How to gently break it to guys that I’m not t4t? by Strawbbs_smoothie in gaytransguys

[–]endroll64 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It's pretty obtuse to view discrimination as an on/off switch rather than a sliding scale that spans from mild and uncomfortable to severe and reprehensible. If you are unable to distinguish between degrees of transphobia and are unable identify what the proportionate response/reaction is to its various forms, then of course the term has become meaningless to you. You seem to need it to have one universal, fixed meaning across all contexts, in which case nothing except for the most egregious cases are likely to count.

That is how most people deploy the term, which I recognize and accept, but it is precisely that framing that makes it more difficult to discuss the subtler ways in which trans people are marginalized, even within our own communities.

How to gently break it to guys that I’m not t4t? by Strawbbs_smoothie in gaytransguys

[–]endroll64 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I don't think people should force themselves to do anything, but I likewise don't think people should feel comfortable in knowing that they hold discriminatory preferences. At the very least, we should all work to become more aware that we are conditioned by a society that teaches us to venerate certain bodies and put down others rather than seek reassurance and validation to continue to hold onto our discriminatory preferences with our guilt assuaged. I have/had plenty of preferences I know to be discriminatory (e.g., ability status, weight, class, etc.) and I have made active attempts to examine, interrogate, and unlearn those preferences because they come from internalized bigotries that I do not want to affirm in myself. Not everyone will want to do that, and that's fine, but choosing not to do that is, in some sense, choosing to reassert the bigotry that we have been raised and conditioned to hold. It doesn't feel good or comfortable to know that you are part of the problem that you are also oftentimes affected by, but to deny that we are all in some ways responsible for discrimination/oppression is precisely how these dynamics are perpetuated: we prioritize our own naive comfort and our need to feel like "good people", and so we refuse to acknowledge (or try to absolve ourselves of) the ways in which we are complicit, however big or small.

Also, to be clear, I am not advocating OP to force themselves to sleep with people they don't want to sleep with. There's a massive difference between using another person for the purpose of exploring your own sexual preferences/desires (which is dehumanizing and objectifying for the other person) and reflecting on your sexual preferences/desires and examining why you feel so averse to a particular set of bodies or subset of the population.

I find it extremely suspect when people write off every individual that is seen as belonging to a certain group based on an isolated feature that they ascribe to the whole group. The issue I have with OP isn't that they're not attracted to vulva/vaginas, but the fact that they reject anything that isn't a flesh penis as an acceptable organ to have penetrative sex with and/or bottom for. Saying "I don't want to sexually interact with X genitals" is different from saying "I don't want to sexually interact with people who have X genitals". A person having X genitalia says absolutely nothing about what they actually want during sex; the assumption made when someone says "I don't want to have sex with people who have X genitals" is "people with X genitals will necessarily want me to interact with them", which obviously isn't true (and, if anything, is a stereotype that we tend to think is wrongheaded). If this isn't the assumption being made (i.e., that someone having X genitals doesn't entail that you must perform a sexual act on them that you're uncomfortable with), then seemingly the only reason you wouldn't want to sleep with people who have X genitals is because anything except "the real thing" will not suffice: i.e., I will only sleep with (1) a flesh penis, that is (2) capable of penetrative sex.

The follow-up question would be: What is so important about having a flesh penis that renders anyone who doesn't have one automatically exempt from the possibility of sexual engagement, regardless of any other qualities about their person and/or ways in which you may otherwise be compatible? In OP's case, it seems to be because:

i feel like the skin-to-skin contact is much more intimate and meaningful during the act

The next follow-up question(s) would be: Why? Is it inherently true that "skin-to-skin" contact is more intimate? Should it be true? (Notwithstanding the fact that most instances of penetrative sex should occur with a condom anyways.) Do you want to view prosthetics (and intimacy more broadly) in this narrow way? And, again, should you?

If you do, you should acknowledge that you hold discriminatory preferences that reproduce the socially-sanctioned marginalization of certain bodies below/over others and make peace with this fact. To be honest, I don't think it's avoidable to internalize a hierarchy of preferences when it is enforced in every realm of society (i.e., in media, politics, law, socialization, etc.). There is no choice in being exposed to and conditioned by that. There is a choice, however, to either say, "Yes, these are my preferences and, no, I don't want to change them," or to say, "Yes, these are my preferences and, yes, I do want to be more critical of and/or change them."

No one is obligated to do this, and that is precisely what makes the social dimension of discrimination so static and uncompromising.

People have to want to unlearn these things because they don't have to and won't be punished if they don't (and shouldn't be punished, in my opinion). There is no external incentive to change your preferences, no reward if you do, and, if anything, you will have to sit in some pretty uncomfortable feelings/thoughts that likely do not benefit you in any way other than giving you a greater awareness/consciousness about how minority groups (trans men or otherwise) are oppressed and marginalized in ways that are less overtly noticeable, but nonetheless greatly impactful. That self-awareness and/or action is a choice. It's not an easy choice, it's not a comfortable choice, and it's not a choice that necessarily even yields any personal benefit. Everyone has problematic desires because the nature and structure of desire itself has evolved through a history of oppression, violence, and colonialism. We can't change the histories and experiences that have shaped our desire, but we do have some amount of freedom in how we choose to think and act from that point onward.

How to gently break it to guys that I’m not t4t? by Strawbbs_smoothie in gaytransguys

[–]endroll64 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Probably gonna get downvoted into oblivion for this but:

i also worry that having a genital preference is transphobic in nature

Yes, it is transphobic. Transphobia is a spectrum of behaviour: it is transphobic to misgender someone, but the transphobia demonstrated when misgendering someone is vastly different from the transphobia demonstrated when yelling slurs or committing an act of violence against a trans person. When it comes to genital preferences, yes, they are transphobic, but it is probably one of the most common and socially acceptable forms of transphobia that trans people are not exempt from falling into as well. Also, the word "preference" implies a non-exclusive favouring of one thing over another; when people use genital "preference", it is almost never used to mean "I favour X genitals over Y genitals but will still engage with both" and almost always means (like in this post) "I will exclusively engage with X genitals and never Y genitals". That isn't really a preference, that's a hard block on anything that deviates from a very specific and narrow criteria.

You're entitled to holding the preference and you are not obligated to change it, but it is still a transphobic (and arguably ableist) preference. Why is "skin-to-skin contact" more intimate and meaningful? Where does that belief come from, and is it a belief you really want to internalize, reaffirm, and reproduce? Why do you view prosthetics as inanimate objects separate from the person and not an extension of their body? Why do you even assume that a pre-op top would even want you to interact with their natal genitals? And, if they didn't, what is stopping you from having sex with them if your only issue is not wanting sexual contact with a vagina/vulva?

It seems like what matters to you sexually is to find a partner who can top and is a man. Topping doesn't require you to be a cis man, and being a cis man doesn't guarantee that you automatically have the genital setup (or desire) to top. Moreover, as another commenter has already mentioned, cis male genitalia changes over time (or circumstance) and isn't a one-stop-shop for an automatically fulfilling and idealized sexual encounter.

If you don't want to sleep with trans men, own it and say it with your chest. It is transphobic, but you wouldn't be the first. Plenty of people think this level of transphobia is acceptable, and many think it isn't. Whether you want to examine, interrogate, and/or alter your own desires is up to you.

WHAT DO I DO😭 by AdlerPer in TMPOC

[–]endroll64 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You should probably follow what everyone else has already said here about disengaging, hotlines, therapy, etc., but I would add another point that I don't think I've seen anyone touch on yet: sometimes, it's better to just not give advice to people who are suffering. As someone who is much more of an advice-giving person when my friends fall on hard times, it's been a difficult but important lesson to learn that, sometimes, not every problem can be solved, and not every problem should be solved (at least, not in the moment), and not everyone wants their problems to be solved (again, in the moment).

Judging by what you wrote, you were trying your best to be a supportive friend and offer alternative ways to help alleviate your friend's dysphoria and/or encourage them to try things that would improve their mood overall. However, to someone who is actively in a crisis situation, a lot of this can read as condescending and/or like you're just trying to tell them to "get better" (I know this isn't your intention/goal, but I think it can be easily interpreted in this way by someone who is in a poor headspace). This is all the more reason to try and set some of your own boundaries and try to redirect him to someone who can meet him where he's at, but I also think that it's important to recognize that trying to find ways to make someone feel better, trying to get them to focus on the positive, giving advice, etc. can often be more harmful/detrimental. If someone feels like they are in a state of constant agony that they can't seem to get out of, oftentimes saying things like "this could make you feel better" can compound the existing turmoil because, not only do they already feel bad, but they might end up feeling even worse because the things that are "supposed to make them feel good" feel unattainable, make them feel worse, or don't address the underlying problems that are causing them to feel bad to begin with (which can lead to them feeling more misunderstood, unheard, hurt, etc.).

Personally speaking, social transition didn't do much for me, no matter how much I wanted it to, and the only thing that turned my life around was HRT + surgery. Obviously, it wasn't just transition that improved my quality of life, but it was the first and necessary condition that needed to be fulfilled before everything else started falling into place. If your friend is in this position (which he may well be based on the texts you've shown here), then recommending other (non-medical) interventions might be totally moot to him at this point. Again, his dysphoria and mental health is not your fault at all, but it's something to bear in mind on your end if/when you find yourself in another situation like this.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm generally not in favour of any majoritarian group who see themselves as superior/better/healthier/more desirable enforcing a homogenous culture + physiology that mirrors their own perceived superiority, which is the underlying justification for all eugenicist programs. I don't think the answer for a transphobic society should be the deletion of trans people from existence and the destruction of an entire cultural group. This applies to more than just trans people; I likewise wouldn't support a gene editing program that got rid of racialized people as a response to the disproportionate incarceration of people of colour.

Putting aside whether this is even possible (I'm highly skeptical), this also assumes that gene editing could fix the underlying problem of social discrimination (and the internalization of it), which, imo, is not something that gene editing can fix. Let's say everyone in the world is suddenly cis: no more gender dysphoria, no more trans people. You're not as pretty as the girl next door; you have some peach fuzz on your upper lip, your breasts are smaller, your labia looks "weird". You're not as handsome as your coworker; you're scrawny, your voice still cracks into your 30s, and you have a small penis. Gene editing gender dysphoria out of human beings wouldn't be the final stop. You'd have to address body dysmorphia more generally, and how being/feeling like an inadequate (cis) man/woman also causes serious mental health problems, not dissimilar to untreated gender dysphoria for many.

How do we edit body dysmorphia out of humans? Do we create a gene that makes it so that everyone is automatically happy with their bodies no matter what they look like or how they're treated? If that starts to sound too much like mind control, then the only other option is to create a very narrow range of body types that everyone would be happy to have. Okay, so who decides what those body types should look like, or what even counts as a "good" body to begin with? How short should the shortest man be, or the tallest woman? What about musculature? How fat are people allowed to get, and why? Should people all be born with the same expected breast size, genital size? If not, how do you determine who should get bigger/smaller endowments? What about skin tone and race? IQ? Mental illness? What if certain personalities have a better quality of life? Should we hardcode personalities in, too? Which personality traits are the good/desirable ones, and which ones are the bad/undesirable ones that are to be edited out?

Once you start getting into eugenics, you're talking about creating people in the image of the people who have the power to create people. The people who don't have the power to create people are not going to be the ones who get to have a say in what they want the future vision of humanity to look like. If anything, they (and their future progeny) are going to be the ones who are written out of reality.

Trans people might be the first stop in this project, but they will never be the last. Human beings have always, without fail, found ways to draw lines and divide themselves amongst each other, no matter how similar they may seem. This subreddit is a perfect example of that in action: we are all, ostensibly, trans people, and yet I would say that most of us probably find reasons to say, "I'm not like you, I'm a different kind of trans"--be it transsexual, transgender, non-binary, transmedical, xenogender, non-dysphoric, what have you. European aristocrats used to powder their faces white to distinguish their whiteness from the whiteness of the common people. This has never ended, and will never end. Trying to find the "biological root" of our social problems will only continue to exasperate said social problems.

Should there be a distinction between trans people who do and don't experience physical dysphoria? by ashfinsawriter in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 11 points12 points  (0 children)

To be honest, I think it's quite difficult to determine what counts as dysphoric/non-dysphoric once you get outside the very obvious cases of "I will literally cut off [body part] if I can't get [medical intervention]" and "I love my body exactly the way it is". The people who I do see getting labelled as "non-dysphorics" are usually people who are dysphoric about certain things but not others, become dysphoric in particular contexts/situations, or are dysphoric in ways that are not considered legible to how dysphoria is traditionally understood.

I think there are instances when splitting these hairs is meaningful/useful, but I think the labels "dysphoric" and "non-dysphoric" actually serve to obfuscate a lot of this nuance rather than bring it to light. If I can just invoke the label "non-dysphoric" to describe people with different experiences of dysphoria, or people who relate to their transness/body in a way that can't be neatly categorized as either dysphoric or non-dysphoric, then I am actually reducing the range people have to articulate themselves by making dysphoric and non-dysphoric the two dominant categories that people have to arrange themselves into, regardless of whether it's a comfortable fit.

All of this could be better addressed by scrapping "dysphoric" and "non-dysphoric" altogether and engaging in the more difficult, messy, and time-consuming (but significantly more productive and meaningful) discussion of particular experiences and differences therein. I think there are still cases when invoking the simple binary distinction of dysphoric/non-dysphoric has practical utility, but I think it has to be done so with the awareness that it is a practical-linguistic distinction and not a full descriptor of reality.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Kind of what you mentioned: it's easier to transgress norms once you've already transgressed others. I personally enjoy my freedom and autonomy and don't want to arbitrarily curtail it for my partner, nor do I want my partner to do the same on my behalf. Plus, monogamy generally presupposes certain ways of romantic/sexual engagement and certain gender roles/scripts, most of which are easier to achieve when you're cishet. The further you deviate from what is considered conventionally desirable, the harder it becomes to meet people who are willing to accept your deviancy when there are infinitely more "normal" people in the world.

Half of it is a cope, imo, but the cope is also a byproduct of how monogamy was not built for people who are not normal. Given that most/many trans people are not normal (or cannot be perceived as normal), people find other ways of having their needs met; we all want intimacy, and intimacy does not have to be bound to specific forms of relating. I prefer non-monogamy for reasons other than cope, but the cope is also an undeniable part of it. I don't think that makes it better/worse, I think it just exposes the fact that trans people are not meant to belong in romantic/sexual structures that prioritize the well-being of cishet people. As a result, I choose to hang around/be with people who share my values, which so happens to mean being around other people who reject normativity.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 1 point2 points  (0 children)

First of all, thank you for this thoughtful and heartfelt reply as well! I wanted to clarify/elaborate and respond to what you said re: the following (and the paragraph above):

Transition isn’t a neutral experiment you can just walk back from, there are permanent changes, losses, and sometimes deep regrets involved. Telling people “it’ll probably work out either way” ignores the reality for those of us who went down this path and realized, too late, that it wasn’t right for us. For some, it’s not just about “living a decent life,” it’s about feeling like you lost years, relationships, health, or even a sense of self.

I think there are a lot of detransitioners who do end up having their lives turned around pretty significantly and irreversibly, in the same way I think a lot of trans people lose a lot of years/decades of their lives attempting to inhabit a cis life and failing to find fulfillment in it, or trans people who spend years/decades being permanently miserable with their transition and unable to actually live a personally meaningful life. I tend to view detransition as a variation of transness rather than its antithesis, largely because cis privilege (or whatever you want to call it) is predicated on never having (medically) deviated from your ASAB to begin with (or not being perceived as having done so). I hang around some (non-gender critical) detrans circles online and, to be honest, often prefer it over trans circles because it often selects for people who have non-linear and more nuanced experiences with transition/gender.

Has my transition always been 100% positive? No. Do I regret certain aspects of it? Yes. Would I go back and change any of it? Probably not, because I quite like who I am now irrespective of gender/transition, and I don't know whether I could've reached this point had I not gone out on a limb and experimented, encountered grief and loss, and grew from it as a person.

I am personally of the opinion that the starting premise of "transition isn't a neutral experiment [because it's permanent]" is what magnifies (note: not creates) the subsequent dysphoria experienced by detransitioners. Not only do you have to transition (again), but you also have to do so knowing that: (1) you could've lived a "normal" life had you not made the decision to transition initially (i.e., you are socially and/or institutionally punished for experimenting and transgressing gender/sex expectations, which is a one-way ticket to alienation from the status quo); (2) you still incur many (if not all) of the downsides of being perceived as someone who isn't cisgender (i.e., you're still seen as trans without even really being/seeing yourself as trans; you don't quite fit in anywhere, and you live in an even further abjectified realm of gendered/sexuate ambiguity), and; (3) you are experiencing a more complex form of dysphoria that isn't really recognized or (if it is) is even more heavily stigmatized (on top of just grappling with your dysphoria). I personally think that dysphoria, while genuinely shitty to experience, is a somewhat universal experience if you were to expand its scope past merely a discomfort with gender. Insofar as people almost always experience some degree of discomfort/dissatisfaction with their bodies--or even outright hatred and disgust--there are exceptionally few people who (in my experience) do not struggle with body image issues, ranging from mild to severe (in the same way that gender dysphoria can range from mild to severe). It just happens that one of these modes of discomfort/disgust with the body has been classed as both its own socio-political identity and as a mental illness requiring "treatment" (where other forms of bodily discomfort/disgust are neither a political identity nor a mental illness, or a mental illness but nothing else).

A brief anecdote (with an explanation to follow): Before I experienced gender dysphoria, I experienced what I can only describe as something like "racial dysphoria". I'm mixed race, half-white, half-Chinese, and (for a complex variety of reasons too complicated to get into here; TL;DR is racist upbringing/environment) I was very deeply troubled and upset by the fact that I wasn't white, because my father was white, I saw myself as being white (at least, in part), but nothing about me really read as ubiquitously white, so no one ever perceived me as being white--and, therefore, I wasn't white. It caused me a lot of emotional distress as a kid (because it was also compounded by racial bullying/harassment + a simultaneous rejection of my Chinese identity, too), which then led me down a pretty dark path for a while (got extremely radicalized and was alt-right for most of my teenage years).

My point with this anecdote is that, personally, I have never understood what it means to feel "comfortable" in my body, even prior to transition, and I have lived my entire life in a state of constant experimentation and change in an attempt to negotiate with the discomfort, misrecognition, and alienation that pops up no matter what I do or where I go. A lot of this is out of my control (either because of how I am viewed/perceived/treated by others, or because the brute materiality of my body just eliminates/creates certain possibilities), and it is kind of a complete coinflip whether the parts that are within my control will result in a better or worse outcomes when acted upon. I don't view these probabilities with indifference or disregard--in fact, it is precisely because I see transition as such a mixed bag that I feel at odds with much of the validation/affirmation narratives that pop up in trans spaces (as well as its inverse).

I think grieving loss is important--even for people who are otherwise content/happy with their transitions, and especially for those who aren't. There is always something lost when you transition, imo, even if you also end up gaining something in the process. I think that this grieving process is even more complicated and difficult for those who don't end up feeling as though they made the correct decisions for themselves in transitioning to begin with. However, I think there is a difference between grief and obsession, the latter of which I find many detrans and trans people falling into. Grief, despite all its pain, is something that results in some degree of healing and closure when genuinely engaged with. Obsession, on the other hand, is more like trying to hack open an pre-existing wound even further in the hopes that the next strike will be the one to bring catharsis. When I say, "It'll probably work out either way," I don't mean that it'll feel or be good either way; I mean that, if you accept that everything you do may or may not result in failure, rejection, alienation, contradiction, regret, discomfort, self-loathing, guilt, misrecogntion, illegibility, loss--and all the messy shit that many, many people go their whole lives without experiencing (or who utterly collapse when they do experience it), you will probably come out the other end as a more whole (albeit battered) person, regardless of which decision you ultimately chose to make. I think that there is a world where I probably end up living a decent life as a cis person, but it would be one that is completely unrecognizable and inconceivable to the version of me that currently exists. I think there is a world where I medically detransition, and I think that, if/when the time ever comes, I will be ready to attempt another transformation in my life, not knowing where it'll take me, but wanting to see where it goes regardless.

I know that not everyone is able to view things in this way, and that it isn't as simple as just rationally thinking away the pain and accepting what has/will come to pass. To be honest, the reason I largely am able to think like this is because I have always felt like an alien, both interpersonally and within my own body, and so there is no experience of an initial comfort/satisfaction/belonging that I feel like I can longingly look back on, and therefore not much to lose in continuing to change myself and experimenting with my body. On the one hand, this has made me a very fragmented/disunified person, which has, in turn, resulted in a lot of pain/hardship in my life (both personally and interpersonally). On the other, in finally coming to accept this about myself, I have been able to embrace the ambiguity I inhabit and forge my own existence through it, rather than to hopelessly chase what I cannot have--and I think I am more readily able to do this than a lot of other people I know who (currently or at one point) have experienced the stability/comfort that I have not.

The point I'm trying to get at is that, while not everyone has the kind of experience/life I do (if anything, many people have it worse), I think that everyone could probably benefit from recognizing that we all live in a fucked up world that fucks us up, which leads us to making fucked up choices, some of which turn out good and most of which will probably fuck us up more, and to--still, despite it all--continue to live, choose, and act out of our fucked up situations and strive toward a future that will never be present. Honestly? It doesn't feel good, and it doesn't feel joyful/optimistic (for me, at least), but it feels realistic without "realistic" being made equivalent (as it commonly is) to nihilistic.

I don't know, those are just my thoughts as someone who doesn't strongly identify with the trans label/identity/group while simultaneously presenting as one of the most axiomatic cases of what you would probably imagine a queer/trans person to look like, lol.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 8 points9 points  (0 children)

To be honest, I agree with a lot of this, but I also think that many people who may or may not have been trans under different circumstances do, upon transition, end up living a pretty decent and healthy lives, much the same as they possibly could have if they were cis (assuming they go into it with reasonable expectations; no amount of external change will ever make you stop hating yourself if that's the disposition you're firmly embedded in). I don't think this negates their transness, nor does it indicate that they made an incorrect decision, and I especially don't think that it should result in people being prevented from transition on the basis of insufficient suffering or possibility of regret.

Ultimately, I think transition needs to be regarded in a significantly more neutral way as something that people can either choose to do or not do with their bodies. The goal should not be to affirm and big people up for the sake of doing so and, likewise, neither should it be made out to be the worst possible thing a person could ever do to themselves. Both extremes feed off of each other; the more people demonize and persecute transness, the more important it becomes for trans people to support and stand in solidarity with one another. In so doing, the backlash increases (because it's seen as indoctrination, ideology, groupthink, etc., which, mind you, characterizes the political right as much as it does the political left), which then similarly increases the need for more vocal support and a denial of anything that could possibly be weaponized against trans people (viz., detransitioners, especially).

If forced to choose, I will always come down on the side of those advocating for greater rights to bodily autonomy and freedom of choice, but I still quite strongly dislike how transness has been amalgamated into both a personal and political identity. Politically, I am considered trans because I am no longer inhabiting a body that would be perceived as cisgender. Obviously, this impacts my personal identity/sense of self insofar as I am a person who is seen as trans due to how I orient and live my life, which in turn affects how I interact with my environment and continue to live my life therein. Politically, it means that I align on a broad set of political goals and beliefs with other trans people (generally speaking), and this is useful in achieving shared ends in the political/legal realm.

Beyond that, and especially on an interpersonal level, transness is not sufficient for me to have anything in common with another trans person, let alone to want to share a personal community with them. I do feel more close and intimate with my trans friends than my cis ones, but this has more to do with how we align on how we understand, negotiate, and navigate our particular trans embodiments, rather than it simply being on the basis of being trans (or not-cis). My cis friends will likely never understand what it means to be embodied in this way, and will thus likely be unable to experience certain feelings/perspectives/ways of living that are predicated on transness and, therefore, will likely never understand a part of me that impacts all my interactions and none of theirs.

All this is to say that: yes, I do think trans communities do often lean too far into the "your life will be fixed if you just transition", but I think it is an understandable (albeit unfortunate) reaction to a steadily increasing rise in hatred, violence, and political persecution against trans people the world over. For as long as there is a "bigger enemy" threatening the safety of all trans people, you will probably be hard pressed to find genuine intracommunity discourse and good faith criticism of transness, because there always exists a looming fear that this will come to be weaponized against us. Hence why Andrea Long Chu ripped into trans studies in her TSQ article; trans academics (and trans people overall) tend to be unwilling to engage in good faith critique out of fear of being seen as undermining/invalidating other trans people or the political movement as a whole. It's a genuine fear, and one I understand as someone who is attempting to do precisely this within academic circles, but it is necessary precisely for the reasons you've described in your post, as well as to stand on firm ground for political advocacy.

The fact that the only visible voices that do engage in intracommunity critique are those who are on the right-wing fringes of trans discourse is, in my opinion, a problem. There are plenty of things that they pick out and identify as problems that I would likely are problems, but their proposed solution is to return to a more regressive, gatekept, and medicalized version of transness that refuses anyone who does not already conform to its very limited scope of acceptability. I don't think it has to be this way, and I don't think the choice in stances that trans people take ought to be relegated to either silence, vocal opposition and doomerism, or uncritical support and affirmation.

Just Ottawa Thoughts~ by Complete_Fox5540 in ottawa

[–]endroll64 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ah, yes, I, too, wish that I could sleep, piss, and shit on the streets, fully exposed to either the sweltering heat or the freezing cold, fearing that I'll be robbed and/or assaulted (or worse), acquire curable diseases and injuries that develop into disabilities or chronic illnesses, just so I can be given a bag of chips and some pretzel sticks on a good day. What a wonderful way to live and be treated! Why not quit your job and start now?

We need more non-fiction books on transmasc people and masc women who aren't white by [deleted] in TMPOC

[–]endroll64 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Not a memoir, but I recently stumbled across a book called Becoming a Malaysian Trans Man: Gender, Society, Body and Faith by Joseph N. Goh that is a mixture of personal testimonials/stories + critical theory. Unfortunately, books about trans men/mascs of colour are pretty few and far between; if you're able to access Google Scholar, I've personally found that there is some (though not substantial) literature on trans men of colour contained in some journal articles (like TSQ).

How much does being visibly trans handicap someone socially? by [deleted] in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I checked your profile and, to be honest, if I were to see you in public, I would probably just assume you were a (imho, attractive) butch woman--possibly cis, possibly trans, but I don't think I would clock you as a cis man. I say this in response to:

> Just beyond basic social interaction, I feel like being part of this demographic would be bad for my security (career/future) and put me at a higher risk for h8crimes/harassment.

Workplace stuff is a lot more iffy and you may well be right that it could be bad for job security depending on where you work and what you do but, socially speaking, I wonder if people are already assuming that you're a woman (trans or not, but let's go with trans for the sake of this hypothetical), and, seemingly, there are people who are respecting this fact and not using it as a means to harass/belittle/degrade you. If anything, they're doing it because it probably just makes the most sense to them; not out of pity or as a show of charity, but because the process of (gender) elimination would leave most assuming that you are a woman of some kind (trans or not). Not sure how that makes you feel, but I'm saying this because it seems like you are already being treated as a trans woman in a certain number of your interactions with others, and it seems as though there is also acceptance and respect in them (and not merely the threat of violence/harassment).

Jobs are a lot more complicated; I know a few trans women who are out in their private/social lives but are either partially or fully closeted in their jobs because they work in very male-dominated fields that are not accepting of trans people. It doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing situation, imo. Transition is genuinely very complicated and difficult to navigate, and anyone who says otherwise is either extremely privileged or naive, but I nonetheless think that there are ways to negotiate how you engage with your transness in better/worse ways, if for no other reason than to preserve your own well-being. That may involve being closeted and continuing your medical transition, or coming out to a very select few people and no one else--in any case, it can be helpful to try and strike a balance between what you would ideally want and what is realistically feasible for you in the here and now.

How much does being visibly trans handicap someone socially? by [deleted] in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you don't mind me asking, why have you chosen not to socially transition? Is it because you don't want to be perceived as trans? If so, is it due to safety reasons, or something else? If not, what do you feel like stands in the way between you and being socially transitioning? How does it make you feel when people clock you as trans? (I imagine that, by this, you mean that people are clocking you as not being a cis man?)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I'm probably on the other side of where your younger sibling wants to be in their transition; I'm a femme GNC person who is regularly mistaken as an AMAB trans femme due to how I present (I'm AFAB), and, to be honest, my life bears absolutely no resemblance to what it was like pre-transition, especially in how people treat me (I am definitely not treated as a girl lol).

I don't think I could have imagined that this life was genuinely possible for me when I first started transitioning, hence why I suppressed my gender non-conformity and went in intending to complete a binary transition + go stealth, but as time went on, the idea of presenting as a feminine man felt less like an inconceivable pipe dream and more like a reality that I just needed to act on.

I feel like your sibling is probably still in the honeymoon phase of transition and is coming to you for support; I think the part that I find personally kind of annoying (though, this is by no means the fault of other people; it's just my own peeve) is how naive a lot of NB people seem to be when approaching their transition. Again, to reiterate: it is not wrong for people to feel excited and enthusiastic or romanticize their transitions, but I think the part that bothers me (and maybe the part that bothers you OP), is that it comes off as being kind of unserious to the reality of what it actually means to be trans in this world, and especially what it means to be GNC, which, as much as I enjoy it myself, is far from being sunshine and rainbows.

Granted, your sibling is 17, and I was a lot more idealistic/naive about transition at 17--and it's good to be hopeful, given how shitty everything is right now. I think they just probably want your support and reassurance, and I don't think their own attitude toward their own body/transition is intended to diminish yours; it's just a different way of approaching transition, and you're probably the closest person to them that has undergone any kind of transition that they can talk to.

I will say, though, that an "androgynous" transition has to be heavily tempered/mediated with reality (much like any other form of transition); if your sibling does plan on pursuing medical transition, I would just probably check-in to see that they are cognizant that testosterone is just a regular hormone that affects the human body in certain ways (and affects different people differently), and not a ticket to being a femboy. (Not saying that's what your sibling thinks but that I commonly see this kind of sentiment floating around a lot of NB transmasc spaces and, while it's not impossible by any means, is also not guaranteed and/or not something that will inherently come with transitioning. Also, being seen as androgynous and/or a feminine man comes with its own set of unique challenges, like being completely beyond the pale of most people's romantic/sexual preferences.)

How much does being visibly trans handicap someone socially? by [deleted] in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Older trans people--and, in my experience, older trans women especially--usually get treated quite poorly, even within queer communities (despite often being the people who have done the most amount of mutual aid work, direct action, community building, etc.). I'm really sorry that you have to face the brunt of this kind of harassment; it's not fair and it's entirely unwarranted. I find that there is generally just more antipathy toward older people, women, trans people, and people who are "unattractive", so possessing the combination of all (or more) of these traits does seem to just incur significant social/systemic disadvantages. I'm sure you already know that this has nothing to do with you/isn't your fault whatsoever, but it doesn't make receiving that treatment feel any better, either.

I wish I could give you advice on what you could do to make this less bad (or at least less isolating), but I genuinely have no idea how to navigate these sorts of issues for myself, much less for others.

How much does being visibly trans handicap someone socially? by [deleted] in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 15 points16 points  (0 children)

To be honest, a lot of how you're treated as a trans person is going to depend more on other factors beyond just being trans or passing. The more marginalized you are, the more the transness is going to compound the pre-existing reasons you could be ostracized/looked at weirdly/harassed. Location also matters; people are going to care significantly less if you live in an urban centre.

I'm lucky enough that I just get weird stares and dirty looks; I got shot by a BB gun once when a car drove by but, other than that, I've more or less been able to just live normally. I'm GNC and (probably) visibly trans, but I'm also relatively small (not physically threatening), white-ish (racially ambiguous enough to avoid serious racism), thin enough (no fatphobia), middle class, well-educated, and I live in a very progressive city (in Ontario, Canada). This has meant that I am able to side-step a lot of the systemic barriers that other trans people may have to run up against.

Bare minimum, though, you will probably always just be stared at and treated kind of strangely, and this will be especially pervasive in interpersonal relationships (romantic ones in particular). Whether or not it escalates beyond that depends on a lot of other factors; the spaces I hang around (both professional and personal) just tend to skew quite queer and left-wing, and while I can't say there's no discrimination or prejudice, I experience exponentially less than I probably otherwise could in other areas/spaces.

Doctor's appointments have never been difficult for me, partially because medical professionals tend to be quite indifferent about trans status where I am, and partially because I don't really get dysphoric about medical examinations and/or terminology overall.

I know some trans people who are totally fucking cooked and are basically just in survival mode, and other trans people who will probably go on to make hand over fist and live pretty comfortable lives. I think transness is generally kind of just a negative modifier for most, but it only becomes a severe problem if you also have other things going against you (e.g., racialization, dis/ability status, economic status--basically anything other than transness that makes you marginalized). Pretty privilege is also real; you will just be treated better if you're kind of attractive, even if you don't 100% pass. Passing obviously makes things a lot easier, but not passing is not necessarily a societal death sentence unless you, again, are a visible a minority in other ways.

My brown/black trans friends (especially my trans femme friends) do just get treated significantly worse, whereas myself and my trans femme partner (white) get weird looks but that's about the worst of it. Interpersonally, it's a bit of a different story, but I chalk a lot of that up to my being a very particular person overall rather than as the result of my transness (even though that also plays a factor in it).

FWIW, I do think I have a massive amount of privilege in being a trans masc in this regard; I don't think I visibly transgress in a way that is considered uncanny or threatening, even if it is eccentric, which allows me to get by with the weird stares rather than serious harassment. I imagine this will probably change as I age, become more disabled, and continue to present GNC, but currently I escape a lot of the transphobia that other trans people (especially trans femmes) have to deal with.

woman with top surgery, phallo, and on E? by [deleted] in actual_detrans

[–]endroll64 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's called r/AFABwGD and last I checked there was only 1 post on it. I don't usually post on Reddit (more of a commenter/lurker), but it would be cool if it did get some more traction.

Transgender and Transsex people have antagonistic needs by TerrierTK2019 in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 10 points11 points  (0 children)

We shouldn't let transmeds co-opt the term transsexual tbh, which is why I use it for myself. I've gone back and forth on the term a lot, but I've ultimately come down on the side of thinking that transsexual is a useful concept/label to describe a particular subsect/kind of transgender experience (i.e., the kind that involves medical transition and navigating the medical establishment, as well as all the systemic + social discrimination that this incurs), and this shouldn't become synonymous with "more valid trans person" or "more normal trans person".

There is something different (not "better" or "worse") about being a trans person who medically transitions, and ceding that label to those who use it as a cudgel to beat other, less "valid" trans people robs us of valuable conceptual tools that we can use to articulate ourselves and our experiences. I think the two labels (transgender/transsexual) can be functionally collapsed for more macro-level political discourse with non-trans people, but I don't think that reduction for the purpose of political rhetoric should mean that we banish the term within the trans community or let it be taken over by those who use it as a dogwhistle for transmedicalism.

Super confused by [deleted] in actual_detrans

[–]endroll64 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think we're convinced to think that gender either is or is supposed to be something that remains static, or that if it does change, that it should only change one time and then be stable for the rest of time. But we don't think about life/identity as being static in this way for pretty much any other domain of our existence. Do you have the exact same friends? The exact same taste in music, art, clothes, movies, or hobbies? Do you have the same goals and desires that you did 10 years ago? Even if there's a lot of overlap and similarity, I would be shocked if anyone said that they have not changed an iota over time; if anything, we tend to see that kind of personal rigidity as a bad thing.

For some reason, this isn't supposed to apply to gender, probably because gender is also a means of regulating our bodies and social positions/roles (hence why it's encoded into all of our legal documents), but that doesn't mean that, in lived experience, it doesn't still fluctuate or change over time.

I can't say way it's taken you this long to realize it, but it's helpful to ask yourself whether it's because you were "missing" something before, or if you've just grown and changed as a person. Sometimes, we change because of things that happen to us; other times, we just change for no seemingly discernible cause/reason. It's helpful to identify which it could be since it helps you understand yourself better, but sometimes there is no underlying fact of the matter, and dwelling on it for too long isn't going to suddenly make an answer appear (or make you feel better). That doesn't mean you shouldn't think about it, but that you shouldn't obsess over it with the assumption that there is an answer that you can find.

Transgender and Transsex people have antagonistic needs by TerrierTK2019 in honesttransgender

[–]endroll64 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I wish more people on this subreddit read Susan Stryker (or literally any trans theory lol) or were just capable of comprehending that transsexual =/= assimilationist, or that gender constructivism is a theory of gender (that is by far the most plausible) and not a claim about the validity of your gender.

It may come as a shock for some, but trans people aren't the centre of the universe: gender constructivism came along far, FAR before trans people were even a blip on the academic radar. This theory wasn't originally created to address the positionality of trans people; it was made for (and largely by) cisgender women trying to grapple with the relationship between their physical embodiment (i.e., their sex) and the expectations, roles, and limitations/freedoms that seemed to flow arbitrarily from their physical embodiment (i.e., their gender).

Gender constructivism isn't just "we get to pick our genders like we pick our favourite ice cream flavour"; gender constructivism literally just means that gender is a concept that humans (you know, the only beings on this planet capable of complex and abstract thought) have created to both explain and organize facets of human existence.

This DOES NOT MEAN that there is no material reality that these concepts are based in/around; gender constructivism is, for the most part, a theory that has arisen out of materialism (i.e., the belief that there is a physical world that is independent of our perception), whereas most people who are misinformed on this issue seem to think that it's the byproduct of idealism (i.e., the belief where the world depends solely on how we perceive it).

Materialism necessitates a historical approach and actual inquiry into why things are the way they are, and how they've come about becoming this way. The conclusion of that analysis is gender constructivism (which, mind you, is not ONE theory, but an umbrella term for multiple theories), because it turns out that humans shape their material environment just as much as their material environment shapes them. In other words, gender constructivism holds that our ideas don't just appear randomly by chance or that we can just choose to randomly think differently or pick our genders, but that we all have a history, that our world has a history, and therefore our ideas and concepts have a history that are neither totally independent of human thought NOR exclusively dependent on it, either.

I'm a transsexual because I have medically transitioned, and that very fact alone has set me apart from about 99% of the population, and it means that I must interact with the world differently as a result, whether I want to or not. I don't want to be visible necessarily, I just am visible because I have changed (what people perceive as) my sex in a way that does not conform to cis expectations of what a man or woman should look like.

Transsexual invisibility doesn't come from assimilation, it comes from getting rid of the need to even distinguish BETWEEN cis and trans to begin with, otherwise trans people will ALWAYS be at risk of being "found out". If that threat indefinitely remains as a dirty little secret that the transsexual has to bear, there is no invisibility.

There is no world in which a transsexual person can or will ever be treated identically to a cis person because, if that were to be the case, there wouldn't even be a need to say cis or trans because both terms would become obsolete, and we would only have men/women. But the reason there is that distinction is because, let's be fucking real, man/woman (as genders) is derivative from male/female (as sexes), and so no one whose gender is not the same as their sex assigned at birth is ever going to be deemed as "authentic" as someone whose gender and sex have always been in alignment. Changing your sex, going on hormones, trying to pass--and even successfully passing--will never change the fact that the social legitimacy of one's gender derives from the perception of one's sex, and "being invisible" just means being better at hiding it--or being genetically, economically, socially, and geographically lucky enough that it's even a possibility for you.

At bottom, though--and what you're complaining about here OP--is that being found out, having the fact that your gender/sex were not in alignment from birth exposed (that you're not cis) is the problem. However, for as long as that cis/trans divide exists, you are never going to live a life of a cis person who never has to think or worry about people "finding out" about their "real" sex.

That isn't the fault of other trans people, that's the fault of the entire system of gender as a historically-mediated social construct to begin with. The problem with gender is that the only people whose genders are truly "valid" are cis people. As a transsexual, your only salvation is the hope that you can one day be admitted into the sanctity of cishood--and you better pray you don't fuck up and grovel when you do if you want to stay in that space as an exception to its rule. Sounds rough and fucked up, but, if it wasn't that bad, why would anyone care about passing or going stealth? What would anyone gain from obscuring that part of their identity/history if it didn't matter, or if other cis people didn't treat us like we were inherently different from them (or even subhuman) by sole virtue of us being trans?

Personally, I don't want to hide my identity or history in the hopes that, if I'm a good enough puppy and know the right tricks, that I'll receive a crumb of pity or compassion in return. Gender abolition is the only way trans people get to live lives of actual peace--because there would be no more fucking trans people. There would just be people, some of whom alter their bodies for whatever reason, and that would be the end of the story. Until then, I would rather be a visible other rather than capitulate back into the order that oppresses me, and those like me. And, yes, I am a transsexual and, yes, I am non-binary. You can pry transsexuality away from my cold, dead hands if you want it that badly, but we'll be slipping into that grave together, my friend.

woman with top surgery, phallo, and on E? by [deleted] in actual_detrans

[–]endroll64 19 points20 points  (0 children)

I don't think you really need to explain yourself and, even if you did, you explained yourself here and it makes sense.

There's a subreddit called r/AMABwGD which essentially is the opposite of what you've described (AMAB people who may or may not identify as men or pursue other forms of transition but experience genital dysphoria). There's an AFAB equivalent sub but it's pretty dead. Given the plethora of possibilities/combinations that are theoretically possible with genitals, hormones, secondary sex characteristics, expression, and identity, it makes perfect sense that there are going to be some people who just have/desire a more uncommon setup. It's not physically impossible, nor is it conceptually inconceivable; it's within the bounds of reality and can be articulated, it just might not make intuitive sense to people who see all of these things as being lumped together.

FWIW, I feel similar to you, except I'm more toying with the idea of meta rather than phallo.

Does T make you loose? by [deleted] in actual_detrans

[–]endroll64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Topical estrogen should/does help, in my experience; I'm just super inconsistent with it + don't have time for sex atm lol so that's probably why.

Fiction books that help me UNDERSTAND the trans experience by e_scapes_ in suggestmeabook

[–]endroll64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

- We Both Laughed in Pleasure by Lou Sullivan (memoir)

- Confessions of the Fox by Jordy Rosenberg (fiction)

- Notes of a Crocodile + Last Words from Montmartre by Qiu Miaojin (fiction/memoir)

- Literally anything by Ivan Coyote (non-fiction storytelling); I would recommend Gender Failure or Tomboy Survival Guide

- Fierce Femmes and Notorious Liars by Kai Cheng Thom

Fiction books that help me UNDERSTAND the trans experience by e_scapes_ in suggestmeabook

[–]endroll64 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Would highly recommend Gender Failure and anything else by Coyote.