Sans titre

I'll be honest that I can sympathize with the knee-jerk reaction to not believe call-outs made against transfems. There are spurious accusations made to fuck people over. However, its now gone full blown abuse apologism.

It starts out with "don't believe claims made against transfems" > "assume that all accusations are made with malicious intent" > "even if it is true, you shouldn't do anything about it" > "you should side with the accused even if they ARE guilty"

If you want to see this in action, check out how they talk about pedophiles vs how they talk about transmascs

"You shouldn't abandon or crucify vulnerable pedos just because of their desires"

"Trans men are untrustworthy abusers, and their desires are indicative of real harm"

All this to prove the point that they actively wish to protect real, actual predators (that being rapists and child sexual abusers) so long as they're transfem!

But if you're a transmasc, either engaging in a kink or literally just existing!! You're an active danger to the community.

And this shit is not new, even 10 year old books on gender politics have this rhetoric that even so much as being AFAB makes you inherently more dangerous

While I generally avoid speaking of birth assignment, this is one of the times when its necessary, since DFAB violence towards the community impacted by transmisogyny is real... It would not be safe or acceptable for a DFAB person to show up in a space for transfeminine people. Indeed, it would just be another example of DFAB violence towards us.

The end game of this rhetoric is absolute to cast all those who were assigned female at birth as privileged, dangerous, and predatory, while casting all those assigned male at birth as eternal victims incapable of doing harm.

I can't add anymore screenshots, but this post demonstrates evidence that this movement absolutely includes cis men, because they're all "potentially TMA" and therefore potentially capable of becoming the class incapable of doing harm.

And here's another quote extremely similar to the arguments above:

Regardless of the personal repugnance we may feel for any crime, including rape, we must remember that without an overarching concern for justice, laws invariably become nothing more than the instruments of tyranny.

Voting not guilty on any charge of rape is the only way to remain faithful to the concept of presumed innocence. And any participation in the system as it stands, other than with the intent to undermine it as much as possible, is taking part in the destruction of that sacred presumption.

And where are these quotes from?

Oh! They're from infamous MRA Paul Elm. Making almost identical arguments to that of those in the screenshots above.

imagine if I said "we need to create and support programs to provide children with accessible and free high protein/nutrition meals" and you responded with "why don't we just eliminate poverty/capitalism though".