i don't like the way this thread anachronistically uses the word "cis," which is maybe 30 years old to talk about the historical experience of black women--a history it doesn't actually engage.

and so it makes a bad sentimental conflation, remember:
women ≠ femininity https://twitter.com/bIackspicegurl/status/1287111639121027072

a lot of this has to do w the idea (that i don't agree w rlly) that the legacy of slavery is the exclusive inheritance of us black ppl (maybe sentimentally it is). Slavery is the inheritance of the world. what this thread overlooks:

Slavery shaped the Western concept of women!

White wom. got to be women because black women weren't legally allowed to be so. BW, like all black ppl were property. the violence BW faced that this thread glosses is a result of this legal symbolic category "woman"--it was NEVER "biological," it was a category of protection

the (legal) protection of whiteness (again nothing to do w "femininity")

that historical legacy of power is what ppl are doing w what the OP disingenuously calls a "woke power statement."

and while it's true this position has major limits in confronting contemporary transphobia

it is a critical part of what Angela Davis mentioned: a truth + reconciliation process focused on the historic racial trauma that continues to haunt the US.

Whether that conversation directly yields liberation for black trans women is up for debate, but it still needs to happen