Yeah, to the second point here: I believe that to a transphobic, cis-centric society, *not* gendering people at every available turn reads as a security threat, because they're insecure if people around them aren't being gender-marked.
In the past when I talked online about taking gender markers off airline tickets I had people -- who clearly had never given the matter a second's thought -- immediately declare that this would make flight less safe by making it harder to know who is flying.
And it's like... our tickets are already tied to a unique identifying number on our government-issued photo IDs. There's not someone out there with my legal name, my number, and a different gender. So where's the safety risk?
And for that matter, even if there *was* such a person, for it to matter we'd have to have a terrorist plot that we're both in on but that depends on us switching places for a flight.

But it made me think of back in the 90s, in a Geocities chatroom, there was somebody who refused to use gender pronouns or answer questions about their gender on the grounds that text chat made it irrelevant.

And some people absolutely couldn't handle this.
The conversations would go like:

"Please just tell me M or F, I need to know how to talk to you."

"Like a person."

"But I need to know who I'm talking to."

"Who isn't a gender."

"BUT I DON'T KNOW WHO YOU ARE."

"It's a chatroom. You don't know who anyone is."
And the thing is I referred to this as a function of cis-normativity up top, but I think it is inextricably tied up with hetero-normativity and homophobia (which, I mean, is par for course), because the root of I Must Know Your Gender is the idea that Man + Woman = Man Gets Sex.
The actual root reason at the heart of transphobia is that if people resist categorization, if people can be sorted into one category and go, "Um, Actually..." then that calls into question the whole system of sorting.
And if there is not a super concrete, super official, super objective, and super permanent way to sort people into two distinct and separate piles marked Man and Woman... then you have to be prepared to relate to anybody as a person, at any time.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Alexandra Erin

Alexandra Erin Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlexandraErin

9 Jan
Earlier today I explained my thoughts on a meal that was served with gravy over it by explaining that my reaction to gravy on anything can be summed up as "This could have been an email."

I don't know exactly what I mean by that, only that it's how I feel.
Like, if I already like something, then the gravy doesn't add anything I need and might obscure or alter what I like about it.

And if I don't like it, then the gravy's not going to change that.

So it's unnecessary to my experience, at best.
Nota bene: You can like gravy all you like. This isn't my hot take on gravy or my attempt to cancel gravy; I'm describing an aspect of my tastes. Your taste can differ from mine without it being a debate or an argument or a tournament known as Mortal Kombat.
Read 6 tweets
8 Jan
So, Tabletop Simulator's statement here, in the most charitable interpretation of how it happened, was written by someone from @BerserkGames who was only familiar with one ban out of a sequence of bans, which they had only been told a self-serving summary of how it had happened.
The description of a user "spamming different key words in an attempt to get flagged" describes an event near the end of the affected user's account of events, linked in this tweet.

Laughably and sadly, that was the user saying she was cis and straight.

And the moderator she sought clarity from about why saying she was cis and straight didn't result in a chat ban when saying she was gay (consistently) did, the mod retroactively banned her for it, and the reasons he gave included "discussing sexuality".
Read 5 tweets
8 Jan
I'm seeing a lot of people asking for a generous reading of this and saying things like "She didn't mean it's encouraging that the unwell are dying but that the well aren't."

I have two things to say about that.
First, the problem with eugenics isn't that it's just so negative.

So rephrasing a eugenicist idea as a positive ("More healthy people!" instead of "Fewer sick people!") doesn't make it not eugenics, or fix the problems that make eugenics deplorable.
And second, if she'd meant something *completely* else... if it should come out that what she meant was something more like, "It is imperative that we do more to protect the vulnerable because so many of them are dying."... the fact that she said what she said is still a problem?
Read 7 tweets
7 Jan
Here's a thing: if you write an essay about your warm and complicated feelings about your husband, and it has a headline, lede, and deck about how awful he is and how much you hate him, AND the essay is behind a paywall?

Most people who see those things won't read the essay.
That "Oh, nobody is reading critically these days, readers are so stupid and gullible." take is missing the point. You can talk about how a savvy consumer should know better than to fall for false advertising, if you want, I guess, but this isn't a question of literacy.
Very possibly not.

And arguably the sardonic, self-deprecating (by way of family-deprecating) approach to the essay's intended point is valid, if a terrible idea given the current state of the art/the industry.

But the essayist wrote it in this world.
Read 27 tweets
7 Jan
I know I've told the story about how I quit the shady telemarketing place before, but I'll tell it again.
This was a cold-calling sales job, but it wasn't phrased to us or the customers as a sales job. We were the "scheduling" department. The sales reps were in the field. We were supposed to call someone and get whoever answered the phone to say "yes" to a visit from the sales rep.
The company was nominally a home-improvement company. Sold siding and windows and a few other things (gutters, maybe?) so that if we encountered somebody who didn't believe us when we told them they needed X, we would pivot to Y and then Z.
Read 28 tweets
7 Jan
There's more than one cause of this (as there is for everything) but when I hear it phrased like that I can't help but think about how much we have relied on moralization and stigmatization in place of health education, in all aspects of life.
We've got a culture that largely gave up on teaching kids to like vegetables (and teaching parents how to help them do so) in favor of the message "No one likes eating vegetables, but you have to do it, because it's good for you."
Our compulsory physical education involves games but in a "You've got to play this sportsball because today we're playing this sportsball" way, with a lot of bullying and sanctioning of bullying, and adolescent anxiety multipliers built into the system.
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(