This is some absolute garbage tbh. Having read the article, there's very little interest in understanding people's views, what the actual problem was with what she said in the first place, or anything at all honestly. https://twitter.com/korviday/status/1249725620852064256

This paragraph assumes a lot about what both "sides" think, obfuscates the actual discussion in ideological jargon, and of course talks far more about what Angie thinks and why her pov is valid

and this is literally just appealing to the reactionary "how can I keep up with all these new terms" gibberish.

It isn't a class-based model of oppression clashing with an identitarian model, Angie said something very wrong that perpetuated a transphobic idea, and people were quite rightfully hurt. I'm sure there are people whose primary concern is class who agree that what she wrote sucks

I don't think Angie is a transphobe, or a terf or whatever, but what she said was transphobic.

To me it felt like the kind of silly thing someone would tweet when you were feeling hurt or mad about something in particular. Maybe even a subtweet lol, who knows.

There is a tendency to say "saying something bigoted while angry isn't a defence - it just exposes your underlying bigotry" and I don't think that's true. I think a lot of the time it exposes ignorance, and a bad instinct to point out patterns of behaviour. Let's talk about that

I think this instinct exists for lots of folks and can be really hard to shake. When you encounter individuals (lots of them) who are actually being shit to you, lumping them into a group can be reassuring in a way, but the truth is they're just shit on their own individual terms

It's a bad instinct but it doesn't mean that person is "a bigot" in some sort of absolute sense. When you're a nail, everything looks like a hammer, and trying to figure out where the hammers come from and what makes them hit you is natural and self-protective.

That's just my read of why Angie said that, and I just wanted to say it because I don't like leaping to "X is a bigot" in an absolute and essentialised way.

However, that tweet was also a cis person burning bridges with trans people in a big way, and when someone burns a bridge with a minoritised group they aren't a part of, we really can't expect the folx from that group to uphold the bridge or try to fix it.

And YET Korviday and Lux, and other folx who tried to explain what the problem was WERE trying to fix things, despite no obligation to, everything taken into consideration. So I find it absurdly gross to make them the antagonists of this piece.

Final thoughts on the discourse in general:

everybody can be toxic, it's not a "male" trait, and even if it were, amab enbies and trans women being toxic wouldn't be them displaying their inherent maleness.

Some folks also thought that anyone arguing against Angie's tweet was trying to prove that certain groups are never toxic, and became pretty incapable of listening to what was obviously being said (see above tweet for what was actually being said)

Some folks try to discuss gender, sexuality and feminist concepts while trying to avoid terms like "toxic masculinity" "cis men" or whatever because they've built themselves up as anti-idpol.

To those people: come the fuck on. Trans folks, queer folks, feminists, have been having the conversations and developing the language to talk about this stuff, just fucking use the language rather than trying to invent your own class-based terms. It makes you sound like a loser

last thought

y'all motherfuckers need feminism