Thomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
The “cancel culture” and anti-“wokeism” moral panics rely on a complete inversion of the actual balance of power, portraying traditionally marginalized groups as mighty forces that urgently need to be reined in – and those in elite positions as desperately in need of protection. (Thread - 1/)
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
It’s an unbelievably cynical game: Some of society’s most vulnerable groups – trans people, for instance, whose fundamental rights, including their right to exist in the public square, are being stripped away – are presented as a dangerous, powerful cabal. 2/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
In a way, the New York Times recently elevating an unhinged anti-“woke” crusader like Pamela Paul is actually useful: In everything she writes, the cynical inversion of  power is dialed up to 11 – which gets you to “In defense of JK Rowling.” It’s not gonna get any more obvious. 3/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
Think about how silly this is: “Oh, the woke militants dominate everything over there!” – when the New York Times has just hired staunchly conservative David French to join the existing stable of famous anti-“woke” columnists like Pamela Paul, Bret Stephens, and David Brooks. 4/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
The only “persecution” that is happening here is David French being criticized online. Some of that criticism may even be unfair or cross the line – the internet is a nasty place. But that’s it. No one is firing or “canceling” him. No one in a position of power is doing anything. 5/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
In this way, this whole affair captures the anxiety that fuels these reactionary crusades against “wokeism” and “cancel culture”: Societal elites - and elite white men, in particular - face a little more scrutiny and public criticism today than in the past. And they don’t like that. 6/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
As soon as traditionally marginalized groups gained enough power and acquired the technological means to make their demands for respect and their criticism heard, traditional elites started bemoaning “persecution” - “The hordes are coming to cancel us!” 7/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
Important to note that it’s mostly the *threat* of scrutiny, the *potential* of being held to account that is enough to cause the next round of reactionary panic. In practice, the power structures that have traditionally defined American life have unfortunately held up just fine. 8/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
These moral panics appeal to (predominantly white, predominantly male) elites because the threat to elite impunity is real - “cancel culture” and “wokeism” may have made it slightly more likely that people get in trouble for racist, misogynistic, disrespectful behavior. 9/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
Simply put, elite life in the public spotlight has become slightly more uncomfortable, at least for elites who used to be able to get away with absolutely everything and now they (potentially) don’t anymore. People like David French and Pamela Paul get more public criticism. 10/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
The reason is that traditionally marginalized groups have forced their way into the conversation, necessitating a re-negotiation of norms surrounding public speech and expression. That process can be messy at times - but the alternative is continued elite dominance and impunity. 11/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023
Everyone agrees that certain transgressions, certain public speech should be met with shaming or shunning. The real question is: Where is the line, and who gets to draw it? Traditionally, this was the prerogative of a predominantly white, predominantly male elite. 12/
Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023

This prerogative has come under fire. And if you believe - as much of America’s traditional elite evidently does - that you are entitled to say and do whatever you want without legal or cultural sanction, that you are entitled to unconditional affirmation, that’s bad.

But actually, it is progress. /end

Show threadThomas ZimmerFeb 16, 2023

Think about how cynical, how utterly vile this is: “No rights are being ‘stripped away.’ None.”

As red states have introduced *hundreds* of anti-trans bills, passing ever-more extreme anti-trans laws every week.

What an unbelievably disingenuous bigot this man is. Despicable.

Show threadEnergetic NovaFeb 17, 2023
@tzimmer_history I think people would be better off if they would unite their cause with disability rights. But of course disabled people are usually missing from the conversation. and there is just so much stigma towards being somebody who needs medical care that people want to pretend like it has nothing to do with the other.
Show threadEnergetic NovaFeb 17, 2023

@tzimmer_history trying to play like transgender rights have nothing to do with disability rights and the need to change how disability rights were written in the first place; since being transgender is cast into the same light as being a compulsive thief…

instead of considering the real effects of gender dysphoria… and the reality of treatment and what can be done…

A lot of linguistic wires were crossed in order to make healthcare denial acceptable.

Show threadEnergetic Nova

@tzimmer_history

The reality that people use the word transgender to mean transsexual and to mean a person with gender dysphoria with no difference in any of these. Not all transgender people get medicalized because transgender people are wide and various and can include drag queens, butch lesbians, femgays, people with non stereotypical with their sex behavior or dress. Transsexual is a medical term which only includes those who transition to the opposite sex.

Feb 17, 2023 at 2:52pmWeb
Show threadEnergetic NovaFeb 17, 2023

@tzimmer_history

Gender dysphoria is a medical term which can even apply to somebody who is cis Who does not feel their physical appearance is masculine or feminine enough. And they may get some work done in order to have a presentation that more aligns with their sex.

it doesn’t exclusively include transsexuals, but it does include all transsexuals. but not all who are transgender. there is a gray area of gender dysphoria because non-binary. It’s complicated.

Show threadEnergetic NovaFeb 17, 2023
@tzimmer_history and it becomes even more complicated when you start talking about the fact that there’s a bunch of people who don’t want to use the medical terms, and exclusively use this broader term transgender. And people who are included in being transgender who do not want to be considered transgender do to association with being transsexual. Not wanting to be associated with disability for example.
Show threadEnergetic NovaFeb 17, 2023
@tzimmer_history I think the medical community in particular has a lot to answer for with regards to intersex people. But geez have they not messed up with just about everyone in the mental health side of things. Especially as we discover more and more evidence of everything being something more of the domain of neurology. A field which is more respected by able-bodied people.
Show threadEnergetic NovaFeb 17, 2023

@tzimmer_history

I personally see a lot of wires getting crossed around the intersex movement, which is where I see everything starting from.
The human rights violations that were historically caused because of trying to force people into binary sex categories are vast.

Link to 2005 intersex human rights investigation.
https://sf-hrc.org/sites/default/files/Documents/HRC_Publications/Articles/A_Human_Rights_Investigation_Into_the_Normalization_of_Intersex_People.pdf

Show threadEnergetic NovaFeb 17, 2023

@tzimmer_history

At least some of the harm was coming from the medical professionals. Some of the mixed messages that were gripped on and created this moral panic we are currently seeing. And none of these anti-transgender laws are addressing the real issues happening to intersex kids. They explicitly make exceptions to continue to allow it.

Show threadEnergetic NovaFeb 17, 2023

@tzimmer_history

It’s like… Are you reading “The Transsexual Empire”? While people are claiming that point of view is completely new? Or are we finally going to advanced to “A human rights investigation into the medical normalization of intersex people: A report of A public hearing by the human rights commission of the city of San Francisco”
A report which has many of the same sorts of players mentioned in it and is a direct debunking of an assumed argument.

Show threadEnergetic NovaFeb 17, 2023

@tzimmer_history

also in case you haven’t read it, and I’m a big believer in reading the opposition’s books,

https://transreads.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/2019-03-20_5c91a4ba712fd_document26.pdf

Here is a PDF for the most transphobic book of all time. Because if you don’t read it, you won’t know what you’re fighting. Make sure you read that human rights report notice the language. Very interesting isn’t it? And people just let the intersex report never be brought up.