#metadiscourse

The thing about being [ingroup] that [outgroup] will never understand is that we [Barnum statement].

One thing I've noticed about the discourse around whether Jax is transfem or transmasc is that both sides do express a great degree of media literacy, but kinda fail at being able to operate in critical discourse with eachother and so end up missing certain details or end up talking past eachother. I'll preface this by saying I do think transfem Jax is going to be canon, and even if it isn't, it's very likely still the intended reading. We do have fairly concrete out of canon evidence (like that progesterone post) to suggest this. But, that being said this problem in the discourse does still exist, and one good example of this is the maid dress scene. I've consistently seen the argument that this scene disproves the idea of transmasc Jax as it would be a horrible thing to put a transmasc person through. This is a fair argument, it certainly would be. But it misses the point that it's also a horrible thing to do to a transfem Jax too. Like, reading this scene through a closeted transfem Jax lens, what we see here is a closeted trans woman being forced into a dress against her will, essentially putting her in a double bind where she is either forced to perform masculinity or effectively out herself. Then she is proceeded to be made a mockery of because of it. This action is still a hurtful action by Zooble. And like, that's kinda the point. This whole episode is about cycles of mutual hurt. Ragatha also seriously hurts Jax earlier in the episode. And all of that hurt that Jax is facing is a product of Jax's own hurtful actions coming back to bite Jax. Pomni is the one who tries to break that cycle, to make a connection with Jax, and in order to do that the narrative kinda requires that Jax be vulnerable and hurt. That particular argument against a transmasc reading of that scene, kinda necessarily glosses over that. I think this is a good example of why media literacy isn't just about making interpretations and defending them with evidence, because it's also about existing in dialogue with other interpretations in order to build consensus. This particular argument here is weak specifically because it does not reflect on whether or not this scene would still be harmful to a transfem Jax, nor whether or not the action being harmful is the point of the scene. And it does not reflect on those things because it takes transmasc Jax in a vacuum rather than a product of a discourse which already recognizes that Jax would have been subjected to a hurtful act either way.

Not enough people appreciate how if you are annoying enough while arguing for a position, it will push people away from that position.

I guess it’s a way of exercising control in a powerless situation, but it’s crazy how fast tumblr began fighting over who’s allowed to express what emotions about the invasion. I maintain that it literally does not matter unless your posts are influencing policy, and let’s be clear, they’re not.