#an....

[arakkne]

are you actually trans friendly? /genq

reading through some of your posts it definitely doesn’t really feel like you are (transvestigating random people on reddit, “the word lesbian doesn’t apply to trans women” meaning you don’t view them as real women, using the acronym “tra” which is pretty much on the same level as using brick and fish) but i might be misinterpreting tone, since it’s harder to guess tone over text!!

(not an attack, genuinely asking)

Hey! Thanks for the question, you're actually not the first to comment on this. I should probably make a pinned post clarifying where I stand.

In short, I describe myself as trans friendly (instead of trans inclusive/exclusive) because I do genuinely believe that radfem beliefs and trans experiences have more to gain together than they do apart. I am very involved in trans community irl: I used to be trans, I have trans family members, the person I'm basically engaged to is trans nb, and I'm involved with LGBTQ groups on my campus. I'm friendly to trans people, and I respect them like a friend, but that won't stop me from calling them out when they're overstepping or simply wrong, just like I would hope my friends would do the same for me.

Put another way, I am friendly to trans people, but I think gender identity ideology (GII) is illogical and even harmful. GII is essentially the metaphysical belief that there is a "gender identity" inside every soul that may or may not align with one's assigned gender based on their sex. This is not scientific, it has never been proven, and believing in it requires faith. It's essentially a spiritualism, if not a religion entirely.

In contrast, radical feminism uses material analysis to form the foundation of its theory. "Material" means focusing on what is real and tangible. Gender identity is not tangible, and it is only real to those who believe in it, the same way God is only real to those who believe in God. It falls outside the scope of material analysis. Gender expression and biological sex, however, are real and tangible.

If you want to believe in gender identity as a framework for your gender expression, fine. That's your right, and I support your freedom to do that.

What I don't support is gender identity overstepping its bounds and TRAs (trans rights activists, aka people who are proponents of gender identity ideology; they may or may not be trans; I do not think this is a derogatory term?) attempting to pass legislation that redefines our laws in terms of gender identity instead of sex. This removes important sex-based protections that feminists have fought decades to secure.

Furthermore, I don't support the redefinition of "woman" to be "anyone who identifies as a woman." That's illogical and not based in material reality. I also don't support the subsequent redefinitions of sexuality to be based in terms of gender identity; that's why I think the term lesbian should be reserved for female homosexuality only. This includes trans men and excludes trans women, not because I want to feminize/masculinize them, but because sexuality is about which sex you have sex with. Gender identity falls outside the scope of its definition, and I'm sorry if people are hurt by that, but they haven't come up with a logical reason to change it in their favor, so....

I hope that answers your question and helps to clarify where I'm coming from!

TL;DR: I respect trans people and love many of them dearly and will fight for their right to exist but I simply don't believe in their beliefs 🫶

[cleargalaxyunknown]

An Florian...

Na duuuu? Du wirst das hier vermutlich sogar lesen, so wie ich Dich kenne. Ich bin Dir so dankbar, dass Du seit Januar Teil meines Lebens bist.. Krass, oder? Dafür, dass ich wirklich dachte, dass wir niemals den Kontakt halten können. Ja, wir schreiben oder reden nicht wirklich regelmäßig, weil wir komplett verschiedene Leben haben. Ich habe mittlerweile einen wirklich total liebevollen, geduldigen und vor allem verständnisvollen Freund. Ich hab zwar manchmal etwas Angst, dass er irgendwann versteht, dass ich wohl kaum seiner Wert bin, aber ich gebe mein Bestes gut genug für ihn zu sein. Er ist wirklich ein Traum. Vielleicht lernst Du ihn ja eines Tages mal kennen, wenn Du mich mal besuchst :P <3 Auch habe ich seit ein paar Monaten einen neuen Besten Freund. Klar, J. war einzigartig. Ich werde ihn auch nie so ersetzen. Würde ihn ebenso gegen nichts und niemanden mehr eintauschen. Weiß gar nicht, womit ich die beiden verdient habe. Ich hoffe, dass Du zumindest Deine Probleme einigermaßen in den Griff bekommen hast und auch auf den Kontakt zum Traumfängerbastler abgebrochen hast. Du hattest Recht. Er war wohl doch nicht so ganz korrekt, wie ich dachte. Danke, dass Du so auf mich geachtet hast, als ich dazu nicht in der Lage war oder nicht sein wollte. Ich habe das Buch, welches Du mir zum Abschied gegeben hast inzwischen schon zum zweiten Mal gelesen. Danke Dir. Ich wäre mit Sicherheit immer noch dort, wärst Du nicht gewesen. Ich hoffe, man liest sich bald mal wieder. :)

[wahbegan]

Okay, I feel I should I explain the dreadlock thing, for all zero of you who read that post and cared about it. Listen, white Rastafarians annoy the shit out of me. Granted. But dreadlocks are not a rastafarian thing. That is a large part of what made them popular in America, yes, but it's wildly arrogant and moronic of you to believe that that movement is what brought about dreadlocks in general, that it should have some sort of monopoly on dreadlocks, that dreadlocks alone somehow imply blackness. People from East and West Asia, India, Pakistan, Greece, Aztecs, Semitic Jews, Tibetan Buddhists, even a Christian Saint all wore dreadlocks, hypothetically completely independent of your culture's influence. Okay, it's a hairstyle. I'm sorry, you don't get to monopolize a hairstyle. When someone wears clothing or a symbol or other iconography specific to your culture that was developed by your culture you have every reason to be pissed. But when someone has a hairstyle that people all over the world developed independently of each other, it's not cultural appropriation just because it's tangentially related to you. That is dumb beyond belief. Nothing about your culture is being made shallow, caricatured, bastardized, or re-packaged and sold as acceptable if white people are doing it because of someone's hair. That's as idiotic as going off on punk kids for getting mohawks. Arguably, it's worse but I'm not getting into that because this post is already too long and I know how social justice bloggers are, they read about three sentences and decide they don't give a fuck cause I'm white. So

Now if a white kid has dreadlocks and wears red and green and yellow beanies and talks about how much they love Bob Marley all the time, yes, please feel free to kick them in the taint