mx alex tax1a - 2020 (6)watching well-meaning randos try and rehabilitate laurelai bailey when she has expressed no remorse and done no atonement and performed actively negative amounts of accountability towards her victims, under the premises that holding her to account would be some kind of "HAL" or "disposability culture" is exactly the failure of accountability that results in people like her continuing to have power, which she then uses to enact HAL and disposability culture on others. get your fucking heads on straight.
you people talk a big game about "believing victims" when some white transfem tells you a sob story, and then when we speak up, it turns into "wow, you sound mean, have you considered that you're the cause of the problem"
your communities collect abusive power-hungry fuckers because you do not take the time to investigate accusations, because that's hard work and difficult conversation, so you just believe whatever makes you feel the best, and that winds up passively disposing of people whose stories are difficult to hear.
laurelai bailey wants you living in a fantasy land where trans women are inherently innocent and can do no wrong. this is a form of affinity-fraud.
and at the end of this, we're left with the question: "is she irredeemable?"
here's the thing: we do not believe she is irredeemable! but we also do not see her doing any of the work she would need to do to have a meaningful redemption arc. instead, every time she's given the opportunity, she rejects it and doubles down!
meantime, we are expected to be "accountable" when people wouldn't even fucking tell us what we were alleged to have done, and then we find out multiple years later that the person behind the allegations was playing the "believe victims" tune without any consideration or consultation of what our actual victim wanted
and when we try and talk this through, the gringa in question gets all soggy because "ublubulub the person youre talking about left, why are you still upset"
im just so fucking tired
MayaMayaMaya@atax1a this sounds like someone debating whether to call themselves agnostic vs atheist.
Blatant abuse plus multiple clear refusals to take any action whatsoever to reduce the impact of said abuse in any way is *plenty*.
"Maybe she will have an epiphany and completely reverse course" is not redeemable, it's denial.
Blatant abuse plus multiple clear refusals to take any action whatsoever to reduce the impact of said abuse in any way is *plenty*.
"Maybe she will have an epiphany and completely reverse course" is not redeemable, it's denial.
@itsmaya it was more of a point of rhetoric about the nature of redeemability, since people seem to have trouble identifying what to look for in terms of giving someone a redemption arc. fwiw this whole thread is colored by our experiences in the white transfem seattle scene. we are aware that the probability of LB taking accountability and exhibiting remorse is approximately zero :p
@atax1a definitely my mistake, also I'm just plain wrong on re-read because "irredemable" is about potential not prediction, so very specifically, "if they had an epiphany and started doing the work to fix things tomorrow, would it still be too late?".
I'm snappy about shitty people being given never ending chances.
@itsmaya mhm. and the same types of people who give her infinite chances believe that we're irredeemable and to be excluded. it makes us actively batty
moby dickgirl@itsmaya @atax1a I mean, she *could*! I want to extend a lot of charity to these kinds of people because I grew up in a Mormon family and considered myself a "conservative" for a while when I was 12! But the reality is that there's no sign she's going to, and there's no point giving her credit for it before she does.
This probably sounds argumentative because a lot of stuff I say sounds like that so what I mean to say is I agree with you and I'm sick of people falling for Laurelai's shit.