# orderedItems[].content
Trans femme "male socialization" is an assertion that has been thoroughly debunked, repeatedly over the years, by trans women coming together to speak about our experiences amongst each other.

Like many trans women, initially I learned to think of my experiences as "male socialization", that this was being accountable, that this was being reasonable, that this was being feminist - despite how dramatically different (and dramatically worse, in a gendered way) my experiences of life were from any man I had ever met, much less grown up with. But, I shut that voice down, I down played it, I rationalized it away, and no matter how much learning about feminism or learning to analyze patriarchy or learning to reflect on women's experiences and no matter how much those understandings made better sense of what was happening to me (and the trans women I knew), I kept it private, knew better than to presume, knew it was dangerous to assert.
Besides, isn't that its own essentialism?
Isn't the reality of socialization and gender just about how you are perceived?
And what about trans femmes who didn't feel that way, wasn't that invalidating them?
Wasn't this making its own gatekeeping?

Do you know what first planted the seed in my mind that something was wrong with the narrative given?
It was a skin-crawling experience of being in a big "feminist" "queer" "radical" circle of conversation where "amab" "male socialized" people of all genders were to come together to talk about "our" "experiences of male socialization" and "hold each other to account and learn to be accountable" in a "fishbowl style" where the conversation would happen "amongst the privileged" surrounded by "afab female socialized people". Even tho seemingly all the trans femme people there bought into this idea wholeheartedly, it was glaringly (blisteringly) obvious that this "male socialization" and "learned male entitlement" we were both talking about was worlds apart. There was simply no comparison; the words were the same, but the examples were totally askew. The difference between actual entitlement and being under constant alienated pressure and being punished in gendered ways for slipping up at the invisible expectations , and the resultant total social alienation, was super apparent, super distinct. I still recall, decades later, feeling dizzy as these conversations really began to get going in earnest - even other people started to get uncomfortable with how the conversation was progressing- clearly, these trans women were not "owning up" well enough, because they're experiences were too different. This lead to a cis man and a cis woman loudly interrupting the conversation to remind trans femmes that they needed to be more "serious" about this, to the murmurs of agreement.
It was simply unacceptable to them that the farce at the heart of this "queer feminist exercise" was innocently exposed as empty and false. It was irrelevant that the trans femme people there were taking it entirely seriously, were offering up lives full of fucked up shit on display for shared analysis, just having experiences that were fundamentally different- we needed to learn to ignore that, for safety, for everyone's sake. I wasn't the only one who walked away from that entire day feeling seriously disturbed. And guilty. And with no answers.

How deeply misguided that approach was would take years for me to process, but what made it most clear was simply taking to time to talk intentionally with other trans women about these narratives, about grappling with the serious complexities around the experience of the closet, about how traumatizing experiences and internalized perceptions were framed as the same as actual entitlement, about not knowing how to process these things before one is out, and about how these were insufficient for making sense of our lives, how we had seen the harm done to other women and whole communities by this being perpetuated, and broadening that conversation to include cis women in making sense of this, how much more willing many were to point out cis women and trans people who just had an agenda, who were just full of shit. Conversations like these have played out again and again, yet despite however much "personal experiences" count for making sense of the world, these ones don't. And they will always bring out whatever freshly out girl they have played into believing all of this uncritically as proof that this is all just some conspiracy

The main reasons "trans women are male socialized" discourse continues to exist is simple to understand: it perpetuates due to the benefits it brings. It is there for keeping trans women in a perpetual indebted dynamic and therefore subservient to any sort of coercion, as a means justifying and excusing abuse, as a means to dismiss caring about a life of trauma, to justify rendering trans women disposable, as an easy win to prop up "community figures" who thrive on finding new people to condemn, to always keep refocusing away from confronting the abuse of actual men to fixating on trans women (the whipping girl dynamic), to keep the "good ones" who bought in to this narrative secure in their place in community (for now), preventing the basic feminist autonomy that comes from being able to honestly and systematically reflect on your own experiences, preventing the formation of solidarity amongst cis and trans women, preventing solidarity emerging amongst trans women, to keep us always suspicious of each other, to keep the fractures between those who can and cannot access transition or passing or social assimilation or coming out, to keep us dependent.

All of which amounts to one central function: preventing the emergence of trans feminist consciousness

# orderedItems[].formerRepresentations.orderedItems[].content
Trans femme "male socialization" is an assertion that has been thoroughly debunked, repeatedly over the years, by trans women coming together to speak about our experiences amongst each other.

Like many trans women, initially I learned to think of my experiences as "male socialization", that this was being accountable, that this was being reasonable, that this was being feminist - despite how dramatically different (and dramatically worse, in a gendered way) my experiences of life were from any man I had ever met, much less grown up with. But, I shut that voice down, I down played it, I rationalized it away, and no matter how much there was to learned about feminism or learned to analyze patriarchy or learned to reflect on women's experiences and no matter how much that made sense of what was happening to me and trans women I knew, I kept it private, knew better than to presume, knew it was dangerous to assert. Besides, isn't that its own essentialism? Isn't the real socialization and gender just how you are perceived? And what about trans femmes who didn't feel that way, wasn't that invalidating them? Wasn't this making its own gatekeeping?

Do you know what first planted the seed in my mind that something was wrong with the narrative given? It was a skin-crawling experience of being in a "feminist" "queer" "radical" circles of conversational where "amab" "male socialized" people of all genders were to come together to talk about "our" "experiences of male socialization" and "hold each other to account and learn to be accountable" in a "fishbowl style" where the conversation would happen surrounded by "afab female socialized people". Even tho seemingly all the trans femme people there bought into this idea wholeheartedly, it was glaringly (blisteringly) obvious that this "male socialization" and "learned male entitlement" we were both talking about was worlds apart. There was simply no comparison the words were the same but the examples were totally askew. The difference between actual entitlement and being under constant alienated pressure and being punished in gendered ways for slipping up at the invisible expectations , ans the resultant tottal alienation, was super apparent. I still recall, decades later, feeling dizzy as these conversations really began to get going - even other people started to get uncomfortable with how the conversation was going- clearly, these trans women were not "owning up" well enough, because they're experiences were different. This lead to a cis man and a cis woman loudly interrupting the conversation to remind trans femmes that they needed to be more "serious" about this, to the murmurs of agreement. It was simply unacceptable to them that the farce at the heart of this "queer feminist exercise" was innocently exposed as empty and false. It was irrelevant that people were taking it seriously, just having experiences that were different- we needed to learn to ignore that, for everyones sake. I wasn't the only one who walked away from that entire day feeling seriously disturbed. And guilty. And with no answers.

How deeply misguided that approach was would take years for me to process, but what made it most clear was simply taking to time to talk intentionally with other trans women about these narratives, about grappling with the serious complexities around the experience of the closet, about how traumatizing experiences and internalized perceptions were framed as the same as actual entitlement, about not knowing how to process these things before one is out, and about how these were insufficient for making sense of our lives, how we had seen the harm done to other women and whole communities by this being perpetuated, and broadening that conversation to include cis women in making sense of this, how much more willing many were to point out cis women and trans people who just had an agenda, who were just full of shit. Conversations like these have played out again and again, yet despite however much "personal experiences" count for making sense of the world, these ones don't. And they will always bring out whatever freshly out girl they have played into believing all of this uncritically as proof that this is all just some conspiracy

The main reasons "trans women are male socialized" discourse continues to exist is simple to understand: it perpetuates for the benifit it brings. It is there for keeping trans women in a perpetual indebted dynamic and therefore subservient to any sort of coercion, as a means justifying and excusing abuse, as a means to dismiss caring about a life of truama, to justify rendering trans women disposable, as an easy win to prop up "community figures" who thrive on finding new people to condemn, to always keep refocusing away from confronting the abuse of actual men to fixating on trans women (the whipping girl dynamic), to keep the "good ones" who bought in to this narrative secure in their place in community (for now), preventing the basic feminist autonomy that comes from being able to honestly and systematically reflect on your own experiences, preventing the formation of solidarity amongst cis and trans women, preventing solidarity emerging amongst trans women, to keep us always suspicious of each other, to keep us dependent.

All of which amounts to one thing: preventing the emergence of trans feminist conscienceness

# orderedItems[].formerRepresentations.orderedItems[].source.content
Trans femme "male socialization" is an assertion that has been thoroughly debunked, repeatedly over the years, by trans women coming together to speak about our experiences amongst each other.

Like many trans women, initially I learned to think of my experiences as "male socialization", that this was being accountable, that this was being reasonable, that this was being feminist - despite how dramatically different (and dramatically worse, in a gendered way) my experiences of life were from any man I had ever met, much less grown up with. But, I shut that voice down, I down played it, I rationalized it away, and no matter how much there was to learned about feminism or learned to analyze patriarchy or learned to reflect on women's experiences and no matter how much that made sense of what was happening to me and trans women I knew, I kept it private, knew better than to presume, knew it was dangerous to assert. Besides, isn't that its own essentialism? Isn't the real socialization and gender just how you are perceived? And what about trans femmes who didn't feel that way, wasn't that invalidating them? Wasn't this making its own gatekeeping? 

Do you know what first planted the seed in my mind that something was wrong with the narrative given? It was a skin-crawling experience of being in a "feminist" "queer" "radical" circles of conversational where "amab" "male socialized" people of all genders were to come together to talk about "our" "experiences of male socialization" and "hold each other to account and learn to be accountable" in a "fishbowl style" where the conversation would happen surrounded by "afab female socialized people". Even tho seemingly all the trans femme people there bought into this idea wholeheartedly, it was glaringly (blisteringly) obvious that this "male socialization" and "learned male entitlement" we were both talking about was worlds apart. There was simply no comparison the words were the same but the examples were totally askew. The difference between actual entitlement and being under constant alienated pressure and being punished in gendered ways for slipping up at the invisible expectations , ans the resultant tottal alienation, was super apparent. I still recall, decades later, feeling dizzy as these conversations really began to get going - even other people started to get uncomfortable with how the conversation was going- clearly, these trans women were not "owning up" well enough, because they're experiences were different. This lead to a cis man and a cis woman loudly interrupting the conversation to remind trans femmes that they needed to be more "serious" about this, to the murmurs of agreement. It was simply unacceptable to them that the farce at the heart of this "queer feminist exercise" was innocently exposed as empty and false. It was irrelevant that people were taking it seriously, just having experiences that were different- we needed to learn to ignore that, for everyones sake. I wasn't the only one who walked away from that entire day feeling seriously disturbed. And guilty. And with no answers.

How deeply misguided that approach was would take years for me to process, but what made it most clear was simply taking to time to talk intentionally with other trans women about these narratives, about grappling with the serious complexities around the experience of the closet, about how traumatizing experiences and internalized perceptions were framed as the same as actual entitlement, about not knowing how to process these things before one is out, and about how these were insufficient for making sense of our lives, how we had seen the harm done to other women and whole communities by this being perpetuated, and broadening that conversation to include cis women in making sense of this, how much more willing many were to point out cis women and trans people who just had an agenda, who were just full of shit. Conversations like these have played out again and again, yet despite however much "personal experiences" count for making sense of the world, these ones don't. And they will always bring out whatever freshly out girl they have played into believing all of this uncritically as proof that this is all just some conspiracy

The main reasons "trans women are male socialized" discourse continues to exist is simple to understand: it perpetuates for the benifit it brings. It is there for keeping trans women in a perpetual indebted dynamic and therefore subservient to any sort of coercion, as a means justifying and excusing abuse, as a means to dismiss caring about a life of truama,  to justify rendering trans women disposable, as an easy win to prop up "community figures" who thrive on finding new people to condemn, to always keep refocusing away from confronting the abuse of actual men to fixating on trans women (the whipping girl dynamic), to keep the "good ones" who bought in to this narrative secure in their place in community (for now), preventing the basic feminist autonomy that comes from being able to honestly and systematically reflect on your own experiences, preventing the formation of solidarity amongst cis and trans women, preventing solidarity emerging amongst trans women, to keep us always suspicious of each other, to keep us dependent. 

All of which amounts to one thing: preventing the emergence of trans feminist conscienceness

# orderedItems[].source.content
Trans femme "male socialization" is an assertion that has been thoroughly debunked, repeatedly over the years, by trans women coming together to speak about our experiences amongst each other.

Like many trans women, initially I learned to think of my experiences as "male socialization", that this was being accountable, that this was being reasonable, that this was being feminist - despite how dramatically different (and dramatically worse, in a gendered way) my experiences of life were from any man I had ever met, much less grown up with. But, I shut that voice down, I down played it, I rationalized it away, and no matter how much learning about feminism or learning to analyze patriarchy or learning to reflect on women's experiences and no matter how much those understandings made better sense of what was happening to me (and the trans women I knew), I kept it private, knew better than to presume, knew it was dangerous to assert. 
Besides, isn't that its own essentialism? 
Isn't the reality of socialization and gender just about how you are perceived? 
And what about trans femmes who didn't feel that way, wasn't that invalidating them?
Wasn't this making its own gatekeeping? 

Do you know what first planted the seed in my mind that something was wrong with the narrative given? 
It was a skin-crawling experience of being in a big "feminist" "queer" "radical" circle of conversation where "amab" "male socialized" people of all genders were to come together to talk about "our" "experiences of male socialization" and "hold each other to account and learn to be accountable" in a "fishbowl style" where the conversation would happen "amongst the privileged" surrounded by "afab female socialized people". Even tho seemingly all the trans femme people there bought into this idea wholeheartedly, it was glaringly (blisteringly) obvious that this "male socialization" and "learned male entitlement" we were both talking about was worlds apart. There was simply no comparison; the words were the same, but the examples were totally askew. The difference between actual entitlement and being under constant alienated pressure and being punished in gendered ways for slipping up at the invisible expectations , and the resultant total social alienation, was super apparent, super distinct. I still recall, decades later, feeling dizzy as these conversations really began to get going in earnest - even other people started to get uncomfortable with how the conversation was progressing- clearly, these trans women were not "owning up" well enough, because they're experiences were too different. This lead to a cis man and a cis woman loudly interrupting the conversation to remind trans femmes that they needed to be more "serious" about this, to the murmurs of agreement.
 It was simply unacceptable to them that the farce at the heart of this "queer feminist exercise" was innocently exposed as empty and false. It was irrelevant that the trans femme people there were taking it entirely seriously, were offering up lives full of fucked up shit on display for shared analysis, just having experiences that were fundamentally different- we needed to learn to ignore that, for safety, for everyone's sake. I wasn't the only one who walked away from that entire day feeling seriously disturbed. And guilty. And with no answers.

How deeply misguided that approach was would take years for me to process, but what made it most clear was simply taking to time to talk intentionally with other trans women about these narratives, about grappling with the serious complexities around the experience of the closet, about how traumatizing experiences and internalized perceptions were framed as the same as actual entitlement, about not knowing how to process these things before one is out, and about how these were insufficient for making sense of our lives, how we had seen the harm done to other women and whole communities by this being perpetuated, and broadening that conversation to include cis women in making sense of this, how much more willing many were to point out cis women and trans people who just had an agenda, who were just full of shit. Conversations like these have played out again and again, yet despite however much "personal experiences" count for making sense of the world, these ones don't. And they will always bring out whatever freshly out girl they have played into believing all of this uncritically as proof that this is all just some conspiracy

The main reasons "trans women are male socialized" discourse continues to exist is simple to understand: it perpetuates due to the benefits it brings. It is there for keeping trans women in a perpetual indebted dynamic and therefore subservient to any sort of coercion, as a means justifying and excusing abuse, as a means to dismiss caring about a life of trauma,  to justify rendering trans women disposable, as an easy win to prop up "community figures" who thrive on finding new people to condemn, to always keep refocusing away from confronting the abuse of actual men to fixating on trans women (the whipping girl dynamic), to keep the "good ones" who bought in to this narrative secure in their place in community (for now), preventing the basic feminist autonomy that comes from being able to honestly and systematically reflect on your own experiences, preventing the formation of solidarity amongst cis and trans women, preventing solidarity emerging amongst trans women, to keep us always suspicious of each other, to keep the fractures between those who can and cannot access transition or passing or social assimilation or coming out, to keep us dependent. 

All of which amounts to one central function: preventing the emergence of trans feminist consciousness

# orderedItems[].content
Hi, its me, 0utØtherside0utwØrldersider of xenoic fem.me, every day billions of trillions of creatures are instantiated via an assemblage of apparatuses known as mitochondria, which has been shown, after long term exposure, to lead to the horrors of sexual dimorphism and differentiation.

For just a small investment of seven hundred million dollars and the donation of an underground research facility, we can help reach these lovely and vulnerable beings, and be part of the solution for all future generations. Won't you help undo the damage done and create a new hopeful 000utside, beyond all borders, cellular and Øtherwise?

This message brought to you by the Wolbacahian Cosmic Dakini Slime foundation in partnership with the Lemurian Neo-Amazonian Front and the Liberated Antinomies of Mu, sponsored by the The Black Goat Of The Woods With A Thousand Young

# orderedItems[].formerRepresentations.orderedItems[].content
Hi, its me, 0utØtherside0utwØrldersider of xenoic fem.me, every day billions of trillions of creatures are instantiated via an assemblage of apaeratuses known as mitochondria, which has been shown, after long term exposure, to lead to the horrors of sexual dimorphism and differentiation.

For just a small investment of seven hundred million dollars and the donation of an underground research facility, we can help reach these lovely and vulnerable beings, and be part of the solution for all future generations. Won't you help undo the damage done and create a new hopeful 000utside, beyond all borders, cellular and Øtherwise?

This message brought to you by the Wolbacahian Cosmic Dakini Slime foundation in partnership with the Lumerian Neo-Amazonian Front and the Liberated Antimonies of Mu, sponsored by the Black Goat Of A Thousand Young

# orderedItems[].formerRepresentations.orderedItems[].source.content
Hi, its me, 0utØtherside0utwØrldersider of xenoic fem.me, every day billions of trillions of creatures are instantiated via an assemblage of apaeratuses known as mitochondria, which has been shown, after long term exposure, to lead to the horrors of sexual dimorphism and differentiation.

For just a small investment of seven hundred million dollars and the donation of an underground research facility, we can help reach these lovely and vulnerable beings, and be part of the solution for all future generations. Won't you help undo the damage done and create a new hopeful 000utside, beyond all borders, cellular and Øtherwise?

This message brought to you by the Wolbacahian Cosmic Dakini Slime foundation in partnership with the Lumerian Neo-Amazonian Front and the Liberated Antimonies of Mu, sponsored by the Black Goat Of A Thousand Young

# orderedItems[].source.content
Hi, its me, 0utØtherside0utwØrldersider of xenoic fem.me, every day billions of trillions of creatures are instantiated via an assemblage of apparatuses known as mitochondria, which has been shown, after long term exposure, to lead to the horrors of sexual dimorphism and differentiation.

For just a small investment of seven hundred million dollars and the donation of an underground research facility, we can help reach these lovely and vulnerable beings, and be part of the solution for all future generations. Won't you help undo the damage done and create a new hopeful 000utside, beyond all borders, cellular and Øtherwise?

This message brought to you by the Wolbacahian Cosmic Dakini Slime foundation in partnership with the Lemurian Neo-Amazonian Front and the Liberated Antinomies of Mu, sponsored by the The Black Goat Of The Woods With A Thousand Young

# orderedItems[].content
XD LOL, the problem is not the need to develop communities of care- these already exist, they just are a gamble as to if they help or harm, as care is in fact never neutral and always complex, and the chaotic interplay of any one persons trauma and the way they have learned to be in relation with others is only magnified by denser webs and networks without anyone taking the personal risk of committing creating skills for something that is an emergent dream, of being responsible to commit to creating new ways of being. The problem is the need to create a culture that reaches some kind of integrity around baselines of lived ethics, to replicate and sustain and mutate between time and space, and thus how to shape the contexts that further their manifestation, and thus tapping into the twisting cyclone tat is the motor of change, even if the practices and techniques by which these ethics of care differ- a trans/sapphic meta-ethics is the problem. Nyaaaaa~~~~!!! :3 ^^ 666

# orderedItems[].source.content
XD LOL, the problem is not the need to develop communities of care- these already exist, they just are a gamble as to if they help or harm, as care is in fact never neutral and always complex, and the chaotic interplay of any one persons trauma and the way they have learned to be in relation with others is only magnified by denser webs and networks without anyone taking the personal risk of committing creating skills for something that is an emergent dream, of being responsible to commit to creating new ways of being. The problem is the need to create a culture that reaches some kind of integrity around baselines of lived ethics, to replicate and sustain and mutate between time and space, and thus how to shape the contexts that further their manifestation, and thus tapping into the twisting cyclone tat is the motor of change, even if the practices and techniques by which these ethics of care differ- a trans/sapphic meta-ethics is the problem. Nyaaaaa~~~~!!! :3 ^^ 666

# orderedItems[].content
One thing that really got lost in the sands of time and writing ephemera is that almost none if the original baeddels believed that trans fem solidarity would just spontaneously arise out of mere shared presence nor shared material conditions: almost everyone involved had lived thru a time period of total inter-transfem hostilities, post the break down of trans women in radical/ feminism, post the break down of trans women having a alt weirdo space recuperated by queer community. Where you could snitch on another trans girl to the one local "friendly" doctor for being ~unfeminine~ or a dyke, where claiming to be a lesbian was still seem as delusional and fucked up, where even passively, rather than enthusiastically, HAL'ing each other was more than enough to get one fully excluded, and the norn of "radical queer" trans fems was to police the "male socialization" of each other in a constant circular firing squad offering up "the bad ones" to tme fuckers. I can't honestly sum up concisely how totalizing the situation was, but I can say that it was happening with full participation of transfems, with actual solidarity being more of a strange, difficult to articulate break from the social norms mostly between the most curious, uncanny, rare outsider strangelings you'll ever meet.

It was always understood that any meaningful opposition and culture of solidarity would have to be seeded and constructed, would have to be made of shredding the structures of understanding that lead to the impasse which made a refusal of being defined by patriarchy unthinkable. It was clear that the base line narrative materials were not even present, and any action around the shared material needs had been fully routed around at every corner.

The synthesis of divergent streams into some radically self-dissimilar lesbian war machine was not something that "just happens" via being encased in 6000 years of patriarchy. at some point, whatever gifts teleology gives to us, we must craft an exit ourselves, a communion of divergent dividuations.

One critique worthy aspect of the resulting mythos functions of the baeddels is a loss or corruption of finer interventions from a lesbian materialist analysis that can make it seem to seekers of escape like the solidarity arises ~just so~, that shared material circumstance makes the empowerment via some "consciousness" as opposed to the possibility being a absence, a gap, something illegible to power, and that without actively inhabiting that aporia beyond the bare fact of "shared identity", such efforts will simply confirm itself to be a (structurally predetermined) incompatible mode of social action. Our power lies elsewhere and elsehow.

# orderedItems[].formerRepresentations.orderedItems[].content
One thing that really got lost in the sands of time and writing ephemera is that almost none if the OG baeddels believed that trans fem solidarity would just spontaneously arise out of mere shared presence or shared material conditions: almost everyone involved had lived thru a time period of total inter-transfem hostilities, post the break down of trans women in radical/ feminism, post the break down of trans women having a alt weirdo space recuperated by queer community. Where you could snitch on another trans girl to the one local "friendly" doctor for being ~unfeminine~ or a dyke, where claiming to be a lesbian was still seem as delusional and fucked up, where even passively HAL'ing each other was more than enough to get one fully excluded, and the norn of "radical queer" trans fems was to police the "male socialization" of each other in a constant circular firing squad offering up "the bad ones" to tme fuckers. I can't honestly sum up quickly how totalizing the situation was, but I can say that it was happening with full participation of transfems, with actual solidarity being more of a strange, difficult to articulate break from the social norms mostly between the strangest outsider strangelings you'll ever meet.

It was always understood that any meaningful opposition and culture of solidarity would have to be seeded and constructed, would have to be made of shredding the structures of understanding that lead to the impasse which made a refusal of being defined by patriarchy unthinkable. It was clear that the base line narrative materials where not even present, and the shared material needs had been fully routed around at every corner. The synthesis of divergent streams into some radically self-dissimilar lesbian war machine was not something that happens via being encased in 6000 years of patriarchy.

One critique worthy aspect of the resulting mythos functions of the baeddels is a loss or corruption of finer interventions from a lesbian materialist analysis that can make it seem to seekers of escape like the solidarity arises ~just so~, that shared material circumstance makes the empowerment via some "consciousness" as opposed to the possibility being a absence, a gap, something illegible to power, and that without actively inhabiting that aporia beyond the bare fact of "shared identity", will simply confirm itself to be a (structurally predetermined) incompatible mode of social action.

# orderedItems[].formerRepresentations.orderedItems[].source
One thing that really got lost in the sands of time and writing ephemera is that almost none if the OG baeddels believed that trans fem solidarity would just spontaneously arise out of mere  shared presence or shared material conditions: almost everyone involved had lived thru a time period of total inter-transfem hostilities, post the break down of trans women in radical/ feminism, post the break down of trans women having a alt weirdo space recuperated by queer community. Where you could snitch on another trans girl to the one local "friendly" doctor for being ~unfeminine~ or a dyke, where claiming to be a lesbian was still seem as delusional and fucked up, where even passively HAL'ing each other was more than enough to get one fully excluded, and the norn of "radical queer" trans fems was to police the "male socialization" of each other in a constant circular firing squad offering up "the bad ones" to tme fuckers. I can't honestly sum up quickly how totalizing the situation was, but I can say that it was happening with full participation of transfems, with actual solidarity being more of a strange, difficult to articulate break from the social norms mostly between the strangest outsider strangelings you'll ever meet.

It was always understood that any meaningful opposition and culture of solidarity would have to be seeded and constructed, would have to be made of shredding the structures of understanding that lead to the impasse which made a refusal of being defined by patriarchy unthinkable. It was clear that the base line narrative materials where not even present, and the shared material needs had been fully routed around at every corner. The synthesis of divergent streams into some radically self-dissimilar lesbian war machine was not something that happens via being encased in 6000 years of patriarchy.

One critique worthy aspect of the resulting mythos functions of the baeddels is a loss or corruption of finer interventions from a lesbian materialist analysis that can make it seem to seekers of escape like the solidarity arises ~just so~, that shared material circumstance makes the empowerment via some "consciousness" as opposed to the possibility being a absence, a gap, something illegible to power, and that without actively inhabiting that aporia beyond the bare fact of "shared identity", will simply confirm itself to be a (structurally predetermined) incompatible mode of social action.

# orderedItems[].source.content
One thing that really got lost in the sands of time and writing ephemera is that almost none if the original baeddels believed that trans fem solidarity would just spontaneously arise out of mere shared presence nor shared material conditions: almost everyone involved had lived thru a time period of total inter-transfem hostilities, post the break down of trans women in radical/ feminism, post the break down of trans women having a alt weirdo space recuperated by queer community. Where you could snitch on another trans girl to the one local "friendly" doctor for being ~unfeminine~ or a dyke, where claiming to be a lesbian was still seem as delusional and fucked up, where even passively, rather than enthusiastically, HAL'ing each other was more than enough to get one fully excluded, and the norn of "radical queer" trans fems was to police the "male socialization" of each other in a constant circular firing squad offering up "the bad ones" to tme fuckers. I can't honestly sum up concisely how totalizing the situation was, but I can say that it was happening with full participation of transfems, with actual solidarity being more of a strange, difficult to articulate break from the social norms mostly between the most curious, uncanny, rare outsider strangelings you'll ever meet.

It was always understood that any meaningful opposition and culture of solidarity would have to be seeded and constructed, would have to be made of shredding the structures of understanding that lead to the impasse which made a refusal of being defined by patriarchy unthinkable. It was clear that the base line narrative materials were not even present, and any action around the shared material needs had been fully routed around at every corner. 

The synthesis of divergent streams into some radically self-dissimilar lesbian war machine was not something that "just happens" via being encased in 6000 years of patriarchy. at some point, whatever gifts teleology gives to us, we must craft an exit ourselves, a communion of divergent dividuations.

One critique worthy aspect of the resulting mythos functions of the baeddels is a loss or corruption of finer interventions from a lesbian materialist analysis that can make it seem to seekers of escape like the solidarity arises ~just so~, that shared material circumstance makes the empowerment via some "consciousness" as opposed to the possibility being a absence, a gap, something illegible to power, and that without actively inhabiting that aporia beyond the bare fact of "shared identity", such efforts will simply confirm itself to be a (structurally predetermined) incompatible mode of social action. Our power lies elsewhere and elsehow.