Thread by @LeiracalMuse

Every single action of attack or abuse towards streamers over a video game was an unacceptable response.

Sadly, none of the victims the author's beliefs are never going to hear the same about the people who leapt at the chance to invalidate their lives.

That's the whole point.

It's a conversation I don't really have interest in engaging with, specifically because it's been hand-crafted to (ONCE AGAIN) burden very single trans person and ally with the full responsibility of every person who acted against anyone they spoke out against.

But ONLY them.

This is a dance I've tried to join a thousand times, but the choreography is specifically written to maximize the chance my feet get stepped on; so I decline.

It's the same argument, from the same corner, that blames all seeking racial justice for looting while absolving 1/6ers.

When you get into the macro level of "these things are being done" in a way that specifically stops addressing "these specific people are doing them" but still tries for "these specific people are *responsible*," there's a simple ethical requirement.

Tie the rhetoric to the act.

To double back to One Six: what was clearly established in the wake - and so visible beforehand that #DontTakeTheBait trended in the days before - was the violent intervention against democracy was the intention.

The words used were carefully crafted to suggest the action taken.

When you discuss thousands of people and dozens of public(-ish) figures, the specific rhetoric matters.

Rhetoric that indicated that streamers didn't deserve to choose or play the games they want would encourage actions against them.

Same for calling trans people "just whiny."

If trans-positive people expressed that streamers did not deserve to choose and play what they wanted, then they hold responsibility for actions that tried to enforce that view on streamers.

The rhetoric that said "it's just a game, stop being so terminally online" did the same.

I know which one I saw more of.

I know which one was the prevailing rhetoric.

I know which was followed up with "I'm not telling you what to do, just explaining what message you're sending."

Which was "now I'm doing this just to spite you, because you deserve spite and anger."

Ultimately, I have utter empathy for any streamer that encountered abuse over a choice of video game.

I have that empathy because they walked into a very small fraction of what I and others encounter daily.

Unlike a streamer, we can't make choices or live our lives to avoid it.

That, ultimately, is why the larger conversation of "responsibility" is exhausting.

It's the people with the most privilege and the least marginalization *once again* telling the marginalized that it's their fault they were marginalized.

It's self-abdication of responsibility.

Show me others who took this stance: that it's the trans-positive online community's fault for enabling abuse via rhetoric about the blood libel game and those who chose to play it.

I'd be fascinated to see their thoughts about how they and others like them enable transphobia.

That's not a deflection.

It's an earnest attempt to promote accountability and responsibility all around.

It's me truly wanting to enable the value of speaking about all as if all must matter.

I want that, because the conversation going on now isn't actually seeking it. //

Postscript: I meant to show screenshots of some of the abuse being levied across the community in the fallout of a specific streamer graduating.

But most of the images *supporting* her portray her as a literal Nazi, murdering "woke" people.

The rhetoric is what sets the tone.