"Not All" guns are loaded, but someone who thinks safety is important treats EVERY gun as loaded until they confirm otherwise.
If you want to help improve the world, inspect and abandon your need to defend yourself from the actions around you that you accommodate more than this.
Allyship so often falters at the point where someone is asked to accept that they're part of a problematic privileged group.
It *specifically* falters when they're asked to see and comprehend:
They accommodate the problematic behavior in their lives more than the marginalized.
When pools were integrated in the 1960s, violent mobs of white people assaulted any person of color for miles around the pool.
"Allies" within city governments paved the pools over instead of arresting the violent mob.
Many of those concrete monuments to cowardice stand today.
We don't become a society of bigotry and bias because too many of us hold terrible views.
We become a society of bigotry and bias because too many of us are willing to accommodate bigotry and bias in a way that we DO NOT accommodate its targets.
Quietly paving over the pools.
If you've never confronted a cishet male ignorant of intimate responsibilities to his partners - an emotional need for him to embrace all forms of intimacy they need with *enthusiasm* - if you can't confront ONE as loud as *this* #NotAllMen cry, then yes, you add to the problem.
Our society does not have most of these issues because "all men" believe in them.
We have them because "most men" - along with most other privileged - prioritize their comfort, and they're more comfortable making it marginalized people's problem that they give privilege space.
I'm a late-bloomer trans woman who prioritized the bigotry of others, who catered to their privileged need not to be challenged by my existence, who bent herself until she broke trying to stop offending their sensibilities.
I fit that anecdote provided for most of my adult life.
I was terrible because **I had hang-ups** about sex, mostly centering around a complete disconnect between internal programming and external tools.
But in living in that space, I recognized - and *contributed* to - most of the male culture things that make this SO pervasive.
It's easy for me to say "yeah, no matter the age, we don't teach men shit in this space, least of all what a woman's needs are and how important to intimacy it is to fulfill those needs *enthusiastically* because they're a partner, and really, none of this is stranger than PiV!"
It was real easy for me to see my part in it, even if I was never in the group, only treated as one.
It was easy because I LISTENED TO WOMEN.
When women started talking about what men fail at, so frequently that gross qualifiers are unnecessary, I prioritized their experience.
#NotAllMen is a farce because it's the cry of retreat from someone who isn't ready to see that, effectively, #YesAllWomen deal with the problem at hand.
Meaning the problem at hand is how we give terrible men space to be terrible.
That's something ALL of us need to do better.//
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Me, exhaustively refuting casually cruel "debate" for half a weekend, having my and others' right to exist measured for a standard of "acceptable genocide," specifically to show trans folks who are emotionally struggling more than I am that I'm going to keep standing up for them:
This isn't the meme with the blue armor guy.
I like that meme, but I'm not here because it hurts me less than it does others.
I'm here because I hope being in the way means that someone else is still standing where the next slings and arrows were meant to fly in my absence.
Those few DMs from people who joyfully found their feet because I found mine will be the thing I take from my time here.
The trolls in the dungeon are already forgotten.
They swung so hard they forgot they were trying to pretend I'd done something to earn it.
Goddess grant me the self-confidence of a white male pundit who just decided his thread ever-so-politely applauding fascists for a bit of wordplay on their latest direct and open call for genocide was just too goddamn fucking CLEVER to be understood.
Openly declaring that you just kind of ASSUME you might have been misunderstood tells the audience your writing skills may be lacking, your audience aim (people concerned the calls for genocide are literal) might be off, or people chose to misread.
But you 100% won't care which.
This much deliberate clowning cannot be taken seriously.
If you paid me to write a reply to the thread, after the replies it received, with the intent to make it clear that you have zero fucks to give about trans lives and concerns?
It is the year two thousand twenty three Common Era and there is no longer an excuse for pretending not to know what the stated - and DESIRED - outcome of "eliminating" a "ism" means for the people within that "ism".
Not even for the voluntary ones, let alone the indelible ones.
They openly declared the end state of all "isms" they disagree with eight years ago.
"Rope, Tree, Journalist" was the event horizon.
That was the moment that claiming ignorance became a pleasant fiction.
You're no worldly philosopher just because you refuse to engage with it.
@drvolts If the wood's not stacked at your feet, it's not your place to weigh in on the fucking heat to light ratio.
@drvolts Take the entire goddamn shoe store out of your mouth and LISTEN to trans voices when we tell you:
THEY ARE LITERALLY, EXPLICITLY, PUBLICLY CALLING FOR OUR MURDER.
What pushed them this far beyond the pale?
Disaffecteds making *excuses* on their behalf.
@drvolts The people literally calling for our death will succeed based on one thing and one thing alone.
It will depend entirely on how willing you are to accommodate them, accommodate your personal discomfort over confronting their openly, publicly stated intentions, over our own lives.
It's akin to the phrase "it's okay to be white," which recent polling showed Black Americans to find far more problematic - because they understand the connotations behind expressing that thought in the larger conversation - than white Americans who want to take it at face value.
The misrepresentation of CRT - collegiate level theory revolving around the ripple effects of systemic injustice and the vestiges of our terrible past - as "teaching white kids their skin makes them bad" is a conscious effort to pervade this rift in conversational understanding.
The demand to point to an unequivocally bigoted statement from a woman whose literal job is to make words evoke thoughts and feelings that aren't on the page, is no different.
It's a tacit defence of supporting a campaign of long knives by covering for the campaign's intentions.
People love to live in self-reassuring circles of their own comfortable inaccurate beliefs. It helps them avoid the sickly feeling like they could be WRONG in some important way.
I don't fear that feeling.
Transphobic people made me live submerged in it for forty damn years.
The thing about coming up for air and realizing your existence wasn't wrong, just different, is that you have to resolve what being wrong means to you now.
Some decide being wrong won't ever matter again.
I'm one to decide learning I'm actually wrong is super important to me.
I spent so long doing everything I could to identify the ways in which I might be Wrong and try to fix it, that I got a little hyperfocused on the ways so we often make others needlessly feel Wrong.
And in turn, the ways in which I might be contributing to that unneeded feeling.