Where you put your mouse Trans_Flag

  • 47 Posts
  • 25 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: July 9th, 2023
  • Mousepad@burggit.moetoAsk Burggit!@burggit.moe•What kind of etiquette should we have about cross-posting porn? Though now that I've written it out, I guess this is more about trans content than anything
    2·
    1 year ago

    If you like that new community name, I find it reasonable!

    I feel I should clarify: To describe art, if the character being described is a futa, I have no problem calling them that. My issue with the term is when it is used to:

    1. Describe real people,
    2. Describe canonically transgender characters (e.g. Bridget from Guilty Gear), or
    3. Describe all FPPWP as a catch-all (overlap with 2 here).

    So I think the current post title is completely fine (assuming 2 does not apply; I do not recognize the character if so). Contrast this with terms like “trap,” which I would prefer to never see in any context, for the reason I mentioned in my reply to PB’s comment. Better terms for that do exist (femboy seems fine)!

    Thanks again for making this post. It’s something I’ve been thinking about for a while, but I didn’t want to bring it up myself for fear of being “annoying,” or similar.

  • Mousepad@burggit.moetoAsk Burggit!@burggit.moe•What kind of etiquette should we have about cross-posting porn? Though now that I've written it out, I guess this is more about trans content than anything
    6·
    1 year ago

    This is going to be a wall of text because I have a lot to say!

    For starters, would you mind if I cross-post this to !lgbt@burggit.moe, tweaked a bit to be SFW? I think part of this discussion would have value there.

    I am transfemme and have complicated feelings on this. I’ll probably end up giving you more questions than answers, but I’m glad you made this post because I think it is a worthwhile discussion to have. I’m going to fix some nonstandard terminology here so that reading this post is not tedious: FPWP = Feminine presenting with a penis, FPPWP = Feminine presenting person/people with a penis.

    I identified three main points in your post:

    1. Is FPWP content acceptable to cross-post if there are no explicit rules against it?
    2. Should FPWP content outside of designated communities be tagged as such?
    3. What is inclusive terminology we can use for FPWP content?

    — 1 —

    I don’t really have anything interesting to say about the first item. Personally, in the rare event that I am browsing Burggit with NSFW content enabled, I like seeing FPWP content regardless of the community (who doesn’t like seeing content they can identify the most with?). If there aren’t rules against it, I say go for it and see what happens. Worst case is you get told off and the rules are clarified.

    — 2 —

    For the second item, my personal take is that it doesn’t matter, as I use the tampermonkey script to auto-expand images (and I enjoy the content anyway). Let’s suppose that there is someone out there that absolutely abhors FPWP content and could filter out posts with an appropriate tag, for the sake of argument. I could see why they would benefit from tagging these posts. We have to balance that against the interesting point you made: is tagging FPWP content fetishizing FPPWP? That’s a tough question to answer so I’ll just present my thoughts on all sides.

    • No: there are many communities outside of Burggit (for example, on Reddit) which will flair posts as depicting someone presenting masculine or feminine (usually [M] or [F]), especially in specialized fetish communities where it doesn’t make sense to segregate (say, for population reasons) and in r4r communities. Many people use these flairs not to actively seek out content depicting masculine or feminine presenting people but to actually filter out what they dislike: quite the opposite of fetishization.
    • Yes: the argument laid out above doesn’t apply to FPWP content as masc/fem presentations are not fetishized in the same way that content involving transgender women is. While people do actively seek out content displaying cisgender women far more than cisgender men, and cisgender women are historically objectified, it is not a minority class and thus cannot be considered a fetish in any reasonable sense of the term.
    • Yes, but this is not an issue: why would there be? Fetishizing (real) FPPWP in a context in which they are sexualizing themselves is reasonable and not problematic. Do (reasonable) people generally take issue with (real) Asian content, another historically fetishized class? No, not when everyone is consenting to the acts and the filming. Why should it be different from FPPWP? The issue with fetishizing any class is when this escapes designated acceptable areas. If I were to post a nude selfie in !fem_penis_3d@burggit.moe, I have no right reason to be upset if people view that content expressly because I am a FPPWP. But if I am walking down the street, I certainly do not want to be harassed about this (even if I have invited such interaction in other areas of my life). I feel replacing (real) with (art) above doesn’t really change much of the argument, morally speaking.

    I have mostly talked myself into the third point above, though there are reasonable people who take issue with Asian fetishization in pornography, I do not see it as such a big issue. There is no other way to categorify it and people should not feel ashamed for their attractions if nobody is being harmed.

    — 3 —

    Lastly, what is inclusive terminology we can use for FPWP content? As a disclaimer, I use what is perhaps aggressive language here, but I am in no way attacking you personally. Any usage of “you” as follows refers not literally to you, but rather a hypothetical person (English sucks: 2nd person singular impersonal).

    CW, transphobic slurs

    I really super hate terms like “dick-girl,” “trap,” “tranny,” “futa,” (this last one mostly because it seems to equivocate real people with hentai) and I know many trans women who take exception to “t-girl,” even. Some of those are slurs, others are borderline. I know very few transgender women who ever like seeing these terms, in sexual contexts or otherwise. The most favorable responses to these terms I’ve seen by transgender women have mostly been “meh, whatever, I don’t care”: not exactly a ringing endorsement. The only people I see defending them are usually cisgender people who just find it convenient to continue using language they’ve been using and are annoyed that others are trying to make them “feel bad” for doing so. I don’t think that’s a very reasonable stance to take. If the people you are describing with these terms are overwhelmingly telling you to stop, then just stop. Even if it is inconvenient, it really would not take much effort.

    .

    So that begs the question: what is better terminology? Well, FPWP is essentially perfect as far as using standard inclusive language goes, but it is not at all recognizable to those who don’t know it and thus essentially worthless as a quick-reference term (such as for tags). Trans-girl/trans-woman is recognizable, but also exclusive of trans women who have undergone bottom surgery (and intersex people AFAB and any other person who might present feminine and have a penis). Despite that, I think this is a good option for a compromise between recognizability and inclusivity. Perhaps something like fem-penis could work: we do have a community named this way and it is practically the same as FPWP, so I think that is my favorite option so far. Maybe others have better recommendations?

    Thanks for coming to my TED talk. Please feel free to share your thoughts on what I have to say, even if you are not yourself trans or queer in any way. Also, something to keep in mind is that I do not frequent booru or similar sites, so I don’t have much to say RE: that culture. I don’t really see this as a problem because a lot of those sites have some pretty disturbing cultural behaviors anyway.

Moderates