I've settled on the idea that "How can you tell the difference between a 'real' trans person and someone who was passing for other reasons?" is unimportant I mean, it's interesting if you really care about the person as an individual but unanswerable in the endhttps://twitter.com/iridienne/status/1377475676400283651 …
-
-
Like look I've said I don't really think George Eliot was trans because she never "presented as a man" in normal day to day life, she used she/her pronouns and wore dresses and her husband and her family and everyone called her "Mary Ann" But ultimately so what
Show this thread -
There are people in our modern world who are "only trans on the Internet" about whom you could say the same thing Only difference is today we have a word and a concept "trans" allowing them to confirm it with the words "I'm trans but only on the Internet"
Show this thread -
What we do know is that the George Eliot "persona" mattered to her, on some emotional level, it was something she was personally defensive of after it no longer served any mercenary practical purpose She wouldn't let them change the name on her books long after she was outed
Show this thread -
There's obviously SOMETHING there, in the ballpark of what we'd call "being trans" You can tell because of the degree to which TERFs have to make shit up to deny it was there ("There were no lady novelists back then and if Eliot had been outed she'd have gone to prison")
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The double entendre is really well done, masterwork.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.