Ah, transmed discourse isn’t something I’ve seen in a very long time, but this ridiculous “transsexual and transgender” dichotomy is something I do remember about it. They don’t know what to collectively believe, though, because of their vibes-based takes on gender identity.
For example, to some transmeds, enbies are valid and acceptable as trans. To some transmeds, being NB and “transsexual” are not mutually exclusive. To some transmeds, if you identify as NB but align with their definition of “transsexual” simultaneously, this just means that you’re actually binary trans in denial [conclusion arrived at through vibes, not any actual coherent reasoning. This is the essence of transmedicalism.]
They also seem to forget that there are binary trans people who do not medically transition. They conflate being NB with being non-dysphoric/non-medically transitioning and being binary with being dysphoric/medically transitioning, but none of that matters for a trans person’s validity regardless.
This is all a part of terminally online discourse that people shouldn’t obsess over to begin with. It’s not difficult to respect someone identifying differently than you, but they’d rather fearmonger and victim blame with bullshit like, “Non-binary people are the reason why trans people aren’t taken seriously!” when chuds clearly have demonstrated that they functionally don’t give a shit, and this just shows how terminally online their takes on everything are. Pair that with the fact that they don’t even have a consistent interpretation of what the difference between a non-binary person and a binary trans person is because, really, it’s all rooted in personal comfort of the person with the identity. Two people very clearly could have very similar transition goals and timelines, but one feels more content with calling themself non-binary and the other feels more content with calling themself binary. This is not a contradiction—it’s the result of viewing things through a proper lens that doesn’t validate cisnormative pathology that is upheld to keep transphobic oppression in place.
What’s actually interesting is that I’ve come to frame my take on my own gender in a totally different way, and the irony is that people like myself would get accused of “attention seeking” for being non-binary when I’d say that the only reason why I’d ever call myself “non-binary” to begin with is society making gender a thing in the first place. It’s the same way I’m “Black” specifically because of European colonizers conjuring up some pseudoscientific concept of race as a justification for imperialism and brutal oppression of people in distant lands. I wrote a whole journal entry that goes into detail about this, but to keep it short, I avoid labeling myself whenever it’s practical. I just want to exist and vibe, not feel connected to a gender identity and sexual orientation, as I don’t validate the concept of gender itself.
Also, her being a cracker is the least surprising part of all of this.
i think several of the friction points people have is because the binary is so rigid and we’re trying to add identities back into a (european christian) system that deliberately obliterated everything else over centuries.
the framework has begun to understand what to do with blatantly nonbinary NBs but it doesn’t have roles or archetypes (? idk terms, like butch is a subgenre of woman distinct in presentation and role from the hegemonic default) yet, and it just pushes binary-passing NBs into the binary which delegitimizes us.
this legitimacy thing wouldn’t come up if these people had a well-established notion of nonbinary genders, read a book, or had slightly more empathy.
![[cw transphobia] "Sure theyre trans or whatever"](https://hexbear.net/pictrs/image/ba01a976-3fa0-42a6-ad5e-390e6a7b6a70.jpeg){kind=link}
Ah, transmed discourse isn’t something I’ve seen in a very long time, but this ridiculous “transsexual and transgender” dichotomy is something I do remember about it. They don’t know what to collectively believe, though, because of their vibes-based takes on gender identity.
For example, to some transmeds, enbies are valid and acceptable as trans. To some transmeds, being NB and “transsexual” are not mutually exclusive. To some transmeds, if you identify as NB but align with their definition of “transsexual” simultaneously, this just means that you’re actually binary trans in denial [conclusion arrived at through vibes, not any actual coherent reasoning. This is the essence of transmedicalism.]
They also seem to forget that there are binary trans people who do not medically transition. They conflate being NB with being non-dysphoric/non-medically transitioning and being binary with being dysphoric/medically transitioning, but none of that matters for a trans person’s validity regardless.
This is all a part of terminally online discourse that people shouldn’t obsess over to begin with. It’s not difficult to respect someone identifying differently than you, but they’d rather fearmonger and victim blame with bullshit like, “Non-binary people are the reason why trans people aren’t taken seriously!” when chuds clearly have demonstrated that they functionally don’t give a shit, and this just shows how terminally online their takes on everything are. Pair that with the fact that they don’t even have a consistent interpretation of what the difference between a non-binary person and a binary trans person is because, really, it’s all rooted in personal comfort of the person with the identity. Two people very clearly could have very similar transition goals and timelines, but one feels more content with calling themself non-binary and the other feels more content with calling themself binary. This is not a contradiction—it’s the result of viewing things through a proper lens that doesn’t validate cisnormative pathology that is upheld to keep transphobic oppression in place.
What’s actually interesting is that I’ve come to frame my take on my own gender in a totally different way, and the irony is that people like myself would get accused of “attention seeking” for being non-binary when I’d say that the only reason why I’d ever call myself “non-binary” to begin with is society making gender a thing in the first place. It’s the same way I’m “Black” specifically because of European colonizers conjuring up some pseudoscientific concept of race as a justification for imperialism and brutal oppression of people in distant lands. I wrote a whole journal entry that goes into detail about this, but to keep it short, I avoid labeling myself whenever it’s practical. I just want to exist and vibe, not feel connected to a gender identity and sexual orientation, as I don’t validate the concept of gender itself.
Also, her being a cracker is the least surprising part of all of this.
i think several of the friction points people have is because the binary is so rigid and we’re trying to add identities back into a (european christian) system that deliberately obliterated everything else over centuries.
the framework has begun to understand what to do with blatantly nonbinary NBs but it doesn’t have roles or archetypes (? idk terms, like butch is a subgenre of woman distinct in presentation and role from the hegemonic default) yet, and it just pushes binary-passing NBs into the binary which delegitimizes us.
this legitimacy thing wouldn’t come up if these people had a well-established notion of nonbinary genders, read a book, or had slightly more empathy.
God, thank you for saying this. 100% how I feel too.
This post rocks, I have nothing to add but upvoting wasn’t enough.