some call her blue garfield

And like... you do get that that is kinda insane, right?

Because this is something that so often leads to suffering. And I am saying this as someone disabled, who had so many issues due to this in his childhood.

Just three examples: when I was 7, I was supposed to get checked for autism. My mother did not want an autistic child. Since she just could have a "neurotypical" child by refusing diagnosis, she did just that.

When I was 12, my mother had decided I needed a certain plastic surgery (one that had a minor health benefit, but still was largely a beauty thing). I did not want it. I really, really did not want it. We still went through almost the entire process until thankfully there was a doctor who went: "Wait, this is elective. I am refusing to do this on a child that does not want it."

And when I was 14 my mother refused to get me to the hospital when I had severe food poisoning. She refused me hospital treatment for almost two weeks. By the time I got actually taken to the hospital I was almost dead.

And here is the thing: all of this should just not happen. The doctor when I was 12 was cool, but... he refused to do the surgery because he had the right to make a conscience call. Legally my mother was in the right to force me into that elective surgery. And that just should not be the case.

A lot of children die and suffer due to their legal inability to consent - or refuse consent - to medical treatments. And I wish y'all would understand that.

this shows up when transfems make posts for and about other transfems, and invariably transmascs will come along to try and make it about them as well. they dont see it as a womens post, they see it as a Trans post that hasnt mentioned transmascs yet

this also shows up in discussions of transmisogyny. transfems discuss the intersectional bigotry we face and transmascs will get defensive that the conversation centres us and not the Trans Demographic as a whole. this is where "transandrophobia" theory comes in, from transmascs misconstruing transmisogyny as just "transphobia for girls" and insisting there must be a transphobia for boys in return, and to deny "transandrophobia" legitimacy is to deny that transmascs face any transphobia. its morphed into its own transmisogynist violence at this point but its inception was very clearly fueled by the transmasc insecurity over there not being one Trans Experience. transmascs think there has to be a blue version, because they dont conceive of transfems belonging to a different demographic than them

i think no small part of this is that transmasculine transition doesnt force them to reckon with transmisogyny the same way transfeminine transition does. of course, it would be wrong to claim no transfem falls victim to this, but far more transfems do have that reckoning because we are forcibly subjected to transmisogyny. and because transmascs flatten the demographic to just Trans, they believe themselves to have a postion of authority to speak on trans issues without ever being forced to interrogate their inherent transmisogynist biases from living in a transmisogynist society and understand the misogyny within the demographic, and any pushback against them is pushback against the Trans Demographic as a whole