TAL9000

159 notes

paristhroughthewindow:

[Trigger warning for discussion of (sexual) abuse, trans-dehumanization, and transmisogyny]

bulhana:

amydentata:

Amy Dentata: Oh jesus christ are people starting to use faab and maab to describe their preferences of who they like to fuck

riskycelery:

[I snipped everything else -Nora]

I’m kinda torn on this issue. 

I’m a transguy. I wouldn’t want to be with someone who didn’t see me as male, but I don’t think I would care if they were attracted to my current, pre-T junk. That is not what makes me a guy.

I’m really only interested in FAAB people.

Bam. Guilty. RIght there. But let’s continue…

I’m sometimes attracted to MAAB people, but that attraction ends once I think about what’s in their pants. I have no interested in being sexual with someone who has a penis right now, whether they’re male or female or trans*. 

So MAAB means “having a penis” now? Since when? Does SRS no longer exist? And being trans* means you’re neither male nor female?

And I understand that I’m sort of reducing people to their genitalia, but that’s just… kind of how it is.

What you’ve just said is, “I’m being cissexist, but it’s ok because I’m being cissexist.”

I’m not attracted to specific genders at all, but definitely only interested in FAAB people. I’ve been working on trying to change that for years, but it’s not happening. That’s my orientation, at least for now.

I don’t think “orientation” is the correct word to use here. “Unchecked prejudice”, for sure. Gender assignment has nothing to do with the genitals someone currently possesses. Equating the two requires a lot of assumptions, that all fall under cissexism.

Maybe it has something to do with survivor issues? Everyone who has abused me has been a cis male, maybe that’s why I just don’t like the peen.

Once again, not all MAAB people have penises. And trans women are NOT cis men. You’ve just lumped trans women together with cis men. Do you see the problem there?

Trans women are abused by cis men, gay males are abused by cis men. I don’t see them making the same justifications. What about someone who’s been abused by people of all genders? Do you think they’d just hide away in a cave somewhere for the rest of their lives and never seek intimacy? What about straight women who are rape survivors and continue to date cis men? Do you think maybe you’re just rationalizing your prejudice?

(But I’m pretty cool with synthetic peen? I should probably stop talking about what I like in bed now.)

I think you just answered your own question. Yes, you are being prejudiced.

I don’t know. What do other people think about this? Is my orientation cissexist, and how do I fix it?

Question all the assumptions you just made in this post. Stop rationalizing it all away. Stop justifying it. Stop qualifying it.

Have you spent a lot of time in the (cis) lesbian community, like many other trans men? If so, you have probably been continuously exposed to transmisogyny. A lot of what you’re saying here is similar to the empty rationalizations cis lesbians use to discriminate against trans women (and all other MAAB queer/trans folk) and exclude them from women’s circles and queer/trans events. You were THIS close to spouting the classic “trans women have male energy” trope. Educate yourself on transmisogyny. That should expose a lot of bigotry that has flown under your radar up until now.

reblogging for commentary by amydentata, blackenedbutterfly and stifledthoughts. to say you’re attracted to someone’s gender assignment that they did not choose, and/or do not identify with, is pretty fucked up and that’s being cissexist.

regarding the “What about someone who’s been abused by people of all genders? Do you think they’d just hide away in a cave somewhere for the rest of their lives and never seek intimacy?” — um, well, it would be perfectly valid if someone did hide or needed space away, and sometimes people do, and also a lot of people don’t seek intimacy or sex (whether they’re aromantic or asexual or grey-a or demisexual/romantic or not…), so i think that part’s somewhat problematic.

I think the problem isn’t this person’s sexuality, just the words he’s using to describe it. Like CAFAB != genitals-commonly-described-as-vagina and CAMAB != genitals-commonly-described-as-vagina. But then amydentata totally loses me.

Just…as a general rule, nobody has to justify their reaction to abuse to you. Nor do they have to “prove” that their reaction is, like, logically consistent. Like, what the fuck even. If someone likes cock that’s synthetic but not gentials-commonly-described-as-cock that’re non-synthetic, you don’t get to tell them that this somehow ~disproves~ the idea that their preferences might be a reaction to trauma. That is so unbelievably presumptuous and-and-and not okay.

Also, I agree with Bulhana: “hide away in a cave” is not an acceptable way to describe “not have sex.” And, as someone who was sexually abused by men and women, I’m super uncomfortable that my decision to keep having sex is being used to tell another survivor that his sex life/sexual preference/etc. is somehow invalid. People react differently, and it doesn’t make sense to establish One Standard of Acceptable Sexual Practice Post-Abuse.

And-and-and I’m uncomfortable with Risky-celery saying that he’s “trying to change” *who* he is attracted to. Because no one is asking that of him. It’s kind of like when someone says “I’m not attracted to Black girls.” And you say, “you’re probably a racist.” And they’re like, “WELL JUST SEND ME OFF TO A CONVERSION CAMP, THEN.”

Because, we’re not asking for you to find a group of [insert marginalized people here] attractive. We’re asking you to correct your assumption that Black women are all loud/hypersexualized/threatening-to-your-patriarchal-masculinity. If you go about your life disabused of all racist notions—and still don’t find a single Black woman attractive? Whatever. But non-racist-you won’t be able to say “I don’t find Black women, as a group, attractive.” Because such a statement relies on a mistaken assumption.

Similarly, saying “I’m not attracted to MAAB people” isn’t cool because it relies on the assumption that MAAB people either can’t have the genitals you’re into *OR* that they’re somehow more like a cis male than some trans* guys. Which obviously isn’t true (and, yeah, is pretty damn transmisogynistic).

Nora speaks truth.

(via poorlifechoicesblog)

  1. becomingh-i-m reblogged this from halfright
  2. unobject reblogged this from calloutqueen
  3. calloutqueen reblogged this from fagglet and added:
    cissexism is grozz
  4. fagglet reblogged this from perrywinxxx and added:
    oy vey.
  5. amydentata reblogged this from deleteaudio and added:
    Race and sex are not equivalent. Try again.
  6. punk-kieren-walker reblogged this from bittergrapes and added:
    Jeez. The cissexism is strong in this one. Also, pretty sure all credibility flew out the window with the use of the...
  7. conjuringseed reblogged this from 2ndversesameasthe1st and added:
    have we mentioned that not all FAAB people have a vulva, or were even born with one? or the sticky issue of us FAAB...
  8. dreamiermaalik reblogged this from misohead
  9. i-sauntered-vaguely-downwards reblogged this from moleend
  10. bittergrapes reblogged this from moleend and added:
    I’m going to flip this so I can try to understand its fuckery a little better. So my experience as a transman, and...
  11. moleend reblogged this from amydentata