birobotic:

aceusnavi:

can y’all fellow tme trans folks Quit acting like transmascs and tme nbs are Incapable of being terfs and being compared to terfs is thus an act of Terrible Transphobia like newsflash asshole there’s tons of nb and trans guy terfs. terfs will take you if you’re afab and willing to beat down your trans sisters. if you use terf rhetoric you can bet your ass you’re gonna get called out on using terf rhetoric. you can’t use your transness as a shield when there’s dozens of trans guy and nb terfs that are eager to sacrifice their gender for radfem approval. y’all are boring and think you’re incapable of falling prey to terf rhetoric just because you’re trans. you’re not. next.

I’ve seen nb truscum who say their own gender is “just a mental illness and not real.”

Literally nothing about your identity hinders you from being a bigot. If the form of bigotry you’re being accused of is particularly targeted towards a group you’re exempt from (trans women,) you’ve ESPECIALLY got no place denying it, even if you’re part of a broader group that gets generally targeted (trans/nb people.) You have privilege over trans women if you’re not one, and if you get called out for endangering them or supporting their aggressor’s, its not your damn place to discredit those accusations on the basis of your identity. Bull fucking shit.

pustluk:

iloveradfems:

pustluk:

iloveradfems:

surfin-terf:

pustluk:

surfin-terf:

vulvacrat:

brighterthanbombs:

vulvacrat:

brighterthanbombs:

vulvacrat:

pustluk:

radical feminism, 1973: one is not born a woman
trans women: hi
radical feminism, 1979: jesus god not like that

god y’all are so obtuse, this isn’t what de beauvoir meant in the slightest. she meant ‘women are shaped into their social role through upbringing and socialisation’ not ‘women make a conscious choice to behave like their designated social role’. if anything this disproves trans ideology and the whole ‘i’m a woman inside’ argument as it states that passive interactions throughout your lifetime shape your womanhood, not some kind of innate emotional feeling. read a book.

hi i’ve read the entirety of the second sex and you’re very wrong

wait are you disagreeing with me or op i’m so confused

with op!!! sorry lmao definitely with the op. i hate how that quote keeps getting taken out of context

oh good lol

i’ve also studied the second sex extensively, and beauvoir is unambiguously referring to socialization. sorry OP

do yall realize youre literally making my points for me and the saying the exact same things as just about every vein of contemporary trans theory since at least, like, the mid nineties or are u just being…obtuse

i don’t possibly see how any of this is making your points for you. your original post seemed to suggest that the ideology of transwomen is totally consistent with feminist ideas (such as beauvoir’s), and their ideology is not consistent with feminist ideas at all.

With “no one is born a woman” she was referring exactly to GENDER, to socialization, not sex.
Stop lying about the meaning of that quote for your own interests.And, for you, aren’t transwomen born women?

no. every contemporary account of gender created by trans women in the outsider theory community–the only place we’re actually welcome–holds that gender is a fully social process. whether you want to look at material feminism, trans material feminism specifically, trans lesbian feminism, trans separatism, or gender nihilism (a school of thought from outsider theorists that has actually, like, been taught at multiple gender studies departments), every last one of them treats gender as socialized (since, like, 1994)–which you would know if you bothered to engage with trans women versed in theory and hadn’t gathered all your information about our alleged self-conception from buzzfeed articles and pop liberalism’s approach to transness.

moreover, if you’d actually read the work from de beauvoir, you’d remember that the first thing she writes in that chapter of the second sex is this:

[B]elief…in a ‘prehistory’ when women created civilization (because of a biological predisposition) while the coarse and brutal men hunted (because of a biological predisposition) is symmetrical with the biologizing interpretation of history produced now by the class of men….Furthermore, not only is this conception still imprisoned in the  categories of sex (woman and man), but it holds onto the idea that the capacity to give birth (biology) is what defines a woman…By doing this…[n]ot only to we naturalize history, but also consequently we naturalize the social phenomena which express our oppression, making change impossible.

from its inception, the party line of the second wave was that hearkening to essentialist accounts of dimorphic, inherent, mutually antithetical sex reproduces the conditions of women’s oppression. it was only in the late seventies–after the stonewall riots had sparked a huge surge of radical gay and trans activism throughout the decade, after biomedical transition had become a widespread possibility for the first time since the 30s, and after the benjamin standards (the product of a white, heterosexual man and not the vulnerable trans people forced to navigate them in order to receive healthcare) were first published–that radical feminism finally made its mythopoetic appeal to sex essentialism. y’all were so desperate to swerve around us that you inverted one of the core tenets of the second wave and absolutely shattered the feminist movement in the process.

lesbian feminism, central to the second wave up through the early seventies with wittig’s le corps lesbien, was forced into its own vein by the panic around “male alignment” y’all created that disenfranchised gnc women–ultimately precipitating the separatist ethos of the 80s. mythopoetic cultural feminism split from post-structural feminism and started an ideological war that persists to this day. the third wave was finally able to regain some ground when crenshaw introduced intersectionality in 89 and marxist feminism started gaining a broader platform–but y’alls legacy is setting the feminist movement back by at least two decades, splintering a 30+ year old party line into fragments which have still not been reunified, and jeopardizing the healthcare, political rights, social situation, and physical safety of generations of trans women–all because you couldn’t be bothered to understand that your (totally justified! we’re totally with you on this!) objections to the benjaminian concept of transness were the product of a straight white male practitioner and not the generation of trans women his antifeminist, antigay medicalized hoopjumping left traumatized.

Mate, you’re just trying to get me confused.I read the book, I know what she meant, she didn’t made a book focused on women’s social role and women’s oppression as some sort of proof that biological sex doesn’t exist.

Intersectionality is about the intersection of misogyny and racism, NOTHING to do with males.

Your far-fetched language essay is making it very difficult to get your point.Is that your intention? Throwing a bunch of disconected and questionable information around won’t change the fact that the only definiton for woman is human female and that women and men receive different socialization and are given different social roles because of their sex, it is the factual truth.Her point is that women aren’t born feminine, docile, submissive, they are taught to be that way, and if a male presents that way it doesn’t mean he’s a woman.That’s it.

Feminism is and will always be about females, because women are oppressed on the basis of being female, not over some ridiculous concept of gender people identify in and out.Patriarchy is about males oppressing females for our reproductive and sexual possibility to sustain a economic system that is based on heirs and a large working class.

Make your opinion more compact.I’m not willing to read a full bullshit essay.

mate. here is a sparknotes version:

(a) you’re being ahistorical;

(b) your concept of trans women originated with a straight white heterosexual male endocrinologist and his work in the 70s, not from us;

(c-i) your concept of trans women pits the full weight of academia against the self-descriptions of poor, older, mostly nonwhite trans women who have never had the privilege and luxury of stepping foot in a gender studies department;

(c-ii) you haven’t read the work of any trans theorists;

(d) the third wave, initiated by crenshaw, re-shifted focus onto nonwhite, gay, and eventually trans women–something y’all had never thought to do;

(e) you’re apparently unwilling to read so much as 4 paragraphs explaining why (see a) you’re being ahistorical and (see c) your ideology is irrelevant to contemporary trans theory;

(f) you need to remove your head from whatever orifice you’ve currently got it lodged in, generally;

(g) i recommend astroglide.

if you think forcing terfs out of online spaces is ‘toxic’, or describe it as a witchhunt, or “just tumblr going overboard again” then kindly get a million miles from me and don’t consider yourself an ally to trans women ever, thanks​

earthmoonlotus:

autismserenity:

Like do people not understand that, if nothing else, when you use TERF arguments on another group, you are strengthening TERFs?? Because when people who agree with you stumble across TERF logic, it’s going to seem reasonable and familiar to them? It’s going to just be building on premises they’ve already accepted?

some examples: “you cannot identify/opt out of privilege” (further reading), “there is an invasion of oppressors coming into our community claiming to be oppressed members of it and They Are The Enemy” (further reading) (especially when you consider that they put as much, if not more energy into attacking those who they perceive as “invaders” as they do against the actual oppressors in question, and they receive hardly any if any backlash from the actual oppressors in question for doing so; if the “invaders” really were members of the oppressor class, you’d think actual members of the oppressor class would get mad at you for attacking the “invaders”, but they hardly ever do, if ever), “all oppression [insert group of people] claims to face is actually misdirected homophobia/misogyny” (including the specific idea that biphobia isn’t real and it’s just homophobia/lesbophobia), “People only have [insert identity/ies] because of internalized homophobia”, mocking/slandering inclusionists as liberals who don’t understand radical anti-oppression theory and class analysis (further reading), especially using the word “kweer” to mock queer people they disagree with, being against the use of the word “queer”, “You just hate lesbians!!!!” (and presuming that it’s necessary to hold their viewpoint in order to be a lesbian / that their viewpoint is the default and/or should be the default for lesbians), identifying with the term “gatekeeper”, claiming that “terf” is a silencing tactic (further reading), claiming that no-platforming is a silencing tactic, claiming that invalidation of personal identity is meaningless (this specifically enables the idea that misgendering isn’t violent),  bonding with right-wingers over hate against people who disagree with you / using arguments originally used by right-wingers, etc.

Keep in mind that this rhetoric is so similar that TERFs have noticed this and used it to their advantage. (source 1, source 2, source 3, source 4, source 5)

Also keep in mind that, while there may be one or two terfs who favor ace inclusion, there are hundreds who are against it. That shouldn’t be a good sign. And non-TERF inclusionists have in the past shown more sympathy towards TERFs than they do towards ace people. (example 1, example 2, example 3, example 4, example 5)

This doesn’t make all ace-exclusionists TERFs, but as the OP was saying, it makes them enablers of TERFs, which is a form of transmisogyny. Also note that, unless you yourself are a trans woman / transfeminine person, you can’t say “but there are trans women on our side!!!” as a way to argue against this, because that’s basically using the “my trans friend agrees with me!!!” argument. You can’t use that as an excuse to say something’s ok when trans women are saying it actively puts them and their sisters in danger.

the terf from yesterday on the Really Long Queer post did reply, with a cryptic remark that i’m out to infringe on her rights (possibly about abortion rights? it was v vague) and trans people are evidence that ‘the left hates women as much as the right’

like when all else fails…. make no sense am i right 🙃

thesinisterspinster:

witchyroses:

vulgarweed:

rosalarian:

beatrice-otter:

gettzi:

killerchickadee:

mswyrr:

monanotlisa:

river-b:

officialqueer:

uphillbothways:

officialqueer:

kgirlskillen74:

kgirlskillen74:

27teacups:

lanewilliam:

robotbisexual:

jormunganndr:

robotbisexual:

violet-lesbian:

robotbisexual:

violet-lesbian:

officialqueer:

Honestly “queer” is so useful for people like me w/ a “complicated orientation” b/c instead of having to say I’m “asexual panromantic” and explain what that means, I can just say “I’m queer” and it tells you all you need to know (that I’m not straight).

yeah sure good for you but don’t ever ever use that word for someone who doesn’t identify as it themselves, it’s not an umbrella term for everyone. also “pan/ace” would definitely work, even if you don’t want to use it, other people could. i use ace lesbian and definitely not the q slur.

Wow its almost like they were just talking about using it on themselves for individual reasons and you butted in to be an ass and be condescending because you think you’re superior for not using queer, then you called their identity a slur right to them. But that can’t possibly be what you were trying to do, right?

Anyone is allowed to use it for themselves, I never said no one should do that if that’s what they want. Queer is a slur though. I just want people to be aware of that, I have no idea if OP is aware of that or not but some people using that word aren’t. I’m tired of people including me and other people who don’t want to be included in that word, and before anyone asks, I never meant that OP did that, because I literally have no idea if they do.

Queer is a slur as much as any other LGBT+ word, I just want you to be aware of that.

“Gay” is used as an insult. It is used to be demeaning. Its used to discriminate. And yet its used as the all mighty umbrella – gay rights, gay marriage, gay community – when discussing the entire community.

Gay gets used as a slur. Queer gets used as a slur. But I don’t walk up to gay people and say “your identity is a slur, you know that right” or get pissed when they say “the gay community” when they mean the whole community.

Personal identity and preference in terms, even harmful words that get used as slurs, are not questioned; except for the word Queer.

Queer gets shut down. Queer people get others in their faces saying “your identity is a slur!” Queer people don’t have the freedom to identify in a community, but are forced under other terms against their will due to hypocrisy and double standards.

So if you’re not going to come onto gay people’s posts for the same behavior, maybe critically analyze why exactly you feel the need to be so condescending to Queer people, specifically on posts that ONLY have to do with personal identity. Why you feel the need to insist to Queer people that their identities are slurs, to directly slap away the power of reclaiming a word from them by demanding it remain in the hands of the Straights as a perpetual slur.

I think an important difference between gay and queer is however, that queer started out as a slur used against members of the community and continues to be used as a slur in many places. Whereas gay began as a word the community chose itself to describe itself and was then later used by homophobes and heterosexuals in general in a negative way, meaning however, that gay doesn’t hold the same negative connotations as queer for many people simply because it was our word that they took, and not a word that they forced on us to make us “strange” or “other” like queer means.

That’s…. Not true. People think so because the history before gay was reclaimed is way older (older than any love community member’s lifetimes, probably,) but gay had the exact same origins.

It was meant to denote sexually perverse people, most frequently sex workers and those who hired them. Anyone who participated in anything but married, vanilla, straight sex might have been referred to as “gay,” including any suspected LGBT person.

The word (already being one frequently used on the community,) was reclaimed as a community identifier when the community wanted to disconnect from the clinical and diagnostic implications of “homosexual.”

There is record of queer being reclaimed and used as a personal identifier literally before the popularization of gay. Both words are reclaimed slurs with negative histories, and BOTH are used as slurs against the community still to this day.

The more recent history of the mid to late 20th century more prevalently favored queer as a slur, as is represented in our media. However its clearly undeniable that the switch back to gay as the popular community slur (along with the ever present f slur,) happened in the 2000s. Which is trying to be denied and rewritten by the anti queer crowd, who completely ignore the words popularity with community members who actually lived through when it was a popular slur.

Yes to all of this. When it comes to words for “not straight” there are hardly any choices that didn’t originate as ways to stigmatize or pathologize us. We are all using reclaimed slurs to describe ourselves. 

Also, queer is reclaimed in a particularly empowering way. It doesn’t just mean “same-sex attraction” but encompasses a whole spectrum of attractions and gender orientations. It’s a word that says to asexuals, pansexuals, bisexuals, trans folks, genderfluid and genderqueer and genderless folks and people who are still figuring themselves out, “hey, you’ve got a home here. We don’t need to categorize you to love you.” 

This is important because there are a lot of divisions within the LGBTQ+ world, and in particular cis gay men and cis lesbians often overlook or exclude trans, bi and asexual people. Queer is the only word that not only demands equal acceptance for everyone, but leaves the door open for words and descriptors that haven’t even been invented yet. 

Somebody else pointed this out earlier to me, and of course I’ve lost the post, but it’s really suspicious that of all the reclaimed slurs, the one that gets the most pushback is the one that is most radically accepting of all identities

“hey, you’ve got a home here. We don’t need to categorize you to love you.”

Lmao yeah! the pushback against this idea is overt and disgusting and I don’t trust anybody who perpetuates it. 

Queer is an ideology and an identity, historically and now. It is an umbrella for that ideology and an umbrella for those identities, historically and now. They can’t be conflated (with LGBT) and it’s super fucking disingenuous to pretend one is just the tarnished besmirched dirty slur version of the other. They’re different. In my particular work for example, Queer bioethics is different from LGBT bioethics and conflating the two will muddle any discussion you try to have about them because they lead to literally opposite conclusions in some cases. 

Yeah I freaking love pancakes

Wait wrong post

By far the best addition to this post

This is one of those things where I feel like an old.

Like, *the* slogan I associate with pride is, “We’re here, we’re queer – get used to it!”

There was a TV show called “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy” that was total mainstream pap. (Not that the show wasn’t riddles problematic elements from the concept out, but ‘queer’ in the title was clearly meant as a positive.)

I just have a hard time processing queer as anything but reclaimed.

They actually shot “Queer As Folk” in my city!

TERFs and radical gender/sexuality bianarists are flooding social media and blogging sites with propaganda smearing the word queer in the hopes of silencing all of us who don’t identify with their hate politics. I fought hard to reclaim the word queer in the late 80s and early 90s, and it’s the one word that doesn’t worship exclusion. Which is why these people are trying to convince you not to use it. fuck that noise. there is literally no word i could use to identify my sexuality that hasn’t been thrown at me in hatred, fear, and violence. No way am I giving up the one of those that allows me to talk about all of my community without trying to put people in boxes they don’t fit in.

I will never not reblog this post. Queer, queer, queer here. 

“Queer” has been claimed by queer people as a self-descriptor since at least 1910. It’s an insult to those historical people (and all the generations of queer historical people who have identified as queer since then) to pretend that the people using it as a slur owned it more than the queer people who used it as a self-descriptor.

image
image

Source: George Chauncey, “Gay New York,” page 101

They don’t want us to use queer because they don’t want to be lumped in with anyone who’s not cis gay or cis lesbian. So fine. You don’t like the word queer? You don’t want to be in the “queer” community? Get the fuck out, then. Y’all don’t welcome us in your community anyway, so we’ll just have our own.

And it’ll be queer as fuck.

I fucking love the word queer ❤

Or, to put it another way, using a great old slogan of the community: I’m not gay as in happy, I’m queer as in fuck you.

Yes yes yes yes yes! These younglings today don’t know their queer history but feel so free to comment on it. Trying so desperately to assimilate into straight culture by turning your nose up at queer, and all the people who take refuge under its umbrella. Queer accepted me when nobody else would, not even the LGBT groups. 

Queer is full of the types of people who don’t make good poster children for the middle class assimilationist cis gay couple just looking to get married and have some kids. Queer forces us to realize the fight didn’t end with gay marriage, and cis gays are gonna have to step out of the spotlight sometimes, and realize cis gays have privilege, and fight for someone with less. Trans people, nonbinary people, people in nontraditional relationship structures, aromantics, asexuals, sex workers. Heck more and more bisexual people these days are switching over to queer because the amount of biphobia in the so-called lgBt community is so alienating, and also because so many of us feel the term bisexual reinforces a false gender dichotomy and we’re too tired of jokes about kitchenware to use pansexual.

Part of what I love about the term queer is that it does make people uncomfortable. It makes them aware of their privilege, exposes certain biases, even within the LGBT community. What’s so wrong with a movement that strives to fight for everybody, huh? Huh?

Proudly bi, proudly queer, and being part of this movement when I was young was an honor.

This is the post that changed my mind about “queer” I still have a knee jerk “ugh” reaction to it Bc of personal life experience but I understand it a lot more now. And sometimes I feel like queer is a good word to use for me.

Idk like personally dont care about the use of queer as a descriptor i do have a problem of people trying to push the boundaries of lesbians. Like if the queer community can get over the discust and pearl cluching because lesbians have attraction solely for the same sex. Like its not even their business but they want to be lesbians. I am really confused as to why they want to look down on us but want to take all of our words as their own descriptions. Also i have a serious problem with kink culture being considered queer. If that misogynistic garbage pile of getting off on harming women is queer than take your whole movement and go.

i was worried for this person that they might be inadvertently absorbing some TERF ideology from someone they follow: They’re actually a practicing Dianic wiccan in the year 2017,

anyway terf, trans lesbians are lesbians, and no queer person in the world actually considers kink to be queer. trying to associate queerness with misogyny and violence is nothing more than a tired, tired old terf tactic to discourage people from reclaiming queer, a word with strong ties to trans history and culture, so, we can guess why you don’t like it. and please for the love of fuck update your theories, the 70s are over. the second wave of feminism died of natural causes and it’s getting really embarrassing for you to be rehashing all of this decades past its used by date.

kat-von-delts:

kat-von-delts:

I vow to never be the “cool girl” by prioritizing men.
I vow to never be the “chill girl” by laughing at or tolerating misogynistic language or sentiment.
I vow to never be the “real girl” by crafting an attitude of disdain for other women.

I vow to always be a woman for other women.

📢📢📢 radfems reblogging this are skipping my third point 📢📢📢