Will get back to you on this, a bit later when I have time.
-
-
Replying to @RichFelker @laurentbercot
I'm not sure if you're aware, but while un-@'ing will keep you out of her mentions, it will not keep your messages from showing up to anyone who opens up the original thread to read it, where they're a derailing microaggression.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker @laurentbercot
Regardless of your not meaning it as such, your comment comes across as concern trolling, and uses a lot of phrasing that will be read as dogwhistles like "identity politics", "extreme", and "unfair [to group not at personal safety risk or any disadvantage due to 'unfairness']".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker @laurentbercot
If someone who constantly deals with aggression and threats due to hetero- and cis-normativity sometimes or always feels more comfortable not being around straight people, their mentioning that is not hurting you or reason for you to advise them not to "hurt their cause".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker
That is very true, and the reason why I removed myself from her mentions. Now there are several things: 1. We NEED to be able to have a conversation about identity politics without it being read as a dogwhistle. Seriously, fuck those guys, I want to reclaim discourse.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @laurentbercot
No. "Identity politics" is not something we need to discuss at all, because it's a framing invented and used by awful people.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker
Then what is the right take? If someone publicly says they've been abused by straight people, what is it, if not categorization by identity? I don't feel *threatened* by it, but I don't think it's *right*; am I wrong about this, and why?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @RichFelker @laurentbercot
If someone says this, it doesn't mean all straight people are abusive. It means they've been hurt sufficiently badly, or sufficiently many times, by things individual straight people have done, intentionally or unknowningly, in a context of heteronormativity, that...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker @laurentbercot
...the pattern is relevant to their self-care/self-defense. And, being in a context of heteronormativity, stating the pattern is not creating any side-effect of disadvantage/harm/threat-of-safety to other straight people who were not the ones responsible for the harm.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
With the roles reversed (but still the heteronormative context), there would be no systemic/normalized harm, at most very individualized acts of harm, and trying to state that as a pattern would further systemic disadvantage/harm/threats to the group as a whole.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.