gender talks

i love women and i am a woman. womanhood is something that is part of me and to my very core, im a woman, but im not a girl. i still defy the gender binary and im still trans as hell and i dont fit into the idea of what cisnormativity says a woman should be. to me, being a woman has little to nothing to do with gender or the expression of gender. does anyone else feel this gender feel.

cisnormative terminology that needs to stop

"female/male bodied": 

  • I’m a man, this is my body. It doesn’t matter what I was assigned at birth, this is my body and I am a man, and therefore this body is a man’s body, and therefore a male body
  • this is erasure of intersex people
  • this is erasure of nonbinary people
  • you don’t actually give a shit about gender, you’re asking about genitals, and unless you’re a doctor it’s none of your fucking business
  • and if you ARE a doctor, you need to figure your shit out so you don’t alienate your trans patients and make them less likely to seek medical help due to dysphoria
  • the term you’re looking for is "assigned female/male at birth" or "afab/amab"

"born a man/woman" (also "used to be a woman/man"):

  • trans people weren’t born cis people and then turned trans; just because it takes us a while to figure out who we are doesn’t mean we were ever somebody else
  • society is cisnormative, and lies to people, and pretends that trans identities don’t exist and aren’t valid, telling trans people that they are cis over and over again since birth like a mantra, so trans people internalize that and believe it, until the evidence to the contrary piles up so high they can’t deny it anymore. That evidence has been piling up since birth; trans people were never cis people
  • this is erasure of intersex people
  • this is erasure of nonbinary people
  • using these terms incorrectly makes it impossible to use them correctly for nonbinary people who DO identify as having started out as one thing and changed to something else
  • the term you’re looking for is “raised as a man/woman”

"male/female parts/genitalia":

  • again, I’m a man, these are my parts, therefor they are male parts, everybody needs to get the fuck over it
  • Yes, I have breasts and that gives me dysphoria and I want them removed, THANKS FOR REMINDING ME, but they are male breasts
  • Yes I have a vagina. Again, this gives me dysphoria, you are an asshole for reminding me. Again, it is a male vagina since I am a man
  • this is erasure of intersex people
  • this is erasure of nonbinary people
  • Unless you are a doctor my genitals are none of your fucking business
  • If you ARE a doctor, you need to start using medical terminology right now, because you’re a medical professional so I think you can use the word “penis/testicles” and “vagina/vulva” without melting like the Wicked Witch of the West
  • Doctors using this kind of incorrect terminology are alienating their trans patients and making them less likely to seek medical help due to dysphoria. Trans people already have ENOUGH trouble with getting medical help, don’t fuck it up more
  • the term you’re looking for is "penis/vagina/vulva/uterus/genitals" or "testes/ovaries" or (and this one’s easy) "chest"

[EDIT] Even if you are a doctor, do NOT refer to someone else’s genitalia without knowing how they prefer for their genitalia to be referred to. If you’re not a doctor it’s safer just not to at all, because their genitalia is none of your fucking business, but if you must (for example if you are in a sexual situation with a trans person), make sure you don’t cause them dysphoria by using words that give them dysphoria. 

"female/male hormones":

  • cis men and cis women BOTH have estrogen and progesterone and testosterone. Intersex people have all of these hormones naturally as well
  • there are cis women who have high levels of testosterone and low levels of estrogen and progesterone, and there are cis men with high levels of estrogen and progesterone and low levels of testosterone
  • these hormones are not specific to one sex or another, and DEFINITELY not specific to one gender or another
  • this term is hurtful not only to trans people but also people with pcos, people who are undergoing or have gone through menopause, and other medical causes for variations in hormone levels
  • this is erasure of intersex people
  • this is erasure of nonbinary people
  • the terms you are looking for, shockingly enough, are "estrogen" "progesterone" and “testosterone”

(╯◎皿◎)╯︵ ┻━┻


"trans*" (with an asterisk) is apparently very controversial. I was unaware of the issues around it, and I have now removed all asterisks from this page as requested. Here’s some posts and articles about the controversy. This post is (I hope) very clearly inclusive of and supporting of literally ALL gender variant people. Cisnormativity hurts everyone.

'straight passing privilege' and 'cis passing privilege' don't exist. What's happening is called erasure, it’s not privilege, it’s part of oppression and a result of heteronormativity and cisnormativity. It isn’t privilege to have your orientation and gender constantly assumed wrongly, it isn’t a privilege to be erased and treated like you don’t exist.

“Cis” Turns Twenty

As of today it has been twenty years since the first known use of the word “cisgendered” on the Internet.

Can we finally be done with the claim that terms like “cisgendered”, “cisgender” and “cis” are neologisms? Can we finally be done with the claim that they are never used outside of academia? Can we finally be done with the claim that they were coined for use as slurs?

why "love is all you need?" spits in the face of queer experience

content warning for bullying, self-harm, suicide, and violence at link.

this video was recently brought to my attention. titled “love is all you need?,” the point of the short film is to bring awareness to the harmful effects of homophobia via the route of reversing homophobia—and the end result is heterophobia, the hatred of straight people. it showcases a young girl’s struggles of being heterosexual in a homosexual world. in the short film, ashley fights to overcome the effects of bullying, rejection born of fear, parental pressure, inability to come out…you know, all the things typically associated with being a marginalized white, cishet, middle class girl in america.

it’s been hailed as an eye-opener for people across america. it’s been praised as heartbreaking, touching, and universally powerful. it’s groundbreaking! it gives exposure to stories of bullying and hatred in our society! but do you know what it actually doesn’t do?

broadcast the voices of queer people.

when we make a short film about reverse oppression, we aren’t actually opening anybody’s eyes to anything (or, rather, we shouldn’t be). it’s not revolutionary or even particularly interesting. showcasing a young straight girl’s romance, regardless of the subsequent failure of said romance, is simply giving representation to more straight people. it makes it appear as though the problems of gay people could be the problems of straight people; however, in the process, it fails to recognize the very diverse voices of queer people all across the world.

not only is the film still focusing on straight people (because heaven forbid we portray queer people in a positive light!), it’s also appropriating the stories of queer people by directly lifting elements from their story and imposing them onto a straight character. and why? because we want this medicine to go down easy, don’t we? what this film basically does is take away the endlessly valuable queer voices that we need in the media, assigning their stories to a more acceptable vehicle in the form of a straight girl.

think about this for a second. there have been countless films about the horrors of homophobia and the harmful effects of heteronormativity—yet what’s the only one that gets any coverage? that’s right: one that paints straight people as the real victims. we are supposed to not only empathize but also sympathize with the main character. we are still supposed to view gay people as the ‘other,’ the anonymous entity that is opposing everything we hold dear to our hearts as a nation.

do you know where my representation in this short film is? it’s in the bullies. it’s in the cruel taunts, the teasing, and the violent hands. my representation is being painted as the bane of society—a view that is already pervasive enough in the media. we were assigned the role of school bully; we were assigned the role of stereotypical gay kid; we were assigned the role of the ones that drive others to suicide.

that isn’t the only thing i found wrong with this video, though. in fact, there’s so much wrong with it that i might not be able to fit it all in one post. but something that was constantly bugging me throughout the film was how the film dealt with gender roles.

we already know that the film worked pretty hard to reverse ‘gay’ and ‘straight,’ something they were pretty upfront about. but if you watch it, you can see that they did some bizarre clusterfuck of gender roles too—and by reversal, i mean they clearly had zero concept of gender roles. when ashley was talking to her mothers, one of them mentions the football team; when ashley admits she didn’t make the football team, she’s ashamed, but does say that she’s going to be in the school play.

now back up for just a second here. her lesbian parents want her to try out for the football team; instead, she tries out for the school play, which is shown to be almost exclusive to gay guys (romeo and julio; she has a minor part, etc.). if you think that doesn’t sound like stereotyping in itself, then you need to reevaluate whether you’re stereotyping or not. lesbians are all tough and manly and play football! gay guys are all girly and effeminate and like drama!

believe it or not, this is NOT turning anything on its head. this is so rooted in society that it’s tired to even see it being used in a short film about bullying LGBTQ+ youth. this just cements and one hundred percent reinforces the idea that liking girls is a masculine trait while liking boys is a feminine trait. now, where could that idea possibly come from? (hint: it’s homophobia!)

however, every lesbian couple you see is still beautiful and feminine, even though they did throw in a shitty bit about the football-drama dichotomy. both of ashley’s mothers wear traditionally feminine clothing, have long hair, etc., while any boy you see is still traditionally masculine. no exploration of how gender expression could potentially be more free in a homonormative world has been done at all. butch & femme have been erased ENTIRELY—and this is some very serious erasure to be done in a film that claims to turn inequality on its head.

it still has the very stereotypical mother-father dynamics firmly set in place. one of ashley’s mother acts more ‘motherly’ toward her, while the other has more of a ‘tough love’ act about her and is clearly supposed to represent the father. we’ve seen the tired cliche ‘gay son coming out to parents, father is disappointed’ scene over and over, and this echoes it. the implications of having a father-mother dynamic instead of a mother-mother (or father-father) include giving a pretty clear statement that same-sex marriages are STILL dependent on heterosexual roles.

it doesn’t help that homophobia is grossly simplified in the short film. all the adults are seen as rather clueless; they just ‘grew up that way.’ they’re either concerned for ashley and sometimes a bit abrasive, or they’re crazy religious zealots! all the bullies are just evil nameless homos, because there is no possible way that anybody could engage in homophobia in ways other than taunting or violence. it ignores how pervasive homophobia truly is by assigning it to arbitrary figures. now straight allies get to pat themselves on the back. “i’ve never beaten up a queer person before! i must not be homophobic!”

this film doesn’t even begin to encompass, however, the huge reality of what LGBTQ+ actually means. it’s supposed to be a film to showcase bullying and how wrong it is; however, the only thing that’s truly changed is that it’s a homonormative world rather than a heteronormative one. it is still clearly cisnormative, mononormative (i.e., pansexuality/omnisexuality, trisexuality, asexuality, bisexuality, etc. don’t exist) world. there are no trans* people to speak of, nor are there any people with anything but a monosexuality. cis gay, cis lesbian, cis straight. those are the three things you can be. is this starting to sound like some seriously shitty representation or what? (there are also no polygamous relationships, but come on—media should have at least caught up enough to showcase a slightly more complex relationship between TWO people.)

there’s some serious racial stuff going on as well. the main character, along with her family, are undeniably white. however, several of the girls who bully ashley at least appear asian, and one of the boys who plays ‘smear the queer’ with her is an older black male. your only characters of color are portrayed as Evil Gay Bullies. that is problematic whether you like it or not.

moreover: straight people are not ignorant. this film assumes that every homophobe, every straight person, must be ignorant in order to bully. this is a ridiculous point of view. straight people actively ignore queer struggles; straight people actively fight against them every fucking step of the way. this is not ignorance, this is privilege and hatred. stop treating them like babies who need to be coddled. they need to get a fucking education, stop being so hateful, and get a clue about what queer struggle really is—and not in the terms of ‘oh look at the poor straight girl.’

the final point i’d like to make, at least for this post, is to address the slurs. several slurs are used for straight people in the film. the main one appears to be ‘breeder,’ a derogatory word for men who sleep with women or vice versa. (a ridiculously cisnormative definition, but what can you expect?) however, d*ke and f*ggot are also used repeatedly—as is queer. that word, for any of you who don’t know, should be reserved for somebody who does not conform to the gender binary or is not heterosexual. a gay male can call himself queer. a trisexual person can call themselves queer. a trans* lesbian can call herself queer. somebody who identifies with no gender can call themselves queer. a cis lesbian can call herself queer. somebody with a non-european idea of gender can call themselves queer. but a straight cis woman has done no work to reclaim the term. the term never referred to straight cis women in the first place. why in the world is it acceptable for them to appropriate the term from us? it’s absolutely fucking ridiculous. same with d*ke—that is a word for lesbians to reclaim. and same for f*ggot—that is a word for gay men to reclaim.

what we NEED to do is give more queer people voices. we need to let them talk about their experiences. we need to be intersectional; we need to acknowledge the huge span of LGBTQ+ issues and not simplify them to a ‘powerful’ or ‘moving’ feature that does little but make people feel good about themselves while simultaneously setting harmful gender roles in stone.

What makes you think trans people won’t go to prison to get free healthcare for transitioning?

Second-year Undeclared major

[M/N: Classism and cis(hetero)patriarchy - shaming people who would be so desperate to save their lives that they would willingly enter the prison-industrial complex, rather than wonder why we don’t have free healthcare, or why medical costs for transitioning aren’t covered by insurance, or why the wage system is so fucked that they can’t afford basic medical care, or why marginalization, murder, rape, and systems of violence against trans people exist.]

Watch on


If you laugh at furries and otherkin, claim their identities are not real and deliberately mix otherkin and furry narratives with trans ones, YOU ARE AN OPPRESSOR. Species dysphoria is a real thing that affects many people, and this is the closest thing they become to the species they were supposed to be. I’ve suffered from species dysphoria myself and every so often it comes back. It is SERIOUS.

And you don’t need species dysphoria in order to be otherkin either. All you need to do is identify as your correct kintype and only you know which kintype you are. I am certain science will help show why transspecies is legitimate and why otherkin should NOT be mocked or denied their identities.


Humans don't have genders, we have sexes

Sex is an essential biological category. 99.9% of humans fall into one of two binary biological categories, men and women. Men have XY chromosomes and women have XX chromosomes. Men have a penis and women have a vagina.

Gender" is a grammatical term referring to words. There are generally four genders in grammar. Masculine, feminine, indeterminate, neuter. This refers to suffixes that changes depending on whether the word refers to something male, something female, something that could be male or female, or something that has no sex.

Sexologist John Money introduced the terminological distinction between biological sex and gender as a role in 1955. Before his work, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories.[1][2] However, Money’s meaning of the word did not become widespread until the 1970s, when feminist theory embraced the distinction between biological sex and the social construct of gender.

Over the last 40 years, the feminist/LGBTQ lobby has tried to redefine the word “gender” and push their redefinition onto the rest of us to take “gender” into this weird psychological place where actual humans have “genders”. This is why we’ve ended up with all this self-identified “cisgender" "transgender" "genderfluid" crap.

Objective biological sex is a more important category than subjective psychological “gender”, for two main socio-biological reasons.

The first reason is that biological sex produces children and psychological gender doesn’t. It doesn’t matter how much a “transwoman" "identifies as a woman”, if he doesn’t have a uterus and ovaries he won’t get pregnant no matter how much his partner puts his penis into his arse or his fake vagina and pretends he’s a woman.

The second reason is about defence. Men are on average physically stronger than women, taller, and don’t have breasts and wide hips which make rough work or combat more awkward. Imagine a tribe where the men think they’re women and the women think they’re men. Now imagine what happens to this tribe when a normal tribe attacks.

What’s more important to the survival of the chicken species, whether chicken noises are made or whether chicken eggs are made?

Please try to reprogramme your mind. Stop saying “gender”. Always say “sex”. Sex is more important.

Article Review: Top 10: Things Your Girl Shouldn't Know

This is an article from

Because you know that all stable relationships are built on keeping things from each other! Keep in mind that this is from the top 10 dating articles from this site.

Woman often tell themselves that they need to keep some secrets from their men.

Wow! I didn’t know that! I thought that people were individuals and such and not a giant hive mind of one gender vs the other!

For instance, she doesn’t need to know about the hot girl who works at your office…

Well, if she’s just “the hot girl who works at your office” then why do you need to keep her secret? Though, far be it from me to suspect the prestigious writers of askmen of adultery!

After all, you always need to maintain some leverage in your relationship…

Mmhmm. As we know, all good and stable relationships are formed from making sure that you have information that you can pull out like a special ops squad to completely shut down your partner.

…And as soon as your lady has all the goods on you, the power distribution will have shifted dramatically. 

So true! It’s been proven that all women want to learn out everything about you so that they can flip the power dynamic, great concept to have in a relationship by the way, and usurp control over the house, which should rightfully belong to the man!

Furthermore, keeping some information to yourself might help keep her honest, and it saves you from the risk of public embarrassment.

Y’know, it’s like these men don’t really pay attention to their prospective partners as people. Nah, it’s more like they go after anyone that looks good and has a vagina.

Read More

Here's the thing that pisses me off about the whole 'friendzone' mentality,

even above and beyond the totally fallacious idea that a girl owes you her romantic interest in exchange for being treated with basic decency.

It’s got this absolutely toxic undertone to it in the idea that of course you’re after her romantically, you were nice to her. It suggests that it would be utterly unthinkable for you to treat a girl as a friend or an equal if you weren’t actively trying to get into her pants.

What the fuck?