the thing about "people have talked about it you're just 21" is that it's not really "young people are stupid" it's more "if you come into an academic discussion you should know what people have said on the matter lest you talk out your ass"
Research is the PPE that prevents you from taking sick burns during a flame war.
this is not the context of the post this comes from at all. what classified it as an "academic discussion"?
imagine someone said something like "we dont talk enough about the danger of inhaling wood smoke" and someone said "actually we talk about it all the time you are just 21". whats going on here? like, sure, the dangers of inhaling wood smoke are a known fact for a long time, there have been various official studies. on the other hand: people sure dont seem to be acting with adequate caution about it. it is often ignored. just because its been talked about before doesnt mean its talked about enough. and why presume the speaker is ignorant of the studies that already exist? for all we know they are very well aware and its informing their perspective. like, this is not some unambiguous knockdown response tbh now imagine people take this exchange as a meme emblematic of like, someone coming into a discussion and not knowing prior conversations. they imagine it necessarily is about the health establishment specifically for some reason, and not what is talked about in some general sense, and they imagine it being covered before is necessarily adequate for whatever the current state is even in health academia. that all seems... kind of silly right?
like ok for context this is the twitter exchange and idk I feel like it's reading a lot into op. "In woke 1.0 we never reconciled that..." so to me this seems like she is asking about like, a resolution to this being the social situation somehow. she never claimed it was never talked about extensively - she claims it wasnt "reconciled"! honestly, to me it looks like a plain failure of reading comprehension on the part of the respondent, but I don't claim to model what they believe or mean exactly either
amd the other thing is that this all implies "subjective" judgements on what would be adequate, and we don't know op wasn't reasonably well informed about the recent past - just that she doesn't think it was adequate
and i still have no idea where the assumption of an academic setting came from
I wish more people actually engaged you (aksemmi) about the points you're bringing up because it's very much not a coincidence that the context is "vocalizing existence of transmisogyny" and people responded:
with flippant dismissal of transmisogyny called out by a trans woman
that people then go on to misquote, making her sound meaner and "snobbier" when this was nothing except a totally neutral statement of observation
any follow up statements to this context being provided is about people using the word ageism and... not the transmisogyny
above mentioned follow up statements are even more removed from context
The thing about "people have talked about it you're just 21" is it's an asshole, transmisogynstic "burn" people are making into a meme
