âGender criticalâ Is and always has been code words for âIâm a terfâ so if youâre âgender criticalâ who claims to be anti-terf⌠like, youâre actually not.
Cisgender LGB people: I see a lot of you speaking about âthe cishetsâ with some kind of bitter taste behind it but never acknowledging your own cisgender privilege and how much transphobia there is in the LGBT community and I want you to know that youâre not fooling anyone.Â
Ewwww⌠cis people using the term cishet like that is awful, why would they do that? Itâs a term for people who are both queer and trans to talk about our oppression, not for cis queers to distance themselves from their transphobia and transmisogyny.
Yeah, the reasons:
–Â
to distance themselves from their transphobia and transmisogyny.Â
– to replace the way they have talked about âthe straightsâ as a coherent group when they didnât want to consider that other people might face any kind of oppression
Pretending that âlgbtâ and âcishet; are coherent blocks that have all experiences in common is a convenient way to ignore their own transphobia, transmisogyny and cisgender privilege all while providing a tool to exclude people.Â
Vocal acephobes do this the most, accusing asexual and aromantic people of being âcishetâ, resisting any kind of solidarity with other issue groups because it would bring the lgbt community in contact with âthe cishetsâ.Â
Itâs gross and it is so obviously holding lgbt/queer movements back, keeping them trapped in debates about who is âcishetâ when they so desperately need to be building a strong wide resistance to the rise of neofascism.Â
I wanted to add:
if you create a strong enough âus vs. the evil irredeemable cishetsâ mentality
this can be used to avoid all accountability ever.Â
Donât like being confronted with your racism? Target all your racism at a cishet POC who did something homophobic once. If a POC from the lgbt community calls you out on it you can call them âdivisiveâ, you can accuse them of collaborating with the evil âcishetsâ, you can ask them why they hate gay people, etc. etc.Â
If enough white lgbt people with a similar mindset support you, you can create a culture where racism is okay as long as the target it not lgbt, and this will drive away persky lgbt POC who might talk about white privilege and other uncomfortable topics or who might at some point catch you just being plain old racist to everyone.Â
Donât wanna be confronted with your ableism? ditto.Â
I had a friend tell me once that they envy me having a terminal condition because I donât have to figure out my future.
And like. I get depression and fear, and adulting is fucking hard, and sometimes when Iâm really sad I think this too.
But please donât tell your spoonie friends you envy them being sick, and not going to school, and âsitting at home watching Netflix whole days everydayâ. Weâre ILL. Weâre in a lot of pain. This sitting in bed whole days is fun when itâs a cool activity to do, but it stops being fun when itâs a necessity everyday and you want to do things but you CANT.
And the thing is, weâre having to figure out our future too. Itâs just for you figure is college and job and happy relationships.
For us itâs our condition getting worse, our parents aging and so us having to find caretakers for us when theyâre gone, and ultimately a lot of sadness and then dying.
Weâre both scared and Iâm not playing pain Olympics here. Iâm just here to tell you that sometimes itâs good to shut up.
radical feminism, 1973: one is not born a woman trans women: hi radical feminism, 1979:Â jesus god not like that
god yâall are so obtuse, this isnât what de beauvoir meant in the slightest. she meant âwomen are shaped into their social role through upbringing and socialisationâ not âwomen make a conscious choice to behave like their designated social roleâ. if anything this disproves trans ideology and the whole âiâm a woman insideâ argument as it states that passive interactions throughout your lifetime shape your womanhood, not some kind of innate emotional feeling. read a book.
hi iâve read the entirety of the second sex and youâre very wrong
wait are you disagreeing with me or op iâm so confused
with op!!! sorry lmao definitely with the op. i hate how that quote keeps getting taken out of context
oh good lol
iâve 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 beingâŚobtuse
i donât 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 beauvoirâs), and their ideology is not consistent with feminist ideas at all.
With âno one is born a womanâ 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, arenât transwomen born women?
no. every contemporary account of gender created by trans women in the outsider theory communityâthe only place weâre actually welcomeâholds 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)âwhich you would know if you bothered to engage with trans women versed in theory and hadnât gathered all your information about our alleged self-conception from buzzfeed articles and pop liberalismâs approach to transness.
moreover, if youâd actually read the work from de beauvoir, youâd remember that the first thing she writes in that chapter of the second sex is this:
[B]eliefâŚin a âprehistoryâ 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 menâŚ.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 womanâŚBy doing thisâŚ[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 womenâs oppression. it was only in the late seventiesâafter 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 publishedâthat radical feminism finally made its mythopoetic appeal to sex essentialism. yâall 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 wittigâs le corps lesbien, was forced into its own vein by the panic around âmale alignmentâ yâall created that disenfranchised gnc womenâultimately 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 platformâbut yâalls 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 womenâall because you couldnât be bothered to understand that your (totally justified! weâre 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, youâre just trying to get me confused.I read the book, I know what she meant, she didnât made a book focused on womenâs social role and womenâs oppression as some sort of proof that biological sex doesnât 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 wonât 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 arenât born feminine, docile, submissive, they are taught to be that way, and if a male presents that way it doesnât mean heâs a woman.Thatâs 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.Iâm not willing to read a full bullshit essay.
mate. here is a sparknotes version:
(a) youâre 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 havenât read the work of any trans theorists;
(d) the third wave, initiated by crenshaw, re-shifted focus onto nonwhite, gay, and eventually trans womenâsomething yâall had never thought to do;
(e) youâre apparently unwilling to read so much as 4 paragraphs explaining why (see a) youâre being ahistorical and (see c) your ideology is irrelevant to contemporary trans theory;
(f) you need to remove your head from whatever orifice youâve currently got it lodged in, generally;
The number of messages Iâve failed to answer across all my devices and media platforms will be weighed against my soul on judgment day, and I will be cast into hell
cishet parents: we love and accept you no matter what đ even if you *nudge* CHANGE YOUR MIND đ no matter what! But if you *flapping smoke signals* CHANGE. YOUR. MIND. thatâs okay and we still l
That ultimately pretty much everyone was bisexual underneath; that gender itself was a big nonbinary mess; and everyone would be able to be their true bisexual, often genderqueer self after the revolution. We wouldnât have or need the gender binary anymore.Â
This was a much more natural belief at the time, because gay and lesbian and bi and ace had been thought of as essentially different genders. Because ânormalâ was two binary sexes, with two corresponding binary genders, which were attracted to each other, and would act on that attraction to make more little normal people. This was the function of society, the thing that gave women any value, the whole point of life.
From âIdentity and Ideas: Strategies for Bisexuals,â an essay by bi activist Liz Highleyman in Bisexual Politics: Theories, Queeries, and Visions (1995), which I need to quote from more extensively but not rn:
âAs the social movements of the early 1970s fell apart or lost their radical edge in the 1980s, the gay liberation movement, now known as the gay and lesbian movement, followed suit.â
This sentence puts it in a nutshell, I think. There was a really concrete shift, from radical âliberationâ from the system for everyone, to acceptance from the system for these two groups.
âThere was a growing emphasis on an identity politics model that likened gays to oppressed racial and ethnic minorities. Sexual identity was increasingly seen as an immutable characteristic without sweeping social or political ramifications. The movement became more focused on civil rights and assimilation into mainstream society.â
 It wasnât an accident, that shift away from the overlapping bi/trans/intersex politics and bi/trans/intersex paradigm*. It was extremely deliberate.
It must have seemed like an easier sell to the straight world, which I can understand. Iâm sure a lot of people thought that this strategy would benefit everyone.
But not only does it leave many of our issues completely ignored or actively erased,itâs also a model that can never work for us.
This just kind of jelled for me for the first time, reading this. Itâs much harder to see if you donât know about both models, at least for me. I tend to believe the âno no, weâre for you too!â without thinking about how and why that hasnât been working.
The civil rights/assimilation model is very rooted in the whole idea that âthe only thing thatâs different about us is which gender we love!â Itâs the weâre just like you model. It works pretty well for fitting-into-society stuff: marriage, health care, employment rights, military service, media representation. Stuff that straight people have, so they can go, âokay, I see how youâre like me, it seems unfair and terrible that you shouldnât have these things too!â
It works really fucking badly for stuff where we are not like them.
The problem is actually that it works really fucking badly for stuff where we do not fit into the gender binary.
Thatâs the specific way the system demands that we Be Like Them. It treats everything else, everything that isnât being a binary sex/gender and wanting a binary sex/gender, as a freakish and in-valid choice, and punishes us for it.
The only progress weâve really seen is that sometimes, itâs not seen as a Bad Freakish Choice to want the âwrongâ binary gender, and very occasionally, itâs not seen as a Bad Freakish Choice to be the âwrongâ binary gender.
A lot of the trans movementâs progress has come from doing the same thing the gay and lesbian movement has done: âlook at us, look how gender-normative and binary-gendered we are, look how we just want to be a normal gender and love a normal gender. Nothing threatening going on here!â
It works. Iâm not going to knock that. People use this shit because they are fucking desperate and fearing for their lives.
But it also means those of us who canât say âweâre just like normal peopleâ become ballast.
You know: the stuff you throw overboard so your hot air balloon can take off.
I think this is whatâs at the core of âace discourse,â âsga discourse,â and all those other gatekeeping arguments.Â
The system only, conditionally, grudgingly, gives certain rights, in some places, to the minority of us who have convincingly argued that weâre Just Like Them. It is exceedingly clear to those people that mixing with non-approved groups puts not only those limited civil rights, but also the entire model used to win them, in danger.Â
Itâs a choice. We all face it. If you identify more with the need for all those normal rights â or with the oppressions around being, or being into, into the wrong binary gender â or you just see that this model is working for some people and you want it to work for you â then youâre likely to cast your lot with the binary-gender-based âgay rightsâ model, which means youâre likely to take a âgatekeepingâ tack.Â
If you identify more with the need for total freedom from the rules of the binary gender system, for whatever reason â and youâre not put off by the fact that we donât have a working political model around that â then youâre likely to cast your lot with the âgay liberationâ model, which means youâre likely to take the âradical inclusionâ tack thatâs inherent to that model.Â
* (I donât think there was an intersex movement at the time; intersex people are still incredibly silenced by not only the media but actively, intentionally, by the entire medical industry. But it is an explicitly intersex-friendly and very ace/aro-friendly model, in a way that the existing model has definitely not been.)
This. This right here is so fucking important to me. As an intersex, aromantic, bisexual, genderqueer personâŚ.I feel this keenly.
Its why Iâve felt so disconnected from the community that calls itself âLGBT.â Its why Iâve felt exceedingly more comfortable with the communities that receive backlash from the LGBT – the mogai and queer communities.
The entire model, the obsession, the focus of the LGBT on just âhomophobia and transphobia,â or âSGA and trans people,â is only âhistoricalâ up to a point. The rejection of the word âqueerâ and the rejection of calling our community âthe queer communityâ (and any other similarly accepting, non strictly defined community labels) goes hand in hand in all of this.
Its a clear and purposeful prioritization of community members who are binary; of members who are exactly everything I am not.
And to further the evidence that its entirely political, its pretty much entirely western. Every single existing friend I have in the community from other countries express some sort of bafflement at the behavior and treatment of us âless acceptableâ members. They get confused when we talk about a-specs or bisexuals not being accepted, because thatâs only an issue over here, with the âacceptableâ members who have decided we donât benefit their movement.
But I am so thankful for someone else pointing this out and showing evidence because I am not the best with words, but its something I actively experience and have had to deal with, without the proper knowledge and words to protest my treatment completely.
The current model the LGBT uses is complete and utter bullshit. Its a community the professes to care equally about all of us – but has no problem using methods and tactics that throw us under the bus, because they work for some of them.
If a community is going to have solidarity, then the methods that prioritize certain members while hurting others needs to be condemned. No amount of success for the few justifies harming the other members, lest you give up the pretense of being equally supportive of everyone.
Which is also why I think the mogai and queer communities have gotten under such heavy fire. Its what we specifically get targeted for – we equally support all members, which is seen as unacceptable. We use a completely different model – the rejection of the binary completely, anti assimilation, which undermines everything theyâre trying for. We donât shirk from embracing and displaying our blatant rebellion and differences from a pericisheteronormative society, which effectively ruins the chances of gold star gays getting the community seen as âjust like one of them.â
Its why thereâs been such disgust displayed at the idea of being associated with âweird, special snowflakeâ genders, its why the attraction TO those genders has been so heavily scrutinized and invalidated. Its why âmogaiâ can be thrown around like an insult, its why we get mocked as âradikweers.â Laughing at those of us that dare to fully abandon the binary, pushing us to the fringes of the community and denying us voices, words, resources, and acknowledgement, and actively denying our existence and validity this way is a frantic attempt to save that model that prioritizes them; and they believe doing so will put them in a better, more acceptable light with the rest of society that treats us the same.
Its why respectability politics has become just as much of a danger to me as pericisheteronormativity is.
And this gives me words to express how I feel about it all. âAnti gay rights, pro gay liberation.â
Reminder that ânonbinary womenâ includes transfeminine folks & trans women who identify that way too and if youâre making the assumption that ânonbinary womenâ can only be non-transfeminine/trans women youâre alienating a huge group of people from their identity. I see people always assuming that nonbinary women were assigned she/her pronouns or that they can bind and take T (not even that they do but that they can) and while that describes some nonbinary women/their experiences itâs doesnât describe many others. Stop alienating and ignoring the experience of nonbinary trans women and transfeminine people.
I got someone harassing me on messenger trying to tell me that the community has ALWAYS BEEN LGBT ever since Stonewall and that Martha P Johnson was the trans woman who started it all
First off, it was Marsha P Johnson.
Secondly, despite the fact that Marsha was the one to start the fight, despite the fact that trans people have been fighting since day one, the trans community was not considered a part of the movement until the 90âs. Many people in The Gay Rights Movement said similar things about trans people as they do now about cisace people: âthey donât experience same sex attraction, therefore they donât belong!â
It is NOT trans erasure to acknowledge that our efforts within the community werenât properly recognized, and that we werenât given a letter in the community until relatively recently. It is being aware of our history, our past. It is knowing how the sins of our past are repeating themselves with a new target.
Also this person intentionally misgendered me so they can fuck right the hell off.
maybe itâs just me, but it seems a bit transphobic to brush the issues the trans community has had in being fully acknowledged as part of the community under the rug.Â
itâs basically denying the lateral aggression the trans community has had to deal with (and still does somewhat since we still have movements to drop the T come up every now and then and some other stuff as well) as well as erasing the efforts the trans community to be acknowledged. if they can tell us we canât talk about it because itâs bad then they can eventually pretend it never happened which can further their whole lie that âright from the beginning itâs been one big happy family fighting against homophobia and transphobia.â
Reminder that Stonewall was where trans women gathered because they werenât welcome in gay establishments of the time
violence committed by cis LGB people against trans people isn’t lateral aggression though. cis and trans people aren’t ever, ever on equal footing so ‘lateral violence’ is a wildly misinformed phrase here