ask-a-radqueer

[ask-a-radqueer]

Hello! I was the person who asked about transharmful IDs. I’m talking about things like “transnazi” or “transabuser”

Would it not make you a nazi to feel internally like you should be one?

Or am I falling for a psyop.

I don't really understand myself and so I won't consider this question to be answered yet, hopefully someone more knowledgeable on it can get into it more (eg. someone who uses these terms or knows of people who use them)

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

What I can say is that a big part of many transids existing is because the person who feels like they internally are or should be something usually doesn't meet the traditional requirements for society to recognise them as such (unless they're also cisid). To me, this would mean they do not have abusive/nazi/etc ideologies.

For me, I primarily struggle with how I should treat these people. If anyone does answer this, a personal question from me would be "do you like to be treated as if you are harmful/hateful?". I imagine it's different for everyone, but as someone who likes to validate people's transids and treat them as they identify, I find myself instinctively avoiding some people with these identities because of that.

This has now been answered! Feel free to submit more answers: answer 1, answer 2

[ask-a-radqueer]

You sort of replied to this in a different ask, but I feel that ask was too accusatory and biased. This also might be, I admit I don't have the best impression of the radqueer community, but I do want to understand better. (Apologizes if this is rambling or wordy, I'm semi-speaking and it comes across in my speech as well.)

Do you think the community does enough to avoid being ableist? From my own perspective, what's turned me off from the radqueer community is that it seems ableism and misinformation around disorders or conditions goes unchecked in favor of making people feel more comfortable. I've seen many people who say they're transDID who outright say the leading theories and research behind DID is false, but they can never explain why they think that. They've just heard people disagree with it and have given it no further thought because it validates them specifically and not because they know what's actually wrong with it or what parts are bad. I've seen people just... not understand how dissociative amnesia works. I've seen people get defensive and angry when these things are pointed out, and that IS ableism. It's frustrating, especially when I'm trying to educate people and I'm getting that kind of pushback. It's honestly driven me away from engaging with radqueers at all, because it feels like explaining the basics of a disorder that disables me gets me pushback. I've experienced the same thing with autism, and being higher support needs and already having to deal with lower support needs people who aren't radqueers talking over me, having people who admit they do not have autism but say they do talk over me feels like a punch the gut :,). I WANT to understand and engage it just feels so... draining.

Do you think the radqueer community does enough to avoid being ableist?

It's tricky because I think that a lot of the misinformation that goes about in transabled spaces comes from too much hope that a full transition is possible. I think that, whilst it is within your rights to tell yourself something is true to feel more comfortable, that thing shouldn't be told to the masses as if it's the definitive truth.

I also think that this post I made is quite applicable to a lot of this too so instead of repeating myself, I'll just link it here.

I've met many transabled people in my time, and from most I never hear medical inaccuracy like this, but from some I most definitely do. As a positive, I do like that I'm seeing more cases of cisdisabled people educating on their conditions and giving advice to transabled people rather than when it was more common to just see transabled people giving advice based on stereotypes.

I think when our community was (and still sometimes is) getting severe backlash from some cisdisabled people who were claiming all of us are able-bodied and that it was ableist to even have these feelings, we became a lot more closed-off to the idea of non-radqueers, and even other radqueers, talking to us about ableism. I think we are averse to being called out on ableism as a community because we've been mistakenly called it a lot by people who did not and refused to try to understand.

This is why I'm such a big advocate for having more spaces where radqueers and non-radqueers can integrate more and get along. I think we can both learn a lot from one anothers presence and experiences. I also think it'd help us to be less reactive when it comes to being called out on ableist ideas by other radqueers too, as it's definitely hard to have the courage to do so when people take it as an attack

It's part of why I made this blog even, because many radqueers take questions or criticisms like these things as attacks due to our history as a community. I wanted to create a space for non-radqueers to ask and get genuine answers, and for radqueers to see what other people are asking or thinking about us and what we can do in response to that.

----

a more simplified summary of this response:

I see lots of transabled people who are great, but misinfo does get spread around by some who want a full transition to be possible, but the things they have to tell themselves to feel comfortable shouldn't be spread around as the truth.

This post of mine is also relevant, the link is here.

I'm happy to see more cisdisabled people educating transabled people, I saw a lot more stereotypes going around in the past. But I still think radqueers struggle with being called out on ableism because it isn't always done in good faith towards us and people have called us ableist just for feeling how we feel.

I think the way to help fix this is more places where radqueers and non-radqueers can talk about these things and learn from one another. It'd also help us to be less reactive when other radqueers want call out ableist ideas as that's what stops them from doing it. Like with this blog, I wanted to have a space where non-radqueers can ask anything and get a genuine answer, and for radqueers to see what other people are asking or thinking about us and what we can do in response to those issues.

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

[ask-a-radqueer]

Do you have any opinions on how the RQC could try to avoid infighting?

“I also just find it sad in general that radqueers can't be radqueer and also exist in spaces for their other identities without issues. It turns our community into a vacuum, and all that does is cause infighting and resentment towards people outside said vacuum.”

I know that quote is from an ask about usage of terminology shifting (within the general MOGAI culture of associating coiners’ discourse stances with the terminology they create). But do you think that having other spaces, that allow radqueers to exist in, would help reduce infighting?

The widespread backlash a couple years ago to transharm-ed/ful labels and then gradual acceptance really has biased me towards not trusting the RQC overall (there are other things but that’s a concrete thing I can talk about) but hopefully that hasn’t affected how I phrased the above questions.

Follow-up question from something I said in this post: link

How could the radqueer community try to avoid infighting?

This is an interesting one because I do think it's important that we keep discussing issues we have in the community and have healthy, productive talks about topics that we're divided on. However, it seems that when there are these discussions it becomes (or just starts as) fighting and aggression, and the rest of the time everyone is trying to remain neutral and co-exist with everyone.

Co-existance is good until the point where people are under pressure to silence themselves and be neutral towards things they think are genuine issues in the community. We have so much infighting that some radqueers won't even dare to publicly disagree with something in fear of starting more fights. That can be really dangerous and just isn't a nice feeling generally

I do think that a bit reason for infighting in any community is lack of exposure to differing viewpoints presented in a respectful way, aka existing in a vacuum. Instead of educating ourselves on what others think and why, we make assumptions to avoid asking them directly, causing misunderstandings and black-and-white thinking (eg. "transharmfuls all think this, I think that's bad, therefore they are all bad")

Having other spaces that allow radqueers to exist alongside one another and non-radqueers of various ideologies could help reduce infighting because more exposure to differing viewpoints presented in a respectful way means people are less likely to view disagreement as an attack, and more likely to view it as constructive. Being stuck in a community and not being accepted anywhere else can mean that even the smallest of disagreements become arguments and even feel like betrayal.

Overall, the more opportunities people have to start associating disagreement with positive things like discussion, diversity, and development, the better.

----

a more simplified summary of this response:

The more opportunities people have to start associating disagreement with positive things like discussion, diversity, and development, the better. That's why I think it's so important for radqueers to be able to feel welcome in more non-radqueer spaces, and around radqueers with different opinions to them.

The fact that this is rarely the case means that we get lots of infighting - the community just doesn't have enough experience with how to respectfully disagree and make constructive counter-arguments.

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

[ask-a-radqueer]

Being radqueer is one of the most beautiful things I've ever experienced.

Finally finding a label that just fits.

The community; the acceptance and kindness from everyone else. The feeling of being understood that you get no where else.

I love it.

[ask-a-radqueer]

Hi MOGAI community. Let's talk about racism.

I'm racist. You're racist. Everyone is racist. Don't panic. We can work through this. Take a moment to sit with that. How does that feel, to be told that you are racist? Think about it for a moment. Try to look back and remember something you have said or done that was racist, intentionally or unintentionally, knowingly or unknowingly.

Can't think of anything? You've never done anything racist and you never will do anything racist? There, that's your racist action, that you claimed that you have never and will never do anything racist. I'm not calling you evil. I'm not calling you a bad person. Don't start apologizing, don't start panicking. Take a moment and sit with that.

We are all products of deeply racist societies. No matter where you live, no matter your own race and ethnicity, no matter your own personal experiences, you have been, continue to be, and always will be shaped by constant and inescapeable racism around you. Racism has been taught to you while you were growing up, racism was reinforced to you in your classes, racism surrounds you in your workplace. Racism is at home in your home.

Recognizing this and accepting this is one of the most important steps that you can take towards anti-racism.

The word 'racist' does not describe a type of person. The word 'racist' describes an action or idea. If we begin to think of racists as some other kind of person, then we separate them from ourselves. When we separate them from ourselves, we deny our own capacity and willingness to be racist. When we deny our own capacity and willingness to be racist, we ignore it when people point out our own racism to us. We become more focused on the idea of, "I can't be racist, I've helped with all of these racial justice initiatives!", than on the idea of addressing racism in and around us. We become more focused on maintaining our own self-image as someone who isn't racist than on working towards anti-racist action.

A person who cannot consider that they may have done or may be doing something racist is not someone that people of colour are safe discussing racism around. A community where accusations of racism are considered more offensive than racism itself is a community that prioritizes the white status quo over the safety and wellbeing of people of colour.

I have done racist things. I will do racist things again. You have done racist things. You will do racist things again. Sit with this. Accept it. Only once you no longer panic at the idea of being racist can you take meaningful anti-racist action. Only once you no longer prioritize your own guilt and shame about performing racism can you begin to prioritize anti-racism.

If you want to know more about the subject, then I can highly recommend White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo. I still have yet to read through the entire book, but I have here a link to the introduction and first chapter of it. It's short, only 14 pages, but wonderfully written and it explains a lot, and while I'm not an expert on the subject of anti-racism I would consider it essential reading for anyone who wishes to dip their toes into the topic for the first time. https://mega.nz/file/uCYSHagT#fVcJ7U_9qX_gtKZiY_-YHMfUzxt0OwOGaKPXeCZrYtI

Some tags for reach. @io-archival @rwuffles @daybreakthing @rabidbatboy @whimes

[ask-a-radqueer]

How to engage with the outside radqueer community? I've been stuck on Tumblr for 2 years and I've been wanting to interact with the wider community outside of Tumblr, but other places are completely unknown to me

I'm not too familiar with what spaces are active these days but here's some ideas:

Discord hosts quite a lot of radqueer servers, just make sure you're joining the one that's right for you and look out for things like contact stance restrictions: Disboard and other server hosting sites will have them, and many are advertised here on Tumblr!

Beyondtheplus is a new organisation looking to host some meetups, and I know other people who've hosted some meetups too but they will naturally be hard to find

Pages like RQD2 and NNIA.space may have some activity, I remember nnia.space being more known. Again, be careful making sure the community is for you and read their rules well

There are radqueer crowds on other socials like Reddit, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok and such, but I find that those platforms also have more trolls and some of them are more just para-oriented than radqueer it really depends

Sites like transid.org might not have chat systems but are great ways to give back to the community and build on it! They also have a Discord linked on there

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

[ask-a-radqueer]

how is it not racist to be transrace? /genq.

Had this in already! look here

[ask-a-radqueer]

I see a lot of radqueers claim the community at large does not support nazi ideologies, actual contact between maps and (chrono) children, etc. but when I go in the tag and even just glance for a moment that seems like all I see. How do you reconcile this? Genuine question

I'll preface this by saying that I don't think the radqueer Tumblr tag is a good representation of what's acceptable in our community. It's not vetted and we can't decide what goes in there, so the people you see in it may identify as radqueer, but they may not be accepted in an actual radqueer community setting where we talk directly to one another (eg. on Discord or other chatrooms).

I'm not sure if you were just exaggeration here for effect, but I'm not seeing any nazi ideologies in the radqueer tag currently (unless you're talking about the antis who recently spammed our tag, lots of them had nazi emoji combos on their accounts and posted nazi imagery).

You could be referring to the occasional time in which transnazi comes up, but I wouldn't classify it as an ideology, it's a word to describe a feeling. My personal views on its execution as a term are complex, but I do not see it as a pro-nazi term.

As for pro-contact radqueers, I am seeing more of them nowadays but I still wouldn't say it's a majority at all. I'd also add that a lot of the para content in the radqueer tag is hypothetical / fantasy, not reality (any posts talking about this in a real sense are against ToS anyway), and that some people use pro-contact without necessarily supporting adult/child contact, though I don't fully understand yet.

From my experience, we seem to be a majority complex contact community, I think we have lost a lot of anti-contact radqueers to the assumption that the community is pro-contact dominated.

For me, even if it was a pro-contact dominated community, I would want to continue using radqueer because I've used it for so long already and it is not inherently any contact stance, so I shouldn't have to leave it behind just because people mistake it for being a pro-contact term. I will continue to stand up for contact complex and anti-contact radqueers regardless.

----

a more simplified summary of this response:

The radqueer tag doesn't show what's actually accepted in our community because we can't vet what goes there. The people posting in it may identify as radqueer, but they may not be accepted in an actual radqueer community (eg. on Discord).

I'm not seeing any nazi ideologies in the radqueer tag currently aside from a recent raid we had from antis. Transnazi comes up sometimes, but it's not a pro-nazi term from my experience, even though I have mixed views on it.

To me, most radqueers have complex views on contact and aren't fully anti or pro. I've seen more pro-contacts nowadays, but there's also people in the tag talking about para fantasies, not real life. Even if we became mostly pro-contacts, I'd want to stay here and keep standing up for contact complex and anti-contact radqueers regardless. I shouldn't have to leave radqueer behind just because people mistake it for beign a pro-contact term

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

[ask-a-radqueer]

What are at least you personal feelings about the advice in see in radqueer transid spaces of "Just say your cis [whatever transid]!"? Like telling a Japanese trace person to just they are Japanese, and not say they are trace. It is advice I've seen once or twice, and for me at least, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Long response incoming, summarised response in simpler words at the bottom

----

What are at least you personal feelings about the advice in see in radqueer transid spaces of "Just say your cis [whatever transid]!"

Quick little aside: saying "I'm Japanese" isn't claiming to be cisJapanese, but I also understand that we're not living in a world that would recognise that statement as including transids, I just wanted to say that before I start.

I see this take occasion but I rarely see it actually in use. For me specifically, saying I'm cis in a way that I'm not isn't really euphoric at all and I know lots who feel similarly. I have sympathy for people who feel the need to do this, as their dysphoria must be quite significant if they struggle to even admit to being transid.

I definitely don't have an issue with people just saying they are [x] rather than cis/trans in things like intros for radqueer servers, because our community knows that if there's no prefix it could be either. I also don't have a huge concern about people lying about being cisid or using no prefix in contexts where your identity doesn't really matter, because I can't tell what's a lie on the internet and most people we say things to on here are people we never see again or say anything significant to; we should take what people say with a grain of salt anyway.

When it does matter to me is if people are withholding that something is a transid for the purpose of being included in a conversation or space that does not include them in their current state (eg. because they haven't had the experiences required to gain access). This also includes when it's done to speak for a community that has a lot more experience being recogised socially as their identity than the transid person does.

I think that, as transid people, we need to be aware of the fact that almost all spaces specific to an identity do not acknowledge that transids exist. By entering them, we will be mistakenly viewed as cisid and this can mean that what we say about being that identity is given the same value as someone who has lived being socially recognised as this identity for much longer and so has much more experience with living as it.

This isn't good. Where possible, we have to let people who have the lived experience of being recognised as that identity have their spaces to discuss that experience without interferance from people do not yet have that.

It doesn't make you any less of your identity to respect that. I am cisJordanian for example, but I'm not going to join a conversation about living in Jordan in 2025 as if I know what it's like because I haven't had that experience. Being something doesn't mean you have to act like you've experienced everything you could've experienced due to being it.

----

a more simplified summary of this response:

I see this said every now and again but don't see it actually acted on often.

I think not using either prefix (cis/trans) in radqueer server intros, for example, is fine because we understand that it could be either. I also think saying you're cisid or using no prefix in contexts where your identity isn't really relevant isn't a big issue. People are always lying online, I won't be able to tell and it won't impact any interactions we might have

When identity is relevant (eg. exclusive groups online/irl, conversations about having a certain identity), we should let people who have the lived experience of being recognised as that identity have their spaces to talk about it without input from people don't have that yet.

That doesn't make transid people less their identities - being something doesn't mean you have to act like you've experienced everything you could've experienced due to being it. That goes for being cisid too.

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

[ask-a-radqueer]

Transplurals feel as if they should be plural but may not bodily be a plural yet, making them untransitioned transplurals. They could also be transitioning to become plural through willing headmates into existence or other methods - they may become endogenic plurals if they do this successfully, making them transitioned transplurals!

Endogenic plurals are just any plurals that feel as if their origins aren’t traumatic in nature. They might also identify as transitioned transplural if they’re willogenic, or transplural in a different way (eg. wanting more/less alters or a different origin), but they might have also not wanted their system. There’s lots of reasons why someone might be endogenic besides creating their own headmates willingly

not out of malicious intent , more so curiosity , what is the difference between being endogenic and transplural ?

radqueer / transid tags are for engagement , i& am not one ! simply curious

[ask-a-radqueer]

Thanks you for having anon on otherwise I would be to anxious to send this, but while I know you can't speak for all radqueers, what is the community's general feeling about Dissomei, Desirdae, etc, at this point in time? Is it still negative, accepting, not really giving a shit, something else? I ask partly because I do see a use for such labels since there could never really a good transid for the feeling of disconnect I have towards my face that dissomei neatly fills.

How does the radqueer community feel about Dissomei, Desirdae, etc, at this point in time?

In terms of the general community, I think a lot of radqueers are frustrated that when we talked about our transid experiences in the beginning, we were met with fakeclaimers in the MOGAI community who told us we were ableist, racist, queerphobic and transphobic, that our experiences weren't real. But now, the MOGAI community seem to act as if they only ever had a problem with people who are pro- all types of transition, transharmful identities, so on, and as if radqueers don't have nuanced views on these things.

It felt like a bit of a slap in the face seeing the MOGAI community praising identities that we were harassed for a few years ago just because their coining posts now specify a few things extra.

I think most radqueers accept people who prefer to use dissomei like they do transids, and I'm glad that people are able to feel comfortable talking about these experiences, but I also feel that it fueled hatred towards transids because "why not use the non-problematic alternative". It definitely contributed to people thinking that transids were inherently pro- all types of transition too, or that all transid users were radqueer.

I do view it as a somewhat direct transid alternative, just with more detailed (and clunky, at least as a non-native English speaker) wording that may make it easier to explain to others and emphasises the 'why' and the disconnect a bit more. I can see its appeal for some people

Personally, I wouldn't use dissomei because I don't like the negative language in it and prefer to focus on my connection to another identity, not my disconnection from my assigned one. I also don't like that the definition suggests reasons why I'm like this, I prefer to just say I am something and expand on why if I want to. I don't appreciate that just because I prefer the wording and style of transids, I'm seen as immediately more problematic, and sometimes even racist/ableist/etc.

I appreciate that desirdae is more specific and so I view it as a lot more unique, though I'm not sure if there were any transid variants that it was aiming to replace or not. I've seen a few radqueers using these but they have said they feel unwelcome in doing so. I rarely see radqueers using dissomei because transid usually covers it

----

a more simplified summary of this response:

I think lots of radqueers were annoyed seeing the MOGAI community praising identities that we were harassed for a few years ago just because their coining posts now specify that they're anti-harmful transition etc, which lots of transid users and radqueers are anyway.

I'm glad that people are able to feel comfortable talking about these experiences under the word dissomei, but it fueled hatred towards transids. People would say "why not use the non-problematic alternative" and would think that transids were inherently pro- all types of transition too, or that all transid users were radqueer. I don't appreciate that just because I prefer the wording and style of transids, I'm seen as immediately more problematic, and sometimes even racist/ableist/etc.

Desirdae is a lot more specific and I've seen radqueers who find it useful but don't feel welcome in using it because they're radqueer.

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

[ask-a-radqueer]

My issue with trace/transrace is that transrace is already a thing and it describes something completely different. Transrace is a term for people who were adopted into families who are a different race from them. The radqueer community has co-opted this term from actual transrace people.

This is why several years ago now, we opted for trace as a replacement, though I sometimes use transrace as a tag since the trace tag is also full of artists lol (and the other term is transracial, not transrace).

The pre-existing term that you're referring to is interracial (or transracial) adoption, and interracial is more often used now, but I'm glad we changed it to trace so transracial could continue being used in this way. Non-transid people spreading transracial around claiming we stole it is only making it harder to move to trace, which we've been trying to do for years as I said.

It's a very easy mistake to have made, I'm not sure why people seem to think it was a purposeful act to name the transid transracial, but if non-transid people could just let us use our replacement name in peace, that'd be great.

bonus: a reblog to this that I liked!

[ask-a-radqueer]

Why is being transrace NOT racist. Similar question for transability and some transharmful ids.

The simple answer to this is because trace as an identity doesn't inherently promote or stand for "policies, behaviours, rules, etc. that result in a continued unfair advantage to some people and unfair or harmful treatment of others based on race" [source]

It is an identity label created to describe how a person feels about themselves, not an ideology label created to promote certain acts or ideas. The same applies to why transabled is not inherently ableist, and I'm not really sure what your question would be for transharmful

I'm assuming that by 'being transrace' you actually mean things like trying to change the colour of your skin and otherwise trying to physically 'pass' as another race - this is not inherent to being trace and, in my experience, it's not what the majority choose to do. I don't personally think it's the best choice to make and I tend to discourage it if people ask for my opinion, but I don't hold hatred towards people who do it for dysphoria reasons. Hatred isn't a constructive way to express disagreement or offence.

I also don't necessarily think 'racist' is the word to describe people who do these things in an attempt to alleviate dysphoria, because that choice is more to do with just wanting to look like how you see yourself than conscious (or subconscious) racism, but that's a conversation for another time.

----

a more simplified summary of this response:

Trace (transrace) is not inherently racist because it doesn't inherently promote discrimination based on race. It's an identity label created to describe how a person feels about themselves, not an ideology label created to promote certain acts or ideas. The same applies to why transabled is not inherently ableist

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

[ask-a-radqueer]

I am back again, hello. Build-a-headmate blogs, or BAH blogs, originated within the radqueer community. They got picked up by anti-radqueers and now if I look through that tag, the majority of what I see are anti-radqueer blogs doing it, with some of them being very vocal about being against or even hating radqueers. I'm curious, what do radqueers think about this situation? I remember seeing one or two posts from radqueers complaining about being pushed out of their own spaces when anti-radqueers first started picking up the concept, but that was a while ago, and I haven't seen much on it since. The same situation happened with multiself, to the extent that it, originally coined as being inherently transid, was put on the Harmless Identities Wiki and redefined as being inherently identiora (for the unaware, identiora is a now-retired term attempting to group terms such as desirdae, dissomei, intusui, and even genderbodiment??? while keeping radqueers and transids out. I have many thoughts and criticisms on it but I will not get into them here). If you are up for it, I would be curious as to your thoughts (or the thoughts of anyone else who is interested in answering) on that matter as well. Thank you very much for your responses, I am greatly enjoying reading them and hearing your perspective!

What do radqueers think about things like Build A Headmate blogs and multiself terms being made by very vocal anti-radqueers?

It can be disheartening to see people using terminology that they know full well was created within our community, and in the same breath acting like we do no good for the queer/MOGAI/plural etc communities and aren't 'actually' a part of them.

It's a method that's been used historically - acting like a group hasn't contributed anything good makes it easier to villainise them and present them as a monolith or inherently bad people. This can look like erasing their input (mass reporting blogs), detaching them from their input (presenting radqueers negatively in posts using their terms), or just making their input your input (recoining). It's how you get groups existing today with not enough accessible history about their contributions to society as there should be (eg. trans and queer people, women, POC, disabled people).

I feel similarly about this as I do about non-radqueers growing to accept transids or transid-like experiences more, though. Recognition for any identity is ultimately a good thing, even if sadly the community it came from isn't being recognised or credited properly. I'm glad that multiself and build-a-headmate didn't get immediately discredited just for being coined by radqueers. I think there's been a bit of progress there.

I also just find it sad in general that radqueers can't be radqueer and also exist in spaces for their other identities without issues. It turns our community into a vacuum, and all that does is cause infighting and resentment towards people outside said vacuum.

I'd argue that this vacuum thing is part of why some radqueers are getting more ideologically extreme too - they aren't seeing respectful, nuanced opinions from people who disagree with them, just the hate that you usually get in the radqueer tags. The fact that so many non-radqueer terms coined by radqueers seem to end up having anti-radqueer dominated communities who lack respect for us is just more reason to stay in our spaces and only our spaces.

----

a more simplified summary of this response:

It's sad that some people use words from the radqueer community, but then act like we've contributed nothing to other communities and like we're not 'really' a part of them. This misrepresents us and our history.

It's good that ideas like multiself and build-a-headmate are accepted by non-radqueers, but their spaces can now feel unsafe for radqueers. This makes our community more like a vacuum, which leads to infighting and resentment towards anti-radqueers, and resentment creates more extreme ideologies. We need more spaces where radqueers and non- or even anti- radqueers can coexist, but it won't work out if this keeps happening to the non-radqueer terms we make

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

[ask-a-radqueer]

what made you start identifying as radqueer and do you ever wish it had less problematic associations?

What made you start identifying as radqueer?

I was (and still am) in the MOGAI community when radqueer was coined and just sort of watched it develop. I started self-identifying as radqueer after a few lovely conversations I had with radqueers on Discord quite soon after it was recoined with the definition most known today (pro-good faith identities including paraphilias and transids, or just pro-para pro-transid). I looked into arguments against it too, and at the time there was no alternative word for pro-transid and pro-para, so that made me radqueer.

Fun fact, I didn't actually identify with transids aside from transgender until about a year into identifying as radqueer when I had a near-death experience that resulted in my developing of BID. My support for transids came from me learning to understand rather than already relating to it

Do you ever wish that radqueer had less problematic associations?

All the time. I don't agree with the original coiners of it and some of the more extreme ideas that have entered the space. I think if I were learning about radqueer just now, knowing all the alternative words that exist to describe being both pro-transid and pro-para, I might've not called myself radqueer.

However, I hope that eventually I'd still come to identify this way. Radqueer as an ideology and concept is fascinating, the community we've created is meaningful, and the word is just badass. I don't want to relinquish all of that just because I don't like the original coiners or some of the community members. It's my identity/ideology now, I get to make whatever I want of it

In the same light, I'll always love The Great Gatsby even if F. Scott Fitzgerald was a prick to his wife.

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

[ask-a-radqueer]

I do have other questions, actually. In my experience, a lot of people outside of the radqueer community, when they see phrases such as pro-transid, pro-trace, pro-transition, and so on, seem to read it as a blanket support of every term and/or experience that could fall under that concept. This is a part of why we& are so hesitant to use stance labels like that for ourself&. Would you say this differs within the radqueer community? When someone says that they are pro-trace, would it be reasonable or presumptuous to take that to mean that they are pro-transition for trace identities? If someone says that they are pro-transition for trace identities, is the expectation that they mean transition in the form of learning a language and recipes, or transition in the form of changing one's skintone? I find that there are many, many nuances in these discussions, and that the painting over of them with snappy opinion descriptors leads to confusion and arguing, but would you say that this is correct or is it more accurate that these stances when used within the radqueer community are rather homogenous and that the ambiguity comes from non-radqueers being charitable according to their own ideas? I hope this makes sense, I do have a tendency to add unnecessary details.

Long response incoming, summarised response in simpler words at the bottom

----

When someone says that they are pro-trace, would it be reasonable or presumptuous to take that to mean that they are pro-transition for trace identities?

In the same way that I am pro-transmasc without supporting taking on misogynistic ideas in order to fit in with 'stereotypical' men, I am pro-trace without supporting taking on racist stereotypes in order to come across as more like a particular race. I think there are limits to what is currently harmless in the areas of both social and physical transitioning for many transids.

I've also seen many radqueers agree with that sentiment, and so I would say it is presumptuous to conclude that pro-identity means pro-transition in all its forms.

I will say that the radqueer community is much more likely to support social transitioning like saying you are your transid without specifying that it's a transid, and more likely to overtly include transid individuals in the same way trans women are included in 'women'. It's not applicable to all radqueers, but definitely more common. I think we are more likely to view transids as an extension of transgender and to treat them in a similar way, at least socially.

----

If someone says that they are pro-transition for trace identities, is the expectation that they mean transition in the form of learning a language and recipes, or transition in the form of changing one's skintone?

Personally, I wouldn't want to assume either way, but unless social transition is specified I would lean towards both social and physical transition methods. This is mainly because I don't see pro-transition used in this way if people are against physical transition, as it's easy to be misunderstood then. I'll usually see pro- social transition or no specification.

As a bit of an aside, I think it's a positive thing for transid liberation that not all physical transition methods are encouraged en masse or emphasised. I think ultimately the less we associate certain groups with a particular look, personality and so on, the better we get at breaking down stereotypes and viewing people as complex individuals with a unique mix of traits that affect their experience of the world. I also think it helps normalise differences in people who are cisid too.

As an AMAB individual, trans men existing has meant that people are more likely to view me as a man despite my more feminine sex traits, because trans allies have decided that you don't have to transition away from those things to be identified socially as a man. I would like to see a future where other transids can have this sort of positive impact too, and so I'm sort of glad that transitioning discourse has become quieter amongst radqueers and I'm seeing more transid people opting for social transition only.

I say sort of, because I do wish we talked more about the ethics and philosophy of transitioning sometimes and how it could change with time. I feel heard when I do speak about it as a brown person in the community, but I don't feel like the opportunity to speak about it comes up much to begin with as people prefer to avoid arguments and not be seen as impeding on anyone's personal life choices.

----

a more simplified summary of this response:

Pro-trace doesn't always mean support for transitioning, especially not support for all types of transitioning. Radqueers seem to be more likely than non-radqueers to support social transitioning, and I do see radqueers who are pro-physical transitioning too but I try not assume that pro-transition always means this.

I also think that less emphasis on physical transitioning means we're more likely to start viewing people as unique and rely less on stereotypes and physical traits to decide whether someone is 'really' that identity or not, which is good for both trans and cis people.

I do wish us radqueers talked about the effects of transitioning more. It tends to be avoided to prevent arguments.

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!

[ask-a-radqueer]

I would be interested in hearing radqueer perspectives on the rise of transids in non-radqueer and even anti-radqueer spaces. It is something I've been watching and have many thoughts on, but my perspective is primarily from the non-radqueer MOGAI community side of things. Does it perhaps feel like a betrayal of sorts, or hypocritical? Do you believe that the radqueer approach to transids, as identities and experiences, is different than that of the non-radqueer approach? One thing I have particularly noticed is that there is more acceptance and discussion of transition in radqueer spaces than non-radqueer spaces. To a lesser extent, I have noticed that anti-radqueer spaces have more of a focus on dysphoria relief than transition.

I love love love this question, I could've gone on forever so had to cut it short. Also I'm getting the vibe that you're at least a bit into small-scale anthropology and/or social observations because same

Long response incoming, summarised response in simpler words at the bottom

----

Does it feel like a betrayal or hypocritial that non-radqueer and anti-radqueer spaces have began including transids more?

I would never be able to view growing acceptance for an identity as betrayal, even when that acceptance means unearthing said identity from its supposed 'roots' (which lots of the main transids aren't 'rooted' in radqueer to begin with, I think radqueer just raised more awareness).

Hypocritical would be a more fitting word, but I also think that hypocrisy is a necessary part of acceptance for any minority identities. Historically and now, people start off thinking that they are 'above' supporting something, either due to lack of understanding or forming an opposing opinion that they use to justify that lack of support.

If those people then start to view that thing as equally worthy of acceptance, that's evidence that they have formed a solidified reason for making that change. I find that acceptance for something always lasts longer when its supporters understand why they accept it and why it's important that they continue to, instead of accepting for the sake of accepting.

Radqueers have reasons for accepting transids, but those reasons didn't resonate with most MOGAI people at the time. That's very common in general queer history: other groups are 'late' to accepting queerness because their shared ideology makes it harder to accept (a big example of this is religion getting in the way)

With the MOGAI community, I think our innate focus on queer sexuality and queer gender limited us in accepting transids as quickly, whilst radqueer was defined without those limitations. We started out viewing it as an attack on the transgender label because that's what we're used to as a community. We then moved to accepting the familiar ones like transspecies, then maybe transabled if the person has BIID, then terms like dissomei instead, so on so forth. When our community branched out to more non-gender non-sexuality terms, we saw more transid acceptance too.

As a community we were able to expand our shared ideology's range of acceptance by making compromises and almost 'meeting radqueer in the middle' to make our space more safe for transid people without taking on the parts of radqueer we didn't agree with, and it required a lot of valuable input and thought.

----

Do you believe that the radqueer approach to transids, as identities and experiences, is different than that of the non-radqueer approach?

The radqueer community was created with its shared ideology automatically supporting transids - people who adopted the label at first found it relatable which is why transitioning was more discussed. Radqueers were transid people trying to navigate what to do about it, their discourse skipped the 'why do we accept transids' stage (until of course the community diversified more and new transids came about) and the MOGAI community was definitely left a bit confused due to missing those 'why' discussions.

I can imagine very few were non-transid allies in the beginning because they had no reason to go against society's (or the MOGAI community's) shared ideology at the time. I'm so glad the MOGAI community found a reason to make way for transids - empathy for the transid people in our community - and acted on it.

I don't think the two communities will fully overlap in their approaches to transids really. Whilst both often use the 'good faith' model, they mean different things by it and I don't think that's about to change. Different ideas of what's harmful and whether self-identities can be harmful to others, and different ideas on what makes a queer person are some of the biggest differences I think

----

a more simplified summary of this response:

Non-radqueer and anti-radqueer spaces embracing transids more isn't betraying radqueers, it's growth. Acceptance is stronger and lasts longer when there's a reason for it and the MOGAI community has found its own reasons for supporting certain transids, just more slowly as we had to rethink our existing ideas about these things first.

Radqueers accepted transids early because our label supports them by default and it started off mostly being used by transid people, so radqueer discourse was more about transitioning than why transids are 'okay'. I still don't think radqueer and MOGAI communities will overlap fully in their approach to transids because they view things like what's good faith and what's harmful very differently

Are you a radqueer with an answer to this question? Feel free to answer it with a reblog or comment, or submit a post to my blog!