Notices by Hrefna (DHC) (hrefna@hachyderm.io), page 2

@jaycatt7 It's like with the child trafficking in the nonexistent basement of a pizza place: the facts don't matter.

They will say that it is happening despite that it has never happened and makes no sense that it even would happen. Despite that they cannot find a single person to which it has happened. Despite that their proposed rules cause real harm.

As Sartre said:

If they say "improve engagement across important product areas" but refuse to state what those product areas are? That's dangerous.

If they say "these three product areas" that tells me what their priorities are clearly and allows me to make downstream decisions. It's still too vague, IME, but it tells me where the focus is and–more importantly–where it _isn't_.

Work thoughts: Strategy documents and "north star" guidance from leadership is not important for what it tells you to do so much as for what it tells you _not_ to do.

A dangerous sign for a team or a company is when leadership fails to give you such guidance. Fails to take anything _off_ of the table.

This is clearly on display with their talk about "medical procedures on children." It shows up when Trump talks about kids "coming home from school" having had a major 5+ hour surgery as if it could be done in the nurse's office.

It's on display when Brianna Wu revises history to talk about "needing to be on blockers for three months before using the ladies room."

In the absence of an actual problem they will simply make one up.

They need someone to hate and playing along emboldens them.

You cannot be one of the good ones. No accommodation you give them will be adequate and, in fact, will only lead to them taking more ground.

The leopards will always eat your face too, in the end.

Marilyn Frye—a TERF—described oppression as a cage and I've long maintained that by her own analysis trans people _are_ oppressed.

We are given impossible questions to resolve then told it is our fault for not resolving them. They hate us because they need a target to hate, not because of us.

I've had Sartre on the mind a lot, and specifically the Anti-Semite and the Jew.

How he talks about how if there were not Jewish People then it would be neccessary for the antisemite to create them. That the antisemite _needs_ an enemy with which to compare himself. One who has no capacity for "good," no capacity to put their supposed power to non-sinful ends.

When I wonder "why do they hate trans people" I think of this. Every time someone tries to be "one of the good ones" I remember this.

@jswilkins Given that the highest odds of being sexually assaulted are bi women followed by lesbians and _then_ straight women (Canan et al, 2021) I'm not sure where you are going with this

"I, a straight person, feel more comfortable around other straight people."

I'm shocked to the core of my being.

Describing straight women as "better socialized" than lesbians is certainly a choice you can make, yes.

@ireneista

(this is what being married to a therapist gets me)

@emma

@ireneista

I admittedly have seen a variation where someone manufactures a narrative on the fly to fit some set of events or people and they fervently believe it to be true—and cannot be convinced otherwise.

Even when presented with objective evidence to the contrary, the narrative shifts. The difference is that they actually believe that their parataxic distortion is true

It ultimately doesn't matter, but I also find it _bizarre_ how out of line with consensus reality she is being.

@emma

@ireneista I can never quite tell with her whether I'm looking at:

1. An outright fabrication meant to mislead others for whatever reason.
2. A fabrication meant to mislead herself.
3. A distorted memory.

@inherentlee "You may need to do the RLE before going on hormones, but you can't use the women's restroom while going through your RLE until you've been on a testosterone blocker for three months."

What.

@jdp23 I'm sorry, we were looking for "What is transphobia?" or "What is the sexualization of trans bodies?"

Like I literally have the SOC 6 right now in front of me and I've read through the SOC 4 & 5 previously.

What is she on about?

Again, maybe her local clinic required something like this or told her those were the reasons, and again, even to the degree this is true why is THIS what you are focusing on?

But still I'm baffled where this universalization is even coming from.

Like where the hell is she getting this?

Is there some WPATH/HBS version I missed? Some set of overall clinician notes?

Nevermind that even if these were the standards:

1. They are gross standards.
2. That isn't going to be why.
3. They shouldn't be glorified.

Sometimes I'll see something Brianna Wu says about the history of being trans and the reasons for some older policy or another and I'm just like… did you and I see the same guidelines? Because I know for a fact what you are describing was never part of WPATH nor HBS at the very least.

I won't discount the possibility that you specifically had some weird set of corner cases to jump through, that absolutely happened, but sometimes it's just like… what?

Sometimes I'll be sitting there wondering about some problem and it will be continually frustrating me and then suddenly I'll go "wait are you a chaos magician or aren't you?"

Then I have two problems, but at least one of those problems is interesting and tractable.

Sentence I actually said today:

"I'm from New Orleans, so cake and mourning aren't all that far apart"

This has been on my mind a lot lately.