I hate the terms MtT and FtT.

[Miffer]

This is all going to be a bit garbled so apologies in advance.

Okay, I wanted to post a thread about transwomen who are allies and what their role is/could be in feminist thought, especially around harmful masculinity. I fell at the first hurdle wondering how to title my thread.

I hate the MtT and FtT terminology, I see it as really dehumanising. I get why people use it but it makes really uncomfortable. I don't see how we can argue that people are biologically male or female (let's just leave intersex for the time being) then use "Male to trans" as a thing. From the other side these people are still male if they are trans, isn't that the whole point?

I like the words transman and transwoman as I feel it's clearly defined enough, being one word, to work as intended as it removes the need to add anything to "woman" or "man" when talking about none trans people. That said I have read why other poster object to this and understand completely.

Is it okay that I like to call trans women I respect "her" and "she"? I mean really, obviously I am not asking for permission but rather other peoples thoughts.

I was thinking about a similar take to this the other day, Miffer, in connection with bumping into a trans colleague (who is very nice, we've never talked about trans issues, we talk about jazz and raspberry pis and the general annoying physical crumbliness that comes with middle age), and thinking how far she was from the trans-activist nutters online (I'm happy to use "she" because she's never been anything other than pleasant and polite).

I came to the conclusion that maybe a guide to my online behaviour should be "if I had to have a discussion about this with her present, how would I present my objections to the trans-activist dogma?" So I'd probably use "she" for transwomen like her who behaved in a decent manner, but not for sex offenders like Ayrton, or attempted murders, or that goady troll Muscato. I'd also use transwoman, but expect to be able to use it in sentences like "transwomen are biologically male, and remain biologically male after transition" and "there is no such thing as a female penis." I'm guessing, since she comes from a scientific background and seems like a decent and thoughtful person, she'd probably agree, though probably tries (given her presumable dysphoria) not to think about it most of the time. I probably wouldn't use MTT (though I have used it) .

I agree that language is important - but its importance resides in making ideas clear. So long as one makes clear that biological facts are non-negotiable, and that use of pronouns is extended as a privilege not a right (and can be rescinded if the person concerned displays male-pattern violence), and that the determinant for accessing women's spaces is biology, not some nebulous sense of gender identity, I think that should be okay. That I think would enable me to still have polite discussions with reasonable trans people while making my position clear (and would still piss the hell out of the transwhacktivists - which I consider an additional bonus).

I use transman and transwoman. Without a space. I have seen trans posters on this board use these terms so feel okay about using them.

MTT and FTT seem a bit dehumanising to me. But acceptable to use as a response to the term 'cis', which is equally dehumanising IMO.

Language is important - it is used to manipulate how we think and how we perceive and describe our world. Which is why the trans movement cares so much about it. And why feminists resist calling men women.

^^This

And the giving an inch taking a mile part.

It must be very difficult for genuine transsexuals to have their gender questioned. This is not the fault of women. It is the fault of transactivists telling us that there is no such thing as male and female, or men and women.

In terms of how you address trans people in your own circle, like every other human interaction, it will be tempered with courtesy and friendship.

In terms of talking about it generally, biological terms are now, quite literally, seen as having negative connotations.

This is not only ridiculous, it is dangerous.

Language is important. And it is in real danger of changing the way people think.