having a condition does not inherently make you an expert in that condition, it only makes you an expert in your own experiences with it
if you use "i literally have this condition" to shut down people arguing with you when *you* are making assumptions about *people who are not you* regarding that condition, i'm exploding your fucking brain in your skull
me wearily staring at the literature showing endometriosis has been found in men and fetuses and is likely a genetic condition linked to developing tissues in utero that Everyone Has, and then the fucking reddits full of pericis women with endometriosis going "it's a Woman's disease it only affects Women it's because [insert janky theory about backwashed menstrual tissue here which has been discredited multiple times by experts]"
also the thing about "we need to focus on the people most vulnerable, and transmascs may be vulnerable but not more than trans women!" is that it doesn't consider transmasc erasure as an active force.
its a take from the perspective that trans men are "vulnerable" is some vague abstract generalized way, not in a way which would behoove anyone to adjust their behavior or take action on their behalf. its the erasure of erasure; the assumption is that trans men probably have enough resources and support anyways, which could not be farther from the truth. some local communities may have more transmasc-focused resources, but many others do not. transmasculine people are left out of vital conversations, are excluded from vital resources, are ignored and forgotten when they are abused and killed.
it treats transmasc erasure as something which is passive in itself and which can be solved passively. which is erasure itself in action. i do not really give a fuck about "who has it worse," it is not about that. it is about the fact that if YOU do not make an ACTIVE EFFORT to advocate for transmascs, to make transmasc suffering and oppression visible and legible, it will not happen. it simply will not happen.
erasure is an active force. we all internalize transmasculine erasure and we can all easily contribute to it; we are expected to contribute to it. trans men&mascs cannot afford the model of "well we only need to raise awareness for the most vulnerable" because our vulnerability is defined by being ignored.
this is why unlearning anti transmasculinity has to start from (un)learning erasure. once you start to see it as an active force/tool of the patriarchy you realize it is the lynchpin that holds so much (especially intercommunity) anti-transmasculinity together. transmaculine absence is so normalized people experience our presence as an intrusion, and people genuinely do not understand why we would ever need to be more visible than we are. it is fucking everywhere.
like idk i remember reading about a trans man in India who, after he came out to his family, was literally locked in a room in their house. just shut up in a basement somewhere, out of sight and out of mind, until he managed to escape (and even then, there's also a trans man in India whose parents sent the police to track him down and kidnap him from a shelter meant specifically for trans people).
or trans men like Sophie Lederer, who was only 19 when he was arrested for "talking silly and claiming to be a boy" in the early 20th century, and the only other thing I know about him is that he spent the rest of his life, over a decade, institutionalized for his transmasculinity. god only fucking knows what was done to him in those years by his wardens.
that is the image of transmasculine erasure. it is boys and men locked in closets and basements and prison cells disguised as hospital rooms for years until they are dead and buried as women. if they even get a headstone at all. it is dead-eyed mothers with three children who have no income or job experience and are married to a cis man ten years older than them who they know would kill them, and possibly their children, if they even mentioned being trans. if you think of transmasc erasure or "invisibility" and imagine a white cis-passing guy working stealth at his office job, congrats! transmasculine erasure is already living like a fungus in your mind. i am trying to make you feel the horror the patriarchy has trained you out of feeling about the state of transmasculine oppression.
if you've followed me for any length of time you've likely already seen this quote, but i wanna talk about it in this context again:
"Unless they present hyperfeminine, butches don’t have access to the job market. You will not be considered if you don’t wear nice women’s clothes. If you set up catering, you will get told, “I am disgusted; a woman who thinks she’s a man is cooking for me.” So butch lesbians normally have an assistant, or their femme partner if they have one, who is more feminine-looking to run the front so customers don’t know a masculine-presenting person is cooking behind the curtains. Many of us become sex workers [due to lack of job opportunities].… But then when police raid brothels and homes, the masculine lesbians get treated “like men.” This means more forceful handcuffing, kneeling, and stripping their shirts off." – Rosa, lesbian and sex worker rights defender El Salvador
i was thinking about this when it comes to how we describe vulnerability in our community, specifically mentioning someone is a "femme" to indicate their need for extra support. i don't know i've ever seen the same be done for butches. i genuinely cannot remember ever really seeing people talk about butches and their economic and social vulnerability, the way i see people talk about femmes.
its not that being feminine doesn't cause genuine vulnerability! but because people have such a binary attitude towards gender (and more broadly), the way we talk about gendered vulnerability leads to this view that feminine people are always more vulnerable than masculine people, that "this femme needs help" to many queers and feminists feels more urgent than "this butch needs help."
the erasure of anti-transmasculinity is so pervasive and harmful and the erasure itself is then erased. and the thing is, the nature of benevolent sexism has always made it that femininity (mediated by race and class and social belonging, amongst other things, Its More Complicated Than That) is seen as inherently vulnerable. people seen as masculine lesbians are "treated like men" in the sense of being treated harsher with more physical violence, while still being subjected to sexual violence out of both misogyny and queerphobia, and also being economically vulnerable because of the disgust aimed at people perceived as masculine women. and who talks about it? not the people who refuse to understand gender oppression through anything other than a binary lens (while pretending that's not what they are doing).
honestly i think on a broader level, we have been seeing the erosion of genuine queer/trans theory for a while in favor of this idea that queerphobia is reducible down to misogyny. & i do think all queerphobia does innately involve misogyny. but i feel there's been this growing aversion to attributing anything to a hostility to gender non-conformity/genderqueerness itself, in favor of attributing it to a hatred of femininity. there is no true analysis of transphobia or misandrogyny as their own forces, its just a side effect of the hatred of femininity.
this is where we get the constant refrain of "the patriarchy likes masculinity, so masculine people are always seen as better than feminine people" & why people may find it incomprehensible that there may be situations where being feminine may be a protective factor in comparison to being masculine.
another example of this from this article:
The trio made their way down a busy street in the Santiago suburb of Pudahuel, close to where Carolina lived with her mother and father. Carolina and Estefania chose not to hold hands to avoid offending anyone.
Suddenly, Carolina felt a force to the back of her head. Then darkness. She had fallen unconscious, and would remain in a coma for a week.
She suffered a fractured skull, a broken nose, internal bleeding and permanent damage to her hearing. There were two male attackers. One had used a large wooden pole to hit her repeatedly on the back of her head, only stopping when Estefania threw herself on top of Carolina, using her body as a shield.
This is significant, says Carolina's mother, Mariela. Because unlike Carolina, who identifies as a camiona and dresses accordingly, Estefania is femme - a more feminine lesbian identity. The attackers targeted Carolina and not Estefania, says Mariela, because she represented an "unacceptable" face of womanhood. It was not just her sexual orientation that prompted violence, it was her appearance as a camiona.
"I want to make it very clear they were trying to kill her," she adds. "There is no other way of looking at it. The fact that she is here is a miracle."
Carolina knew one of her alleged attackers.
"Before this attack he threatened me. He said, 'I am going to kill you.' He said he was going to shoot me with a gun. He called me a lesbian and swore at me. He said, 'Why do you dress like a man?'"
there are people who have been nearly (or successfully) violently murdered for being seen as a masculine woman, while their femme girlfriends were not targeted or were not the main target. but if you reduce everything in patriarchy down to "m > f" you will miss this. and
even in this article, the discussion of violence focuses on lesbianism and misogyny - which, while clearly central to the violence, one has to wonder what becomes of transmasculine individuals who are targeted by this same transphobic lesbophobia, the same transphobic misogyny, whose experiences with violence cannot be made legible through the same narratives as those who identify as women? who cannot appeal to the terms "femicide" and traditional feminist narratives as easily?
I don't know who needs to hear this but you need to stop dehumanising people even if those people are "abusers" or "creeps" because you need to understand that you are not immune to doing something equally as bad
Abusers and creeps are not some species of especially heinous animal or alien or monster wearing the face of a human. They're people. And you NEED to drill it into your head that they are people because you NEED to remember that people are capable of doingn heinous shit. And you are a person. And your loved ones are people.
By emotionally classifying people who have done heinous things as subhuman filth incapable of thinking and feeling and acting just like you and me, and by using that emotional dehumanization as a reason to deny those people any compassion or support on a systemic level, you risk becoming blind to abuse/violence perpetrated by someone close to you or even yourself. Because if "abusers don't deserve rights", then you won't ever want to admit or accept that you or a loved one is perpetrating abuse, and that makes stopping the abuse or preventing further abuse much harder. This is how you end up excuaing abusive behaviour on the grounds that, since you don't see someone as a disgusting subhuman pile of garbage therefore they can't possibly be An Abuser, Trademark
And here'a the even harder pill to swallow: since the world isn't split into "abusers" and "good people", in the same way you or someone you love can inflict abuse/violence on others, the people who HAVE inflicted abuse/violence on others can, in fact, change and become better people
There is no bottomless chasm of moral uncleanliness that someone can run off and fall into and get stuck in forever. People can do better. Yes, even those people. You HAVE to accept this. Otherwise not only is there no motivation for anyone to try and do better (which is when people become stuck in a cycle of violence and abuse they don't want to escape), but your idea of a perfect justice system doesn't look any different from Literal Christian Hell. And I HOPE you understand that Literal Christian Hell is, to put it very lightly, not a good justice system.
The mythical disabled person who is so disabled that everyone consistently supports and accommodates them without question is a straw man which only exists as a hypothetical for the political purpose of denying real disabled people care while still being able to argue that said care would be accessible to disabled people who "actually deserves it"
Okay, since somebody asked, I think it's important that I post just explaining the issues with TMA and TME.
TMA is a term meaning Transmisogyny Affected. TME is Transmisogyny Exempt.
In its usage, anybody that is not transfem is considered TME; in more extreme cases, anybody that is not a trans woman might be considered TME. I've gotten the sense that I'm getting pretty close to the transandrophobes declaring me TME, as the term is very inconsistent.
Here's the elephant in the room, TME is a slur; it is a new slur, and I've not seen anybody really label it as such yet, so I'm taking some responsibility for making that call and getting the word out.
TME is not used as a helpful, educational, empowering, or even consistent label. What it is used for is solely to attack transmasc and nonbinary people. It exists to silence them, to other them; that is its purpose.
TME is also built upon a falsehood; the truth of the matter is that no trans person, not a single one, is exempt from transmisogyny. We are all affected. People using TME as a term like to claim otherwise, as a means of centering themselves, but the claim is completely unsubstantiated and borders on self delusion.
Knowing this, I believe we need to recognize TMA and TME for what they are, unacceptable terms with no valid usecase, which exist solely to cause harm to our community.
Edit: Also feel free to use the tag or reblog or make your own posts about it; I just want to see this term die, so gotta get the word out about what it really is.
I think its been an ongoing issue for a lot of (especially queer) discourse for a very long time where people want to block people "not like them" from using their "resources" and terminology. And its done through the use of terms like tme/tma, before it afab/amab, ace discourse, rad feminism, it happens a lot. It is probably an over correction/trauma response from ALL queer voices and topics being historically silenced and/or medicalized, thus taken out of our hands and communities. At least from what people say when pushed back on this is what it seems like. The idea of "cant we just have one thing for ourselves!!" Said "thing" often being something thats historically been shared by a wider community, or someone trying to relate and compare their, different but still similar, experiences (a thing that people do to build community). I do try to be sympathetic to the emotions behind it because the machine of society grinds us into abrasive dust used to keep the grinding going.
The less sympathetic explanation that has come to mind for me is that its an attempt to copy the kind of closed spaces that racialized minorities sometimes build for their own discussions. As well as an attempt to map the "cultural appropriation" discourse onto separate areas of the queer comminity. (It also inevitably reminds me of the terf refrain of "we need women only spaces!!!") But being queer is not the same thing as being a racialized minority. (Obviously, there are people who are both but thats not really what im talking about, these discussions in the context of race are very valuble, but its not something I think my opinion on needs to be said) there are historical and tangible differences that make the idea of queer people "appropriating" or taking resources from each other kinda... like. They would take the "resource" if they didnt need it? Isnt worse that these resources, if they are truely finite, are being kept from Anyone?? Why would they participate in the discussion if it wasnt relivent to them in some kind of way? I dont really know the best way to word what i mean.
But I really dont think either of those concepts are useful to use just within the context of being queer. (Black queer culture being adopted and appropriated by the wider world is not what im talking about, the racialized aspect gives that a very different dimension is what im trying to get at.) And at worse serve to activly divide and harm us.
As pointed out, no trans person is exempt, many cis people queer or otherwise are not "excempt." People can say its misatributed transmisogyny, but whats actually gained making that distinction? Is it enough to justify the restrictions that must be maintained to make it? If the misfire happens so often it might be that the shooter IS actually also aiming the gun at your neighbor, that their goal is fear and control of everyone. We have far far more in common than any of us realize, and it feels deeply myopic when people declare something is exclusively "for" any part of the queer umbrella, when an experience can ONLY be had or understood by some at the exclusion of the rest. The functional "rest" often being the very underserved folks who aren't able to comfortably "fit" the deffinitions that must remain ridged, so as to serve their function of division and exclusion. Folks who would be murdering their "self" if they did. Folks who already have to suffocate their "self" to interact with the larger world. It sucks extra shit to see it in a community that should have a deeper understanding of that, but that Art Speigleman quote comes to mind, that suffering doesnt make you better, it just makes you suffer.
Its easy and tempting to blame internal exclusionist, people prioritizing division for what ever purpose, as "outside agents" secret 4channers or what ever, psyops to divide us further to make us easy to control. (not saying op was saying that its just a sentiment i do see around and also Im trying to curb the anarchist tendancy i personally have to assume everything is a government plot to quash revolution even tho the government does do that all the time) Maybe there are people like that, spooks etc. But also i dont think we get anywhere focusing in on that. I actually think a wider point im trying to get at is the intentions or "reasons" for doing something are secondary to the results. (The purpose of a system is what it does and all that) so we should think about our systems, the ones "outside" the community, and the ones we build, in our own communities and inside ourselves. Immovable deffinitions, restrictions, are you building a framework to talk about the abuse that you've suffered or are you building a cage to keep your pain sacred?
!!!General disclaimer and clarifications!!!
I think Both transmisogyny, transandrophobia, and the ideas and experiences discussed in context to them are useful and good to have! I think the deffinitions of those concepts are not so ridged, and there is much functional overlap with both concepts, as well as a need for furthur discussion and context provided by talking about exorsexisim and intersexisim. How people wanna draw the lines is kinda beyond the scope of my talking here. Its beyond the scope of one person if you want to get a functional framework imo.
I am talking about tme/tma terms, asab terms too. If people feel like they really wanna lable themselves as such I do think thats their perogative (but i personally do tend to just stop reading if i see that they have -_- or it changes the context of what they are saying for me.)
!!Disclaimer #2!!
We all have much more to be concerned with from the "external" forces of colonial capitalistic hierarches trying to maintain their stranglehold on the world. However much I do think "internal" discourse can be a trap because it feels much more "achivable" to "win", I do still think its important! So that we dont end up reproducing, in whole or in part, the systems that keep mashing our souls to paste!
!!!Disclaimer #3!!!
I am dyslexic and my phone has adopted some of my wrong spellings as real life. If you need clarification because of a misspelling or weird word just ask. And try not to be a dick about it.
The gender realism that is populating transfeminist discourse right now is a huge, flashing "danger" sign and if you don't see the red flashing emergency lights you are either inexperienced in trans discourse, naive, or part of the problem.
It's really interesting the way this gender realism is manifesting though, because it's trying really hard to manifest through social sciences this time as opposed to the medical sciences of yesteryear. Like, not to be all "back in my day", but back in my day when I was a deeply insecure and uncertain trans teenager facing the first Trump admin, the way we tried to argue that trans men are just like any other man and trans women were just like any other woman was with brain scans, studies on the success rates of medical transitional care, and DSM definitions of gender dysphoria.
Of course we read studies wrong. Of course many brain sex studies have since been debunked because their sample sizes were small and skewed and it has since come out that the human brain is not all that sexually dimorphic in general. Of course we only focused on the transition success rates of binary gender conforming trans people, nonbinary people didn't matter. Of course we loved the DSM, we didn't care about the potential threats of medicalization like eugenics as long as it gave us our HRT. Of course we went out of our way to bully and name call and harass other trans people who disagreed with us, none of us wanted those nondysphoric theyfab transtrender tucutes to steal our precious precious undefined ~medical resources~ from us, the real transsexual victims of society.
Now I'm seeing a bunch of insecure and uncertain trans people facing the second Trump admin arguing that trans men are men just like any other man and trans women are women just like any other woman - actually - are the most women to ever women ever - with passing privilege discourse, studies on income rates in the trans community, and sociological / political concepts like intersectionality and materialism.
And it's just kind of like. Of course you're reading studies wrong. Of course passing privilege discourse is old and has been hashed and rehashed 80 different ways to Sunday over the last several decades and it's been bullshit every single time. Of course many surveys on income only reach certain demographics of trans people with higher income stability, who have more time to fill a nonessential survey, who aren't worried about sharing their information, who feel safe outing themselves even privately, who have other potential privileges like whiteness that also plays a huge part in their income, etc. Of course concepts like intersectionality and materialism are being misunderstood by people who have only just been introduced to those concepts in the last 3 or less years, have only engaged with those concepts online, and haven't actually read a book on the subjects once. Of course people are going out of their way to bully and name call and harass other trans people who disagree with them, they don't want those nonpassing lying transandro bro theyfab birthday boys to steal their precious precious undefined ~feminist resources~ from them, the real transsexual victims of society.
It's fascinating watching the same regurgitated talking points that came alongside this discourse resurface too, like "If someone calls it ~queer art~ it's probably bad and transphobic" (typically in reference to RHPS and other adjacent media) and "Queer is a slur" and really anything that deeply hates a more unified idea of queer identity in general. It's all shit that I used to parrot back in the day with a fresh coat of new gender realist paint. People who want to convince you you're just like a cis person are going to do whatever they can to cut you off from and target you against any sense of queer cultural identity. It's built on the false logic that if you find yourself aligning with queer culture, queer identity, then the cishets aren't going to accept you as normal, as one of them, as safe. Because obviously the path to safety as a trans person is trying to break our backs proving to cis people that we're just like them and we deserve safety because we're just like them, and not with our own broader queer community who has been fighting for unconditional acceptance for us all for decades.
It's the same shit. It's bullshit. It was bullshit when we did it 10 years ago and it's still bullshit now. Appealing to cis authority won't get you anywhere good as a trans person. I know because I tried and I ended up isolated and bitter and I actively hurt every trans person that stayed in my life during that time.
But it can get better! It really can! It did for me, it did for a lot of people I knew back in my transmed days, and it can for you too. But you have to realize your reactionary politics are the result of your fear and insecurity and put in a lot of internal work to improve your own sense of self as a trans person. And that's hard. But it's worth it.
It's the same shit. It's bullshit. It was bullshit when we did it 10 years ago and it's still bullshit now.
I'd like everyone to read the short essay "Gender, Identity Politics, and Eating Our Own" by Alexander John Goodrum, published in 2001:
I come late to organizing as a transgender activist. In doing so, I’ve learned a lot. I’ve learned transgendered people truly are everywhere and not just in New York, San Francisco and Washington D.C. I’ve learned many want to quietly assimilate into the white, heterosexual, middle class status quo that is the dominant culture of our nation. I’ve learned quite a few of us have no wish or desire for such assimilation — that for some of us, our greatest desire is to shake up that dominant culture, to question gender and identity on every level — social, biological, political and personal. I’ve learned that perhaps right at this moment there is a transgendered person — most likely an MTF transsexual or crossdresser, most likely a person of color, being brutally murdered. I’ve learned people much younger than I are coming out as transgendered in ways I never believed possible when I was their age and are challenging not only the status quo, but also calling on “old” activists like me to take another look around and see the world through their eyes.
And I’ve learned that, perhaps like all other communities, we love to eat our own. [...]
Being the baby TG activist I am, I come to this drama late. Long after the battle lines were laid down. Long after sides were chosen, opinions formed and set in stone. Long after wounds (both real and imagined) were inflicted.
I’ve watched carefully for the past couple of years as the battle has played out online, in internet chat rooms, and on mailing lists. I’ve read statements from individuals and organizations that have taken a stand on the issue. I’ve received press releases and announcements from one camp or another; a battle of media propaganda that would make the veterans of the Cold War proud. And through it all, I’ve tried to be a rather casual observer, if one can be casual as they watch some of the best and brightest of their community consumed in an internal battle that threatens to tear the entire community apart.
Of course my being a casual observer hasn’t stopped a few folks from demanding to know where I stand. I’ve been pulled aside at conferences and been given “information,” primarily innuendo and accusation, so I am up to speed on the situation. I’ve been directed to websites that were little more than character assassinations in badly laid-out HTML. And I’ve been emailed privately and off-list by those concerned I was going to make the “wrong choice.”
Want to know what my answer to these people is? Okay, here it is — I really don’t care. That’s right. I DON’T CARE. You see, I believe almost everyone entangled in this controversy is acting in what they believe are the best interests of the community with which they feel most closely aligned. I believe they’re doing the best they can with what they have. I believe mistakes have been made by everyone involved, that the personal has become political in the most destructive of ways. I also believe in change and evolution; that even organizations that have had to be forced to listen to me and to consider my issues can learn from their mistakes and realize they must make a seat for me at the table if they are to truly realize the dream of civil rights for themselves and for others. But most of all, I believe in hope.
I was asked point-blank whose side I was on. This is my answer: I am on the side of whoever has the guts and initiative to end this thing and make a real effort to move our community forward out of this debilitating and destructive conflict. I’m on the side of anyone who is more interested in healing the wounds than in proving who is right. I’m on the side of those who have the ability and the willingness to put aside their personal and political animosities and seek some way to bring together everyone involved to begin a healthy dialogue, one without finger-pointing and name-calling.
Until that happens, I guess I’m on the side of those who are the most negatively affected by this dysfunctional family feud. In case anyone needs a refresher course as to who those folks are and the issues they are dealing with, allow me to introduce just a few of them. The transsexual FTM who has lost custody of his child when he began transition; the butch lesbian who lost her job because she refused to wear makeup or shave her legs; the crossdresser whose wife is seeking a divorce and custody of the children he adores; the effeminate gay man beaten to death and crucified on a fence on a lonely Midwestern plain; the 17-year-old MTF doing tricks in the back alleys of San Francisco because her parents kicked her out when they found “him” wearing dresses; the FTM who died of uterine cancer because he couldn’t get insurance approval for a hysterectomy after he had completed sexual reassignment.
Ultimately, it is these transgender, transsexual and gender- variant people who have the most to lose if someone doesn’t step up to the plate to end this.
Goodrum was a trans activist who founded TGNet Arizona, a vital advocacy organization in Arizona, as well as being on the City of Tucson Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Commission. He was a Black trans man, bisexual, disabled, low-income, and he died by suicide a year after this essay was published.
For those of who you know about the recent loss of Ansel @transfaguette, I'm sure the similarities are as harrowing to you as they are to me.
Nothing will change unless we change ourselves. Queer discourse is often myopic and becomes self-perpetuating, but treating it as immaterial or something to be brushed off as irrelevant, in my opinion, only obscures how deeply rooted and harmful it is. Clearly, these issues are not the product of social media or the pandemic or sheltered teenagers or whatever excuse one wants to make. We keep fucking doing this. We will keep doing this until demand a change, a love ethic (in bell hooks' terms) that puts us on the path to join each other, and other communities, in fighting for true liberation.
1) do this even if you're under 40. seriously. I definitely should have been doing something like this for years and I only turned 40 a month and a half ago
2) if you're like me just now trying this going "oh god i've only done 15 and i think my hands are cramping" start lower than 30 and increase by 5 once whatever number you're doing no longer makes your hand cramp up. I can manage about 15 per exercise at the moment.
It really is tragic bc i dont think lucy could have been created and had the same messy but perfect impact by a "better" writer. The uninhibited, 'drawing with my dick in hand', 'violence/edge=deep writing' nature of elfin leid is what allows Lucy to exist as she does. It just doomed her to also be trapped in a comic where the plot is dumb in a not fun way, and most of the other characters are mostly there for blood explosions and/or piss.
me as a teenager: man it sucks to have no privacy or autonomy but i guess its for a good reason. when i turn 18 i will realise how young i was and understand why they did all that.
me as an adult: teenagers are an oppressed class, their abuse is normalised and systemic and they need to start killing people
It really is tragic bc i dont think lucy could have been created and had the same messy but perfect impact by a "better" writer. The uninhibited, 'drawing with my dick in hand', 'violence/edge=deep writing' nature of elfin leid is what allows Lucy to exist as she does. It just doomed her to also be trapped in a comic where the plot is dumb in a not fun way, and most of the other characters are mostly there for blood explosions and/or piss.
everyone tell me your favorite female characters to headcanon as transmasc. i dont remember when or why but at some point i decided that peyton from izombie was a she/her gay trans man and that headcanon got me through a very long flight once
trans girls are allowed to be annoying and stereotypical and socially inept and hyperactive and hypersexual and various types of animalgirl and there's nothing you can do about it. in fact if you're mean to that skirt go spinny reddit trans girl i'm stealing your entire house
