dolorosa_12 | (Reply)

From:

I genuinely believe a lot of people involved in the mobbing of Isabel Fall feel that this sort of behaviour is acceptable as long as it's directed at the 'right' target, and if Fall hadn't outed herself as trans (in much the same way as Becky Albertalli felt pressured into outing herself as bi, etc, etc) they would continue to feel entirely justified in their behaviour. And many — rather than offering an unqualified apology — seem to be self-pityingly angling for absolution. They want their friends and community to tell them that they were right to have reacted in the way they did to the title of Fall's short story, and that their motives were pure.

The article seems to argue that while the behavior wasn't at all justifiable, it was explainable by the transphobia that is endemic on social media; and of course the system of Twitter. Which...even giving the benefit of the doubt that these are the two primary reasons for Fall being the victim of an internet mob, still doesn't explain why similar incidents have happened and will continue to. When I was googling the article for further background, I kept bumping into the case of the 20-something PR person who tweeted about AIDS and Africa back in 2014 (or so). Though I'm sure many people feel she deserved what she got.

I think there is this tendency on the part of the wider public to view each incident as sui generis (despite talking about broken Twitter). In the aftermath we unpack the particulars of the communities and individuals involved, the material that set off the storm, what the intention behind it was, what could have been done differently. We look for explanations. But while the communities might be different, the specific reasons different, the material different, the resulting behavior and impact on the individual at the heart of the storm seem to be quite similar. And there is always far too much focus on the victim and them proving their worth.