What I *Want* Is A *Cis Male* Body To Live In

A few months ago, I watched this fascinating interview with a schizophrenic woman named Cecelia. Cecelia suffers from frequent, often terrifying hallucinations, that she’s had to teach herself to ignore in her day-to-day life.

And while this fact alone would justify sharing the interview, what really blew my mind was Cecelia’s response when the interviewer asked her if she was hallucinating as they were talking:

I don't answer that question. I've sort of made it a rule with myself not to talk about whether or not I'm hallucinating at that moment. Because then, the first response is, "Oh, where is the hallucination?"

And then a common reaction is that everyone in the room looks in that direction. [...] And that's very dangerous. Because then you have real life interacting with your hallucination. And that could really hurt the psyche.

It’s hard to overstate the predicament Cecelia finds herself in. Her hallucinations are simultaneously completely real to her and not objectively real at all. She has to ignore these terrifying visions to have any hope of appearing “normal.” And she’s able to function only because she maintains a sharp, deliberate line between reality and delusion.

I was reminded of Cecilia as I had the following long but instructive conversation on Twitter.

We begin with my response to a user named India, who’d asked for proof that some people deny the existence of same-sex attraction. Feffy took over from there.

---

India:

Can someone show me where the claim trans people are against ‘same sex’ attraction comes from? Even as someone involved in the debate, I can’t find anything. Seems to be a GC/Religious Right smear, which has taken on a febrile life of it’s own.

---

Steve QJ:

---

Feffy:

I mean not entirely correct but not entirely wrong either. You can't possibly know if someone is trans or cis, so proclaiming to know every single person's genitals is actually impossible. Gay and lesbians exist obviously but gays and lesbians who are attracted to trans ppl are not less gay or lesbian than those not attracted to trans people.

---

Steve QJ:

Whether someone is trans or cis is irrelevant to their sex though. Didn't it used to be trans people who reminded us that sex and gender are not the same? Same-SEX attracted people are attracted to people of the same sex. Regardless of how they identify.

And seriously, can we stop pretending that genitals are the only way to discern sex? The concept of “passing” only exists because there are countless subtle details that cue us into somebody's sex, way before we see their genitals. Yes, you absolutely can tell in most cases.

---

Feffy:

Here is the thing. Us trans people try to make what it means to be trans in the simplest of ways easy for you to understand so that maybe you will get it. Sex and gender are not exactly the same but also not entirely separate.

That's the point of having gender dysphoria and/or being trans. And frankly you people who keep making statements that gay and lesbian people who are attracted to trans people are now no longer gay or lesbiand are the ones who are reading [Editor’s note: Feffy meant “erasing” here] homosexuality and gays/lesbians.

---

Steve QJ:

I think you're failing then. In fact, the way trans people explain what being trans is seems to confuse trans people as well. I'm honestly listening. I'm trying to understand. But the explanations are often incoherent.

It's called homosexuality. Not homogenderism. Yes, if you're a gay man who is sexually attracted to females you're no longer exclusively homosexual. Just as a straight man who has sex with men is no longer exclusively heterosexual. All of this is fine.

---

Feffy:

So erasing a man's sexual orientation is fine if it's with a trans person. Yep. Cool. Awesome. Totally the trans people who are erasing homosexuality. Totally not the GC or TERFs who are doing it.

---

Steve QJ:

I'm not a "GC" or a "TERF". If you want me to respect the way you identify, don't assign labels to me that I reject. And I'm not the person saying that same-sex attraction, literally the definition of homoSEXuality, "isn't a thing."

---

Feffy:

You're not listening. You literally just said in another comment that my husband isn't a gay man.

---

Steve QJ:

No, I said that somebody who is attracted to people of the opposite sex is no longer exclusively homosexual. He can, obviously, identify however he wants. I'm sure what I think means absolutely nothing to him. But words still mean things.

---

Feffy:

Did you or did you not make a comment that implies that my husband is not a gay man if he is with a trans man?

---

Steve QJ:

How do you define gay?

---

Feffy:

Man with another man, doing romantic and intimate actions that may or may not involve sex, physical contact, dated, marriage, etc.

---

Steve QJ:

Great. How do you define man.

---

Feffy:

Person who identifies as a man who may or may not have been assigned male at birth or has had documents changed as part of affirmation surgery and treatment.

---

Steve QJ:

Okay. So here's where our problem lies. You can't use the word you're defining in the definition of that word. You see that, right?

---

Feffy:

Yeah. You aren't actually listening or even wanting to listen. I'll be sure to keep you in the far memory bank as a homophobe regardless of your own identity. "let's tell gay people they aren't really gay if they like trans people".

The fact you think insulting my family is the way to get someone to have an "intellectual conversation" to debate someone's existence and identity is astonishing. You're a homophobe for stating a gay man being attracted to men and trans men is no longer a gay man.

The fact you can't at all see how that is a problem makes you exceedingly arrogant and any interactions further are counterintuitive to any possibility of further conversation developing in progressive and productive ways.

You aren't interested in learning about trans people in an authentic way. You aren't interested in actually listening. You just want to advance your point of view further because your mind is already made up. That's not a good faith conversation and that's very evident.

---

Feffy blocked me after this reply, but I decided to respond anyway (even if you’ve been blocked, you can reply to your own tweets, and the other people in the conversation will be notified).

If somebody chooses not to speak to me anymore, that’s totally fine. But not if they sign off by calling me a homophobe.

Anyway, it seems my response changed Feffy’s mind. Because the conversation continues below.

---

Steve QJ:

Ah! Simple question that you can't answer, so you block and run away. How courageous. It's actually precisely because I"m *not* a homophobe that I think same-sex attraction is a "thing".

If I wasn't interested in learning I wouldn't be having a conversation at all. I'm simply asking for a coherent definition of what "man" means. That's table stakes for a good-faith conversation about issues involving men.

As for not being interested in a conversation or having my mind made up, I'm not the one who blocked you for asking a simple question, remember? How can I "learn in an authentic way" if I'm not allowed to ask for basic logical consistency?

I'm not insulting your family at all! I wish you and your husband nothing but happiness. As I said, I'm sure he couldn't care less what a stranger on the internet thinks. But again, same sex attraction is a thing. And it's called homosexuality. That's literally all I'm saying.

---

Feffy:

See. Here is the thing. You didn't ask or show any way of wanting to learn in an authentic way. Your immediate responses were to say "well a gay man who is sexually attracted to a female is no longer exclusively gay". That doesn't show an interest in maybe changing your own biases on that limited view and understanding of how many gay men see themselves.

As for the definition you want with a logical consistency, Man is typically a human who was assigned male a birth or another human who was assigned female at birth and experiences extreme dysphoria in which their dysphoria is resolve by affirming a male gendered identity (masculinization, having male like gender roles, taking hormones for masculinization of body, surgery to create anatomy features of a male and affirm gender identity). Gender is not just a social construct.

I *know* that's been used a lot but gender identity and sex as in genitals is very much linked together for a trans person just like it is for orientation. Many people try to ignore things that are connected for the sake of something more important: relationships, costs to change the body, hatred that can come if you are open about your identity in any way, but I can tell you that me just having "society affirm me as a masculine woman and not feeling like I need to get all these surgeries and hormones" would literally do absolutely nothing.

I would still be suicidal. I would still be harming myself. I would still be praying even if I dont actually believe in a god that I would one day wake up in a cis male body because that's the gender dysphoria for me. I don't even want to be in a trans man body.

What I *want* is a *cis male* body to live in.

---

“I would still be praying even if I dont actually believe in a god that I would one day wake up in a cis male body because that's the gender dysphoria for me. I don't even want to be in a trans man body. What I *want* is a *cis male* body to live in.”

Trans discourse is plagued with nastiness and dishonesty. Because the goal isn’t kindness, the goal isn’t truth or compromise, the goal is to have their genuine psychological distress validated. No matter the cost to women, or even, in many cases, themselves.

To borrow Cecelia’s framing, the goal is to have real life interact with the delusion. Damage to the psyche be damned.

It’s not as if I didn’t realise that some trans people felt this way, but it’s incredibly rare, especially online, to have somebody be so honest about it. As JK Rowling, put it recently:

Some mental distress is so acute the mind can’t grasp anything beyond its own agony.

---

Steve QJ:

Maybe you won't believe me, I'm not sure to what extent I'm "the enemy" in your mind, but I want to a) thank you for being so honest with me, and b) say I'm genuinely sorry that you're struggling.

I do approach these conversations with an authentic desire to learn, it's just that this isn't my first conversation. I've had literally hundreds of them over the past two years. I've learned a great deal. So a conversation with me can't simply be you talking and me listening and nodding. I'm not trans, but that doesn't mean I'm ignorant or biased.

I get that identity labels are important to some people. For many reasons. A few years ago there was a story about conservative, Christian men who had sexual relationships with other men but, identified as straight. Obviously that label of "straight" is very important to them. But I think we'd all be a little happier if we didn't attach so much weight to these labels and just let ourselves love who we love and be who we are and spend less time seeking validation from words.

Maybe, as you suggested, that would do absolutely nothing for you. But then the question is, and I'm genuinely asking, what would? (other than you waking up in a cis male body tomorrow)

---

Feffy:

The only thing that has made me happier and content with life is medical and social transition. Being known as just a man. I don't even talk about my transness offline. I don't want to talk about it to strangers and I hardly bring it up to those who do know. It's not important.

I am simply a man. A man who has required a bit of extra work to get to where I am physically because of developmental things I cannot help. Things that have been distressing since I was at least 4-5. I'm 30 now.

---

Steve QJ:

Hey, I just want to say thank you for the conversation. We see this differently, and not because I don't respect you or believe you. But I think it'll be impossible to get into it without it feeling as if I'm attacking you, which I'm not. Take good care of yourself.

---

As most of you will know, it is wildly out of character for me to bow out of a conversation when nothing has been resolved. But changing Feffy’s mind won’t make the world a better place. All it will do is add to the distress of a stranger who is already suffering.

Feffy has believed, since the age of 4 or 5, that there is something wrong with him. That he has “developmental” problems because he was born with a female body. That he, and other “gender-non-conforming” kids, need to be “fixed” with hormones and surgery.

But I don’t think Feffy ever needed to be fixed. Feffy is a female who doesn’t exhibit stereotypically female behaviour. Who chooses, I presume, to present in a more stereotypically masculine way. And, while none of this literally makes him a man, for the past 25 years, he’s had real life interacting with that delusion (I’m conscious that includes my referring to Feffy as “he”).

It’s hard to say which is worse; to continue to support a lie that’s been sustained for so long, or to finally tell the truth. After so much time has passed, either option will be harmful to the psyche. But whichever option we choose, we have a responsibility to ensure that as few other children as possible feel suicidal about who they are. To help them maintain a sharp, deliberate line between reality and delusion.