X’s and Oh I Didn’t Knows
How cis ignorance and performative activism ruins everything
Before I start, what will most likely be a long form rant, I want to make two things incredibly clear. First, calling trans women “trans womxn,” “transwomen,” or any other label that somehow tries to create a separation between cis and trans women is incredibly transphobic. And so, if you have come here to be told otherwise, you will be disappointed.
Secondly, I am a Black non-binary, assigned female at birth often cis-assumed femme person – all of which are incredibly important to keep in consideration as I speak about my experiences in feminist spaces, women’s spaces, nb/gnc spaces, and – with reluctance - trans spaces. (This reluctance will be expanded on later)
I’m going to speak about the word womxn, and the ways that cis people ruined a word coined by racialized feminist and womanist organizers, with performativity and ignorance. Third and final caveat, I’m not here to tell anyone that they should be comfortable with the use of this word – even with the additional historical context I am going to provide. But I do hope that it can be used as a cautionary tale for cis people to do research before they use words and focus on doing the work to back up the labels they use. And I hope that it empowers trans, non-binary and gnc people to call themselves what they want without constantly holding up their identities to the warped mirror of cis-normativity.
Some Historical Context and Fun Things about Spelling
CW in next paragraph
Further CW for transphobia, TERFS, and discussion of women born women
The word womxn and the feelings around it cannot be understood without first understanding words like womyn, wombyn, or wimmin. The use of these terms was rooted in the desire to remove the centrality of “men” from the word women and in doing so reinforce the autonomy and decentralise patriarchy (and in some cases heteropatriarchy) from feminist spaces. However, the words womyn and wombyn and generally any other variation of the word with the y, was also used in explicitly transphobic spaces that tied womanhood to harmful bio essentialist notions of having a womb or being a “womyn born womyn” (WBW). This spelling was most notably popularized by the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival in 1978, which explicitly adopted and defended the transphobic WBW policy. However, this unabashed transphobia from second wave feminists is not limited to the United States. In 1978 the Lesbian Organization of Toronto also passed a WBW policy. Their publications include use of the word womyn into the 90s and while it has since been removed from recent descriptions of the group there is also no explicit mention of trans women on their site or archive. Other smaller groups across Turtle Island have also adopted the use of the word womyn and WBW policies, many have since retracted and apologized for that stance (I worked for one of these organizations from 2017 – 2019), while others waver and their stance and openness to trans women remains unclear. We know that Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists are not new and still proudly exist to this day as leaders within women’s organizing – but their impact on the variations of spelling is incredibly important to contextualize hurt around the word womxn.
End of CW
There is no historical evidence that womxn was coined by white trans exclusionary second wave feminists, nor has it been used by them until very recently. While womxn has been most generously linked to intersectional feminism its use by Black and racialized feminist and womanist scholars predates the coining of “intersectional feminism” by Kimberley Crenshaw in 1989. Womxn was found in writings in the 70s but didn’t pick up traction within TERF spaces in the way that womyn did. It is only recently that x has been tied - through ignorance and through deliberate attempts by TERFS - to the xx chromosome. Instead, the x can more strongly be linked with gender neutrality in the same way that Latinx was used to denote gender neutrality. The etymological history of Latinx and Womxn, is incredibly important to note because it speaks to the ways that racialized people often create language within POC communities that inform the way we organize and relate to one another. It also is derived from mathematics in which x is meant to symbolize an unknown variable in the English language, and has more contemporarily been used by lawmakers to denote a third gender (that is neither male nor female) on official documents. But basically womxn, was meant to do two things: explicitly speak to centering Black and racialized women in spaces and in organizing and to denote gender neutrality in a way that neither women nor womyn did.
Black Womanhood, Gender-Nonconformity, & White Hetero-Patriarchal Supremacy
So of course, this begs the question of why the aspect of gender neutrality is important within Black Feminist and Womanist spaces? I cannot speak about womanhood, transmisogyny, transphobia, androgyny or Black AFAB non-binary identities without speaking about the hyper masculinization of Black women. It is literally impossible. Little Black girls do not just get to be little Black girls. From the day they are born to the day they die they exist in a world that tells them their femininity is invalid, and they must work hard to prove that they are deserving of softness, or compassion – but their womanhood is constantly called into question. I recently watched an incredible virtual round table discussion in which Aarynn Lnag noted that a unifying experience between trans and cis Black women is that their womanhood is constantly being called into question. And this invalidation happens at both an interpersonal level and a systemic level.
Not every non-binary person is trans identifying in the same ways. But I can only speak for myself and I know that I’m not cis. The way that non binary, gender non-conforming and agender people fit under the trans umbrella is still highly disputed even within trans communities. And so I’m only stating it here so that I can be up front about my own positionality in this conversation. I am a non-binary person who has divested from womanhood, whilst remaining somewhat attached to Black womanhood. It is a complicated relationship to gender, gender presentation, sexuality, biology, and advocacy and one that I don’t always fully understand. But I also know that this is not a wholly unique feeling. For any Black person whose assigned gender at birth, gender performance, and gender do not align with cis-heteronormative standards, there are a lot of ways that we must navigate gender presentation, gender identity, the politics of passing, never passing enough, not wanting to pass, and a world that is trying to do everything in its power to dehumanize us every step of the way. Womxn attempts to give space for these very complicated feelings and experiences.
It is also my deep affirmation in being non-binary, and the lack of similar inward affirmation - t times - of being trans that makes this a very difficult space for me to navigate personally. I do not feel comfortable speaking for or as a representative for trans issues, partially because I know that a AFAB non-binary cis-assumed person is always a more palatable option to cis people. And so, like many other segments of my identity I look inward and outwardly at the implications of the space I take up. I think that the spelling of this word is a deeply Black non-binary issue, and the unwillingness of cis people to see the variation in trans, non-binary and gender-nonconforming experiences has led to a lot of harm.
I have noticed “womxn” being brought into mainstream use and exclusively cis women run spaces with little regard for the historical and racialized contexts that it is grounded in. Moreover, I have seen people using it to claim that the word encompasses cis women and trans women – as if the word “women” doesn’t already do that job. This casual and uninformed misuse has spread so much that it is literally impossible to know whether it is being used to performatively signal “inclusion” or if its used to name a safe space that will hold nuances in experiences of Black femininity and womanhood.
The biggest casualties of cis ignorance in this scenario are Black feminists and womanists who carved out spaces that centered their overlapping, intersecting and complicated experiences with womanhood, queerness, and gender. The non-binary and gender-nonconforming individuals who have lost the ability the flag spaces that will be respectful of their gender identities. And, the trans women who once again must explain that they never wanted a word that made them seem like any less of a woman. I feel for the Black queer folks who found home in the calling themselves a womxn because it spoke to unique experiences of hypermasculinization, performative femininity, and political womanhood. Because like so many of the things that was created by and for Black people it’s been stolen misused and repackaged in a way that is divorced from its origins and intent.
Adding an X doesn’t make you inclusive
I find that cis people using the word “womxn” to refer to spaces, organizations, or services to be more harmful than helpful. Partially because I believe that many people use it as a short form of signaling inclusion as opposed to actually doing work to make a space safer for trans women, and other gender minorities. Furthermore, I think that use of the term “womxn” by cis people to speak about spaces that are cis run, shows that cis people aren’t thinking about the variability in trans, non-binary, and gender non-conforming experiences. Trans women, trans men, trans feminine, trans masculine, non binary/ gender non-conforming people assigned female at birth, and non binary/ gender non-conforming people assigned male at birth are all going to have vastly different needs from a space. And even within these very large gender categories there’s huge amounts of variability in how people feel about their needs and wants. Asking any one trans person to speak for all trans and non-binary people is lazy and transphobic.
Which is why I think that at its best, use of womxn by cis people is representative of laziness. It is a shortcut that gets you out of the work of fully explaining who your space is for and critically engaging with what you have to offer, and the ways that your space is falling short.
A very wise person once told me that the biggest mistake we make in progressive spaces is not simply saying what we mean (I wish I could remember who it was). We say “women” when really, we mean people with ovaries. We say “mothers,” when we mean people who are breastfeeding, or people who are suffering from postpartum depression, or people who are carrying a child. The problem is that when people say “womxn” it’s really hard to know what they mean now.
Do you mean those who have suffered at the hands of heteropatriarchy? Do you mean that the space is prioritizing women of colour? Does your idea of women of colour only extend to cis women? Do you mean only people who are read as women in most spaces? Do you mean anyone who isn’t a cis man? Do you mean anyone who identifies with womanhood sometimes? Do you mean people who identify with womanhood all the time? Do you just mean cis women, but want to seem woke?
Do you see how that’s confusing? And for cis women, it’s not confusing – it’s never confusing. Because in all definitions and spellings of the word it is assumed that cis (white) women will be welcomed in that space. The real harm with the use of this word (and others like it), is that people who have experienced transphobia or constant misgendering or violent exclusion particularly from “feminist” spaces, just don’t access services they need. They will opt out of being part of a space that they know will be harmful to them, and that’s not “inclusion.”
For trans women, it’s unclear if they are entering a bio-essentialist trans exclusionary feminist space. For non-binary people who are assigned female at birth it’s unclear if this is going to be a space in which they will be misgendered and treated as a woman, or if they will be read as a man and then be made to feel unwelcome. For non-binary people who are assigned male at birth it’s unclear whether this will be a space in which they are misgendered as a trans woman or misgendered as a cis man and be made to feel unwelcome. For trans men, there is a trade-off in accessing services to do with reproductive health versus being misgendered or overtly unwelcome in the space. And of course, these are just a couple of scenarios, that don’t necessarily encompass all of the different reactions that people have to gender and gender presentation. But my point is that the possibilities are endless. And most non-cis people are not and should not have to take the risk of rolling the dice on their safety and comfort.
If you are creating a space that is for trans women and cis women exclusively, then there’s no need to use the word womxn. And if you’re creating a space that surrounds an issue, a shared experience, or service delivery – then just say what you mean. Using womxn as a blanket term for all afab people is transphobic and harmful.
And for my nb babes and gender non conforming hunks you aren’t women-lite, you aren’t a woman or a man just because you have transitioned or gone through a gender affirming surgery, you don’t need to present androgynously, you don’t need to be assigned female at birth, you aren’t making things unnecessarily difficult, you aren’t wrong - you have a right to carve out spaces that celebrates your nuance and complexity.
And as a final, slightly related note; stop spelling folks with an x. It’s already gender neutral (and historically used in racialized communities); your performativity is showing, again.
