i could be playing subnautica 2 right now

Sexual Assault

Some of you might have already heard of the "social contract" Tara and other influencers signed. For those who are unaware, this "contract" (post containing the full thing linked here) contains agreements to never call out trans women publicly for any reason, never misgender them (obvious and cool rule), and controversially, never publicly accuse any trans woman of sexual assault.

Two people who will be notable later signed this contract as well: Eve (basedtransgirl) and Emily (ts_emilystone)

The first and third rule are predicated on the fact that talking privately is less harmful to people's reputations, and doesn't reinforce transphobic narratives.

I would like to note that trans woman aren't targeted because of any legitimate harm on their parts. To imply that there is any extent to which protecting the reputation of the community by holding it above the wants and needs of survivors will ever make trans woman safe, is ridiculous on account of trans woman not having to do anything to invoke the rights' abuse. In a world where no trans woman has ever done anything wrong, there would still be transphobes, because transphobia isn't trans people's fault.

The third rule does acknowledge the pain of being a survivor of violence from one within your own community, but this is immediately dismissed as irrelevant in the face of the community's reputation as a whole. I'm all for non-carceral justice, but notably this rule isn't just against taking someone to court, it's against publicly acknowledging they assaulted and/or raped you at all. If the argument then is that public shaming or even harassment is equivalent to the carceral state, I'm going to call bullshit.

The alternatives suggested are as vague as they are buzzwords. "Community preservation" seems to imply that survivors speaking out is damaging to the community, as opposed to an effort to protect it from rapists. "Healing" means nothing in the context of a demand for survivors to silently allow their abusers to go on finding victims. Even if one were to handle all of these things privately, even if everyone connected to the perpetrator in question cuts them off, this is a document written by and for influencers. People with followers that do not have access to inside information without being told publicly- exactly what this rule forbids. This is a demand for rapists to be allowed to keep their platforms. What kind of person would sign off on a contract that protects rapists?

The Evidence

Now there are the allegations. Several people (and apparently more privately to ghettogothdoll and others) have come forward and accused Tara and her former (?) friends of hosting parties in which primarily trans women were drugged and/or coerced into sexual acts, which is rape. There are also accusations that specific people one or more members of this friend group found attractive were brought to these parties for that purpose- sex trafficking.

The most substantial evidence in my opinion are Tara's own words to a former friend, Bonnie (bunnymeat on insta), in conversations she posted snippets of herself, so we know the messages are real.

What Tara says here is basically that sexual violence was very possible at her parties through her own negligence, but that she doesn't know that it occurred. This contradicts what she says here:

Bonnie claims that "Eve directed it, you helped. She's more guilty, but you're guilty too." Tara then agrees "yes I helped and I'm guilty[...] that is abuse nonetheless." So was Tara innocently unaware of the sexual violence that went on at her parties, or did she not only know, but help and by her own admission is guilty of abuse? I don't find the defense of not being a "fully individualized actor" to mean anything other than Tara is running from what she participated in. She basically says "it wasn't just me doing it, I was doing it as part of a group" as if that makes it defensible.

The claim Tara has made in response to these screenshots is not that they are doctored, but that she was lying about being guilty.

I do not find this believable. What exactly would an admission of guilt get from bunnymeat? If the accusations are false, Tara telling her they aren't wouldn't get an admission of that falsehood. There is no reason to lie about her guilt.

Here is how Tara has spoken about these parties publicly:

Tara names the two people involved with the parties who also signed the contract (Eve and Emily). Eve was earlier named by bunnymeat as one of the perpetrators at the parties, and Tara never denies this, instead admitting that she "helped" Eve with the abuse. The fourth creator mentioned (Steph), is acknowledged by Tara to be a predator (Tara also goes on to say this person raped her, which I see no reason to disbelieve).

The narrative being spun publicly by Tara is that she has no knowledge of abuse at the parties, and that only Steph is actually guilty. But according to Tara in private, at least herself and Eve are guilty of abuse.

There is also the matter of how Tara has spoken about Bonnie publicly vs privately.

Here, Tara acknowledges that she "smeared" Bonnie, but says that she didn't rape anyone. However, she did admit to helping Eve with abuse at the parties (notably, "abuse" is the word Tara uses). Abuse of a sexual nature can certainly be rape, and is at least sexual assault. Bonnie then says "you smeared me for my rapists". This is referring to Tara's selectively cropped screenshots of the above messages, which Bonnie then posted these full versions of.

Here is a segment of the smears in question:

Privately, Tara acknowledges at least Eve's (based.transgirl) abuse and doesn't refute Emily's. After doing so she publicly characterizes Bonnie as a "blackmailer" in defense of Eve and Emily. These are what Tara admits in the previous screenshot are smears- lies. This shows what Tara is willing to do to protect rapists.

The reason I began this post with the essay on consent and the social contract, is because I believe they speak to Tara's character. What is the utility of making out consent to be a cumbersome and harmful practice? What is the utility of demanding silence from survivors of sexual violence? What do these actions mean when taken with private acknowledgements of abuse on your part? With "helping" a rapist do what they did? What does it mean when you admit to smearing a survivor of people you defended? No one who takes these actions should claim to be a transfeminist. No one who takes these actions should have a platform.

My request is not that anyone harass or dox Tara. That is in no way helpful. What would be helpful is to stop following her and her former cohort, inform people who don't know to do so as well, and move on from this as a safer community.