Love Begins
Not today Justin
titsay
⁂
Kaledo Art
KIROKAZE
Game of Thrones Daily
d e v o n
RMH
No title available
Sweet Seals For You, Always
Misplaced Lens Cap
if i look back, i am lost
izzy's playlists!
ellievsbear
Mike Driver
wallacepolsom
No title available
DEAR READER
taylor price
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from Romania
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from North Macedonia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from North Macedonia
seen from United States
seen from North Macedonia
@canideformed
Canis -
22 • any pronouns
⬶ traumatised & nd deformed cane user
⬶ intertrans fag
⬶ wolfdog nonhuman
⬶ white, EN/ES
⬶ transfeminist socialist
Original posts are tagged #I’m barking
Reblogs with my additions are tagged #I’m woofing
Always open to good faith questions! Including advice on writing characters or anything else.
Sometimes my ability to type is reduced and I use other methods to write. Please be understanding of errors
Sorry haven’t been posting much. Been having a rough time
anyway. i remember a 'progressive' show i was watching had a trans female character who wasn't super prominent but was in more than one episode. this same show had an episode involving a mental hospital where one of the patients was a 'girl who's insane and thinks she's a man'.
so anyway if you think trans men don't need representation, you can go bite a brick
People calling me specifically a "theyfab" is really quite funny considering I explicitly don't use they/them and I have also never publicly stated or implied my AGAB.
People just assume I was assigned female because I talk about supporting transmascs & trans men having an important place in the queer community. Intracommunity discourse people assume anyone who disagrees with them has a vagina. Some of you really are not beating the transandrophobia & straight-up misogyny allegations. I'm not even transmasc, I just have, you know, compassion for my fellow queers?
No no but you see, it's not misogynistic becsuse they're doing it to men. It would only be misogyny if they did it to women /j
Seriously I think the way the word transfeminist has been appropriated by some of the most bigoted bioessentialist people ever is really sad. There are actual transfeminists, most of them are, actually, I am a transfeminist, it comes with the territory of being an intersex activist.
I sincerely am just at a loss that there is a small vocal minority of people who think transfeminism involves calling trans men 'pooners' and forcing sex assignments on intersex people.
good morning, all sexualities are trans inclusive. this includes nonbinary people. this includes bisexuality. this includes lesbians. this includes heterosexuality. if someone says they are not attracted to trans people or devalues your sexuality based on your attraction to trans people, they are just a transphobe.
Potentially hot take but I simply think that insisting that transmascs who disagree with you are secretly closeted, transtrending TERFs is misgendering.
What’s interesting is that people never really say this about transfems. Mostly what ends up happening is people accuse them of being secretly transmasc.
So like yeah, this stuff does kinda just feel like a roundabout way of misgendering people.
You can disagree with trans people without saying they’re probably really another gender.
It’s because anyone who is female criticizing primarily male attempts to dominate and subjugate is considered bad. Look at all the females considered TERFs just because we’re homosexuals who don’t think lesbians should have to include males into our sexuality, or simply uncomfortable with someone saying that porn and female suffering contributed to their transition and that they should be allowed to be in the same locker room as young girls…
1. That’s not homosexual that’s a genital preference. That’s also not what “males” means when you account for medical transition and that definition is transphobic and intersexist
2. Trans women and fems not only should be allowed to be in the same locker rooms as “young girls” but further belong there
3. You mean like how trans women and fems are considered bad for speaking out on transmisogyny? Like how cis men bar trans women from sports while ignoring all of the data that makes it clear that they don’t have some T “advantage” and that E suppresses T to levels even lower than for cis female athletes? Or how intersex women are barred from sports due to the natural variation of our bodies? Called men the second we have mildly high T levels—even as they tell trans men they’re weak women even after they’ve been on T for years? Or how transfems who stand up for trans men are accused of being transmasc MRAs pretending to be transfem?
Radical feminism is a disgusting fucking poison. This has nothing to do with “male subjugation” and everything to do with people purposefully weaponising the AGAB of a trans person against them by choosing the insults they know are going to hurt the most.
saw a transandrobro complaining that that calling them TERFs is “misgendering”.
which is kinda fascinating! i guess in some minds, TERF = woman who has bad ideas? woman who is transphobic? and not an ideology and movement of violent transmisogyny, sometimes rhetorically shielded by a thin layer of vaguely feminist/progressive-sounding language.
guys, i think your analysis might be just a little off if you think the reason transandrophobia theory is being associated with TERFism is that people are calling you women.
Although I disagree with you generally/We're on different parts of the discourse, I think i can provide some context.
While calling a transmasc a terf is not explicitly misgendering, but it carries similar vibes to calling a transfem a mra. Neither are explicit misgendering, there are plenty of female mras, and plenty of male terfs. But using those words specifically can be questionable, and SEEM like subtle misgendering even if its not.
Also want to add a bit more.
Often, people don’t stop at calling them TERFs. They go further and say they’re “TERFs trying to get make people detrans” or “TERFs weaponising being AFAB.” These statements, I’d argue, imply misgendering. The first implies that the person themselves doesn’t think trans people exist and is trying to detrans people, which then implies that they themselves do not actually see themselves as or identify as men. That is dysphoria-inducing. The second statement puts anybody talking about the ways in which they are vicitimised for having certain traits or experiences in the same box as people who thinks that’s what defines what womanhood is. When you call a trans man a TERF and say he’s somehow “weaponising” having been AFAB, you’re saying that he is “using” his AGAB to appeal to TERFs and identify with them. Which… again, feels like implicit misgendering, like they’re saying he somehow is okay being seen as a woman, when, in reality, most of these men are asking to be seen as men, just men who experience “woman-specific” issues—which, if anything, defeats the very roots of TERF ideology.
I’d also like to point out that very few transfems are accused of being TERFs. Transfems tend to get accused of being mras or of being transmascs pretending to be transfem. Or possibly fake claimed as “not really transfem males” or whatever.
The disparity between what people call transmascs vs. transfems who talk about transandrophobia is pretty clear. And when you realise that only transmascs get called TERFs… how does that not seem like implicit misgendering? We know anybody can be a TERF. But that doesn’t mean the people calling transmascs TERFs does.
Very few transfems get called terfs? Is that a joke? Is it your first day in the community?
No. And this is an extremely bad-faith response. It should have been clear from context that I was comparing the responses from the same group of people; i.e., that the people who call transmascs TERFs, for some reason, don’t tend to call transfems who support the same ideology TERFs.
The people who call trans women TERFs are bigots from the other extreme. That is, transmisogynistic transmascs, not transandrophobic transfems. Certain transfems get called TIRFs but that’s like. A different word. It’s still not great but like. You see how that’s a different conversation and how your response serves only to get annoyed at things I did not say, right?
saw a transandrobro complaining that that calling them TERFs is “misgendering”.
which is kinda fascinating! i guess in some minds, TERF = woman who has bad ideas? woman who is transphobic? and not an ideology and movement of violent transmisogyny, sometimes rhetorically shielded by a thin layer of vaguely feminist/progressive-sounding language.
guys, i think your analysis might be just a little off if you think the reason transandrophobia theory is being associated with TERFism is that people are calling you women.
Although I disagree with you generally/We're on different parts of the discourse, I think i can provide some context.
While calling a transmasc a terf is not explicitly misgendering, but it carries similar vibes to calling a transfem a mra. Neither are explicit misgendering, there are plenty of female mras, and plenty of male terfs. But using those words specifically can be questionable, and SEEM like subtle misgendering even if its not.
Also want to add a bit more.
Often, people don’t stop at calling them TERFs. They go further and say they’re “TERFs trying to get make people detrans” or “TERFs weaponising being AFAB.” These statements, I’d argue, imply misgendering. The first implies that the person themselves doesn’t think trans people exist and is trying to detrans people, which then implies that they themselves do not actually see themselves as or identify as men. That is dysphoria-inducing. The second statement puts anybody talking about the ways in which they are vicitimised for having certain traits or experiences in the same box as people who thinks that’s what defines what womanhood is. When you call a trans man a TERF and say he’s somehow “weaponising” having been AFAB, you’re saying that he is “using” his AGAB to appeal to TERFs and identify with them. Which… again, feels like implicit misgendering, like they’re saying he somehow is okay being seen as a woman, when, in reality, most of these men are asking to be seen as men, just men who experience “woman-specific” issues—which, if anything, defeats the very roots of TERF ideology.
I’d also like to point out that very few transfems are accused of being TERFs. Transfems tend to get accused of being mras or of being transmascs pretending to be transfem. Or possibly fake claimed as “not really transfem males” or whatever.
The disparity between what people call transmascs vs. transfems who talk about transandrophobia is pretty clear. And when you realise that only transmascs get called TERFs… how does that not seem like implicit misgendering? We know anybody can be a TERF. But that doesn’t mean the people calling transmascs TERFs does.
part of the reason i could never take being against intersex transfems who are "too female" seriously is just... people do this all the time? people insist that the multiply marginalised in their community aren't really "one of them" all the time, and i mean ALL THE TIME.
when it's intersex transfems they're not male enough or have easier transitions. when it's black transfems they're too manly and aggressive. when it's muslim transfems they're not really queer because all muslims are evil misogynists. when it's disabled transfems they're just not intelligent enough to make those decisions about their own bodies. when it's transfems from the global south they're homophobic savages and couldn't possibly know what a queer person is.
but conveniently it's the white, perisex, raised christian, abled, western trans people who NEVER have to prove that they deserve a place in the community. do you people think you're being subtle?
When you complain about trans mascs wanting to 'change' feminist vocabulary, because they are 'whiny mras' who can't handle not being the centre of attention...
You are a moron.
Literally, for the past 100s of years, trans men, have always been included in feminism, they were just never called 'men'. Don't believe me?
'abortion would be legal if men could get pregnant'
'men think their p-nises...'
'men don't understand what its like to have biologically stronger...'
'men don't want to (male sex specific thing)'
And you can think of 100 examples of this. Back when feminism started women was thought of as the sex, with gender not being viewed as separate to sex.
Obviously, we now have come to a new better understanding of gender. But this is not what caused trans men to protest the language being used.
Trans men understood, and know that we were included in feminist conversations, despite the misgendering, because women's rights (especially reproductive rights) were also our rights. Every law ever put in place to affect women, also affected us.
The only reason we are trying to widen language now is because of the rest of you! Because so many dumb ass people apparently don't understand this. Like yall genuinely believe trans men are forcing themselves into a space where we have been since the beginning.
And you say 'look at the words being used'. The words we accepted because fighting for our and women's rights was more important than the misgendering. And pretend that rather this being a sign of what trans men had to put up with, it is instead proof that we were not there.
So NOW because of YOU IDIOTS without any READING COMPREHENSION we are asking for change. This wouldn't have happened if you had bare bones knowledge of queer and feminist history.
Words change. The feminist community has always included trans men, and it still should.
Potentially hot take but I simply think that insisting that transmascs who disagree with you are secretly closeted, transtrending TERFs is misgendering.
What’s interesting is that people never really say this about transfems. Mostly what ends up happening is people accuse them of being secretly transmasc.
So like yeah, this stuff does kinda just feel like a roundabout way of misgendering people.
You can disagree with trans people without saying they’re probably really another gender.
Having a slow Sunday today ☺️
Intersex liberation fights for AGAB as a system of oppression to be abolished- nobody would be assigned a sex in a perfect word. (For the perisex person about to comment this is stupid: Sex traits would be taken into account in a medical context but there would be no such categorizations as male or female - which are just lists of individual sex traits)
So, if your definitions of transness as a perisex person are solely based on AGAB, that means you are basing an integral part of your identity on a system of intersexist subjugation that directly results in our culling (selective abortions & infanticide) and subsequent medical torture if we survive the culling.
Defining trans woman as "Woman who was AMAB" and trans man as "Man who was AFAB" and transgender generally as "person who does not identify with their AGAB" is intersexist and it will always be intersexist. How on earth would these people define transness in a world post intersex liberation where nobody has an AGAB? The answer is, they don't want that world to happen. They believe in improving oppressive social structures juuuussst enough for sex variant perisex people to live comfortably within it, but not us. Not those of indeterminate sex.
I'm fucking done with giving grace to perisex devils (cis & trans) whose sense of self relies on my extermination.
I agree 100% and I wish more perisex people listened to us on this topic.
This. And perisex people absolutely refuse to listen to us. I’ve had people explicitly ask for intersex people to tell them if they’ve said anything wrong, and when I’ve very gently reminded them that saying transness is based on AGAB only is intersexist, I’ve had my comments deleted and been blocked.
I’ve also posted a post completely unrelated to whether being trans should be based on AGAB, literally the entire post was just about abolishing the sex binary, and had perisex trans people call me transphobic and transmisogynistic. Because they saw an intersex person say “we should abolish the sex binary.” Like it’s literally the same thing as transphobes calling trans people sexist for wanting to abolish the gender binary!
IMO, the only sensible position vis a vis strictly single-gender and/or single-sex spaces, especially in the context of possible abuse, is to be anti-segregation and pro-bodily-autonomy.
Like it’s one thing to have a space that’s mainly targeted towards/meant for one group of people. Spaces built for women shouldn’t be made to cater to men. But. You just can’t have a “single-gender” or “single-sex” space without leaving some people in the dust. Even if we assume that we lived in a perfect world where nobody would need access to a “single-gender” or “single-sex” space they’re not technically a part of (i.e. an intersex female needing prostate care at a “male” health clinic, a trans man needing support from a “women’s” support group because he needs help coping with getting an abortion, etc.), that fucks over a lot of genderqueer and intersex people.
I’m a wo/man. Am I allowed in a “women’s” single-gender space? If I am, then there is also a man in that space. If I’m not, then that space is excluding women like me who very well might benefit from it and contribute to the community in positive ways. I’m intersex, I was born with a vagina and a micropenis and I don’t produce normal hormone levels on my own. Even though some intersex people may see themselves as intersex and female or intersex and male, many of us don’t and/or can’t truly be categorised as one or the other. What “single-sex” space do we fit into?
“Single-gender” and “single-sex” spaces also allow bigots extra opportunities to exclude vulnerable minorities. How many trans women haven’t had access to important resources because they’re “single-sex?” Or genderqueer transfems like myself who have been left behind by “single-gender” resources because we’re not strictly/only/fully women? It’s not like there are resources for specifically demigirls or wo/men. Where are we supposed to go when we need support?
Strictly single-gender and single-sex spaces that actively try to exclude anybody who isn’t the targeted gender and/or sex will always end up harming people by excluding them.
On top of that, keeping a space exclusively “single-gender” or “single-sex” doesn’t actually guarantee safety, and assuming it will only allows assholes the cover to harass and/or assault people. How many people, especially queer people, were sexually harassed and/or assaulted in “single-gender” or “single-sex” spaces? It’s not any more okay for a girl to laugh at another girl and hide her bra while she’s in the bathroom than it is for a guy to do so. It’s not okay for a guy to stare at another guy’s breast growth and snicker just because it’s happening in a men’s locker room. But I’ve heard so many stories like that from fellow queer, neurodivergent, or fat people, or people of colour, or pretty much anybody who isn’t gender-conforming, white, allocishet, neurotypical, etc.
Being actively against and ready to call out instances of abuse and harassment will always be more effective than just trying to police what “type” of person can access support.
found this today
Please use these terms correctly. Not doing so will deeply harm the people who actually have experienced trauma, gaslighting, triggers, and people who have NPD.
This needs to be shared wide and far. I’m so sick of people misusing these terms. Especially to draw and false sympathy to themselves.
Because of how often these words and misused, I didn’t realise that my abusive ex and ex friends gaslit me and that’s why I feel like I can’t trust myself or reality as I thought I knew it anymore.
I also didn’t realise that I was being triggered when I’d see anything related to them: mentioned on social media, walking past their neighbourhood, going to a place we had hung out at… and my heart rate would shoot up and I’d freeze and lose control over my actions, which would be completely based on instinctually trying to protect myself and not actually thinking the situation through.
Or that I was traumatised.
When you dilute the meanings of these terms, you steal the language abuse victims and mentally ill people need to be able to talk about themselves, their experiences, and their symptoms.
https://archive.org/details/DontBeaS1947
Here’s the whole video. It’s called “Don’t Be A Sucker” and it’s 17 minutes long.
don’t just scroll past this actually watch it, it’s only 2 minutes long. If you re-recorded this today word for word with modern actors and places, it wouldn’t even look out of place as a PSA
300,000 notes and i can’t find a transcript
Transcript: (sorry for the language!)
Speaker: “I see negroes holding jobs that belong to me! And you! I’ll ask you, if we allow this thing to go on, what’s gonna become of us real Americans!”
Hungarian man with clear foreign accent: “I’ve heard this kind of talk before, but I never expected to hear it in America.”
Young man: “This man seems to know what he’s talking about.“
Speaker: “What are us real Americans gonna do about it? You’ll find it right here in this little pamphlet—the truth about negroes and foreigners! The truth about the Catholic Church! You’ll find…” [audio grows quieter as camera shifts to the onlookers]
Hungarian man: “You believe in that kind of talk?“
Young man: “I dunno, it makes pretty good sense to me.“
Speaker: “And I tell you, friends, we’ll never be able to call this country our own until it’s a country without… without what?“
Other man: “Yeah? Without what?“
Speaker: “Without negroes, without alien foreigners,”—the young man is nodding, following along—“without Catholics, without Freemasons! You know these…“
Young man: “What’s wrong with the Masons, I’m a Mason.” Looks to European man worriedly, “hey, that fellow’s talking about me!“
Huungarian man: “And that makes a difference, doesn’t it.“
Speaker: “These are your enemies! These are the people who are trying to take over our country! Now you know them, you know what they stand for. And it’s up to you and me to fight them!” A bunch of the onlookers in the vicinity wave him off like he’s crazy and turn away, “fight them and destroy them before they destroy us!”
Speaker: “Thank you.“
One man in the now somewhat awkward crowd: “claps“
Young man: *is visibly uncomfortable*
Hungarian man: “Before he said Mason, you were ready to agree with him.”
Young man: “Well yes but, he was talking about… what about those other people?“ *the pair sit down on a park bench*
Hungarian man: “In this country, we have no ‘other people.’ We are American people, of course.“
Young man: “What about you? You aren’t American, are you?“
Hungarian man: “I was born in Hungary. But now, I am an American citizen. And I have seen what this kind of talk can do. I saw it in Berlin.”
Young man: “What were you doing there?“
Hungarian man: “I was a professor at the university. I heard the same words we have heard today. But I was a fool, then. I thought Nazis were crazy people, stupid fanatics. But unfortunately it was not so. You see, they knew that they were not strong enough to conquer a unified country, so they split Germany into small groups. They used prejudice as a practical weapon to cripple the nation.”
A film created for folks in case Martin Niemöller was too subtle.
“They used prejudice as a practical weapon to split the people.”
In this country, we have no ‘other people’.
90% of Denmark’s Jews survived the Holocaust, because starting at the top, Denmark’s government and prominent citizens and all the way down emphasized this.
And all this was openly supported by King Christian. He did not, contrary to popular myth, ride his horse through Copenhagen wearing the Star of David, but he did make it clear, as he wrote in his diary, that he considered “our own Jews to be Danish citizens, and the Germans could not touch them”.
Denmark had, in essence, inoculated itself against Nazi propaganda because its citizens believed that Jews were not “other people.” As Bo Lidegard writes in Countrymen:
The Danish exception shows that the mobilisation of civil society’s humanism and protective engagement is not only a theoretical possibility: It can be done. We know because it happened.
Being a Jewish Dane or a Danish Jew might have made you a little different, but it didn’t make you other people.
Unlike Niemoller, they didn’t have to see atrocities visited on a series of Other People and only start caring when it happened to themselves. They understood it as happening to themselves from the start. Because their Jewish neighbors weren’t Other People.
As Denmark’s Jewish population sprang into panicked action, so did its Gentiles. Hundreds of people spontaneously began to tell Jews about the upcoming action and help them go into hiding. It was, in the words of historian Leni Yahil, “a living wall raised by the Danish people in the course of one night.”
Many of them didn’t even see it as “resistance work” on behalf of the Jews because it was simply fighting back against an attack on their own community.
Though there was anti-Semitism in Denmark before and after the Holocaust, the Nazis’ war on Jews was largely viewed as a war against Denmark itself. After the war, most Danes refused to take credit for their resistance work, which many had conducted under false names. Ordinary people who never considered themselves part of the Danish Resistance passed along messages, gathered food, gave hiding places or guarded the possessions of those who left until they returned home from the war.
Communities in which there are no Other People save lives.
Also side note that you to the transcriber for not censoring words. I know certain language can be hard to read and even harder to write, but it’s important that disabled people be fully included. And, when you censor words, even bad ones or offensive ones, you’re implicitly excluding disabled people who need the transcript from a full understanding/experience of what is being transcribed.
