Thread by @fozmeadows

So, this @DarkMatterzine /Nalini Haynes fuckery. Unless you're willing to be out about your marginalisation at all times, no matter the cost, you're not #OwnVoices - but more than HALF the piece is her complaining about how unfairly she was treated when SHE wasn't fully out?

Like. I'm just. It'd be a monumentally shitty (and wrong!) position to take in any case, but I'm gobsmacked that she spent SIX WHOLE PARAGRAPHS talking about how unfairly she was treated b/c others didn't realise the extent of a disability even SHE didn't know to claim fully -

- only to turn around and say, in essence, "If you, like my past self, are in denial about the extent of your disability, or nervous of/unsure about articulating your marginalisation, TOUGH FUCKING LUCK, you're NOT disabled/marginalised enough to claim it."

The fact that she's reduced all marginalisations to having the same potential consequences in all instances... like. There are queer authors who cannot be out because IT COULD GET THEM KILLED IN THEIR HOME ENVIRONMENTS. LITERAL DEATH. This?? Matters?? A lot??

What is this paincore bullshit of blaming anyone who hides/passes/elides their marginalisation for their personal safety or security, as though their desire to be safe is more of a problem than the system that threatens their safety otherwise??

"If you're not willing to risk losing your job or your housing, or if you're not prepared to risk PHYSICAL VIOLENCE, then you cannot claim the identity that sees these things threatened, because you're not paincore enough" is a fucking HELL of a take.

Like. I'm going out on a limb, here, but if this is your attitude towards marginalization, then perhaps there's a reason you lost your councilling job that goes beyond ableism. Imagine saying any of this shit to a struggling client during a councilling session!

When it comes to student debt forgiveness in the US, we talk a lot about the selfishness of people who struggled to pay off their loans saying, "Well, *I* had to suffer, so it's not fair that anyone else has an easier time!" and I think that's 100% Haynes's vibe here.

Should she have suffered in the past? No! Nobody deserves to have their marginalisation ignored or weaponised against them! But this is not a good reason to claim that, because YOU suffered, other people must do so in the future, or else their experiences don't count the same!

And what Haynes is doing, right here? Is ignoring and weaponising the marginalisation of others against them. She's saying, "unless you perform paincore to my satisfaction, I will not allow you to claim your identity. I will doubt your identity is real. You do not count."

If a hijabi Muslim takes off her scarf to avoid violence, she is still Muslim. If a mixed-race person passes as white to avoid being targeted for racial abuse, they are still mixed-race. If a queer person stays in the closet to avoid being murdered, they're still queer.

There's something so depressingly neo-Calvinist about applying this paincore logic to marginalisation. "You've been made to suffer, so embrace the suffering as necessary; avoiding suffering is indulgence, which leads to sin." Literally fuck OFF.

Also, look. Speaking as someone who is also a white AFAB person? Haynes is a white AFAB person who could stand to realise that, compared to a lot of other people, she still has privilege; it just doesn't relate to her disability.

Her whole thesis is based on the idea that, if you're not willing to risk the worst that could happen if your marginalisation was always visible, it doesn't count. Hi, hello, every trans person murdered or harassed into suicide for being out WOULD LIKE A FUCKING WORD.

I just. If you can't acknowledge that maybe, JUST MAYBE, the stakes are higher for some people and in some contexts than others, then perhaps you should consider that your comparative privilege is blinding you to some fairly fucking important truths.

Do some people pretend to have a marginalisation in order to feign the authority to talk unquestioned about that marginalisation? Yes, sadly, they do: the whole Jupiter Wyse thing recently is proof. See also: Rachel Dolezal and her shitty successors. But they are NOT THE MAJORITY

The majority of people who hesitate to claim a marginalisation publicly, or who try to control how public that marginalisation is? Are either trying to keep themselves safe, or worried about being appropriative of their own identities PRECISELY BC OF ATTITUDES LIKE THIS.

the absolute GALL of a white woman saying that a mixed-race person ISN'T A REAL POC IF THEY'VE EVER PASSED FOR WHITE. WHAT THE SHITTING FUCK IS THIS RACIST NONSENSE??

Let's talk about the notion of "choice" in these instances, too, because the idea that any of us are 100% in control of how we're perceived at all times? Is not remotely based in reality.

A light-skinned Black person does not instinctively know, at any given moment, if they're "passing" sufficiently to fool a random white person. Was that cashier extra nice because they thought they were white, or were they just friendly?

If a trans person passes as their correct gender well enough that a transphobe mistakes them for cis, such that they feel comfortable talking about their willingness to hurt a trans person? THAT'S SCARY AS FUCK. You don't stop being trans if you stay quiet to stay safe!

Imagine you're a baby queer writer in an unsafe household, and you read this article saying that you can't claim to be queer online unless you're prepared to come out to the parents who might hurt you, disown you or both if they knew the truth.

I'm so viscerally angry about this I could rant on for days, but I'm going to make myself stop now. Nalini Haynes and DMZ can both fuck off into the sun. KEEPING YOURSELF SAFE AND SECURE DOES NOT INVALIDATE YOUR MARGINALISATION. END OF FUCKING STORY.

ETA: a friend has pointed out that I didn't include an alt-text for the one screencap I posted, so here it is again with an alt-text:

Jumping back on my own thread a final time because: THIS.

https://twitter.com/thecmcaplan/status/1376206082901737472?s=21

HI HELLO, BISEXUALS AND PANSEXUALS EXIST! WE LITERALLY EXIST AND WE DON'T STOP BEING BI/PAN DEPENDING ON THE GENDER OF THE PERSON WE'RE WITH OR HOW LATE IN LIFE WE FIGURED OUR SHIT OUT! IDENTITY IS NOT DETERMINED BY PERFORMANCE!

listen. LISTEN. THERE IS NO ONE RIGHT WAY TO BE QUEER. none of us have the same identical realisation/coming out/dating experiences because, newsflash, WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT PEOPLE. also, where the fuck does any of this leave aro/ace/aroace people?

Some ace people have biological children! This doesn't make them less ace, even though the proof that they did The Sex is walking around in the world! Lots of aro people are still in relationships! This doesn't make them allo! EVERY TIME I THINK ABOUT THIS IT GETS DUMBER