#apparently op was a transmisogynist SO | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

princessefemmelesbian · 3 months

Text

A PSA

Okay I normally don't make posts about TERFs like these because I prefer to reblog them from trans people who know more about this stuff then I do but I just gotta say this, and if I'm being for fucking real I can't believe this even has to be said:

Stop posting screenshots of TERF posts and saying "op was a terf so I'm stealing this post! 🤪"

Seriously, stop it. You're not doing anything good by taking TERF talking points and reposting them to your blog. All you're doing is allowing TERF rhetoric to continue to spread and sanitizing it so that people become desensitized to it and don't recognize actual TERF rhetoric when they see it.

When you screenshot a TERF post and say "op was a TERF" all you are doing is validating TERF points whether you agree with them or not. Because every post a TERF makes, even if it seems benign, is connected to their rotten, transmisogynist ideology. You cannot divorce TERF statements from their true intentions. I think a lot of TMEs on this site really underestimate the fact that TERF is a harmful hate movement. Every statement a TERF makes, even if it seems harmless or actually feminist, is ultimately going to be tarnished by the fact that they are made with the intention of targeting trans women and wanting them dead. If a post is about how men are awful or are "raised" to be a certain way and is made by a TERF, then congratulations, you just found transmisogynistic rhetoric that is actually about trans women and their apparent "male socialization". If a post is about how lesbians should be allowed to not like men and how men are forcing themselves onto lesbians, but a TERF made it, then it's not actually a lesbian-friendly post. It is a transphobic post about how transfem lesbians apparently "prey" on cis lesbians(which they also think straight trans men are, let's make that very clear) by merely existing. Same for any post about the word queer or the beauty industry or periods or anything of the like. Even if they don't explicitly say it, TERFs are inherently lumping trans women in with(cishet) men and trans men in with women/lesbians and THAT is the true meaning of the post. You're not making it any better by reposting it from them.

TERFs know exactly how to make their posts seemingly benign and genuinely positive on the surface so that people get sucked in to thinking that they are truly for the feminist cause and actually have good points to make. But all of it ultimately serves the purpose of continuing transmisogyny, and when you post screenshots of their posts and go "I really wanted to reblog this post but op was a terf so I'm stealing it! 😇" all you are doing is giving terfs a platform and saying that we should listen to them. You're exposing trans women to beliefs and opinions of people who ultimately wish to harm them and do NOT have the same innocent intentions that you believe they have from looking at the post at first glance. You are not helping women. You are not helping feminism. You're internalizing TERF rhetoric, and you're allowing other people to internalize it, too.

It's one thing if you don't realize a post was made by a TERF before you reblog it, and then you delete it afterwards. But if you know someone is a TERF and intentionally repost their vile, sickening rhetoric wrapped up in pink feminist bows and go "I like the message of this post but op is a terf so 🤷🏾‍♀️" then you may as well be reblogging it directly from them, because you're still agreeing with TERFs at the end of the day.

What can you do instead? You can reblog feminist posts from amazing and intellectual trans women who actually are genuine about the cause and actually know what they're saying. They have way better views on feminism and misogyny and lesbophobia and the patriarchy then a radfem who thinks woman=vagina and man=penis ever will, trust me. Uplift their voices instead of stealing from conservative hate groups. It really is that simple.

#terfs dni #radfems dni #tw terf #anti-terf #trans #trans women #transmisogyny #lesbian #lesbophobia #transphobia #misogyny #patriarchy #feminism #op #as someone said on another reblog: 'there's a reason you found this on a terf blog. it is a terf post.'

58 notes · View notes

a-faggot-with-opinions · 10 months

Text

Let's talk about this. Major content warning for discussions of transmisogyny, transandrophobia, sexual violence, violence against trans people, and (a brief mention of) sexual harassment towards minors.

The person who wrote this is asking people to stop comparing TERFs, a group of bioessentialist radical feminists who claim to protect "women's spaces" from "men" (which is a dogwhistle for trans women in this case), to TEHMs, a group of bioessentialist gay men who claim to protect "gay male spaces" from "the straights" or "fujoshi fetishizers" or "females" (all dogwhistles for trans men). While they may seem similar at first, there is actually a lot more to discuss here than there might appear to be when you first look at the issue.

TERFs and TEHMs are treated by many of us progressives as two sides of the same coin, and whether this is a fair assessment or not depends on a few things. A point that the person who wrote the text in the screenshot (who I will henceforth refer to as OP) does not fully spell out but a point that they seem to be implying is that TEHMs are inherently less harmful than TERFs because while TEHMs only aim to gatekeep male homosexuality, TERFs aim to gatekeep womanhood as a whole.

It is entirely true that one of the main goals of the trans-exterminatory radical feminist ideology is to gatekeep womanhood such that no one (trans women) can never get in and no one (trans men and other AFAB people who are not women) can get out. TERFs will paint trans women as predators trying to creep on cis women and will infantilize and demonize trans men. However, it is important to think deeper about this. You will often find TERFs allying themselves with misogynistic men, racists, and even literal nazis, simply because they agree that trans people are bad. The point of trans-exterminatory radical feminism is not mainly feminism. It is transphobia.

Now, let's look at TEHMs, trans- exclusionary (exterminatory) homosexual males. Even though TEHMs are often also transmisogynistic, the core of TEHM ideology is transandrophobia. I also do not think it is fair to say that TEHMs' bigotry is specifically towards Achillean trans men either; TEHMs will attack non-MLM transmascs too, knowingly. TEHMs claim to believe that transmascs are straight women who are trying to creep on cis gay men and force them to have sex with us. They hold very misogynistic attitudes to cisgender women too, but they will find themselves allying with TERFs when it is convenient to them.

Even if a transmasc is not MLM, TEHMs will still target them. That is because the main goal of TEHM ideology is not to gatekeep homosexuality as they claim, but it is to exterminate trans people. The point of trans-exterminatory gay "activism" is not to fight for queer rights. It is transphobia. TEHMs have said and done many bigoted and violent things, some of which I will list here. However, my knowledge and what I have seen is limited, so I do recommend that you talk to some other trans men and transmascs about this topic.

Things TEHMs have done include, but are not limited to:

Sexually harass trans men, many of them being minors. Trans minors on this very site have received messages from TEHMs giving them disturbing descriptions of all the sexual acts that they (the TEHM) apparently would not do with them (the transmasc).

Threaten trans men with violence in real life, and in some cases actually committing said violence. There are many TEHMs that have said that if a trans man tried to hook up with them, that they (the TEHM) would have no problem murdering them (the transmasc).

Advocate for bans on gender affirming healthcare, specifically testosterone for people assigned female at birth. TEHMs actually influence policy because cishet lawmakers can use them to say "see, an actual gay man agrees with us!"

Give a platform to TERFs who are supporting the current trans genocide happening in the United States, often supporting said TERFs and speaking over marginalized women (including and emphasizing trans women).

So why did I list all of these things out? I want to address the second point OP makes, which suggests that TEHMs are passive. As you can see from all of these things that TEHMs regularly do, they are not passive. TEHMs are violently transphobic and misogynistic men who are actively out to exterminate trans people, especially transmascs. So why then does OP imply that TEHMs are passive? OP is trying to say that TERFs are worse than TEHMs, and hence telling us not to compare them.

To say that TEHMs are actually not that bad is erasure, plain and simple. You do not have to deny the very real harm that TEHMs cause in order to advocate for awareness surrounding transmisogyny that is spread by TERFs. TEHMs and TERFs alike want you to believe that they are just gatekeeping their communities, but this is simply not true. Both TERFs and TEHMs use protecting their community as a justification for their transphobic beliefs and their "activism" that calls for trans genocide.

So, do I think that you can compare TERFs and TEHMs? I believe that it is useful to point out similarities between different types of bigotry while still acknowledging that they are different. Here's the thing, though: TERFs and TEHMs are not different types of bigotry. Their bigotry is transphobia. While there are a lot more incorrect beliefs that TEHMs hold that would make them wrong even if they were trans accepting, all of those beliefs stem from transphobia. The same is true with radical feminism: even "trans inclusive" radical feminism is rooted in transphobia.

TEHMs and TERFs are not exact mirrors of each other, but they are two very similar belief systems rooted in the same type of bigotry whose subscribers find themselves agreeing with each other very often. Both TERFs and TEHMs aim to marginalize and exterminate trans people through different means. I will give OP here the benefit of the doubt and say that they are not purposefully erasing transmasculine experiences, but are instead unaware that such experiences exist or to what extent they are prevalent. However, I still think it is important that everyone is educated about TEHM rhetoric and how to avoid spreading it.

#star speaks #this is your brain on tehm talking points #fuck tehms #fuck terfs #long post #seriously guys this post is fucking long and took me over an hour to type up #transandrophobia #transphobia

26 notes · View notes

cetaceanhandiwork · 2 years

Text

Nonbinary Testament was an unambiguous poggers moment for me, but I'm finding that, despite also being broadly satisfied with the latest Bridget news, I'm processing it in a more contemplative rather than celebratory mood.

Because, okay. It feels like even classic Guilty Gear really wanted to play with weird gender stuff and gender nonconformity, but somehow became convinced that it had to bend over backwards justifying that it was doing so. Testament was always somewhat GNC, but they also got majorly surgically altered when the PWAB turned them into a Gear, which I recall being used as a hand-wave for their androgyny at the time. Meanwhile, Bridget was famous as being "a boy who looks like a girl", but that character design was backed by a dumpster fire of a backstory (tl;dr "raised as a girl" to avoid getting killed or exiled due to a hometown superstition about identical twins).

Revisiting your old story decisions, especially when they needlessly jump through imaginary hoops this way, and finding a better way to articulate them, is good, I think. That's part of why I liked the Testament stuff so much; it was always there (albeit apparently phrased in Japanese "third gender" terms that the US localizers could easily misunderstand or ignore), and the redesign and rearticulation and retranslation just turned the subtext into text.

But so much of the existing situation surrounding Bridget is not a matter of "things as they are" (the fictional historical facts within the story called Guilty Gear), but rather, "things as they have been made to be" (our world's creative decisions & cultural hangups that gave rise to & contextualize that fiction). In particular, at least on the English-speaking internet and as I remember it (and with the caveat that my memory is far from perfect), almost the entire reaction to Bridget as a character has been inextricably entangled with the "phobia" part of transphobia - the irrational, feverish fear of "what if I think I'm attracted to a woman but I'm 'really' attracted to a man 🙀" around which most transmisogynistic rhetoric ultimately accretes. Critically, this reaction was a product of the twenty years between Guilty Gear X2 and today when Bridget wasn't portrayed as trans; that simple fact is, I think, part of how "his" case got so many people saying the quiet part loud. For example, Bridget might not have been the first character to be called a "t--p" but was certainly (at least as I remember it) the most-publicized one, and that's a word that's become a slur for trans women broadly. Others, in response to their own reactions to Bridget, constructed elaborate theoretical models to redefine heterosexuality in a way so as to include same-sex attraction to a sufficiently feminine man, because it was the only to avoid the terror of thinking of themselves as even infinitesimally "gay" (there's that "phobia" bit again). And there were, admittedly, also a few folks who, having already begun to understand gender as something more complicated than a booean guy or gal, saw Bridget's situation as a liberating example that gender identity and gender expression don't actually have to align - that one can, for example, adopt femininity without needing to have femaleness as well.

But the sum of all this, I think, despite the things as they are handwave of Bridget's situation, is that we end up with a things as they have been made to be which brought to the surface pretty much the same reactions as a canonical trans girl would've, except without the option of describing the situation in "trans" terminology or bringing "pre-op/post-op" into the conversation (as, for example, discourse around Street Fighter's Poison was fixated upon in the same time period).

If you're the auteur here, what do you do with that? What does a revisit look like?

If the subtext out here in the real world is Bridget as a cipher for all the messy ways people think about trans women, then the advantage of making Bridget a trans woman is that it brings all the ugliness and confusion and self-reflection of that IRL discourse up to the surface for the discursers to see & consider more seriously. Yes, it makes "things as they are" a little less exotic, a little simpler; in theory, there's something interesting and valuable about a character that's GNC in the way a male Bridget was. But in practice, for most people, it was never able to really be about that, because it got caught up in this more general difficult topic. In which case, I think there's also a lot of value to going back and thinking about it, to asking "all those things you said about Bridget... are they any less valid if Bridget decides that she's a girl after all?"

...yeah, the answer is occasionally "yes", and the most unfortunate case there is that, for some folks, it was really valuable and inspiring to have a character with Bridget's old "male but feminine" thing going. That's the one real casualty of this twist in the story, I think.

But as for, for example, the arguments that Bridget's story plays into the whole idiotic talking point of "kids getting raised into thinking they're trans"... I don't think it applies. After all, Bridget wasn't raised as a girl, not really, but rather as a boy who needed to pretend to be a girl, having been (if I understand the backstory correctly) explicitly briefed on the topic by dear old Mom and Dad. It hurts to be denied something you've been told is good, that you've been told you should have had as your birthright... and this is a world where maleness and masculinity is sold as something both ultimately desireable and incredibly contingent (think of all the things that are said to disqualify a "real man"). I can see why it'd take decades for Bridget to even consider whether - given a truly unencumbered choice - maleness was actually what she wanted.

That's also an important thing to dig into, isn't it? The deferral of a trans arc because you've been made to think that your CAAB is what you should want, and that you need to fight to get it somehow.

So in short, yeah it's cool that a character's gender nonconformity is getting a respectful and supportive revisit by the narrative. But in this particular case, it's a revisit that gives us a lot to think about... and I think part of the benefit of Bridget's egg cracking after 20 years is precisely that it gives us a lot to think about. So that's the mood I seem to be in on the topic!

#thinking about #guilty gear #coretta's fire #political posts

15 notes · View notes

eulangelo · 3 years

Text

callout for @genderfluidlucifer

google docs

tw for transmisogyny + TERFs + emotional manipulation

Transmisogyny

Lucifer is a huge transmisogynist who will complain 24/7 about how TERFs hurt the ace community, but the moment @randomclustermissile , a trans girl (who is not an exclusionist at all) tries to point out transmisogyny in inclusionist circles (in the most vague and general way possible, without pointing fingers nor calling anyone names) Lucifer will immediatly jump to block her and so they did with me (another inclusionist) and i have to suppose to everyone else who agreed with that post, even arriving to vagueing about us in private group chats to suggest that we were “sympathizing with exclusionists”. all because we dared point out transmisogyny in inclusionist circles. lucifer is TME but apparently they think they’re the authority on TERFs and their talking points but actual trans women are not, according to them, since this is the stuff that they would go and spew to other people. (screenshots from @enbyoctoling)

here’s more examples of Lucifer (again, a transmasc person) going deep in detail about how according to them, TERFs/SWERFs hate aro/ace people and are an active threat to us

1. link

[Image ID: Three screenshots of a post by Genderfluidlucifer. The first screenshot is of a paragraph that reads, "Hey. So I can actually answer this. Anon your commentary about how you thought terfs would approve of sex repulsed aces is sort of it. Except...not. Basically terfs hate ace people for not wanting sex in the approved by terfs way. Terfs are actually extremely interested in [forcing] amatonormativity onto everyone. Because for as sex negative as terfs are...they don't want to actually acknowledge or change the fact that amatonormativity is at the root cause of rape culture and misogyny."

The second screenshot is a zoomed in section of the post that reads, "So yeah no I have NO idea where exclus allies are getting this idea from that terfs would even remotely care about the sexual rights of ace people. Terfs generally hate any sexualities in the LGBTQ+ acronym that aren't LGB because they can't force a gender binary onto those sexualities. At least, not as easily. That's why it's actually a massive sign of someone who doesn't call themselves a terf being a crypto terf if they use the term LGB in a positive manner. Along with the term SGA, as it is deliberately exclusive of nonbinary and not inherently SGA centric queer-aligned sexualities. /END ID]

link to the full post, these are just excerpts but the whole thing is just a very long rant about how TERFs hate ace people and so on (i think it’s worth noticing that although the actual post is kinda long, trans women are never once brought op in a conversation about TERFs issues and the only time transmisogyny is mentioned is not relevant to the conversation)

2. link

[Image ID: A screenshot of a reblog by genderfluidlucifer. The original poster is nothorses. It reads, "Because apparently I have to say it: Testosterone is not a 'violent' hormone. It doesn't make you 'more aggressive' or a worse person, it doesn't make you 'dangerous,' or 'toxic.' Transmascs do not need to be 'warned of the dangers of T.' We do not need to spend our transitions terrified that we're going to become a danger to those around us - that HRT is going to turn us into a monster.

Everyone experiences mood swings during hormonal shifts (pregnancy, menstruation, menopause, estrogen HRT, etc.) and while you might have grumpy moments or feel anger/frustration that you need to learn to handle differently, that doesn't make you a bad person.

Testosterone can change the way you access/process emotions somewhat, but if you're already thoughtful about how you handle your feelings and treat others, you're going to be fine. It's normal to lash out on occasion, by accident, then apologize and work to do better. It doesn't make you a bad person. Everyone on HRT is prone to this, and everyone experiencing hormonal changes is prone to this.

Getting HRT should be positive and affirming; you should not have to spend your entire transition terrified of becoming a monster."

The post then has a reblog by captainlordauditor that reads, "The big danger of T is that needle ouchy." /END ID]

here’s them reblogging from known transmisogynist user @nothorses (once again, the irony that a post about how testosterone is seen as the "aggressive hormone" does not mention transfem at all which are literally the main victims of this rethoric in the first place)

3. link (1), link (2)

[Image ID: Two screenshots of posts by genderfluidlucifer. The first screenshot reads, "Queer exclus: We're not repackaging terf rhetoric! Saying that is transmisogynistic! Also queer exclus: Remove the plus from LGBT!" and has tags that say, "I will pay these people to grow some god damn self awareness. Imagine being this dense. Queer discourse." The post has 15 notes.

The second screenshot reads, "Honestly it is so stupid and frustrating to see ace exclus continue to deny that the ace discourse was started by terfs. Proof was given countless times. And a big name terf like galesofnovember even admitted to starting it. Those of you who demand proof but ignore all of this never wanted proof to begin with." and is tagged with, "ace discourse. The post has 38 notes. /END ID]

heres another two post of theirs conflating TERFs with ace exclusionism

4. link

[Image ID: A screenshot of a reblogged post by furbearingbrick. The original poster is boxlizard, Lucifer's old account. The original post reads, "By the way for people still in denial about it, here's galesofnovember, a terf, admitting that she intended to start the ace exclus movement. She's taking credit for it. Normally if the victims of this behavior weren't ace/aro or other queer identities y'all be ready to rightfully lynch her. But since it's us, y'all just still wanna stamp your feet and go, 'Nuh uh!' instead of acknowledging facts." The part that says, "admitting that she intended to start the ace exclus movement" is a link to a galesofnovember post.

There is then a reblogged addition from furbearing brick that reads, "archived versions of the receipts" and has two links to the webarchive. The tags read, "Bringing this back since it's apparently still relevant. Terfism mention. Aphobia mention. Queerphobia mention. Blocklist." and has 1,455 notes. /END ID]

this is their post that ive already talked about but basically they found a 52 notes post made by a TERF in 2012 and this one person said "i dont know why i dont get to be the princess of the anti-ace-brigade" and apparently they are convinced that this means TERFs started the ace exclusionism movement and that this is one of their goals. which is insane when TERFs in real life only care about making life miserable for transfem people first and foremost.

5.link

[Image ID: A screenshot of a reblog by genderfluidlucifer. The original poster is yu-gay-fudo. It reads, “Just in case you happen to be unaware, some of the “radfem lite” they post to warm you up to their rhetoric, just off the top of my head:

- Ace/aro exclusionism

- Bi exclusionism or claims that bi people are “less queer” bc of “straight passive privilege”

- Saying you have to be dysphoric to identify as transInvalidating nonbinary people

- Calling queer a slur regardless of context, saying people can’t identify as queer, and saying that it can’t be reclaimed

- “Mogai hell”, “kweer”, or otherwise mocking less common labels and claiming they are “just cishets who want to feel special”

- Excluding sex workers from feminist discussions or claiming that sex work is inherently evil

- Basically anyone who thinks they can determine what other people identify as”. The tags read, "queerphobia tw. twerfs tw. no id." and has 70,727 notes. It was reblogged on March 22nd, 2021 /END ID]

another example of conflating radfems to things that, while wrong, have little to nothing to do with them because being a radfem, again, is something very specific that has all to do with transfem oppression.

Emotional manipulation

Lucifer has done nothing but block, break boundaries, spread lies and vague about people, some of which were even mutuals with them knowing they would see the posts. when confronted about it Lucifer's only answer was "just say you hate me and block me" but they actually ended up blocking everyone first, making it impossible for anyone to set some boundaries with them or even just to calmly confront them about anything.

[proof: Io(popncourse) and Lucifer had a disagreement in a shared discord server, which prompted Lucifer to vague Io in a vent post. Io confronted them, as being vagued is one of buns triggers, to which Lucifer initially agreed to delete the vent post, but then proceeded to victimize themself and immediatly blocked Io. later on, Jude(malewifedeckard) was confronted by Lucifer, then after Jude told them “I’m worried that you’ll vague me just like you did with Io” they proceeded to block Jude and vagued about him too. when Io made a post (which was not a callout, it was just bun setting buns boundaries) explaining what Lucifer did, Lucifer immediatly jumped to victimize themself, acting like they were being called out and straight-up lying, even going so far as to say that no one tried to hear them out, which is a blatant lie if you consider the aforementioned Io and Jude’s attempts at doing so, with Lucifer immediatly blocking and cutting ties with the both of them. ]

(screenshots taken by @popncourse and @malewifedeckard)

as seen in the proof above Lucifer’s behaviour is not ok because they don’t accept any kind of confrontation and immediatly jump to blocking, and after blocking, they'd immediatly go and vague about the people who confronted them pacificly, spreading more lies and painting themself as the victim and even arriving to say “no one hears me out at all” which is simply not something you can say when you block people who are trying to hear you out in the first place.

this is by no means an invitation to go and harass them, send them hate or anything like that. i absolutely don’t want anything even remotely hateful or negative to be sent their way after this post.

this post was only made because:

1. as an ace person who fully supports the inclusion of aspec identities in the lgbt+ community i don’t want to support an enviroment that costantly downplays transmisogynistic oppression in order to be taken seriously. there are hundreds of ways to make aspec activism without acting like we(as in TME aspecs)are the victims of a system that seeks for the annihilation of transfemenine people in real life everyday. i especially don’t want to support TME individuals who act transfem-friendly but then block any transfem who tries to speak on transmisogyny without a second thought.

2. Lucifer’s behaviour has hurt two friends of mine and i don’t want to associate with someone who actively breaks people’s boundaries without taking accountability when messing up.

3. i cannot associate with someone who spreads lies about me accusing me of sympathizing with exclusionists all while having me blocked so that i can’t see it nor defend me. they complain about people not hearing them out but they’re the very first person who does not try to hear people out, and instead jumps to spread baseless rumors. this is not someone i can nor want to associate with.

(image descriptions provided by @malewifedeckard)

#genderfluidlucifer #transmisogyny tw #terfs tw #ask to tag #txt #long post #ok to rb

351 notes · View notes

ablednt · 2 years

Note

neotrances is transmisogynistic and fatphobic

Hey so I did a little looking into this and it looks like a clusterfuck and apparently the og person who made a callout post has since apologized and deleted it because it was misinfo and seems to be just because op is critical of the porn industry... as a sex worker who has experienced trauma as a result of this and he's very specifically transfem inclusive on every post I could find. Like yeah I could probably spend several hours cross examining his blog with every callout (A lot of which seem to be making shit up which would not surprise me because when I criticized kink communities on here I got some of the most vile shit in my inbox and I know that people immediately started accusing me of shit that was incorrect) but that feels weird to do over a single and inclusive post I happened to reblog. Like I think there's a difference between "this person is very clearly hurting people/trying to recruit people into a hate group/is an abuser" and "there was a callout post about this person so if anyone ever reblogs from them they need to do a whole investigation or just take an anonymous persons' word for it."

I'm not defending him because I have no clue what that's about but I'm also not going to take any kind of stance on this one because it seems like a whole mess.

#i do appreciate the ask but im just. not doing anything about this one sorry #like i also got accused of being a s/w/erf on here because I used to be more open about my csa trauma and people were determined to #misinterpret that so it just feels wrong to really investigate this one or to just take someone's word for it basically

5 notes · View notes

revoltinglesbians · 3 years

Note

hey jsyk nakimushiga dash ru, the op of a post u just rb'd, is a transmisogynist, as seen here: https://nakimushiga-ru.tumblr.com/post/651921071786901504/transgenderism-is-very-much-affecting-womens

not a callout or anything i'm just worried abt them being platformed yk

ok usually wouldn't have reblogged a known transphobe but apparently, shinigami eyes has now been disabled in chrome. thank you so much for telling me because otherwise, I wouldn't have realized that it isn't working anymore.

also I deleted the post because if when someone says women they don't mean trans women I don't want to listen to them.

EDIT it just wasn't working for me. apparently it's fine for everyone else. still glad you pointed it out bc I wouldn't have noticed otherwise.

#psa #ask #blocklist #anti terf #post.me

1 note · View note

aizawasgay · 4 years

Note

It's not just trans men. As a trans woman, I am tired of seeing pre-op trans women only being shown as masculine. Magne, for example. I love you, sweetie, I do. I would love to see a trans woman described the way cis women are described in fics. You know, without mentioning how good she looks for being trans. Or mentioning her "leftover facial hair". I see that so much in fics with trans girls. They apparently never learned to shave well or wax. Like...ok. 🤔🙄

yes absolutely! the insidious way tme authors caricaturise trans women is fucking awful and should be discussed and criticised.

transmisogyny in fandom is so unfortunately prevalent and while the posts i've made have been mainly about transmascs, the way transfem people are treated by not only cis content creators but tme trans people too is even worse

yeah like why can't people take even 20 minutes to google how to portray a trans person without falling back on transphobic and transmisogynistic tropes, and then get defensive when we call them out for their inaccuracies jfc

#cheers for the ask #my posts so far have been abt my own experiences so tysm for bringing this up #ask #anon #transphobia .#transmisogyny m

8 notes · View notes

thanatopsick · 4 years

Text

Hey so apparently some assholes are trying to make tme stand for "transmisogyny enthusiast” and I've seen some talk about stopping the use of tme because of this.

I'm trying to get a feel on how people feel about this. My gut says that:

A) there's been plenty of times in which transmisogynists have attempted to co-op our terms and they'll probably keep trying in an effort to take away any language we have to talk about ourselves

B) If you're a trans ally, especially trans womens' ally, it should be clear from your blog that you do not mean this stupid thing they're trying to make it mean. A lot of trans people use tme to make it in discussions about transmisogyny that they are not the ones affected, and typically that was motivated by listening to discussions had by trans women

On the other side of my gut:

A) Trans women deserve to know

B) There are many tme trans people who show very little support to trans women, or are active transmisogynists despite having done this little thing of putting tme in their bio. Maybe it's better if we have to specifically name transmisogyny as something we're against.

So I guess I'm just seeking opinions here, and I'd especially appreciate the opinions of trans women and tma trans people

2 notes · View notes

pbscore · 4 years

Note

i saw that post u rbed and honest to God i have to say that 'exclusionist lesbian chara' is supposed to be transmisogynistic apparently (that's what i saw somewhere). like i can't tell if exclusionists are just ignoring it all, but ppl making the girl their icons saying they're 'proud aphobic lesbians' ignoring the context of why IT'S ALL JUST REALLY FUCKING BAD is just headache inducing pal. like it's rlly concerning ppl wanna ignore and make bigotry a joke

(2/2) also i am so so SO tired of the 'proud aphobic lesbian thing' like my asexual lesbian ass is exhausted by that crap like i guess i don't exist or that i'm not a real lesbian i guess :)

I hear you, my friend, and I also agree. I’m really not getting any joy out of trying to be an ‘aphobic lesbian uwu’ over some ridiculous comic that was made by someone who I don’t even know is being genuine in their supposed ‘hatred’ of lesbians in the first place. I don’t know if this person is ace or is an inclusionist or is just being a troll and purposely trying to stir an endless pot of ‘discourse’ that needs to die already.

This whole situation lacks so much nuance and leaves no room for criticism against the way exclusionists have CONSTANTLY made degrading, racist, homophobic, transphobic, and even ableist media as a way to bully ace and aro people for their identities.

But because some gross comic, that plenty of ace/aro people were already calling out as lesbophobic and criticizing the OP for, miscommunicated such a nuanced experience of what it feels like to be an ace and/or aro person excluded from the only community that could possibly help them...suddenly it’s ok to make gross, even transmisogynistic ‘parodies’ of this comic to ‘stick it’ to those nasty ‘aceys uwu’?????

It makes no sense to me and only reinforces my feelings on the fact that exclusionists DONT want LGBTQ+ people to grow and think critically about anything. Even simple mistakes that could have easily been fixed by someone simply going, ‘Hello! I just wanted to let you know that this thing is kinda bad because blah blah blah...’

And I understand where that lack of wanting to meet ace/aro people where they’re at comes from. So many exclusionists believe that because they’ve experienced some form of ‘oppression’ from cishet society, that they suddenly know all there is to know about ‘real’ oppression. They don’t.

There are so many exclusionists who are privileged in ways that some ace/aro people may not be privileged in because oppression exists on an INTERSECTIONAL scale. It’s not always as simple as saying, ‘you’re not gay, so you can’t be oppressed like me uwu’.

That’s not how oppression and privilege is ‘handed’ out to us by an overall cisheteronormative society that seeks to control every person’s sexual, romantic, and gender identity.

I’m just rambling now but at the end of the day, my friend, just keep being yourself and don’t let anyone tell you why you should or shouldn’t identify a certain way. You are not personally responsible for a few jackasses in a community you happen to be a part of and you are not obligated to change or hide any part of yourself, either. 🐻🌻

#asks #long post #heartening #mutuals #ace discourse #negative

9 notes · View notes

cardentist · 5 years

Text

I’m making another new post just for space conservation, but here’s a link to what this is in response to here (X,X) @seishana you’re Still hiding in replies but whatever I’m gonna tackle these a bit out of order but the order isn’t very cohesive anyways and anyone curious as to what was sent when can just check the notes

I also won’t be responding to everything because not everything is worth responding to

I’ve said it before but apparently I have to say it again, there was nothing on the original post that indicated that it was a vent post, there was nothing on it or in the original notes about them not wanting it to be reblogged or interacted with, and by the time I saw it it had almost 200 notes with zero complaints from op. op only had an issue with anyone interacting with that post when someone disagreed with them. they didn’t even mention that it was a vent post until their second reply. so no, I don’t think it’s morally wrong for me to interact with a “vent post” when it’s indistinguishable from any other discourse post and when the complaint only came up hours after the original interaction. and again, lets assume for a hot second that I’m right, or at least picture a totally different situation between two totally different people. someone saying something potentially harmful isn’t suddenly okay when it’s a vent. personal responsibility doesn’t vanish when you’re upset. it being a vent post doesn’t make it free from criticism

there is an argument that could be made about me continuing to interact after the fact that it was mentioned to be a vent post I suppose, but by that point they were openly insulting me and lying about the things that I said, as I’ve already pointed out. I have the right to defend myself if they’re going to openly slander me.

And Again. if they’re allowed to say whatever they want because it’s a vent, if disagreeing with a vent is inherently wrong, then why is it different when I’m the one venting? I was upset, I felt hurt, I was just venting my feelings too. but I have to be held accountable while they don’t? if I shouldn’t be allowed to disagree with them because they were upset then why are you allowed to disagree with me when I was upset

moreover, it’s not specific to transwomen? like, obviously transmisogyny itself is, but intracommunity bigotry isn’t a one way street? and treating it like it is was part of what set me off the in first place. which, I actually spelled it out in another reblog of the post earlier, so here that is (X)

and A G A I N as I said earlier, trans men only have any form of privilege in spaces progressive enough for them to have social capital, which isn’t most of the world. my point was never and has never been that trans men aren’t or can’t be transmisogynistic, even though op has actively lied to put those words in my mouth, it’s that the potential violence between different kinds of trans people is Lateral Aggression and that specifically trying to paint trans men as more privileged, especially on this hellsite where oppression is treated like discourse points and social capital, works to take away the severity of intracommunity bigotry that trans men face. like

op claims that the ability to bigoted towards another group of people is predicated on them having privilege over them. without the privilege there is no bigotry. that line of logic directly concludes that trans women cannot be bigoted towards trans men because trans men hold privilege over trans women. that is what that line of thought is saying

and you saying that it��s an issue Specific to trans women is telling me that you agree with that line of thought. and I really don’t feel like I should have to point out that it’s bigoted towards trans men to insist that bigotry they face isn’t real or doesn’t matter.

it’s literally not transmisogynistic to point out when someone is minimizing the oppression of another minority

op has compared trans men and/or me specifically to:

- cis men - straight men - The Police

- transmeds - terfs - Terfs A Second Time

they literally did that thing you said they didn’t do from the beginning for the entire time. the closest they got to apologizing was saying that they only said it because trans men have gotten upset with them generalizing trans men before, which isn’t an Excuse.

trans men can be all of those things (well except for cis men obviously), but that doesn’t make comparing All Trans Men to them okay? for the exact same reason that it isn’t okay to compare lesbians as a group to terfs. if they didn’t mean to do that then they had plenty of opportunity to correct themselves or say sorry or Something, but they didn’t. I’m not going to accept an apology that was never made

from my original response:

I Openly Acknowledged that trans men can be transmisogynistic And that those people should be held accountable by the broader community. it is an issue when bigoted people burrow into our community and hurt our other members and I have never once said or implied anything to the contrary. you guys just keep saying and implying that I have so you can justify calling me bigoted when I haven’t said anything bad about trans women.

I’ve stated Multiple Times Now that my issue with the post was never what it was saying about trans women but what it was implying or outright saying about trans men. it’s possible for someone to advocate for something good in a bad way and calling them out on the bad parts of their speech doesn’t mean disagreeing with the good

and again, That Is My Point assigning Valid Points and discourse validity by way of privilege leads to a trans man pointing out when something bad has been said about trans men being labeled as “speaking over trans women” you’re speaking about trans men, I am a trans man, I have the right to an opinion on it. and it’s specifically this sort of thing that makes me upset when trans men are labeled as privileged, because it almost always translates to trans men being minimized in trans spaces, treated like their problems aren’t as important, or outright vilified. and that’s literally, exactly happening

everything I’ve pointed out that made me uncomfortable with the original post has played out in response to me pointing it out

#discourse #long post

16 notes · View notes

goolfriend-moving · 5 years

Note

oh my GOD these idiots in your inbox. odas a massive transmisogynist and apparently it DOES need to be brought up constantly because so many fans excuse it & and to it in their fan interpretations LOL

Yeah I wanted to respond with “Well if it was talked about so much why does it still need saying” but I didn’t want to be a complete bastard lol. Really though I had no warnings like maybe a year ago when I first started OP, and I was in the tags A LOT for a while. This apparent abundance of posts on the topic would have been really useful lolllll

&its like, my intention wasn’t even that you cant like OP or Bon Clay (hey I’m a gay man who loves camp) but you can’t ignore that Oda is a straight guy who is re-enforcing Okama stereotypes jesus cmon I’m not even saying be hyper-vigilant, just saying maybe, hey we can learn what Okama stereotypes are so we don’t defend it, or perpetuate it further when making fan content thank youuuu

Like its really easy to be casually critical of something and still enjoy it lol; esp big franchise stuff you can like reclaim for yourself. I just don’t get why people bend over backwards saying how these stereotypes are good actually, or that something doesn’t need talking about bc its old news (and yet people are still doing it lol)

#&2 ur 2nd ask nah its cool these were from a lil bit ago lol #like cmon i enjoy One's work too but i recognize that he has shitty okama stereotypes too (not NEARLY as much as Oda holy shit christ oda)#but its not excuseable and it #shouldn't be ignored or imitated in fan content :/#or like I love fallout New vegas but I can ackolwdge and not defend its native racism #or tell people to stop talking about it when they bring it up lolllll #milkhare #*acknowledge #woof butchered that spelling huh LOL #this isn't even specifically about those two (1?) anon this is like how so many anime fans react to and treat okama stereotypes lol &my feel #ings on it

2 notes · View notes

nil-number · 2 years

Note

hi ik we arent mutuals + feel free to ignore this completely but im just letting you know that from looking thru the notes, the (now deactivated) op of the "why are you excluding us" "fuck off!" post is a p*do apologist and a transmisogynist (apparently, theres no visual proof of that claim in there but someone said so) among other shitty things so uh, yeah, sorry if this is worded weirdly i have trouble with words sometimes i just thought you should know this ok have a good day

Oh god. Thank you sm for telling

1 note · View note

transmxnfenris · 6 years

Text

I hate this website cos whenever you see something seemingly obvious it’s always code for something.

“Reblog if you’re against men invading women spaces” = op is a transmisogynist who thinks trans woman don’t belong in women spaces

“Reblog if you’re against cishets in lgbt spaces” = op is saying aro, ace, nonbinary, and/or intersex people aren’t allowed in lgbt spaces - also they don’t realise how “cishet allies” includes people coming to support their friends, partner or family, people coming to mourn their dead lgbtqia+ friends, partners or family, etc, and closeted people... but that’s a different conversation.

“Reblog if you think being against gay pda is homophobic” - in the old days on tumblr, this was actually about homophobes. Now it’s this myth perpetuated by aphobes that ace people are homophobic and complain about gay pda. Which is a myth, everyone who’s said this has been proven to be a troll or from a faked image and yet the rumours persist. This has come up a lot lately because people (not aros or aces people) have commented on how sexual harassment happens at pride and how people wanna take their kids there. These are fair complaints and denying them is just hurting survivors. But apparently that means their homophobic... which ... what.

“Reblog if you’re against pedophilia” okay this one annoys me particularly because... That’s society’s default position. Why would you say this? If it was about how teenage girls are sexualised by industries and how child actors are too (see Millie Bobbie Brown and the countdown to when she’s “legal” and Finn Wolfhard and the adult model who hit on him) it would say those things specifically. It would be anti rape culture - because that’s what all of the above are. Saying you’re against pedophilia is like saying you’re against murder... Everyone is. It’s a pointless thing to say - unless it’s not actually about kids being hurt. It’s actually about fandom and shipping - which is fucking ridiculous, comparing actual real life trauma to pop culture is offensive and sick. As a trauma survivor stop doing this okay. The other possibility is that it’s aphobes telling people to not sexualise kids by declaring them aro or ace ... and where have we heard that one before? (*cough* homophobes saying kids can’t be gay *cough*)

I hate that I know this, I hate that this website is so fuckin’ toxic that you can’t take anything at face value

3 notes · View notes