this is the post on the binary that they are talking about

okay.

like it is super clear that samuraipenguin123 has a very… simplistic understanding of colonialism and operations of power (on stop of creating a straw man of my argument – their implication is that i claim binarism played a greater role than it did in colonisation).

But note how they say: the binary and gendered oppression is at the very very bottom of the ways used to destroy culture. note that they are including all manner of ‘messing with gender’ and that there are easier ways to subjugate and destroy communities. okay. sure.

like even if you don’t buy my argument about the binary, like it is pretty obvious to see how the white patriarchy had a significant role in colonialism, the subjugation of people, and destruction of communities. really.

but this commentator (from reddit of course), feels that the targeting of trans feminine iaopoc was a side-effect, rather than a goal of colonialism.

now i could talk about how, at least as far as the Philippines is concerned, that statement is factually and historically incorrect. transmisogyny was a necessary component to solidifying colonial power there.

but i’d rather talk about the inherent transmisogyny in talking about how colonialism impacted trans feminine iaopoc as a ‘side-effect’ and, you know, incidental to the ‘real’ tools of colonialism. this statement, despite that it is pretty easy to see that trans feminine iaopoc today are disproportionately living with the legacy of colonisation, experience far more violence and oppression than many (if not all) segments of their respective communities. despite the fact that many former colonies have colonial era laws still on the books who’s only purpose is criminalizing trans feminine iaopoc[1. seriously, Samoa just decriminilized impersonating a woman]

samuraipenguin123 thinks that, despite the rather obvious evidence to the contrary, that the oppression of trans feminine iaopoc was a ‘side-effect’ of colonialism. okay. they are certainly right about one thing, though: us and our oppression ‘has got to be at the very very bottom’.