1929) I want to be an actor, but I'm afraid that after I transition, I won't be accepted in any roles because of my gender identity.
Well, if you wanted you could always go stealth and not tell them you’re trans.
March 2012
28 posts
1913) I’ve been out as FtM for about a year now. I’ve built my body to a pretty male-like shape, I’ve cut my hair, and I’ve started acting male. But, no matter what I do, people see I’m “Female,” or, those who know I was born female call me female. They refuse to call me “Zak,” “Archer,” or “Saxon,” my three male names that I’m working with. They won’t even call me Tema, which is the female name I’m comfortable with! I try as hard as I can to be open and nice with the people around me. But I just…I die inside when people ask my name, and I say something I’m comfortable with, and then someone else is like, “No, that’s Taylor!” or “She’s not a he!” I mean, seriously…It hurts, a lot. On top of that, I can’t buy a binder. So I’m stuck getting all this horrible attitude…even when I tell someone it hurts me. Oh, yeah, and people won’t call me an FtM, or a Transsexual. Nope, I’m a transvestite. It makes me feel dirty.
Isn’t Taylor a unisex name, though?
1908) I’m terrified that I will never feel like a “real” man… That even after transitioning I’ll be this fucked up lost scared little boy. I’m terrified that I will turn into my abusive father. I’m TERRIFIED that I’m giving up everything (most of my family is disowning me) for nothing. For more hardship. I’m terrified of many things.. But mostly.. I’m terrified that I no longer know who I am…
1. *hug*
2.
If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or, being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or, being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise;
If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;
If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with triumph and disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to broken,
And stoop and build ‘em up with wornout tools;
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: “Hold on”;
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings - nor lose the common touch;
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run -
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And - which is more - you’ll be a Man my son!- Rudyard Kipling
you’ve already done most of that.
you’ll make it all the way, one day.
My suicide →
lesbianpornisluv.tumblr.com
Friday I broke a mirror because I didn’t like the reflection. I was tired of being in the closet. So I destroyed it. I got cut bled. I wanted to kill myself. There was so much blood it triggered me
So I came out. Nothing was better. I feel worse actually. Nothing’s gotten better
It sucks. I have…
if you kill yourself, you’ll never have the chance to be happy. and you deserve that chance. So hold on, make it happen one day, and refuse to die until then.
1863) One of the biggest reasons I can't wait to start T is how much easier it will be to masturbate.
…wait…I thought it made it harder because of decreased sensitivity?
Or does it increase sensitivity?
- libido increases and everything turns you on, which makes it better
- orgasms last like ten times as long and so much more intense omg
- though in the case of the OP, I think he was probably referring to dick growth.
The Unpopular Opinions of a Post-Modern Prep: (More) responses~ →
appropriately-inappropriate.tumblr.com
It’s approximately the ass-crack of dawn here, so I apologize for any spelling errors or shortness of thought. I’ll go and look over this tomorrow, but wanted to shoot a reply before I crashed and the ideas got stale.
- how would you classify a ‘phallus’? Would you date a cis woman with an unnaturally large clit? or a castrated cis man?
I’m going to point out here that there’s no such thing as an ‘unnaturally large clit’. Barring surgical or chemical intervention, the clitoris comes in a variety of shapes and sizes, and consequently, even if a clit is bigger than usual, it isn’t precisely unnatural. In contrast, you could argue that a neo-vagina is unnatural—specifically: that it does not occur in nature.
But that’s just a nitpick.
To answer your question: Yes, and no. A woman with a larger-than-average clit is still a woman. A man without his penis is still a man. Even castrated, a man still retains his malehood, and so I would have absolutely no attraction to a cis man whatsoever.
yeah, wrong word choice there in using ‘unnatural’; sorry about that. Although you could then extend the analogy: if a woman with a larger-than-average clit is still a woman, then likewise a woman with an even larger one - to the extent that society would usually call it a penis - is also still a woman. Biologically, clitorii and penii are analogous organs, and come in a large variety with occasional overlap, such as in the case of intersex folk.
- it places an added obligation on trans people to be upfront about bodies in a way that cis people are not, and can often lead to rejection
I’d like to point out that being upfront about one’s body isn’t the exclusive territory of trans individuals. Yes, it places them at considerable risk and YES, it is a horrible situation to be placed it—but they’re not the only people to experience rejection on account of their body.
Especially in the era of online dating, where a picture can be altered or out of date, rejection on account of one’s physical appearance is pretty endemic. I see it as something very similar, though fatphobia generally is more verbal, while transphobia tends more towards the physical.apart from assuming that all trans* women have phalluses, you’re also assuming that they’re into the kind of sexual acts that would involve them, which can be especially hurtful for trans* women who are extremely dysphoric about their genitalia and prefer sexual acts that don’t involve penetration or even them being completely naked
Right, okay, but let’s imagine, in this hypothetical situation, that a cis woman would really rather not (for whatever reason) come into contact with a phallus. Now, we know that not all trans* women have phalluses, and that not all trans* women are open to sexual acts that require them.
HOWEVER, this hypothetical cis woman also knows that if she gets involved in a sexual scenario with this hypothetical trans* woman and discovers that she is, in fact, bephallused, she’ll feel uncomfortable, have to excuse herself, and risk insulting/hurting the trans* woman in question, AND open herself up to accusations of bigotry and transphobia, which in a community as small as the lesbian/queer community, can imply significant social sanctions and ostracization.
I’m a bit unsure about how refusing upfront to date trans* women would prevent that scenario from happening. Most people don’t go around advertising their trans status; how would you know that any woman you’re interested in is cis or trans to begin with?
Meanwhile, from what I’ve been able to gather, the majority of gay/lesbian communities are still resistant to trans* people and are sometimes vocally transphobic, so I’m not sure how common such a response would be. :\ Unless you live in a heavily trans-populated area?
Also, I’d like to think that if you turned down such a trans* woman politely and respectfully, making it clear that your lack of interest had nothing to do with her as a woman but how you’re just not into phalluses, she might be hurt but not so much insulted. There are rude rejections in which the person in question makes their disgust obvious, and then there are respectful ones.
although I’m not sure about that, either, because if someone turned me down purely on the basis of my genitals I’d be torn up over it for ages. But at the same time I’d still prefer risking such rejection than to be written off completely from the start by all cis gay men as a whole.
SO, now this hypothetical cis woman is faced with two choices:
1. She goes for it and hopes for the best or,
2. She chooses to abstain, or find another partner, and avoids the situation entirely.
It’s basically like a Shroedinger’s Box scenario (if you’ll pardon the pun, it’s late!). You can’t know if your trans* woman partner will, in fact, have a phallus or not, and so, in order to avoid a potential problem down the road, you assume yes and conduct yourself accordingly.
Or at least, that’s how I can see the hypothetical rationale happening.
- just ask
But here’s ANOTHER problem—because it’s considered gauche and rude beyond describing to ask a trans* individual about their genitals. Or so I’ve been told, at least! So, how would one go about asking, anyways?
“Hey there, I think you’re sexy but I’m allergic to phalluses. Got yours?”
It’s gauche and rude to ask a trans* individual about their genitals in a situation where you would not ask a cis individual about their genitals. So I’m pretty sure sexual situations are the exception here, because, well, it will at some point involve genitals, which makes them a wholly relevant topic of discussion.
- if most cis people thought and behaved in such a way, there would be barely anyone who would ‘risk’ being open to trans* people
Right—well, and I say this in all earnestness, what can you do about it? People are entitled to agency regarding their sex lives, and if they decide, for whatever reason, “Well, this is not for me”, then what can you say?
(Not to mention, even in a worst case scenario, wouldn’t trans* individuals also be able to date each other? I mean, a lesbian’s a lesbian, so two trans* lesbians who hit it off could work.)
yeah, they could, assuming that the two trans* lesbians fulfill each other’s Potential Sexual Partner criteria (including genitals; trans* people aren’t immune from that either), and if there are even enough trans* lesbians around to begin with. I’m in a place with terrible LGBT rights and I know only three other trans guys in my country, one of whom is straight, one of whom is my second cousin and straight, and the third of whom is a friend of mine whom I’m not attracted to. So I’m probably going to have a cis partner, and the transphobia in the local gay community is not encouraging. [/never been in a relationship]
But even so—I’m sorry. I know it’s a shitty thing to say, but I absolutely have to respect peoples’ rights to self determination of sexual agency. And if that means they don’t want to have a trans* sexual partner, then… well… so be it.
- have you actually been in a situation where you were interested in a woman only to turn her down upon discovering that she was trans?
No—never in that situation. I have, however, had to turn down a very nice trans* gentleman. He was very handsome and really clever and we got along extremely well and I was flattered—-but he’s a dude, and I’m extremely gay. So, it wouldn’t have worked out XD. We’re still friends, though, which is nice.
Your friend raises an interesting point—but she (they? preferred pronoun is?), still accept that sexual orientation is extremely personal. As your friend mentions, they are attracted to very specific subsets of individuals; “This group and that group, yes. This group and the other group, no.”
So, they’re being….. discriminatory (and I use that word in the classical sense—ie: someone of discriminating taste) in their preferences—and they are entirely within their rights to do so. So, if she’s attracted to mental vaginas, then why is it so beyond the pale for someone to be attracted to PHYSICAL vaginas?
Or, to narrow it down still further—what if they’re only attracted to faab/cis women? I mean, that’s also an example of a specific type.
So, in short: I have wondered about this sort of… undercurrent of hypocracy in the queer community, wherein it is perfectly acceptable to have selective tastes (“Mind vaginas”, or “genderqueer” or “androgynous chicks” or “butches”), but the preference for a physical trait (“cis vagina”) is somehow seen as especially problematic.
Some of the issue is also how the cis/trans dichotomy (and the whole notion of ‘biological’ sex) is partly a social construct too; we’re a phallocentric world that designates genders based on the presence or absence of a phallus, and if, say, we were a society that used different standards to decide that, some currently-cis people might instead be considered trans, and vice versa.
But perhaps that’s another question for another day.
Have a lovely evening, if you haven’t gone to sleep already, and a great weekend!
thanks!
(More) responses~
I totally understand the differences—however, I do believe that the sort of rhetoric is, if not the same, at least similar. Which may, on a broader level, be responsible for the instinctive recoiling?
I mean, if that’s the sort of rhetoric that’s getting used to convince cis lesbians (and I very specifically use lesbians, because I am one, and consequently cannot speak for queer women—and queer seems to be a much broader category anyways!) to see trans* women as viable partners, it’s not surprising that there’s this sort of backlash? I mean, it does sound very similar (at least to me), and that’s unfortunately the sort of rhetoric cis lesbians have had to deal with from het guys for a long time.To address your other point: What then of pre- or non- op trans women? I mean, it’s their absolute right to do whatever they need to do to feel comfortable in their bodies. However, say someone has no attraction to phalluses whatsoever, and no desire to test that boundary. What then? Is it transphobic of them to avoid sexual relationships with trans* women?
As a thought experiment, that might actually explain a lot. Like, okay: it’s very hard to guess what’s in someone’s pants—it may be a phallus, it may be a vagina. Say someone doesn’t want ANY contact with a phallus, regardless of the gender of its owner. So: wanting to avoid the awkwardness of initiating sexual contact only to find out that they can’t follow through (and maybe get called transphobic/hateful), maybe said individual chooses not to engage in the first place?
That might explain the hesitance— but it’s also a very valid concern, because the individual would be caught in a seriously untenable situation. Leave, get called nasty names and have their motive misconstrued— or stay, and do something they’re not comfortable with.
I’d love to hear your opinions!
“However, say someone has no attraction to phalluses whatsoever, and no desire to test that boundary. What then? Is it transphobic of them to avoid sexual relationships with trans* women?”
It would be transphobic of them to avoid sexual relationships with trans* women who don’t have phalluses, but perhaps not with those who do.
The difference lies between declaring “I don’t want sexual relationships with trans* women” and “I don’t want sexual relationships that would involve a phallus”.
(and even that is questionable; how would you classify a ‘phallus’? Would you date a cis woman with an unnaturally large clit? or a castrated cis man? To some extent, our ideas of gendered body parts are social constructs.)
Fewer people would have problems with the latter; it’s the former that usually causes the most problems, because apart from assuming that all trans* women have phalluses, you’re also assuming that they’re into the kind of sexual acts that would involve them, which can be especially hurtful for trans* women who are extremely dysphoric about their genitalia and prefer sexual acts that don’t involve penetration or even them being completely naked.
There’s also the huge amount of negative connotations involved in blanketly declaring a refusal to date trans* women as opposed to specifically people-with-phalluses, because there’s little difference between that and genuinely-transphobic sentiment.
“So: wanting to avoid the awkwardness of initiating sexual contact only to find out that they can’t follow through (and maybe get called transphobic/hateful), maybe said individual chooses not to engage in the first place?”
From what I know, the vast majority of trans* people usually disclose things like the state of their genitals prior to initiating any sexual contact, or if things look like they might lead to sex. Which can be problematic in its way (because it places an added obligation on trans people to be upfront about bodies in a way that cis people are not, and can often lead to rejection). So I doubt this hypothetical is common. If someone is truly concerned about their sexual partner not having a phallus, then… just ask, in much the same way that you might be unwilling to date people who might be of a particular religion or political leaning.
Not to mention that: “maybe said individual chooses not to engage in the first place” -> if most cis people thought and behaved in such a way, there would be barely anyone who would ‘risk’ being open to trans* people; where all the cis people go off to have sexy funtiems and leave the trans* people to be forever alone (potentially also isolated from each other, because cis people far outnumber trans* people) until a pansexual wanders by. And that makes me sad.
out of curiosity - have you actually been in a situation where you were interested in a woman only to turn her down upon discovering that she was trans?
and since I thought this was interesting in further illustrating the variety of ways in which sexual attraction manifests for people, I’m leaving this quote from a faab genderqueer friend, currently dating a trans woman: “i have realized: i am interested in people who like their vaginas or want to have them, regardless of their actual gender identity or physical configuration. … i am attracted to mind vaginas. i can be with trans guys who like their vaginas. and i can be with trans girls who are pre-op but want vaginas, and who can only rly get off by considering their penis a clit. but with a trans guy who is all about having a penis and nothing else, or a trans girl who likes her penis, i can’t do that”
(More) responses~
Oh, sorry for the confusion!
I believe, but am not sure, that it was posted by Ms C Brennan.
- That said, it feels a bit unsettling for someone to declare that they will NOT have trans* women sexual partners - primarily because trans women are a diverse group with diverse bodies, and should be judged as individuals rather than written off completely from the start
See, this is a bit concerning to me. I mean, unsettling though it may be, I have to reiterate that consent is paramount. I mean, the same example could be used (and is, albiet slightly less elegantly worded) by heterosexual men against lesbians.
There is no measurable difference between “a diverse group with diverse bodies, and should be judged as individuals rather than written off completely from the start” and “How do you know you don’t like men? Have you met every man in the world?”
It’s the same question—if someone doesn’t feel a desire for whatever reason, then that is fine and the decision should be respected without question. If that rhetoric is unacceptable for straight men to use against lesbians, it doesn’t get any better in the retelling, if you catch my drift.
- my problem with the screencapped comments had to do with how the writer seemed convinced that only the first type of lesbian existed.
That’s a radfem perspective, and though I can respect it, it’s not one I personally ascribe to. That being said, the OP does raise some valid points; namely that the context of the ‘cotton ceiling’ does relate, according to its creator, to the sexuality (which you posit means trans* sexuality, and I still have to wonder who the OTHER people in the equation are)—which as I’ve stated, is something I take particularly to heart.
- the argument that cis lesbians are universally unattracted to trans women on the basis of their genitals comes across as a bit creepy
See, I don’t see why. I suppose that’s a YMMV sort of moment; I would assume that it’s a matter of the ‘package deal’. As you say, it is possible to date outside of ‘type’, but if someone prefers their partners a specific way, I don’t know that it’s contingent upon US to declare it creepy. I mean, it’s their prerogative to limit their dating pool, right?
And I don’t know that anyone is saying that cis lesbians are UNIVERSALLY unattracted— plenty of lesbians, bi and pan women pair off with trans* women. I think it’s more accurate to say that a small subset of women aren’t attracted, and like I said, I have to say that it’s their prerogative. So long as they’re being respectful, of course.
- I’m not sure if the sexual preference argument would still hold
I’m of the opinion that it would. People have all kinds of preferences. Some kinksters won’t date vanilla. Some people prefer to date brunettes. Some won’t date people who don’t vote a specific way— but we don’t say that they must. So, for me, it all comes down to individual choice, and the fact that individuals shouldn’t be shamed for a choice that they make for themselves, harming noone.
“I mean, the same example could be used (and is, albiet slightly less elegantly worded) by heterosexual men against lesbians.”
Not really; though I guess I could have termed it better. By definition, all cis men are 1) men, and 2) barring accidents or other medical conditions, have a penis. So it’s fully understandable that a lesbian might declare that she’d never be attracted to a cis man. (there are a few who do date trans men, but that’s a different issue.)
But with trans women, you have people who are either:
1) women with penises
2) women with vaginas
and if lesbians are women who are attracted to people who are women and/or have vaginas, then it wouldn’t make sense for them to write off trans women as a whole, if a trans woman in question technically falls within their date-able people criteria.
“And I don’t know that anyone is saying that cis lesbians are UNIVERSALLY unattracted”
Ms. Brennan (if that’s her) seemed to be, so that was where my comment was directed at.
I see people writing wholly warranted posts about how men are sexist pigs, and i agree with them, and then i feel disgusted at myself for effectively wanting to be male as long as i can remember, not just in body, which is defendable, but in all those non-physical aspects of gender, which isn’t likewise defendable, and i hate myself and feel like a jerk for my persistent fantasies of being a regular guy. because i know what regular guys are like and what they do to people. and what kind of sick person must i be to want to be like that.
passively suicidal at the moment. in class so i won’t do anything. just regular self-hate from reading sj things. feeling helpless to do anything. hate my inability to be perfect. perhaps it’s an impossible goal, but i could always try harder, and i hate that i don’t because i’m selfish and i’m so tired and sometimes i put my wellbeing and happiness over that of others because it was killing me being sad all the time. but with happiness thus comes guilt. fml.
sometimes i wish i were a woman
that way i would be cis, and also i wouldn’t have male privilege causing my existence to be inherently oppressive to women no matter what i do or how much i try not to hurt anyone
(More) responses~
I’m not a trans woman (gay trans man here), but the fundamental problem with that entire OP is how it defines ‘lesbian’ as ‘cis lesbian’, and considers it unreasonable to expect them to be attracted to trans women. As well as assuming that all trans women have “peen”. As well as assuming that lesbians are genitally-obsessed people who are attracted to vaginas rather than to women, which I’d think is offensive not just to trans women but to many lesbians, cis and trans. As well as the constant wielding of cis privilege, placing cis lesbians’ health, comfort and happiness over that of trans womens’, which isn’t even considered in the least and practically treated as a joke.
also, given how that commentated-screencap was already pretty triggery for me - unleashing all my insecurities about how no self-respecting gay man would ever be truly attracted to me because I’m trans - I’d imagine it might be worse for someone who is actually a trans lesbian and reading that comment manifesto about how they’re not real lesbians and should gtfo the lesbian community because they make the *real lesbians* uncomfortable.
so you might want to get that taken care of before there can be further dialogue.
Hi there! I’ll try to address the points as they arise.
- the fundamental problem with that entire OP is how it defines ‘lesbian’ as ‘cis lesbian’, and considers it unreasonable to expect them to be attracted to trans women
And here I thought that I was very careful about that. Though I do use the term ‘trans* woman’ and ‘trans* lesbian’, that’s for clarification purposes. As you’ll note, I’m very staunch in my belief that trans* women are women and that they are entitled to a space in the lesbian community.
HOWEVER, having said that, I also firmly believe that consent is paramount and that any individual person has the right to choose their own partners. If that means they choose NOT to have trans* women sexual partners, that is a choice we must respect (so long as they are, in turn, respectful about it. No one’s entitled to rudeness). Hopefully that clarifies this point.
- As well as assuming that lesbians are genitally-obsessed people who are attracted to vaginas rather than to women, which I’d think is offensive not just to trans women but to many lesbians, cis and trans
With all due respect, you’re a gay trans* man. Consequently, your opinions as to the lesbian community aren’t going to really be as important as those views of the people in the community. Some lesbians ARE attracted to vaginas, and that is fine. Some are attracted to a broader scope of genitalia, and both of those manifestations of lesbianism are fine. What bothers me about the concept of the ‘cotton ceiling’ is the implication that any individual is entitled to the sexual availability of anyone else—and that it appears to do so by coersive means.
(For example, “Genitally obsessed” for someone who simply prefers a specific organ, OR “transphobic” for someone who doesn’t want to engage in sexual relations with a given individual. Shaming someone for a sexual preference just isn’t right.)
- As well as the constant wielding of cis privilege, placing cis lesbians’ health, comfort and happiness over that of trans womens’, which isn’t even considered in the least and practically treated as a joke.
Now that’s one hell of an assertion! I’d like to see some evidence of my supposed cis privilege, or where I specifically state that I am placing the interests of cis women over those of trans* women. Please, by all means, show me.
Likewise, I’d be especially interested in whatever statement gave you the impression I considered trans* women a joke—or treated them in any disrespectful manner. If you want to make assertions, fine, but please be willing to provide evidence to back up the inflammatory statements.
- given how that commentated-screencap was already pretty triggery for me
While I am very sorry you were triggered, the screencap makes a valid point, and as such was included. I cannot be held responsible for the million potential triggers in the world, and as such, please be aware that this blog is frequently un-trigger warned, and proceed accordingly.
- I’d imagine it might be worse for someone who is actually a trans* lesbian
This is perhaps true. Having said that: dissenting opinions are still valid ones, and will be presented if they support a specific point or argument. That’s just blog rules. Please read the Salient Points page for more information—because I agree with certain facets of a post doesn’t mean I endorse the whole thing.
As it so happens—I agree with Ms Brennan that the naming alone of Overcoming The Cotton Ceiling workshop sounds coercive and manipulative (especially seeing as how the Cotton Ceiling refers to underwear and thus, sexual availability). However, Ms Brennan and I part ways at issues of radfem ideology—I firmly believe that trans* women are women. Consequently, I address them as such—as members of the lesbian community, their trans* status does not protect them from critique or criticism in matters of lesbian community… nor should it.
- so you might want to get that taken care of before there can be further dialogue.
Thanks for the concern, but I’m rather fond of myself as is. If you have any further points, though, feel free to address them!
Hi!
Firstly, my accusations weren’t targetted at you but to the person who’d made the comments in the screencap; sorry for any misunderstanding there!
“HOWEVER, having said that, I also firmly believe that consent is paramount and that any individual person has the right to choose their own partners. If that means they choose NOT to have trans* women sexual partners, that is a choice we must respect”
I agree with this to some extent - yes, I also firmly believe that consent is paramount and no one should feel obligated to be attracted to people they are not attracted to. That said, it feels a bit unsettling for someone to declare that they will NOT have trans* women sexual partners - primarily because trans women are a diverse group with diverse bodies, and should be judged as individuals rather than written off completely from the start. Using a racial analogy - I would be similarly disturbed if a white person were to declare that they choose never to date a black person; while this may be true, exceptions do sometimes happen, people change their minds when they find someone whom they love, and I know of cis lesbians with trans girlfriends who might have previously thought they’d never date a trans woman, but then they fell in love with one.
“Some lesbians ARE attracted to vaginas, and that is fine. Some are attracted to a broader scope of genitalia, and both of those manifestations of lesbianism are fine.”
yes, definitely. So my problem with the screencapped comments had to do with how the writer seemed convinced that only the first type of lesbian existed.
Regarding the genitally-obsessed term: I don’t speak for everyone, but I know that on my part, I never need to see someone’s genitals before I decide whether or not I find them attractive. I usually make that judgement while they’re fully clothed. So the argument that cis lesbians are universally unattracted to trans women on the basis of their genitals comes across as a bit creepy; not to mention that there are lots of trans women who are post-op and barely distinguishable from cis women in that area. In that latter instance, I’m not sure if the sexual preference argument would still hold, because if a given lesbian is attracted to vaginas and the trans woman in question has one, then would she have a basis to reject her purely because she is trans?
The Unpopular Opinions of a Post-Modern Prep: Addressing issues →
appropriately-inappropriate.tumblr.com
Should the Cotton Ceiling be overcome?
[reblogged as a link because you don’t even want to read it, hi cissies trying to tell me about my opression]
appropriately-inappropriate:Recently, I was informed of the Cotton Ceiling effect,…
I’m not a trans woman (gay trans man here), but the fundamental problem with that entire OP is how it defines ‘lesbian’ as ‘cis lesbian’, and considers it unreasonable to expect them to be attracted to trans women. As well as assuming that all trans women have “peen”. As well as assuming that lesbians are genitally-obsessed people who are attracted to vaginas rather than to women, which I’d think is offensive not just to trans women but to many lesbians, cis and trans. As well as the constant wielding of cis privilege, placing cis lesbians’ health, comfort and happiness over that of trans womens’, which isn’t even considered in the least and practically treated as a joke.
also, given how that commentated-screencap was already pretty triggery for me - unleashing all my insecurities about how no self-respecting gay man would ever be truly attracted to me because I’m trans - I’d imagine it might be worse for someone who is actually a trans lesbian and reading that comment manifesto about how they’re not real lesbians and should gtfo the lesbian community because they make the *real lesbians* uncomfortable.
so you might want to get that taken care of before there can be further dialogue.
Cisphobia
How loud and often can we say this? THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CISPHOBIA. There is no irrational hatred or fear of cisgender people.
What do I mean, you ask? Only that there is no possible way for a trans person to actually use a cisphobic epithet, because cisphobia is emphatically not a thing in our society. It isn’t. End of story.
Just think about that the next time you, cisgender person, think about calling a trans person out for getting angry at you and using violent, seemingly “cisphobic” rhetoric. Think about why you feel entitled to police the anger of trans people without regard to why or how a cisgender person offended them in the first place.
I’m a trans person and still think I deserve the right to condemn things like ‘die cis scum’ as cisphobic (not to mention counterproductive, unless someone can explain how trans people killing cis people will advance trans rights in any way), and the same for people advocating violence against cis people, kthx.
VIRGINITY IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT
Virginity:
- is sexist
- is heteronormative
- commodifies sex
- commodifies young cis-het white women
- contributes to rape culture
- contributes to slut-shaming
- erases queer folk
- erases transfolk
- frames a woman’s worth as inversely proportional to the number of dicks that have been inside her
wtf I’m a feminist gay trans non-white guy and a virgin and I DON’T SEE HOW MY VIRGINITY IS ANY OF THOSE.
I’ll have sex *if and when* I want to, kthx.
virginity-shaming is just as bad as slut-shaming, perhaps more so, because it’s sometimes framed as being feminist. when it’s not. STOP PLACING VALUES ON OTHER PEOPLE’S SEX LIVES OR THE LACK THEREOF.
also that last one: sooo cis lesbians and pre-op trans women and other women who don’t intend to or can’t have dicks inside them don’t count any more, amiright? WHO’S ERASING QUEER AND/OR TRANS FOLK NOW?
“So here is the quick way of working out if you’re a feminist. Put your hand in your pants.
a) Do you have a vagina? and
b) Do you want to be in charge of it?
If you said ‘yes’ to both, then congratulations! You’re a feminist.” —
a) Do you have a vagina? and
b) Do you want to be in charge of it?
If you said ‘yes’ to both, then congratulations! You’re a feminist.” —
Caitlin Moran, How To Be A Woman (via callmeclinton)
…I’m trying to figure out if this is necessarily cissexist or not. because yeah, I answer ‘yes’ to both ‘a’ and ‘b’, don’t really know why it would make me a feminist even though I am, especially when I know lots of feminists who don’t, but then again the thing doesn’t say that you need to answer ‘yes’ to both ‘a’ and ‘b’ in order to be considered a feminist, which would cover pre-bottom-surgery trans women and cis men, but on the other hand there are also lots of pre-bottom-surgery trans men who have vaginas they want to be in charge of but are still virulently misogynist, which I’d think would make them not feminists, and I think I’m overthinking this. /o\
Ello: Liberal shit. →
faquot.tumblr.com
i was thinking, is there actually anything offensive about refering to people as male or female? Some people seem to get really annoyed at it. Like it’s gender discrimination.
I don’t understand why it’s so bad. Could someone please explain to me? I mean, surely it’s no different that mentioning…
1. there’s nothing offensive in referring to people as male or female, unless they happen not to be the gender you assume they are (as might happen frequently with transgender people), correct you on it, and you persist in referring to them as the wrong gender. Like how you might be offended if someone referred to you as female and continued to do so even after you corrected them. Though it’s not really the same thing, because you’re not trans and thus are unlikely to have had a history of being maliciously misgendered by other people, so it wouldn’t be triggery the way it might for a trans person.
2. I hate to be the language police here (especially since I usually hate people who are), but ‘transgenders’ is not a word. ‘transgender’ is an adjective. There are transgender people; transgender men, transgender women, transgender community but no ‘transgenders’, any more than there are ‘clevers’ or ‘fats’ or ‘happys’.
3. I’m gay and I find people referring to things pejoratively as ‘gay’ to be offensive, because in those cases, ‘gay’ is used as a synonym with ‘bad’ or ‘weak’ or ‘pathetic’. How would you not find that offensive? Not hugely offensive, maybe, and perhaps negligible and not worth making a fuss about; but “litterally don’t find it offensive in the slightest”?
You is kind. You is smart. You is important.: So I woke up this morning in a pool of my own blood. →
quinnisgay.tumblr.com
Wait, let me back up.
Hi, my name is Cara and I’m a 21 year old woman. Every 28 days, give or take, I have a period. And it fucking sucks. Today, was one of those where I take from the 28 day cycle. I wasn’t due for another period for at least a week, but considering…
normally I’m nice to people because I don’t like conflict
but as a guy who just went through that stuff today (despite the 1 year on T) and is kind of pissed off about the cissexist accusations in there, IT’S NOT JUST WOMEN WHO SUFFER THROUGH THE MONTHLY BLEEDING, KTHX.
edit: nvm, saw your very nice post about that. ignore this then. <3
The Things That Fuel Me.: I don't have the body I want, but I will never say it's the wrong one. →
spenacethemenace.tumblr.com
So for a couple of weeks now I’ve been mulling some stuff over in my head.
I made a post a while back about how I feel that transmen incorrectly use the term “male” when describing themselves. As a quick recap on that, I just think that “male” and “female” are both biological sexes, predetermined…
“I just think that “male” and “female” are both biological sexes, predetermined by genetics and impossible to alter.”
But they’re not; that’s bad science. Genetics doesn’t determine sex, though it often does. XX, XY and all other variation of sex chromosomes all have the potential to form a ‘normal’ male or female body. There are XY women who look completely female and have even given birth to children despite being genetically ‘male’. There are people with chromosomes other than XX and XY. There are people with a chimeric mix of both. There are ‘male-bodied’ people who have gynecomastia and grow female-type breasts. There are ‘female-bodied’ who can grow extremely impressive facial hair.
Medically, there are at least five distinct genetic sexes. What society currently defines as ‘male’ and ‘female’ are largely based on the length of an infant’s phallus and whether they think it qualifies as a penis. In visibly-intersex cases where it’s hard to determine either way, they just decide on one or the other, with or without ‘corrective’ surgery to reinforce that decision.
Meanwhile, biological sex is far from impossible to alter. What do you think transitioning people do? Hormones are a large part of your biology. As a trans man who’s been on T for a year, I’d say I’m far more biologically male than biologically female.
Here, this article might be helpful: http://tal9000.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/sex-is-a-social-construct/
Wow, I really didn’t ever plan to talk about gender identity here. Whoops.
Is it still dysphoria if you don’t think of yourself as trans?
I’m curious - what makes you think you’re a cis girl? You sound like you’re at least genderqueer, and quite possibly a (gay) trans guy, because the stuff you write is definitely not at all typical of cis girl experience.
also, a person does not ‘become’ trans. a trans person is a trans person, regardless of whether or not they transition.
I’m not all read-up and trans*/queer* terms so maybe I’m wrong, but as far as I understand being a cis girl would mean I was born with a vagina and identify as a female, which I do.
I guess I could be genderqueer, but I’m not sure what that’d mean exactly. I just know that having only a vagina 100% of the time is pretty unsatisfying.
& whoops. I’m sorry about that, my mistake.
hmm, interesting. some possibilities:
1) I’ve heard of cis girls who still experience genital dysphoria and feel that they should have had male bits there instead of female bits, despite still identifying as female. This possibly has some neurological basis; just like how there are trans people who are fine with their genitals in terms of gender, there are cis people who are not.
2) What do you mean exactly when you describe yourself as heterosexual? Do you just mean ‘attracted to men’, or specifically, ‘attracted to men as a woman?’ Because that part of your post resonated a lot with me, and one of the first things that made me more certain of being trans was how I was attracted to men, but in a gay rather than straight way, and was likewise extremely uncomfortable with the thought of having sex as a girl, to the point I considered myself on the asexual spectrum (and occasionally as a lesbian who was exclusively attracted to guys, which completely defeats the purpose of lesbianism).
3) Genderqueer people are those who identify as neither male or female, or a bit of both, or where their gender identity is in a state of flux.
Also, what exactly do you mean when you say you identify as female? Is it about your gender identity (inner sense of being male or female) or just gender expression (being masculine/feminine)? Some trans guys are feminine, some trans girls are masculine.
What is it about being born as a cis guy that is appealing with you? Is it just the anatomical aspect, or identifying as male as well?
Hmm. I don’t know if I can say that I feel like I was born the wrong gender. I think a lot of my discomfort comes from gender inequality and my own fear that I just won’t ever be seen on the same level as a potential male partner when it comes to sex. And idk I don’t really want to try and explain that any better.
Would it make sense if I said I’m attracted to men both as a woman and a man? Because most of the time I’m comfortable with the idea of being with a guy the way I am now, but other times I’ll look at gay porn or something and get really upset because that’s what I want to do, but I can’t.
I guess I could be genderqueer in that I’d like to somehow be able to be both a man and a woman? I don’t know. I express myself as feminine for the most part.
The anatomical aspect is a big part of it, yeah. I want a dick. And I know that having a dick doesn’t automatically make you a man and having a vagina doesn’t mean you’re a woman, but I have a hard time not connecting the two. I don’t feel like I could identify as a man without a penis.
I’m sorry if I’m not explaining things very well.
yeah, you sound like you might be genderqueer and/or genderfluid (where your gender identity isn’t static, but changes).
If - gender inequality and all that other social stuff aside - you could choose an ideal body, what would that be? If your answer would be a conventionally-male body, then you might more likely be a trans guy (though not necessarily; there are genderqueer people and the rare woman who would say the same); if you’d rather have a body that could magically switch sexes at will, you’re more likely to be genderfluid.
“I don’t feel like I could identify as a man without a penis.”
Would you be more comfortable identifying as a woman with a vagina or identifying as a man with a penis, if you had the respective body parts? If the latter, you probably have a male gender identity.
I currently have similar problems fully identifying as male because of my genital configuration, but pre-T I was never able to fully identify as female despite my body, and in a hypothetical situation where I had a regular male body, I know I’d then have no problems identifying fully as male. So for that I consider myself a trans guy.
