Fifteen Minutes To Fame

I don’t get why cissexist women are fighting so hard to be defined by their organs.

inflateablefilth:

When they go on and on about how I’m a woman because I have a uterus but a trans woman isn’t because she doesn’t, they’re saying loud and clear ‘all that matters about being a woman is your sex organs and your ability to be pregnant’. I just don’t get why you want to define womanhood that way. I really don’t. 

(via telegantmess)

TW: Discussion of Child Sexual Assault

TW: Transmisogyny of trans women as rapists

bittergrapes:

lucypaw:

appropriately-inappropriate:

lucypaw:

appropriately-inappropriate:

Ah, well, obviously that’s pretty out of line. I’ve not been a part of the discussion, however, so I can’t really comment about that. (The joys of vacation, I guess! Everything interesting happens when you’re away.)

However, I personally have seen (and will be more than happy to provide posts if you like) support going on for Witherspoon. That’s something that I find… well, a little abhorrent. While Witherspoon’s actions aren’t enough to tar and feather all trans* women, the support that I’ve seen on sites like Jezebel and here on tumblr do tarnish the trans* community—especially when you have big name bloggers using their clout to advocate for them.

(Again, you can call me a bitch or whatever, but trans* or not, I do not feel comfortable with a convicted sex offender in my bathroom. Male, female, martian… regardless.)

That having been said, I can see how people would feel uncomfortable with the precedent this sets. I mean, yes, trans* women should have every right to pee in peace, but I also have to respect that cis women, seeing a case like this (and the subsequent support for Witherspoon), may be…. reluctant to allow late-transitioning or “less-passing” trans* women in spaces like washrooms and changerooms.

I guess my position falls somewhere between yours and roseverbenas. Everyone’s got to pee—-but at the same time, there is something to be said for the Schroedinger’s ___________ mentality. In the case of trans* women, even long-time estrogen users have more upper body strength than a cis woman, so…. I think that’s a concern to be considered.

So do you understand why trans women are reluctant to allow cis women in spaces like washrooms and changerooms because 25% of sexual predators of children and teens are (cis) women?  Because I certainly do.  I mean, damn, that’s a lot of cis women, a lot more than trans women.  So, yeah, I can understand why trans women are so reluctant and campaign to stop cis women from using women’s washrooms and changerooms because of the actions of a few.  Oh, wait, that doesn’t happen.  Because trans women aren’t trained in cismisogyny like cis women are trained in transmisogyny.  Which is to say, just because cis women may be reluctant might be a good time for them to reflect on why one trans woman makes them judge all trans women or even “late-transitioning” or “less-passing” ones.  Confront that bigotry.  Like you didn’t.

Really?  Trans women have more upper body strength than cis women even with long-term oestrogen use?  Citation please?  Because sports organisations that were concerned about this (women’s golf, women’s tennis) didn’t come to that conclusion.

Don’t you know that 81% of statistics are made up?
But as it happens, I am well-aware of women as rapists. I grew up in the Karla Homolka era, so I’m well aware of the depravity women are capable of. I’m also a rape victim, and my rapist was a woman, so while I appreciate your passive-aggressive attempt to ‘educate me’, this isn’t a matter on which I need much of it.

Getting to a few more statistics:

The U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (1999) estimated that 91% of U.S. rape victims are female and 9% are male, with 99% of the offenders being male
Source: UCSC Rape Prevention Education

So, there’s a bit of a contradiction of statistics there. However, regardless of the statistics, the evidence is clear. Men are overwhelmingly more likely to be rapists, and stranger rape, while less common than aquaintance rape, is never the less still a very real threat.

In addition, if we start getting into rates of ‘corrective’ rape, such as is used against the LGBT community, the rate shoots up to almost 100% male. Trans* women have long been aware of this trend; from what I’ve read, the majority of rapes of trans* women are committed by men.

With that sort of atmosphere, everyone’s a little bit tense.
Consequently, areas of vulnerability that can be policed are policed with more rigorousness, resulting in situations like this one.

Which is to say, just because cis women may be reluctant might be a good time for them to reflect on why one trans woman makes them judge all trans women

Have you ever heard of the concept of Schroedinger’s Rapist? Assume anything ‘out of the norm’ is potentially harmful in an attempt at self-preservation? If cis women are trained, as you allege, in transmisogyny, it’s quite likely a manifestation of this doctrine.
And once again, when anywhere between 75-90% of rapists are male, and 1 in 6 women REPORT rape (and we all know that only a miniscule number of rapes are reported), these survivors are already more highly attuned to ‘abnormalities’ in the environment in an attempt to avoid history repeating itself. Which may explain the bathroom policing.
Now, is it right? No, but is it understandable from their perspective? Yes, I think it is. And in this case, where the “man in the ladies’” ended up being a convicted two-time child-rapist….. well, it seems like in this case, the woman’s conclusion may have been correct.

In regards to the upper body strength:
Estrogen has numerous effects on the human body, but it only superficially alters the bone structure and skeletal morphology. Consequently, trans* women who take estrogen still retain the advantage of height and a longer reach, which anyone with basic martial arts training can tell you present a distinct threat to a smaller, shorter opponent.

In addition, all I can find on upper body strength says that “there is a decrease”. That doesn’t mean that the strength becomes less than a natal female’s, only that it decreases with the reduction of testosterone.
The fact that trans* women excel in sports like golf (where it’s all upper body strength) should be a pretty clear indicator that the upper body strength remains at least comparable to that of a natal woman’s.

But we’re tangenting—let’s get back to the salient point here. There was a child-rapist in a hospital washroom where children are often sent unattended. Are we okay with this? Is this someone whose rights we really, really want to advocate for?

I am fighting hard against the belief that you are being disingenuous and derailing on purpose when we have been talking about a woman who raped children, so I bring up the statistics of child rape by women in general, and then you somehow claim those statistics are basically insignificant because of the rates of men raping adult women.  My statistics were completely on point when the claim is that a child rapist woman means that other adult women have reason to be afraid of trans women in the toilet.  I showed that trans women (and other cis women) should therefore also be concerned about all the adult women child rapists in their toilets and maybe keep them out.  You, meanwhile, are apparently trying to obfuscate that point by saying “OMG, there are so many more men who are rapists!” when men being rapists of adult women has nothing to do with women being safe from child-raping women in women’s toilets.  Unless you are claiming trans women = men.  Which, as I see further down, you are.

Also, I wasn’t trying to educate you.  I was educating the people who read my blog.  I was pretty sure you already knew the statistics.  Given that I also know the statistics, I could just as easily ask why you’re putting out the rape statistics of adults when we’re talking about children.

Look, I know you think you’re a reasonable person and all but when you keep appealing to the idea that it is easy to visually tell men from women when, in fact, a number of ‘men in women’s toilets’ issues are that of cis women who don’t pass as women according to at least one other woman, you’re showing some serious cissexism.  Schroedinger’s rapist is something I know, but it only applies if you insist that trans women look like men. Also, the idea that women get raped in the toilets a lot is just… weird.  As we both know, most rapes are by someone the victim/survivor knows.  They also take place in places like the perpetrator’s or victim’s homes.  Stranger rapes are rare.  Rapes in the toilet are rare.  That you suggest that we should put more stock in a rare event when you also say you were raped by a woman but that we should be more concerned about men is headdesk-inducing.  That’s just totally irrational and is not helping actually stop rapes.  It is, however, feeding quite nicely into the trope that trans women are rapists and can’t be trusted in public toilets (so we should send them to men’s toilets?  What?  If we’re being concerned about rapes in toilets and men rape more aren’t we therefore basically saying we don’t give a shit about the trans women that will be raped in the men’s toilets?  Is that what this is about?  Cis women feeling safer from rape in the toilet because trans women are being raped in the other toilet?).

Also, as far as upper body strength and trans women, you have no citation, I see.  You’re using more of that cissexist ‘common sense’ bullshit that also lets us know that trans women don’t look like women.  How about you retract your claim because you don’t actually have anything but speculation and ‘common sense’?  And, don’t blame me for pursuing the irrelevance you brought up.  Except it’s not irrelevant, is it?  It’s about still portraying trans women as threatening because they’re supposedly absolutely stronger than cis women.

As for the salient point, obviously the answer is to not let this woman near children.  That it has been turned into justifying cis women’s transmisogyny and booting trans women from the toilet is ridiculous and obvious bigotry.  That you have attempted to justify this bigotry while claiming to not be a bigot is annoying.  I’ve attempted to show how ridiculous that is in the hope that you might actually catch a clue and stop acting bigoted.  I now severely doubt that is going to happen, so I’m instead writing to help others be able to identify and counter the sneaky ‘rational justifications’ of transmisogyny that bigots like you use.

I’d just like to pop in here with the fact that, according to RAINN (Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network), 73% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger, and 2/3 of rapes were perpetrated by someone known to the victim (info from here).

Appropriately-inappropriate is very much focused on the idea of “stranger danger”, which is NOT what anyone should be focused on. You are far more likely to be assaulted by someone you know and trust than by a stranger in the bathroom.

Furthermore, do we really think that trans*women undergo painful, dysphoria-inducing procedures and treatment to gain access to bathrooms in order to rape cis women? Like, really? Also, do we think that someone in a marginalized position, who is terrified of violence being perpetrated against herself, is going to be all het up on raping or hurting someone who has privilege against her, in both a highly enclosed and highly public place with a lot of foot traffic? That’s not only extremely implausible, it goes against any form of logic possible.

If someone’s going to rape you, 4 times out of 10 it will happen at your house, and 2 times out of 10 it will happen at someone else’s house (again, courtesy of RAINN). I looked through all the reporting data for anything about some huge bathroom rape epidemic, and guess what? There is none. Bathroom rapes (if they happen enough to even be recorded) are lumped in with every other location because they are rare. And there is zero data on the amount of bathroom rapes perpetrated by trans*women. Again, because they are rare. 

Random trans*women in a bathroom are not who you should be worried about. Look at your friends, your acquaintances, your lovers, and be worried about them, because they are far more statistically likely to assault you than a marginalized stranger in a highly public place. Baying about trans*stranger danger and making it into some sort of trans*woman bathroom rape epidemic is not only making you look ignorant, but downright cissexist and malicious.

Reblogged for excellent analysis.  Thanks for looking up the statistics and making the point better than I did.

(Source: roseverbena)

genderbitch:

blackenedbutterfly:

vizzz:

freesamuel replied to your post: It might just be me as a trans person, but to me preferring certain genitalia is what sexual orientation is. It seems wrong to disregard that people can have different physical responses to different types of people.

I think people are conflating genitals with a preference for penetration or penetrating during sex… That’s a legit preference that doesn’t HAVE to have anything to do with gender.

truth!

Don’t you know? That’s all penises and vaginas do! Penises just penetrate, and vaginas just get penetrated. When one person with a penis has sex with a person with a vagina, it’s ALWAYS PIV sex. Every time! Didn’t you know that?!

God, people are so ignorant these days! SHEESH

And let me just add! When two people with penises have sex with each other, they have a choice on who puts the penis in the other person! And when two people with vulvas have sex with each other, well…strap-ons don’t exist, and they certainly can ONLY EVER be used on people with vulvas. But only by people with vulvas.

Also, all sex has to involve all partners’ genitals. Every time.

I cannot stick my dick in a vagina or any other opening. It fires up such severe dissonance that it just instantly kills the mood for me.

So I kinda lol when people are like “I DON’T WANNA FUCK YOU CUZ YOU’RE GONNA STICK THAT THING IN ME”. Um no thanks. I don’t want that thing going anywhere. You’ll be lucky if I even let you touch it with your hands. Cuz that can go wrong too.

I smell heteronormativity and even homonormativity (though maybe not lesbonormativity) in the whole penis=penetrates, vulvas=penetrated/envelops.  I will also say that the sex that I have with other trans people (and I really don’t have sex with cis people much at all any more) a lot of times involves two or more layers of fabric between my partner’s genitals and mine.  Cis people apparently have no imagination when it comes to sex, even if they’re not straight.  This continues to be driven home by their transphobia and cissexism.

Oh, and since I always like giving clues, cis people might want to look into the concept of frottage.  Just a suggestion.

Who you calling ‘entitled’?

transfeminism:

I must not understand how entitlement works. I hear cis people complain that trans women believe they’re actually entitled to their own womanhood, and I’m like, “Yeah, if trans women aren’t entitled to their own gender then who is?” Presumably it’s the cis people who are attacking their womanhood. Apparently these people don’t see it as an entitlement for them to arbitrarily dictate another person gender.

I wholeheartedly believe in entitlements. I believe that everyone is entitled to live free of abuse, violence, exploitation and oppression. I believe that everyone is entitled to food, housing, education, health care, employment and a living wage. I believe that everyone is entitled to consensual, nonabusive intimate relationships of their own choosing. I believe that everyone is entitled to their own gender and sexuality.

As entitlements, I believe everyone should be guaranteed access to all the above. I also believe that oppression can be measured by the extent that our society entitles one group of people to any of the above while disentitling other groups.

So, yeah, I believe trans women are completely justified in feeling entitled to equitably access to the very things other women have access to, and that trans women and cis women both have a shared entitlement to those things that our society entitles men. People who confuse trans women entitlement to accessing vital services with “male privilege” don’t seem to understand what male privilege is.

When a trans woman who is a survivor of sexual assault or intimate partner violence seeks help from a women’s crisis center this is not male privilege. She is a woman attempting to access women’s services not unlike any other woman who has been raped or abused.

However, when a trans woman is denied these vital services because she is trans then the crisis center is exerting an unjust entitlement of cis privilege. If cis people wish to deny trans women equitable access to survivor services for nonvital reasons like comforting the cissexist prejudices of staff and clients that is cis privilege. The denial of cis privilege by falsely accusing a trans woman “male privilege” for believing she is entitled to same vital survivor services granted to other women is a tactic of retaining cis privileges while avoiding responsibility for how this harms trans women.

As I believe everyone is entitled to live free of violence, I also believe this means that all women should have equitable access to services and programs as survivors of violence—regardless of whether they are cis or trans. It is cis privilege that systemically and institutionally reserves these entitlements for cis women while denying trans women equitable access to the same services and programs. Those who deny trans women access to survivor services supposedly designed to help all women seeking to leave, avoid, and heal from violent and exploitative situations need to be held accountable for their role in perpetuating social arrangements that make trans women more vulnerable targets of violence.

When trans women who are survivors of abuse seek and are subsequently denied access to survivor services and programs they are being abused a second time. Denying of trans women access to vital women’s services and programs has nothing to do with challenging male privilege and everything to do with retaining cis privilege. When cis people seek to deny a trans woman’s womanhood and prevent her from receiving survivor support it is those cis people who are abusing their privilege. Trans women shouldn’t be punished because some cis staff or clients let their prejudice against trans women get in the way of providing appropriate and necessary services to all women. It is not trans women’s responsibility to deny their own vital needs in order to comfort the prejudices of cis people. Yet far too often trans women do not seek survivor services for the very reason that they wish to avoid the secondary abuse they’ll experience from cissexist providers.

I emphatically believe trans women are entitled equitable access to women’s services. Those who continue to profess that trans women are only seeking access to women’s services because they are exercising “male privilege” do not have the best interest of women in mind and need to stop calling themselves “feminists.” Self-aggrandizement at the expense of trans women is never feminism.

(via widdershinsgirl)

telegantmess:

life spirit.: telegantmess: life spirit.: telegantmess: magneticsoul: telegantmess:…

telegantmess:

life spirit.: telegantmess: magneticsoul: telegantmess: magneticsoul:…

telegantmess:

magneticsoul:

telegantmess:

magneticsoul:

Fierce…Flawless…: radscumblr: Fierce…Flawless…: radscumblr: life spirit.: Radical…

radscumblr:

Fierce…Flawless…:…

Oh Cathy…you’re quoting yourself as proof of harm done but have yet to provide a single actual example.You may have a law degree, but that seems to mean jack squat here since you have yet to actually provide proof of any of your claims. Events, some actual harm that was done, not hearsay. You’d think with that law degree, you’d know how to do that.

As if that degree proves anything. I’ve known rocket scientists who can’t change the toner in a copier, neurologists that can’t make change, and people with law degrees who didn’t realize that ballerinas wear special shoes to dance on their toes. You can wave that thing around like it means something, but the fact of the matter here is that you have yet to provide a shred of proof, have engaged in ridiculous gotcha games that would shame a kindergartener in their obtuseness, and have projected your behavior on everyone around you. You are toxic, and you are frankly, not even as bright as the right wing politicians that use you to advance conservative agendas.

And who started the name calling when confronted with information they couldn’t resolve?  I provided you with access to at least three scholarly sources that discuss the existence of genders outside of the male-female dichotomy and you started insulting me. Unless you are going to suggest that sociological research done at the university level is suddenly illegitimate information and name calling. I told you the results of your actions, and that makes me nasty? Duly noted. I only lose it when abused, and you, Cathy, are abusive.

So, this sticking your head in the sand thing…is that how you sleep at night after you teamed up with politicians who are diametrically opposed to your rights as a lesbian and a woman and used rape victims as a tool to criminalize trans* women? Or maybe how you justify prioritizing arguing for stripping gender identity as a protected status when the US still hasn’t ratified CEDAW?Do you even have priorities that aren’t centered around hurting someone?

Its funny, you bring up the spectre of rape when asked to examine your biases, yet tell me that you have a right to ignore my “no” regarding this engagement. You harass and attempt to intimidate people who are giving you the chance to learn and grow as a person. I sincerely feel for anyone who is close to you, as this kind of toxic behavior is rarely limited to one area of someone’s life.

Why do you act like and sound like an MRA?

Why do you hate women?

And why do you think that no one realizes that you have three different accounts here? You didn’t invent sock puppeting, Cathy.

I was upset earlier, now I’m actually amused. How ignorant do you think we are? (by the way, that’s rhetorical. Don’t know if you knew what that might be, what with that law degree of yours) You are right about one thing. You don’t need an education from me, what you need is your money for that degree back. Its clearly doing you zero favors.

I love how she’s claimed to have a PhD in trans*.  And then proceeds to completely misstate basic stuff about trans* people and, as usual for radscum, to completely ignore what trans* people have to say about ourselves because we lack law degrees (which is not true of all of us, btw) or something.  I don’t find this stuff amusing because it’s just so pathetic and repetitive.  She’s making no new arguments, offering no insights.  All she’s offered is the idea, cribbed from the MRAs, that we should call women “females” as if this somehow respects them as people in English.

(Source: ad-mirandam)

Just read a cis person declaring that reading about trans* people for years was enough to claim to know all about us

LOLing forever.  Because, my being trans isn’t enough for me to know all about trans* people.  Ah, cis people.  Keep bringing the hilariously ignorant arrogant shit.

bittergrapes:

lucypaw:

telegantmess:

youarenotyou:

autumn-and-eve:

fuckinglesbian:

atriptothemorg:

autumn-and-eve:

Feminism: The movement where we can all put aside our differences and be white cis women

This.

modern feminism specifically address the issues of women of color and transwomen. I’m a fem studies major and we talk about this all the time. trust me. 

Oh my God please guys I don’t ask people to reblog things but come on it does not get any more perfect than this
White cis woman talking over oppressed groups because she ~is a fem studies major~
Oh God I want to have sex with this moment

“no you don’t understand, your lived experiences don’t matter, I STUDY THIS AT SCHOOL” 

Okay, so, I take classes with people who are required to take close to the maximum amount of women’s studies classes my school offers, and they fuck this shit up every time.

Fuckinglesbian, I promise you, you may be talking about it, but its seriously not enough.

Especially if you thought adding that to this thread was a genuinely good idea.

I took an Intro to Women’s Studies course and ended up shouting in class when they decided to talk about people like me as if we were theoretical beings that they had no connection to and would never know personally.  Because, obviously, we would never be in any of their classes or families or work with them or anything.  My shouting didn’t really have much of an effect on them, sadly, even though the instructor backed me up.  Because only white cis women can really be objective enough to be experts on my life experiences.  /sarcasm

I try to bring up TWOC issues in my Women’s Studies class all the fucking time and all it gets me is a blank stare. I brought up CeCe McDonald … blank stare. Even from the instructor. Tried to bring up Shaima Alawadi (not a trans*woman I know, but a recent news event of intersectionality) … blank stare.

We spend more time talking about gay men than we do trans*folks. I’m fucking serious. 

And the instructor spent like half of one class talking about Adrienne Rich.

I cannot even.

And then feminists wonder why trans* people, especially trans women of colour, get alienated from feminism.  And usually blame trans* people for not getting feminism.  *siiiigh*

so-treu:

fuckinglesbian:

atriptothemorg:

autumn-and-eve:

Feminism: The movement where we can all put aside our differences and be white cis women

This.

modern feminism specifically address the issues of women of color and transwomen. I’m a fem studies major and we talk about this all the time. trust me. 

OR YOU COULD FUCKING TRUST WOMEN OF COLOR WHEN WE TELL YOU THAT WE GIVE NOT ONE FUCKS ABOUT YOUR ONE FUCKING CLASS WHEN OUR EVERY LIVED EXPERIENCE OF FEMINISM IS STEEPED IN RACISM, CISSEXISM AND GENERAL KYRIARCHICAL FUCKERY.

and way to prove the OP’s point.

That would be nice.  I don’t think it’s going to happen, but it would be nice.

Why Second Wave Feminism Is Fundamentally Busted

kiriamaya:

superqueerwonder:

kiriamaya:

freedominwickedness:

The zeitgeist of the second-wave feminist movement was the idea that the experiences of upper class white cis women were the end-all, be-all of true womanhood. As a result, second-wave feminism pulled a lemming stampede and jumped off a cliff of its own narrow-mindedness, all the while blaming everyone who tried to save it for being unfaithful to the One True Cause. This makes the second wave not just totally busted to the point of being utterly useless, but rotten to the core and inherently unsalvageable.

The zeitgeist of the third-wave feminist movement, on the other hand, is the belated realization that women have all sorts of different experiences and that a multicultural approach to women’s rights is not only fundamentally right but also much more effective than a monolithic approach.

The third wave is the reconceptualization of women’s rights as an integral component of the civil rights movement as opposed to privileged white women going, “Hey, where’s the rest of privilege!”, and as such is something that people can actually get behind. On the other hand, experience has shown that the third wave needs to be pretty strictly policed in terms of purging second wave influence against the inclusion of trans women and women of color.

Yeah, the third wave has been kind of a disappointment, really — mainly because white cis women still insist upon running the show.

Not trying to derail what you’re saying, but I do want to mention that a lot of really amazing womyn of colour feminists are often ignored when we talk about “second wave feminism” as this monolithic thing. I mean, I’ve been guilty of saying things like “Second wave feminism is all awful” without thinking about people like Audre Lorde and Gloria Anzaldua who are technically considered part of second wave feminism. So, yeah, definitely agree with what you’re saying in part but I do want to disturb a monolithic sense of second wave feminism. 

Edity edit: Nvm, I see the word zeitgest. Yep, I gets what you’re saying. 

Your point’s important, though! Thank you.

Watching Cis People Explain How They Just Happen to Not Fancy Trans Bodies

bittergrapes:

lucypaw:

chalcosoma:

thenewavengers:

sprackraptor:

tw: cissexism, trans* violence, murder

lucypaw:

thenewavengers:

chalcosoma:

lucypaw:

transreprojustice:

lucypaw:

is almost as fun as watching 50-something men explain how they just happen to be attracted to early 20-something women.

[TW for discussion of cissexist circular reasoning]

I once had a cis man claim that he was straight but just “happened” to not be “into” trans women. Cuz, ya’ know, attraction happens in a vacuum and isn’t influenced by our socialization or the cis-dominant exterminationist ideology. Not.at.all. *side eye*

Me: So you’re attracted to women but…not trans women?

Him: Yeah, I like women.

Me: Trans women are women.

Him: Well…my attraction is to vaginas. 

Me: *side eye* Well that’s kinda gross and reductionist. We usually don’t see people’s genitals when we first meet them. It’s not really part of our attraction to people per se, it’s more of a (cissexist) assumption. And some trans women do have vaginas. [Not that it should matter one fucking iota].

Him: I like vaginas, I can’t help it!

Me: So…you like all people with vaginas then? [Insinuating trans men or nonbinary trans* people like me].

Him: NO! I like women!

Me: Trans women are women.

Him: But, but, but…VAGINAS.

Me: So basically you like women… but only if they have vaginas that meet your “standards” for how they should look. And you like vaginas… but only when they’re attached to cis women. And both these qualities have to be occurring [naturally of course!] on one body simultaneously…

Him: Yes, exactly, I’m straight! What’s wrong with that??

Me: …

Yup, remind me again how this isn’t fucking cissexist? Cis people will contort themselves through any number of hoops with circular logic to reduce their viable dating pool down to just fellow cis people and then have the nerve to couch it as an innocent preference devoid of any prejudice.

This is almost exactly the same conversation I had with someone here on tumblr which is why I made this post.  *eyeroll*

What are people expected to say? Not many people need to have a pre-formulated explanation for their own sexuality that avoids possibly offending people… 

What the fuck is wrong with these people?

Why are they making words like “cis” and whatever

Stop naming things that make us different

That’s what causes unease within society

If you’re running round saying: “We’re different because this, this, this and this and this too!” You’re going to make unease and splinter people into groups.

You are doing nothing good.

And for the record, the guy could’ve just said: “I like women who are born as women with vaginas.”

Done. Now shut up.

LOL @ concern troll.  “You cause unease in society by pointing out our bullshit oppression of you.  Shut up!”  Glad you’re shutting up instead of continuing to show your ignorance and trying to force your bullshit on everyone.

What the fuck is wrong with these people? They’re cissexist douchenuts?

Why are they making words like “cis” and whatever Oh… you meant… well, what’s wrong here is that you’re a cissexist douchenut. Glad I could clear that up for you!

Stop naming things that make us different Because that’s not what words are for! Language should consist of only one word that applies to absolutely everything! Communication is for wusses. If everybody would just fit neatly into prepackaged and neatly labeled compartments, there wouldn’t ever be any conflict!

That’s what causes unease within society Wow, and here I thought it was the cissexist insanity that regularly gets trans* people stripped of their rights, persecuted, physically assaulted, and murdered!

thenewavengers, chalcosoma: Sit the fuck down. Shut the fuck up. Educate yourselves or GTFO.

YOU ARE IGNORANT OF US IN AN INDETERMINABLE AND UNQUANTIFIABLE WAY, SO WE WILL MAKE A POINT OF IGNORING OUR IGNORANCE OF WHAT IT MEANS TO BE NOT US, I.E. YOU. IN YOUR FACE YOU STUPID FUCKS HA LOL WE HAVE A MOVEMENT GOING.

Plus, you’re really asking me and Harry to educate ourselves?

As in

The two guys who read science journals as a hobby.

Really

You’re going to go for that

You really are

Okay

Okay

woah woah woah keep me out of this shit, I just said it was unrealistic for everybody to be able to explain their sexuality in a lucid way that avoids offending anyone

THAT IS ALL I SAID

Yes, and where I’m from we call that “missing the point”.  But thank you for the concern.

lol “WE READ SCIENCE JOURNALS FOR A HOBBY SO WE KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT EVERYTHING.”

Fucker, I read science journals for a hobby too and that doesn’t mean I have the right to go telling people they can’t label themselves. Science means shit when it comes to peoples’ identities. The fact that I read articles on the anthropogenic changes in the British botanical timeline means fucking nothing outside of that I can tell you when hazel trees were prominent in Yorkshire, and that’s got fuck-all to do with someone else’s identity as a trans*person or a queer person or whatever.

So sit down, shut the fuck up, and acknowledge the fact that you’re a cissexist doucheshit who really needs to learn where science is and isn’t appreciated.

Well said.  :)

Watching Cis People Explain How They Just Happen to Not Fancy Trans Bodies

chalcosoma:

thenewavengers:

sprackraptor:

tw: cissexism, trans* violence, murder

lucypaw:

thenewavengers:

chalcosoma:

lucypaw:

transreprojustice:

lucypaw:

is almost as fun as watching 50-something men explain how they just happen to be attracted to early 20-something women.

[TW for discussion of cissexist circular reasoning]

I once had a cis man claim that he was straight but just “happened” to not be “into” trans women. Cuz, ya’ know, attraction happens in a vacuum and isn’t influenced by our socialization or the cis-dominant exterminationist ideology. Not.at.all. *side eye*

Me: So you’re attracted to women but…not trans women?

Him: Yeah, I like women.

Me: Trans women are women.

Him: Well…my attraction is to vaginas. 

Me: *side eye* Well that’s kinda gross and reductionist. We usually don’t see people’s genitals when we first meet them. It’s not really part of our attraction to people per se, it’s more of a (cissexist) assumption. And some trans women do have vaginas. [Not that it should matter one fucking iota].

Him: I like vaginas, I can’t help it!

Me: So…you like all people with vaginas then? [Insinuating trans men or nonbinary trans* people like me].

Him: NO! I like women!

Me: Trans women are women.

Him: But, but, but…VAGINAS.

Me: So basically you like women… but only if they have vaginas that meet your “standards” for how they should look. And you like vaginas… but only when they’re attached to cis women. And both these qualities have to be occurring [naturally of course!] on one body simultaneously…

Him: Yes, exactly, I’m straight! What’s wrong with that??

Me: …

Yup, remind me again how this isn’t fucking cissexist? Cis people will contort themselves through any number of hoops with circular logic to reduce their viable dating pool down to just fellow cis people and then have the nerve to couch it as an innocent preference devoid of any prejudice.

This is almost exactly the same conversation I had with someone here on tumblr which is why I made this post.  *eyeroll*

What are people expected to say? Not many people need to have a pre-formulated explanation for their own sexuality that avoids possibly offending people… 

What the fuck is wrong with these people?

Why are they making words like “cis” and whatever

Stop naming things that make us different

That’s what causes unease within society

If you’re running round saying: “We’re different because this, this, this and this and this too!” You’re going to make unease and splinter people into groups.

You are doing nothing good.

And for the record, the guy could’ve just said: “I like women who are born as women with vaginas.”

Done. Now shut up.

LOL @ concern troll.  “You cause unease in society by pointing out our bullshit oppression of you.  Shut up!”  Glad you’re shutting up instead of continuing to show your ignorance and trying to force your bullshit on everyone.

What the fuck is wrong with these people? They’re cissexist douchenuts?

Why are they making words like “cis” and whatever Oh… you meant… well, what’s wrong here is that you’re a cissexist douchenut. Glad I could clear that up for you!

Stop naming things that make us different Because that’s not what words are for! Language should consist of only one word that applies to absolutely everything! Communication is for wusses. If everybody would just fit neatly into prepackaged and neatly labeled compartments, there wouldn’t ever be any conflict!

That’s what causes unease within society Wow, and here I thought it was the cissexist insanity that regularly gets trans* people stripped of their rights, persecuted, physically assaulted, and murdered!

thenewavengers, chalcosoma: Sit the fuck down. Shut the fuck up. Educate yourselves or GTFO.

YOU ARE IGNORANT OF US IN AN INDETERMINABLE AND UNQUANTIFIABLE WAY, SO WE WILL MAKE A POINT OF IGNORING OUR IGNORANCE OF WHAT IT MEANS TO BE NOT US, I.E. YOU. IN YOUR FACE YOU STUPID FUCKS HA LOL WE HAVE A MOVEMENT GOING.

Plus, you’re really asking me and Harry to educate ourselves?

As in

The two guys who read science journals as a hobby.

Really

You’re going to go for that

You really are

Okay

Okay

woah woah woah keep me out of this shit, I just said it was unrealistic for everybody to be able to explain their sexuality in a lucid way that avoids offending anyone

THAT IS ALL I SAID

Yes, and where I’m from we call that “missing the point”.  But thank you for the concern.

(via chalcosoma2)