetoric by saying that some people are less lesbian/not lesbian enough to be included – but like, lesbian isn't an identity with a dimmer switch. you can't be "more" or "less" lesbian than any other lesbian, you just ARE a lesbian or you aren't. and the actual only thing that decides that is how you identify (for eg: as someone attracted to men). at least, thats how i've made sense of this, i'm interested to know your thoughts on how these people perceive lesbianism. -🐸

They’re openly using biphobic arguments…

There’s no “more lesbian or less lesbian”. You’re either a lesbian or not lol. Are people that dumb they cannot understand simple descriptions?

They’re treating bisexuality as if it’s being [insert % homo] and [insert %] hetero.

And it still doesn’t make sense calling that terf rhetoric because it’s not lol it has nothing to do with being a terf.

I think they’re stuck in the 70s back when bisexual sapphics were also called lesbians because of biphobia and bi erasure, there wasn’t a separate term for a woman who’s attracted to both men and women so we were all grouped as one thing (lesbians). But the bisexual movement happened to separate people’s sexualities because we do face different things and experience different things so it’s important to have different labels to describe them.

They really think they’re being progressive by doing this when they’re literally doing just what conservatives do… “if it was a thing in the past then it can still be a thing now”. Things change, whether people like it or not.

#stephanie answers #🐸 anon #long post

[bisexualsdeservebetter]

My spouse is non-binary and I cannot tell you how fucking annoying it is whenever I am told that being bisexual “invalidates their identity” and that it’s “transphobic” for I, as a cis woman, to identify as bisexual because bisexuality doesn’t include trans people

Yes??? The fuck it does?? Why the hell are trans men and women put in a completely separate category?? When I say i am attracted to men and women that also includes TRANS PEOPLE, we don’t need to have a whole separate sexuality to involve trans people when bisexuality has ALWAYS been a thing

Especially since I grew up in the 80s and 90s and no other lgbt person ever came up to me and told me that my sexuality was wrong and invalidating back then

I understand that the majority of pansexuals are young, and I understand that the majority got their information from the internet (not to say that the internet isn’t a great tool for learning lgbt history!) but holy shit they treat elders like me as the Big Bads but ignore the shitty transphobic rhetoric that pansexuals always spout

Sorry for the long ask LOL

All good, you are 100000% right, I agree wholeheartedly. I definitely am not an elder, but even when I was first out in the early 2010s like, nobody said this shit to me even then. This bullshit has exploded in the last 10-15 years and it's insane.

[sanfielle]

how are trans masc people inherently privileged? not all of us are cis passing binary trans men who have Male Privilege ™ and actively most of us face a lot of violence and hatred as well. why cant we be a united trans front instead of playing privilege war?

disclaimer: i am tme so my opinion and interpretation is colored by this, if any transfems want to comment please feel welcome to do so. this is probably the only anon i'll answer in my inbox because i feel it might be the only one in some good faith, and even if it's not, it at least asks concise questions i can answer lol.

acknowledging how transmasc - and all tme trans people, yes, this can even include amab nonbinary people if they don't identify with the transfeminine label - have privilege over transfems isn't antithetical to having a United Trans Front at all. our goals can still be united while we also acknowledge and tackle transmisogyny in our midst - if anything, we CANNOT have a united trans front if we ignore transmisogyny and don't allow discussion of it!

an overwhelming amount of SOCIETAL transphobia is directed towards transfems too. while it's undeniable all trans people experience transphobia on some levels (i'm fucking trans), if you look at the way society as a whole is thinking of us, you'll see the true target is majority transfem people, and we're either an afterthought or we've somehow been groomed by those evil transfem people into this ideology or whatever.

all the bathroom bills in the US, all the drag storytime stuff (which also affects gnc men ofc, but the concern is 'people with penises being feminine is inherently grooming kids', which also lumps in transfems with them), an entire hate movement founded around hating "men who think they're women" is DIRECTED at transmisogyny affected people - the boogeywoman is a gal with a cock.

the woman who coined the term "transmisogyny" (julia serano) says in her book whipping girl:

"when the majority of jokes made at the expense of trans people center on 'men wearing dresses' or 'men who want their penises cut off' that is not transphobia – it is transmisogyny. When the majority of violence and sexual assaults committed against trans people is directed at trans women, that is not transphobia – it is transmisogyny."

sure, that pity that us afab trans people get from these same bigots is infuriating - we aren't confused, we aren't stupid, we haven't been groomed into this, we aren't mutilating ourselves, we aren't mentally ill, etc, etc - but it's undeniable that being treated like a tragic, confused Wombyn or a poor baby girl who just wants to escape misogyny is not nearly as severe as being treated like a rapist just for having a dick and wearing a skirt regardless of how old you are.

especially when that is on a societal level - it's inescapable, it's been baked into our society since day 1. you may not be aware of it, i can't even be aware of it, but just because we can't see our own transmisogyny cooked into our brains doesn't mean it doesn't exist. we as tme people are the least equipped to identify it -- this is why we need tma people to have their own language about it, so that they can point it out to us. if you can understand a similar but unrelated concept of the difference between the intricate details of racism V colorism, this is the idea of it.

you don't even need male privilege to be privileged over transfems. i'm a tme nonbinary intersex butch lesbian! i'm a woman (heavy quotes)! i don't have any kind of male privilege at all and i literally never will! but i still have privilege over every transfem, no matter how cis-passing and conforming they are, because every 'man in a dress' joke will never be about me. there's never going to be a world where that's about me, or you, or anyone else who doesn't experience transmisogyny - hence, we're transmisogyny exempt.

so yeah, even being trans doesn't mean you can escape being transmisogynist (no matter what way that trans is short of being tma yourself, no matter how cis passing or binary you are, no matter your gender identity), and holding this privilege over transfems - just like being any other minority or experiencing hate and violence doesn't just let you off the hook for being bigoted towards others. letting transfems make language to talk about and point out transmisogyny in our spaces is vital to allowing us to understand each other and uplift all of us equally.

otherwise we're just building a space that transfems would never be safe in - destroying that goal for your United Trans Front.👍

#transmisogyny #rape mention #<- sorry. just. gd. #please udnerstand that acknoweldging you have privilege doesnt negate any bigotry youve experiecned either. #white trans people face transphobia every day. btu theyre still capable of enacting racism on others #LGB cis people excprinece homophobia every day. but they can still be transphobic #it sucks extra hard to face bigotry frpm these groups in fact becasue youd think people who would understand it> #<would be fellow Oppressed Groups ykwim?

[biracy]

Okay I'm sorry I'm genuinely not trying to get involved in "discourse" or w/e but like. I hate this OOPS. Your acceptance or w/e of "genderweird folks" is completely performative and meaningless if it does not include recognizing that people who fully identify as men will also identify as women and will sometimes end up dating lesbians (or gay men but this is almost always abt "the woke left is forcing lesbians to date men" what a surprise). If a lesbian dates me, as a girlboything, they are, by definition, "dating a man". There is not a "girl part" of me and a "boy part" of me that I get to turn on and off at will. This would not contradict this hypothetical person's identity bc no one gets to decide who is and isn't a lesbian (or any other label) except the person themselves. I've already complained before about how things like "wlw/nblw only men dni" and "mlm/nblm only women dni" or whatever inherently reinforce the gender binary and divide nonbinary people into "nonbinary people I think are women" and "nonbinary people I think are men". To say that "lesbians date 'genderweird' people, but NOT MEN" is to say that "genderweird" will never include manhood, that trans people (ESPECIALLY transfeminine people) cannot have complex relationships with manhood or masculinity where they don't completely disavow it while still being allowed to fuckin like. exist in front of lesbians, and in my opinion just boils down to one thousand different gender binary-enforcing ideas, from "'man' and 'woman' are always opposites" to "nonbinary people are just woman-lite or man-lite" to "'nonbinary' means neither, or in-between, or skewed towards one end, but never both". Gender and sexuality are extremely complicated and extremely personal and to crusade against a bunch of trans people (again, especially in this context trans women) who are doing it "wrong" and telling them that they don't belong where they say they belong. Not to mention that this is all very very online separatist discourse and "bi lesbian" is an idea that's existed forever lol

#anyway 'bi lesbians' are such a small portion of the population that i cannot imagine it mattering in any way at all #and also the vast majority of 'bi lesbians' are trans women or transfem nonbinary people #and if you as a tme person are obsessing over it i'm going to think it's weird. sorry #it's all 'my gender is dyke' or whatever until a trans woman says it in The Wrong Way then it's the end of the world #sorry i know like. this is going to get me in hot water with a bunch of mutuals but it had 2 be said #at least try to listen to me a little bit #this isn't even going into like my perspective on this as a bi girlthing this is just abt the genders #open mick night #lgbt #gender

[valravn72]

female sea horses are the ones who make the eggs and get "pregnant". they just pass them over in a lil bag to the male sea horse to hold onto until the babies are ready. so i don't think sea horses are a good example of male pregnancy!

thank u for dunking on terfs tho. they get soooo mad that not everyone agrees with their genderless world view. they really think femininity is just stereotypes and that because they hate pink and glitter and high heels that means girls in general hate those things (protip: most terfs are trans men deeply in the closet. once you realize that, everything they say/do makes sense. of course they think girls should be unfeminine! of course they think tw are just "men in dresses" because they cannot comprehend a class of people exist who actually enjoy being feminine and soft!)

Yeah lol some radfem account made sure to tell me that. The original thread on Twitter I was referencing (the one where someone sends the terf a picture of a man holding an egg carton) said “carrying eggs” and I made the mistake of over-exaggerating that even though it made my (otherwise hilarious) argument completely null. I probably should have fact-checked that.

I don’t know if I would say all terfs are secretly trans men but I can definitely say they are absolutely flowing with internalized misogyny. They have that minority-that-only-knows-how-to-identify-itself-through-its-own-oppression-itis. The reason trans women not having previously lived as women is such a big hangup for them is because to them being a woman is about experiencing gender inequality and if you don’t live with the same gender inequality as they do they can’t see you as a woman because they don’t know what womanhood is without that. Basically, the patriarchy has them so codependent that they think they wouldn’t even exist if not for them being oppressed. It’s kinda sad.

You’re totally right about the femininity thing though!! They have that whole “oh you just want to be oppressed so bad” thing going on as if there would be no other reason to want femininity besides masochism. I also see them telling trans men that they’re trans because they have internalized misogyny issues which… projecting much? I think they just wish it was that easy for them to cast off what they see as such a giant burden. They’re jealous and yet they accuse us of not being loyal.

#asks #actually trans #transphobia #trans rights

[sexybabystevie]

✨ So in (positive) response to your lesbian label & liking fictional men post- That’s way more than okay!!! I mean, how many times do straight people say there’s one person they’d go gay for? Sexuality & Romance are all super fluid, like a sea. You can have a pink sea with just a couple food dye drops of blue if you want ☺️ It doesn’t detract from how you identify at all! It’d still be a pink sea! Even though I’m asexual, I find that I like ladies more in real life and men in fiction (but that might be cause theres tons more men lol, and the ones I like tend to be written by women even) But I’m still ace, no matter what anyone else believes. So if you say you’re a lesbian, then I’m the supporting “Let’s go lesbians!!!” fan from behind :)

thank you so, so, so much 😭 i truly cannot explain how much i needed to hear this. for years i've flip flopped between a few different labels, bi and lesbian being some of them, and every time i identified as a lesbian before i just felt like i was lying to myself or to others because i thought maybe one day i would find a guy that i would like. but there are just so many instances where i COULD have been with guys, i could have pursued them or more, but i never did because something always made me feel off and sick about it in a way i can't really explain.

the thing now is that i don't think i could see myself with a guy at all. and yeah, maybe that will change, but i just really do not feel or get what other people who are into guys feel about them. i've only ever fixated on fictional men and sometimes actors, but it's always unattainable and also i really do sincerely think that that wouldn't make me bi, because i'm at a point where calling myself bi doesn't feel right because of all of this.

i don't know, lol. girls are always just easier and can only ever imagine myself with a guy if it's for the purpose of others (as in like societal norms). and i do think a huge part of me being so confused is that i just wanted to be with a guy, even if it didn't feel right to me, because it would be so much easier than being who i really am. it was always just the idea of it rather than my reality, i think.

anyway, sorry if i rambled a lot because i absolutely did not intend on that lol, but i am so incredibly grateful to you and i thank you a lot for sending this in!! <33 i'm sticking with the lesbian label for now and seeing how things go :))

#em speaks #✨ anon #asks #dear anons #<3333

[dykefaggotry]

hilarious how terfs will INSIST they can tell someone's assigned gender at birth and then: harass gnc cis women for using the women's restroom, tell trans men that they will "never be women", tell trans women that they can "never be a real man and they need to embrace their female identity", harass cis women who have facial hair or deep voices or are tall and say they can tell they're really a man, treat cis women of color aaaaabsolutely horrendously bc they see them as masculine, and absolutely lose it when they see someone using multiple pronouns who isn't androgynous because they will guess their agab wrong every single goddamn time

like i've had terfs tell me that i just want lesbians to suck my dick (that i don't have) and i've had terfs when i was hyperfeminine using she/they pronouns without an ounce of testosterone injected in my body tell me that they could "tell i wasn't a real woman" even though i was just a fat 18 year old girl with body hair from being latine lmfao

like babes just admit that you really genuinely cannot tell lol. there's sometimes that you might get it right but that doesn't mean it erases all of the times you very blatantly don't.

and the thing is, they usually get it wrong in the direction of them accusing random afab people of being trans women. bc every single thing they've decided indicates a trans woman is something literally hundreds/thousands/millions of afab individuals possess. you think you can clock a trans woman bc she has broad shoulders? millions of afab people have those. you think you can clock a trans woman by her deep voice? plenty of afab people have that. you think scruff or facial hair enable you to clock them? soooo many afab people have that whether bc of pcos, being intersex, or they're genuinely just hairy bc of genetics. height? same thing. fatness? literally shut the fuck up lmfao. square jaw, adams apple (and yes i know so many afab people with one it's not that uncommon), lack of breast tissue, etc etc etc..... literally every single thing you think enables you to clock a trans woman is gonna lead to you witchhunting random afab people whether they're trans or gnc or just a woman of color.

and of course that's not WHY it's harmful, the hatred of trans women and the witchhunting to identify them is much more harmful, but it is just sort of ironic how much they claim to support and love "women" (afab people) and then the second one of us has too much body hair or too much body fat or we're too tall or whatever, suddenly they just KNOW we're a Dick Having Evil Man like lmfao get a goddamn grip

#transmisogyny tw #transphobia tw #ask to tag

[woman-defined]

non-passing trans women and men are included lol i literally pointed to muscular and masc amab women.

you can be hyperfeminine, have boobs and a vagina yet still be male. because male is a social perception, a construct. it is not a body type, it is a masculine identity and many bodies with vaginas can be perceived as of sperm producing origin. same vice versa.

when i say cultural meaning of woman, i mean like being seen as a feminine ova producer. (btw femininity is not pink and dresses, its an essence)

Your entire definition, if I actually managed to get it because your definitions are so confusing and circular that I’m really struggling to follow, is that being a woman means being perceived as being an adult human female. You’re free to correct me about that but, again, I’m not expecting anything because all your definitions are so convoluted and purposefully confusing because you can’t admit that it’s basically just stereotypes because you don’t want to admit that it’s stereotypes.

Anyway, this means that non-passing trans women aren’t women because they are not perceived to be women/female by the vast majority of society. That’s the problem with relying on other people’s perceptions as part of your definitions: you’re basically saying that other people must perceive trans women as being female (or an ‘ova producer’ as you say) and that’s blatantly untrue and the only way you can deny that would be to deny that misgendering exists.

I then asked you what you meant by cultural meaning without including stereotypes and you then provided me with a definition which literally has stereotypes in it (‘feminine’). You literally said being seen as a feminine ova producer which is just fucking stereotypes, despite how much you deny it!

All in all: you definition relies on stereotypes, despite how much you want to deny it because it’s all about cultural and social perception which is just stereotypes. And non-passing trans people are inherently excluded from your definitions of man and women because society will perceive them as their biological sex, not the way they identify. You can’t just say that words mean exactly what you want them to mean and expect people to just go along with them, especially when you refuse to provide coherent definitions for them.

So I ask you to provide a coherent definition of the word woman once again. Here are the restrictions I’ve put in place (these are mostly set out in my pinned post):

-You cannot use vague phrases like ‘it’s a feeling’ or ‘having an essence’. If you use these phrases, you must then describe exactly what that feeling/essence is

-You cannot use circular reasoning (eg: a woman is a woman)

-If you define woman as being female or experience womanhood, you must then coherently define what those terms mean. Otherwise, I’m going to assume it’s circular reasoning and therefore incoherent.

-You cannot use stereotypes. That’s misogyny. This includes anything about femininity or being feminine (unless you want to specifically describe what a feminine essence is without using stereotypes)

-If you use anything like social or cultural expectations/perception, then I’m going to write this off as stereotypes and say non-passing trans people are excluded. (Again, unless you can specifically describe what you mean by these terms without circular reasoning or stereotypes.)

-You haven’t included this anywhere, but anything like ‘brain sex/gender’ is also off the table as this has been debunked

It shouldn’t be hard for you to write one post with just your definition(s) lined up, right? I think it’ll provide a lot of clarity rather than me trying to pull out definitions from the multiple posts that you have provided. I’ll even get it started for you:

Woman: [insert definition]

Female: [insert definition]

Social Perception: [insert definition]

Cultural Meaning (of woman): [insert definition]

Feminine Essence: [insert definition]

[cock-holliday]

What do you like about both men and women? 🥰

(P.s I adore your blog, slightly embarrassing how obsessed with it I am🫣)

Oh boy howdy how much time do you have? lol how in-depth of an answer are you lookin for here? I'm gonna roll with "ted talk"

What don't I like?

For men I tend to like more masculine guys. Sort of your 'himbo' types. "Soft"er masculine--if he's like hostile "masc for masc" it's just gonna kill the vibe. Physically, I've got a soft spot for rugby builds. Body type is significantly less important than personality though. I've played a lot of sports and can get along with sporty guys well and enjoy the camaraderie and competitive types. I love men who show how you can be a stereotypical Dude™ but be kind and caring people. While that's more my type, I am constantly wowed by men who aren't. I think it's confident--but not douchey--men that catch my eye. Peacocky femme guys always wow me. I think it's taking something I don't really identify with and rocking it that's so appealing.

For both men and women I like sparring partners, so-to-speak. I like competitive people, witty people, I love good banter. If we can rib each other and have push and pull I'm all in. I like people who keep me on my toes.

Physically for men and women I am a sucker for brown eyes. I also tend to go for dark hair, but it's not a major deciding factor.

For women, I definitely have a type. I really like fiery women. Love a woman who could kick my ass. Again, I think it's a confidence and self-assuredness (or at least stubbornness) that's attractive. I tend to like more feminine women--there is something captivating about someone taking female femininity, something I never really related to, and making it theirs. But naturally, there are also masculine women I find appealing. I'll get blindsided by a super masculine butch and be just in awe. Do I wanna be you? Do I wanna be with you? I do not know, but please, let me get the door for you, sir. Physically, I do enjoy being taller, but tall women are also really hot.

Androgynous people are so fascinating to me. I don't really understand how they pull it off, and the confusion is strangely appealing.

And naturally this is all without getting into men who are women and women who are men and people who are both or neither. Gender fuckery is very attractive. Taking the things you like and discarding what you don't and rocking it is wildly appealing.

Idk, I think a wide range of men and women are attractive. Masculine. Feminine. Androgynous. I won't always be aware of what catches my eye physically until I see them, and longer-term attraction tends to come down a lot more to how we interact. There are incredibly beautiful people that I cannot think of a single thing to say to. There are really attractive people who are such assholes that I can't find them attractive anymore. I'm not snobby enough to suggest being something like "sapiosexual" or anything similar, but while I find plenty of people physically attractive, an unpleasant personality just fucks it up for me, whereas someone less physically my type being fun and cool will always win out.

If the person is funny, kind, and has a sharp wit then they're suddenly the sexiest person on the planet to me.

If you're cool then I'm already a little in love with you, end of story. lol

Anyway, long story short: men and women hot.

Haha thanks for this ask! And thanks for the kind words, I'm just out here talkin to myself so I'm glad you're getting something out of it lol

#ask meme #ask #idk I kinda just rambled on this one #thanks for asking tho! #witchy-bisexual