#ask2tag

madatobi + vulnerable spots

Kaiba did not have a tattoo. What he had was a gnarled mess of old scar tissue.

And while i hope those passing comments don't mean much and don't actually reflect the entirety of their values, it does worry me because i've been in online spaces long enough to see those attitudes realized in callout wars.

When that kind of culture of deflection and denial takes root and gets applied in marginalized communities, it leads to situations where the abusers are also marginalized and then that marginalization is used as a reason to  shield them from consequences on the grounds of the perpetrator's safety.

Like many of us have seen how abusers operate; we've seen victims be asked, coerced and manipulated into protecting their abuser just to protect their imago/the family/etc. We've seen social and material consequences be brought up as a way to guilt-trip victims into silence.

Having observed how social justice and activism-focused circles operate, i think it's naive to think that identity politics can't be used on an interpersonal or community level as another tool of manipulation or, in some cases, to DARVO the victim in retaliation.

Before i go on, i want to be clear: 1) i am not claiming ISFF is an abuser, i am discussing different ways these types of mindsets manifest when applied to situations outside of this one

2) this isn't only a phenomenom within the queer community. The same rhetoric in different fonts gets applied in many communities where they are a minority surrounded by a majority, and even in interpersonal relationships where optics are a consideration.

3) unfortunately, just like therapy speech, social justice concepts and rhetoric can be misused and manipulated. I think it's a bit unrealistic to deny that identity politics, "oppression olympics" etc can be weaponized on a community and interpersonal level, depending on the environment.

4) just because these thoughts are surfacing again on a topic that's revolving around transmisogyny and accusations towards a trans woman, that doesn't mean that i think trans women hold some kind of social power, are privileged over others in the LGBT+, are unfairly or unjustly protected etc; that is not the point i'm trying to make, and i know that in many cases the accusations towards a trans woman are a transmisogynist smear attempt. Just because these kinds of mindsets develop in some isolated communities doesn't mean that any of it reaches the larger society.

5) it's imperative we hold everyone to same standards and don't let subconscious biases fly free; if one person is dangerous for a behavior and should be removed for it, so should another one. If a cis woman or man posted the same procontact/map activist/radqueer rhetoric and it breached containment, i would report their blog as well.

6) When it comes to the ISFF situation, i agree with many that it's important that we stay vigilant to how transmisogyny operates and we should all be aware of how, in example, trans women's sexuality is overtly scrutinized and how often respectability politics are employed to justify disproportionate reactions. We need that awareness so that in situations where someone makes an accusation, we can analyze the evidence on whether the accusations hold water, or if they are coming out of bigotry.

Where they lose me is when they follow that up with "and ISFF said nothing wrong". I have detailed my thoughts on why i think the rhetoric she was spreading is dangerous and irresponsible and i stand by that. I think removing people's platforms in cases like hers is a natural consequence and a preventative measure due to the potential harm that rhetoric might lead to.

And that brings me to my point, i think?

The same way we should never just believe someone without considering the whole situation and everything that surrounds the accusation (lest we become a flying monkey in a DARVO campaign), we should never adopt an attitude where every accusation is false. We should always ask questions and consider the whole situation so we can act in a way that's the most constructive and prevents the most future harm.

Fortunately, this is often easier online than IRL, due to how evidence is so easily captured, saved and spread. Granted, on the flipside, that evidence is also easily faked and misrepresented.

It's easiest when you are actually there in real time (as i was at the beginning of the ISFF situation. Not the whole time, since i had to take 4-5 days of mental health break from social media after) and one must always be aware that sometimes people lie online, but if multiple people are sharing the same information that they had independently documented, it's at least worth considering whether the accusations are valid.

In general, i'd just like to discourage the idea that a person must be incapable of harm due to their identity due to how idolization is another form of dehumanization. Placing someone on a pedestal can quickly become problematic and most people don't want to be put in that position.

In my opinion, considering a group of people incapable of harm functions under the same framework as flattening someone into a caricature or a concept. When we do this, when we use identity politics to idealize a group to that extent, it means treating them as lesser than the complex human beings they are.

TLDR If we confuse and conflate any criticism of a marginalized person as a bigoted attack, that relies on the presumption that they will never do anything worthy of criticism.

If any accusation of harm is twisted into a call to action for the most extreme of violence to be enacted upon the perpetrator, that will inevitably create an environment where speaking up is discouraged.