There's this common conception of gender I see: man and woman are often positioned as 'opposites' on a sliding scale and gender as a gradient, and any kind of transition as transitioning 'away' from one end of the scale and 'toward' the other, with 'transfeminine' people being anybody transitioning 'away' from masculinity (which is inherently toward femininity), and 'transmasculine' people being anybody transitioning 'away' from femininity (which is inherently toward masculinity).
This is an inherently exorsexist and intersexist worldview, in my opinion.
Bigender people are almost always forced to 'pick' which gender they are 'more', or have it automatically assigned for them. Their pronouns may be conditionally respected, but people get very uncomfortable, when a bigender person challenges the concept of man and woman as opposite. Constantly, you see "male spaces" and "female spaces", discourse about which labels are for men (and therefore not for women) or vice versa, and other similar conversations, inherently leave out men who are women, and women who are men. Bigender people are ignored, or spoken over, or pushed to 'pick' a gender so they can be neatly categorized, because man and woman are conceived as two opposite mutually exclusive ends of a spectrum that cannot intersect.
Agender/genderless/transneutral people are similarly erased or forced to pick sides, often sorted into a box either based on what people assume they're 'closer' to based on their physical traits (and i hope i dont need to stress how dysphoria inducing that can be) or told they're transfem/transmasc regardless because, well, "You're still transitioning away/toward something", because people conceptualize agender/genderless individuals as being not truly genderless at all, but as being merely at the center of the man to woman spectrum.
Then there are perisex nonbinary people who identify closely with their agab, perisex nonbinary women/fems afab and perisex nonbinary men amab. Gender essentialists either try to cut these people out of trans identity entirely, fakeclaiming them, insisting they're basically cisgender, engaging in intense transmedicalist rhetoric dressed up in a slightly more 'acceptable' font now that transmedicalism is somewhat less accepted in the community..or they insist that, despite many not being at all masculine, perisex nonbinary people afab are all transmasc, and vice versa.
I consider all of these things to be misgendering! Forcing any nonbinary person toward any binary or gendered term they do not identify with is misgendering! And it's done constantly by other trans people who would rather be openly and violently exorsexist than rethink their gender essentialist simplistic reductive sliding scale framework for how extremely complex societal structures and personal identities work.
And, as with any genderessentialist/bioessentialist worldview, this type of rhetoric is also incredibly unsafe for intersex people, who, despite what perisex trans people (and the occasional intersexist intersex person they tokenize) like to insist when they scream over us in these discussions, have a much more complicated relationship with agab and sig than perisex people do, and therefore are also frequently hurt and erased by any model that tries to pose things like man/woman, masculine/feminine, androgenized/estrogenized, amab/afab, etc, as opposite and mutually exclusive. "Intersex people are still [insert agab] despite their 'disorders' and therefore fit into my model the same way any [agab] perisex person would!" is a worldview that will always always be intersexist and extremely harmful.
ellievsbear
gracieabrams
kianamaiart
tangentwithtanner
origamiaround
