Unneccessary to bring her transness into this critique
Valid criticism. 👆 Especially since we had trouble with transphobia lately.
I understand it, its something people say a lot about transwomen on the internet, and I’m not saying its not a worthwhile thing to ever talk about, but it is a strange and uncomfortable thing to shoehorn into this critique which has nothing to do with how feminine contra is now or with transness at all
The way I see it it’s basically the same as talking about “rich white gays” like Buttigieg. Contrasting the fact that they belong to a traditionally oppressed minority with the fact that they themselves aren’t oppressed and therefore become traitors to their peers and further right than the average member of that minority.
Well you said the words ‘material conditions’ and ‘intersectionality’ and called all of your detractors cis so I guess you must be right and my immediate visceral reaction to your title is invalid. You have debated me into a corner, facts truely do not care about my feelings
No, see, because she makes a YouTube which is popular to finance surgery. And that’s… uh… bad?
IDK. I guess people are still upset because Natalie used the V-word in her last video.
not necessarily bad. https://hexbear.net/post/69821/comment/728311
It’s just another edition of “We Live In A Society”.
People with the highest profiles enjoy the highest incomes. So we need to do what exactly? Discourage people from earning money via social media? Impose mandatory waiting periods on trans-surgery, so everyone can suffer equally? Arbitrarily shame people for doing the thing that everyone else in the community is trying to achieve?
All because a Transwoman is dunking on the d-tier punditry of a prior decade on Twitter?
Wtf?
This is the same toxic reactionary attitude I see in the red-pilled corners of Reddit. It’s Michelle Malkin levels of discourse. Just finding any fucking thing to villainize. Why not creep outside Natalie’s window and complain about her countertops while you’re at it?
