Materialist Feminist

This is Andrea Dworkin in 1978 writing to Jan Raymond, of all people calling transsexuals a "vigorously persecuted minority" forced into exile, pushed into prostitution, drugs, and suicide by social conditions.

She says outright their suffering is real. Not fake, not ideological, not something you get to handwave away because it’s inconvenient.

And then she does something most of you refuse to do: she actually analyzes it.

Male-to-female transsexuals: rebellion against the phallus.

Female-to-male transsexuals: trying to access the only "freedom" patriarchy makes available.

Different situations, same system grinding people down.

That’s materialism. That’s what it looks like when you don’t treat suffering like a team sport.

What she doesn’t do is sanitize it. She names the outcomes prostitution, addiction, suicide because she understood that what gets called "choice" is often just what’s left when society corners you and then blames you for how you survive.

And the part you all love to ignore?

"I haven’t changed my mind."

So no, you don’t get to drag Dworkin out like a prop while stripping out the parts where she recognizes transsexual people as an oppressed class under patriarchy. You don’t get to flatten her into a slogan because actually engaging with her would require some intellectual honesty.

Those passages BTW are Dworkin doing a theoretical analysis about taboo, repression, and how sexuality is structured under patriarchy. It had nothing to do with making both look "positive".

You can think it’s wrong, fine but thats a completely different argument.

My post is her explicitly describing trans people as a materially oppressed class under patriarchy.

So no, nobody is "uncritically accepting everything she’s ever said." I am talking about one specific analysis, and you’re deflecting with unrelated quotes like it cancels out the rest.

the issue is men. “rich people” and it’s majority males. “criminals” and it’s males. i’m not understanding how people aren’t recognizing this.

The one essential element that seems to be missing though is labour exploitation. The fundamental purpose of a cult is to exploit the labour of its members. In my queer group, the labour exploitation was in volunteering, where they expected us to always volunteer for their events, even if it negatively impacted our personal lives. I'm also thinking part of the labour exploitation was sex. The thing that made me leave the group was that I was told i'd never belong until I had sex with a trans person to prove my allyship.

you experienced coercion in one specific group, and instead of saying "those people crossed a line," you’re trying to spin it into "trans groups are cults"?

that’s a reach.

That being said pressured into sex to "prove allyship" is such a ass backwards thing to do and I hope you got justice for it. Because hasing is pretty illegal in some places for reason.

But shit like that is not some secret feature of "trans ideology," that’s just people being manipulative as hell.

if a cis-led group did that, you wouldn’t be out here calling cisness a cult, so why the double standard?

Smoke that shit for all I care..

The fucking jump to “incel,” “nazi,” etc.?

Congratulations thats not analysis

That’s just you trying to smuggle in a dash of moral panic so you don’t have to prove the shit coming outta your mouth.

Please do us a favor and 👇