A lot of folks in the trans community are terrified of being infantilised - for completely understandable reasons - I believe, however, this sometimes manifests in a nasty cringe response to anyone who self identifies with language which is seen as infantilising. You see this with the term "enby" as well.

I don't think many people have actually thought too hard about why they have this kind of cringe response to these words. But the truth is that nonbinary language was developed, by and large, by young people, on the fly. So some of it maybe does sound kinda silly, because it was often made by literal teenagers to use for their own purposes ("joyfriend").

I really don't think this is an issue. It is fine to have fun words for young queer people. And it is perfectly fine if adults use these words for themselves, also. So many trans people were denied their youth, I couldn't give two shits if that 45 year old is calling themselves an enby and covering their jackets in bright ass pronoun pins. The issue is that there are not analogous words to use for adults who do want more mature sounding language.

"Enby" has always been posited as analogous to "boy" or "girl", and I've always used it that way. However, I've seen very few proposed terms for an adult nonbinary person - enben is one I've seen, but it's not really caught on, likely due to its linguistic proximity to enby (note how "boy" and "man" & "girl" and "woman" are completely different words with completely different linguistic roots).

People mock nonbinary family terms, because yeah - when thousands of people are feeling around in the dark to create an entire new category of de-gendered and re-gendered language, sometimes it sounds silly. Yeah, yeah, I'd rather you call me a slur, whatever. But you know who loves the term "nibling" ("niece, nephew, nibling")? My old-ass aunty who didn't know what else to call me when I came out as non-binary. She is grateful to have a word she can use without misgendering me. She uses it when she talks about me on her Facebook and she explains it to all her friends. She writes it in birthday cards where she would have formerly written "niece". Allies love this shit, and real allies help to normalise our existence in day-to-day life. They don't waste time mocking or questioning the words we have. They just get on with it.

Boygirls are often not taken seriously and actively infantalised because of the way they identify their gender. This is why I made the switch - I want to be taken seriously. And it seems to have worked somewhat, I've not had anyone call attention to it in an attempt to discredit my opinion yet, as they used to with "boygirl".

However, whatever your personal hangups on language, there is no excuse to infantilise someone or discard their opinion based on their identity.

This type of infantilistic exorsexism is frustrating due to how frequently the people parroting it make out that the majority of people identifying as "boygirls" are trans people who were AFAB and still "have the presentation of a waifish cis woman" (quoted from a post I saw today, to which I'd like to ask: what does a cis woman look like? and why is this type of trans person a problem?) who utilise their "weird" gender identities in order to obfuscate real problems and shut down discussions because they're too stupid to realise they don't experience real transphobia. And it's frustrating especially due to how close this particular rhetoric comes to mimicking the TERF supposition that many trans folks who were AFAB are autistic, stupid, and infantile, and just using their gender to escape misogyny.

Idk. Sometimes I think about how we need to develop more useful, mature language for non-binary trans folks to use in order for people to actually take our conversations seriously. And sometimes I think it just could not be more clear that some trans people still hate it when other people do gender in a way they don't personally like.

Exactly.

I would really like more options for "mature" language for personal & professional reasons, but it really shouldn't matter what the widely accepted terms are when it comes to legitimate discussion. Mocking the accepted non-binary language IS transphobic and exorsexist. And it happens every single time a new term is coined. It's not an accident.

Many non-binary people do it too (I would argue it's a significant part of why entirely unaligned non-binary people seem to be far less accounted for in certain trans spaces than they were a few years ago, in favour of presenting all trans people as "transmasc" or "transfem" - non-binary people have often been made to feel cringe calling themselves non-binary and advocating for their space in the conversation. I've felt it myself). But we all have to learn to clamp down on that cringe response if we expect to dismantle bioessentialism, gender essentialism, and sex essentialism, because inherently accepting non-binary people and all kinds of "weird" genders is essential to that cause.

I feel like we don't talk enough about how "cis men genuinely identifying as lesbians in good faith" not only exist, but are often just closeted, questioning, or unaware of their true gender. As in, they're not actually cis men.

Hell, sometimes they're literally just trans lesbians who are open about their identity as women/genderqueer* people, but get misgendered and thrown into the "cis man" category. Did we all forget about how "men can't be lesbians" is a transmisogynistic dogwhistle?

Cis men (or "cis men") earnestly calling themselves lesbians are probably genderqueer.* And even if they aren't, who cares? It doesn't affect you. And if they're "identifying as lesbians" with the intent of trolling you or harassing you, you will likely be able to tell by additional information.

For example:

• If someone insists that you have to give them a chance sexually/romantically because "I'm a lesbian," they're either not actually a lesbian, or weaponizing their identity against you. Either way, this is harassment. Identifying in a certain way doesn't give you the right to date or have sex with someone, even if you're identifying that way in earnest.
• If someone insists that you have to give them a chance sexually/romantically because "lesbians can be/like men," the same applies. Some lesbians like men, or are men themselves, but this is not always (or even usually) the case. Even when it is the case, consent is imperative. Bi lesbians and lesboys still have the right to say "no."
• If someone is generally homophobic/lesbophobic/transphobic, does not typically identify as a lesbian, using their "identity" as a weapon, and is not taking themselves seriously, they're probably trolling. You know those videos where Steven Crowder pretends to be a woman as a way to dunk on actual women (especially trans women and their allies)? It's like that. You can tell they're trolling because the "identity" is satirical and inconsistent with their usual beliefs and actions.

Notice that "identifying as a lesbian" is not the problem in any of these points. The problem is their behavior, and their weaponizing of the lesbian identity.

I'm a trans man. I used to identify as a lesboy because I wasn't confident in my manhood, and have since moved past that. I don't consider myself a lesbian (nor sapphic) now, and I also wouldn't date anyone who identifies as a lesbian, because it would make me dysphoric.

I was wrong about being a lesboy, but being wrong about it didn't make the exclusion feel any better. I was working through my shit, and was met with exclusion and suspicion in many cases. When I identified as a lesboy, what I needed was a supportive, inclusive, and accepting community. What I often got instead was derision, exclusion, and debates over my "validity" as a lesbian. Sometimes I was treated like a predator, or like I was "invading" a safe space for lesbians. (Does this sound familiar?)

I fully support people's right to earnestly identify as lesboys/lesbian men, whether that's as a stepping stone to their true identity, or just reflective of their complicated experience with gender and attraction.

I think that there's something to be said about identifying as a lesbian when a man you're attracted to feels uncomfortable with that. I strongly believe that you should either change your label at that point, or be quiet about your attraction to them, because misgendering people through your label is still misgendering.

This is true even if you identify as a lesbian in a way that is inclusive to men (e.g. bi lesbian, lesboy), because the word still has strong woman-centric connotations (similar to how calling someone "girl" in a way intended to be gender neutral can still be misgendering). People have expressed attraction to me while identifying as lesbians... It doesn't feel good. If you're attracted to me while continuing to identify as a lesbian, don't tell me, because I don't want to know. I don't care if I'm "the exception" because that still sucks.

Still, I don't think manhood is always outright incompatible with lesbian identity, whether you're attracted to men, or a man yourself. The only thing that matters is how the person experiencing the attraction, and those they're attracted to, feel about it. These things are not always so cut and dry, and I would rather accidentally include the wrong person than accidentally exclude the wrong person.

And yes, if you're inclusive of AFAB lesboys, but not AMAB lesboys, this is transphobic. Basing inclusion on AGAB is transphobic. To the people who think they're being inclusive or enlightened by saying "trans men can be lesbians, but not cis men," I want you to think real hard about what you're implying. Trans men do not have an inherent "closer proximity to womanhood" than cis men. Likewise, trans women do not have a "closer proximity to manhood" than cis women.

*I use genderqueer as an umbrella for "anyone with a queer relationship to gender," including those who are trans, nonbinary, GNC, or otherwise subvert the cultural gender expectations placed upon them at birth/during development. In other words, having a queer gender modality, identity, or expression.