p011ux-v0id

[p011ux-v0id]

just a little note, I like how radqueer people are generally more accepting of typos.

I will see it in antirq trans/queer spaces, where someone will make the smallest typo or word things in a way that isn't perfect, even though it's really obvious what they mean / just trying to ask a genuine question (about their own identity even! like I've seen people ask "am I trans" but because they use "outdated, evil language" all everyone does is "helpfully correct" them, instead of actually helping with their question...).

idk, I've seen people make typos and no one acts weird about it, or word things weirdly, but people understand what was genuine / assume they didn't intend to be bigoted about it, and it's like an actual discussion.

there's a lot of hostility in these spaces for sure. like maybe I understand, they feel they have something to prove to a world that hates them, maybe if everyone uses the right language people will like them, but like come on that's not gonna work, it's gotta be about intent / acceptance, and insulting your own definitely isn't going to help.

[p011ux-v0id]

agree. personally I always think about how it leaves out multi racial people, immigrants, stuff like that, anything that doesn't fit into this perfect box of race/culture really gets discriminated against in these arguments, really makes me think how they feel about these people, do they say these same racist things irl? that immigrants are just here to steal / appropriate / ruin other people's culture? that multi racial people will never count as their races, because they're not pure? that all this mixing, dissolving of barriers between people, people trying to live a better life than the one the rest of world tells them to (whether that's moving, or reclaiming something they were told was wrong, or anything else), is just inherently morally wrong? we should all be segregated into our little boxes, never interacting those different from us?

even just the "culture appropriation" bit, even for non trace people, has always bugged me. sure, some people do it obnoxiously, in a way that's obviously not about learning the original culture, maybe even using it for their own gain, but people then take that to mean all cultural sharing is inherently malicious / harmful / shouldn't be done, which is just sad. I think the world would be better if people understood eachother better. I think sharing culture, like the things that have brought someone joy as a child, helps them connect with family, still something that helps them today, etc. is actually really beautiful.

like I've done it with my grandma and if these people took one look at either of us, they'd call us both racist cultural appriators, one for "diluting white pure culture" and the other for "stealing the culture of poor minorities", even though our cultures are really one and the same, because isn't that how it works? if you're related to someone (in any way, not just biological family), how is what you share with them not the definition of how culture is built? or let me guess, it's only ever supposed be about oppressive white colonists whatever, both in an oppressor and oppressed sense, and no one is actually allowed to find joy in their life outside of these boxes. ""you can't find joy because you're an opprssor (whatever joy you feel must be defined by hurting others), and you only find joy because you're oppressed (because what they're finding joy in would not actually have value if it wasn't oppressed)."" ew

I would also add that, from what I've seen, people who say this don't belive sex is a social construct either, that's also much to challenging, because then people are allowed to exist outside the perfect little boxes, or god forbid, actually move between them (like think of the people who insist it can only be called transgender, not transsex, because "it's your gender that's wrong, not your body" or "you can only change your gender, not sex, cuz one is what you were born as (sex) and the other is just a social construct (gender)" as if the feelings people have that lead them to iding as a certain gender are valueless, just because it's mental... like wow way to be progressive guys, I too love invalidating people's emotions /s).

I never can understand anti-tracial talking points that claim “race isn’t a social construct” or that “it’s not like sex”... because it literally is.

Yes, race does affect your bone structure, fat distribution, susceptibility to diseases and congenital conditions, but sex does that too. And yet many antis believe that sex is just a social construct that shouldn’t matter as much as it does. Maybe you can’t exactly change your sex, but many believe that its a dysfunctional system that needs to be dismantled because it excludes many people who fall outside of the normal sex barriers. But why can’t we think the same way about race? Why do we have to fit ourselves into this strict binary simply because we were born into it? Many people DO fall outside of the typical binary of their race and it is a social system used to put people in boxes much like sex, so I don’t see any reason as to not treat it as such.

Really, how much would it affect other cultures and traditions if we just got rid of these rules and allowed people to identify themselves however they wanted? I think we should focus more on teaching people how to adopt different cultures and appreciate them without being disrespectful, rather than bullying and harassing people for wanting to change their racial identity. It’s not inherently disrespectful for someone to want to transition to a different race and culture, because people can be trans-racial for many reasons other than wanting the ‘aesthetic’ of another race. Race is just a label, and people should be allowed to apply whatever labels they want to themselves because it doesn’t actually hurt anyone, and the only reason people gatekeep racial identities is to uphold traditional standards that seek to keep people chained to arbitrary classifications.

Also, to anyone claiming that being transracial is wrong because they’re only ‘basing their entire transition on a stereotype of a race/the romanticized version of the culture,’ would you claim that trans women are just basing their transition off of a stereotype or a romanticization of femininity/‘being a woman’ because they grow out their hair/wear feminine clothes/ take estrogen/gets breast & bottom surgeries, because some cis women have short hair, wear ‘masculine’ clothes, have high testosterone, or have small breasts/ambiguous genitalia? No. You wouldn’t, because that’s fucking stupid and a clear TERF talking-point. So why would you say the same thing about transracial people?

Would you say trans women are only trying to copy a romanticized version of the female experience because they don’t want to experience the misogyny that cis women face? NO. YOU WOULDN’T. So why say the same about transracial people? Obviously nobody wants to experience discrimination, it’s just something that happens out of our control, and some people of ambiguous race DO experience racism targeted at a race other than their own, so transracial people can experience discrimination to them that is targeted at their ‘chosen’(for lack of a better word) race.

Also, don’t bring up “Some transracial people do/say ___!” Because that’s a ridiculous generalization of an entire community based on one or a group of individuals, which is the main driver of transphobic/anti-LGBTQIA+ rhetoric.

TLDR; let people do what they want, it doesn’t hurt you so don’t let it bother you. And if a transracial person IS doing something genuinely harmful to your community, call them out on it and educate them, as it could just be an honest mistake caused by misinformation, or block them if they’re being malicious.

[p011ux-v0id]

I've seen other people have this discussion before, about the different between trans[x] and cis[x] and wanted share my own thoughts on it.

Speaking from my knowledge of trans and cis in a gender/sex way, since they're more well known (and thus have a lot of stereotypes associated with them), I think they're not that different actually. I don't see them as these permanent, ridged, polar opposite boxes. People can be both, neither, and (more controversially, since there does exist some acceptance for other modalities like tris/iso/etc.), that people using the same label can be extremely different, and/or exactly the same ("despite" using a different label).

Some people will argue that trans people and cis people are polar opposites of each other, that they should always be split up into different categories, like they're different fucking species. Which also goes into how people see male and female, you know, humans, as different species, even though they're literally both humans.

For example, "trans men and cis men are totally different, because all trans men have to get surgery to have a flat chest while cis men have it naturally, so they just don't have the same experience!" which is just so wrong? as if there aren't cis men with breasts, either keeping them or needing to get surgery to have a flat chest. and to extend it, that there aren't cis women with flat chests, either because that's literally just their natural body, or a result of surgery. and what about trans women? even if people acknowledge that cis men and trans women can have breasts (in addition to trans men), they'll still go on to say shit like "male breasts" vs "female breasts", like WTF does that even mean? "even if cis men can develop tiddies, it's just not the same afab breasts!" so what, all trans women will never have "real (female) breasts", and cis men with breasts don't get made fun of for being female / not really male??? (way to diminish the experiences/feelings of everyone)

That's just one specific example, but it basically applies to everything. Gonads, genitalia, hormones, and the resulting secondary sex characteristics like body hair, facial hair, height, weight, fat distribution, muscle, voice, hairline, body shape, and whatever other shit people decided was exclusively male or female. All sex characteristics can be altered, some just have more limitations than others. And people end up with "mixed", or lets be honest, "wrong" "disordered" and "unnatural", sex characteristics all the time naturally.

It makes about the same sense as when applied to socialisation (again, whatever the fuck that means), an argument people use to defend "AGAB" terminology. "Men and women are raised differently, in these specific ways!" Do different cultures exist? I guess they don't, according to the people believe this, the only real culture is white America / Britain whatever the fuck. And that intersection doesn't exist either, race, ability, orientation, etc. none of that gets people treated differently, it's just "AMAB and AFAB", those are the only 2 categories. "But at least they knew what it was like to be men/women before they transitioned!", see above for issues, but also, this acts like people all have the same minds, same opinions, same feelings, just clones of each other. Every single person just treats others exactly the same way, and everyone reacts exactly the same way. Like there don't simultaneously exist people who will say "real men don't cry" and "it's okay for men to cry", and that they won't act differently based on these beliefs. And there don't exist people who will be hurt by the beliefs, not be bothered, or find odd joy in them (e.g. "well I don't care about being a man anyways, so why would I be upset about this? maybe it even proves I'm really different" versus "I can't act weak, or I won't be who I want to be", there are infinite more variations of course). That abusive parents and good parents don't exist. That progressive cities and regressive towns don't exist. So many things that just don't exist. "But experiences! Women experience these things and men these other things" Again, everything above, and this is the same basis transphobia uses. "All trans women are sexual predators and trans men are just confused girls being preyed on!" Is just "all males are sexual predators and females exist to be preyed on". Something that both victim blames and absolves the perpetrator of responsibility, and ignores everyone who doesn't fit into the "male penis being forced into a female vagina" idea of rape/SA. But when you slap a cute trans paint of "AMABs understand privilege and AFABs know what it's like to be sexually harassed" all of the sudden its different, like it doesn't perpetuate the same god awful stereotypes. So very useful categories indeed, really making the world a better place /sarcastic.

So what is the difference? If it's defined based on transitioning, what about cis people who need to transition (that is, changing your body, life, etc.) to be seen as their id, cis people who don't transition even though they don't look stereotypical (because it already fit their id, by their own definition), trans people who don't transition (because it already fits, either stereotypically or astereotypically), and other "unusual" examples that aren't just the cis person who's born the definition of masculinity/femininity, and the trans person who transitions to (some "subpar") masculinity/femininity? You could argue maybe it's all trans, but I mean, if calling a trans person who doesn't transition wrong, I really don't think it's okay to do the same to a cis person. Or define it based on body type, but that's also dubious to nonstereotypical people. Or experiences, but what does that matter, when everyone is so different? Does it make sense to crush it all into two little boxes?

Trans and cis are just a collection of a practically uncountable number of contradictory and supporting ideas, only the individual can account for their own set of variables. So in that sense, it's kind of arbitrary. So I believe someone could, say, transition from transfem to cisfem, be cisagenerine without transitioning (or being intersex), be cismasc and get (vaginoplasty) bottom surgery, etc. (just listing off the weirder takes, instead of the obvious ones like trans people who don't transition, since it's pretty obvious I support that). And the same ideas extend to other transids/cisids outside of gender/sex, like the ones accepted by radqueers and not the anti-radqueers.

That's my essay :p, if anyone wants to ramble, please do, overthinking everything is my hobby

[p011ux-v0id]

least ableist anti rq

they will really say "get help" and then proceed to insult them about their mental state and tell them to kill themselves

A quick note before I go to bed!!

whomp whomp. let me play the world’s smallest violin for you!! 🎻🎻

[p011ux-v0id]

flirting: gender is a social construct

harassment: sex, race, age, etc. is social construct

-��

okay sex in particular seems like a weird detail to cling to for trans people, even if they are anti rq. it's like, isn't transitioning a thing plently of trans people do, where they change their sex characteristics. but they turn around and be like "AGAB chromasomes!!! sex is when male female, everything elss is a gender only :333" intersex people exist?? also, what about the general variability of people? if someone is infertile, young, old, got in some accident, any sort of medical problems etc. etc. are they not male and female? because by the way people talk about "amab" and "afab" they literally are not.

also, isn't the saying "transgender is okay and transrace isn't because gender is a social construct and race isn't", not degrading to both sides? as if gender is nothing but some meaningless social box, and the mental/lived experiences people have that lead to them identifying with a gender aren't real/valuable.

and like race is this real binary thing, instead of a random collection of traits (real or imaginary) people decided needed to be grouped together. if race is so real and so grounded in reality, then how the fuck can someone "not look/act like their race"? how are people mistaken for a different race? should everyone not just be able to clearly tell? if it's innate, why does it need to be learned? are mixed race, immigrant, or just any person with a slightly more complicated background than "I lived in x country my whole life and so have all of my past 1000 year ancestors, and I've no interaction with anything outside of this" allowed to exist within this modal? because, as someone who doesn't fit that specific example, sure doesn't seem like it. and does this not give credence to racism, where they act like these traits are innate and true, as determined by genetics and nature itself... instead of bullshit they made up? "race is very real guys... we can always cleanly sort people into these races... certain races always have certain traits... and you can't change them because race is innate and determined by the universe, it's just the way things are and you're not allowed to challenge it..." seems racist but sure anti rq pal, you're totally not racist and harassing people online for not being white American is super anti racism of you ;)

[p011ux-v0id]

pro atypical dysphoria + anti rqs are just transmeds with extra steps. I swear to God, it's the same arguments.

"we know we can't transition to [x]! we know transitioning is harmful both physically and socially, we would never do something so wrong and unnatural! we know we'll always be what we're born as! if we could choose to be normal we could, we know how appropriating it can seem, but we can't help it :( it's just atypical dysphoria, a mental illness with no cure (no, transitioning is not a option! it will never be real) :((( that's why we're better than the rqs, because we know we'll never ever be [x] and happy :((( we're the good ones, please pick us!"

like bro..... get the transphobic cop out of your head, you can transition, it's literally your own body and life. are we not over this? that wanting to transition should be the only requirement to transitioning, not "uwhghwuw what if it offends other people that I'm pretending to be their gender I need to cater to the transphobes fweelings :((((" fuck em

though saying that to them seems hopeless

[p011ux-v0id]

"I'm going to be so toxic today lol"

*proceeds to talk about my feelings instead of bottling them up so I don't offend people*

✦---

ok for real though I think all this obsession with toxicity and healthiness has rotted my brain. Like I remember when people were starting to be like "it's okay to talk about your mental health!", which then turned into "getting therapy is good" and "don't burden other people with your issues, you're only supposed to do that with paid professionals". I mean it's still better than it all being super stigmatized, but I feel like it's really not better in many aspects. Like all this super performative drama (was it really always like this?) and "get therapy" being an insult, makes me think, are these people really more accepting? In some ways it feels like nothings changed.

In any case, I've been trying to be more toxic and unhealthy, whatever those words even mean at this point, and it's pretty freeing :3

[p011ux-v0id]

Guys, i love the hate, don’t get me wrong. But imagining them refreshing my page just to see I never responded gets me hard.

[p011ux-v0id]

Come on anon, you claim to not be jerking off to this, but it's coming off as high key sexual. - signed, someone who also likes degrading people. it's okay bro, I'm sure there's a transharmed / masochist rq out there for you, you just got to ask for consent first.

u love raping kids? u should kys. ill make sure all u worthless radqueer whores get wiped out and fucked to death. GROOMING CHILDREN AND RAPING ANIMALS AND CORPSES IS FUCKING SICK THEY CANNOT CONSENT TO U UGLY FUCKING BITCHES. FATASS FREAKS. UR FAMILY AND FRIENDS HATE U SO JUST END IT ALL. u have no personality, being a rapist is ur only 'special trait'. kys kys kys kys kys. JUMP. DO IT. WORTHLESS DUMBFUCK. EVEN UR OWN COMMUNITY HATES U. AND NO I AM NOT FUCKING JERKING OFF WHILE TYPING THIS STFU PEDOS.

what

[p011ux-v0id]

back then: "video games cause violence!! people who play video games will become violent criminals!"

now: "fiction causes violence!! people who consume problematic fiction will become violent criminals!"

broo what happened? I swear to God there was a time in between where people were normal about this, like no, pixels on a screen are not equivalent to real life crimes, but it's come back, and seemingly worse than before. why do teenagers these days sound like boomer parents? the younger generations are supposed to become more open minded...

[p011ux-v0id]

Does anyone else have typical mogai alt accounts (so anti rq / not inclusive of controsverisal identities)?

I do, it's just a little blog with a couple hundred followers, nothing important in the grand scheme of things. Though sometimes I wonder what the point of it is.

I'm quite confident that if I was open my about my identities I'd get inconsiderate, unkind, ableist, sexist, and extreme comments. I'd know, because in the past I've made offhand comments about my nonbinary transition, just to get told I'm mentally disabled and ruining my body, which is just like fucking hell dude, thats literally what transphobe say, and you say this as an "open minded" trans person?

Not that rqs are perfect, no one is, and there's rq community drama, but at least it's generally more open minded. Seeing people be like yeah, I belive people should have the right to harm themselves, is so based. I don't consider this harming myself, but it's the principle of the matter. Instead of arguing over what does and doesn't constitute harm, why not just be supportive of people doing what they want with their own bodies?

I post terms and flags because it's fun, but knowing the majority of people who like my posts don't like me in the slightest, and that posting flags for my non mainstream accepted identities is sure to get hate, does make me question why I post anything.

So, what have other people done? Just delete your account without explanation? Make controsverisal posts anyways and just be okay with the harassment?

[p011ux-v0id]

so true.

I wouldn't have discovered radqueer stuff if it wasn't for antis complaining about it 24 7.

even when I tried to block it because of the negativity, it's hard to block. it's like they do everything they can to get around filtering on purpose, while talking about how rqs are bad for "triggering other people". not tagging posts talking about rq, not tagging even general stuff like violence/suicide/assult/etc, using vague language so you know exactly what they're talking about but can't be filtered by key words, screenshots (and with no image id), reposts, the list goes on. if this is so triggering why would they repost a completely unedited and untagged screenshot?? I've had a much easier time filtering rq posts, I blocked the rq tag and simplely never see anything related, only twice did I see them, and they weren't even about being rq. I've had to put so much more effort blocking anti rq posts (plenty talking about the most horrible things possible in great detail, totally untagged).

the horrible arguments and hate, I don't even know what the point is. this isnt helping anyone's mental health, and it can't even be said to be "raising awareness and stopping people from becoming radqueer", because their arguments are just so off putting. like no anti rq tumblr user number 1000, calling rqs "mentally disabled" / r*t*rded as an insult is not "fighting ableism", and suicide baiting isn't "supporting mental health issues". not to mention other sus points like "neurodivergence is stored in the chromasomes", "attention seekers", "narcissist" (as an insult), though there's so much more. I can't belive people think this is being progressive...

like congrats I was turned rq by anti rqs lol

Oh my god , I'm tweaking out over a certain someone and their system like - You would be such a HAPPIER PERSON IF YOU DIDNT INTERACT WUTH RADQUEER STUFF .

That includes ... anti-radqueer people . Even if they are an anti , they still interact and talk about radqueer people . You would be happier and more at peace in life if you just STOPPED . /dir

[p011ux-v0id]

I deserve to be a little toxic/problematic, as a treat

[p011ux-v0id]

you are so dimwitted it's actually insane

Insults of intelligence and sanity? This is exactly why I am against anti-radqueers, you're often all so ableist.

stop making your community look bad challenge (99% anti-radqueers will fail) (caught in 4k) (big ableism energy)

[p011ux-v0id]

hello!! i saw your post asking for anti-rqs to post their arguments so you can debate, and though im not that into this discourse, it gives me an excuse to try and develop my stance, so i’ll put my side here. im bad at debating so im sorry if any of my points are less coherent than desired

i guess i’m not ‘anti-transid’ in the way i often see it, i don’t think there’s anything moral or amoral with atypical dysphoria, i just take issue with how it’s handled in online spaces if that makes sense. i am anti rq, but the stance varies for each term. as asked for in your post im only mentioning brain injuries here though

my first point is that i take issue with how people tend to say that one can ‘act’ as though they have a disorder or condition, and this extends to tbis. i haven’t actually seen much content for transtbis as i try to keep myself out of radqueer spaces, and i only saw your post as it was in the general discourse tag, but ive noticed people tend to use stereotypes or exaggerated behaviours. i am keeping this point briefer than my full thoughts as it is less geared towards trans tbis and so is off topic, but summed up i think though it isn’t intentional, it is easy to slip into accidental mockery or insensitivity, which i am against.

my second point is that i don’t like how gender is equated to these things, as i don’t think gender is a physical thing in the brain. with a tbi, that is a medical thing whereas gender is not. this is more of a general point against transids and less specified, but i feel like the arguments for and against should be different than with gender as they are separate topics. with a tbi, you can gain one through an injury, and it is something based on damage and physicality rather than internal perception and presentation. gender is not something gained and it cannot be defined by anyone but the person themselves, it’s complex and ultimately its own beast entirely. i would probably have a lot less issue with transid if i didn’t keep seeing it being likened to being transgender

this is an unpopular point, and i am only bringing it up because i see a lot of people arguing this point, i don’t actually see anything immoral with one ‘transitioning’ (in quotes as i don’t actually know if this term is used) through injury, if one has BIID or something similar and is at the point where giving themself a tbi is genuinely the best option for them. though i do see a lot of sentiment blaming people for doing similar things, which i disagree with. i think it should be a route explored in a safe medical environment after intervention to see if other methods work, but if someone is honest to god giving themself a brain injury over atypical dysphoria, then attacking them is useless and overall a bad idea.

have a nice day ^^

Why the phrasing "atypical" dysphoria?

I see it a lot from anti-radqueer people. Dysphoria is just the opposite of euphoria, a state of unhappiness. Going by the general definition, "atypical dysphoria" would make me think experiencing dysphoria in an atypical way (like experiencing sadness atypically), which applies as much to transids as anything else. The broader topics covered by transids wouldn't be atypical dysphoria, it just fits the definition of regular dysphoria.

I guess the "atypical" part is because dysphoria, in this context, is redefined only to mean gender dysphoria, so anything that isn't related to gender. By that logic, dysphoria as a part of depression, anxiety, ptsd, bipolar disorder, personality disorders, schizophrenia, plus other neurodivergencies, or just straight up (chronic) pain is "atypical dysphoria" because it isn't gender dysphoria. Or feeling euphoric from exercise, music, sex, drugs, or again as a result of neurodivergence is all "atypical euphoria" because it doesn't relate to gender.

⸻✦

On acting, in relation to disorders / neurodivergencies, I suppose it's a little more complicated.

On one hand, anyone of any disorder can act like anything, including the opposite of what is associated with their disorder. The understanding of the brain, genetics, etc. is far from complete. Disorders are just another one of those abstract human constructs, created to categorise into easy to understand boxes, to help them, or to "help" them (e.g. conversion therapy). Actual experiences don't have to conform to this.

But then that's just the thing, since the understanding of the brain is so lacking, people have to rely on external behaviour to understand a lot of this. Even brain/head injuries, where you can clearly be like, "wow look at all that blood and gore, it's obviously an injury." What it actually entails must be deduced externally, like there is no way to say, 100% this person will get these specific issues (amnesia (what type, just how far it extends, or what it affects), sleep, mood issues (depressed, angry, happy), personality changes, it goes on almost endlessly), you basically just have to ask / see that's what that person is showing. If someone changed from a brain injury / got anything listed above, and never showed it / talked about it (could be possible, depending on what it encompasses), no one would ever know they have it, despite the fact it's physically "obvious".

The concept of disorders, are stereotypes. There would be no pattern, no list of symptoms, no theories, no concept of disorder otherwise. They would just be traits that exist without any meaning added, I mean people could still add their personal meaning, but as a widely agreed upon pattern? No. Things that don't actually bring a person distress can still be categorised as disorders, so disorders fit that definition of stereotype as well.

So I think it makes sense to cling to stereotypes, that's how doctors, society, and even the people themselves (but not always) use disorders. Though, sometimes that contradicts with itself, people make patterns and apply them when it contradicts reality ("you don't look [x]"). Or ascribe additional meaning to it, like a lack of intelligence being an insult.

My solution to that would to just teach people more, about those experiences. Sometimes people fit stereotypes, and just because something is a stereotype doesn't mean it's bad. You just gotta include everyone.

Like amnesia, or some negative impact on cognitive abilities, are stereotypes of TBIs, I don't think that's a bad thing. I only wish people would go into more detail, and not make it out to be some insult.

⸻✦

Oh, now this is where the fun disagreements begin.

I don't believe in things like souls, or in other words, that the mind is magically separate from the brain, a physical organ. A persons everything, personality, beliefs, memory, perceptions, etc. is inseparable from their brain/body, and thus, is just as squishy and malleable. Yes, that includes gender, it's the result of the complex system that is the whole body.

And this I really disagree on, I really don't like the way people think of TBIs, it's shows a real lack of understanding, and consideration that it's a real thing. It's contradictory, as I think just about everyone can say, yeah TBIs cause memory issues, personality changes, whatever, but then, turn around and treat it as but a flesh wound, that doesn't touch on a persons experience of reality at all (perception). That's literally a contradiction.

A TBI is not just a physical boo boo ouchie, it is an internal experience first and foremost, that (can also) effect the way you act. It is defined most importantly by the person themselves. It is complex, and it is "it's own beast", gender is not magically above it. Mental disabilities aren't just some lesser experience, below gender. I'm just saying, if you're going to argue transids are bad, it can't just because it encroaches on the importance of (trans)gender, with the disabilities (that are being used as a point of offence) pushed to the side. If you want to argue anything related to ableism, it can't just be an afterthought.

And again, the physicality isn't even well understood, it just can't be completely measured like that. People can get (seemingly) the same injury and end up with entirely different results. Even the broadest strokes can be ineffective, someone can get a (seemingly) mild concussion and not be fine, and others can have (seemingly, again) not much happen at all.

I do think gender is something that could be changed, just like everything else about a person. I assume people don't want to believe it's true, just like they don't want to think deeply about brain injuries, because the thought that who a person is could be so drasticly changed, that it isn't untouchable and sacred, is uncomfortable, existential even. What's the point of anything if it isn't fate? How can you have comfort in such a lack of security? That doesn't really bother me though, just a fact of life. Don't value things based on permanent they are. Maybe because I've already gotten a brain injury and am forced to confront it, along with some other factors that add up to me not freaking out about this.

People just don't have the technology to just cleanly alter someone's brain, to change their gender. It's a good thing, but even if it did exist, I don't think that changes anything. Alterations of the brain are already a thing, and unethical, unconsensual, things like lobotomies have already been done. Again, I just don't think gender is sacred.

⸻✦

Nice to hear you're okay with transitioning though, autonomy yay! Though I think the intervention bit is a bit sus, I mean practically speaking it's difficult because people don't have that much scientific understanding of the brain, but if it had assurance of it's success, they should just go for it. I don't think this is a last resort existence. Or just accept the risks.

[p011ux-v0id]

For the anti-radqueers, do you think transTBI / transbraindamage / trans mental disabilities in general, are wrong? If so, why? Go in as much detail as possible, I want to debate it :)

[p011ux-v0id]

anti-radqueers be like: "I hate radqueers/transids because they're ableist!"

*proceeds to use ableist slurs like r*t*rd in their "argument"*