A question for Transmen and Transwomen

[SpiritOfEnquiry]

I have name changed for this.

I'm not sure whether this is the best board (or place on the internet) to post this but I gather it's watched by many people so I'm hoping to get an answer from people with first-hand experience one way or another. This is not intended to be in any way goady, there just seem to be so many different understandings of what makes someone 'trans' and I think it's important to know what we're talking about.

I'm generally and genuinely curious about how transmen and women view their own desire to present or be viewed as the opposite sex to which they were born.

Leaving aside anyone for whom presenting as the opposite sex is a sexual thing (I gather there are complicated rules on speaking about this on this board and don't wish to be offensive), my current (no doubt very basic) understanding is that it must fall into one or both of two categories:

1. Dysmorphia in the sense of being uncomfortable or horrified by your physical body, or parts of it, as are people who feel a deep revulsion towards a healthy limb.

1. A feeling that you are a man or a woman, regardless of your body, and wish to be treated as such.

The first category I can get my head around to an extent. I don't pretend to know the reasons or best response but I can understand what is being said.

The second causes me more problems and I am curious to know how transmen and transwomen think of it to themselves. What, to you, counts as 'living as' a woman or man? What, in your view, is the difference between being treated as a man and treated as a woman? If you lived in a society where the expectations ascribed to each sex we're different, or you'd received different messages about that growing up do you think you'd feel differently?

Particularly:

A) Do you believe that there are in fact (perhaps even in science) internal feelings/traits etc. common to all women or all men regardless of the society they live in that you, as someone biologically of the opposite sex unusually share, making you therefore really a man/woman on the inside? Or perhaps
B) Do you feel that 'feeling like' a man or woman is indeed based on sexist stereotyping of the society in which you live but, while that stereotyping is alive and well, it's more comfortable for you to describe yourself as being the opposite sex than to try to present as the biological sex you are but live outside of the stereotypes?

Doubtless I'm stepping on landmines left and right, here, but I truly can't find my own way through the difference between "living as a woman" and sexist stereotypes, and rather than immediately conclude that there isn't one, I'd be very interested to hear others' thoughts.

Thank you in advance.

It's like you "know" what you are. As I said, hard to explain.

So you apparently have a feeling that you are female that is nothing to do with having a female body or anything to do with being told you are female your whole life on account of that female body? And because of this thing you feel we are supposed to take men seriously who say they also feel it, despite their life experience being that of a male.

Honestly, the flat earth society expect better justification than that.

Quite!

All you need to do, is to look at all the vitriol and abuse levelled at women, look at what is said both verbally and pictorially and then, if you can't see the difference, then nothing, nothing and nobody would be able to give you any evidence that could help you

So you apparently have a feeling that you are female that is nothing to do with having a female body or anything to do with being told you are female your whole life on account of that female body?

Yes, this is the "evidence" women are supposed to accept, and accept the breaking down of our hard-won rights.

And we are supposed to accept that the definition of "woman" must change. And if we say "Don't erase us!" we are transphobic.

As WPUK say:

Nothing about us without us.

And if we say "Don't erase us!" we are transphobic

I just don't see how being inclusive of trans people is "erasing" us.
Nobody's saying we're no longer a woman, like we're being erased from existence.
You're still a woman, you don't magically not become one.
I'd still be one.

@LemonadeAndDaisyChains

Babies are generally socialised as female from seconds outside the womb, and possibly inside it if the sex of the foetus is known

OK, but how does that explain trans men then?
As they must know from a young age they "feel" male despite any female socialisation.

Of the trans men I know, none experienced any discomfort with their sexed bodies until puberty. In line with all other females. They may have experienced discomfort about social expectations of people of their sex. That doesn’t of course mean that all females will experience bodily discomfort during puberty, but a large swathe will, again, largely due to external reactions to their changing bodies. People treating them differently and social expectations changing. Of the ones who do actually experience bodily discomfort at puberty, there are a couple of pathways - some will get used to the changes and figure out a way to deal with them (pretty normal - most women). Some will unnecessarily get signposted to transitioning (ROGD, some now starting to detransition and sue trusts for lack of safeguarding). A very small number need significant mental health support to help them deal with what they feel is incongruence None of the trans men I know are in that extremely small final group. The vast majority fall into the middle group who have been incorrectly signposted by well meaning and shit scared adults keen not to be seen as bigots. The trans men I know were all absolutely comfortable in their female bodies until puberty and were rushed onto medical pathway. These are kids I know quite well.

Lemonades, If transwomen are women then the reason I thought I was a woman is untrue, so I am not a woman, I am erased.

HTH

Lemonades, If transwomen are women then the reason I thought I was a woman is untrue, so I am not a woman, I am erased. HTH

Nobody's saying that biology isn't a real thing though (well, I'm not anyway)
Biology part of being a woman is and always will be part of what being a woman is.
You can't change your biology.
There's an innate sense too though that is just as much a part of me being female as the fact I have periods every month.
Trans women being women too doesn't erase me.

MadBadDaddy
"I'm on this website looking for evidence of humanity. Still looking."

Is MBD denying our humanity now? Well I never.

Great for you, but it does erase me. If we share a biology, we don't share anything else

The only thing I have ( had) in common with women is biology.

I have come to terms with the reality of that. I am ( was) a woman because of biology but everything else was irrelevant to that definition and so can not affect who I am or who I am expected to be. At that understanding I had an ease and understanding

But if women means something else, related to my inner understanding of myself, then I am not one.

Using that reasoning, you could equally say that if all men were called women, it would not erase women either.

Women would remain women, just that it was expanded to include all men as well.

And there would now be no word to help us identify and fight injustice , no word to help scientists design tests that didn't exclude half the population, because you can bet your last penny that discrimination would still occur and that the male default would still exist , you just could not describe it any more. Not sure how sex education would go. Would children be given pictures and asked to go into the class whose picture matched their privates.

There's an innate sense too though that is just as much a part of me being female as the fact I have periods every month.

No, there is no universal sense, as many posts here demonstrate, and you can't even define your own "sense". It's your personal view.

This is all food for thought, discussion getting interesting again

And there would now be no word to help us identify and fight injustice , no word to help scientists design tests that didn't exclude half the population, because you can bet your last penny that discrimination would still occur and that the male default would still exist , you just could not describe it any more. Not sure how sex education would go. Would children be given pictures and asked to go into the class whose picture matched their privates

The last bit though Would children be given pictures and asked to go into the class whose picture matched their privates why would it have to be like that?
Surely you don't stop teaching biology? You can be perfectly aware that biology is still a thing (and of course it is!) but also be aware of trans people and accepting of them.
Surely "showing pictures" - how would that even work, as if you showed pictures like you say, if you were trans you would put yourself under the opposite of what genitals you saw....?

Women would remain women, just that it was expanded to include all men as well.

And that's what it essentially does mean, as any man can say tomorrow that he identifies as a woman, and out of male privilege and into an oppressed class.

if you were trans you would put yourself under the opposite of what genitals you saw....?

I think you've missed the point. It would be a bit weird to categorise yourself as a penis haver when you have a vagina. This is the same logic as "menstruator" after all, a non sex based body designation.

And that's what it essentially does mean, as any man can say tomorrow that he identifies as a woman, and out of male privilege and into an oppressed class

See, from a different viewpoint - if a man is a predator, dangerous, they're going to be whatever they identify as.
Seems a fuck ton of bother to pretend to be trans or self identify as female just to assault.
They just would regardless! So lumping all trans women in together with them is just not comparable in my opinion.

Seems a fuck ton of bother to pretend to be trans or self identify as female just to assault.

It's less bother than say, becoming a priest, or a teacher, or a sports coach or a scout master, or a choir master or a movie mogul or a radio DJ, but all of them have happened.

Interesting thread

Not very keen on the attempts to get a rise out of some posters on the thread, one assumes to get strikes...

But still, interesting

Though on that subject...so back tracking slightly. What happened to the deleted posts, 3 strikes and you’re out thing. It doesn’t seem to be happening, is that cos MNHQ is relaxing it slightly, or does it more depend on who’s saying it/whats being said

Hopefully relaxing...

@Cailleach1

Using that reasoning, you could equally say that if all men were called women, it would not erase women either.

Women would remain women, just that it was expanded to include all men as well.

It was called coverture the last time men did it to us.

What happened to the deleted posts, 3 strikes and you’re out thing. It doesn’t seem to be happening, is that cos MNHQ is relaxing it slightly, or does it more depend on who’s saying it/whats being said

Not all deleted posts earn you a strike. Only when you get an email from MNHQ to say you have a strike.

From the FWR special rules:
We can’t promise to send an email about every deletion we make on the boards but if we're issuing a strike we will always get in touch.

It's less bother than say, becoming a priest, or a teacher, or a sports coach or a scout master, or a choir master or a movie mogul or a radio DJ, but all of them have happened.

Or being found dead hiding in a septic tank to secretly perv on women, as men have been.

Seems a fuck ton of bother to pretend to be trans or self identify as female just to assault.
They just would regardless! So lumping all trans women in together with them is just not comparable in my opinion.

Also that wasn't my point. I didn't mention and wasn't talking about assault, so you obviously haven't got an answer to the point I did make.

Women would remain women, just that it was expanded to include all men as well.

And that's what it essentially does mean, as any man can say tomorrow that he identifies as a woman, and out of male privilege and into an oppressed class.

This has much wider ramifications than women's safety (which is very important of course).

Also that wasn't my point. I didn't mention and wasn't talking about assault, so you obviously haven't got an answer to the point I did make

The usual narrative on here goes that people will identify as trans in order to assault, or get closer to women.
If that's not what you mean, would be interested to know what it is you did mean?
Why else would you be concerned about trans women being in toilets/etc if it wasn't from a viewpoint of they'll attack you cos trans?
Curious