So, hopefully folks will show me a little grace in this conversation because it's something I'm genuinely still trying to work out for myself, but I struggle with the idea that it's inherently transphobic to use genitalia to symbolize aspects of gendered oppression. https://twitter.com/insectsinsects/status/1200894470503518212

To be clear, I'm 100% onboard with naming the fact that gender is a social construct, not a biological reality. In no way do I think anyone has the right to police the boundaries of gender identity in any way, especially by using a person's genitalia as a cudgel.

At the same time, gendered violence in our culture *has* traditionally been perpetrated primarily by penis-havers, often with said penises.

In the context of sexual violence, they are in very literal and immediate ways weapons.

I've been thinking about this a lot since Women's March pussy hat critiques were a big thing.

The critique of the racism of pink as default landed pretty solidly with me, but the transphobia critique not as much.

For cis woman survivors, vaginas have a really complex symbolism. They're a site of where real violence and trauma has occurred, and learning to see them as a part of us that belongs to us is a process of power and resistance.

They're also organs that we've all been socialized to view as shameful, disgusting, soiled.

We're simultaneously taught that they're commodities that men are entitled to sell, and that they're a means of (re)production to be controlled by men.

I absolutely agree that it's transphobic and wrongheaded to act as though penises are literally all the time the marker of the oppressor.

It's bad for trans woman, and it also teaches boys exactly the wrong lessons about the connection between their biology and sexist behavior.

But I also can't get myself to a place where I can accept that it's fair to call for an oppressed class to abandon a symbolic discourse around genitalia that maps very directly to their identity-linked traumatic experiences.

I have a hard time seeing justice in a theory of intersectionality that calls for the silencing of an oppressed class of people in discourse around reclaiming what has been stolen from them and naming the kinds of weapons used against them.

It isn't fair for transwomen to have to contend with a symbolic site of patriarchy on their body, but I'd argue that damage is done by patriarchy's history of wielding of that body part a a weapon against women, not by other women's naming of that fact literally and symbolically

I do get that TERFs have wielded genital symbolism as a weapon against transpeople, and that this discourse has developed a polyvalence that can evoke unwelcomeness for transwomen.

I just... I dunno.

Joyful third wave embrace of the vag was such a critically important part of my own path to body acceptance and self-acceptance as a queer woman.

Deconstructing the symbolism of the penis as a site of power and coming to understand that the "power" it represents in patriarchal discourse is inherently violent was an important part of my coming to be able to name the violence of predatory speech.

A joke about a dick guillotines may seem like a trivial thing to defend in a discussion around triggered trauma, but it's an act of defiance against harassers who constantly suggest that I'm worthless because I don't make their dicks hard.

We are constantly told that dick hardness is the only measure of women's worth, constantly informed dick receptivity is expected of us whether we consent or not.

Patriarchy is a discourse heavy with toxic dick symbolism.

I don't know that you can call out patriarchy fully without calling out the dick stuff, too. It's such an essential component of the discourse of patriarchal gendered violence.

Where I'm at right now I guess-- and I'll come back to the mentions as soon as I finish wrapping the thread-- is that as always, context is crucial and learning has to be constant.

The more I learn about TERF policing in some of the local Women's Marches, the more I'm like, yeah, it makes sense for our trans sisters to have asked us to cool it with the pussy hats.

If I ever have cis daughters, though, I'm still in a place where I'd want them to grow up in an environment where sassy, lighthearted vag positivity is the norm and "douche" is an insult they use to mean "worse than useless."

And I do think cis feminists, myself included, need to be better about noticing and understanding how TERFs seize on genital symbolism discourse as a dogwhistle in order to traumatize and exclude feminine trans folks from spaces they should feel welcomed into.

At the same time, I can't quite let go of the sense that in the specific context of critiquing/naming a toxically misogynist, violently dick-heavy patriarchal discourse, rejecting the D literally or symbolically is a meaningful act of resistance against an oppressive violence.

To be clear, I'm grateful for the call-out and not trying to dismiss it or argue it's wrong.

I'm not trying to launch a hot take about why we should all go out and wave vagina flags. I'm just trying to honor the critique and respond thoughtfully.

I've said it in replies conversation but I want to add it here, too:

This was a shitty thread and I regret it. I didn't understand how it reinforced transphobia at the time, but that doesn't make it okay.