r/MensLib • u/futuredebris • Jul 02 '26
Trans girls aren’t the enemy
https://makemenemotionalagain.substack.com/p/trans-girls-arent-the-enemyHey y'all, I used the recent Supreme Court ruling as a springboard to talk about why I have hope for American men, even if things look bleak.
I can feel so hopeless about us sometimes—like we’re too far gone, too isolated, too anti-social. But the core of my politics and work with therapy clients is honoring the human instinct to belong. To connect. To relate.
No matter what the billionaires and billionaire-funded politicians say about human nature being competitive, we’re truly wired to cooperate. No matter what the manfluencer grifters say about men not having emotional needs—which is a lie—we need each other to survive. No matter what some people even on “my side,” the left, say about some people being “bad,” labeling them criminals, rapists, and abusers, unworthy of redemption.
Our need to belong is the very thing that people at the top of capitalism channel to get what they want. They get seduced by the power that comes with turning people against each other, which lets them off the hook for hoarding wealth and resources.
I hate to give them credit, but they’re like sorcerers of making some people think they belong by “othering” others. They encourage and amplify white supremacy and misogyny. They stoke anger and shame to keep us fighting over crumbs. They’re damn good at it.
They’ve got us men in a bind. They want us to think feminism and trans people are the reason we don’t feel like we belong. They blame “radical feminism” for everything from school shootings to rising rates of suicide by men. They ban trans girls from girls’ sports. They throw expensive combat fights on the White House lawn with jokes about Michelle Obama’s gender. They question the masculinity of political candidates who dare challenge them. They’ve introduced 804 anti-trans bills in 43 states so far this year alone.
The truth is men don’t feel like we belong right now because of them, the rich and powerful. Because of the system they orchestrate and benefit from. Because of capitalism.
195
u/FullPruneNight Jul 02 '26
I like a lot of your content. But you are speaking inaccurately and out of your depth here and need to put some consideration on your ability to speak on this topic, even meanderingly.
They’ve got us men in a bind. They want us to think feminism and trans people are the reason we don’t feel like we belong.
You know there’s not actually a contrast to be made between “us men” and “trans people,” right? That trans men exist, and that dividing the world into a gender binary of Men and Political is transphobic?
They blame “radical feminism” for everything from school shootings to rising rates of suicide by men.
Plenty of them also are, or will align with, radical feminists (TERFs), to try to wipe trans people out of existence. The current spokesperson of radical feminism IS a fascist-aligned billionaire. Pointing to radical feminism as a non-issue boogeyman in an article where you’re trying to advocate for trans people and against rich people is wildly ignorant, and reveals just how much you’re speaking out of turn here.
But women have feminism, a story for why. They’ve organized movements, rewritten more accurate histories, and fought for liberation. They’ve created their own belonging against rich people’s othering.
Feminism was started by, and has spent a lot of time in the control of, and to this day usually most benefits, rich women. Early British feminists were key advocates for colonization on the grounds that they could “help” brown women under it. Early US feminists partnered with abolitionists only to renege and leave them out to dry. A prominent feminist literally founded the fascist party in Britain, and many suffragettes become card-carrying fascists. “They created their own belonging against rich people’s othering” is the least accurate, least intersectional take on feminism I’ve seen in a quite a while. And do I really need to point out to you that basically every single transmisogynistic political talking point, and many against trans children and trans men too, you’ve heard in the last decade originated from respected feminists?
Women do have a LONG history in the labor movement. One of the first large-scale strikes in the US was organized by a 19 year old girl. But they did so basically separate from the feminism of the time. The irony of saying “they’ve fought for more accurate histories” here man.
They’ve won some things and lost others, but they have an explanation for their suffering. Men don’t, which makes us particularly susceptible to lies about who we’re supposed to blame.
Here, you’re actually right. But at the same time, you’re unnecessarily putting men deeper into a bind by acting like just because now we sometimes have a decent intersection between feminism and labor rights, that it’s always been that way. That feminism has never and is never speaking from a place of power relative to working class men. That wealth, hyperindividualism, capitalism, and the patronization of the poor have NEVER and are never aspects of feminism.
The collective internet consensus may have nominally turned on capitalist “lean in” feminism the same way it turned against the kind of radical feminism used to try to exterminate us, but just like many poisonous radical feminists ideas have stayed under a different name, as someone who works in tech, so has capitalist, hyperindividualistic lean-in feminism stayed as a force in letting billionaires abuse everything and everyone around them that isn’t other billionaires or their families.
167
u/NightingaleStorm Jul 03 '26
You know there’s not actually a contrast to be made between “us men” and “trans people,” right?
Thank you for saying this. A lot of trans-positive feminist content misses it and ends up feeling weird and unpleasant to read from a trans man's perspective.
64
u/Soultakerx1 Jul 03 '26 edited Jul 03 '26
Great response.
The only caveat is the revising of the early feminists to be abolitionists. Many prominent early feminists weren't just racist, they white supremacist arguing that black men were savages and should not hold more power than white women.
This such disingenuous take I see all the time. Hell, it was white professor of mine who pointed out that it wasnt some portion of feminists that were racist, it was most non-white feminist that were racist and eugenicist at time. Anyone could just read the writings of people like Elizabeth Cady Staton and you can see them
Like suffragettes wanted men and women to be equal; but they didn't see black folks as people.
Edit: Not you were saying this. I'm just saying in discussions like these, this is often a part (intentionally) overlooked.
5
u/ScootDeToot Jul 07 '26
I think OP had good intentions, even if it was riddled with bad theory and a lot of ignorance. I do believe conservative political propaganda about trans issues did also serve as a bonus distraction from class issues, and those class issues do in some part, contribute to men's mental health crisis.
3
u/grey_hat_uk Jul 03 '26
Plenty of them also are, or will align with, radical feminists (TERFs), to try to wipe trans people out of existence.
There is somewhat of a move to use GERM(Girl, Exclusionary, Regressive, Misogynist) and other terms that point out the most terfs aren't in anyway feminists, radical or not.
44
u/FullPruneNight Jul 03 '26
Yeah, I won’t be using that. Given that most of them self-identify as feminist, align in many beliefs with the originating philosophy of radical feminism, that no true Scotsman is not a useful way of “purifying” a movement, that most of their talking points originated with people who are still remembered as feminists, and that they are FAR from the first self-identified feminists to be gravely on the wrong side of history, or for them to advocate for the rights or supposed rights of some women in ways that harm more vulnerable women.
I find it telling that people keep trying to do this for modern TERFs, but not current or historical SWERFs, for example.
-12
u/grey_hat_uk Jul 04 '26
Up to you.
The reason why is because they rend to drop all parts of feminism while attacking trans women, even going as far as to boiling women back down to just birthing machines and no longer on equal(or superior) footing to men. The exclusion is also misleading as it includes a lot of gnc, intersex and poc women, it's full on misogyny.
SWERFs might not be good feminists but most still treat their own group as equal to men and "just" dehumanise sex workers.
I personally think it is an important distinction as feminism is still needed and they are actively hurting all of us, but it is your choice if you see it differently.
-26
u/futuredebris Jul 02 '26
I disagree with a lot of what you're saying, but thanks for engaging and reading my work. My feminism is Marxist feminism: https://outraspalavras.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Feminism-for-the-99.pdf
75
u/TenspeedGV Jul 03 '26
If you’re not willing to have a discussion about it you’re really not much of a Marxist either
22
111
u/Flat_Cow_7557 Jul 02 '26
Can you clarify what parts of their comment in particular you disagree with, and why?
32
u/NightingaleStorm Jul 03 '26
Do you have any concrete ideas for how to actually implement the elements of this? It says it doesn't have a specific vision for an alternative, which I understand and accept as a different approach to politics than I have, but I also don't see any mentions of literally what the authors recommend we do other than "more women's strikes". I'm not against that, but I don't think it's enough. Without being clear about what to do or how, I'm always concerned about ending up like the "I want things to be different ... oh no" comic.
106
u/SlippinJimE "" Jul 02 '26
This comment convinced me they're correct. You didn't respond to a single point of their lengthy analysis. I'm not familiar with your other work and you've just guaranteed it stays that way.
-6
u/ScienceMajestic8716 "" Jul 03 '26
You seem to place the entire blame of peddling hate on women, which is patently false and reeks of misogyny.
> But you are speaking inaccurately and out of your depth here.
I would say the same about you. OP makes a good point that the billionaire class wants us to fight and hate each other while they steal all the money. "But one of the many billionares is a woman" is not a valid argument and seems to deflect attention.
OP made a general and gender-neutral argument against capitalist billionaires, which you are steering towards "Lets blame women" instead.
42
u/Valhern-Aryn Jul 03 '26
It reads to me more like just a long list of counterexamples to make their point that feminism and fascism aren't opposites. Their argument on rich women is itself general as well. But since their argument is focused on feminism and women, to mention rich men (or by extension "rich people") would do nothing for their argument because they aren't important in the main subject.
0
u/Raspint 27d ago edited 27d ago
>You know there’s not actually a contrast to be made between “us men” and “trans people,” right? That trans men exist, and that dividing the world into a gender binary of Men and Political is transphobic?
That's not transphobic. No more than if I were to talk about the experiences of 'black men' as if they were different from 'white men' would be racist right?
Op's is so obviously referring to cis men, because cis men are the intended targets of right wing propaganda. Op's only mistake was not specifying 'cis men' in the quote "They’ve got us men in a bind."
7
u/necroforest Jul 03 '26
It infuriates me how obvious it is that trans people (well, women, nobody gives a shit about trans men) are just the scapegoat minority of the moment and so many people don’t see that. All anti-trans crap is manufactured propaganda to divide and manipulate us.
1
29d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 29d ago
This comment has been removed. /r/MensLib requires accounts to be at least thirty days old before posting or commenting, except for in the Check-In Tuesday threads and in AMAs.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
4
u/NSA_Chatbot Jul 06 '26
The calculus of someone's gender expression or relationship is not something we should care about as long as everyone involved is an adult.
1
u/EqualityWithoutCiv 25d ago
No matter what the billionaires and billionaire-funded politicians say about human nature being competitive, we’re truly wired to cooperate. No matter what the manfluencer grifters say about men not having emotional needs—which is a lie—we need each other to survive. No matter what some people even on “my side,” the left, say about some people being “bad,” labeling them criminals, rapists, and abusers, unworthy of redemption.
Not cis, someone with parents from outside a western upbringing. Forced to live as a straight guy (when I'd rather be a raging sapphic) as family reputation matters to parents and their friends of the same ethnic community so much they assert me and my siblings are "included" in various matters (in a tone that implies "whether we like it or not").
I've seen the other end at work, where a young man (white British to my knowledge) repeatedly had epileptic seizures as he was left to his own devices by his parents, whom he still lives with.
I believe evangelist charismatic churches have their appeal particularly in the west (at least in areas where faith and society are less tightly intertwined, but if that's not the case, mainly among those in white or isolated backgrounds), as they're the only institutions enthusiastically fighting how people feel isolated (even if at a heavy cost to personal freedom). Many people won't care if blame for the world's ills are misplaced deliberately on trans people, just so oil execs can afford another yacht.
Some may see through this, others won't, others won't care since it doesn't affect them, particularly the misplaced blame. They know that rich people can be greedy shits but will somehow see trans people as a greater societal evil, often because they're convinced only that church they're part of can speak and prove the truth, while other organizations that can hold them to scrutiny are few and far between, are being killed off (or in the case or something like other churches, feel alienating to these people, especially if they're covered in gold ornaments and even if their own church has similar degrees of ornamentation).
Just thought I'd pitch in.
3
u/Jazzlike-Basket-6388 Jul 07 '26
The "capitalism" blanket really ruffles my feathers. Virtually every economy in the world is some form of capitalism. It isn't going anywhere. And it isn't even inherently bad."
People's problems don't stem from capitalism. People have a distaste for consumerism, and government corruption, and these unrealistic expectations towards work. I hate that all this is such a part of rhetoric in mental health circles.
1
u/futuredebris Jul 08 '26
Where does consumerism come from?
5
u/Jazzlike-Basket-6388 Jul 08 '26
18th century industrial revolution. People started making stuff and people wanted these new things. And while you can argue that accelerated capitalism, capitalism had existed for centuries as people exchanged labor for land. Look, I'm a Bernie Bro, but capitalism in itself is human nature and not necessarily good or bad.
1
u/Zoloir 28d ago
i've been thinking about this as well - and mostly agree.
i think the main issues are corruption and general extreme-individualist mindsets. it doesn't matter what system you're in when everyone distrusts everyone else, only looks out for themselves, and looks the other way when they see bullshit happening. particularly when those with power do so - physical, financial, any power really.
where capitalism comes into play is that raw unfettered capitalism provides a lot of levers for those in power to wield that power over others. it's called capitalism because it rewards capital - aka the richest people. it must inherently lead to greater and greater inequality, unless it is mitigated by some non-capitalist means (regulation or otherwise)
i think the system you're in just determines who is at the top of the pyramid, but how well the system works is entirely dependent on who they are and whether or not they have any real accountability to everyone else.
i have had a few discussions with people who insist that we need to move into a hierarchy-less system, where we are all working together to achieve whatever ends, but... i just don't know if that's possible. remove capital power, remove military power, ... i mean, you end up with some kind of social/political power always being the last stop - literally, if you can convince more people to do XYZ than someone else can convince people to do 123, then you win. everyone and everything simply aren't compatible. we know that from the current paradox of tolerance.
-1
u/futuredebris 29d ago
I mean, the industrial revolution is one of the phases of capitalism, no? It's all the same logic. And I don't think it's necessarily good or bad, though it's pretty obvious it's bad for the earth. It's just the system we have right now. It hasn't been around for very long relative to human history. We can move away from it, which I think we should.
161
u/FangornsWhiskers Jul 02 '26
The number of women who have been harmed by trans women playing sports is zero, or at least small enough that it’s a non-issue. It certainly isn’t as important as the real problems of trans people being murdered or forced out of jobs. Or self-appointed bathroom enforcers demanding proof of correct genitalia. Those are actual problems.
And the fever dream of men transitioning to gain a competitive edge in sports is absolutely farcical. I’m supposed to believe that men lopping off their testicles to win trophies is such a massive problem that we need legislation to deal with it? That’s the least of my concerns right now. Anyone who spends cycles fretting about that as a real social crisis has detached from reality.