From an internship at the Schwules Museum to an international conference, Mascha Linke moves between theory, activism, and teaching. In November, and for Trans Day of Remembrance, we talk to Mascha about transfeminism—and why it is important not only for trans women, but for feminist movements as a whole. A conversation about academia, archives, and how transfeminist perspectives reveal missing connections.
Yasmin: Wow, what a beauty to behold (both laugh); please introduce yourself!
Mascha: My name is Mascha Linke and I am a master’s student in ethnography at Humboldt University in Berlin. Both inside and outside of university, I lecture, write, research, and publish on topics related to transfeminism, feminist theory, and queer theory.
Why do we know each other, Mascha?
(laughs) We met in 2022—back then, I was just an unassuming girl and an intern in the press and public relations department at the Schwules Museum… And you were my supervisor!
And how was that for you, personally?
The best time of my life!
I get that! At the end of your internship, we also did an interview where you talked about archival material dealing with DIY transitions in the 1970s. What has changed since then?
That’s a good question! In the interview, for example, I talked about the development of trans healthcare. If we look at the situation today, it has been and continues to be under massive global attack, especially over the last three years. The interview also touched on the so-called Transsexuals Act. A year later, I published a short video campaign with you with the cute name “Bye Bye, TSG,” also for the Schwules Museum. A so-called Self-Determination act has since been passed, although the current federal government keeps threatening to make it more restrictive… There’s a lot going on and much of it is concerning!
Please tell us more about the less alarming events!
Gladly! For example, this summer semester I had the opportunity to lecture on the topic of penetration for Humboldt University. The course was called “Going Deeper: Feminist, Queer, and Trans Perspectives on Penetration.” Symbolically, this represents how my work focus has developed in recent years: I have worked extensively with feminist, queer, and trans theories, and many of these approaches have come together in notions of penetration.
In fact, you are known on the streets as a so-called Academic Weapon; what is everyday life like for you as a young trans woman in academia?
While writing my bachelor’s thesis in the field of trans studies, I immediately noticed that there was a glaring lack of discussion of transgender issues in cultural and social sciences of the German speaking world. This situation ultimately led me to organize spaces such as project tutorials and the transdisciplinary conference “Transfeminism” myself. Together with Luana Pesarini and Louka Maju Goetzke, we organized this conference in June at the Cornelia Goethe Center in Frankfurt am Main. It was important for us to provide a platform for ongoing discussions and to bring together contemporary voices. For progressive debates in academia, I believe it is our duty to gather our own resources and create spaces where new ideas about social injustices can be explored.
How do transfeminist theories differ from classical queer feminism or gender studies?
Let me begin by saying that transfeminism is not a term hijacked by any specific group; rather, there are many different transfeminist movements. To me, transfeminism involves theorizing the living conditions of transfeminine people and trans women. Of course, within these groups, people are embedded in gendered systems in various ways: there is no universal transfeminine experience. However, the fact that we live within these gender systems impacts us all, both within and outside of trans femininity. In this way, transfeminist debates are relevant to feminism as a whole. For example, gender studies emerged during the 1980s and 1990s. Especially in the last decade of the millennium, many scholars researching gender studies obtained academic positions, and degree programs were established—gender studies became institutionalized. There have been significant, influential works addressing trans women as well; I am thinking of Judith Butler’s “Bodies That Matter.” However, in queer-theoretical approaches, violence against trans women is often reduced as result of transgressing the sex-gender system—that is, crossing the boundaries of so-called biological sex and gender. This portrayal was then challenged by transfeminist critiques—for example, it is criticized that the material realities of trans women’s lives are misunderstood and that it is not just a simple transgression of the sex-gender system—otherwise, trans men would face the same stigmatization as trans women! Transphobia manifests differently for trans men and trans women. Therefore, transfeminist criticism centers on material conditions, such as the precarious circumstances in the labor market, which often force many trans women into sex work and ultimately increase their stigmatization.
You recently spoke at the University of Innsbruck about materialist-feminist perspectives on violence—why is this important in a feminist context?
Well, when it comes to transmisogynistic violence in particular, I think a materialist approach is important because this perspective makes it clear that trans femininity itself is not the sole reason for violence, but rather the way in which trans femininity is embedded in broader lived realities. We know, for example, that non-white trans women and trans sex workers are particularly vulnerable. A materialist analysis then looks at the living conditions that create this vulnerability, which ultimately leads to violence and even murder. That’s an important perspective!
Can you think of more examples of how a trans perspective can expand feminist spaces?
I often think about the issue of being affected… Every year on March 8, the same discussion arises: is it Women’s Day? Is it Feminist Struggle Day? Or is it FLINTA Day? Feminist movements repeatedly ask themselves the legitimate question: who are we actually doing all this for? Transfeminist work has shown that rigid ideas about who is affected by misogyny and sexism are not only harmful, but also simply untenable. Here, too, the violence to which some people are exposed who would not be covered by a hegemonic concept of womanhood is misunderstood. This question has now concerned me again in my examination of penetration, because penetration feminizes and devalues certain bodies—beyond cis femininity! This starts with colonial ideas of an untouched foreign land to be invaded and conquered, and extends to contemporary ideas of bottomhood.
Which authors, artists, or activists are on your radar that we should perhaps also be aware of?
Jules Gill-Peterson writes extremely good texts; I would particularly recommend “A Short History of Trans Misogyny.” Then there’s also the anthology “Feminism Against Cisness,” edited by Emma Heaney. Finally, another book that I find quite challenging, but which has had a profound influence on my thinking: “Black on Both Sides – A Racial History of Trans Identity” by C. Riley Snorton… Well, and if you want to add a bit of transfeminism to your Instagram feed, you can follow me at @peerreviewedsiren (laughs)
You’re right, back to you! Your seminar “Going Deeper” is about penetration, not as a sexual act, but as a socio-cultural complex. How did you come up with that idea?
It started with me finding the contradictory attributions of penetration to trans women interesting: on the one hand, they are blatantly hypersexualized and reduced to objects to be penetrated, while at the same time they are demonized in TERF rhetoric as a penetrating danger. A common thread emerged that ran through the phenomenon of penetration—I had to share it with the world! I’m really not concerned with the sexual act itself, but with the cultural connotations of this act. How it subjugates, devalues, or feminizes bodies; but at the same time can also be used as a moment of emancipation.
The seminar was a collaboration with the Schwules Museum—what role did the SMU archive play in the project?
While I was planning this seminar, I dropped by the Schwules Museum here and there. In the exhibition “Young Birds from Strange Mountains” about Southeast Asian art, I encountered the theme again in Eda’s work with the giant penis. I then looked for more material and quickly realized that I could use the Schwules Museum to encourage students to think with objects. I believe it’s so important to start understanding and using the expressive power of objects. Often, the archive is seen as a place full of dead objects. But these objects express real-life experiences, circumstances, and social conditions! My goal was to help students think about gender from a specific angle—that of penetration. For many, this was a new perspective, which is why working with the objects in the SMU was key—to try out this lens and, if needed, reject it! I also wanted to encourage students to work with archives. I hoped to show how much effort goes into working with archives, and that’s what makes the Schwules Museum so wonderful! The archive at the Schwules Museum has a great educational program that aims to enable as many people as possible to work with the archive. As a movement archive, it’s designed to be accessible to a broad public! What I also appreciate about the SMU is its self-criticism: Of course, we want to preserve memories that might otherwise be lost. But that doesn’t mean there are no power dynamics or that injustices aren’t reproduced. Over the last three years, the archive has made significant progress; Tarek’s publication “Nicht die Ersten” (Not the First) is just one example… During the seminar, we were also producing short videos to explore this complex topic creatively. We worked with you, Yasmin, in a workshop on this. The SMU was a major partner for the course!
How did the students react to the topic, also with regard to the possibility of working on it visually?
With great interest! There were 40 people in my first class, even though the course was designed for a much smaller group. But as we discussed the topic, I realized that penetration is a taboo subject: the students were cautious, slowly feeling their way into the space and seeing how people were talking about it. When it came to the video work, I sensed a feeling of intimidation or maybe respect. The projects were supposed to be based on SMU’s archive material and individual research. I find this intimidation normal, mainly because archives are often seen as untouchable. Over time, however, truly creative ideas started to surface, but we still need to wait a bit longer for them to be realized and shared. It was very meaningful for me to observe this process.
It remains exciting! What’s next for you?
First, I’m going to finish my semester abroad at New York University calmly. I’ll be back in Berlin in 2026, and I’m sure I’ll come back with new ideas! The Schwules Museum will not be spared!
We’re looking forward to it!
Interview & photo: Yasmin Künze