FLINTA spaces from a transfem view
In this post I'll do a deep dive into the intricacies of “FLINTA” spaces as a means of creating safe spaces from patriarchal oppression.
FLINTA is an acronym used in german speaking regions for women, lesbians, inter, nonbinary, trans and agender people. Sometimes it is extended to also include people questioning their gender identity and/or marked with an asterisk (“FLINTA*“) to indicate further identities that might fit in but are not explicitly named. I'm omitting the asterisk here to avoid confusion with footnotes. Increasingly “safer spaces” are being created based on this inclusion criterion – a space for FLINTA people, declared as “FLINTA only”.
FLINTA spaces developed out of women's spaces (later women/lesbian spaces), which were established in the wake of second wave feminism. Gradually some of them opened up to other gender identities under the assumption of shared oppression under patriarchy.
As a transfem nonbinary person that falls under this term and has been politicized in a sphere that uses the concept extensively, I want to offer some critical thoughts on it that have kept re-surfacing when discussing FLINTA spaces with others and entering them myself.
I hope I can add to the discussion around FLINTA spaces and help people reflect on some important aspects when considering creating such a space.
Do you actually want a FLINTA space?
Given the history of FLINTA spaces, it's not surprising that many of them are overwhelmingly used by endo* cis women. There are more endo cis women than trans + inter people, so in itself this is expected.
* endo = not inter
The crux is to me, whether a space also centers this endo cis female perspective and sidelines other identities as “add-ons”, or tries to give a voice to those identities, too. This needs some self reflection!
Society by and large ist not only sexist, but also transphobic, so bringing together a bunch of endo cis women, even with well intentions, does not necessarily constitute a safe space for trans and inter people — at least some reflection on (internalized) transphobia needs to happen. To me, that could be something like a statement that outlines the space's understanding of FLINTA, the shared vision or approach or a short spoken input when entering the space/starting the event to inform about the policy.
Also consider if FLINTA is the appropriate umbrella term you want to invite (e.g.: if your event is about menstruation, just invite people that menstruate).
Forced outings + erasure
Since FLINTA is (in my experience) often primarily made up of endo cis women, anybody who's not that, will for better or worse be outed as “something else” (or be read as an endo cis woman and made invisible in their identity).
E.g. if you enter such a space with any kind of “male”-looking characteristic, people will assume you're
- a transmasc person (on Testosterone)
- inter
- a transfeminine person who doesn't entirely pass
If you are being perceived as an endo cis woman and you're e.g.
- nonbinary
- a transmasc person
- inter
, then you have to out yourself if you don't want to stay invisible in your identity and/or risk misgendering. This essentially creates erasure for both transmasc and inter people.
The “endo cis men / FLINTA” dichotomy
This is arguably heavily informed by my transfeminine nonbinary perspective:
Dividing the world neatly into 2 categories (FLINTA and endo cis men) may be very convenient (just replace “women” with “FLINTA” and “men” with “endo cis men” and carry on), but it fails to address the lived reality of FLINTAs and endo cis men and it kills all the nuance in gender identity that I'm desperately hoping we'll all realize exists eventually.
- Not all FLINTAs share the same lived reality and have the same needs (not even all endo cis women do)
- Not all “endo cis men” are actually that: gender can shift, they may be nonbinary or transfeminine after all, but only find out later (like me)
Dividing a huge spectrum of variety of bodies and gender identity into one still huge spectrum (FLINTA) and one tiny dot (endo cis men) is unfair to anyone assigned male at birth who does not identify with their birth gender or wants to explore their gender identity freely. We have to make a huge leap to finally consider ourselves trans enough to actually go to a FLINTA space. There's a pressure to “pass as FLINTA”, which if you think about it, makes no sense, because there is literally no bodily characteristic that can not be present in both FLINTA and endo cis men.
Inviting people that are questioning their gender identity is a very welcome first step to alleviate this specific problem, but that places us back at the “forced outings” point. (Admitting to anyone other than themselves that they are questioning their gender identity can be very scary for people that are early in their process or don't have a good support system)
Organizational aspects
I'll keep this one short. If you organize a FLINTA space: Who organizes your space and whose identities and perspectives are reflected in the organizing team? Consider that you'll rarely address the needs of anybody you're not directly interacting with. Also a good point in time to reflect why certain perspectives are not represented.
“Safety” re-contextualized, intersectionality
This is a great podcast on the topic from Booster Club, which touches a more fundamental critique on the concept of “FLINTA safer spaces”:
- What makes a space “safe”?
- Who is safe in that space?
- What kinds of violence are we protecting ourselves from? Are we effectively doing that just by excluding endo cis men?
- Is the space equally safe if you're BIPOC? If you're poor, disabled, gay or experience other forms of discrimination unrelated to gender?
I'm deliberately not touching on state-sanctioned violence as a means of safety here and who benefits from that, because that would derail this post.
The takeaway here is, that in the broader context of safety, it is clear that an invitation policy based on gender identity can at best be one building block towards a bigger concept towards safer communities. (Concepts that try to offer approaches outside of state-sanctioned “safety” are e.g. awareness, community accountability and transformative justice).
Now what?
I want to acknowledge 3 things, to close this post:
Resources are limited. Sometimes slapping that “FLINTA only” label on a given space is just the lowest-hanging fruit for the given goal. I've been there and done it before.
For a large majority of endo cis women, these spaces are probably freeing and a welcome pause from patriarchal behavior. I get that, but still urge you to think about the identities you're inviting in when making a space “FLINTA” rather than “woman”.
I struggle to come up with a good alternative concept to free a space from typical macho behavior. I like the idea of “centering” a space around certain identities while keeping it open for others, to also leave room for more nuance and fluidity. I personally also enjoy TINA spaces, but I feel like that addresses a different, more specific need (reducing cisnormativity).
Message me with your ideas about any of this, I'm genuinely interested!
Update 9th March '26:
I stumbled over this german blog post from a trans woman on the topic. I don't agree on every bit, but it elaborates on some arguments from my post a bit further and gives a more personal account.