Becoming is not imitation#

Wrote at 3am, take with a grain of salt.

The trans-exclusionary radical feminist position makes the claim that they oppose gender. That they are in favor of the abolition of gender.

An examination would show the contrary.

Their position is that "woman" is a stable category, grounded within biology. It rests upon the idea that gender identity is entirely dependent and bound to sex.

Who is a woman? To them it can only be the one who has been born with female anatomy, XX-chromosomes, a womb..

Is this not the consolidation of gender?

Patriarchy sees the woman as a natural kind: they are bodies marked by certain traits, destined for certain roles and restricted to certain forms of life.

The claim that only a person born female can be a woman is in essence a reproduction of that very logic.

The sex assigned at birth is a destiny.

A social order is the fact that is derived from it.

None of this is in any way "radical" as they would claim.

There is no true, fixed essence of "woman" that certain bodies possess and others don't.

To claim that there is goes against the idea of gender abolition.

In this view Trans women are seen as "invaders."

Non-binary people are nothing more than "confused."

The binary order, with its rigid ideas of how bodies should live, love, work, and desire, is preserved, it's reproduced.

Following this: it is no longer a question of the category of "woman" as a hierarchical social position, as the focus shifts on fighting over who gets to occupy this position.

It is fought over the idea of gender as if it was a thing instead of a process.

Gender however is not a thing, not an inner essence, it is a set of movements one enters into. It is, gestures, words, clothes, relations, desires, rhythms. Gender is inter bodily, in language, institutions, social organisations.

Gender is not a box we find ourselves thrown into. It is a current we are caught within and that we traverse.

Trans people, through changing how they live, speak, move, love, are not pretending to be something they are not. They are simply a representation of the reality that gender has never been a solid category.

What can look like a natural fact is simply revealed to be a pattern of repetition enforced by violence, habit and by law.

To refuse this role assigned to the body is to reject this pattern. It is to dismantle the statue of "Man" and "Woman".

We have no need to ask "Who belongs into the category of woman?". We must simply understand what it actually means to become in ways that do not conform to any category altogether.

Becoming is not imitation.

It is not "Men trying to be women" or "Women trying to be men"

It is a dismantling of chains that were bound around bodies telling them what to be.

It is the movement by which life can surpass the label imposed upon it.

Trans existence is only one expression of this.

Not to reinforce the category of gender, but to expose it for the prison it is.

In doing so, we open ourselves up to something more:

Not to define the category "Woman"

But to find the fewer and fewer reasons to sort people into the category in the first place.

Because a true radical would not guard this category, they would resent these borders, whom they serve and what they make impossible.

Because why must human difference be forced into opposition, each with its own desires, jobs, clothes, love they are allowed to indulge in but not supersede.

Trans-inclusivity goes beyond mere inclusion of existing categories. It goes to its end.

Not "to be a more accurate woman" but to have the question of whether one "is a real woman or not" make no more sense.

Because that is what gender abolition is.