Male bodied/Female bodied

" It doesn't mean you have to use the words, but it also doesn't mean opening a thread calling into question whether or not these words are "necessary". To answer your question, yes, these words are absolutely necessary for many people. If they don't apply to ya, pick the one that does (like I said, I use slashes for that reason) and move on."

I disagree.

Calling into question if the words are necessary has likely enlightened and explained them to many people.

We all pick and choose how we say things in our own reviews. People have called into question using words like cunt and cock and pussy rather than medical terms like vagina and penis.

This is no different.

Without questions there is no learning and no answers.

Personally? When doing a review of a toy and how it works for me I'll use terms that are appropriate for my body. It's the only body I can speak for. Especially in light of the huge differences between my body and a trans body that you're pointing out. I'm not sure using female bodied is any better in this regard than using vagina. And as I'm not a trans person, I can't know. So I'll use what's appropriate for my body, since it's my body that's used the toy.

Hopefully, everyone can be understanding of each other and tolerance can go both ways. I would hate to see people expected to use terms they don't understand.

Like you said...

Pick the term that works for you and move on. less

Here are just a few examples of people in this community establishing a variety of terms as options to use when talking about trans people and their bodies. It is clear that this is an important issue to a lot of people and I feel like this original post and a lot of the subsequent comments are being dismissive. I'm saying this because it seems people don't understand why I'm upset or think that I'm creating "drama". It's only "drama" for others because it doesn't directly affect them. less

I agree that without these kinds of conversations, no one would learn, and I appreciate you and everyone else in this conversation that is sincerely interested in trying to understand. If I am coming off as hostile it's only because I feel attacked and am being defensive. These are also issues that are very, very close to my heart. At the end of the day feeling attacked and upset is worth it for me if someone walks away from the conversation with a better understanding of this stuff.

I think your policy is a good one. You're talking about your body and you're using the words you are comfortable with in reference to it; that makes total sense and I would never suggest you use any other words. But similarly, I need to use the words that make me comfortable.

You're also (in my opinion, not everyone will agree) 100% on point about how the words female bodied and male bodied are not really accurate. I usually put female-bodied/FAAB (female assigned at birth) because it's not really accurate to call a trans man's body "female". It's not a female body, you're right. It's a male body. It may look a little different than a cis male body, but it's still a male body. So I definitely dislike that term but I have noticed a lot of people use it, so for the sake of being clear and also to make everyone feel comfortable, I use both. Personally FAAB/MAAB make the most sense; you're saying that's what the person was *assigned* because our doctors go by vagina = female and penis = male. It's still placing the emphasis on the assigned sex, so it's not perfect, but it's better than mislabeling someone's genitals.

Again, I do not want to stand in the way of conversation and learning. As long as people are sensitive and understanding, I am more than willing to engage this conversation. The way I read the original post, though, was basically "Why are these people being so high maintenance and picky?" It made me feel singled out and it made me feel like my needs were an annoyance to others. less

"Again, I do not want to stand in the way of conversation and learning. As long as people are sensitive and understanding, I am more than willing to engage this conversation. The way I read the original post, though, was basically "Why are these people being so high maintenance and picky?" It made me feel singled out and it made me feel like my needs were an annoyance to others."

I'm totally not trying to be a bitch. Truly.

But "you read" and "made you feel" are key words here.

I was actually trying to be diplomatic and unemotional about the whole thing, stating my worry about confusion, the fact that I didn't understand why one set of words was more useful than another, questioning myself and if I was overthinking and asking for thoughts.

I *am* sorry it made you feel attacked. I understand something being close to your heart and important to you.

But perhaps that closeness and importance caused you to interpret my tone and intentions differently because it was genuinely a serious question born of my confusion - and fear that things were being made more confusing for the mass majority of unaware readers of reviews - that had me posting, not an intention to attack or make you feel bad.

In fact, I deliberately left off pointing fingers or naming names to avoid that. You're also not the only person to have used the terms I was questioning.

Again, I am sorry if you felt pointed out or attacked.

I genuinely just wanted to open up discussion about this and see who felt how and why. less

First, let me say that it was not my intention to single you out. It just so happened that I read your review with terminology I'd never seen before at the time this discussion began and I used it as an example. There are many people who use this language in their reviews. The thing is, when I think of the reviews written by those I know to be MtF, for this site, none of them use this terminology.

So, how do we proceed? Are we really expected to try and accommodate each and every individual's preference on gender and sexual identity terminology so as not to possibly offend someone? If so, please, cease using cissexual to refer to me or anybody like me because I find it offensive.

When I write a review that says 'this works for females,' I assume people are smart enough to realize I am talking about anatomy. Because nobody is going to start talking about how a dildo would not work in your vagina just because you identify as male. Of course it would, it would be ridiculous of me to suggest otherwise. We are talking about how toys work with your body parts, not your gender identity.

When I say the word vagina, I expect that you and everyone else who has ever taken 5th grade health, understands which part of the body I am referring to. And if you don't happen to have a vagina or you consider this area of your body to be not a vagina but something else entirely, I still give you the benefit of the doubt in that you are smart enough to get that a dildo can be in whatever particular body cavity you may have, regardless of what you call it, where it's located or how it came to be a part of your body.

At the end of the day, I take my cues from the writings and terminology used by the trans folk who post reviews and articles here. The link you posted above actually has one of them specifically stating that generally trans folk do not like being called male bodied or female bodied. less

It's interesting that you think it's offensive to use the term cissexual but you don't have any qualms about using the word transsexual to define other people's gender. Funny how that doesn't work both ways for you. I guess it's okay for SOME people to qualify someone's gender with extraneous adjectives, but not others. Why doesn't this surprise me. Yeah, it feels kind of weird to have your gender not recognized as centralized and normative; it feels weird for someone else to re-name and re-frame your gender. Again, it works both ways. Why are trans people the only ones that need extra adjectives to explain their gender?

Also, if you read my above comments you'll see that I also do not like the term female and male bodied particularly. I prefer FAAB/MAAB although even those words aren't perfect. However just because one of "them" (seriously, if you wanna ruffle feathers keep turning trans people into a single static, unvarying "them") said they don't like that term, doesn't mean others don't. There is no single term that everyone agrees on.

Additionally, you are presuming that you know who is trans and who is not. You are presuming that I am cis, and that you don't have to listen to me. You do not know who is trans, because not everyone that is trans feels the need to tack "trans" on to their gender. Many people are stealth. So actually, at the end of the day? You don't really know WHO you are silencing when you refuse to "take cues" from them. Although I'm not trying to tell you how to write. I'm simply saying that I'm going to write the way that makes me comfortable even if some people need to Google a term to satisfy their curiosity. Some people might read a review and see "P-spot" and not know what that is. They may also need to open Google. That's the beauty of reviews; they can be educational.

I never suggested someone wouldn't know what the word "vagina" means. Seriously? Again, I've already covered this ground in above comments but I will repeat myself one more time to see if it helps. It's not that some trans men won't know what a vagina is. Clearly they will. It's that LOTS of trans men do NOT identify that part of their body in that way, and when "vagina" is the way the conversation is being framed they feel alienated or even triggered. less

Actually, I do use the terms "feminine-bodied" and "masculine-bodied," which is similar to this. There's nothing wrong with being sensitive to people, and if it confuses someone, they can certainly just ask (no question is a stupid question!). I do not think that it's people trying to get their word counts up either, as was mentioned, because most of the people who I've seen use the terms are just trying to be all-inclusive as opposed to "leaving some individuals out."

There's nothing wrong either way, with saying "this works very good for the g-spot" or with saying, "this works well for female-bodied individuals." On most reviews I've read, they've clarified both - that the product is good clitorally AND for feminine-bodied individuals. Now, as for anally, I've never seen a person say that something's only made for "a man" for anal. That's a bit unnecessary, considering the fact that most people do have a functioning anal canal. But to say that it's better for the p-spot? Sure, why not?

I do not understand, though, what the problem is either way. I have not seen a review where they've only said, "This is good for women," "This is good for men," "This is good for female-bodied people," "This is good for male-bodied people," without describing the toy's function or what body part(s) it works well on.

As I side note, I hate the terms female- and male- bodied. Which is why I use feminine/masculine, because a transgendered man's body is male, no matter what it appears to be, same with a transgendered woman. But then again, I use terms that I've never seen people use - like my "trans-" use. I use "trans-" because a person may be a number of different forms, like transgendered, transsexual, a transvestite. I use "trans-," because, to me, it's more inclusive than the now-umbrella term "transgendered."



Alright, to answer the original post and my idea on it, if I was not clear: I think that it's fine that these words be used. I also think that it's fine if they're not - I'm not personally offended by people who do not use them. I do not feel that they add confusion, other than to those who do not understand them, who, by all means, can ask if they are confused. I also do not feel that they NEED to be used though. Use of a word is not needed, so I do not believe that that term is good. Should they be used? Perhaps, depending on the situation. Will they always be used? No, they won't.

Is it really such a bad thing, though, to use them? Because I am not understanding how it's so bad, if the person also clarifies the anatomy that the product works well on. If it's confusing to someone, they should feel just fine asking the person who used the term what it means. less

Actually, to be fair, I probably should have mentioned that I don't actually care about the term cissexual, I was just trying to make a point. If you are so very worried about alienation of a small portion audience, what about the rest of us, what about what makes us alienated?

Your response, when you thought I was serious was very telling. There was no serious consideration of my request. Only mocking, sarcasm and a "see what it feels like" attitude. Aren't we all equally deserving of the sensitivity you profess to care about?

And, you are correct in the statement that I don't know for sure who is and who is not a specific identity. But again, I can only take my cues from people who speak with authority on the topic and make their preferences known to me.

I cannot begin to guess what offends people who do not actually say they are offended. less

Whew. I really appreciated this comment. Thanks for weighing in on this.

As I've said (about 3 times at this point, hah) I also don't really LOVE those terms. I think they're inaccurate. I said in a previous comment that a trans male body is really NOT a female body. It may look different than a cis male body, but it's still a male body. I tend to say female-bodied/FAAB though, because I know a lot of people do use female-bodied for themselves, and I also know that a lot of people probably aren't familiar with FAAB/MAAB. Believe it or not, I actually have put a lot of thought into the words I choose and whether or not they would be clear. I figure using slashes covers all my bases and gives context clues for what I mean when I say FAAB/MAAB.

For the whole community, I really love both of these pages as far as resources on language politics go.

"Language Politics"
"Semantics, Gender & 'Cis'" less

I understand what you mean, and I saw that you had said that (a few other people did, I believe - I skimmed over responses). And that may very well be why the "out" trans- individuals who write reviews for Edenfantasys do NOT use those terms - because they probably do not prefer them either (though I won't speak for anyone, since I do not really know anyone or their opinions).


I like those pages, by the way! They're very good reads, regardless of what they're talking about. less

Actually, to be fair, I probably should have mentioned that I don't actually care about the term cissexual, I was just trying to make a point. If you are so very worried about alienation of a small portion audience, what about the rest of us, what about what makes us alienated?

Your response, when you thought I was serious was very telling. There was no serious consideration of my request. Only mocking, sarcasm and a "see what it feels like" attitude. Aren't we all equally deserving of the sensitivity you profess to care about?

And, you are correct in the statement that I don't know for sure who is and who is not a specific identity. But again, I can only take my cues from people who speak with authority on the topic and make their preferences known to me.

I cannot begin to guess what offends people who do not actually say they are offended. less

"If you are so very worried about alienation of a small portion audience, what about the rest of us, what about what makes us alienated?"

This statement is the very definition of cisprivilege. Yes, the bottom line is that no matter what language is used, SOMEBODY and SOME GROUP is going to feel alienated. But why is using something like "vagina/front hole" (which is what SL&P said ze uses) alienating to a cisperson? It's not. It's more inclusive. I think we cispeople can handle seeing an extra term tacked on, whereas leaving that term out can be sucky for a trans reader.

The bottom line, as I see it, is that we are all free to speak in whichever terms we want. I'm pretty sure that SL&P was simply explaining how *ze* chooses to use terms such as "FAAB" and "front hole" to be more trans inclusive. I don't see where ze was saying that we should all change the way we write because otherwise there will be an apocalypse.

Using more trans friendly words is a courtesy. We are not all required to extent it. I will defend this issue to the death, but I will likely never use these words in my own reviews (mainly because I tend to only talk about my own anatomy, not what something "works for," but still). The problem arises when cis people starting bemoaning the use of these words. They are there for a reason, and sometimes no, they're not there to make you as a cis person comfortable. You are comfortable day after day in your assigned gender. You can handle some words that may sound foreign to you at first. less

"If you are so very worried about alienation of a small portion audience, what about the rest of us, what about what makes us alienated?"

This statement is the very definition of cisprivilege. Yes, the bottom line is that no matter what language is used, SOMEBODY and SOME GROUP is going to feel alienated. But why is using something like "vagina/front hole" (which is what SL&P said ze uses) alienating to a cisperson? It's not. It's more inclusive. I think we cispeople can handle seeing an extra term tacked on, whereas leaving that term out can be sucky for a trans reader.

The bottom line, as I see it, is that we are all free to speak in whichever terms we want. I'm pretty sure that SL&P was simply explaining how *ze* chooses to use terms such as "FAAB" and "front hole" to be more trans inclusive. I don't see where ze was saying that we should all change the way we write because otherwise there will be an apocalypse.

Using more trans friendly words is a courtesy. We are not all required to extent it. I will defend this issue to the death, but I will likely never use these words in my own reviews (mainly because I tend to only talk about my own anatomy, not what something "works for," but still). The problem arises when cis people starting bemoaning the use of these words. They are there for a reason, and sometimes no, they're not there to make you as a cis person comfortable. You are comfortable day after day in your assigned gender. You can handle some words that may sound foreign to you at first. less

This might help you understand why you're kind of comparing apples and oranges when you suggest that transsexual and cissexual are equally powerful and equally oppressive terms.

I am saying this in a 100% genuine way and not at all to be condescending. I think this is a really excellent resource when it comes to language. less

"If you are so very worried about alienation of a small portion audience, what about the rest of us, what about what makes us alienated?"

This statement is the very definition of cisprivilege. Yes, the bottom line is that no matter what language is used, SOMEBODY and SOME GROUP is going to feel alienated. But why is using something like "vagina/front hole" (which is what SL&P said ze uses) alienating to a cisperson? It's not. It's more inclusive. I think we cispeople can handle seeing an extra term tacked on, whereas leaving that term out can be sucky for a trans reader.

The bottom line, as I see it, is that we are all free to speak in whichever terms we want. I'm pretty sure that SL&P was simply explaining how *ze* chooses to use terms such as "FAAB" and "front hole" to be more trans inclusive. I don't see where ze was saying that we should all change the way we write because otherwise there will be an apocalypse.

Using more trans friendly words is a courtesy. We are not all required to extent it. I will defend this issue to the death, but I will likely never use these words in my own reviews (mainly because I tend to only talk about my own anatomy, not what something "works for," but still). The problem arises when cis people starting bemoaning the use of these words. They are there for a reason, and sometimes no, they're not there to make you as a cis person comfortable. You are comfortable day after day in your assigned gender. You can handle some words that may sound foreign to you at first. less

You're making some excellent points that make a lot of sense to me. I guess I'm just wondering- if you feel so strongly about using trans friendly words, why don't you include them in your reviews? I know that mainly you do talk about your own or your boyfriend's body, but there are times when you could use inclusive language (such as "The Jollet is not meant for thrusting; it’s meant to just hang out in the vagina" and "It’s not for the faint of vagina") and you do not.

I LOVE your reviews and your site and I swear I'm not trying to be contentious, I just want to hear more about your philosophy on this and how you personally make these language choices. less

"If you are so very worried about alienation of a small portion audience, what about the rest of us, what about what makes us alienated?"

This statement is the very definition of cisprivilege. Yes, the bottom line is that no matter what language is used, SOMEBODY and SOME GROUP is going to feel alienated. But why is using something like "vagina/front hole" (which is what SL&P said ze uses) alienating to a cisperson? It's not. It's more inclusive. I think we cispeople can handle seeing an extra term tacked on, whereas leaving that term out can be sucky for a trans reader.

The bottom line, as I see it, is that we are all free to speak in whichever terms we want. I'm pretty sure that SL&P was simply explaining how *ze* chooses to use terms such as "FAAB" and "front hole" to be more trans inclusive. I don't see where ze was saying that we should all change the way we write because otherwise there will be an apocalypse.

Using more trans friendly words is a courtesy. We are not all required to extent it. I will defend this issue to the death, but I will likely never use these words in my own reviews (mainly because I tend to only talk about my own anatomy, not what something "works for," but still). The problem arises when cis people starting bemoaning the use of these words. They are there for a reason, and sometimes no, they're not there to make you as a cis person comfortable. You are comfortable day after day in your assigned gender. You can handle some words that may sound foreign to you at first. less

I just want to say that the way I feel now about this conversation is (thankfully) very different than when it began. I'm really glad to see people trying to be understanding and also Googling and researching and asking questions. It does my heart good, I swear. I agree with Victoria's comment and again, I feel a lot better about this whole dialogue and I am really proud of the way this has turned out. Thank you to everyone that has participated in this conversation. less