Anonymous #2 8w

Friend I mean this lovingly but there is no AFAB privilege. Bodies called female are researched less for health/safety and more for reproductive purposes, and in a patriarchal society are reduced to birthing pods. Everyone is more than their capacity to reproduce but that has historically been the narrative of bodies which were deemed female. I do, however, agree that bodies deemed male/female enjoy a certain amount of autonomy in comparison with our intersex siblings.

13

Anonymous OP 8w

I would say it gives cis women privilege over trans women

7

Anonymous #2 8w

is that not just an overly-general way of saying “cis privilege” tho?

17

Anonymous #4 8w

and if you wanted to say “cis woman” privilege then you could say “cis woman privilege” instead

6

Anonymous OP 8w

“bodies called female”? many* trans women are classed as female, the entire coinage of the word “transsexual” is based in the reality that it’s possible to change your sex. the last two letters in “AFAB” / “AMAB” are there for a reason, the acronyms are past-tense and refer exclusively to what you were assigned At Birth

4

Anonymous #5 8w

* (I would argue most trans women are female, only excluding those who personally self-describe as male for whatever reason, but this was me acknowledging the existence of more “medicalized” models of sex)

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Trans women are female

1

Anonymous #2 8w

yes, that’s what I said

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I agree sex is a medical (and thus socially constructed) term! Thank you for clarifying and being open to my perspective. The label “female” was put on me (and others, but I’m just one guy) at birth and shaped how I was raised and what was expected from me. The term “AFAB privilege” does only benefit cis women, at least in my opinion, but cis women are still a class which face discrimination/oppression from institutional sexism, just like everyone who is not a cishet man.

1

Anonymous OP 8w

By saying “bodies called female,” my intention was to highlight that socio/medical construction of reducing one’s identity to their sex at birth and who have not medically transitioned. The term was not oriented around self-identification/concept.

1

Anonymous OP 8w

you misunderstood my comment you used the phrase “bodies called female” when you were referring exclusively to a category of people who can be impregnated (as demonstrated by what you said about being “reduced to birthing pods”). however, trans women’s bodies are also “called female”, because they Are female. you are excluding trans women from the category of “female” by using the phrase “bodies called female” as if it could Only refer to people with uteruses

1

Anonymous OP 8w

to be clear, it’s not like I think language choices always need to be 100% perfectly precise in areas where the vocabulary we have access to is mostly flawed / reductive. but excluding trans women from the phrase “bodies called female” isn’t just inaccurate, it’s also transmisogynistic

2

Anonymous #5 8w

I apologize for not using terms in ways which were inclusive to trans women. This post is about the assumed privileges of trans men. However, I do believe my point can still stand if replaced with “people with uteruses.” Granted, word count limits make conversations like these a bit more challenging. I agree transsexual women are female, and will use the term “people with uteruses” going forward. Thanks for clarifying and expanding my vocab :)

1