The consequences of your hateful rhetoric

As politics become increasingly binary, talking points and imperative rhetoric proves to be more efficient than any debate or discussion in regard to uniting crowds. Yet the consequences of this immense linguistic limitation hurts everyone but the victor, coming down the hardest onto disadvantaged and oppressed groups. This very issue is exemplified by the obtuse fear mongering currently utilised by right leaning idealogues against transgender people, becoming the hot new hate to bash your fist and face into. Matt Walsh’s incessant obsession with insulting transgender women and Jordan Peterson’s crusade on the intellectual poisoning of the trans community come to mind. Yet, to what extent are these individuals held accountable for their proud transphobic rhetoric when actual tragedies against trans people take place?

Brianna Ghey is the most recent trans victim of this hate that many recall, and I don’t mean virtual hate on social media, but physically fatal, literal, and undeniable hate. Carried out by her own peers, a sixteen year old English transgender girl was stabbed and murdered to death on the 11th of February. Currently, whether this act was a hate crime is being taken into account by the authorities due to the extreme bullying she had faced in her school life due to her identity. So one must ask, how much of this can be placed on the middle schoolers who held the knife versus the rampant bigotry toward transgender people that the U.K. holds collectively? The denial of cultural responsibility is clear by the adult trial of these teenagers in this hate crime. Yet U.K. publications have criticised the U.K.’s recent rejection of Scotland’s Gender Bill and Brianna’s facing of transphobia following her death as prime examples of the systematic and social outcasting of trans people in their modern society. Lowly and underhanded coverage of Brianna’s trans identity