so anyway my controversial opinion is that some transids are morally dubious. i'm radinclus forever however i do think (for example) being voluntarily transtrauma specifically for the "aesthetic"/for fun is very iffy
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Personally, going with your example here, I feel like somebody being transtrauma for fun/aesthetic/“surface level” reasons is arguably LESS harmful/dangerous than somebody who is transtrauma for coping reasons and is putting serious consideration into transitioning?
Obviously how each individual presents themselves is going to factor into things, for example if you’re transabled it’s probably dangerous to posit yourself as a source for experiences of those diagnosed with your disability. But I’m not sure I can get being the idea that motivation decides validity
additionally i am extremely opposed to disrespecting anyone's identity just on principle and at the end of the day idc that much and will argue against identity policing just because i think that narrative is far worse
i have other reasons such as transid unity but my full reasoning would be better suited to a tumblr post. this is another reason why i don't call myself radqueer anymore, my criticism is out of step with core rq beliefs
i feel this way about goregenders as well by the way it's not just transabled/harm ids. no idea where this puts me ideologically but mhm. what are your thoughts i'm willing to hear opposing opinions
Comments
Personally, going with your example here, I feel like somebody being transtrauma for fun/aesthetic/“surface level” reasons is arguably LESS harmful/dangerous than somebody who is transtrauma for coping reasons and is putting serious consideration into transitioning?