I’ve got friends on Facebook that espouse all kinds of views (I’m a pretty irritating motherfucker, so I don’t know if they’d call us friends in real life). I’ve got hardcore anti-Zionist Arabs who post daily about how Israel is conspiring genocide on the Palestinians. I’ve got hick relatives who re-post about how global warming is a hoax. Conservatives telling off the ‘lib-cucks’ who disagree with The Donald because he’s a vile, lying, blustering demagogue who can’t tell his ass from his elbow. I’ve got GMO conspiracy theories on my Facebook wall. I’ve got folks who are convinced Hillary Clinton is the Antichrist (same folks who thought Obama was the Antichrist back in ‘08, coincidentally). I’ve got people who consider me the most liberal person they know. I’ve also got people who consider me to be a problematic cis-scum shitlord with a hidden agenda of white supremacy.
Lately, I’ve noticed an increase in the incidence of certain sentiments being posted. Extreme, modern, third- to fourth-wave feminism and social justice warrior types. To be clear, I am on board with a lot of what these folks are saying. I understand that privilege is a useful tool for examining inequality. I agree that systemic racism exists. I have read historical and modern narratives explaining transgender psychology, and I agree that people ought to be able to piss in whatever the hell bathroom they choose. Beyond that, I understand the stuff I don’t agree with. I’ve been in enough arguments to get the runaround on my microaggressions, my various internalized phobias, my determinist bigotry and so on and so forth from every self righteous chihuahua to the point that I feel like I can run half the argument in my head before I even open my mouth.
I have a lot of issues with what I will, for lack of a better term, be referring to as Extreme Social Justice rhetoric. I’m going to try to focus on one particular nugget that was raised to me recently.
This is the actual text of an actual post:
“Trans/queerphobia is not limited solely to the actual murder of people it also includes but is not limited to:
-casual cissexism (ie. “girls are so strong for dealing with their periods!”)
-denial of privilege (ie. “yeah gay people might have it hard, but i have it hard too and im straight!!”)
-trivialization of oppression (ie. “not all cis people are like that!! Theres a few assholes out there, but most people are accepting!”)
-passive by-standing (ie. not actively oppressing trans/queer people, but also not DOING ANYTHING when they are being oppressed)
-refocusing attention onto the privileged party (ie. “yeah you got called a [t slur] but you called me a cishet which is bullying!!”)
-weaponizing support (ie. “now that you were mean to me, i dont know if i want to support queer people anymore”)
-invalidation of anger (ie. “just because youre oppressed doesn’t mean you can just bully people!”)
-simplifying oppression (ie. lets all just be nice to each other!”)
-erasure of identities (ie. just stop labeling yourself and you wont get oppressed!”
That’s insane, right? I thought it was satire at first. Nope. There is exactly one demographic of people that can read something like this and think it is a reasonable set of expectations: isolated college-age kids who haven’t let themselves be yelled at by enough different types of people to recognize that every person thinks they have it figured out, and you shouldn’t go around expecting people play by your rules. This kind of rhetoric is dangerous. It elevates the statements and opinions of one group of people as so privileged and untouchable, that all conceivable statements of defiance are not only automatically invalid, but also automatically cause to label your person as being fundamentally bigoted.
Let’s take apart these examples.
1. Casual Cissexism: “Girls are so strong for dealing with their periods.”
This statement, according to this system of beliefs, is morally objectionable to the point of it being compared to the actual murder of human beings. I suppose they expected the statement ought have recognized that some girls don’t get periods, despite the fact that the vast majority of girls do get periods, and the fact that the term ‘girls’ is used in a clear way in this sentence, using the magic power of context clues, to refer to girls who get their periods. The kind of self righteous pedantry necessary to find a statement praising biosex females for having the fortitude to deal with having their uterine wall lining painfully disposed of every 28 days an affront on transwomen is mindboggling.
2. Denial of Privilege: “Yeah, gay people might have it hard, but so do I, and I’m straight.”
This isn’t a denial of privilege. This statement does not deny the privilege of not being subject to the specific injustices visited upon LGBT folks in our society. It states that a human being, despite not experiencing those particular injustices, does not in fact dance with unicorns and shit gold. If someone talking about their problems without relating it specifically to their privilege is the denial of privilege, no one could ever talk about anything. It obscures language to put such barriers in place for the sake of god-knows-what.
3. Trivialization of Oppression: “Not all cis people are like that! There’s a few assholes out there, but most people are accepting!”
Are we now moving on to condemn condolences as being criminally insensitive? The implication here, so far as I can tell, is that, in fact, every cisgendered person hates trans people, cannot accept them, and if you dare suggest that most human beings don’t give a rats ass about how you conduct your private matters, you are the problem. This isn’t the trivialization of oppression. This is called sharing opinions on the human experience.
4. Passive Bystanding: Not actively oppressing trans/queer people, but also not DOING ANYTHING when they are being oppressed.
We’ve now moved on from the condemnation of basic human faculties and into the mob-psychology portion of the program. This post just laid out some ridiculously wide definitions on what counts as ‘oppression’, and now is expanding the guilt to be equally shared with anyone who doesn’t wholeheartedly cooperate with the most extreme voice in the room. That’s right. Not only is your friend a fuckboi for implying that maybe the vast majority of the human race actually doesn’t care about your gender identity one way or the other, but you’re a fuckboi too for not calling him out like you eat graphite and shit diamonds.
5. Refocusing Attention Onto the Privileged Party “Yeah, you got called a tranny, but you called me a cishet which is bullying!”
The key words here that disturb me are ‘got called’ and ‘called me’. According to this version of things, injustice leveled against you is justified cause to be an asshole to your fellow man, even if they had nothing to do with what happened to you. You can take all the anger in the world and just spread it around more because you’re special.
6. Weaponizing Support “Now that you were mean to me, I don’t know if I want to support queer people anymore.”
So, not only does being a victim give you the right to victimize others, but those you victimize are not allowed to do anything but smile and nod. If your shitty behavior turns people off your cause, it’s because they’re bigots, not because you give your cause a bad name. You’re always in the right, no matter what, and anyone who disagrees with you is in the wrong, no matter what.
7. Simplifying Oppression: “Let’s all just be nice to each other!”
The most effective movements for changing society are ones of peace, understanding, and kindness. Christianity, in its most basic form, recognizes that everyone has faults (though the Bible sure does have funny ideas about what some of those faults are) and calls upon us all to tolerate, understand, and forgive. Nonviolent movements of the 20th century that provided broadbase support for social change were based on the idea that you view oppression and cruelty as the exception, and not the rule. Perhaps “Let’s all be nice to each other” is asinine, but the fundamental idea that this system is rejecting is one of great strength and beauty.
8. Erasure of Identities: “Just stop labeling yourself and you won’t get oppressed!”
Labels, Identity, and Selfhood are far too complex to get into without meandering moreso than I already have. Suffice to say I agree that this statement is, in most cases, ignorant of the facts of a person’s situation, and not particularly useful.
I can’t help but feel that these kinds of statements come from a lack of an honest attempt to empathize with the way other human beings might put together a system of ethics. It wholeheartedly assumes your own preeminence as the arbiter of right and wrong, and the arbiter of complex human interactions, boiled down to easily misinterpreted language. That on its own wouldn’t be that much of a problem. What’s truly frightening is this system that is then created which de facto excludes all deviant or moderating thought as being evil. When people stop thinking of other people’s opinions correct with a particular set of assumptions, when you reduce disagreement to a moral fault, that is when I get afraid.
What can you do? Well for one, stop unfriending people who disagree with you. Get angry. Think about why it made you angry. Recognize what they see in their own argument. Develop a counter. That’s how rational discourse works. Shutting people out because you don’t like what they have to say is a good way to get out of touch very quickly.
