The responses to my asking "who is 'abusers'?" are very telling. I've been accused of gaslighting, silencing 'survivors' (another term thrown around as a noun, usually to invalidate survivors who disagree with them), and policing language.

But nobody answered the question.

The reason that folks just got mad and started making accusations, attacking me and projecting shit that had nothing to do with me is because they were uncomfortable. They're uncomfortable with the idea of abuse as something people do, as opposed to an identity group of people.

Our society is abusive as fuck, is sustained by abuse, and we refuse to deal with that truth. So we respond by taking behaviors and ascribing them to others, making everything individual and everyone but us "bad" and then using that to paint a picture that makes us feel safe.

We are safe from abuse if we can make "just these people" abusers and then cast them out, and we are safe from being viewed as abusive if we can separate the abuses we commit and are complicit in from those of "abusers."

When people say, "no space for abusers", they very often mean men and they very often mean rape and DV. Which does nothing to keep those of safe who are abused by people who are not men, or who are abused in other ways, or who are men who are abused.

What about people who physically and emotionally abuse their children, their siblings, their same-sex female partners, their barista or server, their employees, their power within institutions to exploit poor Black folks?

When people talk about "abusers" as a caricature of a person, someone you can cast out, it's reactionary. Bc keeping each other safe from abuse is proactive. You can't make me safe after my safety has been breached or "hold someone accountable" for harm they've already caused.

You hold yourself accountable to changing the conditions to prevent the harm from reoccurring. You hold yourself accountable to not reproducing abuse onto others. You hold yourself accountable to confronting the structures that leave us vulnerable to abuse and destroying them.

When people talk about "abusers" as an identity they can ascribe onto others, they are making it clear they only care about abuse they have experienced or are at risk of, not how they participate in a society sustained by abuse. But if bullets start flying, they're getting hit.

Does "death to abusers" include teachers, doctors, managers, academics, parents, therapists, business owners, social workers? And not just the ones who commit interpersonal violence, but all of them whose existence is sustained by subjugating and justifying abuse of others?

This thread, nor my OG tweet are meant to be an attack of anyone or to judge or shame. I love my people and I want us all safe and free. I ask these questions because I think it's important that we think deeper about these things as we imagine and try to shape a world of freedom.