this is a repeated pattern: there was no need to know about the abuser's real-life abuse or fed ties to recognize the rhetoric ITSELF as fundamentally dangerous, harmful, and providing rhetorical cover for abusers. this has happened over and over and over again.
...and there was no need to know about faer real-life abuse or fed ties to realize what was out in the open was toxic in and of itself—and faer ability to have a respectable reputation in general, and a trusted voice on the (skinny white trans girl) racism problem...
from LB to anonsee to motherfucking michel foucault (yes im not kidding), it is NOT ACTUALLY NECESSARY to know about their own personal abuse in their own personal life or ties to deeply evil institutions in order to recognize their rhetoric as abuse apologia designed to foster sympathy for abusers>
> and cast suspicion on allegations as inherently untrustworthy, victims as inherently hysterical or "privileged" or "protected," and the entire project of survivor advocacy as inherently reactionary or "sex-negative" or "moral panic" or a thousand other things.
for the love of god i am BEGGING, BEGGING, on my hands and knees, for people to learn to recognize & resist abuse apologia EVEN if it's coming from someone who isn't a (known) abuser themselves.
MOST abusers are never outed & not every apologist is an abuser themselves.
what is OUT IN THE OPEN is already identifiable as toxic, dangerous, abuse apologia. you DON'T NEED to know "all the details" to recognize the harm in what is OUT IN THE OPEN.
