I'm going to summarize what you said briefly before I explain further so that if I misunderstood anything you can correct me if you want. I'm also going to say that I'm fully open to being wrong and that sometimes you have to say stuff or defend an opinion to learn things so I really appreciate you replying to me. I've always appreciated how you've responded to people when they offer opinions because I feel like you're always super fair when it's warranted but don't take shit when fairness isn't being offered to you.
First, if I understand correctly, I have made you feel like I haven't listened to a word you said over the years that I've been following you and it's perplexing/insane to you that I would still be following you while holding an opinion that you feel in antithetical to your existence.
Second, you mention a very valid point about how people regularly use logic like mine to cut out people that they are uncomfortable with.
I'm confused about this sentence "it is also simply absurd to state that the less included demographic is somehow in the wrong for making their own spaces as a reaction to being excluded constantly". I agree? That would be completely absurd. I'm guessing that you interpreted something from my tags differently than I meant it. What I was saying is that: I think people should be allowed to have spaces that have only other people like them in them. My huge caveat to this that I couldn't include since Tumblr has a 30 tag limit is: these spaces should be temporary and should only be for supportive/positivity purposes (a very subjective metric but I think if you're a generally empathetic person it's pretty clear when your excluding someone completely baselessly). I 100% firmly believe that any space should be inclusive by default. I just also think it's reasonable to be able to say "can we have a few hours with people like us to talk about our overlapping experiences due to [x] unifying factor?" and then carve out some time and a space for it and label it properly.
Third, lots of mlm spaces are utterly pointlessly and hurtfully excluding trans men and it's adding to the difficulty of navigating life as a trans man because it's completely unnecessary but painfully common.
I do agree that trans men are men. It's a fact. It's part of the nebulous intersection between the physical form you have (highly variably as with most species), the genetics you possess (even more variability with most species including us), how society interacts with you, and how you WANT society to interact with you. Trans men are men by literally any metric that matters. No debate there.
I do think though that it's appropriate to have spaces where certain people are excluded for the purpose of supporting a particular group. I think that all those spaces should be adequately labeled. I think that they should be far fewer than spaces where everyone is not only included, but feels comfortable and welcome. I think it's entirely appropriate for people to have get-togethers/meetings/retreats with people who look exclusively like them whether that's all wheelchair users, fat people, trans women of color, or cis white teenage men. Again: I feel that the vast vast majority of spaces should be inclusive of everyone who is going to be supportive and friendly. Also, as mentioned before, these spaces should be temporary and should have an express purpose that they couldn't accomplish otherwise.
I do understand that, yes, people with malintent will take this too far. That IS a serious problem. A serious problem that needs to be dealt with and we're seeing the fallout of it not being dealt with adequately far too often. It doesn't mean that no one should be allowed to have unique spaces. I think that it really means that we as a society need to get better at socializing our kids so that they have the empathy to understand when a group is being harmful vs actually offering support and positivity. There's a big big difference between being repulsed by someone else's body vs feeling most comfortable because everyone around you looks like you (whether that's physical form [skin color, height, acne scarring, mobility aid use], style of dress or age). An absolutely massive difference. The first is an issue that needs to be addressed. The second imo is part of being a species of social creatures who have an easier time fitting in with people we have the most in common with.
I do think that it does matter what people see and how they feel about it. Human brains are made to categorize and sort things. Obviously everyone experiences their body differently. And how you experience your body impacts how you see other people. Everyone has different levels of body dysphoria/euphoria (obviously changeable over time). From being in love with your body exactly the way it is to being utterly neutral to needing/wanting to change stuff to feel comfortable in your own skin.
I am asexual. I don't personally love looking at my body through the lens of "woman" or "man". Sometimes parts of my body pull me out of my brain and into a space where I don't want to engage with them but am now overly focused on them. Sometimes I look at my body and am incredibly happy with it. I really didn't care who sees me naked or why. I am still more comfortable being naked around people who share my body type. I'm not UNcomfortable around people who are skinnier/fatter or darker/lighter or have different genitalia than me, not at all, but I'm MORE comfortable around people who look more like I do. When I say "comfortable" or reference "comfort" I'm not talking about "seeking out people like you because people who look different make you feel weird". I'm talking about an increased level of comfortability and I just don't have better words for describing "any person's body is fine or even good but ones that are most similar to mine have more ease around them because they're more familiar".
It's very not about being uncomfortable first and seeking to relieve it. I think that people who feel that way need to take a long hard look at why and take the time to untangle those feelings so they can address them and reframe whatever thoughts are surrounding them that cause those feelings.
Which is why I think it's entirely reasonable to have spaces that are for specific body types or sexualities etc. I don't think it's appropriate for those spaces to be hostile to people who they aren't marketed to. That falls into the "we really need to do better at socializing our kids" because there is an appropriate way to express a need for support/positivity from a particular subset of the population without being a dick about it.
My thought process was really just that I think it's okay to have [x] only support/positivity places as long as everyone is actually following the generally acknowledged guidelines of "be a decent human being" and it's clearly labeled (not retroactively decided and a bunch of people rudely kicked out or worse) and that if we're going to support that for some of the spectrum of human sexuality and gender then we need to support it across the spectrum. And yeah I feel like any exclusive group needs to have an explicit and positive purpose and, again, be short-lived. Really, like 95+% of places should be inclusive. Maybe more. Spaces should be inclusive by default. Spaces that aren't inclusive should really consider why they aren't and if that's a justifiable reason. I just also feel like people should be allowed to have their own spaces even if it's the majority group.
