I may be cringe, but i am free.

i think the fact this has turned into the discourse that it has is disappointing because it feels like a step backwards in that it has become a very large abstraction of identity politics that is almost entirely detached from reality.

I've noticed that as time as gone on the posts about the situation have turned into essentially trying to come up with the theory that will allow them to accuse the other side (and this goes for both sides, to be clear) of being more white, more cisheteropatriarchal, etc, because the attachment of an identity label relating to The Oppressor is being used to attack credibility or imply an inherent immorality to the argument. To be more queer, have more poc points, etc, is the end goal of a lot of these posts to try and turn opposition to the point being made into an act of bigotry which cannot be argued nor redeemed.

Now, don't get me wrong. I think identifying the way these structures play into the theory at hand and the situation itself is important. Discussing these aspects are important. But after a certain point, people are just writing theory about theory and using these identity labels as shorthand for good or bad. pedophilia isnt bad because its associated with the patriarchy, pedophilia is bad because it hurts children. pedophilia is a tool of the patriarchy because it hurts children, but you dont have to be benefiting from the patriarchy to be a pedophile who hurts children. so on and so forth.

its disappointing because while this tactic has been used since the beginning to try and turn ISFF into a symbol of transfems on tumblr both by herself and by transmisogynists on this site, i expected better from those not devoted to being bad actors.

as ive said before, i think even entertaining the notion that ISFF represents a substantial population of trans women on this website is an unacceptable way of engaging with the situation. if you are arguing about whether or not pedophilia is good, or inherently queer, even if i think your take is correct i think youve decided to concede to the concept of a world where this is a possibility and i simply do not think its worthwhile to entertain the idea this is an arguable stance. really, its that ISFF propositioning this whole manifesto is void on its premise: that is not how the real world works and there is no way you can convince me that its anything other than gibberish.

i think if you find it worthwhile to try and go through and debunk the concepts proposed, by all means, have at it. but the idea that what she said was anything other than the niche ramblings of a specific internet subculture that supports pedophilic apologia; that it is in any way a statement that broadly applies to society or raises some important question of youthlib, queerness, transmisogyny... well frankly that is fucking stupit a little.

the problem is that this all came about during a time of widespread public discussion of these issues. (eespecially with it coinciding with other large incidents involving transfeminism that are unrelated but wouldve had vague discourse posts circulating concurrently) i would argue tumblr is in a transfeminism discourse wave. That's not me saying the website is overall transfeminist (this has been clearly disproven), i just mean that it is a widespread focus that has given rise to both a wave of transfeminist support and a wave of intense transmisogyny. and i do think ISFF took advantage of that fact and connected the two: although it would be disingenuous and frankly conspiratorial for me to say she did so in bad faith. i think to her, as a trans woman, connecting those aspects is an entirely genuine move. and because of the fact shes a trans woman, in this specific instance, there is going to be intersectionality in how these ideas play out on the stage with how people interact with her and her ideas. but connecting her social theory of paraphilia and transfeminism has done more harm than good

see, ive seen a lot of posts recently, more broadly transfeminist in nature, that are clearly using the ISFF situation and talking points as their basis. they are, in doing this, aligning themselves with her and her rhetoric. but i dont believe this is like, some effort of a massive wave of pedophiles. i dont think 99% of the people who make these posts are pedophiles nor do i even necessarily assume they support pedophiles, especially the people so far down the reblog chain that any original context of the post is lost. part of why my disappointment over how this has turned into id politic mud-slinging is because it has put a lot very well-intentioned trans women in a position where they feel the need to align themselves with a manifesto i do not think they believe in order to be heard or engage with the overall discussion of transfeminist theory, which is ddangerous and unfair. TME transfeminists, too, well-meaningly adopt either the explicit stance of supporting her individually or regurgitate her talking points with vague allusions to the situation, when the material reality is that this is one woman who chose to align herself with pedophiles and who should not, in any way, be considered representative of trans women as a whole, nor a case study in the persecution of good faith trans women who are wrongly aligned with pedophiles. i agree that it is important to watch for transmisogyny in the criticism of ISFF-- for example, i do not think ISFF herself is a pedophile (more on this later) but i do not think she is a case of transfem sexuality being unfairly policed, either. i think by positioning herself as a key example of transfeminist martyrdom she is unfairly dragging down everyone else with her.

another reason this is all so disappointing, related to the above, is that there really is nothing unique about ISFF-- not in regards to "cancellation" trends, but in that nothing she has said or done is unique to trans women or really even worthy of broader discussion. she is a garden variety tumblr sex idiot, unfortunately. i think pointing out the potential danger to children her rhetoric poses is more than fair, but i also think its a little silly its gone on this long and to such a degree of debate. and the reason i say this is because she posted this all the way back in the summer:

this was what i saw that led to me going "oh, ew", and deciding i wanted nothing to do with her. this was long before any of the current situation. the fact people are acting surprised is very silly; because she wasnt exactly trying to hide anything. ISFF isnt a predator hiding in plain sight: shes someone with stupid, dangerous opinions about sex, opinions that we see on this website all the time and i thought we all agreed were stupid and potentially dangerous. at best, its tasteless. and again: not unique. to act like any of these things are unique to transfemininity or even queerness is ridiculous from any side of the spectrum here because we all have been subjected to melanie martiniez' lyrical terrorism for years. coquette bloggers, ABDL, DDLG, fauxcest-- these subcultures are overwhelmingly cishet. why are we even arguing about this. none of this discussion really had to get to the point it has because this happens like every couple of months or years. trans men im looking at you dont act like toonimal or lee whateverthefuckhisurlwas or even other TME bloggers like nonp or the many personal instances ive encountered where we have learned they are into varying degrees of questionable porn havent been popping up recurrently for years.

all of this is to say that ISFF is an individual with shit opinions. thats it. all the whataboutism (well what about this kink or that group etc) thats been brought into it is deflection and, frankly, inappropriate. to act as if one must choose between criticism of one or the other is reductive. she is not so special or such a pillar to transfeminist theory and discussion that it becomes mutually exclusive to criticize her and transmisogyny, and the fact so many people have entertained that for so long is ridiculous. she is also not uniquely evil, nor do i think she is an active predator-- but i think too many well-meaning bloggers try to overcorrect by flocking to her defense. an overeager ally is not a loathsome thing, but i do not think you need to absolve her to criticize transmisogyny in coverage of the affair. when you do so, you, knowingly or not, also align yourself with what she said-- the problem i elaborated on in the first few paragraphs. you do not have to do that to also critique transmisogyny. two things can be true at once.

that also being said, though, i find it alarming how many people are lumping her blog being terminated in with the terminations of other trans women. i dont know if the original social murder comment was made about her; but i think there is a difference between stalking/harassing the average blogger and what ive seen of the ISFF situation, which is that she keeps remaking under similar URLs, aimed at the same very large audience. i dont think this should have gone on as long as it has-- again, i think back in summer we shouldve gone "well, thats shit" and blocked, but part of the ISFF issue is that

a) she became a massively popular blog, knew this, and that was the reason she posted that big pedophilia post in the first place. she was aiming for her audience

b) she then openly supported and platformed open pedophiles

c) this audience has allowed access between those pedophiles and minors. (again. i do NOT think ISFF is a predator, but the advocating for friendships between children and pedophiles at least among her supporters is alarming)

if she remade under a different name with no intention of continuing this world tour, kept the blog to a mutuals circle, whatever, i think it would be far more egregious for people to "hunt her down", but theres no hunting here. she is trying to return to the same active platform as before; and the issue at hand is one that enables harm towards children. i DO think that there are bad actors who have been taking advantage of the situation to be bigoted, and i dont think thats acceptable, but that doesnt come close to equating this to what happened with photomatt last year in the slightest. i dont think stalking is finding when someone immediately remakes a URL, im sorry. i havent seen evidence of things progressing into stalking territory as of posting, so i may be wrong, but from what i understand this isnt that.

i dont think she should have a very large audience. and again, i think its dangerous to lump her in with the people who are wrongfully terminated for like, selfies. thats a phenomenon that exists! and i think its fair to say she may be more likely to experience this consequence than someone who is TME and is given more grace, but that doesnt mean she should have her blog in the capacity she did prior. im sorry im open to hearing discussion on anything ive said here but i just dont think she should have that kind of reach while championing really stupid, dangerous ideas.