This might be a thread. How does any of the trans activism actually benefit anyone born female? https://twitter.com/JamesBarry1789/status/1354575577425059840

I haven't seen a single trans male (so a person born as a woman transitioned to male) somehow getting all the male privilege and instantly becoming CEO of everything.

Somehow, all the trans female-to-male "power" seems centred on the "domestic" sphere. That's odd. Shouldn't they be out being CEOS and wearing sharp suits and conquering the world? Not "proving to everyone they can have a baby and still be a man"?

If transitioning to become a man means you get to stride about the world and have all the power, how come we don't magically have loads of trans males (born female) running companies, rising up through the ranks, getting promotions, being powerful?

For whatever reason, and despite the explosion in numbers of girls transitioning to men, we haven't seen a parallel increase in these new men actually achieving "men goals" and being promoted and preferred like men have always been. How is this possible?

Well, James, that's a rhetorical question, isn't it? Because these "trans men" (girls who become men) aren't ever really accepted in the power circles, now are they? They're never going to be the sharp-suited guys in the C-suites. That's Not. Going. To. Happen.

No girl who transitions to male is ever going to be given the privileges that men get. Unless you count “someone being a bit more respectful of you in a local space, because you think this is an issue” as a “privilege”.

Girls who transition to male don't get to be in the fraternities, or the old boys' clubs. They don't get the mentoring (which in real life is "I like you mate, you remind me of me, let me take you down the pub and talk to you about office politics.")

Girls who transition to male don't get the easy, back-slapping, in-jokes, brotherhood. And they never will.

Girls who transition to male are not supported in a corporate sense. No major company has a policy that centres "trans men". But that's not the point. (The point is to centre trans "women" who are male and have already made it up the corporate ladder to a position of power.)

"Trans men" (girls who become men) are only supported and pushed forward by the trans community as evidence that "a man can have cervical cancer" or "a man can have a baby." They are reduced to their bodily functions, just as women always have been.

Think about it. When was the last time you saw a trans man (a girl who became a man) in the news for anything other than "having a baby"?

When was the last time you saw a trans man (girl who became man) celebrated for running a company, or breaking records for sales, or managing a major event? Nope. Trans men only make the news when they get pregnant. Because it's a good headline to say "man gives birth".

But the trans community (which is OVERWHELMINGLY male-to-female) makes sure to groom these girls who become men, so that they say the right things and believe themselves equally oppressed. It's not the same oppression. At ALL. M

There's been a reply saying "but the trans girls-to-men are all under 25"- yes, that's true. But the trans men-to-female are all ages. This would suggest to me that we're talking about entirely different reasons for "transitioning" and that it's not helpful to put all together.

Also, as someone else has pointed out (helpful that these threads happen in real time) trans women can still inherit historic titles in the UK. If you're a girl, born to an aristocratic family, "transitioning" still won't get you the stately home. Patriarchal primogeniture, baby.

So, briskly, in short, the whole trans movement just uses trans men as examples of how "men can have babies or cervical cancer". And trans men are actually the most marginalised, the most discriminated against. Because they're reduced to their bodily functions for tabloid use.