#sorry to use a trans empowerment phrase in this way

[thiefree]

people say "god gave us wheat but not bread, and fruit but not wine, so that we could share in the act of creation." but actually we did wheat and a lot of the fruits too.

Big guy's slacking is my point. nothing new in years

[vampireqrow-moved]

hey so I agree with a lot of the stuff in your post about the transphobia involved in the origin of the pansexual label, but I just have one question: what are the actual impacts of people with good intentions calling themselves pan? If you don't hate pansexuals and consider them bi, why type up a paragraphs long manifesto on the harms of the origin of the label if it means the same thing in the way that most non transphobic people (your audience) use it? a lot of identities can be used in transphobic ways (like bi and lesbian and anything really) and plenty of valid identities from problematic roots and evolve over time as people use them differently (queer, transsexual). so how is a person with good intentions using a not-perfect label in a way you don't like a threat to the community? if someone is using the label pan transphobically, wouldn't their bigotry exist independently? if pan people do not act in transphobic ways besides using the label pansexual, realistically what is changing if they call themselves bi beyond holier-than-thou aesthetic activism? plus, a blog on the internet isn't going to get everyone to stop identifying as pansexual, especially considering multiple prominent celebrities ID as pan. so why spend all that energy quibbling on semantics because some bi people use a slightly different word when you could be worrying about Literally anything else? just feels like you want to find something to argue about lol. extremely disappointed that I had to break a mutual

im going to respond to each thing you bring up chronologically- im not trying to nitpick or prioritize certain things you say ill just forget things if i go out of order and i dont want to miss something important. ALSO! i will be typing less formally (like keysmashes and shortening words n stuff) in this response than my og post bc its 1am as im starting to type this so im tired but i want to be clear that i am like. taking this seriously and im not like. mocking u in anyway if it could read that way?? i hope not but just in case anyways here it goes!

in terms of actual impact people with good intentions identifying as pan: honestly im not  sure the full scope of the impact this has, so ill only be speaking to what ive personally seen which might not be all. but like... id argue my younger self has good intentionals iding as pan. i wanted to support trans people, even if i didnt understand a lot of the nuance involved. as a result of this, i developed a sense of superiority over other bisexuals and a mentality that bisexuality was a primitive and lesser sexuality. that mentality is harmful, and although im not sure if it affected bisexuals around me (of which there are many most of my friends are bi ajfjfjf) its still a harmful mentality and can easily hurt people even if i specifically didnt. also using it even with good intentions, which i know many people have, still spreads and further normalizes a label that imo can not be separated from its transphobic origins. this effect is not as extreme as other forms of transphobia and biphobia by A LONG SHOT. the bi community faces a lot of other issues but that doesnt mean this one isnt worth addressing if that makes sense?

if i dont hate pansexuals: ik this is part of a larger point which i will adress but i specified this in my post bc i see a lot of other posts that are negative towards pansexuality have "i hate pan ppl" somewhere in it or a close equivalent. i do not shame these ppl for their anger, i just wanted to be clear i think a lot of pan ppl are bi ppl with good intentions choosing a label they dont fully understand based on a misunderstanding of bisexuality.

why write a paragraphs long manifesto on the harms of pansexuals origin: ok 😭😭 the real reason here is that im literally just bad at summarizing. like thats literally it. i also like talking, its a bad combination. plus ive been thinking abt this for like. over a year im not even kidding and just like i have a lot of thoughts and figured if i was going to bother making my own post instead of rbing someone elses that i might as well get everything i wanted to say off my chest. ALSO BTW i literally got an ask like a week ago that was several paragraphs long asking me to explain my thoughts on why pan was harmful and some other stuff so like. this is partially responding to that and partially just me wanting to air my grievances ? idk if thats the right expression 😔😔

why write the post if my audience of people who identify as pan arent doing it in a transphobic way ? again sorry i didnt really understand the phrasing so i hope this is a vaguely correct summary!! um but like... again imo i think pan cant be separated from its transphobia and like. again imo iding as pan is like. a transphobic action/choice? obviously one transphobic thing does mean someone necessarily is like officially a Transphobe (it CAN be depending on the action but i dont think that applies here) but that doesnt mean there arent problems with what they did. this is like very complicated, but like. someone doing something harmful without the knowlege that its harmful doesnt make that person a bigot by any means it just means they didnt know. and i feel thats the case here? a lot of ppl (myself included until recently) know next to nothing abt pansexualitys origins so a trans inclusve sexuality might seem like a safe and good bet just because they dont know too much abt it, and like? i cant hate those people cause that was me for 5+ years and djgjfjdj you just dont know what you dont know!

basically i think iding with a transphobic label is inherently a singular transphobic action that doesnt make the person transphobic by itself, but is still a transphobic instance.

a lot of identities can be used in transphobic ways like bi, lesbian, etc.: this is true and a point i attempted to make on my original post, but i might not have clear enough. my issue with pan is specifically that it is a transphobic response to a preexisting identity. lesbian isnt an attempted trans inclusive indentity that replaced an identity that already existed (which have many trans ppl identifying with the og label). transphobes can use whatever labels they want, but transphobes using a label vs a label having a transphobic origin is very different. bigots use inclusive and supporting language for their bigotry all the time but language that originated with that bigotry is worse.

many valid identities stem from problemstic origins (like transsexual and queer) but the words evolve: ok my paraphrasing is a little weird there. anyways. the thing here is that. those are slurs. reclaimed slurs that can be empowering to many people, yes, but slurs nonetheless. reclaiming a slur is taking a harmful word and wearing it as a badge of pride. first off, pansexual is not a slur (ur not implying that in anyway just. saying) and it isnt being reclaimed when people dont treat it as having harmful origins. transsexual is the way some people identify but ppl acknowlege its a slur and originates from transphobia. ppl love to act like queer isnt a slur, which is an issue in and of itself, but just. factually it has historically and is currently being used against ppl with the intent to hurt them. pansexual isnt on the same level as these and other words like the f slur, d slur, etc. pansexual originates from trans and biphobia WITHIN the community and not outside of it, and most pansexuals dont see themselves as reclaiming the title because they dont think anythings wrong with it in the first place. and reclaiming it just seems unnecessary considering its history? theres no empowerment from using pan as a label as opposed to queer or transsexual, and it just divides the bisexual community for no reason.

how is a person using a not-perfect label a threat to the community? ok i dont think its a threat but still an issue if that difference makes sense? id like to reiterate a few things ive said before, but for me personally, it made me look down on bisexuals and see them as lesser, and it made people around me see pan as the "trans inclusive" sexuality as opposed to bisexuality, and basically its usage just leads to further biphobia. is this the worst of biphobia? no!!! but its still biphobia and why not attempt to target and minimize that? i have no way to singlehandedly stop biphobia, but my post might get through to my friends who id as pan and that small thing is better than nothing.

if someone used the pan label in a transphobic way, wouldnt that bigotry be different from people using it not transphobically?: someone claiming all bi ppl are transphobic and only pan is the acceptable label is obviously a lot worse than someone iding as pan and saying bi/pan solidarity but again, the second isnt not an issue because the first one is a bigger issue, its just a smaller issue in comparison. i wouldnt say the bigotry is different, one is just worse than the other, but it still has the same problems.

if pan people dont do anything transphobic other than id as pan then what changes with iding as bi over pan other holier-than-thou activism: its just one less person using a transphobic label? which isnt that big but it might lead to their friends stopping iding as pan and cause fewer people around them to see bi as a transphobic identity. which is small scale stuff, i wont try to blow it out of proportion, but thats still a step in the right direction and hopefully more people follow with it. its not terribly huge or lifechanging but something small that may only affect the people close to you is still something rather than nothing.

a blog the internet isnt going to get people to stop iding as pan: oh absolutely not. honestly i expected to get unfollowed/blocked more than change peoples minds regarding the pan label (im surprised i only lost two followers so far honestly) but again, someone literally asked me to do this and i wanted to be clear on my stance on the label, since in the past ive been supportive of it. im not expecting the post to get more than five likes, its more directed to my followers rather than the internet as a whole. im not expecting a large impact, im hoping to change the minds of my followers and friends who id as and support the pan label. thats it. if something bigger comes from it- great! but thats not what im aiming to do.

prev point + many prominent celebrities id as pan: the first name that comes to mind is someone im not a fan of for separate reasons but thats irrelevant. i mean im repeating myself a bit but some celebrities in the past validated and made me feel excited abt my identity as a pan person when they came out, and it justified the label to me, even when i had doubts. i have never interacted with a celebrity and do not plan to change their minds abt their identity. again, my post was for my friends and followers and maybe who ever was scrolling through the biphobia tag and decided to read my post.

why spend that much energy worrying abt the pan label instead of something else: ive spent waaaaay more energy thinking abt a singular meme i didnt like regarding my favourite rwby character so like. maybe i just overreact to things lol. maybe i have a lot of energy and since i cant talk my friends ears off abt my favourite fruits or the different voting methods i learned in my math class or what would dreams taste like, then i gotta put my energy into something. idk. i have a lot of energy and honestly? this didnt take that much. but i felt it weighing on me as my friends talked positively abt the pan label, when i felt guilty for the superiority i felt over my bi friends INCLUDING my best friend and favourite person in the world so like. i spent enough energy worrying abt it, and like. in hindsight since its been over 12 hours since posting it, im thinking abt it less. i was more worried abt feeling dishonest with my friends than actually worrying abt pansexuality, but i figured i owed them an explanation for why my feelings around it had changed.

just feels like you want to find something to argue about: okay i DO love arguing but im not pulling this out of my ass for fun. its in response to posts ive seen on my dash, asks i recieved abt pansexuality, and my way of letting people know my views have changed and why since i know at least some people are curious.

i am sorry to lose a mutual as well, and i genuinely hope things go well for you, but uh yeah thats that.

again, if people have further questions im willing to answer them i just might take a while bc i have school and other stuff 2 do but uhhh yea sorry if im clogging ur dash sjfjfkkf

[transpocsuggestion]

I don't have an issue with your page itself but as a transman myself I find it, despite knowing you have good intentions, lowkey offensive to refer to being trans as beautiful? Again, I know you mean well but does being so disgusted and uncomfortable in your own skin to the point you'd drain your entire bank account to slice your genitals off sound beautiful? Being transgender is miserable. It's not to be a ashamed of, but it shouldn't be glorified. I wish I was cis, being trans fucking blows.

Hey! Sorry about the wait to answer this, I know you sent this a couple days ago. I wanted to be able to give this a full response but unfortunately, I have had a lot going on, so I hope it’s okay that I’ve only just gotten around to it. 

I really appreciate you sharing your opinion, and I understand why you feel like that. I’m sorry to have offended you, as you said, that was indeed not my intention. Don’t get me wrong, I agree that there are aspects of being trans that are way less than pleasant, so I can see what you’re saying, but at the same time, we have different fundamental interpretations of the phrase “trans is beautiful” that cause this, so I wanted to unpack that. Personally, I don’t see calling something beautiful (or the phrase in question) as a form of glorification. To be honest, I didn’t realize anyone else thought of it that way either, otherwise I would never have used it as the title of this blog. We may have different experiences in this case, but I had only really seen the phrase used in the context of empowerment, so I hope you understand why I didn’t think of it that way. To me (and others in my personal experience), saying “trans is beautiful” is a way to give agency to the fact that you don’t have to be cis to be beautiful, you know? Similar to saying trans people are strong, brave, etc.. Again, I apologize that it offends you. Like you said, being trans is not something we have to be ashamed of, but of course, there are still a lot of people who are, so having that reminder that you can still be beautiful or empowered or even just turn out okay is important. There are two more things I would like to point out here which are: (1) there is more to being trans than what we do with our bodies, and (2) not every trans person wishes they were cis (I don’t think either of those things need much more explaining, but if you would like me to elaborate, let me know). It’s completely understandable why you feel the way you do given the message you’ve sent, however, I would like to kindly remind you (and I’m sure you already know this, but just to reiterate) that many people have different attitudes towards/experiences with being trans, which is why you might feel differently than someone else might and that’s perfectly okay!

With all this being said, I have since removed the blog title anyway because I don’t want to hurt your feelings or anyone else’s if they feel the same. I also removed it because I have been getting quite a bit of traffic from blogs sexualizing trans people and after receiving this message, I began to worry that those people were also misinterpreting what the title was meant to mean and that it was contributing to that issue. I hope this was a suitable response, and that whenever I come up with a new title it will be better. Feel free to send input if you would like to!

[rad-feminism]

hi sorry i'm just wondering, do you or the like radfem group (sorry that sounded awkward idk how to phrase it) not believe that trans people are real? like that they're faking it? i'm just wondering because i can't always tells from the posts. thanks!!

As far as I understand, there’s trans people with sex dysphoria (called “truscum” if they spoke against non-dysphoric people calling themselves trans), and there’s non-binary individuals who don’t identify with their gender, or make new ones. As far as I’ve seen, radfems don’t believe in the need for a gender binary (making non-binary people’s labeling pointless).

 They don’t say trans-people don’t exist, just that surgical transitioning is a drastic, expensive form of mutilation as a treatment for a psychological issue (sex dysphoria). In regard to non-binary individuals- to some extent, everybody is uncomfortable with their gender because of the gender-roles that are imposed on us. Neither femininity (encouraged on females) nor masculinity (imposed on males) assists with liberation, in fact, femininity (even hyperfemininity as exhibited by liberal feminists claiming empowerment in makeup & beauty rituals) is used as a means to control and regulate women’s behaviour. 

Identifying out of your assigned gender is a privilege that most people cannot afford, and it is an unhelpful way to address the flaws with gender as a system. Gender=/= personality traits. Gender is the way that society stifles women’s growth and takes away opportunities for them to excel. Addressing this, and discarding the need for gender roles, while emphasizing the huge role our sex (male/female) plays in our oppression is important to achieve liberation. Our biology is the root of our oppression and we cannot ignore this, as most trans-activists and liberal feminists seek to do.

[sylvaetria]

1 Of 2: I don't think the creator of that post said that men couldn't practice magic, just that they couldn't be witches. I don't know if there are any practices available only to witches, but I'm guessing that a wizard, warlock, druid, or whatever can worship the same deities or cast the same spells as a witch. It's important to some people that the title witch be reserved females because it's a historically female term, and I'm not saying that's right or wrong.

2 Of 2: I know you’ve done research and there are claims of historically male witches but I’m honestly a bit dubious of the numbers you’ve provided, and no matter what way you paint it, women were the majority killed in the Salem Witch Trials, the majority who are prosecuted to this day. Shouldn’t there be some female exclusive magic space? There are a number of gender neutral terms for magic users, or male terms, but witch is already associated with females and the only term that has traction. 

And I’m not trying to be bitchy or condescending I’m just confused and I want to understand both sides of the issue.

I got off my phone and on to a computer to answer this question. Doesn’t seem like you want both side of the issue, honestly - I have given mine, quite clearly, and you seem to have picked yours, also quite clearly.

Witch is a gender neutral term. The term witch isn’t “historically” female - it’s only been a term used to describe magic users as mostly women in modern times (1600s; that’s only 400 years). “Witch” has always been a gender neutral term - only in recent times has it been used more exclusively for women, but that was not ever its only usage. Man, even in Wicca, they call men who practice “witches.” 

Druids are not the same as witches; druidry is closed prior to initiation - people shouldn’t be using that title unless they are a druid or studying to be an actual druid - so that term should not be grouped in with the others.

You know, other people made the gender neutral terms, because shit like this made them scared and uncomfortable to use the term “witch.” They were frightened people would come out of the woodwork and tear them apart because “oh you’re not a woman, you can’t use that word!” Think about that.

There are zero practices available only to witches (if you’re referring to “witches” as still women-exclusive then yeah, definitely no practices closed to anyone due to gender either) - witchcraft is an open practice that anyone can delve into, use as they like, and take away however they want. So, yes, literally anyone can cast spells like a witch, but they can also cast spells as a witch - using that term as their classifier, if they so wish. Because witchcraft is not closed in any aspect to anyone, neither is the label. No one can dictate who can use the term “witch.”

I don’t honestly know why you’re bringing up Salem tbh. Yes, perhaps the majority of the people accused during Salem were female, but that still doesn’t give women the right to place ownership over the term “witch.” It seems like you’re trying to imply something about the fact that women were the ones who “mostly” died for it, so they should have a right to it exclusively? Correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s what I’m getting, and oh man does that not feel right to me.

Witchcraft was never a woman-exclusive space, period, and I don’t think it ever will be, and I think it’s great that anyone can come in and be accepted for who they are and practice magic like a boss however they want. If you want there to be spaces exclusive for women, make one, but it’s not the fault of the practice for not being that way naturally; there actually is a woman-specific space in Wicca, Dianic Wicca. However, exclusive spaces and stuff shouldn’t be something that is thrown over the entirety of the community regardless of how anyone else feels about it.

The term “witch” was never exclusively for women, as I’ve stated like a half a dozen times now - it is associated with almost exclusively women because that’s how it’s been used in modern times, but it has been used for men in the past too. It is gender neutral. If you thought it was a term for women-only, I’m sorry, but it never was; we’re not actually taking anything away from anyone, it was free to use from the get-go. You’re free to make your own spaces, but don’t try to take or claim something that wasn’t actually your “property” to begin with, please, and leave the rest of us struggling to fill it in. Just because we may not have “died” for it, doesn’t mean we have less of a right to it. 

(Okay, calm, calm down Richtor, civility.)

You’re also ignoring the fact that there are people who use the term “witch” who don’t fall under the category of either men or women. You declaring it a female-only term or space is not only excluding men. You’re excluding me too, you’re excluding many other people who don’t identify as either, which is why I am standing so hard for this point.

Witchcraft is an open practice. Anyone can use the term witch, and anyone can practice witchcraft. I stand by my point, and the history of the word witch. If you don’t like it, well, I’m sorry, I’m not stopping. I’m standing up for me, for all the male witches, for all the trans witches and the non-binary witches, and the genderfluid witches, like me. We have just as much right to that term as anyone else, because hey! It was never exclusively for women, and witchcraft is a very open practice that anyone can take and use as they like. So I’ll be damned if I stop calling myself a witch, and I will not stand by as other people are bullied for using that term because of their fucking gender.

(Sorry, civility lost, let’s see if I can calm down again.)

This is a passionate issue for me, as I’m sure you can see. Trying to collect myself, I’ve made a few changes to what I wrote, but I’m not changing how I think, or some of my phrasing choices. This is important to a lot of us - having an inclusive space and term would be awesome for our community, in my opinion. A lot of people get into witchcraft because they have not many other places to go, to turn to, to draw strength from. Some people draw their self empowerment and confidence from calling themselves a witch - yes, exactly that term witch, not any other term. It gives them the strength to keep fighting and being active in their own lives, to not take life’s shit lying down. We use the word as armor, sword, and shield. It means the world to some of us, because of how it can be seen, regardless of gender. 

It’s a shame you can’t see past the gender part, really. There are some lovely witches out there, men and people who aren’t either, or who are both, and we just want a place to belong and feel welcomed. Trying to exclude us from a term no one actually had any rights to… It doesn’t feel nice. Which is why I will forever stand by my followers and friends, those who identify as ways other than how the term witch has been used, and still call themselves that with pride. (I still stand by those that use other terms for whatever reason, I stand by all magic users, but I hope you can see my point on this one.) I will keep fighting for the word that has no rightful owner, and for the people who want to call themselves it, regardless of its stereotype. 

If that is something you can’t accept, well, what you do next is on you. Because I know where I stand on this, and I’m not going anywhere.