Male bodied/Female bodied

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.

Really? I can't find that in any of those threads. But either way, we're just repeating ourselves at this point. I'm saying medical terms are not comfortable terms for everyone. You think they should be. It's gridlock so we just have to recognize that we'll both use the words that make sense for us and respect that.

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.

Totally understandable, and I appreciate you explaining your intentions. Ultimately I feel like this thread ended in a good place and hopefully people can take something away from it. I see that your question was genuine and not trying to be snarky and I apologize for reading something into it that wasn't there.

I do think it's good that people want to talk about it. If people want to ask sincere questions I'm actually happy to answer them if I can. I'd much rather someone come right out and ask a question than stay quiet because they don't want to step on anyone's toes. It's better to ask the question and come away from it with some new information then to silence yourself and never really understand. I totally understand that. I was incorrectly interpreting your post as more of a rhetorical question that was making a value judgment about the terms, which it wasn't.

These kinds of issues are REALLY hard to talk about without people getting hurt. EVERYONE has a different idea about what good, accurate and body-positive language is. I had this conversation the other day about the word "fat". Some people I know loooove that word and proudly say things like "Oh, my fat ass would *never* fit in that!" It's not a self-degrading thing at all; they love being big and say "fat" with pride. Other people HATE that word and find it very triggering. Language is complicated, but being able to have conversations likes this makes things a lot easier.

Actually, right now I feel MORE connected to the EF community because I'm glad to know people actually want to learn about this stuff. I'm glad I can say I was wrong when I assumed the intentions of starting this conversation

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.

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.

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'"

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.

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.

You know, I saw a documentary regarding the surgical procedures for sex reassignment surgery. Apparently, the surgery is providing the clients with very similar results. What I want to know is, since the community is using different terms for the transgendered, are there really large differences in how sex toys work? For example, lets take a simple vibe, not a g spot vibe but a traditional vibe. Will that work the same way for a trans individual? I think that if the toy will work differently for a trans individual we will want to mention it, but we will want to make it clear that is what we mean. Thoughts?

I have yet to find a way to not offend someone in some walk of life. Any term you use will offend someone. On Eden, some people prefer to use slang while others prefer to use traditional verbiage. I think that the most important thing we as reviewers need to make sure of is that we are not attacking anyone whether it be an individual or group of people in our reviews. In today's world there are so many different types of sexuality and practices that it is impossible to cover them all in a single review. Even so, if we look for offensive terms we will find them. If we look for out right attacking on reviews we will more than likely hardly ever find them. The truth is, Eden is a community where everyone is able to speak their mind and not fear retaliation. Everyone is able to share their thoughts and experiences with sexuality as long as it meets legal grounds. This is a wonderful community, and we need to remember that when tensions get high.

Thank you, Victoria!

Thank you, Epiphora. That last paragraph is exactly the point.

This.

Also, I see no issue with male-bodied and female-bodied and have used it in my reviews. It includes everyone. I know that this may not even be the best since not all people may consider themselves male or female-bodied, but I think it's a happy medium that doesn't confuse people but is still inclusive.

If you're offended, you might want to look at yourself a little closer. Cis privilege is something that is always around and not often realized. Try to have the courtesy to be open to a new word since it means more people will be comfortable.

Unfortunately, this type of 'help' is not helping for me, I'm too tired to even look up what othering means. I am not a native of English and all the negative connotations that you may see in every level of language are not yet mastered by me, some but not all. If I understand you are saying that transsexual is an oppresive term? Then, I'll remember, and I had never heard the word cissexual before today either.

I think you were upset about all the conversation because you were thinking on a level that we tried not to start a discussion on, which is how people feel about their genitals when you are comfortable or not with the body you were born with, whether or not you went through surgery. I think you can see that we tried to keep it on the subject of the genitals themselves. I think the psychology that you defend, righteously, could have been an entirely other discussion on its own. And yes, I was afraid too that this discussion could go in a very bad direction this morning.

I think discussions like this are really interesting and they remind me along with reviews like yours of a part of society that I never see, and that I tend to forget, and thanks to you, I remember.

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.

I feel strongly that others should be able to use trans friendly words in reviews without being interrogated. However, I don't use them, and that is my personal choice. It's honestly not something I ever *decided.* It's how I write. I realize that there is an element of cisprivilege in the way I refer to vaginas, and I will never deny that.

However, when I held Courtney Trouble week and reviewed a ton of queer porn, I emailed Courtney and asked for pronouns for every single one of her performers. When referring to specific people, I think it is very important to use the pronouns they have chosen for themselves. That is one way in which my reviews are trans friendly, and I'm proud of it.

I do not believe that asking about what makes us alienated is about cisprivilege, which I do not particularly like as a term. At one point it's too easy to rely on victimization. I disagree 'cisprivilege' was the case here, except for the sake of argumenting.

To reply to your question, I personally find that front hole is alienating. I have been sexually abused/used, and simplifying it as a hole makes it awkward for me. No one I slept with has ever made me feel more than a masturbation sleeve. Yes, I know the term is not meant to be directed to the vagina-ed people, but it’s still right next to it and I can’t help making the association. I had noticed before, and I did not and I am not lashing out at anyone, but I am just bringing another minority/group/reality that may contradict the given neutrality of the term used. It’s not just about gender or identity.

I also find interesting how the situation was compared to people of color. Here again, I do not like the term people of color, because it acknowledges a difference based on the color of the skin. Which I believe is still a form of racial-based expression. Racism is almost completely non-existent where I live and honestly, I do not usually notice any differences in the tone of the skin unless the topic is brought up. However, if I have to use any term, I say African American. It’s based on ancestral origin, and not based on color. However, in this case, I also find it amusing how this does not go both ways. I should start feeling offended if someone called me white, but then meh.

All that to say is that it is impossible to find that perfect term that will work for everyone and make everyone happy. This is why at the beginning of the discussion the thought of finding something that would fit everyone was frustrating to me. Sex, Lies and Pre-Law said that trans people did not agree among themselves on the terms they prefer, why would anyone not trans or, even very well versed in the lexicon of that societal niche, be able to choose a single word that would work? How can actual gender, past gender, identity, orientation, social expectations, personal issues, identity issues be resumed in one or even two words?

What I wonder is why would they feel offended if the words we use do not fit their situation. It’s not fair if they can’t even manage on their own and agree on something. Maybe they should also be more understandable that we might not be able to, and it’s not because we are resisting their rights or anything.

Anyways, I am aware I am quite rough around the edges, and I have a lot to improve in the way I go through discussions like this, and I apologized in the beginning if I was to offend anyone, it is not my intention.

Let's all hug and grope a little.

*Many good arguments have been made as to why that is important to some and less a priority for others. My only additional suggestion would be that anybody using uncommon acronyms and words that may be new to the reader go one step further in their efforts to enlighten and actually include a short definition so readers do not have to expose themselves as ignorant by asking or take the trouble to Google.*

I think this is a totally reasonable request. I think I'm going to just say "female assigned at birth" instead of FAAB and I'll probably make the phrase into a link to a quick definition of the phrase.