#trans exclusive radical feminist

[luminalunii97]

Jk Rowling tweeting about Iranian women bravery is interesting,

I hope she understands trans women are part of that fight and bravery too. There are many Iranian trans activists who have been fighting for years against the dictator regimen of Iran. Take Shaya Goldoust for example. She's a trans woman who's been the face of one of the most successful Persian LGBT podcasts. She's been an activist for queer rights and women rights for years now, defying and criticizing the government. 🏳️‍⚧️

It's desperate times for Iranian people, but exclusionism is never accepted, especially now that we need unity more than ever.

[tervenbutch]

retweeting this in agreement on main, but not in the way they think

[glitterxfemme]

Fuck off and stop interacting with my blog you fuckin terf

gotta be one of the more confusing asks i’ve gotten for 2 reasons, the first being if you don’t want me to interact with you block me then lol, the second being calling me a terf which is literally laughable

[llycaons]

you see some wild things following random poll blogs

[the-feminist-philosopher]

I saw someone else on here say it and I wanted to repeat it:

If your only anchor to womanhood is your pussy and tits, you've successfully been indoctrinated by the patriarchy to reduce "woman" to nothing more than our commodifed, sexualized and exploited functions; functions closely tied to our reproduction.

[fujimilovers]

ppl who are like self described queer love to just randomly put a post on my dash that boils down to “i think trans men can be lesbians and its terf rhetoric to say they cant” you people are just terminally stupid and have 0 understanding of what lesbianism is and are adamant to add men into the equation for some fucking reason

[vexingwoman]

Referring to JK Rowling, of course. Interesting how these unhinged cultists never conjure up similar, overly detailed rape and torture scenarios about conservative men whose opposition to trans ideology stems from homophobic and misogynistic views (like Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro, or Jordan Peterson).

Interesting how these rape and torture scenarios are reserved exclusively for the one woman whose opposition to trans ideology stems from radical feminist and gender abolitionist views.

[azuremist]

A message to Twitter users coming to tumblr: a message from your local duel-hellsite citizen

So, I’ve seen a ton of Twitter users talking about making and sharing their new tumblr blogs, to escape Elon Musk’s “anti censorship” bullshittery. First of all: welcome! I know it’s looking bleak over there; especially for trans people. But, now that you’re here, I’m here to tell you all about tumblr etiquette, how this website works, and how it’s different from Twitter. Because you can’t come onto here acting like it’s Twitter, lest The Beast get to you.

First, here are a small handful of tips and tumblr facts!

Your likes and who you are following are automatically set to public. You can make them private in your settings!

You can block tags from the settings, too.

There are lots of bots on here. If you’re not careful, you could be mistaken for one! The main way you can avoid this is changing your icon and header from the defaults. Adding a bio helps too!

You can queue and schedule posts so that your account posts throughout the day.

Like Twitter, tumblr has a radical feminist and TERF problem. However, they’re pretty easy to spot. There are lots of guides out there to help you learn how to spot tumblr TERFs!

Tumblr, for the most part, does not have any celebrity or brand accounts.

Your tumblr follower count is private.

You can have multiple accounts with the same email, and they’re very easy to switch between! These are called “sideblogs”.

Your main page is not a “timeline”. It is a “dashboard”!

You can have a custom desktop theme using HTML! Think like ye olde MySpace days. There are tons of pre-made tumblr themes available, if you’re not already proficient in HTML; including free ones!

Now, let’s talk tumblr etiquette and how it’s different from Twitter. You’re a tumblr user now! It’s time to start acting like it!

Don’t just like posts. They don’t increase visibility whatsoever. The way that you can help posts that you like is reblogging them to your blog. Especially for art!

We don’t say “oomfs” or “oomfies”. Just “mutuals” is fine, thanks!

Adding onto a post with pointless comments is frowned upon. If all you have to say is “this is so true,” or something else to that effect, you should put that in the tags of your reblog.

Most people don’t have carrds or rentries on here. Some of us do, but it’s not an obligation like it is for Twitter.

Similarly, we don’t censor words like “die” and “death”. Posts about wanting to brutally murder people in power go viral all the time, and it’s completely allowed. I’m serious! Enjoy your newfound freedom!

Blocking isn’t a big deal here. Get rid of any weird notion you have that morality is linked to blocking certain people.

But lastly, and most importantly:

Drop your discourse at the door.

If you try to post about most of the things that Twitter users discourse about, you will be laughed off the site. Especially Twitter LGBT+ discourse. Posts actively mocking topics of Twitter discourse go viral on here regularly.

Tumblr has mostly healed since its discourse-ridden days, and it’s now much more chill. Of course, discourse still happens, but it is so easy to avoid now. For a lot of us, tumblr is the last pleasant social media site left, so don’t ruin it.

Here is a list of discourse-related things that tumblr users don’t do:

Most of us don’t do callout posts, unless it’s something actually serious (like that one blog that had a human slave).

Everything that you heard on Twitter was “exclusive” to certain LGBT+ groups is used by just about everyone on here. Bi women use the double venus symbol on here. You’ll just have to learn to live with that.

In particular, I want to emphasize how much we don’t do flag discourse. To the point that somebody caring about flag discourse of any kind is how we tend to identify an ex-Twitter user.

On here, you will never have to see another slur discourse post again, unless you actively seek it out.

You’re free.

You’re welcome. And enjoy your time on here! If you have the time, please consider watching StrangeÆons’ Tumblr Etiquette Manual on YouTube, as well.

[gendont]

Couldn’t have said it better myself! :)

[porcelain-dollbones]

so- if gender is completely innate, unmalleable and obvious, it shouldnt need protection or maintanence. the existence of trans people could be considered temporary and unlikely to have any lasting effects on gender, so not worth making the focus of hatred or campaigning.

if gender is vulnerable to manipulation or dilution, one would have to argue that current ideas of male and female and their associated roles and stereotypes are worth protecting and preserving. this is fine if youre an open conservative, but should be incompatible with feminism, radical or otherwise.

if gender is not malleable or alterable in the long term, it becomes necessary to identify a material harm caused by people who transition. if trans women are transitioning to access the privileges of women, that necessitates claiming that women are privileged over men, enough so that it is worth abandoning the privileges of malehood, which is certainly not a viable radical feminist position. if the contention is access to lesbians, that would necessitate ignoring trans women who exclusively date other trans women or men, and setting aside that there are fewer lesbians than straight women.

the claim that trans men are harmed by undergoing hormone replacement, mastectomy or hysterectomy seems to fly in the face of the essential, inalterable gender- these surgeries could not have meaningfully changed them, if the argument is that one remains a woman no matter what. the only viable claim then is "some number of women might be tricked into having consensual hysterectomies they later regret", which seems dubious in feminist terms and surely too minor a concern for women's liberation to be chosen as its key platform.

there is no liberation for women to be found in the reinforcement of gender as an inalterable cage, or as an institution worth preserving at all costs in its current form.

[tervenbutch]

thinking abt when i was accused of being a “secret terf” on twitter for being a “t4t” bi trans man. even using the most non-offending inclusive terms just being homosexual gets you terf accusations

[honeyblankets]

the thing that first got me somewhat radical was the fact that trans ideology/logic crumples after one argument against it.

i literally started researching gender ideology to become a better trans ally, as did most of the radical feminists i interact with. i kept seeing people say “define a woman?” and i didn’t know how to answer it in a ‘trans-friendly’ way. all the trans activists i knew answered something like “someone who identifies as female” but how can you identify as a sex which you are not? or they answer as “anyone who identifies as a woman” but then, what is a woman? “it’s a gender identity” but gender isn’t real, it’s a social construct? so identifying as a woman is simply identifying as the stereotypes and gender roles assigned to women from the patriarchy. so i thought, that can’t be it, can it?

but it is. there is literally no legitimate answer to this question which agrees with trans ideology. then i question this, and get labelled a ‘terf’. i didn’t even know what that meant, i just knew i should hate them because the people i otherwise agreed with said that they were transphobic and sexist and hated women and were conservatives.

and then i started to think critically. i started to see news story after news story of women’s spaces being destroyed while men’s were left untouched in the name of “trans inclusivity”. i started to see posts with thousands of likes saying lesbians are bigoted for not wanting to have sex with males. i started noticing that medical terms were only ever deemed exclusive if they originally applied to women like “chest feeding” or “people with vulvas”. i started seeing people attack women relentlessly for simply questioning these things. i started noticing that the only people who ever benefited from trans ideology were males.

and now i’m a radical feminist! :)

and it’s not scary and it’s not evil and it’s not exclusionary and it’s not bigoted. may all the feminists refraining from questioning trans ideology because of being ‘cancelled’ and berated discover their answers and feel free enough to speak their mind. xxx

[genderkoolaid]

I'm sorry but you people have demeaned the word lesbian so badly... the LITERAL definition of a lesbian is a NON-MAN who likes NON-MEN. How is that so fucking hard to understand? Not you specifically, but people like you have made it into something it's not; the whole "bi lesbian" and "straight lesbian" shit, saying trans men can date lesbians (which is literally just transphobic), straight up just saying lesbians can date men???? MEN???? DO YOU NOT HEAR YOURSELVES?

And now the whole butch discourse lmao. Sure, maybe in days long past it was a broader term, but today when someone hears the word butch, I can guarantee their minds will jump to a butch lesbian. If y'all want it to be the GBT community so bad then just say so

Also I can guarantee that you were one of the mfs laughing at lesbians who used he/him or he/they pronouns back in 2020 lmao performative ass bitch

Definitions of words do not descend from Heaven straight from the lips of God. We make them up! So I simply disagree with your definition of lesbian, as do many others. Personally, I enjoy the definition of "queer love/desire for women." For one, it centers lesbianism around women, instead of centering it around the exclusion of men. And two, "non-men loving non-men" is a definition which utterly erases nonbinary people. If an agender person is dating a neutrois person, they are not lesbians- or gay men- simply because y'all cannot get your head out of your binary asses for five seconds. "Non-men loving non-men" is a definition that attempts to be nonbinary-inclusive but only succeeds in making nonbinary & genderqueer identities palatable for radical feminism and political lesbianism. Honestly, I would prefer someone who defines lesbian as "woman loving woman" but understands that many people have complex relationships with womanhood while still feeling attached to the label of lesbian, than someone who uses this "NB-inclusive" definition and goes absolutely feral over genderqueers who are Doing It Wrong.

Anyways, speaking of radical feminism: acknowledging male lesbians and mspec lesbians is not "making lesbianism something its not." It is just recognizing the beautiful complexity that has always existed within lesbianism.

The lesbian community- which I'm using to refer to all kinds of communities organized around queer relationships to women & womanhood- has always been a haven for a lot more people than cis women exclusively into other cis women. The idea of sexuality-as-identity is very recent, and the idea of drawing a hard line between people who only like people of the same gender and people who like the same gender and more is also extremely recent. Beyond that, trans men and nonbinary people have always taken shelter under lesbianism. "Butch" in the context of lesbianism has always been a trans* identity, a way for people with a queer gender to find community and safety.

The reason why we have this idea of lesbianism as a strict category with hard borders is..... you guessed it..... radical feminism! And specifically "political lesbianism," which essentially placed woman-only relationships as the only true feminist relationship you could have. "Lesbian" became a political identity because of its focus on woman-woman relationships. But that meant that, for political lesbianism to be acceptable to radical feminism, it needed to conform to radical feminist beliefs about what makes a good feminist. Which meant:

No trans women or fems (because they are too male and probably predators)

No trans men or mascs (because they are too male and also traitors)

No bisexuals (because they are too male by association and are also traitors)

No penetrative sex, or at least no strap ons (because it imitates men)

No kinky sex (see above but with bonus "kink is evil" flavoring)

No butch/femme roles (because they imitate heterosexuality; everyone has to be neutrally androgynous).

I believe that much of modern lesbian discourse comes from trying to marry lingering radfem beliefs with modern attempts at trans-inclusivity. So you adapt the blatant transphobia: now, trans women are allowed in (as long as they are palatable to cis women), because they're women! And nonbinary people can also be allowed in- at first they were woman-aligned, and then later as long as they weren't man-aligned. Being butch/femme is Back In Style, but we have to soothe the gender anxiety that butches cause by assuring everyone that only True Lesbians can be butch, and butches are always women, even if they kind of aren't, but regardless they're definitely not men, because butch has always been a lesbian term (except it hasn't.) The discourse is haunted by the ideas that lesbianism is constantly under attack, more than anyone else, and that lesbian culture is unique and special and must be guarded from (male/-aligned) invaders who are probably also sexual predators.

To say that this is all just "days long pasts" ignores both that, in physical queer spaces there very much still are male lesbians and bi lesbians who are accepted parts of their local communities, and that you only see those days as "long past" because of the impact of radical feminism on lesbianism. The only reason you see these changes as a good thing is because you've swallowed radical feminist ideas without realizing it.

Also, "if you say butch most people will think of butch lesbians" is an extremely silly argument. Literally who fucking cares. If you say "man" there are still a lot of people who will immediately think of exclusively cis men (see: every feminist who says shit like "if men could get pregnant). Does that mean that trans men should just give up their identities because other people don't understand them? You dork?

Anyways. The funniest part of this ask is how damn confident you are that I was apparently hating on he/him lesbians three years ago. Idk how to tell you this but I'm a boygirl gaylesbianbisexual and have identified this way for years. I have been personally terrorized by shitty lesbian identity politics, the same ones you are repeating now, which told me that if I was even 1% male then identifying as a lesbian made me a disgusting predator. Which caused me years of suffering because no matter how hard I tried, I could not ignore my multigenderedness and how that affected my sexuality. Sowwy but you look silly as hell and your argument is bad and you should feel bad </3

[toddstool]

reminder that "terf" means so many things. from radfem to lesbian to conservative to alt right followers to anyone that questions gender ideology to people that don't want to date/sleep with a trans person to people that simply believe there are two sexes to plain transphobic normies to detransitioners to men to women. it's original meaning, "trans exclusive radical feminist", is used kind of properly on tumblr but on many other social medias and even irl the term is so fucking muddled that it doesn't mean anything. if you are a radfem, stop replying to posts addressed to "terfs". it's about as meaningless and confusing as gender ideology is lmao.

[the-feminist-philosopher]

They tell me that- as a woman- one day I'll eat my words. One day I'll regret standing by those who they seek to exclude. They even suggest that some day someone will take advantage of my advocacy; that it may bring my death.

While I know that isn't so, I'm still willing to take that chance.

Mostly because I know that defending the purity of white womanhood has always been a "significant axis of common bigotries" and that Fascist propaganda often obsesses over white fertility. I also know that if I am to be assaulted, statistically, it will be by someone closest to me.

I don't fear the world, even though I've long been told that I should.

I also recognize that when your movement is lauded by the likes of Piers Morgen and highlighted by the likes of Tucker Carlson and defended by the likes of Ben Shapiro, there's a better than good chance you're on the wrong side of history.

I know you're funded by Christian rightwing groups from the United States. And I know you've allied with groups from the Heritage Foundation to the American Center for Law and Justice to the Alliance Defending Freedom. I know they design the legislative templates you use for your anti-trans legislation and I know they help campaign your legislation.

I know your monies and the organizations and leaders who head your movement are supporting the very organizations and politicians working to strip people of the right to abortion.

I hope your bigotry tastes sour knowing you traded away our rights to the "devil" for the chance to hate without consequence. I hope it tastes sour knowing that you helped create the very tool with which the rightwing aims to destroy feminism altogether.

I hope it continues to sour on your tongue as you give your money and support and alliances to those who are banning books from our schools and public libraries; to those who are suing libraries for displaying pro LGB books, accusing them of peddling "porn" and "obscenities;" to those who are pushing to end privacy protections in marriage and medicine- that very thing that allows people to love in peace; and to those groups dedicated to connecting "radical feminists" with hate groups who target the LGBT+ community and who think LGBT+ people are a sin and child predators.

I hope it tastes foul knowing that the founders and co-founders of your movement are eco-fascists who believe that the Earth needs a "mass die off" in order to preserve the environment.

But you don't care about the genocidal foundations and tone of your movement, do you? Wasn't it Janice Raymond herself who advocated for “morally mandating [transsexualism] out of existence,” mainly by restricting access to transition care? And wasn't it Sheila Jeffreys who called trans women "parasites"?

Please understand that the likes of Richard Spencer recognize how useful your language and beliefs are to recruiting more women as white supremacists. It doesn't take much to convince someone who believes that our hierarchies are due to biology to believe in overt white supremacy. It doesn't take much to convince someone who believes in gender essentialism to fully embrace bio essentialism.

You may have "liberation" and "radical" and "feminist" in your self-proclaimed title, but I know your movement has ultraconservative ties. You cannot ally with these groups and still call yourself an advocate for women's rights or claim to support lesbians. You cannot ally yourself with anti-abortion, violent misogynist, or hate groups and still claim you're a "feminist."

You have co-opted leftist language and now capitalize on women's social frustrations and genuine grievances with the patriarchy and the existing social order to create a feeling of political loss. And you tell them this loss is the result of a lower social group.

But, no, go ahead and make yourself palatable to the very system that exploits us and mistreats us (/sar). Go ahead and repeat the same talking points as the alt right.

Like the idea the is an immutable physical sexual dimorphism

or the idea that pornography is corrupting

or the idea that activist criticism destroys people's social capitol

or the idea that one's gender is tied to one's sex

or the idea that certain groups are intrinsically violent and aggressive, so we should have "separatism:" the practice of separating a certain group of people from a larger body on the basis of ethnicity, religion, or gender

or the idea that science and "fact" can never be bigoted, as if that's not exactly what people said about eugenics and as if there aren't countless examples of "biological fact" being used to justify atrocious things

or the idea that policies around sex or gender are an act of paternalism; a way to "protect" women

or the idea that there are innate qualities to the different sexes

or the idea there are certain universal and intrinsic biological or psychological features at the root of the difference between the sexes

or the idea that sex is a necessary condition for gender

or the idea that biological sex determines who a person is

or the fixation on classifying people into separate groups

or the idea that some "women" are simply foolish and brainwashed; that they can't really think for themselves to make a big decision about anything from medical procedures like transitioning to careers like sex work

or the idea that women are defined by and subject to their biology and biological functions, thus reducing women only to the break-down of their definition: a bipedal anthropoid of the sex that can bear offspring and produce eggs, and stripping them of the the quality or condition of being an individual person

You don't even realize how your sense of comfort in the public sphere is tied to your views on ‘proper’ 'female' presentation. You cannot discriminate on the basis of transgender status without imposing a stereotypical notions of how sexual organs and gender identity ought to align. You are making assumptions about someone's reproductive anatomy and making decisions about someone's status or inclusion based on how you think people with that reproductive anatomy ought to behave or do behave.

"Transphobic policies may be instituted on the grounds of 'protecting women,' but in practice, all they do is institute a hellish panopticon where everyone is constantly inspected for signs of gender nonconformity, and where the only way to stay safe... is to present as the absolute most stereotypical version of your assigned sex at all times."

-Jude Ellison S. Doyle

When we try to set firm limits on who’s allowed to identify as a woman, or what women are allowed to look like, cisgender women invariably suffer too. Limiting the definition of "woman" is only going to lead to more violence against women as this practice will always exclude people who are women, but who don't neatly fit into your definition of woman.

"Any attempt to catalog the commonalities among women … has the inescapable result that there is some correct way to be a woman. This will inevitably encourage and legitimize certain experiences of gender and discourage and delegitimize others, subtly reinforcing and entrenching precisely those forces of socialization of which feminists claim to be critical."

-Carol Hay 

In reality, your pro-police, anti-sex worker, anti-porn, anti-trans politics only robs people of their autonomy and personhood under the guise of keeping them safe.

Can you even structure a feminist argument or discuss a feminist issue without an attack on trans, nonbinary, gender non conforming, and intersex people?

Your misogyny is old. It's tired. It's unoriginal. And it's time to put it down.

[nothorses]

Hello there, I found on my tl this post presenting a different view on "baeddelism" from the perspective of a trans woman that claims that she was actually there when the og group existed and explains why the word has become somewhat of a transmisogynistic slur. And I wanted to ask you If you might have any thoughs on this reading of the subject matter?

www.tumblr.com/euniexenoblade/741692501713387520/anyways-baeddel-is-a-slur-against-trans-women

I mean, I think there's merit to the idea that calling people "baeddels" when they don't actually claim to be one themselves is at best counterproductive. The term refers less to A General Ideology, and more to a very specific movement- or, more accurately, two unrelated-but-similar movements that happened in the early/mid 2010's.

There's a term for what folks are usually talking about when they call some random trans woman a "baeddel" when she says she believes trans men oppress trans women: "TIRF", or trans-inclusionary radical feminist. It's a term that was coined by people who call themselves by it, and it's a lot more broad & generally useful here. It doesn't come with ties to a group that dissolved because of sexual assault allegations & rape apologism, and it isn't rooted in an Old English slur, which means it's a lot less charged. It's less likely to get people to shut down or laugh your whole point off because of how clear it is that you aren't listening to or engaging in anything they have to say with good faith.

So yes, I agree, calling random people "baeddels" is not in good taste. Don't do it. "TIRF" exists, it's more accurate, and it's less likely to hurt your argument anyway.

That said.

I take issue with the implication that:

a) Baeddels were tiny and utterly non-influential (therefore all references to them at this point are malicious exaggerations and bogeymen), and

b) Everyone self-describing as a "baeddel" today is actually just reclaiming a slur, exactly like people do with "tranny" and "faggot".

Baeddels (on Tumblr; again, there was a "baeddel" movement on Facebook at the time as well, but it was unrelated and ideologically distinct) were not so small that they had no impact, and to characterize them as widely unpopular- or, worse, influential only in that everyone hated them so much that alt-right bigots immediately revived "baeddel"s original meaning as a slur to in order to victimize all trans women- should immediately ping some alarm bells.

Baeddelism's core ideology centered around the idea that trans women are the most oppressed group, that transmisogyny is the root of all oppression, that trans women are always victimized, never safe, never understood, except around and by exclusively other trans women. This sucks, because there is very real oppression and trauma being preyed on here; trans women are encouraged to be paranoid and distrustful of anyone different from them, and their own experiences with oppression are weaponized against them in order to do so. This should remind you of the recruitment tactics cis radfems use.

That aside, there are some places where baeddelism's influence has been documented: @baeddel-txt is one example. Note that a lot of the posts archived there are recent. Here's one of the original crew, still active and spewing the same shit. Baeddelism has been experiencing something of a renaissance in recent years, too. Here's one of the original (ex-)baeddels talking about it as recently as 2021.

This is not "reclaiming a slur", these people are referring very explicitly to the original ideology & the desire, or observed desire, for that same movement to be brought back in the present day.

Does that make every TIRF-y trans woman a baeddel?

No!

But it is incredibly, and suspiciously disingenuous to deny the harm they caused, the influence they had, and the admiration people still hold for their ideology. And it is downright ahistorical to claim that the term is now, or was at the time that the group was most popular, used genuinely as a slur (sources, I am begging you).

Do not call people "baeddels" unless they're claiming the word for themselves. Do not allow anyone to make you think, even for a moment, that transfeminine people are The Enemy; they do not oppress us, they do not benefit from our oppression, and the vast majority of them are not interested in any kind of lateral violence against us in the first place. They are our allies. Do not forget that they are our allies.

Forgetting that trans people are each other's best allies is what lead to baeddelism in the first place. We need each other. Things can only improve for any of us if we fight for each other. Don't let resentment sabotage you- or hurt our trans siblings.