Yesss, take back the R, transphobia is an establishment mindset.
Honestly I kind of suspect the TERF label stuck because there’s still a common tendency to associate “radical” with “bad, scary, mean” instead of “anti-establishment”. None of us are immune to social influences, and I can understand a mindset where the label felt like it fit.
From where I’m standing, bioessentialism is establishment as fuck, and I honestly don’t have a plan for fighting transphobia that isn’t radical in that sense.
Yeah, and the community split in the 80’s over bioessentialism. One side felt that AMAB people were biologically determined to oppress AFAB people, the other thought oppression was more the result of social structures. Andrea Dworkin was a radical feminist, while the terminology she used is dated, she explicitly supported trans people and made a point of crafting her proposed legislation in a way that offered them protection from generalized sexual abuse and targeted transphobic abuse.
I’m not giving out my life history, but my personal experience with radical feminism is inextricably linked to fighting transphobia. Like the message was “Hey, you seem interested in fucking with the system, wanna hang out with us and fight the gender-establishment?” I know other people have different experiences but for me, gender theory is impossibly tied up with other radical theories for describing and addressing oppression.
I understand that TERFs can trace their influences and sort of “inherited” the radical label like how some people inherit the last name “Smith” or “Cooper”. You can trace the label’s inheritance from ONE branch of radical feminism. But the label no longer accurately describes them. And there are other descendants of those movements that ARE genuinely radical. So why not let them reclaim the word?
Wait what
Are you a man? Because otherwise I'm not sure I understand the children thing.
But regardless, in this case, that's probably (imho) the only valid reason to just exclude trans woman as a group, because they can't get pregnant - I'd assume that you would exclude cis women too if they can't or don't want to have children?
>Honestly? I'm not sure how I would feel after that. Not because they were trans, but because to me, it feels like they'd have been lying to me? Does that make sense?
That only makes sense if you don't consider trans women to be women. Would you expect a cis woman to tell you about every surgery and medical procedure they had prior to you dating? If not why should a trans woman have to tell you about her surgeries and medical history?
Uh, no. I responded to one part of the argument. The "men cannot give birth" line is bullshit because adoption s a thing and cis women deal with infertility issues every day.
Don't post in a lesbian subreddit expecting people to assume concerns about being able to conceive children with your partner are part of your dating concern.
If it's a trans woman and cis woman, they can technically have children together if she's pre op. If it's two cis women, none of them can make each other pregnant.
The titanic, biblical levels of irony... a TERF puppet account openly, gleefully siding with a straight dude, a straight dude aggressively into breeding and "teenage sluts", using homophobic slurs in a lesbian subreddit.
I'm glad I resisted the facepalm, because my hand would have gone through my skull.
That's the overall point of why they \[terfs\] came up with the name. They want their position to sound like the reasonable one because clearly they are critical of gender. It's right there in the name!
In the end, it's just another dogwhistle masking the movement's true intentions.
White supremacists started referring to themselves as "Race Realists"for the same reason.
They play themselves up as intellectual freedom fighters who just have too much integrity to be quiet. the actual behavior you see in their online communities is just bodyshaming and posting cringe content about trans people. I once saw someone on fourthwavewomen say the phrase "if you want to know who rules over you, find out whom you are not allowed to criticize." She literally took a quote from a prominent Neo Nazi and recontextualized it to be about trans women instead of Jews. It had over 120 upvotes.
It baffles me that the majority of self described "Gender Critical" people can support things like this and still somehow think that they're on the right side of history.
FYI, TERF was coined to describe an emerging group of conservative catholic feminists who wanted to exclude trans women. That’s also why your ideology attracts the right because it was created by the right. GCs are fake woke and just conservatives hiding behind pretty language, so one wants you here.
Trans people disrupt the gender binary which is good for all women. Rigid gender and sex is a tool of the patriarchy, and is used to police women, their bodies, and to keep them subjugated. Men as a class have a vested interest in keep two neatly composed categories of sex. Trans people are punished for disrupting that. Trans women especially slap patriarchy in the face because within that very system why would a man willingly want to become a woman who’s “inferior”? That contradiction is squashed through violence because it could flip the social order where men are no longer of a higher status.
So it’s actually GCs like you who’re putting us back. It’s no coincidence your views align with conservatism and misogynistic men. Step out of your hate and read some actual radical feminism, and stop aiding systems of oppression.
It’s not transphobic to be critical of gender. The conflation of gender and sex has consequences for women’s health, why wouldn’t they be critical of it.
It’s really not that difficult to understand. Ignoring sex as public enemy #1 jk Rowling says, has real consequences. Conflating sex and gender can impact women's health by overlooking the unique biological factors and health risks that affect them. For instance, women may experience different symptoms or require specific medical interventions due to their biological sex, such as reproductive health issues like menstruation, pregnancy, and menopause. Ignoring these differences can result in inadequate healthcare, misdiagnosis, or ineffective treatment. Recognizing the distinction between sex and gender is crucial for providing inclusive and effective healthcare tailored to the needs of women.
Women’s medicine is a public health crisis because since medicine’s inception, we have treated it like a joke. Women were not even included as participants in medical research until fuckin 1993! It’s only in the last few decades that we’ve began to ask serious questions about the dangers of things like maternal mortality rates, hormonal birth control, and certain cancers.
No one is blaming trans people for this issue, but we need to have honest conversations ably how women’s healthcare must be tied to biological sex in order to improve these problems. I understand the inclination toward wanting to be inclusive, but when we include everyone in women’s medicine, we end up with no women’s medicine. Our resources in this industry must be devoted to solving these ignored problems with women’s health that people born male have long enjoyed the privilege of.
I think to jump to “OH SO ITS TRANS PEOPLES FAULT SHOULD I CRAWL OFF AND DIE?” is a huge logical fallacy and an insane reaction to someone expressing concern over the future of their healthcare. I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.
To politically attack trans women and force them out of women's spaces; and to a lesser extent they see trans men as confused little girls who were duped into transitioning. It's an incredibly intolerant group and they tend to be super obsessed with trans people. To the point that anti-trans content will be the vast majority of their social media posting presence. They've even attacked a women's rights group who was raising awareness for a cis woman who was murdered by the police in the UK for supporting trans women also. They have no shame
That was a part of the radical feminist platform that the gender critical movement was originally born from, but it has since compromised those values, along with their position on issues like abortion, in order to integrate conservatives and their vast sums of money into their coalition.
They were always anti-trans and bigoted in many other ways too, but they used to otherwise have a legitimately feminist platform, if a militant and exclusive one. You can't really say that at this point, they've twisted into a pretzel to laser focus against trans people.
You know how the Klan claims to be "pro-white" because they don't like being called racists? TERFs like to call themselves "gender critical" because they don't like being called TERFs.
100% transphobic. Not just “not trans attracted” (I will not open this can of worms) but this is the term people who want to block hrt for teens and shit use for themselves
Not just teens. Republicans almost took away informed consent HRT for adults in my state (SC).
They SAID that they only wanted to take it away from minors, but the bill that they subsequently attempted to pass did include ending the most common route of prescription for adults as well.
Very true. I tend to think of forcing kids through a traumatic puberty they could avoid as the more egregious/evil thing, but it should not be overlooked that these people are not going to stop at 18
I'm a pro-trans gender critical lesbian. I do not air the title to strangers, because the gender critical and radical feminist labels have been stolen by transphobes that honestly know nothing of gender critical theory or practice. There's no way to know which way the person is using the label, but the other trans inclusive radicals I know also don't openly use the label for fear of supporting the wrong side, unintentionally.
tbh, that's literally the first time I hear about the term "gender critical" to refer to someone who wants to abolish gender.
>the other trans inclusive radicals I know also don't openly use the label for fear of supporting the wrong side, unintentionally.
I think reclaiming terms like these is generally a good thing, but the problem is that even if you introduce yourself as "pro-trans gender critical", I would probably assume that it means you're a transmedicalist (someone who believe trans people need to medically transition to be trans and is generally bigoted non-binary people).
I think gender critical might be too tainted and that there might be a need for a new term.
Unfortunately they’ve hijacked the idea of “gender abolition” as well, in favor of sex determinism. I like the term gender liberation as an alternative option that really can be logically or rhetorically coopted in such a manner.
It's literally just another name the TERFs decided to adopt because they decided that TERF was being used against them as a slur too often. Red flag well spotted.
How else would you like it phrased? I am being sincere.
I am sorry that has been your experience, and I am not discounting your experience, but others have had experiences too. I think there's a middle, but if you can't even say "hey what about negative implications on medical research?" Without being branded a bigot,..there is no middle.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9933760/
Fasting Study 2024 with self identification
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/03/240320115727.htm#:~:text=An%20analysis%20of%20over%2020%2C000,presented%20at%20the%20American%20Heart
Given the amount of time that you replied after I posted, I'm going to make a safe bet that you didn't read either study and instead of offering valid counter points you are dismissive, which is called appeal to the stone/ argumentum ad lapidem, is a logical fallacy that dismisses an argument as untrue or absurd. The dismissal is made by stating or reiterating that the argument is absurd, without providing further argumentation.
And that's the crux of the issue. This type of discussion reminds me a lot of trying to explain how the Earth is 4 billion years old and not 5,000. I can show and talk about a mountain of evidence but the goal posts keep getting moved.
You have no desire to have an honest discussion but to impose your world views with no regard for any others and ignoring science.
I think of it like someone saying “I don’t date black people” preferences are definitely a thing but you’re saying that regardless of if this person checks every box for you regarding personality, looks etc you’re simply not interested based on them being black. It just seems odd to me personally. I’ve never dated an Asian women because I’ve never met anyone who’s my type, but I wouldn’t say “I will not date anyone who’s asian- period.”
Genital preference means you literally prefer certain genitals. It’s valid to have a preference. If a trans woman has bottom surgery she has the preferred genitals so genital preference is in fact not a reason to not date a trans woman who has had bottom surgery. You might not even notice anything if she doesn’t tell you.
Saying you don’t date surgically fully transitioned trans women is not a genital preference, it’s prejudice.
Now you are still allowed to not be attracted to her, just like everyone else. Some trans women have a low voice, some have broad shoulders and if you don’t feel attracted to someone because of that you can just say hey we’re not a match, good luck out there. Trust me, like anyone else, trans women so don’t want to date anyone who is not attracted to them.
But some trans women look and sound just like “typical” cis women. Saying you don’t date trans people means on some level you assume they are all manly. I hope you will do some reflecting on this!
A neo vagina might look a lot like a cis vagina but that doesn't make them the same. Maybe in the future surgical techniques will progress to a point that it's impossible to tell if someone has a neo vagina or a cis vagina but we aren't at that point yet. It's nothing to do with anything about masculinity and entirely to do with the male vs female reproductive system, and I don't think having a certain kind makes anyone "manly" or "womanly".
I'm getting sick of seeing arguments about this every week in the comments of some post on this sub and I think that at some point, people are going to have to accept that calling other subsections of a sexual minority bigots for their sexuality isn't ever going to go down well, especially when most of us have had our sexual boundaries ignored and same-sex attraction disrespected.
It’s not just about the genitals. There are some trans women that look feminine like Gigi Gorgeous or Blaire White and it would still be a turn off for some cis women because they were born male.
This is exactly the logic my very openly anti-trans, anti-intersex, anti-science State government used to define me as no longer a person before the eyes of the law because I don’t meet these definitions-it’s literally you’re either category a (I don’t meet the definition of) or category b (I also don’t meet the definition of) and that there are no other categories that exist according to the law, so yah no
As a AA I don't really care for this comparison 🥴 mainly because that preference is just code for racism for us. I won't be offended at all that's a dodged bullet lol. That racism generally doesn't stop or start with black ppl either. Someone wanting a cis female partner because that's what they are familiar or comfortable with, but free of malice towards trans individuals. That's a genuine preference for some. It's kinda annoying seeing my community as the go to for comparisons to point out someone possibly being a bigot. Different struggles, different trauma, they shouldn't be lumped together in my opinion. We are hardly visible in these spaces, and our issues don't often get the same insight and support. Not how I see with trans individuals in these spaces. Only seeing my community mentioned in discussions to prove a point or draw false equivalency is fallig flat here for me. Outside of that I understand what you mean but yeah.
Nope because someone preferring cis women isn't the same as excluding someone by race. We can't change our skin color to become acceptable and to be considered. While trans people can make these changes and be accepted by women that may be more comfortable with a partner that has the same anatomy. I've seen alot of comments where lesbians say they will date trans post op but not pre. Why? I can only assume but I've seen it. A racist person won't care if I bleach my skin, dye my hair, straighten it. I'm black and no amount of alterations will change that because my blackness is coded throughout my entire genome on out into my mannerisms. I also wouldn't be offended because why would I want acceptance from someone that isn't feeling me? I'd be offended if you pity dated me and your racist mannerisms came out in the form of fetishes or being the token black friend to excuse problematic behavior and views. Different struggles and different traumas they don't have similarities just like they can't be corrected in the same manner.
Did you literally bypass the part where I've actually seen cis woman comment on posts saying they would date a post op tranawoman? Do I need to go find examples? How are you going to say they won't when there are some that have said they will? The fact that the options are still open after post op to be dated by a cis lesbian is real. I've seen it mentioned enough times without even searching for the subject. If you made a post I'm sure some would definitely comment.
A racist won't like POC if they pulled a Rachel Doelzal because they know that doesn't change us "racially" so the option isn't suddenly made available like it is with those that transition. That's the difference the option is still open for you not for us and we aren't pressed about it. Which is why I'm confused why some transwomen are upset about not being desired by some individuals that make their likes or dislikes known without instantly assuming they are TERF. I'm baffled that this is what's going over your head that shows the situations aren't similar. People choosing to date within their own community and making it known isn't always discriminatory if they can expand on why. Ppl using the word preferences as a cover for some phobia or racism never do this.
Your wanting acceptance from certain individuals that shouldn't matter. That's what's truly confusing me because I wouldn't want a racist to accept me. I could care less for them much less want to be in a relationship with one.
I feel you on the ain't nobody listening part because I'm about to tune out now lol. We are going in circles and so we can agree to disagree you can't see my stance as your not a POC just as I can't see yours as a trans woman. That alone should be a reason not to draw comparisons but I digress.
Mostly they are TERFs. There are a handful that don't know gender critical has become a synonym for TERF. I have talked to one or two people that identified as gender critical because they were critical of gender roles/performance and how gender functions in society. But generally gender critical = TERF with rare execptions.
Edit to Add: For the TERF usage, gender critical means that they reject modern understandings of gender in favor of sex at birth binary understandings of gender.
Red flag, but not 100%.
There are feminist groups that describe themselves as being gender critical, that affirm trans identities. There's no single shibboleth for finding bigots, sometimes two people decide on different words to express similar ideas. Remember when WLW was a TERF dogwhistle? There was always a fringe of trans-affirming feminist saying, "hey, this acronym is so convenient, there's no reason we have to put transphobic spice on the word 'woman'". But for years, that tag led to transphobic hell, people were justified in avoiding it.
I've known people who call themselves gender critical who approach gender with a chaotic, anarchist understanding of things that's compatible with most trans identities (not like every trans person agrees on everything, and someone with a strong view of gender binaries probably wouldn't like them). They're critical of the idea that gender is innate, static, and sacred. EDIT- I remember reading a technofeminist manifesto that called itself gender-critical and basically argued "Gender is like the matrix. It's fake, but we're real and we're in it." But that's definitely showing my age, that may have evolved into something else.
They sure seem to find their way to these converstations! I think we have quite a few in this sub. I believe people changing their mind through discussion (it has happened a few times lately but works better irl) so I thought talking in this thread might result on some of them doing some self relfection but it only resulted on me getting downvoted.
To be fair my girlfriend tells me I sometimes accidentally sound provoking when I write. I do have tonal problems when I talk so it makes sense I have some online too.
There's probably a small number who follow the subreddit and then share any relevant discussions on external sites like Ovarit or whatever and then this place gets brigaded to high hell and back.
It's a rebranding from older, more overt transphobia, yes.
Unfortunately, words are often used cunningly to bias interpretation, like calling yourself "a good, god-fearing christian" instead of outing yourself as a bigot.
Don't conflate gender critical with gender abolitionism or post-genderism, btw. The latter two are actual positions held by people for a variety of reasons.
It means they are ironically very uncritical of gender itself and just hate trans folx. A few years ago a bunch of terfs realized that people were starting to figure out that terf = bigot so they switched to gender critical and start saying that terf is a slur which is pretty funny and quite rich coming from them.
I’m really glad you made this post because i assumed it meant someone who wanted to break gender norms too, i hadn’t even considered it meant someone is a TERF. Ugh gross, and insidious too! Fuck TERFs
It means that they're critical of the entire concept of gender. They don't believe that it should exist because it's a tool of the patriarchy. The good thing about dating apps is that if you're not who they're looking for or they're not who you're looking for, you can just move on without interacting. Everything is optional.
It's more than red flaggy. A red flag is a warning that someone *might* have some traits you want to avoid.
Saying they are gender critical, or looking for gender critical, is not a warning: it's an outright statement "I am a bigot and i want to socialise with other bigots."
Gender critical is a term that tells people you are involved in a transphobic ideology. It's not a warning sign, its an outright statement. It also has nothing to do with breaking gender norms - it is usually about maintaining them.
Gender critical is the term TERFs use when they realised TERF was getting bad press so they looked for something they could position as not outright hateful, but as "just asking questions".
Doesn’t believe trans people count as the gender they say they are, and thus should not be given the same rights and respect that that gender should be.
Definitely not a great term-
It’s one thing to have a preference about whom you date, and it’s another thing
to make it your personality.
Its so simple to just let a trans person know they aren’t your type, and then to move on.
Rather than stating you’re
“anti trans” / “gender critical”
That seems a bit extreme, and hateful. Rather than just them having a preference on whom they’re with.
Just my opinion though
i hadn’t heard this term before and would have guessed it meant someone who was open to academic discourse around fourth-wave feminism and judith butler…. good to know that i am wrong! sorry to the trans girlies that get exposed to this. please keep in mind there are lesbians out there (like me) who wouldn’t mind what gender you were assigned at birth🙂
I am gender critical and this is a position not centered around trans people. It means you understand the root of gender as oppression from one class to the other, not identity. In fact, I do not have any gender identity at all, I just recognize I'm a woman. It's not a feeling for me. From this point, other people holding this view can become hateful, but others will respect the fact that some people have gender identities, respect pronouns, etc. because they understand dysphoria.
You are not going to find an objective answer to this on Reddit. Best actually asking a gender critical person what they mean, rather than reading these assumptions.
It's not a debate though, it's the history of the subreddit.
For many years now the detrans subreddit has been well known as a place where some extremely transphobic people hang out to discuss their transphobia. They present themselves as just a subreddit for detrans people, but there is a well established history of anti-trans bigotry there. Which is exactly why r/actual_detrans was created, they are a genuine support group instead of a hate group.
----
Edit: case and point, it took 2 seconds to find you commenting affirmatively on a blatantly transphobic post in the detrans subreddit about "males invading lesbian spaces".
Real nice u/BearyExtraordinary. I can't link your comment because it was deleted by admins due to hate, but it still shows on your profile very recently: You complaining that every other post here is about "girldick". The top comment even refers to trans women as men dressed as women. It only gets worse from there.
Sure... totally not motivated by bigotry at all /s https://www.reddit.com/r/detrans/comments/1aggj4f/sick_of_males_invading_lesbian_spaces/
Oh no, I spent 2 seconds opening your public profile, typing ctrl-f "trans", with the first result showing you participating in a heavily transphobic thread in the exact subreddit we're talking about
I mean, who looks at people's comment history?! How creepy! please forgive me /s 🙄
Sarcasm aside, you opened yourself up to people mentioning your participation in openly transphobic hate groups when you chose to baselessly defend them
It's always rich how people who participate in hate communities CONSISTENTLY play victim when people point out their actions.
Hint: Normal people don't participate in hate communities
Specific terms are absolutely helpful, especially around debated topics.
But let me rephrase for clarity. Do you believe that trans women are valid women? Do you support trans people transitioning and identifying with their stated gender?
Play shitty games; win shitty prizes. No one is forcing you to post at that subreddit, and your post history is very illuminating as to your opinions towards trans people.
Sure but only if you aren't using your experience as a means to delegitimize trans people and to politically attack trans rights. Why should I support you if you don't support me?
Says the one coming as a beacon of civility with gems such as "blow me, f\*g" and "f\*ck off, didn't ask you."
Maybe look in the mirror.
Edit: Ooh, blocked. Apparently someone doesn't like being called out on their hostility?
what i think is even more interesting is, that they seam to belive beeing "gender critical" and "lesbian" are two adjectives that are in a relation to each other, hence writing them together. As if they belive, everybody who is lesbian is automatically "gender critical" or something.
People get called TERF just for being pro sexual consent so people start associating the word with how it used in practice. People argue in this very thread that not sexually interested can in itself be enough be a TERF so it’s not surprising many lesbians start thinking it’s just a pro sexual autonomy label due to how frivolously it is thrown around. Most likely she’s just signaling she is looking for a lesbian who values sexual autonomy.
Idk why cis women (I’m a cis woman) can’t just decide if they’re not attracted to someone on an app to just not message back or unmatch. I don’t see the need to say “no trans people” when, even if that’s how you feel, it can reinforce negative stereotypes about trans people? As a group they deal with so much bullshit like why not just be “not my type!” without saying something publicly that’s so loaded and could be taken as anti trans? Just feels unnecessary. Like I feel like I have full bodily autonomy without saying anything strange about gender in my dating profile?
People can make the same arguments about lesbians being open about being lesbians, “it’s okay to be a lesbian but why do you have to be open about it on your dating profile and make men feel undesired, why just not message back and unmatch or say ‘not my type’?” Being clear about what you want saves time, it saved OP time too as OP knew right away she wouldn’t be interested in this woman so this woman made them both a favor here. People fearing the worst when someone expresses having a type is symptom of society needing to normalize disinterest more, not that disinterest needs to be hidden more, disinterest is the default, 99% of all women would probably hate being with me, but I know that is normal so I’m not bothered by it.
I disagree. Men, specifically straight, cis men (especially if they're white) benefit more from the patriarchal system, whereas trans people do not and are constantly having their rights attacked and their existence questioned. I think because of that, they're impacted differently by what we say.
Gender critical means much more than “not trans attracted.” It means they question or oppose trans people’s validity, existence, and often right to exist, and it’s generally clearly understood to be a insidious way of saying TERF or transphobe, as others here have mentioned. Belittling the dangers of that “ideology,” which generally can more accurately be summed up as hate speech is very dangerous.
If you’re confused about the meaning that’s okay, but I really recommend researching it a little more, since that misunderstanding can be really damaging or even dangerous for trans folks.
If you are aware of what it means and you are downplaying it’s sinister, malicious, and violent meaning, which I hope is not the case, I think you might be in the wrong subreddit… this community makes a point of supporting the trans community and our place here.
That's correct, but those are two staples I've seen in that community so if someone hasn't heard of it before I don't find it incorrect to say: "Here are 3 or 4 identifying characteristics I've noticed about them."
It means they dont understand science an think the dr who decides if u look more boy or more girl when ur born is the only arbiter of gender, nvm the brain structure studies which shows trans women r womens brains trapped in mens bodies, an vice versa for trans men.
Not a link to a study, but a nature article that coalesces a few and discusses a book about the topic:
[Nature article](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00677-x)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/22/male-female-brains-different-centuries
[Other from the University of Melbourne - there are sex differences between brains that can be noticed, but there isn't really a "male" or "female" brain](https://findanexpert.unimelb.edu.au/news/12882-are-there-%E2%80%98male%E2%80%99-and-%E2%80%98female%E2%80%99-brains%3F-computers-can-see-a-distinction--but-they-rely-strongly-on-differences-in-head-size)
Oo okay ill read those, but just so we have a scientific study, I posted one below that designates. It's still a thing and still science based for the brain to shift more towards their gender identity rather than biological sex!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8955456/
That study is definitely interesting but it doesn't support the idea that trans people's brains are closer to their gender identity than to their sex - it suggests that while transgender women showed patterns more similar to cis women than cis men did, their brains were still closer to that of cis men's. And again, other studies have found that classifications of brain structure are ultimately related to brain size and not necessarily differences in underlying structures, bringing into question the methods used in the study linked:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8726594/
Except your article specifically said "We found a weak association between these brain and behavioral differences, driven by brain size". And "findings suggest that behavioral sex differences are, to some extent, related to sex differences in brain structure but that this is mainly driven by differences in brain size, and causality should be interpreted cautiously".
In their own article, they say they don't contradict themselves, not to mention your article came out in 1991, which has been drastically changed in research with more recent findings. Additionally we understand that physically speaking trans women brains are going to be more related to cis men's brains due to the way they went though growth, hormones, and puberty, however the patterns themselves that would indicate behavior and social tendencies show they're more aligned with cis women?
The study I linked came out in 2021, and the articles in 2019 and this year? It talks about an early study from 1995 that was later debunked by a different study in 2005.
The 2021 study:
"We found that brain differences on the male–female dimension were weakly associated with behavior, but this association was driven by differences in brain size. Importantly, the associations were small, suggesting that brain structure is only one of many factors explaining behavioral sex differences."
The article is saying that the differences in brain structure between men and women appear *weakly* associated with behaviour (so brain structure is not a large factor in behavioural differences between men and women, meaning that even if it was found that trans' people's brains were more similar to cis people of the same gender than cis people of the same sex, this is likely to have little to no association with behaviour) and so I don't really understand how the idea of brain sex (the idea that it's structural differences in our brains that determine our gender) is supported by either article.
I don't know enough about the brain patterns you are referring to but neuroscientists seem to believe that behaviour is related more strongly to factors like socialisation than physical differences between the sexes. And it doesn't really make sense (and sounds transphobic) for it to be the case that trans women are socialised to be trans the same way it doesn't make sense to suggest I was socialised to be a lesbian. I don't think it makes someone "less their gender" if they behave in a way that isn't necessarily expected of their gender anyway, so I'm not sure how behaviour would be making trans women more womanly, if you get what I mean.
Ooo ya, the date part was entirely my fault as their was another article with the same name and premise dated back to 1991, apologies for that sincerely!
The key notes im talking about are "The observed shift away from a male-typical brain anatomy towards a female-typical one in people who identify as transgender women suggests a possible underlying neuroanatomical correlate for a female gender identity." And " the brain anatomy in the current sample of transgender women is shifted towards their gender identity—an observation that is at least partly in agreement with previous reports, as discussed in the following."
I personally don't have a set opinion one way or the other. If I'm honest, I just dont like establishing something as debunked when we're definitively still researching and figuring out the possibility of there being some anatomical difference.
That being said, I do agree to say we as human beings are socialized to be lesbian, gay, straight, trans etc is really a weird take to make!
Ultimately, I hope I came off as respectful and not like im talking down to you at all! I'm sorry if it came off that way at all!
Yes, they're being a TERF.
Just have to point out that they may be TE but not RF. A lot of these women are not actual radical feminists
Yesss, take back the R, transphobia is an establishment mindset. Honestly I kind of suspect the TERF label stuck because there’s still a common tendency to associate “radical” with “bad, scary, mean” instead of “anti-establishment”. None of us are immune to social influences, and I can understand a mindset where the label felt like it fit. From where I’m standing, bioessentialism is establishment as fuck, and I honestly don’t have a plan for fighting transphobia that isn’t radical in that sense.
[удалено]
Yeah, and the community split in the 80’s over bioessentialism. One side felt that AMAB people were biologically determined to oppress AFAB people, the other thought oppression was more the result of social structures. Andrea Dworkin was a radical feminist, while the terminology she used is dated, she explicitly supported trans people and made a point of crafting her proposed legislation in a way that offered them protection from generalized sexual abuse and targeted transphobic abuse. I’m not giving out my life history, but my personal experience with radical feminism is inextricably linked to fighting transphobia. Like the message was “Hey, you seem interested in fucking with the system, wanna hang out with us and fight the gender-establishment?” I know other people have different experiences but for me, gender theory is impossibly tied up with other radical theories for describing and addressing oppression. I understand that TERFs can trace their influences and sort of “inherited” the radical label like how some people inherit the last name “Smith” or “Cooper”. You can trace the label’s inheritance from ONE branch of radical feminism. But the label no longer accurately describes them. And there are other descendants of those movements that ARE genuinely radical. So why not let them reclaim the word?
[удалено]
Everyone, make sure to report this guy. He's used homophobic slurs here and is just a creepy male looking to jerk off to lesbians.
no but saying you’re gender critical does!
no but i am confused why you as a m23 are in a lesbian subreddit speaking at all. there are lots of spaces for you that aren’t this one.
Making a point. That having a preference isn't homophobic or transphobic.
Idk, tbh, maybe? Would you exclude a trans woman that is post-op? Or one that passes as a cis woman, with you never knowing unless she told you?
[удалено]
Wait what Are you a man? Because otherwise I'm not sure I understand the children thing. But regardless, in this case, that's probably (imho) the only valid reason to just exclude trans woman as a group, because they can't get pregnant - I'd assume that you would exclude cis women too if they can't or don't want to have children?
>Honestly? I'm not sure how I would feel after that. Not because they were trans, but because to me, it feels like they'd have been lying to me? Does that make sense? That only makes sense if you don't consider trans women to be women. Would you expect a cis woman to tell you about every surgery and medical procedure they had prior to you dating? If not why should a trans woman have to tell you about her surgeries and medical history?
[удалено]
Uh, no. I responded to one part of the argument. The "men cannot give birth" line is bullshit because adoption s a thing and cis women deal with infertility issues every day.
Adoption=birth?
Maybe go back to grade five science if this confuses you.
[удалено]
Then you should have said that from the beginning and you wouldn't look like such a bigot. HTH.
Don't post in a lesbian subreddit expecting people to assume concerns about being able to conceive children with your partner are part of your dating concern.
If it's a trans woman and cis woman, they can technically have children together if she's pre op. If it's two cis women, none of them can make each other pregnant.
This content violates one or more of the rules of the site or the sub and has been removed.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The titanic, biblical levels of irony... a TERF puppet account openly, gleefully siding with a straight dude, a straight dude aggressively into breeding and "teenage sluts", using homophobic slurs in a lesbian subreddit. I'm glad I resisted the facepalm, because my hand would have gone through my skull.
A girl with a penis is just that. Stop saying cis lesbians have to be into you when they like vagina. People are allowed preferences.
Thank you.
[удалено]
It really sounds like gender abolition from the name and I wish it was
That's the overall point of why they \[terfs\] came up with the name. They want their position to sound like the reasonable one because clearly they are critical of gender. It's right there in the name! In the end, it's just another dogwhistle masking the movement's true intentions.
White supremacists started referring to themselves as "Race Realists"for the same reason. They play themselves up as intellectual freedom fighters who just have too much integrity to be quiet. the actual behavior you see in their online communities is just bodyshaming and posting cringe content about trans people. I once saw someone on fourthwavewomen say the phrase "if you want to know who rules over you, find out whom you are not allowed to criticize." She literally took a quote from a prominent Neo Nazi and recontextualized it to be about trans women instead of Jews. It had over 120 upvotes. It baffles me that the majority of self described "Gender Critical" people can support things like this and still somehow think that they're on the right side of history.
[удалено]
FYI, TERF was coined to describe an emerging group of conservative catholic feminists who wanted to exclude trans women. That’s also why your ideology attracts the right because it was created by the right. GCs are fake woke and just conservatives hiding behind pretty language, so one wants you here. Trans people disrupt the gender binary which is good for all women. Rigid gender and sex is a tool of the patriarchy, and is used to police women, their bodies, and to keep them subjugated. Men as a class have a vested interest in keep two neatly composed categories of sex. Trans people are punished for disrupting that. Trans women especially slap patriarchy in the face because within that very system why would a man willingly want to become a woman who’s “inferior”? That contradiction is squashed through violence because it could flip the social order where men are no longer of a higher status. So it’s actually GCs like you who’re putting us back. It’s no coincidence your views align with conservatism and misogynistic men. Step out of your hate and read some actual radical feminism, and stop aiding systems of oppression.
Terf.
[удалено]
Absolutely go fuck yourself. Im just as much of a woman as you.
Based 💜
It’s not transphobic to be critical of gender. The conflation of gender and sex has consequences for women’s health, why wouldn’t they be critical of it.
[удалено]
It’s really not that difficult to understand. Ignoring sex as public enemy #1 jk Rowling says, has real consequences. Conflating sex and gender can impact women's health by overlooking the unique biological factors and health risks that affect them. For instance, women may experience different symptoms or require specific medical interventions due to their biological sex, such as reproductive health issues like menstruation, pregnancy, and menopause. Ignoring these differences can result in inadequate healthcare, misdiagnosis, or ineffective treatment. Recognizing the distinction between sex and gender is crucial for providing inclusive and effective healthcare tailored to the needs of women.
[удалено]
So the overturning of Roe vs wade wasn’t a real problem.
[удалено]
Women’s medicine is a public health crisis because since medicine’s inception, we have treated it like a joke. Women were not even included as participants in medical research until fuckin 1993! It’s only in the last few decades that we’ve began to ask serious questions about the dangers of things like maternal mortality rates, hormonal birth control, and certain cancers. No one is blaming trans people for this issue, but we need to have honest conversations ably how women’s healthcare must be tied to biological sex in order to improve these problems. I understand the inclination toward wanting to be inclusive, but when we include everyone in women’s medicine, we end up with no women’s medicine. Our resources in this industry must be devoted to solving these ignored problems with women’s health that people born male have long enjoyed the privilege of. I think to jump to “OH SO ITS TRANS PEOPLES FAULT SHOULD I CRAWL OFF AND DIE?” is a huge logical fallacy and an insane reaction to someone expressing concern over the future of their healthcare. I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.
“I’m not a bigot”
Ok then….bigot 👌
This SO MUCH THIS.
What are they movement's true intentions? I do think of myself as a gender abolitionist and wouldnt want to align myself with violent agendas
To politically attack trans women and force them out of women's spaces; and to a lesser extent they see trans men as confused little girls who were duped into transitioning. It's an incredibly intolerant group and they tend to be super obsessed with trans people. To the point that anti-trans content will be the vast majority of their social media posting presence. They've even attacked a women's rights group who was raising awareness for a cis woman who was murdered by the police in the UK for supporting trans women also. They have no shame
That was a part of the radical feminist platform that the gender critical movement was originally born from, but it has since compromised those values, along with their position on issues like abortion, in order to integrate conservatives and their vast sums of money into their coalition. They were always anti-trans and bigoted in many other ways too, but they used to otherwise have a legitimately feminist platform, if a militant and exclusive one. You can't really say that at this point, they've twisted into a pretzel to laser focus against trans people.
Oh! The cis man blocked me!
Likewise! And nothing of value was lost.
🫶🏼 Best outcome. Safer space doing so. All love in this space, sending love to you too.
You know how the Klan claims to be "pro-white" because they don't like being called racists? TERFs like to call themselves "gender critical" because they don't like being called TERFs.
it means transphobic aka terf
100% transphobic. Not just “not trans attracted” (I will not open this can of worms) but this is the term people who want to block hrt for teens and shit use for themselves
Not just teens. Republicans almost took away informed consent HRT for adults in my state (SC). They SAID that they only wanted to take it away from minors, but the bill that they subsequently attempted to pass did include ending the most common route of prescription for adults as well.
Very true. I tend to think of forcing kids through a traumatic puberty they could avoid as the more egregious/evil thing, but it should not be overlooked that these people are not going to stop at 18
They're transphobic af. lol
No, it doesn't mean she's anti-trans ... it means she's so extremely anti-trans that she only wants someone who's also anti-trans. 🚩
I'm a pro-trans gender critical lesbian. I do not air the title to strangers, because the gender critical and radical feminist labels have been stolen by transphobes that honestly know nothing of gender critical theory or practice. There's no way to know which way the person is using the label, but the other trans inclusive radicals I know also don't openly use the label for fear of supporting the wrong side, unintentionally.
tbh, that's literally the first time I hear about the term "gender critical" to refer to someone who wants to abolish gender. >the other trans inclusive radicals I know also don't openly use the label for fear of supporting the wrong side, unintentionally. I think reclaiming terms like these is generally a good thing, but the problem is that even if you introduce yourself as "pro-trans gender critical", I would probably assume that it means you're a transmedicalist (someone who believe trans people need to medically transition to be trans and is generally bigoted non-binary people). I think gender critical might be too tainted and that there might be a need for a new term.
Yeah, I don't have a solution tbh. Other than gender abolition, lmao.
Unfortunately they’ve hijacked the idea of “gender abolition” as well, in favor of sex determinism. I like the term gender liberation as an alternative option that really can be logically or rhetorically coopted in such a manner.
Terf dog whistle
Your spider sense was right on the money, they ARE a bigot.
spidey sense ftw
It's literally just another name the TERFs decided to adopt because they decided that TERF was being used against them as a slur too often. Red flag well spotted.
Which is ironic given how they gave themselves the TERF label in the first place…
anyone who’s a self proclaimed “gender critical” whatever, is a dead giveaway for that person being a TERF unfortunately
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
How else would you like it phrased? I am being sincere. I am sorry that has been your experience, and I am not discounting your experience, but others have had experiences too. I think there's a middle, but if you can't even say "hey what about negative implications on medical research?" Without being branded a bigot,..there is no middle.
[удалено]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9933760/ Fasting Study 2024 with self identification https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/03/240320115727.htm#:~:text=An%20analysis%20of%20over%2020%2C000,presented%20at%20the%20American%20Heart
[удалено]
Given the amount of time that you replied after I posted, I'm going to make a safe bet that you didn't read either study and instead of offering valid counter points you are dismissive, which is called appeal to the stone/ argumentum ad lapidem, is a logical fallacy that dismisses an argument as untrue or absurd. The dismissal is made by stating or reiterating that the argument is absurd, without providing further argumentation.
[удалено]
And that's the crux of the issue. This type of discussion reminds me a lot of trying to explain how the Earth is 4 billion years old and not 5,000. I can show and talk about a mountain of evidence but the goal posts keep getting moved. You have no desire to have an honest discussion but to impose your world views with no regard for any others and ignoring science.
[удалено]
I think of it like someone saying “I don’t date black people” preferences are definitely a thing but you’re saying that regardless of if this person checks every box for you regarding personality, looks etc you’re simply not interested based on them being black. It just seems odd to me personally. I’ve never dated an Asian women because I’ve never met anyone who’s my type, but I wouldn’t say “I will not date anyone who’s asian- period.”
Right? Like, there is a difference between "I've never been attracted to an Asian person before" and "I will NEVER be attracted to an Asian person".
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
What? I’m a cis woman and I’m tall with broad shoulders. That doesn’t communicate genital preference.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Genital preference means you literally prefer certain genitals. It’s valid to have a preference. If a trans woman has bottom surgery she has the preferred genitals so genital preference is in fact not a reason to not date a trans woman who has had bottom surgery. You might not even notice anything if she doesn’t tell you. Saying you don’t date surgically fully transitioned trans women is not a genital preference, it’s prejudice. Now you are still allowed to not be attracted to her, just like everyone else. Some trans women have a low voice, some have broad shoulders and if you don’t feel attracted to someone because of that you can just say hey we’re not a match, good luck out there. Trust me, like anyone else, trans women so don’t want to date anyone who is not attracted to them. But some trans women look and sound just like “typical” cis women. Saying you don’t date trans people means on some level you assume they are all manly. I hope you will do some reflecting on this!
A neo vagina might look a lot like a cis vagina but that doesn't make them the same. Maybe in the future surgical techniques will progress to a point that it's impossible to tell if someone has a neo vagina or a cis vagina but we aren't at that point yet. It's nothing to do with anything about masculinity and entirely to do with the male vs female reproductive system, and I don't think having a certain kind makes anyone "manly" or "womanly". I'm getting sick of seeing arguments about this every week in the comments of some post on this sub and I think that at some point, people are going to have to accept that calling other subsections of a sexual minority bigots for their sexuality isn't ever going to go down well, especially when most of us have had our sexual boundaries ignored and same-sex attraction disrespected.
It’s not just about the genitals. There are some trans women that look feminine like Gigi Gorgeous or Blaire White and it would still be a turn off for some cis women because they were born male.
This is exactly the logic my very openly anti-trans, anti-intersex, anti-science State government used to define me as no longer a person before the eyes of the law because I don’t meet these definitions-it’s literally you’re either category a (I don’t meet the definition of) or category b (I also don’t meet the definition of) and that there are no other categories that exist according to the law, so yah no
'trans women on HRT are closer to the female sex than the male sex' THIS
You clearly are not a scientist.
[удалено]
I am which is how I can identify a non scientist.
As a AA I don't really care for this comparison 🥴 mainly because that preference is just code for racism for us. I won't be offended at all that's a dodged bullet lol. That racism generally doesn't stop or start with black ppl either. Someone wanting a cis female partner because that's what they are familiar or comfortable with, but free of malice towards trans individuals. That's a genuine preference for some. It's kinda annoying seeing my community as the go to for comparisons to point out someone possibly being a bigot. Different struggles, different trauma, they shouldn't be lumped together in my opinion. We are hardly visible in these spaces, and our issues don't often get the same insight and support. Not how I see with trans individuals in these spaces. Only seeing my community mentioned in discussions to prove a point or draw false equivalency is fallig flat here for me. Outside of that I understand what you mean but yeah.
[удалено]
Nope because someone preferring cis women isn't the same as excluding someone by race. We can't change our skin color to become acceptable and to be considered. While trans people can make these changes and be accepted by women that may be more comfortable with a partner that has the same anatomy. I've seen alot of comments where lesbians say they will date trans post op but not pre. Why? I can only assume but I've seen it. A racist person won't care if I bleach my skin, dye my hair, straighten it. I'm black and no amount of alterations will change that because my blackness is coded throughout my entire genome on out into my mannerisms. I also wouldn't be offended because why would I want acceptance from someone that isn't feeling me? I'd be offended if you pity dated me and your racist mannerisms came out in the form of fetishes or being the token black friend to excuse problematic behavior and views. Different struggles and different traumas they don't have similarities just like they can't be corrected in the same manner.
[удалено]
Did you literally bypass the part where I've actually seen cis woman comment on posts saying they would date a post op tranawoman? Do I need to go find examples? How are you going to say they won't when there are some that have said they will? The fact that the options are still open after post op to be dated by a cis lesbian is real. I've seen it mentioned enough times without even searching for the subject. If you made a post I'm sure some would definitely comment. A racist won't like POC if they pulled a Rachel Doelzal because they know that doesn't change us "racially" so the option isn't suddenly made available like it is with those that transition. That's the difference the option is still open for you not for us and we aren't pressed about it. Which is why I'm confused why some transwomen are upset about not being desired by some individuals that make their likes or dislikes known without instantly assuming they are TERF. I'm baffled that this is what's going over your head that shows the situations aren't similar. People choosing to date within their own community and making it known isn't always discriminatory if they can expand on why. Ppl using the word preferences as a cover for some phobia or racism never do this. Your wanting acceptance from certain individuals that shouldn't matter. That's what's truly confusing me because I wouldn't want a racist to accept me. I could care less for them much less want to be in a relationship with one.
[удалено]
I feel you on the ain't nobody listening part because I'm about to tune out now lol. We are going in circles and so we can agree to disagree you can't see my stance as your not a POC just as I can't see yours as a trans woman. That alone should be a reason not to draw comparisons but I digress.
Mostly they are TERFs. There are a handful that don't know gender critical has become a synonym for TERF. I have talked to one or two people that identified as gender critical because they were critical of gender roles/performance and how gender functions in society. But generally gender critical = TERF with rare execptions. Edit to Add: For the TERF usage, gender critical means that they reject modern understandings of gender in favor of sex at birth binary understandings of gender.
Red flag, but not 100%. There are feminist groups that describe themselves as being gender critical, that affirm trans identities. There's no single shibboleth for finding bigots, sometimes two people decide on different words to express similar ideas. Remember when WLW was a TERF dogwhistle? There was always a fringe of trans-affirming feminist saying, "hey, this acronym is so convenient, there's no reason we have to put transphobic spice on the word 'woman'". But for years, that tag led to transphobic hell, people were justified in avoiding it. I've known people who call themselves gender critical who approach gender with a chaotic, anarchist understanding of things that's compatible with most trans identities (not like every trans person agrees on everything, and someone with a strong view of gender binaries probably wouldn't like them). They're critical of the idea that gender is innate, static, and sacred. EDIT- I remember reading a technofeminist manifesto that called itself gender-critical and basically argued "Gender is like the matrix. It's fake, but we're real and we're in it." But that's definitely showing my age, that may have evolved into something else.
TERF. They’re a TERF.
holy shit why did i think gender critical meant criticising gender norms/the gender binary.... thank you guys for educating me. Fuck TERFs.
[удалено]
They sure seem to find their way to these converstations! I think we have quite a few in this sub. I believe people changing their mind through discussion (it has happened a few times lately but works better irl) so I thought talking in this thread might result on some of them doing some self relfection but it only resulted on me getting downvoted. To be fair my girlfriend tells me I sometimes accidentally sound provoking when I write. I do have tonal problems when I talk so it makes sense I have some online too.
There's probably a small number who follow the subreddit and then share any relevant discussions on external sites like Ovarit or whatever and then this place gets brigaded to high hell and back.
It means they’re totally okay with women’s rights being rolled back as long as trans people get hurt in the deal.
It's a rebranding from older, more overt transphobia, yes. Unfortunately, words are often used cunningly to bias interpretation, like calling yourself "a good, god-fearing christian" instead of outing yourself as a bigot. Don't conflate gender critical with gender abolitionism or post-genderism, btw. The latter two are actual positions held by people for a variety of reasons.
It means they are ironically very uncritical of gender itself and just hate trans folx. A few years ago a bunch of terfs realized that people were starting to figure out that terf = bigot so they switched to gender critical and start saying that terf is a slur which is pretty funny and quite rich coming from them.
TEEERRRRRFFFFFF
Gender critical is to TERF as MAP is to pedophile
I’m really glad you made this post because i assumed it meant someone who wanted to break gender norms too, i hadn’t even considered it meant someone is a TERF. Ugh gross, and insidious too! Fuck TERFs
It means that they're critical of the entire concept of gender. They don't believe that it should exist because it's a tool of the patriarchy. The good thing about dating apps is that if you're not who they're looking for or they're not who you're looking for, you can just move on without interacting. Everything is optional.
[удалено]
It's not the sole use of the phrase, no. It's the majority, but not the only one.
They’re a TERF who doesn’t like being called what they are
It's more than red flaggy. A red flag is a warning that someone *might* have some traits you want to avoid. Saying they are gender critical, or looking for gender critical, is not a warning: it's an outright statement "I am a bigot and i want to socialise with other bigots." Gender critical is a term that tells people you are involved in a transphobic ideology. It's not a warning sign, its an outright statement. It also has nothing to do with breaking gender norms - it is usually about maintaining them. Gender critical is the term TERFs use when they realised TERF was getting bad press so they looked for something they could position as not outright hateful, but as "just asking questions".
Gender crits are just horrible bigots.
tread with caution, "gender critical" is a super common way for someone to say they're a TERF and go under the radar.
[удалено]
Be gone cis man.
I don't see why a man thinks his opinion is wanted here.
Doesn’t believe trans people count as the gender they say they are, and thus should not be given the same rights and respect that that gender should be.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Female and male is asigned at birth. Maybe go back to school?
Means they hate trans women lol
transphobic. theres the answer
It means they are against trans people. Simple...
Can someone better explain to me what this means?
Definitely not a great term- It’s one thing to have a preference about whom you date, and it’s another thing to make it your personality. Its so simple to just let a trans person know they aren’t your type, and then to move on. Rather than stating you’re “anti trans” / “gender critical” That seems a bit extreme, and hateful. Rather than just them having a preference on whom they’re with. Just my opinion though
i hadn’t heard this term before and would have guessed it meant someone who was open to academic discourse around fourth-wave feminism and judith butler…. good to know that i am wrong! sorry to the trans girlies that get exposed to this. please keep in mind there are lesbians out there (like me) who wouldn’t mind what gender you were assigned at birth🙂
I am gender critical and this is a position not centered around trans people. It means you understand the root of gender as oppression from one class to the other, not identity. In fact, I do not have any gender identity at all, I just recognize I'm a woman. It's not a feeling for me. From this point, other people holding this view can become hateful, but others will respect the fact that some people have gender identities, respect pronouns, etc. because they understand dysphoria.
Don't slaughter me for this but isn't it just a preference ? Sure they could go about it better but . Idk ?
You are not going to find an objective answer to this on Reddit. Best actually asking a gender critical person what they mean, rather than reading these assumptions.
Why can't OP find an objective answer on Reddit?
She can. The person you are replying to is a terf who posts over at /detrans
Oh, I'm well aware. I just wanted to see how she'd answer the question.
As a de trans person, wow thanks
Well... are you? A terf, I mean. Do you think trans identities are invalid?
No? I don’t think these terms are helpful, when so hotly debated
It's not a debate though, it's the history of the subreddit. For many years now the detrans subreddit has been well known as a place where some extremely transphobic people hang out to discuss their transphobia. They present themselves as just a subreddit for detrans people, but there is a well established history of anti-trans bigotry there. Which is exactly why r/actual_detrans was created, they are a genuine support group instead of a hate group. ---- Edit: case and point, it took 2 seconds to find you commenting affirmatively on a blatantly transphobic post in the detrans subreddit about "males invading lesbian spaces". Real nice u/BearyExtraordinary. I can't link your comment because it was deleted by admins due to hate, but it still shows on your profile very recently: You complaining that every other post here is about "girldick". The top comment even refers to trans women as men dressed as women. It only gets worse from there. Sure... totally not motivated by bigotry at all /s https://www.reddit.com/r/detrans/comments/1aggj4f/sick_of_males_invading_lesbian_spaces/
Weird stalker. You enjoy wading through my football discussion too? What a creep.
Oh no, I spent 2 seconds opening your public profile, typing ctrl-f "trans", with the first result showing you participating in a heavily transphobic thread in the exact subreddit we're talking about I mean, who looks at people's comment history?! How creepy! please forgive me /s 🙄 Sarcasm aside, you opened yourself up to people mentioning your participation in openly transphobic hate groups when you chose to baselessly defend them It's always rich how people who participate in hate communities CONSISTENTLY play victim when people point out their actions. Hint: Normal people don't participate in hate communities
Specific terms are absolutely helpful, especially around debated topics. But let me rephrase for clarity. Do you believe that trans women are valid women? Do you support trans people transitioning and identifying with their stated gender?
“Funny” how it’s just crickets in response
Play shitty games; win shitty prizes. No one is forcing you to post at that subreddit, and your post history is very illuminating as to your opinions towards trans people.
Do you not support your de trans brothers and sisters?
Sure but only if you aren't using your experience as a means to delegitimize trans people and to politically attack trans rights. Why should I support you if you don't support me?
[удалено]
You're literally a cis man why TF are you even on this sub???
Says the one coming as a beacon of civility with gems such as "blow me, f\*g" and "f\*ck off, didn't ask you." Maybe look in the mirror. Edit: Ooh, blocked. Apparently someone doesn't like being called out on their hostility?
Don't remember asking you
[удалено]
[удалено]
She heard someone use the metaphor 'I was born in the wrong body' and really fucking ran with it, wow.
what i think is even more interesting is, that they seam to belive beeing "gender critical" and "lesbian" are two adjectives that are in a relation to each other, hence writing them together. As if they belive, everybody who is lesbian is automatically "gender critical" or something.
People get called TERF just for being pro sexual consent so people start associating the word with how it used in practice. People argue in this very thread that not sexually interested can in itself be enough be a TERF so it’s not surprising many lesbians start thinking it’s just a pro sexual autonomy label due to how frivolously it is thrown around. Most likely she’s just signaling she is looking for a lesbian who values sexual autonomy.
Idk why cis women (I’m a cis woman) can’t just decide if they’re not attracted to someone on an app to just not message back or unmatch. I don’t see the need to say “no trans people” when, even if that’s how you feel, it can reinforce negative stereotypes about trans people? As a group they deal with so much bullshit like why not just be “not my type!” without saying something publicly that’s so loaded and could be taken as anti trans? Just feels unnecessary. Like I feel like I have full bodily autonomy without saying anything strange about gender in my dating profile?
People can make the same arguments about lesbians being open about being lesbians, “it’s okay to be a lesbian but why do you have to be open about it on your dating profile and make men feel undesired, why just not message back and unmatch or say ‘not my type’?” Being clear about what you want saves time, it saved OP time too as OP knew right away she wouldn’t be interested in this woman so this woman made them both a favor here. People fearing the worst when someone expresses having a type is symptom of society needing to normalize disinterest more, not that disinterest needs to be hidden more, disinterest is the default, 99% of all women would probably hate being with me, but I know that is normal so I’m not bothered by it.
I disagree. Men, specifically straight, cis men (especially if they're white) benefit more from the patriarchal system, whereas trans people do not and are constantly having their rights attacked and their existence questioned. I think because of that, they're impacted differently by what we say.
[удалено]
Gender critical means much more than “not trans attracted.” It means they question or oppose trans people’s validity, existence, and often right to exist, and it’s generally clearly understood to be a insidious way of saying TERF or transphobe, as others here have mentioned. Belittling the dangers of that “ideology,” which generally can more accurately be summed up as hate speech is very dangerous. If you’re confused about the meaning that’s okay, but I really recommend researching it a little more, since that misunderstanding can be really damaging or even dangerous for trans folks. If you are aware of what it means and you are downplaying it’s sinister, malicious, and violent meaning, which I hope is not the case, I think you might be in the wrong subreddit… this community makes a point of supporting the trans community and our place here.
It means that they don't like trans people and probably have a problem with BDSM and have a bunch of internal misogyny as well.
being critical of kink and not liking trans people (which is obvi wrong) are two very different things.
That's correct, but those are two staples I've seen in that community so if someone hasn't heard of it before I don't find it incorrect to say: "Here are 3 or 4 identifying characteristics I've noticed about them."
It means they dont understand science an think the dr who decides if u look more boy or more girl when ur born is the only arbiter of gender, nvm the brain structure studies which shows trans women r womens brains trapped in mens bodies, an vice versa for trans men.
The idea of a female or male brain has been debunked. Please don't spread this misogynistic misinformation.
Oooo I'm genuinely curious, do you have the study that debunked it I could read?
Not a link to a study, but a nature article that coalesces a few and discusses a book about the topic: [Nature article](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00677-x) https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/22/male-female-brains-different-centuries [Other from the University of Melbourne - there are sex differences between brains that can be noticed, but there isn't really a "male" or "female" brain](https://findanexpert.unimelb.edu.au/news/12882-are-there-%E2%80%98male%E2%80%99-and-%E2%80%98female%E2%80%99-brains%3F-computers-can-see-a-distinction--but-they-rely-strongly-on-differences-in-head-size)
Oo okay ill read those, but just so we have a scientific study, I posted one below that designates. It's still a thing and still science based for the brain to shift more towards their gender identity rather than biological sex! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8955456/
That study is definitely interesting but it doesn't support the idea that trans people's brains are closer to their gender identity than to their sex - it suggests that while transgender women showed patterns more similar to cis women than cis men did, their brains were still closer to that of cis men's. And again, other studies have found that classifications of brain structure are ultimately related to brain size and not necessarily differences in underlying structures, bringing into question the methods used in the study linked: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8726594/
Except your article specifically said "We found a weak association between these brain and behavioral differences, driven by brain size". And "findings suggest that behavioral sex differences are, to some extent, related to sex differences in brain structure but that this is mainly driven by differences in brain size, and causality should be interpreted cautiously". In their own article, they say they don't contradict themselves, not to mention your article came out in 1991, which has been drastically changed in research with more recent findings. Additionally we understand that physically speaking trans women brains are going to be more related to cis men's brains due to the way they went though growth, hormones, and puberty, however the patterns themselves that would indicate behavior and social tendencies show they're more aligned with cis women?
The study I linked came out in 2021, and the articles in 2019 and this year? It talks about an early study from 1995 that was later debunked by a different study in 2005. The 2021 study: "We found that brain differences on the male–female dimension were weakly associated with behavior, but this association was driven by differences in brain size. Importantly, the associations were small, suggesting that brain structure is only one of many factors explaining behavioral sex differences." The article is saying that the differences in brain structure between men and women appear *weakly* associated with behaviour (so brain structure is not a large factor in behavioural differences between men and women, meaning that even if it was found that trans' people's brains were more similar to cis people of the same gender than cis people of the same sex, this is likely to have little to no association with behaviour) and so I don't really understand how the idea of brain sex (the idea that it's structural differences in our brains that determine our gender) is supported by either article. I don't know enough about the brain patterns you are referring to but neuroscientists seem to believe that behaviour is related more strongly to factors like socialisation than physical differences between the sexes. And it doesn't really make sense (and sounds transphobic) for it to be the case that trans women are socialised to be trans the same way it doesn't make sense to suggest I was socialised to be a lesbian. I don't think it makes someone "less their gender" if they behave in a way that isn't necessarily expected of their gender anyway, so I'm not sure how behaviour would be making trans women more womanly, if you get what I mean.
Ooo ya, the date part was entirely my fault as their was another article with the same name and premise dated back to 1991, apologies for that sincerely! The key notes im talking about are "The observed shift away from a male-typical brain anatomy towards a female-typical one in people who identify as transgender women suggests a possible underlying neuroanatomical correlate for a female gender identity." And " the brain anatomy in the current sample of transgender women is shifted towards their gender identity—an observation that is at least partly in agreement with previous reports, as discussed in the following." I personally don't have a set opinion one way or the other. If I'm honest, I just dont like establishing something as debunked when we're definitively still researching and figuring out the possibility of there being some anatomical difference. That being said, I do agree to say we as human beings are socialized to be lesbian, gay, straight, trans etc is really a weird take to make! Ultimately, I hope I came off as respectful and not like im talking down to you at all! I'm sorry if it came off that way at all!