Angel

First Gamer Pope!?!?!?

I disobeyed the title.

Growing up in a West Indian family that regularly used habanero peppers in the sauces and food we ate makes this the most alien thing I've ever read with my own two eyes.

Relevant maymay:

I consider myself demi and pan, and what they're saying is very much relatable with how I feel.

That explains his daughter's name!

This Movie:

Oh, that's definitely not the implication, comrade.

And this is what gender abolitionists like myself believe in, hence my comment here tying in perfectly, the one starting with "I honestly hold it to be a semantic argument..." These semantic discrepancies are what got me to reject the notion of gender abolitionism initially. I don't base my view of the existence of trans people off of conditioning like you mentioned, and that isn't an inherent part of proper gender abolitionist views. Any gender abolitionist with a proper grasp on how gender works in this society will not see it that way, but the same can't be said for TERFs. TERFs don't often manifest this kind of thinking because they try to have bioessentialism and gender abolition co-exist, which is just nonsensical on their part. I was exactly thinking the same way as you before I understood these things, so I understand where you're coming from for sure. This knowledge may not do the same for everyone, but in my personal experience, I found so much more comfort, peace, and liberation in my gender (or lack thereof) once these realizations hit.

Honestly, I wrote up a response similar to this to @EelBolshevikism@hexbear.net, but I didn't want to seem argumentative. I just hope to be educational and clarify what trans-affirming gender abolitionists believe in. Here it is:

"I don't agree that total social constructionism is genuinely transphobic. I also don't think your dichotomy is accurate here. To say that 'If sex is entirely socially constructed, then the only potentially applicable explanation for dysphoria is that it's caused by submitting to patriarchal norms and nothing else can possibly be the explanation for such a feeling whatsoever' presents that false dichotomy. Let me ask you this: why must those only be the two options?

When people say gender and/or sex is socially constructed, they're not necessarily saying that the 'feelings' around gender/sex aren't real. If gender/sex were abolished, what we now know as masculinity and femininity could still exist. If gender/sex were abolished, what we now know as gender dysphoria could still exist. If gender/sex were abolished, you're still gonna have your genitals, hormones, and characteristics of 'biological sex' as people know it. It's just that these things would all take on a different outlook. These things wouldn't have an idea of 'gender' tied to them. Gender abolitionists seek this reality because it liberates people from how seemingly concrete gender is placed as an expectation within society.

Gender and sex are made up categories regardless of the things we categorize within them. Dysphoria could be innate to trans people, but the way we have gendering around it obviously is entirely a social construct. A very non-gendered way explain the manifestation of a trans person would be something like:

Person is born with penis and gonads that produce testosterone.

Person doesn't like effects of this testosterone hormone.

They take pills to increase the presence of the other hormone instead and seek out other features they would rather have such as longer hair, a bigger chest, and a higher-pitched voice. They feel much happier afterwards.

No where in that explanation did I mention gender. Although, this kind of reality sounds unimaginable because of how deeply gender is woven into society, nothing is saying that the hypothetical trans person in this scenario would be unable to be uncomfortable with the way testosterone impacts their body. That's something that could theoretically occur regardless if you tie a social construction of gender or sex to that discomfort or not.

It's effectively the same thing as:

Person is born with male features.

Person grows up and develops as a man and doesn't like it.

They undergo procedures and changes to look like a woman instead, and now they feel more comfortable.

The difference is that this latter example is gendered, and it's the way many people would look at it as things stand now. We don't really need to have an 'explanation' for dysphoria in particular to validate it. To be honest, we don't have a perfectly definitive explanation as to why people experience gender dysphoria now, and the same could honestly be said about homosexuality even. This does not mean that gender dysphoria and homosexuality aren't real things people experience. The simplest explanation that I wish people could accept for queer people is: it be like that sometimes (seriously)."

There are some trans people who effectively argue that "If you assert that gender and sex are socially constructed and can be abolished, you're basically saying that my transness/dysphoria isn't real when it feels very real," and that interpretation leads to quite a lot of trans people opposing this abolitionist viewpoint. I know because I used to be one of them, even though I am non-binary. The Gender Accelerationist Manifesto cured my ignorance there. I only learned to properly understand what gender abolition is about after reading that, so I don't fault trans people who don't have as coherent of an understanding of such a position.