I'm asking this out of genuine curiosity (mixed with confusion and frustration, but the curiosity is still there) and not as some sorta "gotcha":
what does "material analysis" mean to you?
how would you define it?
where did you learn that phrase?
have you ever read Hegel or any philosophy that Marx was building in top of?
it's okay if you haven't! but I keep seeing people within the trans / transmisogyny / transfeminist discourse using this term incorrectly, and I have a hunch as to why (re: people gathering it from Marxist theory that doesn't explain it very well and assumes some level of prior knowledge that most modern readers engaging with it don't have, and then pulling out a very slanted concept of materialism and material analysis from that work). and like. I can answer the "why" fairly easily, but the thing I can't seem to answer is... what the fuck are people actually meaning, then?
because clearly it has some sort of meaning to the people misusing it. they're not just throwing it out there as a garnish for no good reason. they have some concept of what "material analysis" is in their head, even if that definition is incorrect. and enough of them seem to agree together on the same general thoughts that they've formed community lingo about it. but I just, honestly, cannot figure out what the fuck this definition is for them. I don't know what they're thinking when they use that term, which makes it difficult to parse out what they're saying because it's definitionally inaccurate and inappropriate to the term they're using, but clearly they still mean something by it. I just don't know what that "something" is.
do I have a frustration and bitterness and annoyance at people being ignorant? yeah sure. I'm not gonna pretend otherwise. but, on a very genuine level, I am somebody who cares to read between the lines and actually engage with what somebody's trying to communicate to me. for the most part, at least. definitions are still important, because you still need mutual agreed upon meanings in order to communicate anything, lest communication fall apart altogether, but if somebody meant one thing and used a different word to describe it, I think it's annoying and disingenuous to argue against what they actually meant vs what they literally said. we can understand that concept just fine when we're talking to somebody whose native language isn't English, but for whatever reason we act like that's a weird concept to apply to native speakers as well. if you ask me where "the thingamajig" is, I can probably infer through context what you're asking me for. it would be a jerk move to put my hand on my hip and be all "it's not a thingamajig, that's not the right word for it, how dare you use that word" when I know what you meant.
so like when I'm asking "what the fuck do you mean when you say "material analysis"? what idea or concept are you trying to communicate when you use that term?", I am not trying to be a condescending little shit about it. even if I'm annoyed at the collective ignorance causing this frustration + the pretentious, stubborn-ass attitude people have towards any sort of correction about it or embarrassment they feel at being called out for their ignorance. I won't hide that part. but I can be simultaneously annoyed while also genuinely wanting to know a practical answer to a question, so that I can better understand what the fuck people mean. and like. meet people at their level, at the very least.
people are trying to describe something by using that term, even if they've chosen the improper term to do so.
