We all know transgender people are their intragender, transrace people are really their intrarace, and transage folks are really their intra-age. But where does that leave transautistics and transabled folks? (I have a friend that believes transautistics are just regular autistics and should embrace being autistic.) It seems like there’s a disconnect here and I haven’t seen anyone mention it. I also heard someone on pedi describe transopinion as: “you like the idea in theory and you wish you could believe it or feel like you should but you just. cant.” This seems squarely in the “want” camp.

What do you think?

    • A Friendly Stranger@rqd2.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. I figure there’s a comparison to be had with kinship. On one hand there’s “I am literally this” and on the other “I feel a connection to this”, with of course a multitude of varied experiences in between.

    • iwakan@rqd2.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      This opens up the interesting possibility of being trans-trans-something. There’s no obvious reason you couldn’t feel that sort of connection to being transgender or transage without actually being those things.

  • arisu.exe@rqd2.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just as a heads up, the lemmy isn’t very active yet so it might take a bit for people to start answering

    It’s a complicated topic for sure. It kind of calls to mind what’s a social construct and what’s not, cuz I’d say things like gender and race are definitely social constructs, but things specific disabilities and species?

    It’s hard to find where to draw the line. I think getting into the semantics of it all just leads to discourse “oh transgender is only valid because it’s a social construct! X isn’t so you can’t be transX”

    Though obviously you’re not trying to start discourse about what’s valid and what’s not. It’d be easy to say that all of the identities are "to be"s or all of them are "to want"s, but I don’t know if it’s correct to say either. I think there’s definitely some divide, but it’s not one I want to pay attention to cuz it’ll just lead to validity politics and people trying to cause separation.

  • ZIM vt/it/vx/ve/he@rqd2.netB
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    we aren’t transgender but are nonbinary transidgender, xenorace, & transage, and for transidgender & xenorace it is want to be for us, not internally that. same with lots of other transid we r like transspecies, transorientation & transabled. want to be is how we primarily view r transids