tygerofaera:
appropriately-inappropriate:
tygerofaera:
appropriately-inappropriate:
tygerofaera:
appropriately-inappropriate:
tygerofaera:
appropriately-inappropriate:
tygerofaera:
appropriately-inappropriate:
tygerofaera:
appropriately-inappropriate:
tygerofaera:
appropriately-inappropriate:
transgender-fiddleford-mcgucket:
kinda eyeing up the tags right now @ trans men thinking they’re incapable of replicating the male gaze
like claiming manhood while dismissing any of the negative associations w/ manhood is kinda yikes my dudes
yeah trans men shipping w/w pairings isn’t automatically fetishizing but tbh if I just suddenly started shipping only lesbian pairings it would be kinda…suspect
honestly i’m just gonna assume that most of the trans men who are fighting tooth and nail to deny any possibility of replicating the male gaze or other forms of misogyny are gonna become terfs or terf allies unless they check themselves
Seeing as how you totally missed out on male socialization–you know, what with being born and raised female–you can’t actually replicate the male gaze.
What a ridiculous statement.
Furthermore a trans man is still female, and since sexual orientation does appear to be an innate trait, they’re not fetishizing lesbians, they’re simply being true to their nature.
Anyways, what’s wrong with being a radical feminist or an ally? Fuck it–trans men, you’re welcome to chill any damn day. You know this lot doesn’t have your back, but we do.
Untrue I’m steadfastly backing my trans men brothers as are a lot of trans women. Radfems on the other hand well doctrine, practices and history makes you a liar.
My goodness, if this is what you call backing your brothers, God knows I’d hate to see you actually treating them poorly.
Radical feminism welcomes all females–even, or especially, those who hate their bodies due to patriarchal conditioning.
Please search my blog, I respect my brothers though you can’t even get past statements designed to be triggering and misgendering towards them.
Radfems aren’t welcoming of anything that doesn’t conform to dogma including other forms of feminism.
Plain out your blog and comments and contributations on other blogs are openly not respectful to trans men.
You’re a liar and I”ll maintain that stance.
Why on earth would I waste a sunny Saturday afternoon scrolling your blog? Nothing you have to say could be so important.
You don’t respect your “brothers”, not if you’re posting bullshit like the above.
Though it’s funny you should mention dogma–lets see now, English isn’t my first language but I don’t think that word means what you think it means.
For instance, Mirriam-Webster says:
“ a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted”
You know what sounds like dogma?
“Trans women are women”.
So maybe catch a clue, before you go running your mouth.
Dogma. Pfffft.
Effing prove how I’m disrespectful you effing liar, seriously because I’d love to see that.
And yeah dogma…Trans women are women is an equity statement.
But radical femism, it’s postings and it’s non-stop push is so hyperfocused that it’s fundamentalist in nature. Y’all even got so bad other feminists coined a term for y’all.
“Trans women are women” is dogma–it is literally a perfect example.
A set of beliefs accepted by a group without questioning–
So, why are trans women women? What makes them women? How do they know they’re women? What is a woman?
Go ahead. If it’s not dogma, I’d love to hear the answer. Because not only is it dogmatic, it’s a thought-terminating cliche and eerily reminiscent of cult behaviour, wherein questioning the message is heresy.
And how, exactly, is radical feminism fundamentalist in nature? Go on, explain that. I’d love to hear it. I’m sure it’s hilarious.
All women are women.
And there’s only two groups that really aren’t at least partially accepting of trans women or trans men or non binaries and that’s folks like yourself the trans exclusionary radical feminists and the right wing religious fundamentals that you’re allied with.
And as I just said on this thread your behavior in that trans super focused way has given entire tags worth of proof.
That burden of proof has long been meant.
And why are trans women women?
You haven’t answered the question, only doubled down on the statement.
Trans women are male, dude. You don’t need to like it, but you need to accept that fact. You were born male, raised male, socialized male. You look male, act male, and in a million years when archaeologists dig up your bones, they will know you’re male.
I can believe I’m a pigeon all I please, but no amount of gluing feathers to my ass will make me fly any better when I leap off a balcony.
And as always when radfems are told a plain intersectional truth that’s pretty much accepted outside of their bubble and that of the other right wing zealots they resort to misgendering…8 times in 2 sentences with a side order of debunked socialization radtheory.
Uh, still not seeing a lot of support for the statement.
Just because people parrot the party line out of fear–and it is fear, because you lot are fucking nuts when someone disagrees with you, ejaculating on shit and throwing glitter into old women’s’ eyes–doesn’t mean they agree with you.
They’re just afraid of people like you beating them up, like that boxer trans woman did to the woman who called him out in the bathroom. What a great way to prove you do, in fact, belong and aren’t a threat–causing $60,000 in facial reconstruction bills!
But it’s not an “accepted truth”, because you guys just keep busting out that thought-terminating cliche.
You say trans women are women–but can’t explain why, or how, or what makes someone a woman, and we’re expected to buy it?
Amateur Hour is over that way —>
Good thing I’m way the eff over here <—
Yeah you don’t want to see the world as it is, it wrecks the radfem narrative.
Fear…Yeah with our death rates and the death tolls…uhm nope Hunty, Huge Nopes.
See the world bar radfems and other right wing fundamentalists actually gets that without your for crap biological arguments which are pretty easy to debunk that you have to rely on your sociological arguments which are just as pooworthy.
See y’all can’t exclude trans women on being women through biology no longer and you could never actually prove socialization and other feck.
All women are women and it’s literally that simple.
If they’re so easy to debunk, debunk them instead of wasting our time. That’s a direct challenge–go ahead.
Prove to me that our ‘crap biological arguments’ are debunkable. Show me scientific sources–peer reviewed, please, none of these tumblr blogs–that say biological sex is irrelevant in homo sapiens.
If you can prove your point, I’ll delete this blog. How’s that for you, hmm? Prove to me that biological sex is crap, and this blog will be deleted.
I’m THAT confident in my statement because unlike you, I don’t have to rely on literal cult tactics in arguments.
“All women are women”? Okie dokie then, that still doesn’t explain why trans women need to transition at all, unless, of course, they were something other than women to start out with.
Funny how we’ve been doing this for a full day and you still haven’t figured out a way to explain that.
So sad.
I don’t need to explain something that simple but here you go Hunty.
You define women as a terf by biological essentialisms…your realities according to dogma that all women possess.
But when you’re told that’s not always the case and in fairly high percentages you double down on your social argument.
But your social argument is based off of radfem theories on socialization. A theory that has never ever, ever seen peer review in pyschology nor sociology and isn’t even a component of women’s and gender studies unless we’re specifically working at looking at radfem works.
You want to know why?
Because socialization from radfem analysis leaves out cognative assimilation in favor of a political broadbrush use.
And we transition to feel right in our own skin, to feel what our minds have long told us of things not matching in the processes going on inside than the unfortunate defective outside.
Nice othering attempt with something “other than to start with”
It’s correction.
And we’ve been doing this here and on other threads because I don’t respond well to bigots, or their beliefs and bullies in the trans man thread or the fact you can’t effing let go when a trans woman asks you to not make claims that we actually as a majority dislike Caitlynn Jenner.., seriously you have issues with trans women period in the basest, fundamentalist, 2nd wave bigotted of ways.
You know what’s cute? You tried to call me out on ablism because I called you an idiot–but here you are, calling me hunty, which is a portmanteau of honey and cunty.
Cute misogyny, bro, super radical.
“You define women as a terf by biological essentialisms…your realities according to dogma that all women possess”
It’s not dogma to reference biology, because dogma is an article of faith that can not be proved. That’s why it’s a religious term.
Biology can be proven–I’m using my phone and I could pull up a google’s worth of references to support my point. What do you bring to the table?
“But when you’re told that’s not always the case and in fairly high percentages you double down on your social argument.”
Show, don’t tell. I wouldn’t believe you if you told me the sky was blue, dude, so you’re gonna have to do better than “because I said so”.
Furthermore:
“But your social argument is based off of radfem theories on socialization. A theory that has never ever, ever seen peer review in pyschology nor sociology and isn’t even a component of women’s and gender studies unless we’re specifically working at looking at radfem works.”
Early childhood socialization has been demonstrably proven to start as early as infancy; gender roles start as early as wearing pink or blue in the neo-natal ward. Haven’t you heard of the Baby X experiments? Are you really that ignorant?
“Because socialization from radfem analysis leaves out cognative assimilation in favor of a political broadbrush use.”
Cognitive assimilation? Thinking you’re a dog doesn’t mean the dog catcher’ll nab you if you go outside unattended; believing yourself to be a woman doesn’t mean you’ll be treated like one by others, ESPECIALLY prior to transition. What you experience as an outsider isn’t “cognitive assimilation”, it’s appropriation.
But nice try with that.
“And we transition to feel right in our own skin, to feel what our minds have long told us of things not matching in the processes going on inside than the unfortunate defective outside.”
If you feel yourself to be defective, that’s a psychological illness. We don’t treat anorexics with diets, and we don’t confirm their identities–why should we support this?
Furthermore, your minds do not exist in a vacuum–what your minds tell you are the amalgamation of societal messages; what you “feel” womanhood is is your outsider’s romanticization, not reality.
It’s the definition of magical thinking, and frankly, I feel so very sorry for your inability to relate to reality.