#justify violence against trans women as some kind of ultimate oppressive class

[thekidsfromyestergay]

Reminder that the idea of the Evil Trans People Forcing Cis Men To Become Women was made up by t/rfs to paint trans women as evil and predatory while also perpetuating their narrative that feminine men are "appropriating womanhood", and attempting to reframe that exact idea as a real and serious problem is simply feeding into their transphobia and lending it validity

[regina-georg-blog]

Trans Activism and Ur-Fascism

So, you know how trans activists are constantly insisting that so-called “terfs” are Nazis or fascists?  Well I’m in a trolling mood, so just for fun, lets compare the contemporary trans movement to Umberto Eco’s fourteen-point definition of fascism.  How many characteristics of fascism does trans activism share?

“The Cult of Tradition" characterized by cultural syncretism, even at the risk of internal contradiction. When all truth has already been revealed by Tradition, no new learning can occur, only further interpretation and refinement. This point is debatable I guess, depending on your definition of “tradition.” The contemporary trans movement certainly relies on a rigid dogma from which “no new learning can occur,” but it’s not necessarily tied to nostalgia and it’s certainly not a form of nationalism.

"The Rejection of Modernism" which views the rationalistic development of Western culture since the Enlightenment as a descent into depravity. Eco distinguishes this from a rejection of superficial technological advancement, as many fascist regimes cite their industrial potency as proof of the vitality of their system. Like other post-modernist movements the contemporary trans movement absolutely rejects modernism and reason while embracing and even glorifying new technologies that serve its purposes.  This one is pretty open and shut.

"The Cult of Action for Action's Sake” which dictates that action is of value in itself, and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science. The same as the previous point. Contemporary trans activism is based in post-modern queer theory, which rejects science and reason as tools of oppression. Contemporary trans activism promotes an ethos of “action for action’s sake,” by celebrating violence, disruptive spectacle, and constant struggle, and by discouraging critical thinking and introspection.

"Disagreement Is Treason" Fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith. Contemporary trans activists circulate “terf” block lists and try to suppress “terf” rhetoric because they know that their ideology is internally contradictory, and they fear that it will collapse under critical scrutiny.

"Fear of Difference" which fascism seeks to exploit and exacerbate, often in the form of racism or an appeal against foreigners and immigrants. Despite the racism of some trans activists, contemporary trans activism does not rely on racism or xenophobia, so this point doesn’t really match up.  However, contemporary trans activism absolutely relies on the demonization of marginalized out-groups, especially lesbians.

"Appeal to a Frustrated Middle Class" fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups. Contemporary trans activism does not rely on an economic appeal.  However, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that alienated, downwardly-mobile, middle class white males are its primary constituents.

"Obsession with a Plot" and the hyping-up of an enemy threat. This often combines an appeal to xenophobia with a fear of disloyalty and sabotage from marginalized groups living within the society. This point is pretty obvious.  Contemporary trans activism is obsessed with a non-existent “terf” conspiracy.  The movement also promotes an extremely paranoid worldview, teaching its followers that everyone is out to get them and encouraging an unhealthy hyper-vigilance about trivial things like “misgendering.”

Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as "at the same time too strong and too weak." On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.  See the “terf” conspiracy.  Contemporary trans activism promotes the idea that its followers are under constant existential threat from powerful and dangerous “terfs,” while simultaneously crowing about how ugly, uncool, unpopular and politically marginalized “terfs” supposedly are.

"Pacifism is Trafficking with the Enemy" because "Life is Permanent Warfare" – there must always be an enemy to fight. This is evidenced by the fact that contemporary trans activism can never be satisfied and must constantly move the goalposts to maintain a state of permanent struggle.  No matter how much trans activists claim to want to eliminate “terfs,” they need “terfs” to oppose them in order to justify their movement’s existence.  If every single woman on earth acquiesced to all of their demands, they would still never be satisfied.  No level of submission will ever be enough to make peace with them, because they don’t actually want peace.

"Contempt for the Weak" which is uncomfortably married to a chauvinistic popular elitism, in which every member of society is superior to outsiders by virtue of belonging to the in-group.  Contemporary trans activism resembles a cult, in this respect.  Followers are encouraged to believe that their edgy haircuts and obscure micro-identities make them morally superior to the unenlightened “cis” masses. 

"Everybody is Educated to Become a Hero" which leads to the embrace of a cult of death. As Eco observes, "the Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death." The contemporary trans movement aggressively promotes and glamorizes mental illness, self-harm, and suicide as markers of authenticity and righteous victimhood.  In turn, trans activists’ fixation on their own supposed victimhood is used to justify their victimization of others. 

"Machismo" which sublimates the difficult work of permanent war and heroism into the sexual sphere. Fascists thus hold "both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality."  The contemporary trans movement is intensely misogynistic and homophobic.  Among the straight male leaders of the movement, it’s easy to see a kind of machismo in drag.  Despite the superficial trappings of femininity such as makeup and clothing, most male trans activists exhibit stereotypical masculine behaviors, including aggression, sadism, narcissism, sexual entitlement, emotional fragility, and contempt for weakness.

"Selective Populism" – The People, conceived monolithically, have a Common Will, distinct from and superior to the viewpoint of any individual. As no mass of people can ever be truly unanimous, the Leader holds himself out as the interpreter of the popular will (though truly he dictates it). Fascists use this concept to delegitimize democratic institutions they accuse of "no longer represent[ing] the Voice of the People." While the contemporary trans movement lacks a single Leader who can speak for everyone in it, it does have a small vanguard that dictates its Common Will.  The contemporary trans movement conceives of its constituents as a monolith who all share the same interests and dogmatic opinions.  Any trans-identified person who rejects this dogma is smeared as an enemy and often said to be “not really trans.”

"Newspeak" – Fascism employs and promotes an impoverished vocabulary in order to limit critical reasoning.  This point speaks for itself.  One of the most obvious features of contemporary trans activism is its heavy use of obnoxious jargon and its aggressive sloganeering and cult-like repetition of thought-terminating clichés.

[faggotron9000000]

there was a lot of drama around moneycat when she left tumblr and i don't remember any of it well enough to comment on it but i think of her a lot bc she was probably one of the first ppl to point me towards leftist politics (& specifically marx)

she was the first trans lady i saw who did that bit that trans ladies do sometimes where they fantasize that a shitty cis dude would get good if only he became a woman-- which is a funny bit if you don't turn it into like, an ideology lmao.

she was one of the first of many ppl who i saw promoting the radical feminist ethos that 1) gender is defined as a political hierarchy that privileges men and subjugates people who can have babies, referred to as 'women'. the hierarchy is inherent and defining-- you cannot have even the concept of "men" without a counterpoint concept of "women" to contrast them against, and that contrast inevitably plays out via oppression and violence. hierarchy is too entrenched in gender for gender itself to be rehabbed; it needs to be scrapped, evolved-past, into a fully egalitarian future where biology is irrelevant.

this fucked with my head as a freshly-formed trans man because like, i don't think this definition is wrong-- it's an accurate description of how gender has been conceptualized & how it has functioned, at least in my world here in america.

i think it's only recently that i think i've realized that gender is only one of the hierarchies that we live with every day, and its ultimately one of the weakest in terms of producing either solidarity or subjugation, for better and worse. at least ime, i tend to find solidarity among poor/neurodivergent/poc men than i do among non-men who are none of those things.

tl;dr narratives about class struggle cannot be remapped onto gender and still be coherent, bc gender does not change one's prospects for life as strongly as class does-- while women with money do suffer under patriarchy, but the actual punishment for forsaking gender norms is... losing your financial security and class position.

anyway i can't say too much bad about moneycat bc while her takes were awful in 2014-- arguably, she personally was one of the ppl who led me to put off my transition for like, a year and a half; that sucked at the time but tbh wasn't that big of a deal, in the scheme of things-- but being challenged by her led me to figure out some things that have stuck with me since then, in a good way.

the idea that gender is a path to political/ethical purity-- women good, men bad!!!!-- has decades of history in feminist philosophy so moneycat didn't really do anything that her forebears didn't set up, and it kind of makes me uncomfortable that she (a mentally ill trans woman) is still remembered as this unique monster when i see so many of you assholes in the years since implicitly-but-loudly agreeing with her. "men are the bad gender" has been a normie opinion for ~30yrs, she wasn't special. and having reckoned with myc's bad 2014 takes, i think i'm better equipped to own my identity and justify myself to assholes than a lot of the trans men i see coming out today, who are desperately self-conscious about being men at all.

imho moneycat was a worthy ideological challenge for me & i'm disappointed in how i now, ~8yrs later, live in a landscape where people agree with her but don't think about it-- i would wayyyyy rather argue with a radfem trans woman about why men deserve dignity and humanity than spend an hour in the same room with any of the little bratty trans queers i run into who just think men are gross and refuse to even try to justify it. at least she cared about knowing why she thought what she thought, at least that gave me something real to chew on.

between her & jobhaver (sex-negative radical feminist trans woman SWer) i feel like i got an early crash course on reckoning with radical feminism in an environment where the well was not completely poisoned bc all the ppl bringing it up were trans women-- which didn't tell me that radical feminism is right, only that i am capable of hearing from radicals & empathizing with them even if their opinions hurt my feelings. because of this, i don't think radical feminism is inherently transphobic-- its entirely possible for radical feminist action & political theory to be trans-inclusive, hypothetically, someday. i don't think its worth it to shy away from all self-proclaimed radical feminism any time it shows its face, when our contemporary feminist scene is so lacking in materialist critique & so easily co-opted by corporations and government.

i dont think the ultimate goal of radical feminism-- an egalitarian future where biology is irrelevant-- is a bad one. i think their failure comes in the assumption that binary gender will disappear if only we socially condemn it enough-- an opinion that is invariably transphobic against binary trans people but is also shared between radical feminists and the majority of nonbinary people i have met, so do with that what you will i guess. hopefully this attitude leaves me open to solidarity with radical feminists (and gender abolitionists in general) at a time when like, i really would like their help + would also like to see them evolve past the ongoing plague of TERFs and general transphobia

i realized that i prefer a materialist analysis of gender over things that validate me personally, and i've tried to find a balance between those things since, which-- like, it's hard, but the journey's been good imo. now when i log on instead of seeing moneycat's radfem marxist blogging, i feel like i kind of just get a firehose of regurgitated decade-old shit-talk without anything to actually think on or build on or learn from, and like. if i'm going to be the constant subject of debate in my social circles could i at least not die of boredom while i'm here

does anyone remember....... monetizeyourcat