tranwrecks:

A Trans 101 For Trans People

1. You are human. You are worthy of respect. You deserve to be treated with the same dignity as anyone else. There is nothing inherently wrong with your gender. You are not broken, you are not disgusting, you do not deserve to be hurt.
2. You’ve been brought up and live in a world that’s designed to erase and demonize your existence, you’ve probably internalized a lot of that- and that’s not your fault. But it can be hard to deal with. But you aren’t alone in dealing with it. And sometimes you have to buy into it to be able to handle it (trigger warning: transphobic violence). And that’s okay.
3. Your gender is no more or less than anyone else’s. Your history doesn’t make you “not really” or “less” your gender than someone with a cis history, it just makes you a person of your gender with a different history.
4. You do not deserve to be held to higher standards than cis people. You do not have to “prove” your gender by forcing yourself into societal roles that may not fit. You are not “failing” anyone by fitting into societal roles that are comfortable. It is not your job to break down the binary/patriarchy/or anything else. If you want to, go for it, but you have no obligation to do anything for cis people just because you are trans.
5. Being yourself does not hurt trans rights (so long as you aren’t trying to do so while stopping others from being who they are) and is not a reason why people don’t have to treat you with respect. There is nothing wrong with being a feminine man or masculine woman, or being a person who’s comfortable in their body, or being a person who doesn’t transition all the way, or being out about having a non-binary or genderqueer gender. You have not “failed” anyone by doing this, you are not “less” of your gender than someone else. Being who you are is not a valid argument for why people can’t treat you as who you truly are.
6. No one else has the right to say your body needs to be changed. It only does if you need to change it. Or if you want to change it, that’s valid, too. Your body does not make you “less” your gender. It doesn’t make you “not really” your gender. It doesn’t mean you’re trapped in someone else’s body. You do not have to fix your body to “become” your gender- you already are your gender. All you need to do is what you need to do to be comfortable in your body. And if that includes reclaiming your right to label your own body, you are allowed to do that.
7. You have just as much of a right to privacy as anyone else. You do not need to tell anyone about your body, your medical history, or anything else. Whether or not your body needs to be changed for you to be comfortable, you do not have to change it to deserve to be treated as who you are. You do not owe anyone intimate details about your personal life before you can be treated as who you are.
8. You have no obligation to educate anyone. This includes trans people, but is most important with cis people. You are not a walking encyclopedia of transgender and/or transsexual information, you are a person. You do not have to answer every question any cis person comes up with, you do not have to represent trans people as a whole, (see 7) you do not have to bare the most personal and vulnerable parts of your soul to other people on demand.
9. Not educating people does not “hurt” trans rights. NEVER let anyone try to guilt you into educating people or doing something you don’t want to do by insisting that doing otherwise will “destroy trans rights/acceptance/whatever”. Trying to force trans people to become walking information desks or to put themselves in dangerous situations regardless of whether or not you’re even up for dealing with this destroys trans rights and shows a great deal of intolerance. Asserting that you don’t have to tell anyone anything you don’t want to? That really doesn’t.
10. If you do want to educate people, you are allowed to set limits and boundaries. You are allowed to say that you won’t talk about certain issues, or that you will only talk about them on your terms. You are allowed to decide which people you will talk to about which issues. You are allowed to change these boundaries if you become uncomfortable educating people you were previously willing to educate. You are not obligated to educate anyone just because you educated someone else.
11. You deserve to take care of yourself- whatever that means. You deserve to be comfortable and safe. You deserve not to be in dangerous situations. If you can’t handle something alone, you deserve to ask for- and get- help or, if you can, take a break from it until you can handle it. Or just stop doing it all together, that’s okay. Taking care of yourself does not make you weak, it does not make you an attention-grabber or overdramatic, it does not make you “less” your gender, it does not mean you betray other trans people by not being a full-time (or even part-time) activist. You’re human, you have limits, and that’s okay.
12. You deserve to have your boundaries respected. Any boundaries- how and where people can touch you, what information you give to who and when, what places you feel comfortable going or who you feel comfortable going with, what people can tell others about you.
13. You deserve to have the words you are and aren’t comfortable being referred to as respected. You deserve to have the proper pronouns used (and, if there are times when it’s unsafe for that to happen, you deserve to have your safety maintained by those around you), you deserve to be called the proper name, you deserve to have the words you want used to describe your body used, you deserve not to be called by any label, pronoun, word, or name that you don’t want to be called.
14. If you’re asking for something that you need to feel respected, comfortable, and safe- you are not asking for too much. Your identity is not “too complicated”. Your needs are not less important than anyone elses’.
15. You are human. You are worthy of respect. You deserve to be treated with the same dignity as anyone else. There is nothing inherently wrong with your gender. You are not broken, you are not disgusting, you do not deserve to be hurt.

(via sometimescoherent)

janetmock:

trannypowah:

TW: transmisogyny, racism, violence directed at camab trans people of color

There is a place in this world full of horror, untranslatable. Here, in the midst of violence inconceivable, we struggle. Would you envy us, if you knew?

As trans women and camab trans people of color, we inhabit a…

Learn it, and learn it well - from the brilliant minds behind a new space called Tranny Power which is ”a Take-Shit-From-No-One TWOC (trans women/femmes/genderescents of color) blog.”

And yes, this blog is a reclamation of a word that still stings many women - so please if you’re not a trans woman don’t go around shouting “Tranny” as your own. 

I would say that butch does not necessarily imply manly, though I get where she is coming from and probably was sincere about her attraction to women like that, while still viewing them as women. I mean a lot of cis women fit into that category not because they intentionally try and look more masculine in a cultural sense (though there is certainly that), but because they just do for whatever reason. Facial/bone structure, body type, and even voice depth.

However, just saying “love your body” is unhelpful and condescending so I don’t want to come across like that, but I would say it is important to keep in mind body/sex/gender diversity in everyone, not just trans identified folk.

(Source: mtfconfessions)

bold-queer-writes:

stardust-and-dirt:

me too

Perhaps a bit TMI but (so stop reading if you don’t like descriptions of sex), that was definitely my reaction after just becoming sexually active. Looking back I think that it had to do in large part to me being trans, like so much of my life. I’m not saying sex was terrible, just that it was not the experience it was built up as.This is probably due to the popular image of what sex is, namely penetration.

I was never really “good” at penetration. Yeah, I suppose I had the “equipment” but that’s all it was to me, equipment. I felt so detached from the experience. Luckily my partner at the time was not really into penetration either. Well let me qualify that, we did do a lot of penetration with her using a strap-on. That was kinda the mainstay of our sexual life, and for the most part it worked. It was that or me going down on her. I never much liked “blow jobs” (wtf, why are they even called that) for the same detached reason as penetration. Most of the time I simply could not get off. So strap-ons and cunnilingus, makes sense now…

Anyways, flash forward, I now feel like I’m (re)discovering sex for the first time and it is much much better. I’m so much more in control over how I define and allow others to interact with my body. Still sex is not the OMG-LIFE-CHANGING event that you see in movies or T.V.

Yet, I don’t think my experience as a trans* person excludes the possibility for my experience to speak to a larger problem over how people still perpetuate narratives about sex. Me being trans* was only part of the issue revolving around a more general social problem around sexuality. Even for those who are not trans*, the issue of what counts as “typical sex” is a problem. My particular journey involves becoming aware of how I want to be touched, what names I want parts of me to be referred to as, and not stressing out about orgasms (which is is the best way never to get one). Things that almost all sexually active people face, be they cis or trans*.

(Source: nosdrinker)

So, I’m co-facilitating a panel at the Philadelphia Trans* Health Conference. It’s my first time there as well. Should be exciting! I wanted to shout out to my followers to look at the proposal and give me suggestions on what you would want covered. We’re putting together the material now and want to include as detailed of a perspective.

Like the title suggests it is an allyship panel, one in which I will explain that allyship is earned not something you claim in order to get “I’m a good person” cookies. Beyond that (which is a bit of a topic in itself) we want to focus on how to be not just a ally to trans people on an individual level, but to be a political ally. This would mean recognizing systemic oppression, not just moments of clear bigotry. Race and class will be a big part of that.

If you have anything specifically you would like to see in a panel with that aim, please send me a note. Even if you think I will cover it, I’d still like to poll people on what they think are glaring deficiencies in conversations about allyship. Thanks for reading y’all!

-b/cass

b8-n-cstr8 asked: hey as a twoc - i find that quote that equates white skin with "penises" in terms of triggers really false and oppressive. and that whole article is really transmisogynistic (defends wbw space like michfest). it is basically radscum politix coded in race theory so its more "palatable". its really upsetting to me to see that posted in a trans female space, and i think it should be removed from your blog immediately.

But, this paper traces the historic divides within our community as well, those along surgical divides. Post-op trans women siding with factions of MichFest who advocated for only post-op trans women. Documents Riki Anne Wilchins’ role in GenderPAC and the divides it caused by the more radical anti-normative stance it took in it’s later years. a stance which demanded, rightfully so, an intersectional approach with attention to race and class.

That alone should make the paper worth sharing in the interest of intellectual honesty and integrity.

I read your post: http://b8ncstr8.tumblr.com/post/48982667249/hey-for-all-you-critical-thinkers-out-there and I think you take some things out of context.

The paper is not defending the “womyn-born-womyn” but placing it in a context:

Defenders of the “womyn-born-womyn” policy argue that transsexual women who truly value the women’s movement and culture should respect the festival policies by refraining from entering the Land. “Just as many Womyn of Color express the need for ‘room to breathe’ they gain in Womyn-of-Color space away from the racism that inevitably appears in interactions with a white majority, womyn born womyn still need and value that same ‘room to breathe,’” argued Lisa Vogel, the owner of the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival. [16] This exact pattern of argument is extremely common in lesbian and/or feminist publications — complete with the comment about how much they respect women of color space and how transsexual women should do the same for “womyn-born-womyn.” “I’ve spent years educating other white festigoers about honoring the workshops and spaces that are planned for women of color only… It grieves me to see ‘progressive’ folks attacking an event that is sacred space for women-born-women” wrote a reader of Lesbian Connection, for example. [17]

It uses direct quotes from anti-trans feminists. And then goes on to highlight the flaws in that logic of only focusing on a simple sex hierarchy and not an intersectional one. The radical feminist/lesbian separatist logic tokenizes Women of Color and is an example of the casual racism inherent in radical feminist exclusionary tactics. The author ends with a pretty good quip:

In other words, Dobkin attributed the accusation of racism to the patriarchy’s attempt to “wipe” lesbians out and not to the legitimate concerns of women of color, effectively accusing these women of color of conspiring with the patriarchy. “What is the theory behind racist feminism?” asked Audre Lorde. [25] She argued, “many white women are heavily invested in ignoring the real differences” because “to allow women of Color to step out of stereotypes… threatens the complacency of those women who view oppression only in terms of sex.” [26]

I don’t think that characterizing someone as dismissing legitimate concerns of women of color is very much in support of them or their position. It kinda is calling them a bigot who wishes to perpetuate a white-washed feminism under the guise of defending “lesbians.” That is a pretty damning characterization of the white-washed myopic focus of radical feminism.

Seriously this paper is well researched, well written, and is theoretically deep.

You could just read the ending out of context and see where the author stands:

By the same token, feminists who are vehemently anti-transsexual have much better understanding of how threatening transsexual existence is to their flawed ideology than do transsexuals themselves. The power is in consciously recognizing this unique positionality and making connections to the contributions of women of color and other groups of women who have been marginalized within the feminist movement. With this approach, I am confident that transsexual women, along with all other women who live complex lives, will be able to advance the feminist discussions about power, privilege and oppression.

So radical feminists recognize that the experience of trans women represent a flaw in their logic, and must be dismissed or marginalized or else they will further advance an anti-racist anti-classist dialogue. I’m fine with representing a flaw in that oppressive logic.

I’m honestly not sure if we read the same article.

Also, who cares if the author uses transsexuals, sure it’s a bit out of vogue, but honestly some people identify that way.

EDIT: an example of why context matters, I put in bold the quote you had and italicized the part of the argument missing in your characterization:

To make thing more complicated, some trans activists who are politically more savvy support “womyn born-womyn” policy or at least accept it as an acceptable feminist position. Kate Bornstein, for example, “encourages everyone to engage in mutually respectful dialogue, without specifying what outcome might be desirable or possible,” because “exclusion by lesbian separatists” cannot be considered oppressive when lesbians do not have very much “economic and social resources.” [29] Another transsexual woman, in a private conversation, told me that she would rather be excluded from the Land altogether than risk the possibility of a male entry under the pretence of being transsexual. [30] While I appreciate their supposedly feminist good intentions, I must remind them that their arguments support and reinforce the environment in which white middle-class women’s oppression against women of color and working class women are trivialized or tolerated. I must remind them it is never feminist when some women are silenced and sacrificed to make room for the more privileged women.

Whose Feminism Is It Anyway? The Unspoken Racism of the Trans Inclusion Debate by Emi Koyama (via sage-power)

i need to find this entire piece! nao!

(via sheknowshowtofly)

Here is the whole essay!

(via noetherian)

OH. SHIT. SON. THIS QUOTE.

(via so-treu)

(via struggleisacircle)

julianmorrison:

https://payhip.com/b/hRtK

In case you missed it, FTW #0 is back on sale! If you downloaded it free off that Google drive link please consider purchasing a copy. Miranda is working on a next issue!

I hear there will be a review of Nevada by Imogen Binnie, which I would also HIGHLY recommend. Seriously, it was so amazingly on point in oh so many ways.

Fuck yeah badass trans* women artists!

Hey, I wear bow ties now. Bow ties are cool. [x]

[Image description: White trans woman with a medium length asymmetrical haircut wearing a fuchsia colored button up and a red bandana made into a bow tie.]

bold-queer-writes:

So I have gathered my thoughts about people saying, as they always have, that the rest of us need to wait and be patient:

The focus on marriage is actually itself counter productive. It is not about how we sequence these rights that it the issue. Politics does not focus itself as a single queue, steadily moving progressively forward. It is amorphous and every move shapes the image of who is involved and the direction of movement. Marriage itself is tied up with a system in which the state acts as a force of legitimation, setting the standard for acceptable behavior within a normative capitalist order. Those who will benefit from marriage will do so at the expense and further marginalization of an intersectional struggle against racism, classism, ablism, cissexism, and (trans)misogyny.

So it is not a matter of waiting, NOW is a matter of framing our political present and setting our political horizons. What we do now, how we conceive of this narrative of oppression, be it a liberal ideology of assimilation or as a space for radical questioning of such narratives, means something. It means something fundamentally different to rethink our political future and move towards building a future.

That is what this moment is now, yet another fork in the path of liberation or further violent distancing of the margins. This is the the set of future actions that you are authorizing. And you are anything but neutral, your actions, or lack there-of, are not without far-reaching consequences. If you disagree with radical politics and faithfully believe in the capitalist order, that is your position. But be honest with what your actions, because you are most assuredly acting.

Let me be perfectly clear: It is NOT about focusing on one thing to the detriment of other issues. That is a weak argument, since radical political struggles too are pluralistic and require many groups working together in affinity and solidarity. However, this affinity and solidarity with the marginalized as a whole, is precisely what is missing. The HRC is not an organization of solidarity, it is an organization that has only the interests of the most privileged on it’s agenda. It is incapable of fundamentally changing structures of domination and can only hope to at best be co-opted by them.

It is not an issue of how fast the line is moving, it is about our ability to transform the structure, that line. To transform it into a circle, to transform it into something else entirely.