#but those people are very exclusionary and if you don't agree with all of their points they don't want to talk to you either | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

transmutationisms · 1 year

Note

could you outline in more detail just how each of the siblings are attracted to fascism? i kind of get it for roman and connor but not quite for shiv & kendall

ok so, for roman and connor the connection is pretty clear because they both openly buy into the sort of hierarchical thinking that matsson and mencken bring to the table. connor has his nofap semen retention masculinity thing, and roman basically agrees with logan's dichotomy of masculine strength vs feminine weakness, but identifies himself as being in the weak category and has a sexual fixation on those he perceives as strong and dominant. also both connor and roman have tossed out some haha antisemitism moments, which goes back to their general buy-in to racial thinking and hierarchies. obviously antisemitic violence is a major strategy, tool, and goal for fascist movements. roman and connor both fixate sexually on masculinity, and although connor identifies with it in a way roman does not, they both use this strong / weak, insider / outsider thinking that makes fascism appealing to them.

with shiv i think you have to keep in mind that liberalism is not in any way opposed to fascism. fascism historically is basically an attempted solution to the internal contradictions of liberal democracies; in particular, liberalism is rhetorically egalitarian but in practice hierarchical, exclusionary, and class-divided, because it is capitalist. fascism basically says "that's fine, actually; the hierarchies are natural and biological, so they don't need to be eliminated." this is why shiv is the one to do business with matsson, who shows off his strong masculine body all episode and has a team of strapping young olympians and fulbright scholars. this type of biological-meritocratic appeal is a specific way of naturalising and justifying the class / race / gender hierarchies that liberal capitalism produces and depends on, meaning it's not discontinuous with shiv's liberal ideology at all. (note that her wealth and whiteness allow her to operate within the gender hierarchy, even as the episode shows us the ways in which she's kept from the very innermost masculine socialisation that her brothers have access to). also, her persistently thinking that poor people are dirty is, like, very classic fascist thinking lol.

kendall doesn't really have a cohesive political ideology, but he sure does think capitalism is Cool, Dude. he wants to be, like, a visionary angel investor (wearing lanvins), and he responds to matsson's stupid techno-futurist bullshit. for him fascism has a similar appeal as it does for shiv, because of the capitalism of it all, except kendall doesn't even have to detour through liberalism because he literally doesn't care. in fact, the thing that turns him off matsson's deal is that he wants to run logan's empire himself—so, he's still buying into the hierarchy and logan's concept of dominance, only he's placing himself at the top of it. kendall's not really crusading for any particular political goal because he like.... doesn't think about people besides himself. but what he wants for himself is to be the patriarch-ceo that logan was, thus replicating logan's fascism (but deluding himself into thinking his underlings just Really Like Him, Actually). his ideological vacuousness, combined with his power drive and desire for (retroactive) logan approval, mean he's drawn to fascism as a mode of capitalist governance / corporate management.

i would add that although logan's fascism comes through most directly in roman and kendall (because they don't have their own ideologies), all four sibs are operating within a capitalist political epistemology that logan('s ghost) defines. also, they all have various loganish interpersonal qualities; for example, shiv and connor share that tendency to want to Exert Their Will and Be Right, hence both of them going into politics lol.

i would also add (i'm paraphrasing césaire) that fascism was not 'new' when it arrived in europe in the early 20th century; it was already the modus operandi of colonial governance around the world. what was new was that white europeans started to experience it as directly curbing THEIR freedom. waystar is obviously a different type of empire than the nation-states of the 20th century; namely, it is a corporate entity. however, i think there's still something to be said here about the fact that waystar operates multinationally and engages in certain forms of economic imperialism and foreign political meddling. i would argue that anyone involved in upper managerial positions in the company is at the very least acceding to logics of authoritarianism and fascism in the far reaches of the empire, and more realistically is also okaying it 'domestically' (note that this reverberates all the way down to the level of the roy family unit, as it is an articulation of logan's empire).

#tripping the light fantastic

134 notes · View notes

chaos-event-horizon · 1 year

Text

An update of a sort.

Have been informed that Goldie is looking at this blog and screenshotting it to make comments about how she doesn't like or support proshippers and "doesn't give special support to anyone" and that includes trans people, because trans people are normal humans, but has never once said anything bad about them or incorrectly gendered anyone.

Hmm. Interesting.

"I couldn't be further from a trans exclusionary feminist, I respect trans people and don't align myself with feminists!" || "Trans rights activists are so dramatic! The person who has called for their rights to be taken away and supports groups calling for their murder is OBVIOUSLY in the right here! They should really just listen to her, I'm sure they'd agree that they are horrible people if they did!"

Ah, yes, how big and different of you.

"Anyone with a uterus is a woman. All afab people are women. Didn't your mommy teach you the difference between men and women? I am ignoring the fact that you specifically mentioned trans people because I think that as long as I don't mention them, no one will read between the lines here when I say that if you were born with a uterus you are a woman and nothing will ever change that. This cannot possibly mean that I am disrespecting trans people because I am ignoring them."

You're right, what else could that possibly mean?

And not a proshipper? Not supporting proshippers?

Hmm. How very strange. Then maybe you should stay the fuck out of the tags and stop using them to promote yourself? Since all this shipping stuff doesn't matter to you, why bother forcing your ass in? Since you think proshippers are so stupid and dramatic, why are you using them to try to get people to interact with you-- something that clearly is not working, since you claim to not like anyone here besides the person who is telling everyone involved with "problematic" media to kill themselves?

I'd say that this could all be chalked up to misunderstandings, as it is implied that you are from Germany... however, English is not my first language, and I seem to be able to understand these things well enough.

I'm aware that there are people who follow Rian and I, and who we interact with, who still interact with this person and claim that she's a lovely person who would never hurt a fly. You know, except for the very obvious blood kink and sado-masochism. Whatever, I do not care. The only thing that concerns me is the health and happiness of my family and close acquaintances, and whatever drama is attempting to be stirred up about this is just needless internet dick measuring.

But if you're going to have a pissing contest, at least have the decency to not chew on your own feet while trying to aim. The results might get messy.

As for avditor or whatever, I know all I need to. He's an asshole who sends threats and calls people pedophiles for liking fictional things. He's a twerp. He's an idiot. He's a blowhard who is simultaneously claiming to defend and bow down to a group while talking over them and telling them to kill themselves when they correct him. And I personally think it's hilarious that he hides behind all those acts, just like you do-- and yes, Goldie, I know someone is showing this to you for your viewing pleasure, in the hopes that they get to see more drama to light up the inevitable darkness of all of your worthless existences. I'm fairly certain that if I hadn't put my foot down and turned off anon, we would have been hit by another laughable wave of bitches and cunts that seem to be at the neck and call of that sad little group.

So go ahead. Say what you will. Eat your own tail as you all bend over backwards to justify your own hypocrisy while condemning people who do far less. I quite honestly do not give two shits, except insofar as how it effects Rian. why not screen shot this and pass it to your own followers? You can circle-jerk and claim victory to your heart's content, and eat shit while doing so, as I will no longer be addressing these issues directly.

I however am tossing this whole farce aside, now. Because quite frankly I'm too busy to deal with arrogant insects. Enjoy whatever conjecture you wish to continue spinning on this, because I will no longer be publicly speaking on this matter, and neither will Rian.

But if I hear about anyone sending anon threats on our behalf, I hope you imagine the sound of my crushing your skulls and think better of it. We will have none of that.

#discourse #mature #goldie90 #avditor

38 notes · View notes

a-faggot-with-opinions · 9 months

Note

whats up with radfem ideology/radfems? are they any good? are they bad? (in relation to transmasc-ness/nonbinary stuff specifically. does radfem hurt transmascs?)

Radical feminism, also commonly referred to as TERFism, is an ideology that used to be a lot more common in the past, but is still around. Even though "TIRFism" exists, TIRFs don't really identify themselves as such, and TERFism is more common.

Radical feminism is basically feminism that states:

There is no greater oppression in the world than misogyny, and misogyny is the root of all oppression. (This is an anti-intersectional talking point and is used by cishet women to obscure their relationship to homophobia and white women to excuse their racism.)

There are innate differences between the brains of men and women, and men, either by their nature or by "socialization," are more dangerous and aggressive than women. (This is intersexist and transmisogynistic.)

The patriarchy must be done away with by creating a reverse-patriarchy, or a matriarchy, where women have power over men, becuase women's brains are simply better suited to be in power. (This is another evasion of responsibility for homophobia and racism, because they're claiming that when women oppress someone more marginalized, it's less bad than when a man does it. This has also been used as an excuse for some lesbians to be biphobic, such as with political lesbianism.)

Porn, sex work, and kink are bad, because men are usually involved in those things, and since male sexuality is inherently evil and aggressive, no woman can consent to doing any of those things with a man. (There's so much to unpack here. Not only the homophobia in saying that male sexuality is inherently evil, but also the infantilization of women who disagree with them.)

The big difference between trans-exclusionary radfems and trans-inclusionary radfems, is that trans-exclusionary radfems believe that trans women are evil oppressive men, while trans-inclusionary radfems believe that trans women are women and since trans men are men we don't experience misogyny. Both are very bad and transphobic. Though it isn't an obvious part of their ideology, TERFs also believe that young trans men are confused autistic girls (ableism and transphobia) and older trans men are preying on the younger trans men as well as women or gay men, take your pick depending on the trans man's sexuality.

TERFism is transphobic more than it is cisfeminist, too. TERFs have found themselves allying with misogynists (see: TEHMs) and literal nazis if they can agree that trans people deserve to die.

Radical feminism is bad no matter which flavor you go with, but TERFism is significantly worse than TIRFism even if TIRFism is still bad.

#asks #terfs fuck off #fuck terfs

26 notes · View notes

pluralsword · 13 days

Text

we know that tumblr is not bluesky so like. are we bonkers for saying this but we somehow dont think that the horny human bodied trans posts using the transformers tag (which is also not something sex workers and horny trans humans on bluesky do they're having a normal one) are coming from anyone but bot accounts. especially since some of them are using trans guy and trans gal (without like, a bigender or polygender tag, which is strange) and trans exclusionary radical feminist tags all in the same breath, and the kicker here is - a lot of these posts were within the last 24-48hrs with the trans day of visibility tag. TDOV is march 31st. nice try.

so like even before getting into how this effects trans transformers art and writing this takes up the trans tag too and its like. whatever fucking asshole is out there making a mockery of trans people of all kinds by and likely stealing photos of the likes of us for porn accounts let me personally, and respectfully say what I have to say about how people like you have been doing this for cis women too: This is an awful act, and I have the utmost disdain for you for commodifying our bodies without consent or agency. It makes navigating this website already bereaved with transphobia and transmisogyny (which effects everyone not just trans women but us in particular) more of a pain in the butt and it is deeply insulting to both the real variety of our expressions and our (a)sexual lives.

What we hate most about this is that the backlash by staff and mass reporting will likely result in actual trans people whether sex workers or not losing their accounts so scrap you honestly. YOU KNOW THERE'S A GENOCIDE GOING ON IN MULTIPLE COUNTRIES RIGHT? AND REGARDING THE USA AMID MASS ARRESTS FOR BEING ON HRT OR OUT AS TRANS IN STATES WHERE THAT IS NOW ILLEGAL, DO YOU KNOW WHAT V-CODING IS? DO YOU KNOW WHAT PRISONS DO TO TRANS WOMEN IN THE USA? AND THIS IS WHAT YOU DO INSTEAD OF BOTHERING TO AT LEAST VOTE FOR SOMEONE WHO GIVES A SHIT ABOUT US OR DONATE MUTUAL AID TO ACTUAL TRANS PEOPLE INCLUDE PEOPLE IN THE SEX WORK INDUSTRY? You haven't read Gender as Accumulation Strategy by Kay Gabriel which goes over how trans people, trans women, left with nothing and sexually commodified and exiled by society made use of sex work to build up resources, support each other, and fight for liberation. Frag you. Sweet Solus, frag you.

For our part, posting trans transformers stuff is something that doesn't get as much attention tumblr interaction-wise (after releasing our essay and the whole thing with polls a while back it was very clear that are a number of people who do pay attention to this stuff but dont interact directly which is understandable there's no shame in that especially with all the shit going on right now and we just want to say to those who follow our stuff we appreciate you, salute you, and hope the best for you) and we don't bother with actually using the transformers tag here much to search for things but it does hurt.

Again, what we hate most about this is that the backlash by staff and mass reporting will likely result in actual trans people whether sex workers or not losing their accounts. Dear fellow trans and gender expansive people, we are in this together, be kind to each other, we will only survive with solidarity to one another and to all issues of oppression and not on trans liberation alone. We definitely agree with Kay Gabriel on that

#transformers #trans #transgender #spam bots #cw transphobia #transphobia #livid #this fucking hellsite

3 notes · View notes

homosociallyyours · 2 years

Note

hi this is kinda random but i just wanted to share my piece on this and i’ve seen you talk about it before so i thought this would be a good place. i’ve been seeing so much blatant misogyny and ageism around here lately and it’s really taken a toll on me. like no matter how much you try to justify it as a moral thing, if you spend your days calling olivia wilde a cunt, narcissistic asshole, bitch, and talking shit about her age you ARE being misogynist. you’re not obligated to like her. i personally am not the biggest olivia wilde fan. a little background story, i was obsessed with booksmart when it came out, so as we often do with micro obsessions i deep dived into all things involving the movie, and that of course included olivia. i watched all the press interviews, read all the print ones, and i thought she was awesome. but as a trans lesbian, i always tend to search for celebrities’ stances on those issues before i start to actively support them and their work. not because i want or need celebrities to be activists, i just need to know they’re not assholes about things that are important to me. and that was when i found olivia’s comments about considering considered “a soft kind of lesbian relationship, just gentle kissing and scissoring” when she was lonely after the end of her first marriage, and not using too much make up because she can easily “go tranny” and the overall brand of trans-exclusionary and overly simplistic white feminism she stands for, and that of course was really hurtful and disappointing to me at the time. but still, i will NEVER ever sit around calling her names and talk about her with so much vitriol like most people around here do while intentionally digging up things from her past to try and make that behaviour somehow justifiable because people don’t want to admit how misogynistic and hateful they really are. but just an fyi, we can see right through it and not only is your deep rooted hatred for women crystal clear, but this rage against beards also makes you look str*ight lmao

Hello nonny!! As you may or may not know I'm a big fan of tea and this is like a steaming pot of Yorkshire Gold, so thank you♡

I know that posting this might upset some friends and mutuals, but i think everything you've said is so important and should be heard. I love everyone i follow, even if i don't agree with their stances on everything, and am not shy about having direct conversations about a thing that bothers me instead of indirecting folks or sending anons, so hopefully anyone who disagrees here will do the same.

I think in particular i really feel you on talking about Olivia's particular brand of white feminism, in large part bc it's one of the more common reasons given by people talking about how much they hate her. Your statements are accurate; she has said some things that lead me to mistrust her politically and that feel very deeply entrenched in cis white privilege. She also seems to vibe pretty hard with a lot of pretentious white male auteurs (she recently reposted stuff about John Cassavetes, for example), and in my experience i just. Don't gel with people who do that.

HOWEVER the thing that always gets me is that Harry presents some of the very same white feminist tendencies, albeit, frankly, worse than Olivia? I love him, but he repeats earnest yet empty platitudes about not letting anyone tell you what to do with your body and donates $. It's nothing award worthy, and although i do appreciate that he wants to be careful what he puts his voice behind, it means that he actually says/boosts very little.

I know people dismiss it as performative activism, but i do actually think that celebrities sharing links to resources can be really helpful. Just to use the most current thing that comes to mind, Harry sharing a link to abortion funds (as Olivia did) would've gotten a message about their existence to a lot of people. A message of support isn't nothing, but it's certainly not evidence of top tier feminism.

I think if i saw more critique of Harry's (or any 1D member's) politics from the "i hate her for her white feminism" crowd, i would feel differently. But as it is, it appears that women are held to a high standard while men get the bar set on the ground and a medal if they trip over it 😬

Also, I wish more people understood that you don't actually have to give reasons for disliking someone! Olivia doesn't have to be a narcissist or have terrible politics for you to hate her. It's fine to just... Not like her. And then maybe not talk about her? Not joke about her violent death. Not make fun of the way she looks (she's ugly because she's a bad person/she's way too old to wear/do that thing so I'm gonna laugh at her).

Set misogyny aside for a second if you've got to-- it's just a horrible way to behave toward anyone, and the target (Olivia) is too distant to be hit by the negativity anyway. Instead those comments can end up hurting the people who read them and making them self conscious. For what?

It's not a popular opinion, but i personally view the beards in a generally positive way at the moment. I choose to believe that Harry and Louis have talked through what they want and made some decisions about how to handle their images. This isn't 2014/15 anymore, and the young men who I think did very much want to come out back then are in massively different places in their careers. There's no road map for an ex-boybander coming out and being successful. There are very few examples of successful solo artists who came out early in their careers and continued to find success afterwards. Harry and Louis are navigating an extremely difficult path, whether they're working toward coming out or not. I don't envy that aspect of their lives.

I think it's likely that the women who Harry and Louis are seen with were chosen (by them!) for reasons that i can't or won't be able to see/understand right now. And as I've said before, there is literally no woman in existence who could be liked as a beard in this fandom. No set of behaviors will lead to people not critiquing these women, and that's evidenced by searching tags on some of the blogs who talk loudest about the beards. (Spoiler alert: not one of them has been palatable if she stuck around for more than a couple days!)

And that's the real sign to me that unfortunately this is misogyny at work. If you can name more women associated with 1D who you hate/dislike than women associated with 1D you do like, why is that? How do you feel about it? Is that reflected in your other social circles or interests? Jamila Jameel asked a similar question on her Instagram a few years back and absolutely changed my perspective on misogyny. Would love it if that could happen throughout this fandom.

#long post #1d #on fandom #i don't wanna tag this as discourse but that's probably what it is #fandom misogyny #stunt mention #bearding #it's ok if you wanna unfollow me for this folks i know it feels bad to read critique that feels pointed #but pls know this isn't directed at a single blog/blogs #it's something pervasive in this fandom that has bothered me more and more over the years #also bc i feel like it'll happen: you are welcome to call me a white feminist-- i am white and a feminist and #i do not consider my feminism above criticism #i do my best to think about intersectionality and to de-center myself when it comes to politics #but i also know i don't succeed sometimes so. yeah. absolutely ready for that criticism here

47 notes · View notes

impunkster-syndrome · 6 months

Note

Genuinely- if somebody has multiple disorders that affect their ability to communicate- it is not “coddling ableism ” to have grace with them when they misword things. From everything I’ve read, Autistikate is very open to learning and changing her mind.

What she wrote in the first post wasn’t okay- I agree. At the same time, we have to acknowledge that people are coming from different stages of learning, and that some people have disabilities that affect communication.

To call that “coddling” leaves a bad taste in my mouth as that word is often used against disabled people that need extra help and support (including support in understanding concepts and wording things correctly.).

There is a difference between internationally being exclusionary/harmful and miswordimg something in a way that does harm. It still causes harm whether it was intentional or not. You are still allowed to be upset either way.

How do we move forward from this? That’s when intention matters in my opinion, because the way to move forward will be different depending on the intention.

For instance if her intention was to cause harm- then yeah that sucks and I wouldn’t be kind either, but her intention wasn’t to cause harm, so instead there can be education. (Just an example)

You 1000% don’t owe anybody kindness. At the same time- to deny kindness to somebody who is open to listening to you and learning, and who misworded something and has been open about having disabilities that affect their communication- I think is counterproductive to any movement, let alone an anti-ableist movement.

All of this said with love and by somebody with multiple disabilities ❤️

You can think what you want. I have seen so much ableism in the same vein as this that there's no way that those kinds of responses were okay. I don't personally really care what you think because of the refusal to acknowedge the rhetoric as harmful or to make assumptions about me and not look for five seconds at my blog to see that neuropunk, cripplepunk, and madpunk are my most posted tags.

There is no way that the belief of "you need to be nice to me if you talk to me about the harmful shit I do/say" and "You need to debate me privately" is ever in good faith in my experience. It is always to save face about the harmful stuff you do to avoid any public criticism.

My blog name is literally "kunikos," greek for dog-like. The root of "cynical." If you're looking for a super positive view of the world and how other people might just happen to be doing what I have encounted with ableism time and time again, you came to the wrong place.

#the blackbox askbox

1 note · View note

gondwana · 2 years

Note

the internet spreads misinformation, especially when it comes to women’s innocence (or persecution). we are mutuals and i’m a feminist., what they call these days a “terf” used to be “witch”. i am not transphobic, that’s more misinformation about what feminists believe… i’m not saying this to upset or attack you, just to inform you that there are many people who still want to silence feminists / women in generals voices. what they call a “terf”/“witch” does NOT believe that women are weak/incubators - that’s a very conservative/“republican” (im not american but i think thats comparable) ideal, bioessentialism, which is as far away from feminism as you can possibly get… feminism, and radical feminism, are about liberating and empowering women - every woman has the right to bodily autonomy. Every so-called”terf” agrees on this with you, whilst every conservative misogynist disagrees- they believe in the “role” of a woman being that of a mother and nothing else, etc.. Anyway, i just wanted to share since we are mutuals and i think misinformation is not a good thing . Peace and love to you <3

the problem with trans exclusionary radical feminism is not the radical feminism part it's the trans exclusionary part. I have absolutely zero beef with the aggressive and endless pursuit of women's autonomy. what I have beef with the idea that "women's autonomy" does not include the right for trans women to be safe and not aggressively questioned or ostracized.

of course I have overlaps in my beliefs w terfs. that doesn't make me uncomfortable or confuse me, and it doesn't make me question being very very trans exclusive when it comes to my philosophy about feminism.

also, in terms of misinformation, there is a LOT of misinformation that gets spread around terf circles on Tumblr. like, there's a whole masterpost of alleged crimes done by trans women, and they all link to like, extremely republican/alt right websites, or the link is broken and goes nowhere. and I've read those articles, and they're uncited, or the sources are deleted. it's all fucking fake. trans women being the enemy is so fake. a trans man being some sort of tragic loss of a butch woman is so fake. young feminist women are being brainwashed, because the world is a nightmare, and they're scared, and terfs tell them that biology is to blame.

like, the only Work that terfs have really been able to Get Done has been the oppression of trans people, like with all of these bills being passed thru u.s state governments restricting care for transgender youth. that does nothing for the advancement of feminism. that does not make women safer. women are not living in a world that is getting better. and it's like, these terfs celebrate these fucked up bills in order to feel better about the fact that things are not getting better for women. in fact, if roe v wade is repealed, things will be much much much worse. I think it's a nightmare. i cannot imagine someone else's oppression being further enshrined in our institution being treated like a consolation prize for the fact that women, cis and trans alike, are still treated like shit everywhere.

idk why you are defending terfs. I don't think there is anything there for you in their philosophy. i don't think that they're the modern equivalent of witches. witches were like, women with property that the government wanted to steal. not women on twitter sending death threats to trans women.

this message has been very long. I genuinely don't understand why you're trying to defend the term terf. I do not find confrontational feminism a problem. I find it necessary. but like, terf rhetoric is bioessentialist at it's core. it is what defines it. it is of the opinion that "maleness" is the "opposite" of "femaleness" and that being amab is evil and bad and violent and, in reverse, that women are good and virtuous and victimized. there are a million ways to be amab. a million ways to be afab. a million ways to react to male/female socialization. sex needs to stop mattering if we're ever going to get anywhere, and making sex-segregated rules about bathrooms/sports etc, and restricting people's access to hormones is like, NOT how to do that. and that's what being a terf is to me. it IS about controlling people's bodies. it IS about transphobia. it exists because regular ass radical tear misogyny out by the roots feminism wasn't trans exclusive enough . lol.

anyway,

23 notes · View notes

atheautistic · 1 year

Text

Hey guys, welcome back to Atheisms. Clearly You are gluttons for punishment. I feel like i might have run long the last couple of times, so i shall try to keep things brief!

I wanted to post this one for my loved ones that may be stalking my tumblr profile actually. Firstly, if that's you, welcome! i think you're awesome and brave to come read this. I allow anonymous questions on this blog too, so you can ask whatever you want without anyone knowing. But i don't pull punches here and i speak my mind in its entirety. This is my thinking place, so be prepared to hear my thoughts!

I think that Theists (people who believe in a God of some sort) often worry very much about the people in their lives that turn out to be agnostic or atheist. Being a former Christian, I have a pretty good idea what those worries might be. Here's a couple of specific worries they will likely have.

Fear that my immortal soul is in jeopardy of spending an eternity of unrelenting suffering in literal darkness and flames where i will burn without dying for crimes that are finite (and minor). In essence, the Theist (christian) believes that their God will torture me for eternity. Not destroy me, (that would be better for me obviously) just torture me. For no purpose other than revenge. No wonder you're afraid! I'm sorry that God feels that's necessary. Not sure what i could have done to deserve all that. Is it just because my AuDHD brain has a hard time accepting fantastic claims that have no testable or verifiable evidence? Well, hopefully I'M correct and I'll just get to stop existing!

Fear that, now that i no longer believe in God, somehow my moral fortitude will collapse, sending me, anyone close to me, and those in my care into the depths of sin and despair. Now, if that's you, i gotta tell you that's really hurtful. But, i don't blame you exactly. You worry about that because the church has pushed upon you the belief that only The Church knows what's right and wrong, when they clearly have no idea themselves. They can't even seem to all agree if the LGBTQ+ community are actually really human beings that should have rights or not. Not sure why we're relying on the guidance of an organization that is clearly exclusionary, bigoted, theocratic, endorses (yes, still) slavery, and whose highest figures of moral authority have been found guilty of awful sexual crimes against the most vulnerable demographics in the world, all over the world! (Can you read that last sentence out loud in one breath?) i think we can find a better standard for morality then that.

Fear that the person they love will suffer some kind of reprisals for their (in this case,) non-belief. This is, of course, a valid concern. Atheists are amongst the most disliked people in the world according to an article written for scientific American By Daisy Grewal on January 17, 2012 (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/in-atheists-we-distrust/)

4. Finally, it may cross the mind of a caring theist that the person is choosing to be rebellious against god, essentially throwing an existential temper tantrum. The problem they have with this is that many theists believe and fear a God of tough love who will:

A. punish me in some inscrutable, or perhaps even supernatural, way (see point #1)

B. Just let me fail in some spectacular way that is likely to harm me.

Also, this suggests that the atheist is childish in his non-belief, which is also pretty insulting. Especially when you consider what children are known to believe in.

Those are just some of the reasons why loving theists worry about their apostate loved ones. Isn't it sad that most of these concerns are actually a fear of what their god might do? What does that say about Him? A lot, i would say...

Listen, don't worry about me Fam! If God really is in control, and he doesn't want to have to toss me in the lake of fire, He definitely knows how to get ahold of me, right? Even with my free will intact, there should be a way for a being such as Him to reach me right? So what's to worry about? God says he didn't want anyone to perish right? So if he exists, I'm sure he'll straighten me out somehow, despite my great learning! (Obscure tongue in cheek bible reference.)

Happy questioning!

#atheism #christianity #deconstructing christianity #faithless #faith in god #faith in jesus

2 notes · View notes

tiammc · 1 year

Text

As a literature major and an avid reader, I believe words have power. They can be used to help or to harm, to soothe or to injure. With the advent and proliferation of social media, it's become easier for people with influence to use their fame and their platform to push certain agendas, either for good or ill. I'd like to take a minute and talk about a phrase I've been hearing a lot in recent years. And that phrase is "separate the art from the artist".

The phrase “separate the art from the artist” has been coined as a way to differentiate one's appreciation of an artist's work (music, films, literature, etc) from the artist's actions or beliefs. It's a way for people to seemingly condemn the words and behavior of an artist while still being able to enjoy the media they created. Examples of this would be still listening to Kanye's music despite his anti-semetic statements, still watching films by Woody Allen and Roman Polanski despite the multiple rape and sexual assault allegations, and still watching Dave Chappelle specials despite his openly transphobic and homophobic statements.

Which brings me to my main point. JK Rowling is a TERF, i.e. a trans exclusionary radical feminist. She doesn't believe trans women are real women, and has been VERY vocal and open about her feelings about the trans community in general. She has defenders, including actors Helena Bonham-Carter and Ralph Fiennes, writer and creator of The IT Crowd Graham Linehan (who argues that transgender activism endangers women and has likened the use of puberty blockers to Nazi eugenics), and late actor Robbie Coltrane. You know who else is an avid defender of Rowling and her views?

Vladimir Putin.

Now, like many of you reading this, I grew up reading the Harry Potter books. My first date with a boy in high school was to see the newest Harry Potter film. I had HP Uno, Funko Pops, etc, etc. And I could have done what other people have and "separate the art from the artist". But it's not that simple. And here's why: She doesn't. JK Rowling has explicitly said that she believes the fact she's still making money off Harry Potter is evidence that people generally agree with her views on trans people or at least her beliefs aren't a "dealbreaker" for them. Let that sink in. She firmly believes that you buying the newest HP merch means you agree with her or at least don't care enough about the well-being of trans people to stop supporting her. Because that's what you're doing when you buy the newest Loungefly bag or video game. YOU may not think buying those things is supporting her transphobia, but SHE DOES.

And this is why I can't separate the art from the artist. As long as this persists, I cannot, and will not, support people who are actively harming various communities. It's 2023. We should be actively fighting against homophobia, transphobia, anti-semitism, racism, and bigotry in all its forms. And as long as they continue to make money off of you, they will continue to use their platforms to spread hate and lies, and it will get people killed. As long as you continue to buy their art, they will keep thinking you agree with them, because in a way you are. Their actions need to have consequences. Stop buying HP stuff. Stop buying Kanye's music. Stop giving your money to men and women with hate in their hearts and poison in their words.

Please.

Stop.

#transphobia #jk rowling #i do not support jkr #bigotry #boycott

4 notes · View notes

skeppsbrott · 2 years

Text

Venting some frustrations about autism, social contacts in general and dating in particular below the cut, if you want to chat with me about it that'd be welcome X

I loathe to call it trauma because that seems like an incorrect usage of a quite serious term, but there are a few major experiences I carry with me from being a young autist in combination with a target of bullying from ages uuh 7-14, that I keep thinking I've moved past but which time and time again prove their grip on me.

The experience of "I thought everything was fine but it was not and I have no way of knowing whether the fault was mine and if so what I did wrong" I think is fundamentally human. Second guessing yourself and your impact on others is healthy. That said there is a difference where many of my allistic friends can tell themselves (or have others tell them) they are overthinking and most of the time be right whereas in my case, more often than not over the course of my life, that fear was very much founded and for many years I learned the hard way that I should second guess myself more than I thought. The result is that while I have become a much more socially competent person, it is at the expense of never resting in my ability to assess a situation, always being prepared for things (from my perspective) turning on a dime and really struggling with assigning the cause to anything but myself. This itself is not great for portraying yourself as a wonder of charm and charisma.

This time it was someone I matched with on Tinder who I, today, found out had unmatched me. It happens every so often and usually I just bite the disappointment of "this was an attractive and interesting person who for whatever reason decided the effort wasn't worth it" because it's so superficial anyway. I've unmatched people before. Whatever.

And yet.

Me and this person got directly into some shared passions, she complimented me multiple times, we agreed to meet and it was only after I suggested a different date from one she originally had to turn down that she unmatched me. I was a bit antsy because she was very, very slow to reply so I shared some screenshots with a friend to assure me that I wasn't actually crazy and that aside from the slow replies she seemed genuinely interested, looking back at them I feel none the wiser. I don't know. I explain slow replies with social anxiety or work hours or downplaying interest, I know I am not owed an explanation but I so, so wish for the politeness of a "thank you but for personal reasons I will have to decline". Just anything. Whatever. Maybe she got back together with an ex or maybe she never liked me and was just playing along or maybe her aunt died and she just removed herself off of the internet altogether or maybe she found out she knows someone I once hurt or maybe she has personal issues and couldn't handle following through.

I don't need to know. I genuinely don't expect strangers to reveal those kinds of things to me. But there is something about being ignored or left talking to the void that upsets me deeply. It makes me feel like that middle schooler that people were talking about but not to. It makes me feel like an alien, a wild beast in people's clothing, like everyone has noticed something I have not. Like adults switching to a different language when they talk about scary or important things they don't want their children to hear. Like my faults are inherent and not worth addressing because what is there to do about them? Nothing. It is the kind of thing you understand or you don't.

There is no purpose in self love. There is nothing about me inherently unlovable, repulsive, distasteful. I know this. I know my strengths and I acknowledge those and I prove in my friendships and familial and professional relationships their importance and usefulness and power. I am better than no man, and no man is better than I. All of this is true. I observe myself and in spite of bullies and exclusionary norms I see my own self worth, appreciate what and who I am, feel no shame in stating that. I am attractive in ways which are perhaps unremarkable but nonetheless fine and attractive. I have proven time and time again that I am capable of loving as well as of recieving love.

And yet.

#Bluh bluh #Not feeling too hot

11 notes · View notes

georgieluz · 4 months

Note

6, 10 and 13! 💚

hiiiii 💚

i answered 6 over here just a second ago, but i haven't done 10 or 13 yet so let me do those

10. worst part of fanon

i generally enjoy most parts of fanon but there are a few things that i sometimes don't particularly agree with, or see, myself? harry welsh being constantly described as the token straight is one of them. i know that most of the time this is a lighthearted joke/meme type of thing, but i do think the fandom actually thinks it too. i mostly find this kinda weird bc the only reason people give is that he talks about his wife a lot and is super super into her. bi and pan men can also love their wives to that degree and be "dedicated wife men". it just feels kinda exclusionary that people just naturally assume that a man who loves his wife in a wholesome way can't be bi or pan. especially bc it never applies to any of the other easy men who canonically had wives. and honestly, take it from me, an actual queer man: in comparison to most of the men in easy company, harry actually has queer vibes in abundance. he's definitely not giving cishet man the way people headcanon him. it's not really that deep, but yeah, i will 100% die on this hill. harry welsh is pan and kitty grogan is bi!! harry just doesn't feel like he'd give a fuck about the gender of the person he's into. i feel like he just wouldn't think about it in that kinda way, he'd be like "well, i'm into this person and that's that" and would just be down bad for them regardless of what they identify as.

so yeah, fuck the token straight harry headcanons!! if anything, [redacted] is actually the token straight :)

13. worst blorbofication

ok this is actually a bit of a tough one bc blorbofication is different to uwufication in my mind. like it's a whole separate thing to me. uwufication is more about taking away all the sharp messy edges of a character, whereas blorbofication is more about "oh this character lives in my chest now. i live and breathe their essence" kinda thing. so i don't think blorbofying characters is necessarily something i would see as having a 'worst', especially in our fandom, where side characters with little screen time are often fan favourites. in fact, i'd encourage the blorbofication of all hbo war characters!!! uwuifying some of them in writing does really put me off a fic or headcanon though, especially if it's very ooc. i don't mean the fics where you go deeper into their emotions and explore their inner feelings, or where there is a gradual evolution of their character, that's just good writing, but the ones where all their rough traits and flaws are filed down and polished away, just so the author can write the perfect little fluff fic with innocent flaw-free canvases instead of characters. people do it with speirton all the time, less so with webgott but you do still see it. i'd say winnix fall somewhere in the middle, but closer to speirton than webgott, on the scale. messy winnix is actually way way way more interesting than the flat boring married side couple that most fics position them as. i've gone off-track but still!

for the choose violence ask game!

#julian's inbox #julian's ask games

1 note · View note

first-only · 2 years

Note

This is going to be a 'hot take' (as some people might call it), but lack of knowledge of queer history and the like is not exclusive to queer youth.

For an example of this, my aunt, who's in her 30s, is less knowledgable then I am, I am 18. She had some pretty exclusionary veiws towards non-bisexual mspec people (in her defense, they were do to unfortunate bad expiriences, not due to cruelty), and it took me defending pansexuals (and others) to help her begin to break out of those views. (I don't hold this against her, she is a lovely person, and like many, didn't mean to fall into that mindset. I'm glad she was open to listening to me, and admit her faults)

I just don't like that these issues are veiwed as a 'youth' thing, it just really rubs me the wrong way. (I think it's in the same boat as 'all antis are minors' stuff. Which also leads to views as 'all minors are antis', and similar thinking does seem happen over in queer spaces. I do get the impression that a portion of older queer people think that the youth are just clueless people who are unwilling to learn about history. But maybe that's just me, I am very senstive to how people talk about kids/teens, but can you blame me?)

i absolutely agree yes.

sometimes i like to give people the benefit of doubt, and when they say 'young queers' i dont read it as 'young people who are also queer'; but as 'people who have recently found they are queer [and thus have not familiarized themselves with communities and/or interrogated their own thoughts and biases]'

its a distinction dear to me at least - being young at age doesnt mean you are new to everything. but in the same way, being older age-wise doesnt mean you are more experienced at anything. so the phrase 'young queers' i like to interpret as 'young/new at being queer', metaphorically

this is often not how people mean it, and it seems... unwise or at least not well-thought out to me. throwing insults at people just because of the years they've spent alive seems very illogical. they didnt choose it, they cant change it. they're not a hivemind responsible for everything wrong you see in the world. and really, even if younger people were somehow a strong singular driving force behind some kind of bigotry then... explain? educate? pave a brighter road? what will campaigning against people who will lose the quality that distinguishes them from you in just a few years accomplish? are we now the people decrying an entire generation because we cannot grasp the inevitability of time passing?

#ask #in the same way 'old queer' is sometimes used for people who have just spent more time in such communities ya know #which might coincide with age it might not #alas the more we remove ourselves from terminology and pull towards a more shallow interpretation of words (which is a common thing for #everything not just discussion - look at what happened to 'critical')#we also tend to apply this concept to literal years lived or age and ????#i dont know how to tell people a 16 year old 'child' as they like to say is just 5 short years away from the ones usually spewing this shit #and might as well have known queer adults for longer than they knew what queer is #and a 40 yr old person might just be discovering this possibility while coming from a toxic community and be spewing some very bigoted shit #its not about age its about understanding and acceptance

1 note · View note

queerautism · 2 years

Note

Hi hey hello wassup look I'll get right to the point I'm singlet and I don't have much dog in this fight BUT realizing "fep" stood for "fixing endo posts" has kinda sent me off on a rage filled series of flashbacks, because that kind of blog format is inherently harassment. TERFs to it to trans people all the time, it was an incredibly popular tactic used by exclusionary bloggers against aspec people, and tbqh I did not spend my teens getting bullied in that way to sit by as an adult and let that kind people act like this person isn't doing anything wrong just because SHE is a teenager /at the moment/.

Not only that, but 17 is goddamn well old enough to know what you're doing is cruel and fucked up and that there are endless better things you could be spending your time on that are better for your own mental health.

And what the fuck is her excuse gonna be after she turns 18? I won't be surprised if a bunch of people that are currently up to bat for her suddenly toss her to the wolves because she isn't legally a minor anymore. Because that happens really fucking frequently in these in groups that act like "I'm a minor!" is equal parts a shield and a cudgel.

Like. Fucks sake this shit reminds me of when anti-SJ bloggers would go around screenshotting peoples blogs and blog descriptions to post and mock to their followers, calling it their "blog of the week," which always resulted in the screenshotted blog getting flooded with hate. Spending my teens on the internet in queer, neurodivergent, and otherkin/alterhuman spaces, resulted in me seeing this specific type of harassment /a lot/. And it made me a cunt, because that was the only way to get people to fuck off.

When you open the door to ruthless internet mockery even a little, the floodgates open and are very very hard to get shut once more.

You are always doing more harm than good by running troll accounts like that. You're perpetuating a toxic cycle of bullying by refusing to live and let live. You are not the champion of the DID community. No one fucking is! No one is the ultimate authority on any mental health configuration! You're not going to end the abliesm and discrimination of the psychiatric industry by being a dick to people you don't even know on the internet.

Go make an art blog or an aesthetic posting blog or SOMETHING constructive to fill your time with rather than repeatedly subjecting others //and yourself// to needless stress and even trauma from pointless arguments.

Sorry for leaving paragraphs in your inbox Rouke you can delete this or w/e if I'm out of line at all I just got a bit Heated when those memories hit.

Yeah, i absolutely agree. That's part of my issue, I've seen if A Lot. And i think it's ridiculous that my critiquing of her posts is supposedly harassment, but the entire concept of her blog isnt? It's ridiculous

32 notes · View notes

modernvintage · 3 years

Note

mmm maybe don’t encourage smut in a fandom for a kids show whose main characters are mostly minors (julie, carrie, flynn, nick, carlos, and the boys are all minors, and willie is likely to be a minor as well) and whose cast features several minors (madi, jadah, sacha, sonny) though, not to mention a lot of people in the fandom are minors.

Initial response: Haha, oh you have sent this to the wrong blog, my friend.

Grown-up response: Let’s have a chat.

Look, I get it. Kids need to be protected. There are creeps in the world, etc. etc. I am not suggesting that we all go hog wild and start chatting up minors with evil pervy intentions and go buy a van with "free candy" written on the side. I run a JATP fantom olds chat that is specifically only geared toward those 21+ because it's important for adults and kids alike to have safe and happy fandom spaces to engage. Nuance is good. There's a time and place, yadda yadda yadda.

But I will die on the hill that people in fandom can make whatever the hell they want within fandom.

Look. This whole purity police/culture thing that's happening in all fandom is bad. Bad bad bad. Even if it has good intentions (don't you care about the children, Vinnie?! The children!) this shit can go off the rails in .02 seconds.

Where's the line, hmm? Can't write smut because "omg minors might see it!". Then you get people saying what ships are ok and which aren't (already happening, btw), and that you can only write fic or produce art about "approved" subjects, and who the hell makes that list?

I do not believe in hierarchy in fandom. I am a fandom old. The only people who can tell me how to fan are the content creators (to an extent), and they can do that with a cease and desist letter and a whole bunch of lawyers; thankfully we have AO3, so I don't really worry too much about that shit anymore. Fandom has shifted. I subscribe very much to the AO3 method of fandom-ing. Which is...

Tag your shit. You want to write explicit, porny, smutty, filthy fic with minors? Tag it. You want to write ooey gooey coffee shop AUs that are adorable fluffy masterpieces? Tag it. You want to write an end of the world, gritty, bloody, gory apocalypse horror AU? Tag it. Whatever floats your boat, fam. Tag it. You don't have to agree with it.

If people of any age - including minors - want to take a swing at writing sex scenes for JATP, they should go for it. And they should tag it. And those who don't want to read it, shouldn't.

I'm also decidedly not of the opinion that omg sex is bad, btw, which we're ehhhhhhhh skirting a little close to and that makes me uncomfortable. Minors should have a chance to explore their sexuality and learn and grow and mature in a way that is safe for them to do so and fandom can offer that by being an extension of a fantasy and not a real life scenario. It's why tags exist. It's why content warnings exist.

Minors have to be responsible for what they consume on the internet. The internet cannot 100% successfully cater to minors or any other person of various interests and comfort levels, even with the use of tags and content warnings. Personal responsibility and accountability have to coexist with tagging and content warnings.

Fandom does not exist in a vacuum, even for minors. Fandom doesn't go away once people turn 18. People have to self-govern and curate their own experience. People can assist in this by tagging their shit.

And I really, really implore you to consider the effects of your likely positive intentions. You just want minors to be safe and that's cool. As an older member of fandom, I want that, too. But I will still exist and contribute to the fandom that I desire, the same as anyone else should. We, as a fandom, as individuals, should never ever cater to one demographic. We can't. Because then you become exclusionary, and fandom is for all.

And quite frankly? I think a lot of the whole minors debate, especially in JATP, is virtue signaling. It's also really closely intertwined and sometimes twinged with misogynoir/misogyny. The minors on the show are teenagers. There are interracial couples. Not everyone is straight. Teenagers have sex. Teenagers explore their feelings and physicality and that is part of growing up. JATP also tackles a lot of other issues exceptionally well in canon, including grief, home dynamics, and sexuality. And, actually, I don't really agree that JATP is a kid's show. It can be enjoyed by kids and adults alike. I don't see anyone saying that it's not ok for the show and fandom to explore ... being a teenage runaway or fighting with your parents because they don't agree with your sexual identity, which occur in canon and are potentially hard for minors to understand and digest. The fandom has run with both of those examples and I don't often see anyone clutching their pearls about it. But I do see fans policing sex. Why is that? The sex is usually happening between interracial couples, too, and I don't think this fact can be ignored, either, when we're discussing it.

I do have to laugh at the irony of receiving this kind of ask since I purposefully do not engage with a majority of the JATP fandom, because, since it's inception, it's been grossly puritanical. I attribute that to a younger audience of mostly girls who haven't yet come to terms with how society wants to control them, and are therefore mimicking this behavior in their own personal lives and online. But I also think it's a huge culture and demographic shift generally, because I've been a part of fandoms of teenage girls and young women before, and it's never been policed like JATP is.

Anywho. It's ok if fandom talking about underage sex makes you uncomfortable. But what is not ok is for you - or any other fan - to tell other people what they can and can't do in fandom.

So I guess...why do you feel the way you do? Why do you think you're justified in making this decision for an entire fandom? What personal experiences have you had or not had that have informed this decision? What have your experiences been like in fandom? Have you considered all of the different ways this could snowball out of control? What are your honest intentions?

I am asking because it's possible for minors to have a safe and enjoyable experience in fandom where they can grow and learn their own likes/dislikes while underage sex fics exist, while adults run and interact and engage in the same fandom. These things can coexist.

And if you don't like it...you don't gotta read it. If you're gonna write it, tag it. That simple.

#jatp #julie and the phantoms #fantom olds #the fanfic debate

318 notes · View notes

a-womans-rhetoric · 3 years

Text

Natalie Wynn's "J.K. Rowling" and Disruptive use of Women's Rhetorical Tropes: A Defiant Reply to Transmisogyny

ContraPoints, surrounded by an opulent, candle-lit set and adorned in witch's garb, leisurely pours champagne into her glass — she's ready to breach the internet's hottest topic of January, 2021: her childhood idol being outed as a transphobe (link here). The video itself being over an hour and a half long, I would be hard-pressed to claim that I could ever hope to cover its entirety, comprehensively, in a single post. So to save-face, I'll be dedicating this space only to breaking down her most frequently used rhetorical tropes, one by one.

Irreverence

"Joanne, I wanna talk to you, Joanne! [Fans herself with a rainbow paper fan with the word "BIOLOGICAL" written across it] What is it about Joannes? I can't catch a break from these people" (00:23-00:29, emphasis added).

Wynn's introductory lines immediately open a dialogue with J.K. Rowling — however, this invitation of discourse is defiantly "irreverent" (reminiscent of Nomy Lamm's punk-feminist style in "It’s a Big Fat Revolution” (1995)). Contrapoints, herself a transgender woman, is aware that her very existence is considered in opposition to the TERF-ideology that Rowling subscribes to. Thus, she's rather playful — even openly disrespectful — with her diction: calling the British author by her first name in a mocking-tone and flaunting her own trans identity to the camera (in a way that would likely offend the fragile sensibilities of a transphobe). Her personal tone (with ample use of the pronoun "I") servers a duplicitous purpose: a simultaneous message of "sit down and listen" and a fair degree of "I don't care if you can't accept me."

"So, now that 2020 is finally over, I think we can let the record conclusively show that it was a year whomst is bad. And on top of everything else going on, truly the last thing we needed was the author of Harry Potter coming forward to announce there's two things she can't stand: bigotry, and the transgenders. (00:31 - 00:50, emphasis added).

Finally broaching the subject at hand directly, Wynn employs kairos alongside her irreverence. Kairos, or the rhetorical use of an "opportune moment," holds incredible weight in the first month after 2020: the year in which the whole world fell into a stasis. Characterizing Rowling's transphobia as a collective "the last thing we needed," is also rather dismissive — she unites herself with her audience with the pronoun "we" and invites us all to groan at the exasperating nature of Rowling's bigotry.

Claiming the Right to Speak / Personal Experience

"This is a painful topic for me all around because, as a transgender woman, I am honestly really hurt by a lot of the things Joanne has said in the last year. But I also know what it's like to be the target of a Twitter mob" (01:36-01:47).

As she begins to touch on the topic, Natalie Wynn claims the right to speak on the issue of Rowling's transphobia — a type of bigotry that directly effects her. However, Wynn also situates herself partially with Rowling in her acknowledgement that receiving Twitter backlash is a terrifying experience (an experience, she argues, that the human brain is not prepared to handle the scale of, 01:49-02:39). In treating her subject with such dignity — and adding her own deeply personal account— ContraPoints creates a credible ethos in the beginning of her video essay. The audience is inclined to listen to someone who has been directly effected by the subject of Rowling's controversy (transphobia) and someone who is, rather compassionately, willing to empathize with those who would wish her harm. Although the generally sassy, glamorous, and irreverent tone of the video still appears soon after (see: the above image), her opening up for this somber moment garners a fair degree pathos in the viewer — we, as human beings, are inclined to sympathize with people who are open about being hurt.

Metis (Embodied Rhetoric)

[The following ContraPoints quote is addressing the above J.K. Rowling tweet, content warning for transmisogyny] "Transphobes love to play this game where they pretend that trans people just don't understand basic biology, that's our problem! As if I didn't start taking female hormones because I'm acutely aware that my body is not the same as a cis woman's body, that sex is real. "[Fictional TERF character] You will never be a woman, Nathan. Every cell in your body is male and has a Y chromosome." Really? That's crazy. How you'd you learn so much about science? You know I don't really feel the need to have a second X chromosome, I get by with only one, I make it work. I actually like the Y chromosome, I think it's a little more dainty, you know, it's little softer, a little more petite. The X chromosome has a lot of extra appendages, and don't you think? I don't need anymore of those, thanks. No trans person thinks it's possible to change chromosomal sex and to pretend otherwise is to argue in bad faith" (08:47-09:34).

If you can excuse my gargantuan quote, I hope you'll agree that the dialogue ContraPoints builds here was just too good to cut short. Within this excerpt, we see Wynn's use of irreverance and personal experience blended seamlessly together. For this YouTuber, the personal is perpetually political — especially when her own identity is constantly taken as an ideological stance. She uses her own expertise in trans issues to pick apart just how disingenuous Rowling's assertions are — even accusing her of "argue[ing] in bad faith" with her reductive claims (later, taking specific issue with how Rowling treats trans-ness as a costume). But, here, she also directly invokes another rhetorical trope: that of metis, or embodied rhetoric. Natalie Wynn specifically references her transgender body as a sort of counterpoint to the condescending "sex is real" claims by TERFs. She cites her intrinsic desire to pursue hormonal therapy as evidence that she — and other trans people like her — are all "acutely aware" that there are chromosomal differences between themselves and cis women. With this salient statement, she then follows with some humor: which, again, utilizes her trans body in her rhetoric. Her characterization of the Y chromosome as "more petite" and playful declaration of not needing "extra appendages" lightens up the often dark tone that arguing for trans rights and liberation can take. The clever points she makes are by no means weakened by her humor — if anything, the audience is more willing to listen to someone who can "joke about themselves" (so to speak) while still arguing an incredibly important message.

Naming and Defining Issues

"When I see Joanne tweeting about how trans people think sex isn't real and they're erasing same-sex attraction and they're silencing women, alarm bells are ringing because I recognize these as familiar transphobic talking points, specifically TERF talking points. "TERF" means trans exclusionary radical feminism. God are we still talking about this? I promise this is the last time. So TERFism is a hate movement that disguises transphobia as feminism. ... The fundamental problem with TERFs is not that they're mean. It's that they're politically reactionary, they want to reverse the progress of trans liberation." (14:05-16:02)

In her definition of TERF rhetoric, Natalie Wynn outlines some dog-whistles that are obvious to her, as a trans woman. She calmly explains to the viewer that, oftentimes in the present-day, rhetorics of exclusion are thoroughly disguised; TERFs, specifically, hide their rampant transphobia as a form of feminism. However, she further clarifies that the specific "danger" that TERFs pose is not from their cruelty — it's from their fervent dedication to strip away trans rights through political means. By specifying this danger, Natalie Wynn shifts the conversation away from empty discussion of offensiveness/terminology, to issues which directly affect the lives of trans people every day.

[This portion addresses the picture above] Also an act of naming and defining, ContraPoints makes a distinction between "Direct" and "Indirect Bigotry." She argues that many people envision bigotry as a festering, public, frothing-at-the-mouth hatred — a phenomenon she dubs "the Westboro Baptist Church theory of bigotry" (20:06). In bringing attention to the human tendency to think of people as exclusively practicing "direct bigotry" — envisioning them as a sort of delusional "other" — she then forces the audience to contemplate the relative omni-presence of the more covert (and possibly alluring) "indirect bigotry." This definition, crucially, requires introspection. By allowing ourselves to think of bigots not exclusively as "Westboros," we're made to adopt a much more nuanced view of subjects (most) generally prefer to keep black-and-white. Natalie Wynn uses her J.K. Rowling case study to complicate this 2D view of "The Bigot," inviting others to more carefully examine how politically reactionary views develop.

Phew, this was probably the longest post I've ever typed up on tumblr! Hopefully, I succeeded in demystifying (or at least adding clarity to) some of the specific tropes ContraPoints uses (that are common to women's rhetorics as a whole). Thanks for reading if you stuck around this long, and my ask box is always open!

#contrapoints #tw transphobia #tw transmysoginy

22 notes · View notes