Anonymous Didn't the LGBT community lose the battle the moment the "T" got added on? I mean, being transgender has nothing to do with sexual attraction so it makes no sense why its there. Heck, LGBA is more valid than that since asexuality is actually about, you know, sexuality.
This is literally not remotely fucking true how do you lack even the most basic knowledge of queer history/culture.
Bitch, fuck off. Tucutes weren’t a thing when I was part of LGBT activism 15 years ago.
“tucutes” is just a bullshit term for the modern iteration for what would have had a different name back then, would have gotten medicalised into binary trans, or supressed completely. You’re also purposely shifting the bar from trans people in general, to non-binary people and in particular what’s sometimes regarded as a subset of non-binary people(though usually used to imply the concept in general lacks validity).
I’ve been part of LGBT activism for roughly 15 years, also, and there have always been people with varying sorts of identities. Concepts like genderqueer and genderfluid are more than 2 decades old, let alone 15 years, but before that these things had different names. “Androgyne” was used more often when I was starting out.
The reason why trans people are “included” in LGBT groups despite not being a “sexuality thing” is because the deeper issue is going against gendered norms. If you knew anything about our history you’d understand this. Historically, since “gay” men and women often affected masculine or feminine behaviours(perhaps simply because they found themselves out of the mainstream gender models) and were seen as such even if they didn’t, there wasn’t always a clear division between people who lived full time as women, using female pronouns and taking/aspiring to take hormones, and queer men and part time drag queens. As time has gone on though, and as white gay men(and some “respectable” trans people) have gained exception, the divisions have deepened.
This is especially true in black & latinx queer culture, and particularly ball culture. For example, can you tell me what the difference between a femme queen and a butch queen is? I’m sure back in the day the Respectable Homosexuals(and rich white transsexuals, the blair whites of the era) may have considered them snowflakey as well. The gender identities you found on the streets of many cities in Europe and the US, starting around the late victorian era and especially becoming prominent in pre nazi germany/weimar republic, and 70s ball culture in the US, were often diverse.
Do you know what happened to much of the records of the former trans people? They were fucking burnt. By Nazis. The Institut für Sexualwissenschaft was the primary centre for this and it hadn’t really gotten to the point where that research was corresponded by other institutes. Very few places *kept* record of places like us, and where they did they were often buried or destroyed. So pointing to history as an example of our absence(when there’s plenty pointing to our existence anyway) is complete bullshit.
Moreover an ideology cannot be both “post modern” and “marxist” and only some dumbass lobster would even think that. Post Modernism is the rejection of a grander singular narrative, and Marxist is very much about the narrative of class struggle. Marxism is a modernist ideology, and you can’t just assign it to things you don’t like. And again, while on average most LGBT activists nowadays would have some Marxist leanings, you’re hinting on the “Cultural Bolshevism” of the Nazis by correlating the two.
Of course I’m not saying you’re a fascist or even far right but much of your thinking on this is certainly derived from what would be considered far right (and colonialist) ideologies.
Speaking of colonialist, non binary genders are very common globally. Research the Khusra/Hijra, Waria, Muxe, Two-spirits. African cultures have had many different genders. Arabian culture/early Islam had it’s own “trans” identity(which often get explained away by conservative muslims as “eunuchs” even when that makes no sense in context). Classical Judaism had 6 genders.
None of this is new, it’s just an extension of the colonialist desire to erase cultures different or strange or challenging, including subcultures like we say in the weimar republic. There is violent thought behind the labelling of identities things like “tucute”, ridiculing and trying to push them even further out of mainstream society.
And what annoys me is that everything I’ve said here is historically accurate, I and other trans people have done our research. But you’ll still paint us as re-texturing society or history to fit some sort of nihilistic agenda when from my point of view that’s what you’re doing. You’re erasing so much just for some misanthropic hatred.
“tucutes” is just a bullshit term for the modern iteration for what would have had a different name back then, would have gotten medicalised into binary trans, or supressed completely. You’re also purposely shifting the bar from trans people in general, to non-binary people and in particular what’s sometimes regarded as a subset of non-binary people(though usually used to imply the concept in general lacks validity).
Incorrect. There wasn’t an epidemic of young kids pretending to be trans to be trendy even 15 years ago. That is what tucute means. It is a recent phenomenon and it absolutely does happen.
I’ve been part of LGBT activism for roughly 15 years, also, and there have always been people with varying sorts of identities. Concepts like genderqueer and genderfluid are more than 2 decades old, let alone 15 years, but before that these things had different names. “Androgyne” was used more often when I was starting out.
Yes and “demisexual” wasn’t. Because demisexual, along with several dozen other sexualities, were made up in the intervening years. And we know demisexual is made up because it’s first instance of use was on a roleplaying forum years ago.
The reason why trans people are “included” in LGBT groups despite not being a “sexuality thing” is because the deeper issue is going against gendered norms.
I honestly couldn’t give a shit. Take your post modernist deconstruction somewhere else.
If you knew anything about our history you’d understand this. Historically, since “gay” men and women often affected masculine or feminine behaviours(perhaps simply because they found themselves out of the mainstream gender models) and were seen as such even if they didn’t, there wasn’t always a clear division between people who lived full time as women, using female pronouns and taking/aspiring to take hormones, and queer men and part time drag queens. As time has gone on though, and as white gay men(and some “respectable” trans people) have gained exception, the divisions have deepened.
Yes, you’re right on this. Back then there was a lot of conflation between drag, crossdressing and being trans. That should not be the case today. You’ll note that I never actually said that I disapprove of the T being added to the acronym, just that it does not fit with the paradigm of sexuality, given how you can be trans and straight.
Unless you somehow think that being trans automatically makes you inherently different in your sexuality, thus automatically granting you entry into the LGBT. Which, frankly, I would find goddamn condescending.
This is especially true in black & latinx queer culture, and particularly ball culture. For example, can you tell me what the difference between a femme queen and a butch queen is? I’m sure back in the day the Respectable Homosexuals(and rich white transsexuals, the blair whites of the era) may have considered them snowflakey as well.
I like how you keep bringing up race. Man, your shitty intersectional ideology sure seems to be front and center here. Guess what? What you’re talking about is not the same thing as using literally made up sexualities and genders and attempting to use them to insert yourself into the LGBT.
Do you know what happened to much of the records of the former trans people? They were fucking burnt. By Nazis. The Institut für Sexualwissenschaft was the primary centre for this and it hadn’t really gotten to the point where that research was corresponded by other institutes. Very few places *kept* record of places like us, and where they did they were often buried or destroyed. So pointing to history as an example of our absence(when there’s plenty pointing to our existence anyway) is complete bullshit.
“Our absence” makes me think that you’re one of these people I’m talking about and you’re getting your back up about it. I recognize trans men and women, but other than that, you’re co-opting the trans label for yourself. I’m truscum, I believe you should have dysphoria and the desire to physically transition (even if you don’t have the financial or social means to) to be considered trans.
Moreover an ideology cannot be both “post modern” and “marxist” and only some dumbass lobster would even think that. Post Modernism is the rejection of a grander singular narrative, and Marxist is very much about the narrative of class struggle.
Marxism is often used nowadays to the application of Marxist philosphy to non-economic means, like race and gender. So you’re right, Neo-Marxism would probably do better. And either way, Marxism is shit and is a horrific ideology no matter what it is applied to.
Of course I’m not saying you’re a fascist or even far right but much of your thinking on this is certainly derived from what would be considered far right (and colonialist) ideologies.
Fuck off. I’m left wing and always left wing. I don’t give a shit if what you think my ideas are derived from. People call capitalism ‘colonialist’ too and guess what? It’s literally the best system we’ve developed yet as a species.
Speaking of colonialist, non binary genders are very common globally. Research the Khusra/Hijra, Waria, Muxe, Two-spirits. African cultures have had many different genders. Arabian culture/early Islam had it’s own “trans” identity(which often get explained away by conservative muslims as “eunuchs” even when that makes no sense in context). Classical Judaism had 6 genders.
But it’s hilarious how I hear from people within those cultures that what you’ve described often entails transsexualism, intersex, eunuchs and simply gender-non-conforming individuals.
It’s funny because we have words for that last too nowadays. Tomboys. It’s amazing how in an attempt to break down gender roles, you just end up enforcing them even more by creating new genders when people show even the slightest amount of deviation from stereotypes.
None of this is new, it’s just an extension of the colonialist desire to erase cultures different or strange or challenging, including subcultures like we say in the weimar republic. There is violent thought behind the labelling of identities things like “tucute”, ridiculing and trying to push them even further out of mainstream society.
“Violent thought”. Fuck off. And fuck tucutes and fuck you too if you’re a tucute. Your line of thinking is everything wrong with society today. “Violent thought” and “violent ideas” are why we have people like Antifa punching people in the street.
I don’t know if “lost” is the right word, but it certainly did open up the entire thing to the gender spectrum bullshit. You have to keep in mind that for the longest time, that insanity wasn’t actually a thing and the T wasn’t a wedge at the time.
It’s only relatively recently that people have using the T to force themselves into the community.
However, I agree. By all means, Trans doesn’t really conform to the sexual attraction acronym. Because you can be trans and straight.
And what annoys me is that everything I’ve said here is historically accurate, I and other trans people have done our research. But you’ll still paint us as re-texturing society or history to fit some sort of nihilistic agenda when from my point of view that’s what you’re doing. You’re erasing so much just for some misanthropic hatred.
Ah yes. Because back then we had people literally using AUTISM as a way to gender identify. Right?
I’ll also tag @rabbittiddy and @alaija who both can comment on a lot of what you’ve said, given their familiarity with what you’ve said.
Hijra is NOT nonbinary! Please STOP saying that it is! Anyone who thinks it’s meant to be a separate gender has no clue about the situation of trans rights in India.
Hijra is usually used to describe MtF trans people, eunuchs, or men with androgen insensitivity! It’s also called “number nine” or in South India, Ali, because them being transgender or “biologically defective men” according to Indian culture makes them “neither male nor female!” It’s why some government forms have transgender as a separate gender option instead of seeing trans people as women and men!
I am sick and tired of foreigners misunderstanding LGBT issues here and using it as a trump card for themselves. If anything the Hijra/Ali idea is blatantly transphobic and needs to be nuked into oblivion.
Okay, so let’s unpack the term “non binary” here. The idea is not actually an entirely modern invention. The idea is that it’s something that is not according to the (generally western) gender binary. In fact, Hijra are not simply “MtF trans people” but a culture to themselves with their own customs, history, and even language. The archetypical Hijra live in their own communities train under a guru. There’s some definitely parallels with ball culture with house mothers etc. as is often the case with marginalised gender identities/sexualities in such cultures.
Also, some hijra activists have *actively campaigned* to be recognised as a third gender. It’s not something hoisted on them by the government. Saying that this is somehow false but a random dude with low sensitivity to T is is a pretty hot take.
Another popular myth is that Hijra never identify as trans and are universally opposed to the western idea of transgenderism, it’s curious you’ve gone the opposite direction. Some Hijra do identify as trans. Some consider themselves outside of that precisely to resist colonisation from the west. To be honest, I don’t entirely agree as I think words like “transgender” should be seen as a more elementary concept but I also respect that such terms can have cultural baggage.
I like how you bitch and moan about ‘colonization’ but you have the gall to tell a bisexual Indian, someone genuinely oppressed by her government, and part of a culture you are not apart of, that she’s wrong.
Guess that western savior complex gives you the right to come in and act like an authority over the poor brown folk, right?
These are YOUR rules here and you’re getting fucked by them. By your own assertions, this makes you not only a colonizer, but a racist too.
You did this to yourself. Deal with it.
Also, surprise: I come from a colonised country too.
Anonymous
