#THAT SAID under the current cultural understanding that'd be a dangerous place to start this kind of shift in language use

[nothorses]

I think these conversations would go better if we conceptualized terms like "homophobia", "transphobia", and "misogyny" not as the "basic" oppression that you start with until you sprinkle intersectionality on top, but rather as names for where more complex experiences overlap.

"Transphobia" is not the "base" we start with and build on with other experiences; it's the place where more specific experiences overlap. It's the middle of the venn diagram where "transmisogyny", "transandrophobia", and "exorsexism"/"nbphobia" all overlap with each other.

It's the thing we all have in common; not the thing that some people get extra special versions of while others do not.

#like i think there's a place for virtually any kind of more specific label #even differentiating the experiences of white people with misogyny for example- #not because there is any kind of white oppression. but because misogyny is shared between everyone experiencing it but there is no 'default #implying that white experiences are the default is weird!! and it could in fact open up room for conversations abt other experiences #to frame them as equally a part of the conversation about misogyny #rather than something fringe and niche that is only relevant sometimes #THAT SAID under the current cultural understanding that'd be a dangerous place to start this kind of shift in language use #but like. understanding this on a fundamental level does make conversations about things like transandrophobia waaay easier y'know? #it's not about whether we're More Oppressed it's just about naming different experiences