you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]piylot 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

But from my experience tomboy wasn't used pejoratively, girls happily called themselves tomboys, and it didn't have any implications about being in the wrong body. It does have "boy" in the name, but nobody would make any mistake in understanding tomboys were girls.

[–]Wot 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

Tomboy still implies that to like "masculine" things means you are male-like. Male adjacent. It's opposite, girly girl on the other hand reduces womanhood in its entirety to femininity. It implies actual, real, proper womanhood is femininity; that's why whatever is "girly" is only feminine. That's why fems looks at studs/butch/gnc and think they want to be men because to reject femininity means you reject womanhood since both are seen as being the same.

[–]piylot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Hmm, but the word "masculine" also means male-like. I'm not sure that there's any way to use a descriptor that avoids that. And when we all understand what masculine activities/interests/appearance means, can we avoid having a word for it at all without trying to deny a pattern that's prominent in our culture?

[–]Wot 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

And when we all understand what masculine activities/interests/appearance means, can we avoid having a word for it at all without trying to deny a pattern that's prominent in our culture?

Nothing wrong with having a word for something but it should exist along side gender abolitionism or else we get very much the more of the same arbitrary gender roles perpetuation and the TRA bs we are dealing with today.