tirfs do occasionally use a lot of terfy language and do point out biology whenever its needed which some tras are very much against. they will use words like "male" or insult males by referring to their Y chromosome and such. i dont think most tras would even consider us as allies. even if we are completely supportive of transitioning
3 notes
·
View notes
i'm so tired of being talked down to. men don't know know to have a conversation, they just see it as a battle. never speak to a man surrounded by other men.
4 notes
·
View notes
Seriously though, fuck terfs and radfems who double down on their bullshit and tell other trans people that they're "using the murder of a child" to "further their own agenda", like really Becky?
When we get mad at the abhorrent murder of our own community and try to spread awareness, you tell us that we're disgusting pigs twisting the death of someone into an argument for our benefit, (protecting trans people. How evil, right?) while you pretend to remain ignorant to the fact that YOUR IDEAOLOGY is KILLING CHILDREN ALL OVER THE WORLD.
Make no mistake, they know that accusing us of that makes no sense, but it's the only way for them to argue their way out of being part of a movement that tells others to kill trans people.
They are cowardly hypocrits who need to twist reality to justify their hatred. They will try to gaslight people and shift blame any way they can.
1K notes
·
View notes
Intresting how so many TARs suffer from mental health problems which distort the view they form about who they are, their personality, their place in society, or simply make them see and interact with the world in a much different way. (E.g: social anxiety, depression, autism , bpd, did, cluster B disorders in general)
I have not seen a single TRA person not to provide an extensive list of mental health disorders along with their pronouns.
What these people need is good therapy not surgeries.
30 notes
·
View notes
I think we need to talk more about the nuance of transition.
Specifically, the diversity of transition and the ways in which a person's gender and presentation can fluctuate and never reach an "end."
The first time I tried to get on T, I second-guessed and disappeared. Didn't answer calls from doctors, didn't reach out. I had seen an openly trans psychotherapist a few times as he was guiding me through the steps to accessing hormones. When he asked me when I started to feel "this way" about my gender, I answered that it had been fairly recent, maybe a few years. His response was that that was strange, because "most people figure it out when they hit puberty." Well, that shut me up and I haven't spoken to a therapist about transition since. It's clear to me now that he was approaching transness from a medical background. The medical model of course has not been a favourite of the trans community, myself included. It conceptualizes transness in terms of deficit, self-hatred, misery, and it envisions transition as an end.
This idea of end, of the reached destination, terrified me at twenty-three and it terrifies me now. How are twenty-three year olds, middle-schoolers, or kids approaching puberty, supposed to be able to envision their end, and to argue their case with such certainty if they want access to methods of transition? Where is the elbow room for change, evolution, and discovery, and even "mistakes"?
Many trans individuals, some colleagues of my own included, say they have always known who they are and what their gender is. This is the dominant trans narrative for a reason. I don't mean to discredit their words and their stories. It is not anyone's business to tell another person who they are or are not, and above all we should all continue to advocate for the voices of trans kids to be heard and honoured.
The philosophy of discovering who you "truly" are, of "finding" yourself, even of "cracking your egg" is starting to sound heavily Western and neoliberal. There is rarely a conversation about how our identities are changed by others, our environments, or by ourselves. Instead the dominant conversation around transition is centred in finding the true self. I criticize this philosophy because of its limitation. It is an end.
I recently joined a support group, and in the first meeting I attended my colleagues talked about finding their names, and about bridges. They shared stories of their own name decision-making processes, and how they used "temporary" new names as placeholders for their true names. A "bridge," they called it. I loved this sentiment. It spoke to the idea that gender and identity are more fluid than we are taught to believe, and I of course did this temporary name thing, too. But still with all of my colleagues there was this idea of truth, of finality.
I criticize it because it is another barrier of access to transition. People seeking means for medical transition are expected to be one-hundred percent, without-a-doubt-sure of their gender identity and of their future decisions regarding transition. It's starting to sound like a way to gatekeep transition, to bar access from those who are not "trans enough" because they do not fit the medical model's description. We know this. We've had these conversations before.
If we keep thinking about transness only in terms of the true self, the cracked egg, then we leave little room for those who are curious, for those who simply want to be creative with their identities, cisgender people included.
In writing this, I had to really fight the urge to go back and outline all the "clues" in my childhood that point towards my transness. I fought this because that is exactly what we as trans (genderqueer, genderfluid, trans* etc) people are supposed to do if we want to be believed. As if the only way to legitimize transness is to have "all the signs" in early childhood, as if transness is some chronic disease. Don't get me wrong --- this remembering and legitimizing works for some people, myself included. It is the way we know how to learn about ourselves. And at the same time, it is a key part of the transmedicalist approach.
We should not have to explain our histories and be certain of our futures to be believed and to have access to care.
It's an abusive relationship dynamic between the trans individual and institutions --- the desperation to explain ourselves in detail, explain our histories and our possible futures, so the institutions might allow us access to methods of transition.
The sooner we explore more possibilities beyond the idea that transness and transition are the final self, that transness is some chronic and fatal condition diagnosable from self-hatred cues in childhood, the sooner we can remove barriers of access to trans kids, and invite more people into the excitement, creativity, and nuance of trans experiences.
33 notes
·
View notes
the thing about pro-life is...
even if an abortion was murder, the right to bodily autonomy overrides that
i know i worded that weird so let me explain
a fetus or embreyo is using the pregnant person's organs in order to survive, it can't live by itself
it is dependent on the pregnant person's organs in order to live
therefore if the person does not want that fetus there, if they do not want to carry that baby to term, they have a right to get that fetus out of their body
if something is using your body, living thing or no, without your PERMISSION and without you WANTING it to be there, bodily autonomy gives you the right to get rid of it
doesnt matter if that thing is a human
if it could be a human
if it could cure cancer
if it could end poverty
bodily autonomy gives YOU the right to CHOOSE
147 notes
·
View notes
major TW:
question for other radfems,
if an an@rexic woman says she’s a feminist, would you say she was? i used to struggle with EDs, and i realised the reason i had an ED was because i wanted male validation, to be thinner, etc. when i studied radfem ideology i realised both physically and mentally it was harmful. opinions?
22 notes
·
View notes
canonize women. make an effort to learn about great women and give them the respect and recognition they should have had all along.
how many times have you heard phrases like “he’s the mozart of coding” “he’s einstein-levels of brilliant” “he’s the new mark zuckerberg/elon musk/steve jobs/bill gates” “he was out of there faster than usain bolt” “focusing with bobby fischer-like intensity” “innovative like shakespeare” and so on and so on and so on?
how many exceptional men have become so easily recognized as brilliant that their names become symbols for greatness itself? how many exceptional women are ever even acknowledged, much less known widely enough to get the same treatment?
canonize women. mention exceptional women and act like it’s a travesty (because it is!) that their contributions aren’t known.
396 notes
·
View notes