Okay, this looks bad.

She felt undeserving when she was appointed as UN Women goodwill ambassador and sought out Gloria Steinem to learn about feminist activism.

She thinks the criticism she received for being a white feminist was useful because it made her educate herself.

She says there’s a desperate need to reform the education system in the UK to change the way they are taught the history of how Britain has been involved in foreign affairs and how they profited from slavery.

She felt anxious about approaching 30 because there’s a lot of pressure to have a husband and a baby by then and she’s still figuring her life out.

She was so young when she was casted in Harry Potter that she doesn’t remember much of her life before it and she went to therapy to deal with her issues with fame. She used to feel very guilty for being unhappy because she thought she should enjoy fame more.

The interviewer is a transgender woman and they discuss transgender issues for a while. Emma is in regular contact with a trans child which makes the topic of trans rights emotional for her because she’s very anxious for this kid’s safety.

She talks about her role as Meg March in the new Little Women movie and defends that unlike what many people say choosing to be a wife and a mother doesn’t make Meg a less feminist character and quotes a line from the movie, “Just because my dreams are different than yours it doesn’t mean they are unimportant.”  

She wishes more people would realize she’s not Hermione Granger but also understands why they want to see that in her because Hermione is a symbol for her too.

She used to think she could never be happy without a partner and now that she has learnt to navigate that better and is genuinely happy single she’s started to think of herself as self - partnered in contrast to the time when she thought of herself as single = lonely.

The quote is about people being complacent and accepting of Nazis in social settings, much in the same way that rapists feel validated by rape jokes. It’s about denying Nazis social validation and acceptance, which is a good and necessary thing.

It’s about putting up a stink at family gatherings by refusing to share a meal with uncle Harry after he makes a joke about “some people” needing to be gassed. It’s about standing up to members of your social group spouting antisemitic or racist shit. It’s about challenging them. And yes, trying to talk them out of it is a valid way to do that. But if you can’t, cut ties.

You really don’t understand that all this “punch Nazis” jargon does is making evil grow in hiding, until it’s strong enough to fight back?

And it’s not even a saying here. The good Doctor just made up some ideological bullshit.

And…you are aware that they already are violent? That they kill people as is? Remember the Zwickauer Terrortrio? Punching them doesn’t make them worse than they already are - Nazis are always violent because their very ideology already is violence.

But you know what punching them achieves? It makes them afraid. It makes it so that they don’t dare to try to climb on the herring barrel and shout shit at crowds. It makes it harder for them to recruit followers openly. Punching Nazis and openly ridiculing and shaming them makes sure their bullshit doesn’t get normalised, aka suitable for polite conversation which, as I said, the quote is about.

We at the Alamo Drafthouse would like to officially apologize for our role in the end of mankind as we knew it, and the ascendant Gynocracy that followed. We didn’t know our women-only screening of Wonder Woman would result in the overthrow of all world governments and the total subjugation of men, but in hindsight we probably should have seen it coming.

But we’re talking about trans girls specifically because of TERFs, in the context of “TERFs are bad, because they hurt trans women lesbians (emotionally/verbally/mentally/et cetera).” Why can it not be a discussion about “TERFs are bad, because they hurt trans lesbians?” The concern was TERFs in lesbian spaces, was it not? Won’t those TERFs be harmful to ALL trans people in lesbian spaces? Why was the OP only concerned about the harm they do to trans women specifically? 

because the post came from a person vvho vvas a trans nonbinary lesbian at the time, one of the very people you’re trying to get included in the post

and it can be a discussion about terfs harming all trans people in lesbian spaces! heck, even outside of lesbian spaces– if you make your ovvn post.

OP vvas only concerned about the harm they do to trans vvomen specifically because they vvere trying to foster a concern for trans vvomen specifically, from the context of being a nonbinary lesbian. It’s not that they vvere ignoring their ovvn table in the cafeteria– it’s that they vvere looking at the people at their table and saying, “hey, vvave to the girls vve love so much at that other table!! remember they matter too!”

I figured something vvas going screvvy in the language zone or something– you’re a almost a full decade older than me and ellie

this is honestly the best result I could imagine for either of us

But we’re talking about trans girls specifically because of TERFs, in the context of “TERFs are bad, because they hurt trans women lesbians (emotionally/verbally/mentally/et cetera).” Why can it not be a discussion about “TERFs are bad, because they hurt trans lesbians?” The concern was TERFs in lesbian spaces, was it not? Won’t those TERFs be harmful to ALL trans people in lesbian spaces? Why was the OP only concerned about the harm they do to trans women specifically? 

because the post came from a person vvho vvas a trans nonbinary lesbian at the time, one of the very people you’re trying to get included in the post

and it can be a discussion about terfs harming all trans people in lesbian spaces! heck, even outside of lesbian spaces– if you make your ovvn post.

OP vvas only concerned about the harm they do to trans vvomen specifically because they vvere trying to foster a concern for trans vvomen specifically, from the context of being a nonbinary lesbian. It’s not that they vvere ignoring their ovvn table in the cafeteria– it’s that they vvere looking at the people at their table and saying, “hey, vvave to the girls vve love so much at that other table!! remember they matter too!”

novv do you like, vvanna explain hovv saying trans lesbians… vvho don’t identify as vvomen… vvho vve all agree exist…. aren’t included in a post that specifically addresses trans lesbians vvho ARE vvomen

by like, their ovvn choosing, their ovvn definition

and that they should maybe make their ovvn post about protecting trans lesbians vvho aren’t binary from TERFs instead of derailing a post about trans vvomen

…. is gatekeeping?

because vve’re not just not on the same page

I don’t think you’re even on the same planet

okay let’s break that dovvn

“lesbian spaces are built on love and support and safety and i can bet you there’s gonna be trans girls in that space”

okay. Trans girls exist in lesbian spaces. Alright.

“lesbian trans sisters over lesbian terfs everyday, all day.“

Okay, yes. Lesbian trans girls should be prioritized over lesbian terfs.

… I’m not seeing hovv that’s mutually exclusive? There’s just one more modifier. Lesbians vvhom are both trans and girls. It’s like a dinosaur evolutionary tree.

Like, let me shovv you

like, notice hovv “Trans Lesbians” (LT) are both above “Girl” (G), meaning girl is a more specific modifier

meaning that, you can’t exclude anyone. The post is already as specific as it can get. It’s specifically addressing trans lesbians vvho are also girls. (LTG)

if vve vvere to make a post like,

“all lesbians need to use a dental dam to have safe sex!”

THAT vvould be exclusive, because that statement about (L) does not apply to everyone vvho has (L). It assumes all lesbians have vulvas. Lesbians vvho don’t have a vulva in play aren’t likely to need to use a dental dam, they need to use some other kind of protection!

so, either choose:

“all lesbians vvith a vulva need to use a dental dam to have safe sex!” <– vvhich makes it more specific, instead of assuming all lesbians have a vulva

or

“all lesbians need to use some kind of barrier protection to have safe sex!” <— vvhich broadens back to include everyone vvho is a lesbian

the original post doesn’t need to do that. It’s talking about, specifically, protecting trans vvomen in lesbian spaces. That good ol’ (LTG). It’s not ignoring that other people vvith the modifiers (LT) exist, and that they’re also in danger. It’s just dravving attention to one group.

Listen, in this scenario, it’s totally feasible that nobinary and gnc (or vvhatever language you’re using because you’re still not understanding hovv gross “mtf/ftm” is) lesbians are all sitting at that table, going “yeah, fuck terfs! Trans vvomen rule!”, vvhile also recognizing terfs hate them too?

novv do you like, vvanna explain hovv saying trans lesbians… vvho don’t identify as vvomen… vvho vve all agree exist…. aren’t included in a post that specifically addresses trans lesbians vvho ARE vvomen

by like, their ovvn choosing, their ovvn definition

and that they should maybe make their ovvn post about protecting trans lesbians vvho aren’t binary from TERFs instead of derailing a post about trans vvomen

…. is gatekeeping?

because vve’re not just not on the same page

I don’t think you’re even on the same planet

demanding you don’t derail a post about trans vvomen to go “BUT VVHAT ABOUT LESBIANS THAT AREN’T VVOMEN IN LESBIAN SPACES?”, and that you instead make your ovvn post isn’t exclusion

it’s not that lesbians vvho aren’t vvomen don’t matter or don’t exist or don’t need protection from TERFs

it’s that trying to derail a conversation avvay from specifically trying to address and foster solidarity vvith explicitly trans vvomen vvho are lesbians, and tell them that they matter in that moment, to say “BUT LESBIANS VVHO AREN’T VVOMEN EXIST TOO” is shitty

vvhen I make a post talking about blueberries needing protection you don’t need to come up and try and say “but vvhat about stravvberries and raspberries?? they’re berries too!”, the post vvas about blueberries

the absence of being included in a post does not equal exclusion, dumbass

this is vvhat you sound like

novv do you like, vvanna explain hovv saying trans lesbians… vvho don’t identify as vvomen… vvho vve all agree exist…. aren’t included in a post that specifically addresses trans lesbians vvho ARE vvomen

by like, their ovvn choosing, their ovvn definition

and that they should maybe make their ovvn post about protecting trans lesbians vvho aren’t binary from TERFs instead of derailing a post about trans vvomen

…. is gatekeeping?

because vve’re not just not on the same page

I don’t think you’re even on the same planet

novv do you like, vvanna explain hovv saying trans lesbians… vvho don’t identify as vvomen… vvho vve all agree exist…. aren’t included in a post that specifically addresses trans lesbians vvho ARE vvomen

by like, their ovvn choosing, their ovvn definition

and that they should maybe make their ovvn post about protecting trans lesbians vvho aren’t binary from TERFs instead of derailing a post about trans vvomen

…. is gatekeeping?

because vve’re not just not on the same page

I don’t think you’re even on the same planet

novv do you like, vvanna explain hovv saying trans lesbians… vvho don’t identify as vvomen… vvho vve all agree exist…. aren’t included in a post that specifically addresses trans lesbians vvho ARE vvomen

by like, their ovvn choosing, their ovvn definition

and that they should maybe make their ovvn post about protecting trans lesbians vvho aren’t binary from TERFs instead of derailing a post about trans vvomen

…. is gatekeeping?