spelunking

i'm a transneutral enby who wishes to have an open dialogue about intra community issues. ive been on this webbed site for 13 years, ive seen it all. ive been out as transnuetral since 2013.

im a radical inclusionist, i believe that anyone who engages with queerness in good faith deserves to be here, kill the panopticon in your mind.

i think that it is an important to have a good faith open dialogue about issues within and outside of the community, i feel that the ""discourse"" is just people talking past each other and refusing to take others in good faith, name calling and quite frankly childish engagement with disagreements.

i use 'community' as a loose amalgamation of information, resources, and social groups. you do not have to accept an asshole into your social group, but you do have to let them access resources and information pertaining to their lived experience and needs.

i especially want to open up a dialogue that dissects the transmasc/transfem binary dichotomy that is ever present within trans theory, a reliance on 'ASAB'/'AGAB' language, and enby and intersex exclusion.

i want to engage with this platform in good faith, disagreements will be discussed with that in mind. however, i do have my personal limits. terfs and transphobes are not welcome, i have no interest in arguing with cis transphobes.

this account will not engage in callout posts, especially those against our transfem sisters, as it has and will continue to be a tool to demonize, silence, and exclude transfems.

Just cus you say it isnt inclusive to intersex folk doesn't mean it is.

Would you say a straight man in a relationship with a bi woman is facing biphobia? No. He's just in a relationship with one

Similarly transmascs whilst sharing space with tma people are not tma as they merely share the same space culturally but not socioeconomically as proven by every study that shows opinions on transfems are lower and more likely to be antagonistic than towards transmascs.

my side is i want to have a better more nuanced community wide discussion on our shared oppression that doesnt devolve into people just yelling at each other :<

i would not say a straight man in a relationship faces biphobia because he is straight. however, i dont think its fair to compare transmascs/transfems to straight/bisexual. its apples and oranges. in a previous ask, i related it to 2 bisexual people dating each other, which imho is more comparable. bisexual jess and jakey face biophobia and homophobia, however they face different versions of it because of their gender. bisexual jess might get "oh thank god youre with a man so i can have a grandchild" and bisexual jakey might get "oh thank god youre not a faggot" both are experiencing biphobia and homophobia but experience it in different ways. i think that the intersections of transmisogyny and transphobia bleed into each other a lot more than specific gendered biphobia though. its an imperfect comparison but i think its a lot closer than comparing transmascs to straight people. i agree that transfems are more likely to face outward violence at the hands of transphobes, both thru social murder (the engles definition) and thru direct acts of violence.

It might not correctly describe intersex people's intersectional oppression. Because their oppression intersects far more with intersexism/intersexphobia than any other oppression!

Tma/tme has been a very useful tool particularly among those multiply marginalised as a way of directing attention to the specific social and cultural conditions transmisogyny creates.

is it though? it literally is a dichotomy between 'exempt' and 'affected'

and if it doesnt account for intersex people, who imo are inextricably linked to trans liberation (think venn diagram), then how inclusive is it?

tma/tme language draws arbitrary lines on what type of person can experience transmisogyny. transmisogyny exists, and is integral to the functionality of the patriarchy. however, i think it is reductive to delineate between "transmisogyny exempt" and "transmisogyny affected" people in the ways these terms have been used. when we could be more precise with our language, not discount the lived experience of others and categorically say that "someone cannot be affected by this axis of oppression" is reductive and essentialist. when talking about the experiences of specifically trans women and femmes, we can use terms explicitly like "trans women and femmes." i feel as though the urge to simplify our language into catchy 3/4 letter acronyms has left a lot to be desired and lessened the efficacy of communication. which in lies my issue with the terms, they are imprecise and require constant and changing attestations of their meanings, which defeats the purpose of having a term.

transneutral is an umbrella term for nonbinary people who fall outside the transfem/masc binary.

who can be transneutral? anyone! regardless of ASAB. im not a cop.

why is transneutral? transneutral as a term has been around for a minute, dating back to at least the early 2010s. transneutral is used to describe, not in oppose to, but in conjunction with transfem and transmasc, the process by which and individual can express androgyny / agender / genderfluid / multigender experiences. one can be transfem / transmasc on top of being transneutral, or they can just be transneutral. utilize the term if you feel like its right for you.