I think they're responding to a transphobic comment and not being transphobic themselves. I think they're addressing a far left, socially conservative conspiracy of saying "trans people r bourgeoisie inventions for culture wars to distract the public from the class war". This person is saying that this is a far fetched idea.

I'm correct in understanding this, right?

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 45 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Gonna give you the benefit of the doubt. You are not understanding right.

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Oh man. That’s some sick shit. He had obviously been saving up this speech, waiting for an occasion to spring it on some unsuspecting poster.

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 13 points 3 months ago

Oof. Tankies rlly r weird, huh

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml -5 points 3 months ago

Still not clear on what’s so trans phobic here (having read the context, which is a private message TBC).

It seems like they’re saying that major coordinated transphobic misinformation from the bourgeoisie is unlikely given that there’s also clear pro-trans activity. Whixh is superficial IMO as such doesn’t discount multiple activities but it certainly isn’t defunct logic I’d say, where there are clearly transphobes and plenty of transphobic energy in mainstream culture at the moment.

But I don’t think they’re saying transphobia isn’t a problem. The first rule of the instance they admin is against transphobia, for example. It seems to me all they’re saying is that it isn’t a major mission by the bourgeoisie. Which compared to making corporations and capitalism happy is maybe not unfair.

[–] Beaver@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 months ago

That's not the situation at all.