Thursday, February 22, 2024

I Get Comments

So, apparently people who have made careers out of attacking trans people (and trans women in particular) are "unfailingly polite", and it's trans people who are being unreasonable (apparently).

Let's put something in perspective here - people like Riley Gaines, Kelly-Jay Keen, and "Billboard Chris" make quite a living running around attacking trans women on a daily basis.  Most of them have built up huge social media platforms through notoriety, and they get heard as a result.  

It wouldn't be contentious if these people were working from a position of actual honesty and discourse.  They aren't.  For the most part, they engage in rage farming.  The language used is that of moral absolutes, the framing presupposes that trans women are basically what used to be called "peeping toms", or that they are rapists looking to get closer to their victims, anything that would naturally ramp up a fear response.  

Are they engaging in direct violence against trans women?  The answer here is "yes, they are".  Violence can be done through both words and deeds.  The harm of violence happens regardless of whether it is physical or mental abuse that happens - we know this from the psychological study of trauma and abuse.  

But, as has been demonstrated repeatedly in recent years, the words of these people can inspire others to act against the target group.  On Twitter, the account "Libs of TikTok" has been associated with anything from direct violence against individuals to bomb threats made against schools targeted by the account's owner.  There's a term for this - "Stochastic Terrorism".  Stochastic terrorism is quite literally provoking others to engage in violence. 

They love to characterize trans women as "hulkingly huge" (most aren't), of being "violent" (again, seriously?), of being sexual predators (also false in the large), of being "a danger to women" (a claim without merit), of "grooming children" (because they can't understand that trans adults were once trans children, even if they didn't have the language for it), and so on.  All of these claims lack objective merit, but they make wonderful slogans.  

So, when the trans community (and allies) comes out in numbers to challenge these people, I would argue that it is absolutely understandable that people are going to be angry - the violence has been ongoing for months and years, and these people are at the centre of it.  Demands that trans women be excluded from public life are not invitations to "sit down and have a cuppa and a chat" - they are quite the opposite. 

You asked, I provided. The violence is being done over and over, on a daily basis by these people and their followers.  If you think that's an example of "male violence", you're completely missing the picture. 


lungta said...

Bit of a tempest in a teacup
Trans priveldge is wholly disproportionate
Take entertainment
trans are statisticaly about 0.004% of any population
that is 1 in 2500 actors
given 50 actors per show
thats 1 trans every 50th show
not one trans in every show as it is now.
We have empowered a tiny group that either cannot tell a penis from a vagina or if they can, do not know what it means. and 99.006% of the population have to pretend that changing to accommodate this is intelligent and economical. Reality will set in when the money runs out. It always does.

MgS said...

Oh look - the "I don't care if you're , just stop waving it in my face" argument comes up.

Remember the 1990s? When an actor being "out" was a big deal, and suddenly everybody was complaining about gay / lesbian characters in shows? Yeah - we've heard that script before.

Here's the thing - representation matters. It mattered in the 70s and 80s when ethnic minorities started to be written into scripts; it mattered in the 90s and early 00's with gay and lesbian people, and it matters now. It normalizes the idea that people who are stigmatized aren't actually different from mainstream society.

As for your whining that the trans community "can't tell a penis from a vagina", you are exactly the person that needs the exposure to that "tiny group" you seem so willing to shove under the carpet.

As for "reality setting in", reality is here - the trans community has always been here, and it isn't going away. Did oppression make people of colour, gay and lesbian people go away? Nope - it never did. Don't think for a moment that the trans community is going to disappear to make you feel comfortable.

lungta said...

proportionate response
There are 10000 things more important and relevant to every person including TG than every single person knowing about your bits and feelings about your bits and how hard done by you are because of your bits and feelings.
Any other group with such a tenuous self evaluation of their own status has a clinical designation. You mention people of color.
White people claiming native status or black status because they think/feel they were born into the wrong skin is ridiculous BUT is exactly the same argument.

MgS said...

Congratulations, Lungta.

That's probably the stupidest thing I've read all day. Thank you for proving that you really don't have a clue what you're talking about - now I know I can safely ignore anything you say on the subject.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

The Cass Review and the WPATH SOC

The Cass Review draws some astonishing conclusions about the WPATH Standards of Care (SOC) . More or less, the basic upshot of the Cass Rev...