If a behavior is patterned, reproducible, and harms others, then accountability is necessary.

Ignoring it doesn’t make it less real, and once it leaves closed communities it enables greater harm—think about White men like Andrew Schulz seeing Black men’s misogynoir and bonding with them over it.

Marginalization along one axis of identity doesn’t cancel out privilege or social positionality of another—nor does it absolve perpetuating systems of marginalization from which you benefit.

Cis Black women should still be held accountable for transphobia, able-bodied trans folk for ableism, etc.

4c. Critique is not bigotry:
• Critique punches across/up.
• Bigotry punches down or assists in structures/socially dominant groups punching down.

If the pattern you’re naming furthers oppression—e.g. Black erasure via exploitatively appropriating Black radical rhetoric—its analysis, not prejudice.

Critiquing SOME Asians’ simultaneous anti-Blackness/appropriation of Black culture isn’t anti-Asian.

Critiquing SOME Black men’s simultaneous anti-Asian views/appropriation Asian aesthetics isn’t anti-Black.

Now if I said “all Black (wo)men/Asians/White trans femmes are/do X”?

That’s different.

4b. You can discuss the problematic behavior specific to a group without it being bigotry.

Critiquing SOME Black women’s unique rhetorical/social patterns of misandrist homophobia isn’t being misogynoir—and it doesn’t dismiss Black women’s struggles OR say that Black men can’t also be homophobic.

4a. You took my point—an intra-community claim about members of a specific group with a unique influence within the queer community misusing Black activist rhetoric, and why it is uniquely problematic given the marginalization they uniquely face—and decontextualized it to frame it as transmisogyny.

In the GM example you cited, Crenshaw was critiquing the flattening of identities as a form of systemic erasure/exclusion of (going back to “hypervisibility”) under-recognized subjects.

You analogize this to White trans femme’s proximity to White cisness granting them safety, but NOT visibility.

In your response, you talked about:
• transfemininity without the racial axis
• White womanhood without the trans axis
• White womanhood as if it were interchangeable with cisness.

While you raised good points, my point is purely intersectional and these responses flattened axes of marginalization.

b. I’m not sure how Crenshaw’s GM example is relevant to your point here. Similar to my last point, the point of this case study is not defining the rigid boundaries of identity, but demonstrating how people’s intersectional identities are flattened to singular axes that further marginalize them.

Case in point: we agree that they face a level of police violence that cannot be explained by their Whiteness or womanhood.

My point is: given that they face this threat shared with Blackfolk in ways other White queers don’t, it makes their (mis)appropriation of Black thought on carcerality unique.

3. Returning to 1b.:

a. Intersectionality is not a fixed/rigid demographic categorization, nor is it a framework to compare the degree of one group’s marginalization to another’s.

It’s about identifying unique experiences groups face that are not simply the sum of their identities.

2. Things I did not say (cont.)

c. “white trans women are … exempt from transmisogyny” I was explicitly clear in situating and naming the transmisogynist marginalization White trans femmes face, but was delineating where the contexts of the theory you cited did not apply.

2. Things I did not say:

a. “trans women cannot simply be counted under 'white women'”
> I said that White trans femmes benefit from Whiteness

b. “trans women are in some favored position above men”
> I said their experiences receive more attention—not that it was inherently positive/their fault

1b. Your misapplication of “hypervisibility” (and “intersectionality”/Crenshaw’s GM example here) dovetailed with my original thread regarding Black radical thought being stripped of contexts in ways that undermine it.

I am not denying your Blackness—nor calling you poorly read, cus you’re def not.

Whether or not you read/reply to this, I want to make some points clear:

1a. I never said you were White/ignorant on Black texts. I gave historical/structural context to the Black feminist theory you cited, but did not fully define, and used the term *you* cited as it was written to make my point.

I'll do my next raffle pick when this hits 150 likes!

And you can keep adding your OCs' refs, this is still open for folk to join for free art!

I programmed the magic wheel to take all the folks who posted refs in the original thread OR the QRT (and I'll take out winners each draw ofc)

oh i'm stupid... i thought i had 3 but i have 4—but the pro > ex upgrade isn't TOTALLY totally unaffordable 👀👀

ILYSM THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TELL US 😭