#but don't think i don't see the transphobic connotations either way!!!

[courtmartialme]

someone asked under my post basically what's the difference between genderbend and trans aus since i asked my transmasc riza art to not be tagged as genderbend so i'm rambling about that

someone added this comment when reblogging my transmasc riza where i ask people to not tag it as genderbend since it had been happening to my trans hc posts and i was a lil annoyed. i don't think genderbend is inherently bad obviously because i have my own genderbend au, but there's a clear distinction between genderbend and trans hcs that seem to be obvious but it's also hard to put into words so i felt like talking about it

to me, genderbend is playing with the character's Assigned Gender By The Author and seeing how their traits would translate into the opposite one, since we live in a Society and how we're taught how to think and act is influenced by that, so the way we perceive the character changes and it's fun to play with it... the focus is usually on that regardless of whether the writer/artist makes them cis or trans

As for trans AUs(that make the character a different gender from canon, not necessarily the "opposite" either), or at least my own, it's about taking canon character traits that can be read as signs of being trans and playing with it, with the focus being on the transition process. in my transmasc riza AU the canon timeline is untouched, everything happens exactly as we know it, and only post canon riza starts questioning their gender and then realizes he's male aligned... basically i think all it takes for canon riza to be a guy is to be introduced to the possibility of transitioning lol so it isn't genderbend if it's the same riza as always

so basically, the main difference to me is what you choose to focus on with your AU. genderbends can be trans AUs but trans AUs aren't genderbends most of times. genderbends usually play with gender roles while trans aus are made to play with traits that are already there that could be read as signs, and the transition process...! a lot of people don't like genderbend because of the transphobic connotations the genre is built on, which is very valid, so it's why i and other people don't like it when our trans headcanons built on identification are labeled genderbend. in the end it's about respecting the OP's wishes

[opinated-user]

Puking anon here. I appreciate the offer of an anon space. When I read your write-up about the video, it covered most of the points I was going to make

There was just two things I wanted to add.

What pissed me off the most about her video, was that LO acts like she is the spokeswomen for all Trans-Women, including trans-women in the 70s and 80s that were apparently offended by the movie. COMPLETELY IGNORING the fact that RHPS was and still is a place where a lot of Trans, NB, and Queer people were able to find themselves.

LO is allowed to dislike the movie. That is perfectly fine. But to act like it's been this massive shame point on the Trans community is DISHONEST and shows her lack of ability to do ANY research.

And speaking of her inability to Google, I just wanted to post this quote from a Guardian Article from 2020 regarding Richard O'Brien

"His openness and inclusivity made it surprising when he remarked in 2016 that a trans woman “can’t be a woman. You can be an idea of a woman.” It felt like an inflexible statement from the man who in Rocky Horror preached the ultimate message of empowerment and self-actualisation: “Don’t dream it. Be it.”

Does he still hold that view on trans identity? “You and I have to be very careful here,” he says, sounding wary for the first time. “We’ve seen what’s been happening with JK Rowling. I think anybody who decides to take the huge step with a sex change deserves encouragement and a thumbs-up. As long as they’re happy and fulfilled, I applaud them to my very last day. But you can’t ever become a natural woman. I think that’s probably where Rowling is coming from. That’s as far as I’m going to go because people get upset if I have an opinion that doesn’t line up with theirs. They think I’m being mean-spirited and I don’t want that at all.” He came out as transgender comparatively recently, saying at the time “I believe myself probably to be about 70% male, 30% female … I think of myself as a third sex and it makes things easier.”

That doesn't sound like the words of a raging TERF to me, especially since he-himself is Gender Non-conforming. I honestly don't think he is being mean-spirited about his statements. I don't want to pull an LO and speak for other people though. I just wanted to illustrate that Richard O'Brien isn't the massive Transphobe that LO makes him out to be.

a person doesn't have to be a TERF in order to be transphobic, and by denying trans women their womanhood O'Brien is actually transphobic/transmisogynistic. that's an indisputable fact according to his own words. his own identity as well is irrelevant in the big scheme of things. regardless if he intends to be "mean spirited" or not, the impact of those words is just as harmful as when other bigots says them with all the hatred they can muster. LO's completely within her right to hold that against him and i can't actually blame her either if that fact colors too the way she views the movie. it colors the way a lot of people view that movie too, unfortunately. she's not alone on that nor it's wrong of her to feel that way. however, the real issue is that LO refuses to understand the historical context and impact that the movie (arguably more than the creator) had for people at a time where seeing any character being shamelessly themselves was revolutionary. it had problematic implications and a transphobic creator, but it also gave a lot of people hope that one day they would find their own communities and they wouldn't have to be scared anymore. by simply rejecting it all as it was trash and the people who like it (gay men) as just liking the rape on it (which is full of homophobic connotations), LO's actually dismissing the experience of so many other people whose only contact with queerness was this movie or the fandom around this movie. it's lack of research but also lack of basic understanding for how valuable this movie was.

[uncanny-tranny]

I’ve been wondering this for a little while, but I haven’t been able to find any answers so I thought I’d ask. Why did the transgender community move away from the terms transvestite and transsexual? I’ve heard that transgender is more current and I understand that, but I wanted to know if there was a more legitimate reason

A lot of it (I think) comes from the appropriation of "transsexual" and "transvestite" as a sexual or erotic category. Either that, or some people see these terms as inaccurate to many trans peoples' experiences (in that "transsexual" has heavy medical connotations and "transvestite" can be viewed simply as somebody cross-dressing/acting in a non-typical way to their "actual" gender with no real commentary on their own or actual gender).

See, these terms would describe somebody whom we may call "transgender" today. In fact, many elder transexual/transvestite people do not like being labeled as transgender, and that's for many reasons, but I think part of it may be that they fought for themselves and their life as a transsexual/transvestite and they want to honour that part of their life, and they want others to honour it, too. This may be my interpretation as a non-elder trans person (so it may be less than accurate for some or many transsexuals/transvestites).

Some people also see "transsexual" specifically as an exclusionary term, too. While some people have called themselves transsexual in order to distance themselves from "undesirable" trans people, I don't think that's a problem with the label itself. It's the problem with the person using the label.

I think the immediate association with erotica when somebody says "transvestite" or "transsexual" isn't really the faults of the people who it is describing, so it leaves me with a bad taste when somebody is criticizing a transsexual or a transvestite for using these labels, and I think putting the blame on every transsexual/transvestite is not only unfair, but even transphobic. Some people prefer "transgender" because they believe it is most accurate to describe themselves with, and some people use "outdated" language because they are most comfortable with it. Regardless, we need to respect each other in the gender diverse community.

[backbracebruin]

JK Rowling deserves all the criticism and heat she's getting and so much more, for a number of things, her trans-exclusionary beliefs chief among them. A lot of people are saying much more eloquent statements about how damaging being transphobic and/or a TERF is than I ever could, especially those who directly feel the affects of such harmful and ill-informed rhetoric.

I don't want to speak of the experiences of trans folks, as I am not one, but I would like to address her statements about being a victim of domestic abuse and sexual assault, as those are two things I have experiences with myself; and how I think she is using those as a buffer from criticism for her hateful words and actions.

As a victim/survivor (whichever words you choose to identify with, because that's a whole other kettle of fish) of trauma, specifically abuse or assult, your brain learns to make associations. People who have spent time in war zones hearing shellfire, for example, frequently react negatively to hearing loud sounds like fireworks or a car backfiring, once they are in a different environment. When you've been assaulted or abused, either ongoing or in an isolated incident, your brain makes connections to things that you remember about those events and they often take on negative connotations, either consciously or subconsciously.

After fifteen years of domestic abuse, it took a long time and a lot of therapy to realize that I didn't have to associate every type of touch as negative. I was 27 before I would willingly give or receive a hug. I had to realize it's not an inherent danger for anyone to be walking behind me, even friends and family. I now know that if someone puts their hands on my shoulders in a comforting manner, it does not mean they are going to strangle me.

My abuser was a cis man, and while I can agree that the fact that they as a demographic wield essentially most of the power in the majority of spaces, it does me no good to make a sweeping generalization that every single one of them is going to harm me. There are discussions to be had and that are being had about diversity and inclusion in all facets of life to elevate others to the same status that cis men have, but that is not the point I am trying to make. The point is that because my abuser was a cis man, because I have only ever been sexually assaulted by cis men, I had created the association that not only were they not to be trusted, but that their purpose was to hurt me, and I had to unlearn that.

Making that sweeping generalization may be okay when we're looking at systems of power and how to fix them so that they are not so imbalanced, but on a personal level, it is a very dangerous way to think. Because when I read JK Rowling's statements about her experiences with assault and abuse, it seems clear to me that she uses her association with her abusers -men- as a way to justify her argument that anyone she defines as a man is inherently a danger to anyone who she defines as a woman. I look at her and I see her making those claims, and I see someone who has not properly gone through the therapeutic process. I think it's safe to say that ALL women and those that are female-presenting have felt the same fear at some point in their lives in the presence of a man. It's not specific to people she classifies as biologally women.

I suppose my ultimate point here is that I find it disgusting that she is using her trauma as an excuse to diminish transwomen, to limit their rights, privileges, and safe places in society, and to feed into the narrative that transwomen are still just fundamentally men.

I keep thinking about that tweet about having suffered and thinking you turned out fine. JK might have suffered and think she turned out fine, but if she's okay with the fact that trans-women experience suffering as well, then I don't think she turned out fine. I certainly don't support her in any way, but I hope she looks inwards at the origins of her hateful and baseless beliefs, puts in the work, and tries to change, because unfortunately she is still an influential person to a lot of others.

[kinkymagnus]

Hey I've read a lot of your posts, where Magnus is a trans boy and I like that a lot, but I was wondering if you don't like the canon cis male Magnus? I'd ask you non-anonymously too, but I'm honestly scared of some people's hate messages for a question like this... sorry

long answer long answer lmao

hmgmgmnggg ok so i, hm. ok, i don’t think this was meant in a rude way at all, and i promise im in Education(TM) mode not Kill The Malicious Evil Transphobe(TM) mode like im not, accusing you of anything here, at all 

but i do have a few Issues with like, the way this was asked i guess

i will answer your question just--give me a sec, im a little uncomfortable here

also like, ok, i get why you’re sending it anonymously, it’s cool--personally i’ve never seen anyone get hate on behalf of trans magnus headcanons (rather than against them) but i mean, hate can come in all shapes and sizes i guess? and anxiety, so. whatever, it’s fine, i get it

but anyway moving on: first, “canon” cis magnus. my dude... my guy... did at any point magnus say I Am Cisgender or pull out his dick.... like... neither trans or cis magnus is really “canon” just as like, you know, izzy isn’t confirmed straight or bi or pan. we know she likes dudes and personally i think the way she looks at clary indicates she sure do like girls, too, but that doesn’t seem to have been intended so it’s debatable, and that’s basically it. 

also, in the context of just like... historical shit, realistically magnus isn’t cis. is he trans in the way i write about (like afab, “pre op”)? no, not necessarily in canon (although he isn’t... not that either i guess--we do see his flat chest, no scars, but HYPOTHETICALLY that could be a glamour, or the scars are magically healed. we know he has an adams apple, but there ways to do that without magic, let alone with magic. so like. i’m just saying.) 

but like, he wouldn’t be cis how we understand it either by the simple virtue of being much older than the western gender binary as we know it. even if he was born with a penis and all of that and identified as a Man(TM) And Nothing Else that wouldn’t mean his idea of masculinity/manhood would be the same as ours, or that it wouldn’t at least be shaped by very different factors. so like. even if my version of trans magnus isn’t confirmed canon, cis magnus certainly isn’t either i think. that might be slicing hairs or getting finnicky with language, but it’s how i feel about it. 

and just assuming that he’s canonically cis rubs me the wrong way, like, characters aren’t cishet by default, you know? obviously the writers probably weren’t intending to make him trans, and cc certainly wasn’t when she stole his character from dark hunters and made it “her own”, or else there’d be a bunch of transphobic tropes in there, but like, you know, death of the authors, we make sense of canon now. intentions arguably don’t matter, we do with the story what we will, especially when working within it.

again i don’t think you were necessarily being like “well magnus is canonically cis so :/” but it rubs me the wrong way and is something i’ve seen before so like, yeah

secondly, “trans boy” magnus versus “cis male” magnus. why boy, anon. why boy

(god why does “why boy” sound like a bizarre t-shirt slogan or a mbmbam segment--NO, BRAIN. WE ARE ON SERIOUS BUSINESS.) 

but seriously tho like the sort of infantilization of trans men is really a thing (seeing them as “soft bois” and “uwu cute boys” and feminine/soft/small/delicate) and like, specifically calling magnus a trans boy versus when he’s cis he’s a “male” (which technically can refer to any age but has those like, Connotations) sits wrong with me. like, magnus isn’t a boy, you know? i mean i get making jokes like “aw my boys <3″ or whatever, but with this it’s not that say memey context AND specifically it concerns a trans man (not to mention him being asian) so like, it feels, yikes? like just. he isn’t a “trans boy”

im sorry i realize it seems like im just like harshly picking apart your answer and i really dont mean to sound like a bitch here but like, again. Education(TM) mode not Anon Hate(TM) mode. just for learning, it’s cool, i’m not angry at you, it’s chill. 

to answer your question with the yikes language gently nudged to the trash chute: do i dislike cis magnus? 

simple answer: yes.

complicated answer: not really. i already stated why i don’t like Cis(TM) magnus as it feels unrealistic and dumb and also he just doesn’t have cis energy lmao, but if you just mean like... well this isn’t really “cis” but kind of what people mean in this context, AMAB magnus (meaning he was “assigned male at birth” aka has a penis and all that) and he’s canonically gnc so like, he’s “cis” even if his understanding of masculinity might be different than ours and obviously we’ve seen him be gnc and all that.... i don’t really hate that, and objectively, i have no issues with it, but personal taste wise, i basically only read/write trans magnus as you see on my blog now. because i’ve kind of absorbed it as “canon” in my head (fanon, i guess, lmao) 

plus, just generally trans magnus is really important to me because like, a) he is #goals i too want to be a muscular gnc hottie, b) he’s relatable and i project all my shit onto him lmao, c) it just feels very validating, in a lot of ways--with the sexual preferences i write about, his insecurities, just the way he looks, and him being trans is just kind of reassuring, you know? also d) i honestly think it fits him/his character/his backstory and he just has the vibes u kno 

so basically, Cis(TM) magnus? no-go. cis magnus as in AMAB/identifies as a man full stop even if it’s wibbly wobbly compared to current times and lbr no one is going to really explore that much beyond him being outwardly gnc sometimes? fine, whatever. trans afab magnus still being gnc as hell? yessssssss

ldkgjfgh anyway im glad you like my posts!!! and hopefully ive Inducted Another Into The Trans Magnus Cult (thats a joke, but seriously, im just like,,,,,maam do u have time for ur lord and savior trans magnus?? maam blease)