#conditional privilege

[hussyknee]

re conditional privilege:

whether it comes to race, ability, gender, sexuality or class, people are really hung up on this idea that ambiguity affords protection, which is the same as privilege. as though having camouflage means you aren't hunted.

only the oppressed are concerned with our own variation and degree of difference. there is no ambiguity in the eyes of the oppressor. the reality is that the oppressors don't care how like them you are. in fact, being like them is all the more reason to punish you and keep you in your place. the project of exclusion is not to force conformity, it's to find people to make an example of so that others try to buy safety by trying to obey the most cruel and arbitrary rules. the more people try to conform, the narrower the criteria becomes, the more they fail, the more can be punished. that is how systems of power propagate themselves, because power can only be retained by exercising it, by whichever rationales necessary.

i understand that "identity politics" is a word that's been weaponized by the right wing, but it's a legitimate criteria of criticism for the left. when something moves from self-definition and community to tribalism, policing and self-branding, it has become a project of neoliberal hyperindividualism. identity politics focuses on defining ourselves by the extent to which we are punished as individual groups and under what criteria, imagining a rational and restrained power matrix that metes out punishment according to the degree of difference and perceived threat. it imagines an oppressive power structure as a methodical, conscientious gardener pruning a rose bush, rather than a brutal machinery that has invented arbitrary rules to violently subjugate and systemically mass murder the lives it needs to sustain itself. instead of building a community around the fact that we're all being hunted by the same beasts, idpol would rather build a hierarchy of prey animals according to the ways we'll be skinned and cooked, stopping only short of putting us on a menu with accompanying prices.

i suppose when you define yourself according to the appetite of the thing that wants to eat you, you end up weirdly attached to the romance of being eaten, and hate to give it up.

[kaibascorpse]

some of you people are so obsessed with having an acceptable group to ‘punch up’ at that you would rather pretend a marginalized group are Basically The Oppressors™ than listen to their valid criticisms about the fact that ‘punching up’ very rarely hits the intended target, and the majority of the actual damage of that act is suffered by fellow marginalized people in your own community. there is a significant difference between venting frustrations about privileged groups and just outright attacking anyone who (you assume) experiences that axis of privilege regardless of - and in many cases outright denying - their actual lived experiences. it goes far beyond just ‘venting frustrations’ when what you’re really doing is trying to find a moral justification to bully people you don’t like, and when your own desire for catharsis and moral superiority leads to ignoring the voices of the vulnerable people you hurt. you’re not ‘punching up’ - you just like punching people for the sake of punching.

[trans-androgyne]

Radical feminism cannot ever be trans-inclusive.

Why do I keep saying this? Because I have increasingly been seeing transmasc and transfem folks weaponize radical feminist ideas against each other and I am tired of it.

(TL;DR at the end, I know this is lengthy.)

So, what is radical feminism and how does it differ from other kinds of feminism? It’s the idea that patriarchy is the primary root oppression from which all other oppression spawns. It holds that the two primary classes are men/males and women/females, and that men are responsible for creating and maintaining all oppression, with women playing a more passive, secondary role. We're off to a bad start already; this is an inherently racist framework that absolves privileged women of their role in creating and upholding oppression, as the idea is that if women ran the world oppression would not exist. Intersectional feminism, on the other hand, understands the way many forms of oppression are rooted in racism, and that all systems of oppression are interconnected without having one singular root.

The way it functions and its prescribed remedies rely on the idea of a sisterhood--all women/females are connected with each other against men/males. The common belief is that males as the more powerful* class will always try to oppress women unless women band together against them and intervene. Men are framed as the enemy to be fought, not potential allies to be recruited into feminism.

Many of us have an idea of traditional cis radical feminism and how that leads to TERFism. But how does it function in the trans community? For radical feminism to work, a "sister" class oppressed by misogyny and an enemy class causing it must be identified. Radfem trans women will say that their identity as women means they experience the worst misogyny--trans men and mascs just get the weaker "misdirected" version, and in fact have a motive to uphold misogyny due to their identification with manhood*. Trans men are the enemy class that oppresses trans women. Radfem trans men will say that people afab are the real class that experiences the worst misogyny due to their ability to give birth*--while trans women and fems as people amab* are more aligned with cis men due to having received male privilege and been "socialized male" in addition to not having the same reproductive capabilities*. Trans women are the enemy class that oppresses trans men.

Both of these notions rely on painting groups of trans people as having access to patriarchal power they do not. They downplay the way misogyny functions in the lives of the perceived patriarchal class of trans people. It inherently ignores the real experiences of trans people and paints some of them as an enemy class; it cannot ever be truly inclusive of all trans people. Intersectional transfeminism would take into account the way misogyny functions in the oppression of all trans people, and analyze the material conditions of trans folks to reveal that no group of them is granted access to patriarchal power and cis male privilege. It means banding together as a unified trans community and understanding where our experiences are shared, as well as accounting for the way other systems of oppression critically shape the lives of trans people of color, disabled trans people, intersex trans people, and other groups.

*There are a lot of assumptions present in this analysis like the assumed agabs and reproductive abilities of trans men and women; these are not my beliefs but the oversimplifications espoused by the radfems I'm describing.

TL;DR: Radical feminism requires identifying one class as the patriarchal oppressors and the other as the oppressed victims. In the "trans-inclusive" version, this means downplaying the experiences with misogyny of either trans men and mascs or trans women and fems. It identifies either transmisogyny or "afabmisogyny" as the real root of all oppression, ignoring the voices and experiences of the most marginalized trans people. Truly inclusive transfeminism would unite all trans people against the patriarchy instead of falsely implicating us in it.

[abhainnwhump]

Caretaker leaves little notes around the house to remind struggling Whumpee to do things like drink water, sleep eight hours, eat regularly, and bathe.

[uncanny-tranny]

What people often confuse, I think, is the idea that you can have specific benefits in different situations, but that is not the same as having systemic privileges for whatever identity/presentation/assumed identity or presentation that was given benefits.

If you want an example of what I mean, I have experienced some better treatment as people have recognized me as male, but society doesn't offer me systemic benefit because I'm a trans man - my transness, even in a context of being seen or assumed as a man, is not granted to me. I'm not saying that I don't ever get treated better in certain instances where I am seen as a man (even if I'm seen as a cis man), what I am saying is that that is different than systemic privileges. I think that difference matters, since people see systemic benefits as indications that people don't need help, or even that those people need to be "taken down a peg." This viewpoint isn't conducive to helping people, if that's what your goal is.

I use myself as an example just so people aren't confused. This is a complex topic that is, fundamentally, intersectional. If the only voices being heard are one type, we will be coming away with a dangerously narrow view of how social benefits and societal privilege work.

[daisywords]

rereading Fairest bc I have my own copy now (yay $2.50 at a used bookstore!) and so far it's as lovely as I remember

but anyway I do like how Aza's "ugliness" is characterized by people actually treating her badly because of it. People talk about the stereotype of YA protagonists being like "oh poor me I'm so ugly" in an attempt to make them relatable but the narrative actually treats them like they are gorgeous and every character that isn't a villain finds them attractive.

Vs. here it's like. yeah her self perception is all tied up in cultural ideas of beauty and she's definitely not objective either, and a lot of what she thinks is inherent to her ugliness is all wrapped up her related social anxiety, etc.

but! It's very refreshing to see a book that deals so much with beauty standards actually commit to it! It's not like she's just vain and obsessed with looks! You can tell she wants to be beautiful because she wants to be treated like a person! The way it is just that blatant! Most people are rude to her or ignore her! And she makes it worse in her head and compounds the problem by letting her own insecurity draw attention to herself, but at the end of the day, she's right! People would treat her better if she looked different!

The details that we get about her appearance are not even "ugly" traits, either! Like we get the pale skin, black hair, red lips combo pulled directly from the traditional Snow White fairy tale, where those traits are supposed to be beautiful and desirable! But in this culture, apparently those traits are a part of her ugliness, which just perfectly highlights how the beauty standards are inherently arbitrary! And yet! They affect her life in real ways! It doesn't matter much how we, the reader, picture her; we believe that she is ugly because people treat her like she is!

Anyway I especially love how her insecurity regarding her size is portrayed. The combo of feeling small and meek and timid on the outside but being large and imposing on the outside. She feels like she takes up too much space. She doesn't want to wear anything at all attention grabbing. She doesn't know what to do with her limbs. Her biggest fear about demonstrating her magical singing trick is that she would have to show people how she moves her stomach (the horror!)

anyway everyone ever should read Fairest. I could write 12.5 dissertations on it. fantasy books for 12-year-old girls are the most serious fiction in the world actually

[chronicsymptomsyndrome]

Friendly reminder…you don’t ever have to publicly specify the “self” part of self-diagnosed. if you don’t want to. because I know it can sometimes feel like a caveat that you’re obligated to disclose but the thing is, you’re not even obligated to disclose your diagnoses in the first place, much less the source. so you can just say diagnosed. if you prefer. to feel safe and avoid scrutiny or fake-claims or for any other reason. because it’s the truth, it’s not even a lie. self-diagnosed is diagnosed

[a-faggot-with-opinions]

begging people to learn the difference between privilege (conditional access to resources that some people do not have) vs privilege (the systemic power to oppress people of a different class)

[cripplepunkfag]

god i wish i could stop fuckin thinking this i feel like such a dick i KNOW people with more obvious and more serious disabilities dont "have it better" but i cant stop thinking about it i just wish i could collapse dramatically and get rushed somewhere and magically diagnosed i feel like such a fuckin drama queen because i feel awful all the time but its just like dizziness and pain do i even have the right to claim im disabled? its not like im diagnosed. its not like i know whats wrong. its not like its serious. maybe i am just fuckin faking it.

[trans-androgyne]

The moment a transmasc person stops identifying as a girl their misogyny is no longer internalized but oppressive? Really? Or could you take one second to consider the situation might be more complex than that.

[lookninjas]

2320.

Everyone's white when there's work to be done just not when it comes time to pay

[transmascpetewentz]

Thinking about how most of the examples of ways that trans men have been respected in recent history to "disprove" the idea that we're oppressed have been straight trans men. Thinking about how being attracted to women was a requirement to medically transition from female to male until very recently. Thinking about how the little respect trans men might possibly get from transphobes depends on us being attracted to women. Thinking about how people use examples of straight trans men being benefited by their attraction to women to blame gay trans men for every bad thing a trans man has ever done. Thinking about how straight trans men are the only ones who get taken seriously by non-leftists. Thinking about how the vast majority of trans men who claim that trans men aren't oppressed are straight or otherwise attracted to women.

[imaginarianisms]

more asoiaf comparisons, parallels & antiparallels to the first dance of the dragons vs the second & final dance of the dragons (& possibly the sixth blackfyre rebellion): the blacks being daenerys i targaryen's supporters, the golds being aegon vi targaryen's supporters, tommen baratheon being a close equivalent to gaemon palehair & his mother essie & sylvenna sand which may be interpreted as a parallel with queen cersei lannister & taena merryweather of myr, trystane truefyre being a close equivalent to aegon/young griff & perkin being jon connington & the shepherd being the new high septon the high sparrow, dalton greyjoy being euron i greyjoy's ancestor & the latter surpassing him, alyn waters later alyn velaryon resembling aurane waters later aurane velaryon & finishing what their ancestors started. history repeats itself.

[nebulouscoffee]

Me, attending the latest in a ridiculous number of funerals this year in the place of a childhood friend who couldn't be there, watching the lifeless body of an old lady who used to make me snacks in the kitchen when I was a kid be carted away forever while my friend's mother cries and tells me she's grateful I could be there because it felt like having the support of her own daughter, hugging her and talking reassuringly and not processing a single one of these emotions: ... I am going to write soooo much fanfiction about this

[weiss-royal-schnee]

It's funny but not at all in a haha kinda way when people who glorify celebrities are shocked when they fall for israeli propaganda and say the most racist, anti-semetic shit. Just remember y'all CELEBRITIES ARE NOT YOUR FRIENDS. Hell they're not your allies either half the time.

[eccentriccryptid]

.