#generally these types of arguments are focused towards women but i know non binary and men have faced this shit before also | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

werevulvi · 4 years

Note

What's the difference(s?) between being GNC vs trans NB in your opinion??? I used to think they were very diff until i read about "you don't need dysphoria to be trans" discourse and also stories from dysphoric GNC ppl so is it like a matter of ideology?

There is a lot that goes into this, so this will be a very long reply... but yes, ideology is deeply soaked into it, although it's not only because of that, I think. So like, okay, first off, you probably know I come from a radfem perspective, but then I also take into consideration things that radfem in general may disagree with if I find it to be logical or making sense enough. So my opinions are more so rooted in what I personally think is logical and makes sense, as well as facts, which just so happens to mostly align with radfem, rather than being truly rooted in radfem.

That said, however, this particular topic is not so much based on scientific facts (as there's just not much established science to go on here) but more so on anecdotal evidence and my own logical conclusions of that.

Not sure where to start, but there are several different "ways" to "validate" the existence of nonbinary, if you feel ever so inclined. One is by understanding that a nonbinary person who's dysphoric has the same legitimacy to identify outside of the sex they were born as, as "binary" trans people, and if their dysphoria is atypical enough, that it also makes sense for them to not wanna identify as the opposite sex either.

That is probably the simplest way to view nonbinary as different from being gnc, by simply applying the same logic to them as you would to differentiate butch/masc women from trans men, or feminine men from trans women: their sex dysphoria is the defining factor, not how they dress/act.

And how to then differentiate nonbinary from "binary" trans, is that the nonbinary dysphoria is often atypical in nature. That generally means the person may be dysphoric about only some of their sex characteristics, but not all (for example a dysphoric nb may have discomfort towards their chest and voice, but not their genitals or their curves/lack of curves) - but it can also mean that the dysphoria is towards all of their sex characteristics but the desire is to look "sex neutral" instead of as the opposite sex. It can also be a combination of those. A third distinction is that their dysphoria may be fluctuating a lot. Like maybe they feel really uncomfortable with their sex for a certain amount of time, then love their bio sex, then again dysphoric. Basically any sex dysphoria that makes the person not feel like they "should" appear as the opposite sex entirely could be called atypical.

This is also NOT to say that "binary" trans people who opt out of for example genital surgery are nonbinary. It has to do with the intent/desire, what one's body would be ideally and how one interprets that ideal - not necessarily what they actually change with hormones/surgery in practice. Like for example there IS a difference between being okay with one's vagina and not wanting any surgery on it because neo-penis doesn't live up to one's desires, but still wishing they had an actual penis - and actually genuinely LOVING one's vagina and feeling strongly protective of keeping it as is, with no desire to have an actual penis, while still being dysphoric about other sexed aspects of one's body. However, that's also not saying trans men have to be dysphoric about their vaginas to count as "binary" - it has more to do with the individual's own interpretation of what their dysphoria means to them, and what being a man/woman/nonbinary means to them.

But there is more to it than that, which is what you call into question: the "you don't need dysphoria to be trans." This is where it gets tricky, anecdotal and a little whimsical.

Many are sceptical of that notion, however most nonbinary people are not. Ideology does absolutely go into this. The sceptical ones tend to be (or lean) transmedicalist/truscum, or in rarer cases radfem, while those who don't think you need dysphoria to be trans tend to be (or lean) tucute/sjw/libfem. And I too am more than just fairly sceptical of this... However, I have found one argument which I'm considering... plausible, for considering non-dysphoric trans to be a possibility.

That argument is: gender incongruence without marked distress.

This is where shit gets complicated, so I'll try to explain it as well as I can, and then you can make your own opinion on if there's any legitimacy to it, or look into it further if you wish. I'm not here to attempt to change your opinion in any way. I'm only sharing what made me reconsider the notion that dysphoria is necessary to be trans. What you do with that info, is entirely up to you, and I honestly don't even care about holding it against you, or anyone else, for that matter. I just wanted to clarify that, in case this comes off as me trying to shove a weird ass argument down your throat, as that is absolutely not my intention by any means. You're absolutely free to call bullshit on this.

Alright, before I dig into it, I first have to raise the question "what is gender/sex dysphoria?" and answer it: My understanding of what this type of dysphoria is, is that it's not only wishing your body looked different and to be read as the opposite sex (or both/neither sex) but it's categorised as marked distress/strong discomfort towards your body's sex. This is important, so try to remember that.

I used to think that's all there is to feeling like you're not capable/willing to live with your body/gender* as it is naturally. However, I then started talking to a few transsexual MtF's and FtM's who happily medically transitioned... without dysphoria, and their stories puzzled me, but they also intrigued me. Thus, I listened with an open mind.

(*I should probably explain my view on what gender is, but very briefly: I consider it a personal interpretation of one's experiences with anything gendered and/or sexed. So it's a subjective perception and personal conclusion, more so than a feeling, similar to how "feeling cold" regardless of actual temperature is perception and a conclusion of how your mind and body responds to the temperature, and not an actual feeling like happiness or anger, nor is it objective fact. "Gender" can also simply be "I wish I was male but in fact I'm female. Thus I intepret my gender as man" without even including gender norms at all, but literally only focusing on sex. I personally conclude my own gender by my bio sex and my sex characteristics (including transitioned/desired ones) only, but I also accept the former definition for others just fine.)

Then I started also analysing my own dysphoria and noticed that it's not really a one big solid thing happening, but different aspects that together make me come to the conclusion that "I'm not comfortable looking/being clearly female, I feel a deep internal desire to look/be partially male, thus transitioning is alluring to me."

Split apart it's more like this: 1.) The first aspect is a strong discomfort with certain aspects of being physically female (I mean in the past before I transitioned, to clarify.) 2.) The second aspect is a strong desire for those aspects of my body to instead be male (again, only applicable in the past tense, as those aspects of my body now are appearing male.) 3.) The third aspect is what is the social result of what my sexed body appears like, meaning people read me as a man or woman based on what sex my body looks like, which is a direct reminder of what I look like (negative pre-transition, positive post-transition.)

The third aspect is generally what's considered "social dysphoria" and generally is considered a result of physical/sex dysphoria, than a stand alone thing. Some disagree with this, however. Many trans people split their experience of dysphoria into "social" and "sex/physical" as it's very common to experience both. However, both the first and second (as listed above, to clarify) aspects are together what most people only recognise as simply "sex/physical dysphoria" without really paying attention to that there are TWO aspects of it. One which pushes you away from your actual sex, and the other which pulls you towards the opposite sex (or both/neither.)

And here's where shit gets interesting... What if a person only has one of those two aspects of physical/sex dysphoria?

Meaning, they either feel discomfort about their physical sex, but lack the desire to instead appear more like the opposite, or both/neither sex (just discomfort, no desire) - or they have the desire to appear like the opposite, both or neither sex, but lack the discomfort towards their actual physical sex (just desire, no discomfort.)

The former point, feeling discomfort without desire, arguably is not "really" gender dysphoria, but something more along the lines of body dysmorphia/poor body image. That, however, is only my personal, unprofessional opinion. As most shit I say is, lol.

That latter point, however: Having the desire to appear like the opposite, both or neither sex, but lacking the discomfort towards one's actual physical sex - is basically what is considered experiencing gender incongruence, but without actual dysphoria.

So then what is gender incongruence? Typically it's part of gender dysphoria as a whole: it being sex dysphoria, gender incongruence, social dysphoria, and if/when alleviated: gender euphoria. If you have all those aspects then it's not really important to consider the incongruence aspect separately. However, what gender incongruence is, is basically just feeling like you should be of the other sex (or both/neither.) So, it's basically just the "desire" aspect of what's generally considered the concept of "gender dysphoria" as a whole. Except, without distress... dysphoria is not dysphoria.

Whether it's actually possible to have gender incongruence without dysphoria, I think is very difficult to say. However, what I struggle to de-legitimise is: if someone is transitioned (especially medically) and happy with the result, but what drove them to transition in the first place was a desire without distress. So what I actually consider to be "trans" is not necessarily "dysphoric person" but rather anyone who is happily transitioned, or know they would be happier transitioned, regardless of what drives/drove them to transition in the first place - as well as dysphoric people who don't wish to transition and/or detransitioned.

One thing I find compelling about this "incongruence without dysphoria" argument is that this is not actually a new thing.

I spoke to an older trans man (in his 50's) who transitioned back in the 90's and said outright that he never experienced dysphoria, yet he's (by his own words) satisfied with his transition. He's a fairly known and I guess "famous" trans activist in Sweden, and also hangs out in the same fb group as me, apparently. So I exchanged a few words with him on the topic of dysphoria. Although he didn't call his experience "gender incongruence" that's kinda what he seemed to imply. I've also talked to an older trans woman who also transitioned decades ago and also firmly stated and explained she never experienced dysphoria, yet is happily transitioned. Then I've also heard the same sentiment from a few younger trans people.

But in total, I've heard about it from less than 5 trans people, and all I have is that anecdotal info.

But then the thing is that they were all medically transitioned. They "prove" to me that they're trans by simply being satisfied with their transitions. So whether they had dysphoria or not is not actually important in hindsight. What matters is that they're satisfied with how they changed their bodies. Because when it comes to most "non-dysphoric" nonbinary people out there, they don't even wish to transition medically at all. And that is different. Are all of them legitimate cases just like the "non-dysphoric" yet happily transitioned trans men and women I've talked to? No, probably not. I mean, let's be honest.

Nonbinary is (no matter how much a legit thing for some, also) a hype/trend and very many do absolutely try to identify out of misogyny, sexist gender norms, sexual trauma, etc, by picking up the nonbinary label. Some of them experience body discomfort vaguely related to their sex traits, but it's not actually gender dysphoria, or whatever it is, transitioning would probably not be the best solution for them. I think it's important to keep in mind that the culture around nonbinary identities is to not ever question their identities and that any kind of "invalidating" is considered a horrible hate crime, to them.

That attitude is a recipe for validating people who are not actually trans, but suffer from gender in other ways. And I don't think we should forget or dismiss that. I don't think there's much harm in them simply carrying a nonbinary label and some odd set of pronouns - but letting every single nonbinary identified person jump on hormones and surgery would be a very terrible idea, and when it comes to that identity specifically, I'd be VERY, very careful, as they seem more likely to disregard the possibly negative outcomes of medical transition and then end up devastated, as many of them disregard dysphoria, and often logic and reason altogether... where as "binary" trans people, although not at all without doubt and detrans rates, tend to be at least a little bit more careful and educated.

That said, however... I have heard from ONE nonbinary person who very nicely explained their experience of basically gender incongruence without dysphoria, and they were also happily medically transitioning. They were also older and seemed mature and emotionally stable. So, I'm at least open to the possibility that some nonbinary people can be satisfied with transition without gender dysphoria, and thus, I'd personally count them as trans. It's a youtuber so I could probably link that video in which they explained it, if I can find it from my huge playlist of "favourites" to which I'm pretty sure I added it. I found that video through Blaire White making a rant video about how the nb person was only transitioning for attention. Valid concern, but erh, I think she made an incorrect assertion, in that particular case.

Anyhow, I do worry that this whole argument of "incongruence without dysphoria" very easily becomes a slippery slope of... basically people transitioning for shits and giggles, or because they have a bad self image and just really badly hope the grass will be greener on the other side, which is why I'm still very hesitant to give it credit, and at this point I'm still only considering it plausible.

One thing worth noting is that some transmeds actually think that having incongruence without dysphoria counts as a form of dysphoria, but that is in fact not the medically established definition of gender dysphoria. "Dysphoria" in and of itself literally means "abnormal depression and discontent" so taking the distress aspect out of gender dysphoria is going against its very definition. So that's quite some intellectual dishonesty, that some transmeds are willing to admit that some trans people don't have dysphoria, but without actually admitting it, because that would go against their ideology.

I also think that it's foolish to say that every trans person who is happily transitioned "must" have been dysphoric, because we can't actually know that. We have not actually heard every single trans person's reason for why they transitioned. We can only assume that it was probably because of dysphoria, because that is the (most, or only) logical reason for wanting to transition in the first place, and for being satisfied with one's transition in the long run. That is not enough to make the claim that ALL happily transitioned trans people MUST have experienced dysphoria, which means there is and always has been a possibility that you may not actually need dysphoria to be trans, even if it's the most common reason.

I think it's important to at least be open to listen to especially happily transitioned people's experiences when they don't align with our beliefs on what makes someone trans. They might be wrong about what their inner experiences with gender actually mean (as in they might have had dysphoria but were unaware that's what their experience was, or they might not actually be all that happy with having transitioned) - and we might be wrong about that gender dysphoria being the only thing that could make a person satisfied with transition.

So like... keep using those critical thinking skills, even after you think you know the truth ;)

Have I really answered your question, though? I'm not sure, but basically: trans nb generally means that your self-interpretation of your gendered experience as a whole (meaning how you RELATE to being male/female, feminine/masculine, considered a man/woman, etc, not if you are gnc per se) does not match your own interpretation of what it means to be either "fully" a man or "fully" a woman. Which is what gets watered down to the chanted phrase "nb means not identifying as either fully male or female."

So, how is that different from just being gnc? In some cases, it actually isn't. Some really do think that rejecting gender norms is what makes them nb, and in those cases, I won't personally consider them trans or truly nonbinary. But what matters (I think) is that there are also nb people who base it on sex dysphoria, and/or gender incongruence as thoroughly explained above, and I think there is at least some legitimacy to those reasons.

Then how gnc gets in the picture for those latter two reasons is pretty simple: For the same reason most trans men are masculine: to more easily blend in among men in society, as masculinity can in some cases help with passuing as male when you're female (and vice versa for femininity and passing as female for males.) That is sadly due to the reinforcement of masculinity as being "intended for men" and femininity as being "intended for women" which causes many people to subconsciously connect femininity with femaleness and masculinity with maleness, and many also confuse those things.

Ever heard a woman say that her having breasts is a "feminine" trait, for example? Yeah, no, it's not. That's her confusing femininity for what's actually a female trait. However, having large breasts can be considered "more feminine" than having small or no breasts, due to how society views gender, but that does not mean that large-breasted females are inherently "more feminine" than small-breasted ones, or those who don't have breasts, because that's really just a natural variation of femaleness.

That's an example of how femaleness easily gets blurred with femininity, and vice versa masculinity gets equally blurred with maleness, with for example beards and deep voices. Because the feminine and masculine archetypes do also include certain female and male body types. This is why I view my transitioned features from testosterone as male features rather than as masculine ones, because I can more easily differentiate what is SEXED from what's GENDERED, than probably most people, mostly due to my rather unusual upbringing. Thus, "binary" trans people can take advantage of that societal confusion and blur the lines between being perceived as masculine vs male (or feminine vs female for MtF) because the gender norms are so ingrained. Of course it doesn't always work in favour for trans people (hence non-passing trans men being seen as butches, and trans women seen as drag queens) but it CAN fool the eye to some extent.

Then, as for nonbinary people and androgynous gender expression: androgyny has often, historically been confused with... well, I may fail to put this delicately, but yeah basically having certain intersex conditions, which have been poorly understood throughout history as "hermaphrodites" and other harmful shit. Androgyny, meaning a combination of feminine and masculine, can thus be used to a nonbinary person's advantage (at least in theory) to attempt to confuse others to see them as either a combination of male and female (similar to false representations of certain intersex conditions, which I want for everyone to know that I absolutely abhor) or as sexless, basically.

(Just a sidenote for clarification of gnc: being "gnc" is in and of itself a form of androgyny, in either the combination of "feminine + masculine" or "feminine + male" or "masculine + female" but when it comes to binary vs nonbinary types of gender expression, I think it's important to differentiate the degree of gender non-conformity being expressed. I vaguely differentiate "androgynous" from "fem male" and "masc female" here and I hope you know what I mean. It's not to make more unnecessary boxes, but just for the sake of argument. Kinda like a gnc lesbian is not necessarily a butch, but a butch is definitely a gnc lesbian, if that makes sense.)

Does androgyny have that same "confusion effect" as masculinity and femininity, though? Not really, in practice. Fewer are fooled by it, largely because "androgynous agender/bigender" (neither gender/both genders) is not an established social gender category like "feminine woman" and "masculine man" are, but is more like a fantasy concept. Also most people will automatically want to figure out if someone is male or female, which makes it extra hard for nb people to actually be viewed as... not that. So "androgyny as expression for sexlessness/both sexes at once" mostly only works in theory, but that is (or can be) the intent behind a nonbinary person's androgynous style, as it can still offer some mental relief even if the outcome is sadly not aligned with the intent.

(Metaphor time: You know, like sometimes I wanna bake a nice looking cake, but it turns out looking like sad poop, but that's okay, because it still tastes good. Meaning, the outcome didn't match my intent, but the outcome was still good enough to enjoy.)

So basically: trans nb people may not be nb because they're gnc, but be gnc because they're nb. Just like many trans men tend to be masc because they're ftm, not ftm because they're masc. So the difference between gnc and nb is in the intent. I think that's the best way I can explain that distinction.

(Also last sidenote: anyone reading this transitioning because you're masc/fem/gnc... PLEASE reconsider that, I urge you!)

5 notes · View notes

rivalplatinum-blog · 7 years

Text

Pocket Ethics: Why Ash Won’t Date

-This is a repost from my amino blog-

Hey Guys,

It's Valentines Day tomorrow and love is in the air. So, what better way to celebrate than ruining all of your hopes and dreams about love in the Pokémon Universe. Today, I'll be examining one timeless question from a bit of a different perspective... Why Ash never gets a girlfriend. No, Serena doesn't count Amour Shippers. There's a difference between a relationship and an implied kiss. I welcome you all to the first ever holiday episode of POCKET ETHICS

!WARNING! THIS BLOG CONTAINS OPINIONS. I WILL TRY TO BACK THESE OPINIONS UP WITH FACTS. HOWEVER, IF YOU ARE SENSITIVE TO THE THOUGHTS OR FEELINGS OF OTHERS TURN AROUND NOW. FOR THIS BLOG WE WILL ALSO BE FOCUSING ON THE MAIN SERIES AND NOT THE MOVIES. SO ANY ROMANCE WITH A CERTAIN LATIAS IS TO BE DISCOUNTED. This topic is one very near and dear to my heart. I am trans-male, so if you want to make hateful comments this is not the place to do it. I feel as though everyone should know about this stuff, though. Exposure is the best way to combat hate. What is Socialization? According to experts at Palomar College, "The general process of acquiring culture is referred to as socialization," In this process we're taught everything from how our gender should behave to what is right and wrong. This isn't an exaggeration. Did you ever steal something when you were a little kid, get scolded for it when you were found out, then were told to return the item. That is a common example of socialization in action. There are several agents of socialization. The main one, when you're young, is your family. Be that (a) parent(s), older siblings, or guardians. As we get older, generally schools take over the role of the main agent of socialization. A school would be an example of a social institution. However, friends also begin to contribute at that point. There are other social institutions (Such as the Military or a Gang), and other types of agents of socialization (Co-workers and Bosses are a good example). But, keep a tab on those two terms: Agents of Socialization and Social Institutions. We'll come back to them later.

Ash/Satoshi Ash, or 智 (Satoshi) in the Japanese anime, is the main protagonist of the Pokémon Anime. Over the years he has traveled through the regions with various companions, on a quest to become a Pokémon Master. And, frequently these companions are female. So, why hasn't he actually romanced any of them? The Easy argument is that he's a prepubescent ten year old in most of the seasons, so he wouldn't feel sexual attraction to any of themes. But kids CAN actually feel romantic attraction. So, even if a relationship didn't go anywhere explicit, he still could have been proclaiming his love (love, not lust) for any one of his companions. Puppy love baby. Instead, Ash is possibly not romantically inclined to be in a relationship.

Gender Identity It's important to mention this. Gender is defined by what a person identifies as. Male and Female are both sexes. Man and Woman are both genders, or more correctly Cis-Male and Cis-Female. We haven't seen a truly transgendered or agendered character in Pokémon. Unless Ilima is hiding something from us. It's pretty safe to assume Ash's gender. That he's Cis-Male. This is likely partially due to the fact that he was socialized as a male. Professors, Gym Leaders, Champions, and the Pokémon League are all either Agents of Socialization or Social Institutions. Though it seems like a fairly equal minded organization, again, do we see any trans Gym Leaders? Nope. And Ilima is a Trial Captain. Which means they technically work with the Kahunas. Even if they aren't transgender or gender fluid or even agendered, let's face it, Ilima isn't a stereotypical male.

Sexuality Okay. So, sexuality is BIOLOGICAL. This is the perfect example of an aspect of ones identity being created by nature over nurture (Which annoys most Sociologists to no end). There's nothing one can do to change if they are physically attracted to a man, woman, someone who is non-binary, all of the above, or no one at all. In an article from Psych-Central by Elissa Malcohn on Neuroscientist Simon LeVay's book, Gay, Straight, and the Reason Why: The Science of Sexual Orientation, there is a brilliant quote, "Rather than ask, “What went wrong?” biological theories examine sexual variety as part of nature. Homosexual behavior is common among nonhuman animals. Graylag geese include male-male sexual pair bonds that can break up if females become available. Male and female bonobos freely engage in both homosexual and heterosexual behavior. Domesticated sheep include rams that refuse to mate with ewes, but that readily mate with other rams." These anecdotes both show that there is a spectrum of sexual orientations in nature. But, we can't say that Ash is homosexual (Though he might be asexual). He hasn't shown any sign of being attracted to Brock, Cillian, Clemont, or even the GLORIOUS Kiawe. And, isn't this piece about how Ash ISN'T attracted to women? The main sign we've seen of Ash liking a girl was in the last episode of XYZ where Ash is possibly kissed by Serena. And, Ash didn't initiate that action. It was Serena who did. So, he's likely not homosexual.

Romanticism Here's where the interesting part of the argument comes in to play. Ash is, likely, aromantic. For those of you unfamiliar with terms like this or Latin, the prefix "a" means "Not" or "Without". Aromantic means Not Romantic. Ash can be seen with two girls in particular who are shown to possibly (or actually) like him. Misty and Serena. These girls are in ways complete opposites. So you have a wide range of personalities for him to choose from. Serena made her interest in Ash fairly obvious, even if it was, at times, unintentional. Misty, on the other hand, acted more like a (please don't kill me for saying this) tsundere. She would slip a gushing line in occasionally, then act hot-tempered. Ash could have picked either of them. But, he didn't. In fact he was oblivious to most of their actions. So, he might be homoromantic? I doubt it. It's important to note that Ash hasn't made any romantic advances towards any male characters. Even if people do ship Ash and Sawyer. It's likely that we'll never know for sure, but I'm guessing that Ash would be aromantic. I hope you enjoyed this. See! I didn't ruin part of the franchise. Well... Unless you ship anyone with Ash. But it's still just an idea! Anyways, Happy Valentines Day! Peace Out, -Plat Sources Palomar College - http://anthro.palomar.edu/social/soc_1.htm Psych-Central - https://psychcentral.com/lib/gay-straight-and-the-reason-why-the-science-of-sexual-orientation/] Sociology in Modules

#Pokemon #PocketEthics #ash #ash ketchum #satoshi #misty #serena

3 notes · View notes