The word "transvestite" predates the Nazis by a few decades, coined by someone the Nazis hated because he was gay and Jewish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_Hirschfeld

> trans women on HRT develop breasts without surgery).

Transgender people go both directions, not only AMAB but also AFAB.

I did intend to type "Nazi era", though I find the clarification is meaningless to the point. I'm all for reclaiming words, but I am unaware of any significant efforts to reclaim and promote the word in question. It is anachronistic and inextricably connected to 20th century transphobia and violence against trans women in particular

Re: your second point, a closer reading of the comments will show that this thread is discussing "women."

e: The far more interesting discussion is whether the revival of eugenics-era language is justifiable. This is hardly the first example on this site of arrogant commentators casually reviving language that came to be understood as hateful in the 20th century.

> I am unaware of any significant efforts to reclaim and promote the word in question. It is anachronistic and inextricably connected to 20th century transphobia and violence against trans women in particular

It's the primary term I grew up with in the UK specifically about what is also called cross-dressing.

It's also used by one of my favourite comedians, Suzy Eddie Izzard, as self-description ("executive transvestite") before she identified as transgender: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dress_to_Kill_(Eddie_Izzard)

> Re: your second point, a closer reading of the comments will show that this thread is discussing "women."

1) Quite a lot of transphobes focus entirely on women, thus ignoring how their own rules end up forcing trans men to end up in women's-only spaces.

2) I am informed that many trans women have implants before hormones. In fact, one woman I know openly discussed face surgery as part of her transition.

Also: cis women have breast surgery. I'm told most often as a reduction. Facebook, in its complete uselessness, has advertised the surgery to me along with dick pills.

It's bizarre that you try to talk down about trans issues that you are not informed about and label your interlocutor, a trans woman, as transphobic for not highlighting trans men when talking specifically about women.

If the answer to why you use the word "transvestite" is "I am steeped in 90s celebrity and watched RHPS" fine, but your disingenuous accusations of transphobia and extreme interest in a topic you seem exceptionally ignorant about fit a corrosive pattern that attempts to shutdown meaningful discussion. The rise of eugenics-era language is deeply concerning and I would actually like to better understand why this site in particular has seen an increase of commentary using regressive 20th century language.

I am very confused by your response. I listed a bunch of different *common* definitions of "what is a woman" and showed that *all of them have flaws*. It's the idea of "common sense language" that I'm opposing here, because the reality is much more interesting than such simple definitions.

I am also not labelling *you* transphobic at all. It was quite obvious that you are not, even before you stated you are a trans woman. Fun fact: myself, gender fluid. (Huh, first time I've said that in a pubic forum with my name on it…)

When I wrote:

> Quite a lot of transphobes focus entirely on women, thus ignoring how their own rules end up forcing trans men to end up in women's-only spaces.

This sentence is not about you. It's a much more general observation, noting what is wrong with *the public discourse*, specifically that transphobes insist on certain definitions which end up with outcomes that they themselves are dissatisfied with.

> RHPS

While I also watched the Rocky Horror Picture Show in my teens (late 90s), that film (1975) predates me by so much, I wasn't sure if they used "transvestite" to mean "cross dressing" or "transgender". Where I first used the word "transvestite" to your objection, I meant specifically what is also called "cross dressing", because I was talking about *outward appearance in public*, and clothes are the outward appearance in public.

That and hair, I guess. My hair is long enough I've had at least one straight guy get half way through a wolf-whistle before noticing a beard. At least, I assume they were straight, given the appearance of a beard was simultaneous with them stopping.

I promise I'm asking this question in good faith because I would genuinely love to understand your reasoning: why does the term "transvestite" have anything to do with Nazism?

From what I remember, that word was common and acceptable when I was growing up in the 90s, and I don't remember any Nazis using it. Nor did anyone tell me that the word "transvestite" was derogatory or offensive, although if social mores have shifted then fine, I won't say it.

What did I miss?

no worries, people typically use “transgender” or “trans” as an umbrella term these days

I have heard of folks who claim the label “transveatite” for themselves. Others see it as derogatory.

I suspect there may have been a misunderstanding of my earlier comment that led to this chain.

Where I wrote above:

> current external physical appearance — which tends to lead to confusion by both transvestites in public

That wasn't a statement about being transgender. I was saying that people judge clothing, and are confused by that clothing. "Public" being about clothing, because there aren't many public places where you're going to see enough skin for anything else to cause confusion.

("vest" as in vestments, clothing).

The emotions fueling my reaction are based on the way I experienced the word as a child in the 80s and 90s, and I could delve deeper into that but it's mostly irrelevant beyond the fact that I experienced the word in hateful ways.

In truth, I misspoke when I said "Nazi demographic" and had intended to write "Nazi era demographic," as the word's origination was in its use to describe the nascent trans community in Weimar Germany. In fact, the Nazis disregarded the validity of trans status entirely and the folks we'd regard as trans women today were classified as homosexual men before being subjected to the violence of the Nazi state. Trans men received a different, no less humiliating punishment.

The motivation in asking the question, beyond my disgust, is that I have observed a trend on this site of anachronistic language that fell out of favor after being associated with hate speech. It is generally being used in contexts supportive of the prominent far right agenda, and I seek to illuminate the motivations of the commentators who facilitate such odious reversions in discourse.

I apologize for my lack of clarity.