3ggsandwich

Jumpscare! That hot chick had a cock! This incident is about how everyone except her feels about it.

This is Fern, everyone exclusively refers to them with they/them pronouns, it will never be elaborated upon narratively, they are a static character outside the main cast

Tee hee, I'm an anime girl who's actually a BOY. Have I mentioned I'm a boy today?

Critically acclaimed subplot where a trans man self actualises and then does nothing else for the entire rest of the series. Everyone has long serious talks about his identity in vague terms that are perfectly useless for anyone to reflect on themselves or relate to him in any way whatsoever.

Critically acclaimed story about the tragedy of a 40-year-old trans woman who's so, so brave. Just so incredibly brave. The cis man playing her sacrificed so much of his dignity for this role where he put on a wig and said "respect my choice to live my truth".

Today on Copaganda we ask the important question: Is the murdered sex worker in the wrong sometimes? It's complicated, because penis.

Because Fern is treated as a substitute for representation of nonbinary experiences in general. Fern has always been Fern, their pronouns have always been they/them, and that means as far as the story is concerned they are effectively a cis nonbinary person.

They have never transitioned beyond what the audience has to infer from the fact that they exist and use they/them pronouns. The same trans representation for someone using she/her pronouns literally would not register as trans rep, because she would just textually read as a cis woman.

One Fern is whatever. Many Ferns across multiple pieces of media, consistently treated as sufficient representation, become a problem. Trans "representation" without transition.

Defanged. Nonthreatening. Easy to pretend you didn't even notice. Decoupled from having been born, having been expected to be one gender and then actually being another.

1. this is not true

Why are you defending such posters. Nobody asked you to, and it was entirely unnecessary. Shut the fuck up and less transfems talk about our oppression. Your whole post (most of which I cut out) was just mansplaining to me what these posters were doing as if I, the person talking about them and directly affected by their rhetoric, did not understand.

Yeah, they're trying to persuade cis people who don't care about transfems. That is the problem. Transphobic cis people are not viable allies in transfeminist liberation. Why do you want them as allies so desperately.

The reaction of Black men to feminism has been notoriously negative. They are, of course, even more threatened than Black women by the possibility that Black feminists might organize around our own needs. They realize that they might not only lose valuable and hardworking allies in their struggles but that they might also be forced to change their habitually sexist ways of interacting with and oppressing Black women. Accusations that Black feminism divides the Black struggle are powerful deterrents to the growth of an autonomous Black women’s movement.

Tumblr user spyrothesquish-0006 (2005)

Yeah if Black men benefit from misogynoir there's no reason to believe that trans men don't benefit from transmisogyny.

The fact both Black cis men and white trans men sit there and cry about how feminism "divides" the struggle in the same way white cishet men say feminists hating on men "isn't helping their cause" is not coincidence.

It's always the same kind of nonsense excuse for it too. "I face hardship too! And you're ignoring that!"

And it's like...no? I'm literally just centering women instead of you because the stakes are much higher, at least, in reality where the rest of us are. Trans women face more violence and that's doubly true for Black trans women. That is a fact. We are not "all equally out of the frying pan and into the fire"

Trans women of color, who are among the most likely targets of violence, see statistics that reflect their reality co-opted to bolster the idea that all women are facing the same level of danger. Yet support from mainstream white feminists for the issues that directly impact trans women has been at best minimal, and often nonexistent.

- Mikki Kendall, Hood Feminism

And now trans men are co-opting this statistics too? So that they too can pretend we all face the same level of danger?

That's transmisogyny!!!

Decentering Black women has never helped Black women either and as an anti-racist I see no reason to keep doing that.

Thinking otherwise just to save yourself?

That's privilege!!!

And guess how often trans men center trans women of color 💀💀

What's worse? The entitlement. That extra layer of privilege. Expecting trans women and especially Black trans women to decenter their actual lived realities in exchange for validating the feelings of trans men.

And to that I say if you're so worried about whatever issue(s)you're facing (racism, transphobia, classism, etc) then you should center women in that struggle too, we all know they're facing more danger than men are.

To quote The Combahee River Collective Statement again:

In “A Black Feminist’s Search for Sisterhood,” Michele Wallace arrives at this conclusion: We exists as women who are Black who are feminists, each stranded for the moment, working independently because there is not yet an environment in this society remotely congenial to our struggle—because, being on the bottom, we would have to do what no one else has done: we would have to fight the world. [2] Wallace is pessimistic but realistic in her assessment of Black feminists’ position, particularly in her allusion to the nearly classic isolation most of us face. We might use our position at the bottom, however, to make a clear leap into revolutionary action.

If Black women were free, it would mean that everyone else would have to be free since our freedom would necessitate the destruction of all the systems of oppression.

And therein lies proof of yet another way trans men utilize their privilege: asking for the attention, time, and labor of women who's freedom will not be won by fighting for the rights of anyone but women.

What's worse? When you disagree with those transmascs they paint you as a petty, hateful feminazi/radfem who just hates men and loves causing community discourse!!

That's transmisogyny!!

Anyway.

The oppression of transfemmes isn't build on the oppression of transmascs so liberating transmascs won't lead to the liberation of transfemmes. But the oppression of transmascs is built on the same systems that oppress trans femmes.

We should all have solidarity with one another through the structures of oppression we face whether it be race, transphobia, class, ableism, colonization, etc.

And that solidarity should also stretch into allyship and understanding where it intersects with the structures we don't face. We should be uplifting those of us who face the highest levels of persecution and violence.

Likewise this kind of praxis should lead us all right back to the conclusion that the Combahee River Collective came to. The common denominator is Black women. Thats who we need to be uplifting and fighting for.

Black intersex women, Black trans women, Black indigenous women, Black immigrant women, Black disabled women, etc.

Black women are capable of facing every single intersection of oppression and it's Black women who face the highest rates of violence across nearly all of those intersections and I'm saying this as an Ojibwe two spirit who knows better than to act like a afro-indigenous women don't exist.

If Black women were free to be Black, to be women, to be disabled, trans, fat, old, intersex, to be indigenous, etc then we all would be free to be those things.

If all Black women were safe, all the rest of us would be, too.

Can the same be said of liberating transmascs? I didn't think so.

Why aren't we talking about the real reason male college enrollment is dropping? (Celeste Davis, Oct 6 2024)

"White flight is a term that describes how white people move out of neighborhoods when more people of color move in.

White flight is especially common when minority populations become the majority. That neighborhood then declines in value.

Male flight describes a similar phenomenon when large numbers of females enter a profession, group, hobby or industry—the men leave. That industry is then devalued.

Take veterinary school for example:

In 1969 almost all veterinary students were male at 89%.

By 1987, male enrollment was equal to female at 50%.

By 2009, male enrollment in veterinary schools had plummeted to 22.4%

A sociologist studying gender in veterinary schools, Dr. Anne Lincoln says that in an attempt to describe this drastic drop in male enrollment, many keep pointing to financial reasons like the debt-to-income ratio or the high cost of schooling.

But Lincoln’s research found that “men and women are equally affected by tuition and salaries.”

Her research shows that the reason fewer men are enrolling in veterinary school boils down to one factor: the number of women in the classroom.

For every 1% increase in the proportion of women in the student body, 1.7 fewer men applied.

One more woman applying was a greater deterrent than $1000 in extra tuition! (…)

Since males had dominated these professions for centuries, you would think they would leave slowly, hesitantly or maybe linger at 40%, 35%, 30%, but that’s not what happens.

Once the tipping point reaches majority female- the men flee. And boy do they flee!

It’s a slippery slope. When the number of women hits 60% the men who are there make a swift exit and other men stop joining.

Morty Schapiro, economist and former president of Northwestern University has noticed this trend when studying college enrollment numbers across universities:

“There’s a cliff you fall off once you become 60/40 female/male. It then becomes exponentially more difficult to recruit men.”

Now we’ve reached that 60% point of no return for colleges.

As we’ve seen with teachers, nurses and interior design, once an institution is majority female, the public perception of its value plummets.

Scanning through Reddit and Quora threads, many men seem to be in agreement - college is stupid and unnecessary.

A waste of time and money. You’re much better off going into the trades, a tech boot camp or becoming an entrepreneur. No need for college. (…)

When mostly men went to college? Prestigious. Aspirational. Important.

Now that mostly women go to college? Unnecessary. De-valued. A bad choice. (…)

School is now feminine. College is feminine. And rule #1 if you want to safely navigate this world as a man? Avoid the feminine.

The reaction of Black men to feminism has been notoriously negative. They are, of course, even more threatened than Black women by the possibility that Black feminists might organize around our own needs. They realize that they might not only lose valuable and hardworking allies in their struggles but that they might also be forced to change their habitually sexist ways of interacting with and oppressing Black women. Accusations that Black feminism divides the Black struggle are powerful deterrents to the growth of an autonomous Black women’s movement.

Tumblr user spyrothesquish-0006 (2005)

Yeah if Black men benefit from misogynoir there's no reason to believe that trans men don't benefit from transmisogyny.

The fact both Black cis men and white trans men sit there and cry about how feminism "divides" the struggle in the same way white cishet men say feminists hating on men "isn't helping their cause" is not coincidence.

It's always the same kind of nonsense excuse for it too. "I face hardship too! And you're ignoring that!"

And it's like...no? I'm literally just centering women instead of you because the stakes are much higher, at least, in reality where the rest of us are. Trans women face more violence and that's doubly true for Black trans women. That is a fact. We are not "all equally out of the frying pan and into the fire"

Trans women of color, who are among the most likely targets of violence, see statistics that reflect their reality co-opted to bolster the idea that all women are facing the same level of danger. Yet support from mainstream white feminists for the issues that directly impact trans women has been at best minimal, and often nonexistent.

- Mikki Kendall, Hood Feminism

And now trans men are co-opting this statistics too? So that they too can pretend we all face the same level of danger?

That's transmisogyny!!!

Decentering Black women has never helped Black women either and as an anti-racist I see no reason to keep doing that.

Thinking otherwise just to save yourself?

That's privilege!!!

And guess how often trans men center trans women of color 💀💀

What's worse? The entitlement. That extra layer of privilege. Expecting trans women and especially Black trans women to decenter their actual lived realities in exchange for validating the feelings of trans men.

And to that I say if you're so worried about whatever issue(s)you're facing (racism, transphobia, classism, etc) then you should center women in that struggle too, we all know they're facing more danger than men are.

To quote The Combahee River Collective Statement again:

In “A Black Feminist’s Search for Sisterhood,” Michele Wallace arrives at this conclusion: We exists as women who are Black who are feminists, each stranded for the moment, working independently because there is not yet an environment in this society remotely congenial to our struggle—because, being on the bottom, we would have to do what no one else has done: we would have to fight the world. [2] Wallace is pessimistic but realistic in her assessment of Black feminists’ position, particularly in her allusion to the nearly classic isolation most of us face. We might use our position at the bottom, however, to make a clear leap into revolutionary action.

If Black women were free, it would mean that everyone else would have to be free since our freedom would necessitate the destruction of all the systems of oppression.

And therein lies proof of yet another way trans men utilize their privilege: asking for the attention, time, and labor of women who's freedom will not be won by fighting for the rights of anyone but women.

What's worse? When you disagree with those transmascs they paint you as a petty, hateful feminazi/radfem who just hates men and loves causing community discourse!!

That's transmisogyny!!

Anyway.

The oppression of transfemmes isn't build on the oppression of transmascs so liberating transmascs won't lead to the liberation of transfemmes. But the oppression of transmascs is built on the same systems that oppress trans femmes.

We should all have solidarity with one another through the structures of oppression we face whether it be race, transphobia, class, ableism, colonization, etc.

And that solidarity should also stretch into allyship and understanding where it intersects with the structures we don't face. We should be uplifting those of us who face the highest levels of persecution and violence.

Likewise this kind of praxis should lead us all right back to the conclusion that the Combahee River Collective came to. The common denominator is Black women. Thats who we need to be uplifting and fighting for.

Black intersex women, Black trans women, Black indigenous women, Black immigrant women, Black disabled women, etc.

Black women are capable of facing every single intersection of oppression and it's Black women who face the highest rates of violence across nearly all of those intersections and I'm saying this as an Ojibwe two spirit who knows better than to act like a afro-indigenous women don't exist.

If Black women were free to be Black, to be women, to be disabled, trans, fat, old, intersex, to be indigenous, etc then we all would be free to be those things.

If all Black women were safe, all the rest of us would be, too.

Can the same be said of liberating transmascs? I didn't think so.