YouTuber, ex-philosopher 
Business email: info@contrapoints.com
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
I'm pretty hesitant to clarify my own views or address rumors, since in the past that's only made things worse for me, but it really never hurts to say: you don't need to be on hormones to be a trans woman, you don't have to pass, you don't have to be a bottom.
But when you're in conversation with straight men who think men who like trans women are, in virtue of that fact, gay, I think it helps to start with examples of trans women that they're likely to find comprehensible from the cis point of view.
I feel like I'm pushing the limits of cis toleration and understanding as is by being so forward about the "feminine penis" aspect. But it seems like a lot of trans people want me to push it even further to "hairy tops not on hormones can be women too"—which yes, yes they can!
But in view of the fact that most cis people don't really view ANY of us as women, I'm not sure that's the place to start, rhetorically speaking. But I'd be genuinely happy to be proved wrong!
But don’t you see that that approach throws those gnc women under the bus? That doesn’t win approval for trans women, it wins approval for white, fem, attractive trans women. Which accomplishes nothing in actually opening minds because it’s the same dynamic applied to cis women
I'm a cis man, and I agree that if a man is attracted to someone he perceives as a woman, it's not gay. However, hairy tops not on hormones may psychologically identify as women, but they probably aren't perceived as such. At least not initially.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
