Best Miaou Does Anarchism

gotmetardisgotmeboys:

Next time some asshat complains about singular ‘they’ as a gender neutral pronoun

just tell them ‘we are not amused’

(via voicelesspostalveolarfricative)

mewtwoalaid:

“transmasculine” is a very binarist and truscum-esque way of referring to DFAB trans people please stop using it to refer to all DFAB trans people thanks

Same thing with “transfeminine”. It’s binarist and doesn’t represent neutrois/agender people and people who have a gender that’s not easily expressed/represented within the binary. Just stop. We have the terms DMAB and DFAB (or CAMAB and CAFAB) for a reason.

valeriekeefe:

zjemptv:

To-do: A post about the possibility of using Burdizzo clamps for incisionless in-office castration, studies that have been performed on human subjects, and why the hell this isn’t more widespread and available to trans women.

Why is it not more widespread? Seriously? The current medical model, with the occasional informed-consent exception, does everything it can to prevent womyn transitioning, and to encourage their detransition. Got a problem with needles? We’ll need those follow-up blood tests anyway. Non-operative? Expect extra scrutiny. Oh, your blood pressure is too high for spironolactone/estrogen despite that actually being a PROINDICATION for these drugs. Wearing pants to your psych eval? We’ll kick that endocrinologist referral back a bit. 155 over 95? Bah, you need a psych eval before spironolactone. Meeting an endo? Time for a genital and breast exam, and not with someone the sex/gender of your choosing because, hey, that’s totally relevant, amirite? Need a refill? Fuck that, I’m going to make you see an endocrinologist again, even though they won’t give you any more detailed hormone information than ‘normal.’

Sorry, those last four are mine.

I’m surprised they haven’t said they can’t use any anesthetic for an orchidectomy at this point, honestly. And yeah, if you could walk into a pharmacist and start HRT, I’m pretty confident we’d see a percentage prevalence of transition in the mid-to-high single digits instead of the half-percent it is now.

I have yet to find a doctor who can show me incidence numbers to indicate that estrogen, progesterone, or spironolactone are more dangerous than aspirin. Fuck, I’m the only one who ever talks incidence or prevalence in the doctor’s office.

(via khito)

shutthefuckupstraightpeople:

Every advert I read regarding an LGBT+ group that I would think of joining always ends the same way:

For LGBT people and allies

I’m fully aware that I’ve said this before:

• it’s not the fact that there are queer spaces that accept cishets that annoys me,
• it’s the fact that there are basically no spaces exclusively for queer people anymore,
• and the fact that if you dare to mention it, you, as a queer person who has more entitlement to that space than any cishet will ever have, are suddenly ostracised from said space. And that should never ever be the case. 

This is why I have very strict rules that cis binary-identified people must follow in my trans and genderqueer group. For one, they must be chaperoned by a trans or genderqueer person, and aren’t allowed in without someone vouching for them. We need space without privilege-blind cishets around, because their very presence changes what we can say and how we can say it.

itsallrights:

shutthefuckupstraightpeople:

I’m trying to articulate why the ‘gay is a sexuality not a personality’ line makes me want to vomit on people’s faces. 

I know it’s all about the ‘good gay’ and ‘bad gay’ dichotomy but it’s more than that. 

It seems to be screaming for the cishet approval. (And that sucks a lot)

Confused- if you wouldn’t mind elaborating?

The way you’ve phrased it here makes it sound, to me, as if you’re saying that the statement “gay is a sexuality, not a personality” is incorrect to the point of causing disgust… You’re saying that being gay should be the whole of one’s personality- not just one’s sexuality, but simply simply who and what the individual is.

Is that what you’re saying?

Obviously, I’m not the OP, but here’s why I agree with them. When you say that, you are making a distinction between those gay people who are “gay acting” and those who are otherwise “straight acting” (but still have gay sex). This implicitly gives permission to hate on all of the femme gay men or butch gay women, thus reinforcing oppositional sexism and all of the other oppressive systems of gender.

I should also mention that there are some cases where this wouldn’t bother me as much. The primary one would be if a gay person was having a hard time coming to terms with their sexuality because of not fitting the stereotype(s) of gay behavior. However, this needs to be tempered with an understanding that these behaviors aren’t bad, just not universal or necessary to be gay.

emigrl:

bestmiaoudoesanarchism:

That’s an interesting definition of transmisogyny, and I have to say that I don’t really agree with it. I would define transmisogyny as the unique mix of oppressive forces used against those who are both transgender and women. It’s the intersection of transphobia and misogyny, and how each modifies the other when targeting this class of people.

Thank you for your comment. I guess there are multiple ways to understand the term “transmisogyny” linguistically.

The way I understood it, based on my interpretation of Julia Serano’s book, is that “trans” in “transmisogyny” modifies the word “misogyny.” In other words, I understand the term “transmisogyny” to refer to a particular kind of misogyny, similar to how “trans woman” refers to a particular kind of woman (rather than something else entirely).

Examples of transmisogyny given by Serano in her “Trans-misogyny primer” do confirm this view: all of the examples, such as media representation, violence, and pathologization, describe instances of misogyny or targeting of femininity and femaleness that have profound additional impact on trans women.

Perhaps the meaning of the word has changed when people started using the contraction, “transmisogyny,” as opposed to Serano’s “trans-misogyny”… That explains why I was confused about it.

Two quick points here. As radtransfem pointed out to me, it would be very troubling if there were only one definition of transmisogyny, as that would probably mean that some sub group of trans women had taken control of the term for their own ends, so I’m all for many people using it in different ways. We all gain from that.

Second, I want to point to a specific paragraph in that link to Serano’s Trans-misogyny primer that sounds like a contradiction of the way that you are interpreting her:

So these days, when people ask me about trans-misogyny, I often forward them a primer on the subject that I wrote for the 2009 Women, Action, & the Media (WAM) conference (specifically for a panel called “In/Out of Focus, Broadening a Feminist Lens: Gender, Non-Conformity and the Media”). It is a one-page handout that provides a brief introduction to trans-misogyny. It is far from complete, mind you - while it highlights the ways misogyny exacerbates transphobia, it does not delve into how transphobia can exacerbate misogyny, nor does it discuss how transphobia and misogyny also intersect with other forms of oppression. But, it is decent intro to the topic.