you are probably right!! thank you for the credit; I couldn't find the original post where I saw it in my likes
to be clear this is something I took from someone on bluesky (and if I look far enough back in my bsky likes I will find who originally said it!), so I gotta give credit where credit is due :)
the biggest example of A is calling jk rowling a TERF (kinda true but also sheâs not really a *radical* feminist), and as for B, iâve seen media outlets call far-right politicians TERFs to avoid directly calling them transphobic (theyâre not even feminists in the first place)
general usage uses TERF for a) someone transphobic âin the name of feminismâ or b) anyone transphobic (to avoid directly calling them transphobic). both usages annoy me to no end bc trans-exclusionary radical feminism is its own thing & shouldnât be used to encapsulate all forms of transphobia
(2/2) means that a lot of what i care about (climate change, attacks on trans rights/healthcare, gaza, alternatives to policing) got ignored in favor of what appeals to moderates in either party. politically strategicâand iâd rather disappointedly vote for kamala than let trump winâbut annoying
i shouldnât be surprised when the future commander-in-chief of the worldâs biggest military talks so much about it. and i shouldnât be surprised when a country that has been allied with israel since its inception expresses pretty much unconditional support. still can be a bit disappointed!
her speech is a lot more militaristic than i would have expected - a loooooot about creating a strong military
kamalaâs speech: a lot about her upbringing & mother, nothing surprising about policy (speakers did a good job of covering her positions), solid takedowns of trump
the surprise is⌠there is no surprise?