the more basic the queer theory in a post, the more likely it is that a total fucking asshole wrote it

like if someone posts something like "reminder that lesbians are women who don't date men" my suspicion fucking skyrockets

as they get closer and closer to just straight-up queer tautologies my suspicion approaches infinity

one of these days someone's gonna post some shit like "reminder that queer people are people who are queer :)" and one of my eyebrows is just gonna shoot off my head

@HTHR i never thought we’d reach a point where “words have meanings” is a dogwhistle yet here we are

@HTHR This is an interesting phenomenon; I would be similarly suspicious, despite that making no sense on a naive analysis. I guess, when you see someone saying a tautology or near-tautology, you assume they must have had a reason for saying it/an opinion they want to assert, and it can't be the overt meaning because no one cares about tautologies.
This implies that the non-overt meaning mightn't always be sinister. I think such examples could be constructed, e.g. (?) "girls? they're girls!!"

@HTHR I mean "trans women are women" is already a tautology but people somehow need to be taught it sooo

linguistics, TERFs, agreeing with you at length Show more

Sign in to participate in the conversation

cybrespace: the social hub of the information superhighway

jack in to the mastodon fediverse today and surf the dataflow through our cybrepunk, slightly glitchy web portal