The sex/gender distinction of the 20th century and now deeply popular among LGBT+ circles in the 21st century was one step forwards, two steps backwards. Although it provides a simple “explanation” of trans people, it ultimately cements sex and thus patriarchy as the natural state of things. Human sex has always been a social concept with biological justifications applied retroactively and selectively. The proletarianization of women and advances in medical science lay bare the absurdity of sex and for the first time in human history create the conditions for the world-historical abolition of sex and male supremacy. As the proletarian revolution self-abolishes the proletariat, so too does the transsexual-feminist social revolution self-abolish the woman and transsexual. Down with cisgenderism!
Thank you for this post times a billion!
Funnily enough, around four nights ago, I was ranting about this to my friend who is a trans woman, and we both agree that this “Man/woman’ are for describing gender, but ‘male/female’ are for describing sex, so trans women are women, but they’re not female!” is performative shit that harshly showcases the energy of liberals trying to advocate for trans people but failing miserably in the process.
“Biologically male” and “biologically female” are also just transphobic euphemisms. There is no ‘set’ definition, even among biologists and geneticists, of what constitutes a “biological male/female.” Multiple factors are considered to be aspects of sex, and that includes things that trans people can, and often do in fact, change, such as hormones, genitals, and secondary sex characteristics.
It’s the strangest semantic hill for these people to die on, and I saw a trans man doing it that same four nights ago in an Instagram comment section, arguing so hard that he’s “biologically female but still a man,” even when people tried to validate the position that I’m validating now as a response to him insisting that he is a “biological female.” That’s what prompted me to talk to my trans friend about this.
There is no reason why we have to adhere to the weird gender/sex distinction other than giving a half-assed attempt at appeasing transphobes (half-assed because “Gender and sex are different!” isn’t even a satisfactory argument for them).
“Cis” and “trans,” at least for the time being, are good enough distinctions. We don’t need convoluted shit like “Trans women are not female, but they’re women!” or “Trans women are socially women but not biologically female!” If people can’t be satisfied by “Trans women are women who happen to be trans, and they are also female.” and “Cis women are women who happen to be cis, and they are also female.” as the prime distinction, then that’s their damn problem and not mine or any trans person’s for that matter.
How does one change sex when they have no sex?
Officer, I am for the abolition of sex and the abolition of sex.
thisisabit
The VOLCEL POLICE are on the scene! PLEASE KEEP YOUR VITAL ESSENCES TO YOURSELVES AT ALL TIMES.
نحن شرطة VolCel.بناءا على تعليمات الهيئة لترويج لألعاب الفيديو و النهي عن الجنس نرجوا الإبتعاد عن أي أفكار جنسية و الحفاظ على حيواناتكم المنويَّة حتى يوم الحساب. اتقوا الله، إنك لا تراه لكنه يراك.
Twilight Sparkle would never say such a thing
I am canceling Twilight Sparkle
I remember this cringe from my early days of figuring out my queerness.
I used the genderbread man in my high school GSA
We need to provide better political education for the youth
Doesn’t including “assigned at birth” suggest they either don’t think its immutable or that its just a social construction (or both)?
The graphic also lumps female and woman together and male and man together.
Colloquially, female & woman and male & man are the same. There are few situations where people use them with distinction, and I only see it used for either technical reasons (like geneticists) or a way to be casually transphobic.
Sex assigned at birth is such a can of worms lol. I’ve seen a couple feminists use CAxAB (coercively assigned x at birth) to make it clear that sexing is a social construct. On the other hand I’ve seen a lot of people use AFAB and AMAB when it’s completely irrelevant. Even in medical settings it’s not relevant. I am “AMAB” but I have a vulva and breasts. My partner is “AFAB” but they have PCOS, which gives them facial hair and is present in up to a tenth of the human population yet isn’t considered an intersex condition probably because it would show how ridiculous the sex binary is. So honestly I kind of prefer the MTF/FTM terminologies because they’re much clearer that transition changes your sex, but they also imply you were something that you never were just like AGAB terminology (let’s be clear, trans people are not meaningfully socialized as the sex they’re coercively assigned at birth; at most a trans woman is socialized male only in the same sense a masking autistic person is socialized as a neurotypical… I could go on about this for a while). Also it’s funny how AGAB is the shorthand form of assigned sex at birth.
I mean I feel like ‘coercively assigned’ is kind of redundant, as ‘assigned’ already implies that you didn’t have any say in the matter. That’s kind of the point of the terminology as is.
It may be linguistically redundant, but it still establishes a point that a lot of people seem to forget about assigned sex at birth: that it is coercive and rooted in social construction. The point is that, with a lot of people allowing “AMAB/AFAB” essentialism to take the gender binary’s place (because they are functionally the same thing, whether AGAB essentialists will admit it or not), we need to remember that “AMAB” and “AFAB” have way less important meaning than people give it. We’re now at a point where I’ve legitimately seen people say things like “I support AFAB rights!” and it’s honestly disgusting.
That just seems like terf shit, and I feel like disgusting people will find a way to be disgusting no matter what terms we use. But I see your point, thanks for expounding.
Yeah, I’m not a fan of using terms like “CAxAB” either, but I get where it comes from. I don’t want any kind of gender essentialism at all actually, and it honestly would become a euphemism treadmill if we keep replacing terms. For instance, “AMAB” and “AFAB” have become what “biologically male” and “biologically female” are, and if “CAMAB” and “CAFAB” came into regular usage, the same exact shit would happen with that term.
Colloquially, female & woman and male & man are the same. There are few situations where people use them with distinction, and I only see it used for either technical reasons (like geneticists) or a way to be casually transphobic.
They’re different parts of speech (male/female can also be a noun, but usually only done by people like disconnected from the subjects they’re describing, like cops and scientists). I mentioned that the graphic doesn’t differentiate them as a positive about it FTR.
On the other hand I’ve seen a lot of people use AFAB and AMAB when it’s completely irrelevant.
I’ve probably used it in times you’d probably think it was irrelevant as a way of avoiding making more specific claims. Easier to say what I’m not (which AMAB, imo, implies - I don’t agree it implies you ever were the thing; just that others said you were).
So honestly I kind of prefer the MTF/FTM terminologies because they’re much clearer that transition changes your sex
Back when I was a lot more ignorant about gender/sex/etc, I liked those labels because it was clear what was meant. Given transphobes will say things like “we need to stop transmen from going into the women’s bathroom” when they mean to exclude trans women, I was never 100% what was meant when they’re used.
Now I’m not a fan of them because they feel like they exclude NBs (which usually is not intended) or those who don’t medically transition.
at most a trans woman is socialized male only in the same sense a masking autistic person is socialized as a neurotypical… I could go on about this for a while
My mom certainly isn’t socialized as a girl. And she was AFAB and identifies as a woman (granted, her definition of “woman” is based 100% only on the bits she was born with). Socialization is certainly more complex than AGAB. It describes how people TRY to socialize with us. Was at a family gathering (these tend to be very woman-dominated) not long after realizing I was an egg and my cousin’s BF tried to do guy talk with me (sports or something) and quickly got bored and went to chat with my mom instead. Just kinda funny seeing that gendered socialization expectations break down in such an obvious way.
I’m gay
I also don’t feel like I have a male sex even though I did have it at one point. Sex isn’t an immutable characteristic, most people with xy chromosomes in fact tend to lose the y with age, and my breast tissue produces a significant amount of estrogen, and I have been on it long enough to permanently depress my testosterone levels. If I somehow had to stop my meds it’d be bad for my bones but the t doesn’t fully come back, and I have proof of it once after not having e for six months. I’m somewhere in between at this point in regards to sex, even without surgery imo
I'm also gay
I had a male sex with your dad last night
Based I’m so glad he’s opened up more possibilities, though he’s probably too old for you
A good DILF satisfies my cravings every once in a while
Gender is fuckin fake shitI changed my sex this past year
Will pregnancy be abolished in the future with advancing technology or will it just become something anyone is able to do?
These are the real questions folks!
Babies will be produced both in vivo in either endogenous or transplanted wombs, and ex vivo.
I’m now imagining a culture war between modernist ex vivo child birth and transplanted tradwombs.
There’s been work into functional womb transplants, but the focus has been cis women. But its not really that farfetched that it could be accomplished in the near future for trans women, but I don’t know if there’s anyone skilled/knowledgeable enough to try it and able to get ethical boards to approve it.
Personally, I do hope it is largely abolished. No clue how progress towards that is. Been a while since I’ve seen anyone who spends a lot of time advocating for it.
A friend of mine actually emailed the guy leading research on womb transplants and he said that nothing technically prevents trans women, but the surgery is currently a very dangerous one and they only allow applicants that have a higher chance of success (prior pregnancies, fairly healthy, can produce their own eggs, among other criteria). He said once the technology matures over the next decade or so and the kids currently born reach the end of early childhood development they would be more interested in expanding the criteria
Thank you for this. The unicorn always made me feel kinda uncomfortable. I think it was a necessary step for my transradicalisation, but now I’ve surpassed the need for it.
deleted by creator
That’s not actually what OP meant by this, but I understand why you might get in this line of thinking. I used to embody it myself.
Look at it this way: the categorization and the way we handle sex is definitely socially constructed. The very fact that we made sex a “thing” using these categories is the result of social construction. Abolishing sex or gender isn’t making the case that everyone must be androgynous or gender-neutral in presentation or in any aspect, but rather, it’s asserting that we shouldn’t assign any specifics relating to presentation, role, or lifestyle to these rigid notions we’ve developed in the context of sex and gender.
What we now know as “gender dysphoria” could still exist if gender were to be abolished. What we now know as “masculinity” and “femininity” could still exist if gender were to be abolished. What we now know as “biological sex” could still exist if gender (or sex, depending on how you want to frame the semantics) were to be abolished. It’s just that the societal outlook and approach to these things would change entirely, in the sense that these things would be about as gendered as attached earlobes and free earlobes are. Believing that these things will remain isn’t mutually exclusive with the abolitionist view that OP offered, but like I said, I understand why you hold this viewpoint because I held it myself for a very long time.
It only became clear to me what OP was conveying when I read The Gender Accelerationist Manifesto, and with that, I unlocked the realization that my experience, especially as a non-binary trans person in particular, would benefit from nothing more than to not have gender matter at all in my life, and with that, the grand scheme of society as a whole.
deleted by creator
think at this point the ironic bellcurve meme needs more Choppd n Screwed treatment
I can make a variant with the political horseshoe
could always combine them into a horrifying entity that mocks creation itself
Yeah I have a couple ideas… I’ll cook it up later and post a template for future use
I haven’t really heard about this before, kind of a foreign idea to me (hell, the idea of being trans is still a big shock to me). Idk, I am what I am. Wish I had a uterus and all the typically accompanying bits. How should we refer to male, female, and intersex anatomy? Like, I’m a girl with a ding dong so what what would I be referred to as?
Well, the point is there is no set male, female, and intersex anatomy. There are a collection of physical characteristics that modern patriarchal society associates with say, the female body, but a very significant portion of cisgender women would fail to completely check off every one of them. Trans women can acquire many of these traits, and the number they can acquire grows as technology advances. The traits that make up “biological sex” are not scientifically objective, either. For instance, facial hair is considered a male secondary sex characteristic, yet PCOS causes it in what “science” would call “females.” It also causes higher testosterone levels, so you would expect it to be considered an intersex condition. But then one-tenth of the population would be intersex, and that would have all sorts of Implications. The point is, “biological” sex is highly socially constructed. Anyway, as long as sex exists, it’s still useful to use terms like transgender & cisgender, man & woman.
Like, I’m a girl with a ding dong so what what would I be referred to as?
As far as we’re concerned right now under our current capitalist patriarchy, you’re a trans woman. I imagine in the future we will stop sexing babies and medical professionals will simply consult your chart for relevant biological data and medical history. As for how people will self-identify this expression of their humanity in the future, who knows.
Is that unicorn from something, I swear I’ve seen it before.
Gender unicorn. The sequel to the genderbread person. The genderbread person was completely binary, while the gender unicorn adds a third variable in all the categories. Associating nonbinary inclusion with unicorns was an interesting choice…
