The moment they openly defended keeping chasers around and sexually tokenizing trans women, I was out. Those lead to a compatibilist approach to integration via internalizing self-deprecation and worse.
The moment they openly defended keeping chasers around and sexually tokenizing trans women
barely related tangent warning:
chasers are thing in most lgbtqia communities and it’s fascinating to me how they’re embraced in the ones i’m a member of (bears, chubs, daddies, mature) and how they’re reviled in most of the trans communities and for the same exact reasons in all circumstances.
it makes me wonder if the way that men and women are conditioned to regard to their own sexuality has anything to do with it.
One thing to consider is that the people you’re describing as accepted are fundamentally already in the in group that is oppressed - gay or bi. Chasers are basically universally cis men treating trans women as a fetish object. The dehumanizing aspect is different when it is in no way self-referential and when the basic identity is what is fetishized.
Another way to think of it is that for a group of people oppressed in their societies, one of the few ways those (cis) societies “value” trans women is as a taboo sexual fetish, often an exploitable one.
This does relate to gender in that these societies are misogynist and treat women’s bodies as available for purchase in one way or another, plus a long ladder up to that actual act - simulation, imagery, drama, etc. The act of “acquisition” is gender biased in the extreme and coincides with the impoverished of women, and not coincidentally trans women. What is the value of a woman?
The moment they openly defended keeping chasers around and sexually tokenizing trans women, I was out. Those lead to a compatibilist approach to integration via internalizing self-deprecation and worse.
barely related tangent warning:
chasers are thing in most lgbtqia communities and it’s fascinating to me how they’re embraced in the ones i’m a member of (bears, chubs, daddies, mature) and how they’re reviled in most of the trans communities and for the same exact reasons in all circumstances.
it makes me wonder if the way that men and women are conditioned to regard to their own sexuality has anything to do with it.
One thing to consider is that the people you’re describing as accepted are fundamentally already in the in group that is oppressed - gay or bi. Chasers are basically universally cis men treating trans women as a fetish object. The dehumanizing aspect is different when it is in no way self-referential and when the basic identity is what is fetishized.
Another way to think of it is that for a group of people oppressed in their societies, one of the few ways those (cis) societies “value” trans women is as a taboo sexual fetish, often an exploitable one.
This does relate to gender in that these societies are misogynist and treat women’s bodies as available for purchase in one way or another, plus a long ladder up to that actual act - simulation, imagery, drama, etc. The act of “acquisition” is gender biased in the extreme and coincides with the impoverished of women, and not coincidentally trans women. What is the value of a woman?