There's been a push for a long time to bring back the term "transsexual." But the truth is the current trans discourse is more or less talking about transsexuals. All the political pushback is about hrt and surgeries. Things like that.But representing us are, for the most part, transvestites. People who don't intend to or can't medically transition. The hons and crossdressers who wear a wig and some panties and call it a day. There's nothing wrong with being a transvestite. But it's entirely different from being a transsexual. Transvestites need a name to describe them that normies are familiar with. Transvestite itself is a bit gross and dated, sounding, hon is too offensive. Crossdresser and Drag Queen are better but don't quite hit the mark. Perhaps a better word would fit but the category needs a name.
>>35530973cringe boomer term, just use tranny
>>35530973>Transvestite itself is a bit gross and dated, sounding, hon is too offensive. Crossdresser and Drag Queen are better but don't quite hit the mark.what's the difference between any of these and "transgender" if you interpret it literally for people who put in effort to alter or mask their physical gender markers? though I agree that "transsexual" makes more sense when referring to "gender" dysphoria rooted in physical sex traits, there's no consistency here in the terminology unless you use the umbrella terms popular today
>>35530973Many trannies view hons as bad optics. But the truth is that for the most part they have nothing to do with us.Dresses exist. Men with beards exist. Men look bad in dresses. There will always be an incentive, comedy, horror, w/e, to put men in dresses. You can't stop it. Get over it. Just give it a name so it's not conflated with us.
>>35531121Transvestite doesn't include transsexuals. Transgender includes transexuals.
>>35531183>Transvestite doesn't include transsexuals.so you're redefining it to be exclusive to people who do not medically alter their sex traits, only cosmetically? is this use consistent with any other understanding of the words?>Transgender includes transexuals.now I'm even more confused, please explain
>>35530973>There's been a push for a long time to bring back the term "transsexual."No, there hasn't been. Transsexual can stay gone as a term.
>>35531204>redefiningI'm not redefining it, that's how the words were used back in the day.>is this use consistent with any other understanding of the words?Yes. How they've always been used. Transvestite is clothes only. Transsexual changes their sex. >now I'm even more confused, please explainThe modern transgender term includes both transsexuals and transvestites as both are changing their gender presentation.
>>35531121Ideal transsexual is identical to a biological woman
>>35531241Perhaps a new term with the same meaning?
>>35530973yes
