SOME THOUGHTS ON THE COTTON CEILING

The What? you may be asking…

Essentially, the Cotton Ceiling – with reference to knickers – is the term parts of the trans community have inventively adopted for the way that, however theoretically accepting of trans people a lot of progressives may be, when it comes to actually having sex with us, they vote with their …um…feet.

This is not – to jump straight in and answer a crude debating point that has been made by the usual ‘radfem’ suspects – a matter of the trans community demanding access to cis people’s vulnerable and reluctant bodies. It’s a matter of asking the question ‘how can you say you accept us and still have – as many people do – a blanket assumption that you would never ever sleep with someone trans?’ I say ‘people’ in that sentence because the assumptions that create the cotton ceiling are not peculiar to cis, or if you prefer ‘non-trans’, people. It’s an issue to do with internalised transphobia as well, and something that a lot of trans people have to face up to in themselves. I’ve not always been as good on this as I might have been.

What I will say is that it is a huge mistake for lesbian trans women to assume that it is only their issue. For one thing, it is closely linked with the issue of ‘chasing’ of straight men who fetishize pre-operative and non-operative trans women, or lesbians who fetishize trans men (often in a way that entirely disrespects their identity and treats them as a different flavour of butch women). For another, one of the major manifestations of the ceiling in our culture is the assumption that to be attracted to someone trans throws your own sexual identity into question – that a lesbian who fancies a trans woman has somehow gone straight, that a straight man who lusts for a trans woman might as well buy the Glee collected soundtracks immediately, that a gay man who falls for a trans man is on the slide to suburbia. What is always going on is an assumption that the person is the current status of their bits, and the history of their bits.

Which is about as reductive a model of sexual attraction as I can imagine.

All of this affects all trans people. Straight trans women face the possibility that male lovers will feel obliged to defend their ‘honour’ violently just as much as lesbian trans women face the possibility that their lovers will face ostracism by all their friends – at least one of my major past relationships broke up over that, and other lovers have had to face tireseome interventions by (now former) friends.

So, in the end, my substantive point is this – the cotton ceiling exists and it’s an issue for all trans people, women, men and non-binary. It’s a matter of transpobia, including internalized transphobia. Given the fact that access to surgery or even HRT is already in the US, and may become in the UK, an economic issue and quite often a racial one too.

To pretend the cotton ceiling does not exist is to deny an important component in transphobia. To pretend that it is only a problem for lesbian trans women is to breach solidarity, to give hostages stupidly to the likes of the horrid GallusMag who is already ranting about it.

Mostly, though, we need to talk.

Advertisements

About rozkaveney

Middleaged, trans, novelist, poet, activist
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

44 Responses to SOME THOUGHTS ON THE COTTON CEILING

  1. steepholm says:

    I quite agree with all the above – only I hadn’t been aware that anyone thought it was an issue for lesbian trans women only. That seems a very, er, eccentric point of view.

  2. one of the major manifestations of the ceiling in our culture is the assumption that to be attracted to someone trans throws your own sexual identity into question – that a lesbian who fancies a trans woman has somehow gone straight, that a straight man who lusts for a trans woman might as well buy the Glee collected soundtracks immediately, that a gay man who falls for a trans man is on the slide to suburbia. What is always going on is an assumption that the person is the current status of their bits, and the history of their bits.

    I think there’s a lot of biphobia in this as well – the idea that if you’re even slightly attracted to someone of a different gender, or who might present as a different gender, or who might once have presented and/or identified as a different gender, you’re somehow not A Proper Gay. It’s a depressingly reductive way of looking at attraction, sexuality and gender. I suppose to an extent it’s about a marginalised community trying to protect itself by policing behaviour, but it happens at the expense of other marginalised groups.

    I don’t think we can go around telling people who they should and shouldn’t be attracted to, but for someone to declare dogmatically that they will *never* want to sleep with a trans person (or a bi person, or a person of colour) is prejudice, pure and simple.

    • My gut instinct is that there’s a lot of biphobia behind it. In my experience there is a lot stigma against both straight males and lesbians being attracted to anyone who could be perceived male.

    • hamsterine says:

      Yes, I think excluding whole categories of people, including theorectical individuals you haven’t even met, is.. well, it seems more like setting a rule than simply expressing a truth. The reasons behind setting oneself rules like that could certainly be seen as politically suspect.

  3. calimac says:

    I’m rather uncomfortable with applying rules of prejudice to matters as personal and subjective as sexual preference. By analogy, is my support of same-sex marriage compromised because I’m a pure vanilla heterosexual and wouldn’t want to marry a man myself? I thought liberalism consisted of not trying to enact your personal preferences as civil laws or (as Rick Santorum would) unalterable laws of the universe, and in not treating people differently on a cultural or social level because of them.

    I occasionally see people apparently assuming that approval of a legal right to do something equals personal desire to do that thing. (Once when I told the members of a fringe political party that I thought they had the right to express their views, they tried to get me to join. I found that vexing.) I think that’s a mistake. It eliminates the role of tolerance, and turns social progress from increasing tolerance into changing people’s personal tastes.

    • rozkaveney says:

      The trouble with thinking of this in this way is that, in the end, it means that trans people’s identity is being seen as somehow inauthentic. We’re not asking that people stop being straight or gay, just that they accept we are women and men. Except for those who are not.

      • cmcmck says:

        But is there not a danger of seeing the sum total of existence as pertaining to who we’re screwing/being screwed by? While sex is fun (another plain vanilla het type and of the married persuasion here) it doesn’t define any of us, trans or cis, surely?

        Would I have wanted to be bedded by someone who didn’t like me? Not a lot. Did I had problems finding guys who did like me? Nope.
        Were they any less guys for liking me? Nope! Did they have problems with me being me? not at all.

        I’m willing to accept that I may have been lucky, but…………..

      • rozkaveney says:

        As I say, in my own history, the issue was less whether or not people were attracted to me, it was whether they were prepared to let it be known that they were attracted to me, and whether or not they got hassled by other people for being attracted to me. On a couple of occasions, also, in spite of my being as far out as I can be without tattooing trans on my forehead, it was a matter of people changing their mind when I disclosed my history before moving from – as it were – the couch to the bedroom.

        At which point, things that they had explicitly mentioned as attractive – my height and strength – became signifiers of my verboten status.

      • x_mass says:

        snap – thats happend so many times

        having said that I probably had people going after me and I was just too flirt blind to notice

      • calimac says:

        I can undertake to treat transexual people as their preferred sex in social and cultural interactions, and I have acted on that, to the point where I no longer have to feel conscientious about it. (My attitude is expressed in my article on “A Game of You” in The Sandman Papers.) How I would feel on a personal sexual level, however, I don’t know. I’m not prepared to speak for my reactions without the experience, and as I’m a monogamous married man, the opportunity isn’t going to arise. Unlike (apparently) many men, I’m not sexually attracted to hardly anybody de novo. But I can say that, for me, sexual attraction is very much a subset and consequence of romantic attraction, and this has in the past led me to relationships with women whom I would not have previously guessed would have elicited my interest. That is all I can say about that, and if it’s not good enough, I’m sorry.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Roz, thank you for writing this. This has been my experience, over and over again, since coming out thirteen years ago. Always the same line: “you’d be perfect, is only you were a cis man/woman”. An obsession with my genitals. My partners being bullied/interrogated about what we actually do in bed/having their sexualities questioned/mocked. Prospective partners too frightened by what they’d ‘be’ if they went to bed with me to actually do it.

    Love and desire are so precious – I don’t understand how anyone could run away from them because of transphobia.

    Trans masculine/andro kind of person here.

    • marypcb says:

      I think I’d find some variant of Groucho applying for me in the ‘you’d be perfect’ circumstances along the lines of it being a lucky escape not to be with someone who could be that shallow, but I expect that puts the cold in comfort. I’m glad the ex who once told me they’d love me more if I were thinner grew out of those kinds of prejudice.

  5. marypcb says:

    I feel very naive for having my first thought be ‘but isn’t it whether you’re attracted to the person’ because I do know a lot of it’s mediated through culture and what that tells us we’re allowed to feel/desire.

  6. hamsterine says:

    That’s not an expression I’ve heard of before, or something I’ve actually encountered.

    Personally, what I’ve always found is that that the more femme I present my clothing etc, the more people try to have sex with me. The more masculine I dress, the fewer people do (which is not to say that they weren’t a select and appealing few, for the most part). This applies equally regardless of my hormone levels, the secondary sexual characteristics these create, and therefore the genitals that people are assuming I have when they do or don’t cruise me.

    I also think it’s useful to point out that some of us have more of a straightforward preference for certain types of genitals whereas other people’s preference is genuinely about gender. I think mine is a valid preference.. well, I would think that 😉 But some trans people are going to feel that this creates untoward focus on their operative status. In fact I think it’s not about treating trans people differently to cis people, but similarly. If I met a cis woman that I was attracted to I’d probably say, if it seemed appropriate “you’re hot- if you had a cock I’d sleep with you in a second!” and if I knew her well enough to think it wouldn’t cause her to feel bad in some way I’d say the same to a post-op trans woman. Sex is, after all, often about doing stuff to people’s genitals, and people often make decisions to have sex or not based on what the other person’s genitals are actually like. Cruising for someone with a big penis is a common example.

    All this is very different to someone saying “I would totally have slept with that post-op trans person before I realised they were trans, but now I don’t want to any more.” I’ve heard of people saying this, although never encountered it first hand. It does strike me as very odd that a person’s history rather than their physical reality can have such an effect on whether they seem sexually attractive or not. Partly I wonder if this is about the nitty gritty of genitals and what they are like again, though. I think one would wonder, and in some cases be right to wonder, if surgically constructed genitals would stand up to close scrutiny or whether they might in fact seem a bit odd. I’ll be the first to admit that my phalloplasty is crap in many ways, that I’d rather have a penis that grew naturally, and I’d probably rather fuck one too.

    • hamsterine says:

      Also, I note that for a lot of people having sex can be linked to getting emotionally involved, a lot more than it usually is for me. In such cases I imagine people would be thinking a lot about the sort of stuff that potential partners might have going on for them and whether they could be bothered to share in it the way romantic partners so often do. It’s harsh and not in any way fair to say “you know what, I have enough of my own crap to deal with, I can’t be bothered to take on someone else’s problems right now if those problems are too big” but at least it’s better to say that at the beginning than to start a relationship, then say it and leave. Problems that seem “too big” could be anything from the person having children to raise (which is probably not seen as a problem to a person who likes and chose to have children yet would seem problematic to a potential partner who wouldn’t chose the same) to trans-related problems like body dysphoria and transphobia. Some types of problem seem bigger to some people than others, which mainly highlights areas which they are bad at dealing with.

      I think people aren’t “fair” in what they want, for the most part, they are just more or less decent in how they go about getting it.

      I’m not saying this to “excuse” people who can’t deal with, for example, transphobia directed at their partner (and themselves by association. Pragmatically, what trans person wants a partner who is completely useless and freaked out, and makes that stuff into an even bigger deal than it already is? I think that if a person find this stuff too hard to deal with they are right to exclude themselves from our dating pool until such time as they learn to deal with it better, because we as much as they simply don’t need the hassle.

  7. x_mass says:

    you should be coming to BiCon I the only tranny i know who deosn’t seem to end up going out with someone, most of the trans people I know there are poly and seem to spend their time discussing the issues of multiple relationships….

    but cotton ceiling +10

  8. x_mass says:

    access to surgery isn’t just economic its physiological

    you can nnly have surgery if you fit within physiological crietria since the surgery is ‘cosmetic’ i.e. not crtical to survival

    weigh too much and you can wait your entire life and not get surgery

  9. when i first started transition all of my friends felt it was important to inform me that they wouldn’t ever be attracted to a transwoman. this came along with stuff like, “i can hit you because you’re not really a girl.” (in the context of me and a ciswoman giving him grief about something. the message being, while i can’t use violence against women, i can against you because your gender doesn’t count.)

    so for me the, cotton ceiling is about using sexual attraction to justify violence against people, and for erasing the victimization people experience and to deny them access to help.

  10. Anonymous says:

    “Cotton ceiling” is a cute phrase for it, but you’re right, it is absolutely a serious issue for trans people. Two examples that have driven the point home to me:

    In my gender support group, several years ago, one of the regulars was a trans man. One evening he shared the difficulties that transition had led to in his relationship. He and his partner had been a lesbian couple, and one of her early objections to his transition was, “Damned if you’ll make a straight woman out of me!” (Spoiler alert: the story has a happy ending; they’re still very much together.) But the fact that *his* transition challenged *her* identity illustrates what you’re saying — that cis people can feel it as a threat to their own self-understanding when they’re attracted to a trans person.

    The other example comes from a year and a half ago, when I first moved to Atlanta. I came here for the job (from Ann Arbor, via a couple of years in Louisville), so I didn’t know anyone except my work colleagues. One of the ways I worked to remedy that was to sign up for an online dating service. I’m bi (or maybe I should say gender-neutral) in my attractions, so I thought that should actually widen the field of possibilities. And I had a reasonable number of contacts, both sent and received, but as soon as the topic of my transness came up, they never got past the e-mail stage. I finally re-wrote my profile to start with, “I’m a transsexual woman. If that’s a problem for you, please look at someone else’s profile. Now, if you’re still reading…” Still, nobody cis was interested, but I did get a very enticing note from another middle-aged trans woman. Long story short, we’ve been together since the fall of 2010. 🙂

    I now have lots of friends here, as well as in places I’ve lived previously, and I’m quite close to some of them. But in the seven years since I started transition, not one cis person has ever showed attraction to me. I really don’t think it’s because I’m a repellant person; it’s pretty clear to me that the cotton ceiling is real.

    • cmcmck says:

      You may have something here and it maybe explains why I haven’t had the issues some people are plainly experiencing. I’m in a long term het relationship which became a marriage when the legalities finally allowed it here in the UK, so am no longer looking. I transitioned and undertook GCS long before social networking, dating sites and the like had become everyday reality (late seventies) so in a sense, if I wanted relationships, I had to go looking (admittedly, being a postgrad student helped in that regard :o)

      There’s also the small matter that I’m woodworked which was the only safe way to be back in the day and it simply became habit.

      • maellenkleth says:

        In my experience (she said, writing these words from a business-club desk in Edmonton, the capital of Canada’s most Tory-ridden province), being in the woodwork is still the way to go.

        I shudder to think of what might befall me, should my colleagues at the colliery ever discern my long-ago personal history.

        From what I can discern, from my isolated perch at the far corner of the Internet, near-real-time connectivity has been a mixed blessing to us as a people.

      • valeriekeefe says:

        I live in the same city… it seems fairly okay, though you have to deal with the occasional asshat. (And yes, it’s worth it, and not only that, it makes life better for the more vulnerable among us.)

  11. marjaerwin says:

    I think this has been coming up in the lesbian community, more often than the straight community, because trans lesbians see both sides of the taboo, while trans straights only see one side of it. And it’s coming up in the lesbian community, more often than the gay men’s community, because there are more transitioned lesbians than transitioned gay men.

    An asexual trans womon is unlikely to be attracted to another trans womon.

    A straight trans womon is unlikely to be attracted to another trans womon.

    A pansexual trans womon is quite likely to be attracted to another trans womon, but if the second trans womon has a penis she might explain it away as a straight or queer attraction.

    A lesbian trans womon is quite likely to be attracted to another trans womon, and if the second trans womon has a penis she may realize this is still a lesbian attraction.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Thank you, darling, for a clear voice amid the vile and incoherent noise on this topic. Mwah!

  13. Anonymous says:

    I agree that there is bi-phobia here bigtime. I’m bi. What that means to me is I’m monogamous. If my partner now had been a different gender when I met him, I would have loved him the same. If my partner becomes a different gender I will love her the same. If my partner no longer wants to identify as male or female, I will love hir the same. And that’s that. What other people think is what they can cram where the sun don’t shine. If people can’t admit what they desire and who they truly love they are not fully realized dynamic quality human beings. The cotton ceiling has long existed for bisexuals, too. We can stay silent or we can say “fuck you, too.”, step out of the identity politics circle jerk our scenes can sometimes be, and find someone to love out in the wilds of society. There are 6 billion or more people on the planet. There are many somebodies out there for everybody.

  14. Anonymous says:

    It took me over a week dear Roz, but I finally got round to writing your a response. It’s detailed: http://lastofthecleanbohemians.wordpress.com/2012/04/07/tranny-shaggers/

  15. Anonymous says:

    Why shouldn’t a lesbian, of which I am one, decide that she only wants to sleep with women – and by women I mean people with female bodies. In my book, that is the definition of a lesbian. I am not being prejudiced by declaring i will never sleep with men or never sleep with Trans people with male bodies, I am simply stating my preference as a lesbian.

    I think actually it is quite arrogant for Trans people to tell lesbians what their definition of a lesbian should be.

    • rozkaveney says:

      I’ve chosen to answer this at length in a later post – and may I say that I generally regard it as polite of people to sign their comments on my live journal?

    • Anonymous says:

      Sorry for the late comment, but…

      The thing is, trans women are women. Some of them have a penis, some of them do not. Either way, they are still-female bodied, because the person inhabiting the body is female. Grok? It’s not the body nor the body parts that are male or female. “Lesbian” doesn’t just mean “a person with a vagina that likes people with vaginas”, just as “gay” doesn’t just mean “a person with a penis that likes people with penises”. It’s women loving women, and men loving men. Saying someone is male or female bodied because of their genitals reduces someone down to what is in their pants.

      It’s not arrogance. It’s trying to get people to realize that genitals aren’t the only thing that matters, and that saying you love WOMEN or MEN means trans women and trans men, too.

      You’re allowed to refuse anyone sex. It’s the motive behind it that is upsetting people. The motive sees to be “sorry, but you’re not a real woman”/”man”.

  16. Anonymous says:

    No problem signing my comment but just didn’t know how to. My name is Lesley.

  17. Anonymous says:

    I didn’t know how to post my name and am more than happy to share it. My name is Lesley.

  18. Anonymous says:

    The term was created by Drew Deveaux and refers specifically to lesbians/queer women not to non-trans people in general. Maybe in practice it will stretch to mean more than that but the term was coined to refer specifically to lesbians.

    Lesbians have sex with trans men. That suggests the issue is not transphobia.

    As to disrespecting trans men identity, I am sure the trans men know when they are having sex with lesbians. If it bothers the trans men then they should stop having sex with lesbians because it’s pretty obvious the lesbians didn’t suddenly turn hetero. Trans men probably realize the likelihood of having sex with a non-trans straight woman is practically nil. I bet very few gay men have sex with trans men either. There is really no reason why lesbians and trans men shouldn’t have sex if they turn each other on.

    I read in another article on this topic that out of respect for trans men lesbians should question why they are willing to have sex with trans men but not cis men. There is nothing to question. Lesbians have sex with trans men because trans men are still biologically female which is what attracts lesbians. I guess the trans men are fine with it as long as socially they are accepted as men.

    Ironically, it’s in large part due to access to better surgical outcomes that narrows the field of sex partners for trans women. Those who are post surgical no longer have what would attract gay men nor do they have what attracts most lesbians regardless of whether the trans woman is pre or post op.

    Aren’t trans people warned by doctors about how their operations are going to affect the pool of prospective sex partners? Are they not told that they will be sexually rejected by almost all non-trans people with the exception of pan/bisexual or queer people, and many that do accept them will still mostly do so on the basis of their original sex assignment?

    According to the medical community trans people have a psychological illness which is aided by surgery. Maybe that isn’t true. Maybe there is some biological basis, but until proof exists, and even after that, most non-trans people base their sexual attraction on original genitalia when choosing sex partners, not gender. That’s not transphobia.That’s a justifiable sexual preference.

    • rozkaveney says:

      Um, my problem was never with my pool of sexual partners so much as with the friends who gave them a hard time for sleeping with me. Those of my friends who went stealth never had a problem, either those who were straight or those who were lesbian or gay – there is no magic that lets sexual partners know your past if you don’t choose to disclose it and happen to pass. Both of these facts indicate that what you are seeing is based either on ignorance or bigotry.

      And when I asked Drew, she said that she had always meant to open the question out, and was grateful to me and CN Lester for moving it on.

      You are talking about sexual preference in this area as if it were not a social construction. Yet you would not say that about someone who would reject a lover if they discovered they had a mixed heritage.

      • rozkaveney says:

        Your assumption that no gay men want to sleep with gay trans men is baseless as everything else you say – why do you think that you can pull factual information out of the aether and not get called on it.

      • Anonymous says:

        If I were blind-folded I could be sexually aroused by anyone? Does that mean I’m bisexual? ‘Passing’ is no different than placing a blind-fold over someone’s eyes within a sexual encounter. This is because people are assuming gender presentation is representative of biological sex and are therefore turned on. Trans people know this assumption is being made and know that it will probably affect the individual’s decision on whether or not to pursue a sexual or romantic encounter. To interact sexually under deliberate false pretenses feels like rape to me and it doesn’t prove transphobia. All it proves is that the victim was blind-folded and sexually humiliated, betrayed by their own body.

        I agree that socially it is no ones business what other people do or don’t have between their legs or when or how it got there. Intimacy is different.

        What are therapists saying to people prior to transitioning? Do they not warn trans women that non-trans lesbians, gays and straight men are unlikely to accept them as sexual partners? Do therapists not say that it is dishonest to lead someone into a sexual relationship without disclosing biological sex? These are serious questions. I really do want to know if you don’t mind sharing.

        Gisele (sorry I didn’t sign my last post)

      • rozkaveney says:

        The analogy between stealth and blindfolding is extraordinarily insulting to everyone concerned – because the lovers of stealth trans men and women know everything about them except for one fact about their history. And the accusation that trans people who don’t regard that fact as relevant are rapists is peculiarly vile and stupid.

        Therapists do not tell people they will never find a partner because that is not true. The reason for this whole debate is that – because it is not true – the fact some people do obsess about the trans history of potential partners while others do not needs explanation.

        It’s ironic that trans-exclusionary lesbian feminists have gone on, in this debate, about shame and coercion being used by trans people, because, if we look at the historical evidence about the period when trans women were excluded from much lesbian space – Geri Nettick/Beth Elliott’s MIRRORS is a good account – shaming and coercion were precisely the methods used.

      • rozkaveney says:

        The other reason why your argument is dodgy is that you originally implied that the source of reluctance to sleep with trans people was an innate physical repulsion. When I pointed out that stealth means that no such innate repulsion can exist, you talk of bodies betraying people. Isn’t that a rather drastic shifting of goalposts? And aren’t you making some rather odd assumptions about sexuality?

      • rozkaveney says:

        Also, to revert to your previous comment, if you think trans people who don’t disclose their history to partners are guilty of rape, why do you defend cis people who refuse to recognize trans identity as authentic and have sex with trans people while disrespecting their sense of their own identity? Surely, if you are going to start flinging accusations of rape around they should apply at least equally to lesbians who sleep with trans men while not making it clear that they don’t regard this as indicating their own bisexuality, but refuse to acknowledge their partner’s truth. (But then, you don’t seem to have any problem whatever with patronizing people.)

    • mackelzinzie says:

      I was recently sleeping with a gay trans man. I am not lesbian. He apparently is able to date other men.

      It wouldn’t have been ok if I had treated him like a woman. I didn’t see him as a woman. I was attracted to his masculinity, and accepted his pussy. It’s ridiculous to imply that the only thing that can turn someone on is another person’s genitals.

      Fuck you, you apparently objectify everyone based on their genitals.

  19. mackelzinzie says:

    cotton ceiling is a good word for it.

    I have a hard time understanding. I am a genderqueer person with a lot of privelege and luck, with the potential to be attracted to any gender of person with any arrangement of bits, if they are nice to me and respect me and seem like they would be fun to have sex with. And all genders and theoretical sexualities have hooked up with me (unfortunately, some of that involved pretending I was the “appropriate” gender).

    So I know all of this happens, I’ve seen it, and I’ve even received some of it, but I don’t understand the fear. No transphobic person has ever explained it to me in a way that I understood. Even “allies” made me feel like punching them on occasion. Isn’t sex to have fun with another person? It’s about giggling, looking each other in the eyes, or maybe flogging someone until they scream. I understand wanting pussy, or cock, specifically, but I don’t see how that is a critical factor more important than chemistry.

    The other day someone was attracted to me. I was in drag as a woman. He realized I was in drag and got upset that he might be gay. He confronted me about not being a woman, and I said I’m not a dude. He sighed in relief, and I rolled my eyes. I said, what does that make you, then, if I’m not a chick either? He told me the reason he thought I was a woman was that I looked at him like he was a piece of shit, and drag queens usually don’t do that. I told him that maybe his actually being a piece of shit might be a more likely explanation than my being a woman.

  20. rozkaveney says:

    Poor naive little country mouse…My emotional life over the last thirty years would seem to prove you wrong, but obviously you believe you know better than they do the sexuality of my various women lovers.

    Or perhaps you are wrong? Wrong about them, wrong about me, wrong about life and love and feminism.

    You believe people should not transgress boundaries. Perhaps you should not trespass in matters that do not concern you.

    And mis-spelling slang is not cute but infantile.

    • I know well what is to be a women and feminism because TA DA i’m a female, with vagina, uterus, progesterona, cromossomes XX, to be women is not a “feeling” is reality
      feminism is all around females, not males, there is no such a thing as trans feminism.
      haha a male feminist?JOOOOOOKE hayahaha

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s