I'm a dude. Always have been.
Being a woman always felt really performative - like, lol, live action role-playing who I was supposed to be in order to have the least painful experience possible for myself, family and friends. I wanted an easy stress free life so I hid under makeup and shein hauls.
I thought conforming to expectations would give me the easiest path in life. But I wasn't happy and I wasn't responding well to the situations that path was getting me into.
I had my outlet of male characters I enjoyed writing, but reality always felt like an ill fitting glove when I came back to it.
People would call me on it like, oh, for a girl you're very masculine, female chad etc. Are you a lesbian? They'd say I find you easy to talk to for a woman because you're just like a guy! You're not like other girls!
Always stuff like this.
Being trans is sometimes like the nose on your face, it's there but you don't always see it. If you're like me, you might see it and ignore it.
Eventually, I couldn't ignore it any more.
Being a woman always felt really performative - like, lol, live action role-playing who I was supposed to be in order to have the least painful experience possible for myself, family and friends. I wanted an easy stress free life so I hid under makeup and shein hauls.
I thought conforming to expectations would give me the easiest path in life. But I wasn't happy and I wasn't responding well to the situations that path was getting me into.
I had my outlet of male characters I enjoyed writing, but reality always felt like an ill fitting glove when I came back to it.
People would call me on it like, oh, for a girl you're very masculine, female chad etc. Are you a lesbian? They'd say I find you easy to talk to for a woman because you're just like a guy! You're not like other girls!
Always stuff like this.
Being trans is sometimes like the nose on your face, it's there but you don't always see it. If you're like me, you might see it and ignore it.
Eventually, I couldn't ignore it any more.
YinYang_Creator wrote:
Hey, i have a question. Please forgive my stupidity, but what’s the difference between the terms Intersex and Hermaphrodite? Like i said, please forgive my stupidity, and don’t get mad at me, I genuinely don’t know.
In addition to what EmoAndrewHussie said:
It's worth noting that a human in the real world can't be a hermaphrodite, and this term is often used as a slur towards queer and intersex folks. Hermaphrodites are capable of both producing both egg and sperm needed for reproduction, something no mammal can do. Real examples of hermaphrodites include many types of earthworms and slugs. Some people use the term without realizing this. Basically, if you're talking about a real world person with mixed sex characteristics, they are intersex, not hermaphroditic.
I'm probably about to get into some trouble for this but, oh well.
Intersectionality is important.
Along with all the other super fun and totally not dystopian things happening in the world right now, I've found out that it is gonna be a lot harder to get a legal name change, a thing that would probably help me considerably move past some other super fun things I don't want to get into.
I'm not trans, I'm cis. But of course, issues that affect one marginalized demographic always affect the others.
I've known intersectionality was important for years. Disabled people and trans people fight the same front for wider-available healthcare, and being disabled was my gateway education. From there, I learned that queer and BIPOC people fight societal stigma that are all rooted in the same kinds of harmful attitudes and archaic cultural norms. This recent bout of nonsense is just my most recent reminder of how interlinked our problems really are, and how necessary it is for us to stand up for each other. The world is better when we fight together.
I'll be fine without a name change for a while. It would be helpful, but it's nowhere near as necessary for me as gender-validating changes for trans people and I would like to say that my heart goes out to y'all and your constant struggle to be accepted and feel safe.
Intersectionality is important.
Along with all the other super fun and totally not dystopian things happening in the world right now, I've found out that it is gonna be a lot harder to get a legal name change, a thing that would probably help me considerably move past some other super fun things I don't want to get into.
I'm not trans, I'm cis. But of course, issues that affect one marginalized demographic always affect the others.
I've known intersectionality was important for years. Disabled people and trans people fight the same front for wider-available healthcare, and being disabled was my gateway education. From there, I learned that queer and BIPOC people fight societal stigma that are all rooted in the same kinds of harmful attitudes and archaic cultural norms. This recent bout of nonsense is just my most recent reminder of how interlinked our problems really are, and how necessary it is for us to stand up for each other. The world is better when we fight together.
I'll be fine without a name change for a while. It would be helpful, but it's nowhere near as necessary for me as gender-validating changes for trans people and I would like to say that my heart goes out to y'all and your constant struggle to be accepted and feel safe.
Aardbei wrote:
I'm probably about to get into some trouble for this but, oh well.
Intersectionality is important.
Intersectionality is important.
I'm not sure why you feel like anything you said there (including in the rest of your post) would get you into any trouble, unless perhaps you're concerned about bringing in too much "politics?" If that's the case, a lot of things definitely can be tricky territory, but it's been expressed that RPR does not consider a person's inherent existence and right to be treated equally to be some off-limits political thing, so long as things don't turn vitriolic, basically.
In any case, you're right. Intersectionality is extremely important. Folks with one shared identity aspect but lots of others that differ are going to have very different experiences. I very lightly tried to touch upon a small piece of this in my explanation of what Pride is:
Quote:
Worth note: don't get stuck on the term "gay bar;" Pride is not just for gay folks, and some of the most important figures in its creation were trans women of color.
LGBTQ+ POCs have to additionally deal with racism (and its many, many effects) and often different sets of cultural issues.
LGBTQ+ disabled and neurodiverse folks have to additionally deal with ableism, difficult financial situations that many get forced into, possibly restrictions on medical treatments that could be much more dangerous for them (if even possible), and neurodiverse people in particular (who statistically appear to much more likely to be LGBTQ+, especially trans, than neurotypical people) deal with a lot of infantalization and invalidation on the basis of their neurodivergence. Also there's all the blatant misrepresentation and misinformation around how mental illness ties in.
LGBTQ+ folks in lower social/financial classes have classism, poverty, and very often a lack of information or adequate education that can get in their way and cause others to treat them more disdainfully or more easily get away with mistreating them.
In the US, at least, LGBTQ+ military vets have to deal with an abysmally-run "support" system that often makes timely or appropriate healthcare (including mental health) pretty much inaccessible, and fails them in plenty other ways, too. While this one is arguably a choice, class is among the things that can make it seem like the only option available to some, and no one goes in expecting to be one of the ones so utterly let down.
And while religion is another thing that can be counted as a choice, someone's faith and/or the religion they are raised in can still have a massive impact on how they'll relate to themselves and how others will react to them. Obviously, I don't want to go into detail; I will simply mention that the problem also isn't totally one-sided. (As vague as that is, I realize there's a high chance of what I actually mean being misunderstood. If necessary, I'm willing to explain a bit better via PM - that goes for anyone reading this.)
Plenty of other things can come into play, too; and, of course, being LGBTQ+ will, in turn, change a person's experiences to differ from others in a given group who are not LGBTQ+. Intersectionality can make everything a lot more tricky to address, but to ignore it is to end up excluding huge populations, whether by simple failure to consider and accommodate, or by outright dismissal and alienation.
And you're also right that so often, things that are a problem hurt multiple groups, and things that are helpful benefit multiple groups.
My, uh... habit of I guess preaching to excess aside... If you're in the US (don't recall if it's ever been mentioned) and changing more than one part of your name, something I've learned the hard way isn't commonly mentioned in any of the how-to's I've seen: create accounts with the 3 credit bureaus (TransUnion, Equifax, and Experian - especially the first 2). They are key to proving your identity to a stupid degree, only get updated about changes in specific events, and apparently don't process multiple simultaneous changes very well (and sometimes will create multiple "files" for an individual as a result; I existed as 2 or 3 people for awhile). Having a (free) account with them is the absolute easiest way to see what they think your info is and to contest it if they have it wrong.
The only reason I even knew they'd messed mine up is because one service I use apparently relies on TransUnion for certain personal data and would not allow me to correct it directly, and some government sites wouldn't let me even create an account (literally for updating some of my legal identity stuff) because the info I was inputting conflicted with the info Equifax had (and I didn't even know in what way until I made an Equifax account). I honestly don't like having to create more accounts in more places, but even calling wasn't getting me anywhere.
Yesterday, I responded to a post on Twitter. It was a doctor discussing the lesser known complications of childbirth after the birth had taken place, and how women deserve to be educated on all possible known outcomes to make informed decisions for their bodies. It was a great, educational couple of tweets!
I responded that I was in agreement with her, and kindly requested that she consider changing 'women' to 'people' in her terminology moving forward, because not everybody who is capable of giving birth is a woman. I mentioned pride month, and I thought that was it.
Boy was I wrong.
I spent most of my Monday fighting TERFs/bigots. They swarmed my tweet and kept insisting everyone who gives birth is a woman. If you want to be called a 'man' that is fine, but the moment you rocket a child out of your nethers, you are for all intents and purposes a woman!! I had people claim that using 'people' is exclusive to women and I think my brain melted numerous times. This one person really took the cake though, I was laughing so much.
She said that using 'people' excluded women. She then went ahead and made a comment saying that "More people have disagreed with you than agreed!", not realizing that the vast majority are... women? I also informed her that if a person is not a woman, then any laws that apply to people instead of women henceforth do not apply to her! She got really offended, told me that this meant my 'argument was on thin ground' for grasping at straws here, and she blocked me.
I exhausted hours responding to these people that they're wrong, that this is transphobic, that science doesn't actually back up any of their claims. My block list has grown exponentially.
My request was simple: be inclusive. Use a term that encompasses all people who can give birth. It's a term we already have and that is widely used in all other facets of life. We use it everywhere. And the response was a massive onslaught of hate, denial, and disallowing people the right to be called what they are -- not women -- because cishets feel being inclusive erases womanhood. That is makes men less of men for being lumped in with people who can get pregnant.
The transphobia is immense. Someone assumed I was a trans woman based on my comments and threw "Do you want to suffer menstrual cramps for one week out of every month?" and "Women don’t have the luxury you afford yourselves." at me. Which... was ironic, because trans men are highly likely to have a uterus anyway? So even if I was trans, yes, I do have these things?
There were a lot of cishets in the discussion who implied that this was asking for special treatment, that this negatively affected straight women and erased their identities. And I want to emphasize how freaking offensive this narrative is. Inclusion does not lead to exclusion of cishets. Pride is not about erasing cishets. People who think it does are part of the problem that makes Pride necessary in the first place.
I'm still mad about this thread today, but I'm trying to calm down and enjoy myself for the rest of the day doing chores and attending meetings lol.
I responded that I was in agreement with her, and kindly requested that she consider changing 'women' to 'people' in her terminology moving forward, because not everybody who is capable of giving birth is a woman. I mentioned pride month, and I thought that was it.
Boy was I wrong.
I spent most of my Monday fighting TERFs/bigots. They swarmed my tweet and kept insisting everyone who gives birth is a woman. If you want to be called a 'man' that is fine, but the moment you rocket a child out of your nethers, you are for all intents and purposes a woman!! I had people claim that using 'people' is exclusive to women and I think my brain melted numerous times. This one person really took the cake though, I was laughing so much.
She said that using 'people' excluded women. She then went ahead and made a comment saying that "More people have disagreed with you than agreed!", not realizing that the vast majority are... women? I also informed her that if a person is not a woman, then any laws that apply to people instead of women henceforth do not apply to her! She got really offended, told me that this meant my 'argument was on thin ground' for grasping at straws here, and she blocked me.
I exhausted hours responding to these people that they're wrong, that this is transphobic, that science doesn't actually back up any of their claims. My block list has grown exponentially.
My request was simple: be inclusive. Use a term that encompasses all people who can give birth. It's a term we already have and that is widely used in all other facets of life. We use it everywhere. And the response was a massive onslaught of hate, denial, and disallowing people the right to be called what they are -- not women -- because cishets feel being inclusive erases womanhood. That is makes men less of men for being lumped in with people who can get pregnant.
The transphobia is immense. Someone assumed I was a trans woman based on my comments and threw "Do you want to suffer menstrual cramps for one week out of every month?" and "Women don’t have the luxury you afford yourselves." at me. Which... was ironic, because trans men are highly likely to have a uterus anyway? So even if I was trans, yes, I do have these things?
There were a lot of cishets in the discussion who implied that this was asking for special treatment, that this negatively affected straight women and erased their identities. And I want to emphasize how freaking offensive this narrative is. Inclusion does not lead to exclusion of cishets. Pride is not about erasing cishets. People who think it does are part of the problem that makes Pride necessary in the first place.
I'm still mad about this thread today, but I'm trying to calm down and enjoy myself for the rest of the day doing chores and attending meetings lol.
EmoAndrewHussie wrote:
The main difference between hermaphrodite and intersex is that hermaphrodite is an organism possessing both types of gonads whereas intersex is an organism possessing several sex characteristics of both male and females such as chromosomes, gonads, sex hormones or genitals.
So, in other words, hermaphrodite only has the parts, but Intersex has more than just the parts?
YinYang_Creator wrote:
EmoAndrewHussie wrote:
The main difference between hermaphrodite and intersex is that hermaphrodite is an organism possessing both types of gonads whereas intersex is an organism possessing several sex characteristics of both male and females such as chromosomes, gonads, sex hormones or genitals.
So, in other words, hermaphrodite only has the parts, but Intersex has more than just the parts?
It's a bit more complex than that. This page might help, it has both hermaphrodite and intersex listed and explains both:
https://www.rprepository.com/help/gender-options
Quote:
- Hermaphrodite - This term refers to a being that has the ability to provide both egg and sperm needed to reproduce. Some species of animals are hermaphrodites, such as most snails, plants, angelfish, worms and sea stars.
However, there is no such thing as a real human hermaphrodite - humans who have been mistakenly called hermaphrodites are actually intersex. Because the word hermaphrodite is so frequently misused on humans or fetishized, many people have come to view it as a transphobic slur. We included this term in our gender list because we are a RP site that plays home to many animal-based, fantasy or sci-fi races where the hermaphroditism may be literal and intersex may not apply, but we urge players to use the term with extreme care when deciding whether to use it on a "human-type" character.
Because this is not something that applies to real humans, we offer it only for characters, not for users.
- Intersex - Someone whose physical anatomy is different than what society generally expects. It might describe someone who looks female on the outside, but has mostly organs associated with males on the inside. Or, the person might have sex chromosomes that are different than expected. The person may have a combination of both sexual organs. In the past, intersex folks were often referred to as "hermaphrodites," but this is incorrect as hermaphrodites are both fully male and female at the same time and have the reproductive capacity of both. Unlike "hermaphrodite," intersex is a real way that humans can be born and exist in the world, at a rate of about 1 in 1700 births.
Oh… ok, coz it was really confusing, so thanks!
Sanne wrote:
Yesterday, I responded to a post on Twitter. It was a doctor discussing the lesser known complications of childbirth after the birth had taken place, and how women deserve to be educated on all possible known outcomes to make informed decisions for their bodies. It was a great, educational couple of tweets!
I responded that I was in agreement with her, and kindly requested that she consider changing 'women' to 'people' in her terminology moving forward, because not everybody who is capable of giving birth is a woman. I mentioned pride month, and I thought that was it.
Boy was I wrong.
I responded that I was in agreement with her, and kindly requested that she consider changing 'women' to 'people' in her terminology moving forward, because not everybody who is capable of giving birth is a woman. I mentioned pride month, and I thought that was it.
Boy was I wrong.
Similar frustrating stuff
I've made this same kind of mistake on YouTube. I continue to get shoddy arguments I've already addressed on comments I made months ago, or just plain called a liar. Two that have been especially "fun" have been:
- someone who decided the entire list of links, article names (and where they could be found), and searchable quotes from major medical and psychology organizations was entirely worthless after clicking on the first link and taking issue with the term "assigned gender at birth" because it's "just an ideology" (after I'd already pointed out that the entire concept of civilization is an ideology).
- a guy (identified himself as such) who went from telling me, personally, that I should never have kids because I support trans folks and am non-binary, right to "oh you should have kids, they're the best!" the moment I said I'd already decided not to have kids and had addition reasons why it'd be a bad idea.
- someone who decided the entire list of links, article names (and where they could be found), and searchable quotes from major medical and psychology organizations was entirely worthless after clicking on the first link and taking issue with the term "assigned gender at birth" because it's "just an ideology" (after I'd already pointed out that the entire concept of civilization is an ideology).
- a guy (identified himself as such) who went from telling me, personally, that I should never have kids because I support trans folks and am non-binary, right to "oh you should have kids, they're the best!" the moment I said I'd already decided not to have kids and had addition reasons why it'd be a bad idea.
One of the things I've managed to realize from a lot of these arguments is that many, many transphobes actually believe that inclusive terminology is supposed to be universally and exclusively applied to cis women, so that trans women are the only ones who get to be called "women." That realization has helped to contextualize how a lot of the misinformation keeps spreading; unfortunately, a lot of the people I've tried to explain the reality to - that those terms are only meant to be used in reference to groups and unidentified/unknown individuals, in situations where the term in use is the point of relevance (such as "people who menstruate" when discussing menstrual health and "people with ovaries" if the topic is something like ovarian cancer, etc), to include trans men, non-binary folks, and intersex folks who have the relevant parts/experiences/capabilities and to not pointlessly include cis women who don't, and that similarly inclusive language is desired when discussing things typically associated with men for the same reasons - usually responded by either directly or indirectly calling me a liar. Others just didn't seem to be understanding, and others still simply vanished (which could potentially indicate some will be thinking on it, at least).
But not all is bad. A week or two ago, I groaned internally when I saw another notification appear. Turned out to be someone responding to a comment I'd left about how voice changes had completely wrecked my singing ability and pre-existing anxieties made it really hard to practice, even though it was pretty important to me. They were being sweet and encouraging. As a little bonus, by that point I did actually have a small bit of good news to report on that front, so that felt nice.
Alright folx, time to pack it in! No more being gay for the rest of the year! All the corporations have already removed the rainbow colors from their profile pics so now it's back into the closet with us! Same time next year?
For the straights watching: Yes, all the gays do share the same closet. We all pack in there like sardines until June 1st and then we erupt out into the world like a spray of flamboyant confetti to make everything gay for the next 30 days. The more you know.
For the straights watching: Yes, all the gays do share the same closet. We all pack in there like sardines until June 1st and then we erupt out into the world like a spray of flamboyant confetti to make everything gay for the next 30 days. The more you know.
Aardbei wrote:
Alright folx, time to pack it in! No more being gay for the rest of the year! All the corporations have already removed the rainbow colors from their profile pics so now it's back into the closet with us! Same time next year?
You are on: Forums » Smalltalk » Wanna Talk Pride?
Moderators: Mina, Keke, Cass, Auberon, Claine, Ilmarinen, Ben, Darth_Angelus