genderbitch:

fortheloveofsquiddles:

genderbitch:

alisonofagun:

genderbitch:

twofourteen:

genderbitch:

lescomynadventures:

SexEd Spread for XX/XY

The whole digital process thing is really frustrating for me, but I think I may have learned half a thing or two in the making.

I guess no one grows up into trans women shapes…

No need to shit all over someone’s message of positivity, even if it doesn’t include everything other people identify as a woman. I think this is a great, great image.

All I hear is, “No need to shit on someone’s message of positivity, even if it’s bigoted, like me.”

Why don’t you sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up? Cuz your erasure apologism isn’t welcome here.

Wait, the lower left one isn’t a trans woman? 

I kinda thought that was supposed to be a little cartoon penis, although I didn’t go over it with a magnifying glass or anything.

For a while I thought the same thing. But I looked at it closely and I’m pretty sure at this point that’s just heavy pubic hair. Which btw, heavy pubic hair is perfectly fine and awesome.

I’m just tired of trans women’s existence not being acknowledged.

Forgive me if I’m awfully mistaken here, but I think this particular page not covering trans women isn’t erasure by anyone’s standards. If there were a second one covering a range of MAAB bodies, and there was no representation there, then there’d be an erasure problem.

Facts are, FAAB kids aren’t massively likely to grow up into trans women. This picture is showing a range of FAAB bodies, not female bodies. You are finding issue with entirely the wrong thing, if you ask me. This picture is a damn good thing.

(I’m obviously working under the assumption that the third-on-the-bottom-row person’s androgyny isn’t without reason.)

I forgive you for being awfully mistaken here. There are plenty of women, including trans women who are androgynous and I sincerely doubt this person was trying to include trans guys in this with the whole barbie spiel up at the top.

It’s erasure cuz this is pretty clearly about women (body image issues based on a doll marketed exclusively to girls) and trans women, regardless of being MAAB (and some aren’t, there are unassigned folks too), are still WOMEN.

And ergo, something about women should include all women.

Personally, I can’t see how the Barbie spiel discounts the possibility of trans guys being included. You’d really have to ask the person behind this picture before you can jump to the assumption that anyone is or is not being erased.

If there were a second page, much like this one, with a little boy and an Action Man, and there was a feminine/androgynous person in the second picture who one could assume might possibly be trans, would that then fix it?

You’re obviously right about the whole body image thing, but in the end it says ‘people’, not ‘women’ (if it did, I’d have fewer qualms). FAAB kids, as I said, don’t tend to grow up into trans women - with a few exceptions, of course.

We’re both working under a tonne of assumptions, of course, but I just think it’s not right to go on about how this picture is wrong without it being in any real context or without wholly knowing what its creator intended of it.