This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/truscum by /u/thinking_feller on 2024-10-01 19:53:49+00:00.

I think what bothers me so much about people who are 100% feminine but call themselves “transmasc” is the fact that it’s just so damn imprecise.

Like, sure, they can have the internal experience of maleness or transness–whatever that may be like for them–and I’m not saying they’re not allowed to identify with maleness in any type of way, but if they have willingly done NOTHING to masculinize themselves and just straight up aren’t mascuiline… how does the term “transmasc” reflect their experience at all?

And these people love to say “you wouldn’t call a feminine cis man a woman!” and they’re right, I wouldn’t, but I wouldn’t call them masc, either. Masculinity is 100% social stereotypes and it has ZERO substance other than what society commonly categorizes as male traits. I’m not saying the traits themselves have no substance, just the fact that they’re “masculine.” If God were to somehow delete the concept of traits being associated with men, then masculinity just wouldn’t exist at all.

Some people feel inclined to certain behaviors and traits which happen to be associated with men. Those people are masculine, and they can be any gender. Some people feel inclined to certain behaviors and traits which happen to be associated with women. Those people are feminine, and they can be any gender. Most people feel a mix of the two, and there’s varying degrees of androgyny.

It’s not my business to know or say if they’re really a man or a woman or anything in between, but I genuinely can’t figure out the logic of calling themselves transmasc.