,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
[1] If you’re concerned when trans and non-binary folks report feeling unsafe in your profession, your target is a particular interpretation of gender identity that excludes trans and non-binary folks. Your target is not women - no, not even the women who hold such views.
[2] If you suggest that tone-policing the anger of vulnerable folks shifts moral attention away from why they were angry in the first place, you are not thereby agreeing with everything they said in anger. You are pointing out a way conversations go wrong under oppression.
[3] Justifying abuse toward women “because they were asking for it,” or for any other reason that boils down to “they’re women,” is misogyny. Standing against misogyny is compatible with criticizing trans-exclusionary views. Oppression isn’t a contest. There can be more than one.
[4] Criticizing the views that happen to be held by some LGBTQ folks is not the same thing as attacking fellow members of the LGBTQ community. There is a difference between standing against exclusionary views and advocating the exclusion of those who hold them.
P.S. [5] I don’t take “show me evidence that trans and non-binary folks are being attacked by those with trans-exclusionary views” to be a request made in good faith.
