this was such a lovely and insightful piece as always!! <3 definitely agree that the current attack on trans rights is indicative of a larger need to control and tame queerness -- seeing the wave of TERFism is so upsetting bc it feels not only ideologically misguided but an intentionally oppressive tool of the state reconfigured to seem otherwise. thank you so much for sharing this!!
All this word salad and you’re still wrong. It is the PATRIARCHY that “manufactured exclusionary bio-essentialist boundaries of womanhood”. Feminism has long sought to fight against the notion that women are biologically predisposed towards certain things like femininity, being emotional, etc. You forget that finding “empowerment through assigned identification” applies to all identities since they are all “manufactured” by their socio-political context, literally what the article argues. You’re so close to getting to the root of the problem (the patriarchy) yet you choose to stop at misogyny. Do better.
hey there, i understand ur perspective, n it’s logically coherent how u arrived there. however, i miscommunicated n devoided my statement of clarification; by “empowerment thru assigned identification” i’m referring to cisgenderism, the basis of neoliberalist feminism, said exclusionary boundary (i included parentheses for). additionally, neoliberalist feminism did not exclusively manufacture gender bio-essentialism, i agree the patriarchy contributed too (w/misogyny n more confluences of contributions). not criticizing feminism itself, rather the misappropriated version (neoliberalism) that significantly contributed to terfism’s transphobia.
additionally, i personally find ur articulation n phrasing unkind. please include constructive, respectful phrasing that’s non-defensive, w/o offensive statements as “word salad” “do better” “you’re still wrong” “you choose” or multitudes of “you”. it’s not questioning nor objectively articulated, or yearning for understanding or further corrections. especially considering intersectional/radical feminism’s collectivist n communalist goals, we cannot further jeopardize nor atomize ourselves, catalyzed w/feminist infighting; community-oriented solidarity strengthens ourselves n thus feminism. we must kindly communicate w/one another, dynamically collaborating n w/information exchanges practiced politely, for facilitated collective enlightenment. let’s do that, shall we? (also im a neurodivergent highschool freshman youngster, discoursing more kindly is preferable).
Thank you for writing this. I think you're not wrong about "why write this essay" in that I've read a thousand similar micro essays about this on twitter or tumblr, but the point is you're distilling all that and stretching it out and kneading it into something considered and comprehensible. There's tremendous value in that-even if you weren't necessarily writing something new, you were grounding these ideas in research and structure and your personal experiences. And I could see all those ideas in a new light again and understand them better, than before.
This was a really interesting and well-written article. Thank you. It's definitely given me a lot to reflect on, especially regarding identities within a sociopolitical context.
Probably the most emphatic and forceful piece by yourself that I've read so far. Always refreshing to read a corrective to an idea of identity and community that is oddly disembodied from material politics. It may not be a new idea what you present but it bears repeating in a thousand ways until it sets.
Charlie, I have no idea if you are a male or female at birth. I don’t care. Your essay was wonderful and thought provoking. I’m baffled that any-one cares about another persons sexual preference or how they wish to be defined. The current backlash against trans people is better understood when you think of it as protection for the patriarchy and socioeconomic status quo. We must all protect each other against this evil prejudice which is also racism, “ otherism”, and fundamentalism. Your article makes it clear that we are all in this together.
this article reawakened all my befuddled (and personal) qualms and considerations about queerness at large. it got me thinking about what queer self expression includes or excludes and what groups/ systems subconsciously and consciously dictate it. separately - it got me thinking about how much more palatable and how aestheticised 'white queerness' is as opposed to BIPOC and their queer self expressions. your writing always ends up reviving deeper parts of my brain. thankyou for writing such thoughtful work! in solidarity <33
Thank you for this essay! However, the painting by otto dix is not a self portrait but a portrait of the journalist sylvia von harden as far as i know.
“The mass attack on trans people, socially and politically, is the result of transphobia. It is also the result of an empire struggling to assert control over its population by dictating its own definition of who we are, and who we can be.” YES!!! EXACTLY!! you worded this so perfectly. as a trans man this is something that i always emphasise when talking about trans rights. the rollback of rights for trans people has larger implications for *everybody’s* freedom. we are all in this struggle together.
"Perhaps it is the undermining of the nuclear family as the sole pathway to happiness and meaning." I would love to know what you think about this sole pathway when you are thirty years older. Sadly I'll never know.
<i>you can have gay sex and be straight. In fact, you can have gay sex every day for ten years and still be straight. Because being “gay”—being queer—is not an identity formed by action, inaction, or attraction, but by politics.</i>
So you get to invalidate other people's sexuality if their politics aren't in lockstep with yours? Fuck off.
not really sure how this is an “invalidating” statement; if you read the article it’s pretty clear that i am saying that the closeted teenage boy from a conservative family in nebraska who has never kissed a boy has more in common with the queer community and queer history than a man who has homosexual sex for release and not attraction while he’s at sea for six months then happily returns to his wife and children. the thesis of the essay is that actions alone do not constitute sexuality unless they are politicized by a social and legal system; in that sense political lesbianism falls outside this definition because while the actions may be politically motivated the personal identities of the straight women performing them are not politicized
this was such a lovely and insightful piece as always!! <3 definitely agree that the current attack on trans rights is indicative of a larger need to control and tame queerness -- seeing the wave of TERFism is so upsetting bc it feels not only ideologically misguided but an intentionally oppressive tool of the state reconfigured to seem otherwise. thank you so much for sharing this!!
All this word salad and you’re still wrong. It is the PATRIARCHY that “manufactured exclusionary bio-essentialist boundaries of womanhood”. Feminism has long sought to fight against the notion that women are biologically predisposed towards certain things like femininity, being emotional, etc. You forget that finding “empowerment through assigned identification” applies to all identities since they are all “manufactured” by their socio-political context, literally what the article argues. You’re so close to getting to the root of the problem (the patriarchy) yet you choose to stop at misogyny. Do better.
hey there, i understand ur perspective, n it’s logically coherent how u arrived there. however, i miscommunicated n devoided my statement of clarification; by “empowerment thru assigned identification” i’m referring to cisgenderism, the basis of neoliberalist feminism, said exclusionary boundary (i included parentheses for). additionally, neoliberalist feminism did not exclusively manufacture gender bio-essentialism, i agree the patriarchy contributed too (w/misogyny n more confluences of contributions). not criticizing feminism itself, rather the misappropriated version (neoliberalism) that significantly contributed to terfism’s transphobia.
additionally, i personally find ur articulation n phrasing unkind. please include constructive, respectful phrasing that’s non-defensive, w/o offensive statements as “word salad” “do better” “you’re still wrong” “you choose” or multitudes of “you”. it’s not questioning nor objectively articulated, or yearning for understanding or further corrections. especially considering intersectional/radical feminism’s collectivist n communalist goals, we cannot further jeopardize nor atomize ourselves, catalyzed w/feminist infighting; community-oriented solidarity strengthens ourselves n thus feminism. we must kindly communicate w/one another, dynamically collaborating n w/information exchanges practiced politely, for facilitated collective enlightenment. let’s do that, shall we? (also im a neurodivergent highschool freshman youngster, discoursing more kindly is preferable).
lol get out in the real world kid - those words mean nothing there.
Thank you for writing this. I think you're not wrong about "why write this essay" in that I've read a thousand similar micro essays about this on twitter or tumblr, but the point is you're distilling all that and stretching it out and kneading it into something considered and comprehensible. There's tremendous value in that-even if you weren't necessarily writing something new, you were grounding these ideas in research and structure and your personal experiences. And I could see all those ideas in a new light again and understand them better, than before.
This was a really interesting and well-written article. Thank you. It's definitely given me a lot to reflect on, especially regarding identities within a sociopolitical context.
Probably the most emphatic and forceful piece by yourself that I've read so far. Always refreshing to read a corrective to an idea of identity and community that is oddly disembodied from material politics. It may not be a new idea what you present but it bears repeating in a thousand ways until it sets.
Charlie, I have no idea if you are a male or female at birth. I don’t care. Your essay was wonderful and thought provoking. I’m baffled that any-one cares about another persons sexual preference or how they wish to be defined. The current backlash against trans people is better understood when you think of it as protection for the patriarchy and socioeconomic status quo. We must all protect each other against this evil prejudice which is also racism, “ otherism”, and fundamentalism. Your article makes it clear that we are all in this together.
Thank you so much, Toni!
this article reawakened all my befuddled (and personal) qualms and considerations about queerness at large. it got me thinking about what queer self expression includes or excludes and what groups/ systems subconsciously and consciously dictate it. separately - it got me thinking about how much more palatable and how aestheticised 'white queerness' is as opposed to BIPOC and their queer self expressions. your writing always ends up reviving deeper parts of my brain. thankyou for writing such thoughtful work! in solidarity <33
Really love this piece ❤️
Thank you for this essay! However, the painting by otto dix is not a self portrait but a portrait of the journalist sylvia von harden as far as i know.
Ooh thank you for letting me know!! I'll update my caption... I should have known given the lack of the iconic Otto Dix Art School Haircut
This may be obvious to you but it isn't for everyone (e.g. me) and I definitely gained a new perspective reading your essay.
“The mass attack on trans people, socially and politically, is the result of transphobia. It is also the result of an empire struggling to assert control over its population by dictating its own definition of who we are, and who we can be.” YES!!! EXACTLY!! you worded this so perfectly. as a trans man this is something that i always emphasise when talking about trans rights. the rollback of rights for trans people has larger implications for *everybody’s* freedom. we are all in this struggle together.
Don't really agree with any of this but nice element of historical context and certainly readable
"Perhaps it is the undermining of the nuclear family as the sole pathway to happiness and meaning." I would love to know what you think about this sole pathway when you are thirty years older. Sadly I'll never know.
<i>you can have gay sex and be straight. In fact, you can have gay sex every day for ten years and still be straight. Because being “gay”—being queer—is not an identity formed by action, inaction, or attraction, but by politics.</i>
So you get to invalidate other people's sexuality if their politics aren't in lockstep with yours? Fuck off.
Also, this is how you get political lesbians.
not really sure how this is an “invalidating” statement; if you read the article it’s pretty clear that i am saying that the closeted teenage boy from a conservative family in nebraska who has never kissed a boy has more in common with the queer community and queer history than a man who has homosexual sex for release and not attraction while he’s at sea for six months then happily returns to his wife and children. the thesis of the essay is that actions alone do not constitute sexuality unless they are politicized by a social and legal system; in that sense political lesbianism falls outside this definition because while the actions may be politically motivated the personal identities of the straight women performing them are not politicized
just wanna say i love ur blog u rly inspire me to write more
i love this piece so much <3 <3
oh what a joy to be queer - and to read this article. thank you for your insight, a lot to listen to and digest from this.