Que deus te elimine ✨

Abundant planting. The effect of the herbaceous planting on either side of this straight flight of steps is to give it a meandering line. This is an example of excellent grouping of plants to complement a structural feature.

- marsha p. johnson repeatedly identified as a gay man and drag queen and survived into an era where the language did already exist if he chose to identify as transsexual. he explicitly stated that he was not transsexual and claimed that all transsexual people were also homosexual.

- sylvia rivera did identify as a transsexual woman (and made disparaging speeches about lesbians). she was not an ally to lesbians. lesbians and transwomen have not always been allies.

- neither of them were there when the stonewall riots began, according to marsha’s own testimony. sylvia was sleeping off a drug trip on a park bench, and by the time marsha arrived at stonewall, the riots were already in full swing.

- storme delarverie, a mixed black gender-nonconforming lesbian and drag king, may have been the one who incited the stonewall riots. she never identified as a transman despite surviving into an an era where the language was made accessible to do so. accounts differ as to who started the riots.

- stonewall was not a special haven for trans people and drag artists, it was just some bar where gay people met up. by all accounts, it wasn’t even a good bar.

- pride as a festival and parade was invented by gay men, lesbians, and bisexual people. fred sergeant is one of those gay men, and he has been beaten (in recent years, as an elderly man) by trans people and their allies due to his views on medical transition. non-homosexual trans people were unheard of in this era.

When a child would be born it’s biological sex, being an actual physical reality, would be noticed but not a single assumption regarding the child’s personality would be made based on it.

Growing up, children would be free to chose what toys and clothes they prefer. If they want to play with toy trucks or dolls, it would be fine either way. If they want to dress comfortably or in frilly colorful dresses, it would be fine.

Certain personality traits would not be encouraged in members of one sex and discouraged in the other. Females would be free to be strong, brave and assertive and males would not be shamed for being shy and soft spoken.

No female child would be called a tomboy and no male child would be called a sissy. No kid would ever be bullied for what we in our gendered world call “gender expression”.

When children would reach puberty they would still be free to dress how they want. Females would not be pressured to wear clothes that reveal their bodies and males would not be shamed if they chose to. Everybody would have a free choice of accessories, which would not be categorized as “men’s” or “women’s” but people could should whichever they liked. Or chose to not wear accessories at all if that’s what they are more comfortable with.

Females would not be pressured to keep their bodies slim, soft and hairless. Males would not be pressured to be athletic and muscular. Expectations of femininity and masculinity upon the body would not exist and affect negatively people’s relationship with their own body.

Everyone could choose a career without fearing stigmatization within that particular field because of their biological sex. The most important thing would be competence and not what someone has between their legs.

Domestic work would not be considered “women’s work” and would be shared equally between the sexes.

Biological sex would only be thought about when relevant. And everyone would be free to be themselves without ever having to worry about gender expectations. Nobody would feel the need to repress certain parts of their personality and exaggerate others in order to fit into some gender role that is being forced on them.

Gender abolitionism is not about restricting people’s choices but about giving them greater freedom.

Some of this sounds great. Don’t force certain personality or behavior on kids. Don’t pressure people to maintain a specific physique.

Some of it sounds like absolute hell. I cope with my gender dysphoria by doing things that are generally considered feminine. I want to dress a certain way because that style of dress is feminine. I use GENDER EXPRESSION to EXPRESS my GENDER, because if I don’t - or in this supposedly perfect world -  I CAN’T, then my dysphoria goes off the wall with no gender euphoria to offset it.

I don’t think there is anything wrong with having gender tied to certain elements of self-expression. The problem is not that male and female things exist - it’s that current social norms enforce those concepts too strictly. Men can enjoy feminine things; that certainly does not mean the PERSON is feminine, but the THING he enjoys can still be considered as such.

Gender “norms” allow people to identify ourselves and each other. My entire life revolves around this. My happiness revolves around identifying myself as woman, and part of that includes having others also identify me as a woman. In a world where gender and gender norms do not exist, my identity and sense of self also cease to exist.

We are not stopping you from being who you want to be; you are stopping us from dismantling our sex-based oppression.

If the goal of trans and non binary people is to maintain gender and therefore female oppression and male supremacy, just so that their identities are validated, then they are choosing to stand directly in the way of feminist goals and female liberation from sex based oppression.

If MY chains must remain in place so that your self expression can be “validated,” then YOU are standing in the way of my liberation.

Gender, the idea that there are things that are masculine and things that are feminine, is just another way of saying sex stereotypes. Sex stereotypes exist to reinforce male supremacy and female subordination.

There is literally no reason other than reinforcing oppression to associate stereotypes with either sex. The concepts of masculinity and femininity were only invented to serve the purpose of reinforcing male supremacy and reinforcing female subordination. These stereotypes are harmful to those who fit decently within them and even more to those who don’t (which includes trans people, among others).

If there is a group of trans activists that is claiming that dismantling these sex stereotypes is harmful to them because then they won’t be able to use the markers of sex stereotypes to demonstrate their gender identity, then they are in fact reinforcing those stereotypes and therefore reinforcing male supremacy and female subordination. 

This is anti feminist and actively works against female liberation and the liberation of all people from oppressive sex stereotypes.

Everyone enjoying freedom and humanity would destroy sex stereotypes and therefore the entire structure of trans identities.

this is so fascinating to me. he admits his life revolves around gender stereotypes and that his happiness depends on other people playing along.

is wanting to be a wife and mother a requirement for being a woman?

why might OP be annoyed with replies assuming that this post is about being aroace or transmasc if a woman doesn’t want to be a wife or mother?

are there reasons unrelated to sexuality and romantic interest that might make a woman not want to be a wife or mother?

are there reasons unrelated to gender identity and expression that might make a woman not want to be a wife and mother?

core concept: what is gender essentialism?

is it gender essentialism to imply that all women inherently want to be wives and mothers? could this be what OP is critiquing?

look at the notes OP responds to. is it gender essentialism to imply that being a wife and mother is so affixed to womanhood that to not want to be those things means you’re incapable of sexual/romantic feelings, or not a woman?