So, this is a bit of a tangent? But every time I see people policing the language trans men use to describe themselves and their experiences, I think about this:
There is this form of social control that I’ve never seen adequately described, whose mechanism is to prevent the victim from being able to describe their life, experiences, or identity in any meaningful way. Usually, it’s described as “gatekeeping”, but I’ve always found the term inadequate because it implies that the main function is the maintenance of a boundary, and the protection of an in-group. While those *are* functions of it, it’s primary purpose is to create a state of threat, isolation, and and uncertainty in the victim, while silencing their ability to talk about any of those things.
It’s functions through a series of logical traps, namely:
- this word as applied to you is inaccurate (“this word describes something real, but does not apply to the thing you are describing,”)
- this word as applied to you is invalid (“even if you meet the correct conditions for this term, it is the wrong word, because something fundamental about you precludes it being the right word.”)
- this word as applied to you is incoherent (“this word cannot be used/is not meaningful in the way you are using it”
- this word as applied to you is appropriative or harmful (“this word belongs to someone else” or “this word is innately sullied and using it makes you a bad person.”)
These traps can overlap, they can be sequential, and they can have a sort of whack-a-mole approach to alternate terms (“this term belongs to someone else, but that one is incoherent,”) but the function is always the same: to silence the victim, to create a state of fear around speaking/belonging/self-description, and (crucially) to frame any attempt to speak as an act of violence - against another, more worthy, group, against themselves, against society.
They are, of course, deeply hypocritical, and not leveraged against people who the perpetrator does not wish to victimise.
Applied effectively (or frequently) enough, the victim becomes self-policing, and capable of inflicting enormous emotional pain upon themselves every time they try to speak about their experiences, and will preface their whole selfhood with disclaimers that they don’t belong, or are not entitled to speak about a thing.
Groups of people to whom this has happened often (ie, marginalised people) are often hyperaware of criticism to the terminology they use, and much easier to manipulate on this way. (Or, conversely, they are wise to it.)
Sometimes, I’ve seen this cynically applied (the whole poly/polyam thing, anyone?) but more often I suspect people do it instinctively when they feel threatened, or are dealing with people whom they are prejudiced against.
I’m not saying everyone who quibbles over language is doing this, but I think it’s a tendency we really need to guard against, as a community. Yes, we should be mindful of the language we use, but if we actually care about making the world better need to stop caring so much about the exact words someone is using to self-describe, and pay a lot more attention to what they’re actually saying.
