I Know I've Said This Before But I Really Don't Think Constantly Talking About Trans Women & Fems Who

It’s funny to me that people use “TMRA” as a negative descriptor. Like I get it, they're comparing an oppressed group of people to MRAs, cause they're fucking clowns.

But it goes to show they think any sort of advocacy that centers trans men is a bad thing. They refuse to see them as trans, just men. Pretending that the "man" part overrides the "trans" part of the identity makes them feel better about their own bullying. And if they paint anyone who defends them as a "men's rights activist", they can dismiss their concerns without ever addressing their arguments.

I advocate for the rights of TRANS men alongside the rights of trans women and nonbinary people! Because, as it turns out, ALL trans people are oppressed, and trans men aren’t the exception! I place just as much importance on their struggles as I do on my own.

What kind of person would think that’s a bad thing?

Oh, right. Transphobes.

Lying about who invented forcefem and forcemasc being a copy of it is one of the weirder manifestations of the weird aggressive radfem claim to everything under the sun but far from the only one.

Trying to trademark "eggs" for transfems is a fundamental refusal by radfems to see anyone else as trans. Even assuming it's true that it started specifically with trans women and it was ever exclusive for more than five seconds after it's creation, which would like to see some evidence for but am not holding out much hope considering it definitely fucking wasn't, it's completely absurd to act like the basic concept of a name for a concept like that should be exclusive to begin with. The only justification for it is that you don't think other trans people have any kinna journey like that to go through in the first place. What the hell else are they supposed to call it? Literally, what combination of words other than "egg" is a good metaphor for that situation?

And the answer to this conundrum is just that they don't want other trans people to have a word period. Radfems don't think other trans people are trans. Radfems do not believe it's possible to want to be a man or the desire to be a man to have any inherent worth, because dysphoria has fully taken control of their every waking thought and can only conceptualize trans people AFAB as bitches who are making fun of them by pretending to want to be something they desperately want to escape from and project their fear they're not a Trve Wymyn on to everyone else so they can reinforce their own shaky faith in their gender identity. You wouldn't see radfems saying things like "those AFAB cunts are evil for saying all the time that binary trans women have boring genders [fabrication] but actually we know more than anyone about gender because of transmisogyny" if they were not dealing with a psychological wound that's bleeding all over every post they make.

And, of course, radfems count any trans person AMAB as "TMA," which is essentially a way of labeling them Trans Women With Extra Steps. Have you seen a non-binary tee-em-ay that did not also identify as woman? Because I sure haven't! They surely exist, somewhere, but every one I've seen is also fem, and there's nothing wrong with that nor does it make them less non-binary, but it's very telling about TMA/TME culture and it's views on transfemininity, and what trans people AMAB who aren't also fem tend to think of that whole framework.

Isn't it such a strange coincidence that most of it tends to be super broad concepts that are in no way exclusive, in terms of material reality, to trans women, like "person who doesn't know they're trans yet"? If they ever were transfem exclusive, you'd get the idea that they were designed purely to bait people into picking it up just to yell at them for it, but what's actually happening is going after abso-fucking-lutely everything to tear people's language away as a power trip and feel like the most special queers to ever live.

But let's look at something less essential than terminology. Let's take the shark plushie. That, for one thing, has just provably never been transfem specific. Ever. Not once time in history, any claim otherwise is a deliberate lie. But even if it WERE, why? Why do you NEED it to be transfem specific? What about the shark plushie makes it transfem culture? What does that even MEAN? How do you signal a shark plushie is transfem culture? What exactly is happening when you see a trans man saying he put top surgery scars on his shark plushie? Can you explain to me why that's like watching your partner cheating on you? Besides that, do you understand this is a toy for toddlers that was never deliberately aimed at anyone queer? I genuinely so badly want to ask these extremely stupid people if in twenty years they'll scream at the hundreds of thousands of cis people who had one when they were four and were fond of it.

Like, it's wild, right? Because radfems will say on a regular basis "oh, they took the shark plushie, they took catgirls, they took forcefem, they took uhhhh flips to a random page of a book on a compilation of queer shitposts pumpkin fucking." And then, in their next breath, they'll go on about how transmascs make nothing but inferior degenerate art of no value.

They know we, trans women, have culture besides that shit, right? Drawn art? Film? Video games? Literature, too, even though every transfem book I've heard of sounds terrible, since I know that's only because I haven't ever looked for more. Like, I know good transfem books are OUT THERE if only people would discuss the ones that aren't about testosterone turning you into a feral monster or being gifted Trve Biological Wymynhood by the gods, as though that doesn't display some sickeningly bioessentialist transmed trends among the radfems on this website.

There is so much good transfem culture people could be uplifting instead! But instead they go with transradfem culture, which, let's be clear, is not representative of trans women or our actual, authentic cultural output, and is mostly bought off the shelf at Walmart.

Like, oh, wow, if trans radblr is supposed to be transfem culture then I guess transfem culture is a bunch of fucking shallow memes, kinks, and literal baby toys. Great cultural output, girls! Great going! Truly the ZENITH of human civilization! They'll put down transmasc music every other day but I'm pretty sure just about anyone with a pulse could fuck around with a middle school recorder for a few minutes that has more artistic value than the transradfem culture that radfems act like hyper-defensive weirdos about.

Which includes a bunch of slurs for others, which is funny, because on one hand you're like, hey, this word originated on 4chan, and they're like "no, trans women invented it," and you're like, yeah, those aren't mutually exclusive ideas, maybe rethink that line of defense Birdgirl because you're going to get your client in even worse trouble here. Maybe instead say that yes, it was invented by transphobes for transphobes, but you're choosing to appropriate this 4chan slur anyway because you're jealous some non-binary people were invited to a concert you wouldn't have gone to anyway. That'd be at least a little more honest than inventing this false history where it was created specifically because of the pain and trauma of some non-binary people being invited to a concert you wouldn't have gone to anyway. Or at least that I hope you wouldn't have gone to even if you had been extended an invite.

Like, instead of celebrating real transfem culture that does actually exist, radfems incapable of creating their own stuff just want to grab everything in sight and plant a transradfem flag on it, which makes the definition of transfemininity and transfem culture they want to push all the more grotesquely empty.

just because you slap the word “trans” in front of radfem does not make radical feminism a good thing. Yall are still parroting conservative talking points, just directing it at other marginalized groups instead.

the problem with being an intersex nonbinary person is that you have experienced both uniquely transmasc and transfem things, but because you are neither you can join neither conversation without being told “you’re afab you can’t have experienced this!” or “you’ve not medically transitioned so this can’t happen to you!”

intersex trans people exist. intersex nonbinary people exist. regardless of what our “agab” is, or whether we’ve taken hormones or not, we have experiences that need to be included in your conversations. by gatekeeping these conversations you’re leaving vital voices out of the narrative.

Hey we all know pronouns aren't a privilege, right?

It doesn't matter how "annoying" a trans person is, it doesn't matter if they disagree with you on some intracommunity issue-

Use the pronouns they have in their bio, or the pronouns they ask you to use. Even if you really don't like them, or you think they're problematic.

Your comfort with somebody's pronouns isn't a factor. Using ANY other pronoun for a user that prefers it/its is misgendering. Same with neopronouns. If you can't manage it, don't talk to it.

Oh and just to be clear-

Claiming that a trans woman's account is actually "run by a man" is misgendering. Saying a trans man's blog is part of some "secret terf circle" is misgendering. Pretending a person is actually your oppressor in disguise so you can misgender them is, get this, misgendering!

I don't care how much you dislike someone, use the right fucking pronouns.

being a man or being masculine is inherently neutral

being a woman or being feminine is inherently neutral

dont play into any narrative that frames men/masculinity as inherently bad and women/femininity as inherently good, this is radfem rhetoric

dont play into any narrative that frames men/masculinity as inherently good and women/femininity as inherently bad, this is religious extremism

in the wake of genderqueerdykes transmisognistic post shall you not use it as an excuse to be anti good faith identities, or spreading the “transandrophobia truther” theory. Just because someone is a shit person doesn’t mean you get to be horrible back. and if you try arguing with me on this fuck off because i will block u.

pride includes trans men and transmascs btw

trans men and transmascs deserve to be proud of their manhood and masculinity

this is not up for debate

The fearmongering around medical transition for transmascs will never not be upsetting to me.

“you’re gonna look ugly as a man” “but you’re such a pretty girl, don’t change that” Wrong. You will look different after T, but you will look happy. You will probably grow hair and gain weight and look pretty different, and none of that is bad or makes you less desirable. You are going to look like you and that’s all that matters.

“T makes you angry” “you’re gonna be a scary man i won’t feel safe around you” Wrong. Testosterone does not “make” you angry. Messing with your hormones will mess with your emotions for sure, but you will not immediately become some scary predator when you start T. Being a man/masculine does not make you a threat, a predator, or inherently angry. That’s radfem shit.

“bottom growth is gross” “no one will want you with bottom growth” Wrong. Bottom growth is cool and a LOT of guys end up loving theirs a lot more than they thought they would. For a lot of people it is a desirable trait, there are people who find bottom growth hot and attractive. And! If you’re sure you don’t want it there’s things you can do to work around that, just talk to your provider.

“bottom surgery is super painful and not worth it” First off, call it phalloplasty, because that’s what you’re talking about. Second, yes it’s painful, it’s surgery. There are risks to it and complications can happen, but that’s true of any surgery. Phallo might not be for you, but it is life saving care for other folks. It is beautiful and should be talked about as life saving care and not as some afterthought thing that no one actually does.

Being transmasculine is a beautiful thing. Transitioning medically is not something every trans person wants, but if you notice yourself holding back for the reasons i’ve listed above (or similar) maybe reconsider.

You all realize Feminists have been critiquing "women only spaces" for decades right?

I think often about Audre Lorde's critique of a women only event that welcomed her wife and daughter, but not her son. Because she questioned it - the function and purpose of barring even the sons of Feminist women from Feminist events. Especially the barring of her young Black son, who would otherwise be left alone in the city where he would be more prone to the very violence those same Feminist women claimed to want to change.

Because what functional, forward thinking Feminist purpose does it actually serve to do that? What message does that send to women with sons, husbands, brothers, lovers, friends, who want to involve the men and boys in their lives in their activism? Who want to build a functionally better world for us all outside of the oppressive grasp of Patriarchy? Especially for the marginalized men who often sit at their own intersection violent Patriarchal oppression, that still happens to be Patriarchal oppression despite it not being distinctly misogyny?

What purpose does it truly serve to sequester yourself away into a pocket of the world, detached from those you share it with? What bright and shining future does that really promise you?