The making of the next Martha P. Johnson?

Another round of historical revisionism? Correct me if I'm wrong...

Does it seem like there's an attempt to turn Dora Richter into the next Marsha P. Johnson in order to tie the narrative of trans oppression to Nazi atrocities?

It's strange. If there's evidence Richter was killed when the Nazis sacked the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft and burned records of its research, I'd be interested to see it. It’s possible Richter died in the May 6, 1933 raid on the institute and that—as far as I can tell—nobody mentioned it until decades later. But thousands and thousands of people—including Institut für Sexualwissenschaft staff—fled Nazi Germany in 1933 or went underground. Nobody seems to know what really happened to Richter.

Richter’s story has taken on a new life as a matter of political expediency, rather than as the result of any new evidence coming to light. Meanwhile, with each retelling, Richter’s fate moves from speculation toward ‘fact’:

Never mind for the moment the real questions about whether Institut für Sexualwissenschaft was providing "gender-affirming care" (red flag for ahistorical application of a 21st-century concept!) or medically experimenting on vulnerable patients to, for instance, “cure” homosexuality…

Remember The Danish Girl? Elbe died as a result of these experiments, persuaded to undergo the operation after doctors made medically impossible promises to a mentally ill patient. So much for ethical care.

It's also gallingly ahistorical to erase the undisputed victims of Nazi atrocities here by submerging them in a label they would likely have considered a vile epithet (now a trendy 21st-century political identity): "queer." The Nazis targeted and killed homosexuals.

Again, if there's evidence Richter was killed by the Nazis in the raid on the Institut, let's see it. In the absence of evidence, this seems like another irresponsible ploy to prop up an ailing narrative of trans oppression with a fresh round of historical revisionism. It'd be a tremendously convenient narrative if it were true (or widely believed to be true) and an effective way to guilt would-be defectors back into line: the unity of oppression and all that. But boy does it ever have strong "we've always been at war with Eastasia" vibes. What actually happened matters, whether it makes for a good story or not. This looks like another attempt to create a convenient past that somehow speaks in the language of 21st-century activism.

Trans activists rewrote Stonewall to put a brick in the hands of Marsha P. Johnson, a move intended to place a moral obligation on the gay-rights movement to center trans issues and sideline their own concerns about a movement that's transing gay and lesbian kids. Never mind that Johnson wasn't “trans” and wasn’t there when the riot began!

Now trans activists are desperately trying to claw their way into those unforgettable lines of Martin Niemoller’s in order to invoke a moral imperative: defend trans activism against all questions and challenges, no matter how legitimate those questions and challenges may be.

Manufacturing a history of oppression serves many purposes. Rampant historical revisionism camouflages what the trans movement actually is: a recent creation of medical technologies and queer theory.

Shameless piggybacking on the oppression and marginalization of other groups helps entrench a narrative of trans ‘victimhood.’ Insinuate ‘trans’ in the history of actual genocide and oppression, and you’ll avoid scrutiny and shut down criticism.

The trans movement pretends to be something it is not: a grassroots* movement for the basic human rights* of a historically oppressed group* that has no implications for women,* no implications for LGB people,* no implications for children's wellbeing.* (*Check these claims.)

Since the truth is [much] more complicated than trans activists will admit, no one must be permitted to speak freely about this movement that seeks to reshape our societies and the very idea of what it means to be human/embodied.

That's why trans campaigners across the Western world have bent over backwards to avoid public scrutiny. And that's why they so often resort to historical revisionism and other forms of camouflage and deception to advance an unpopular and indefensible agenda.

(Cross-posted from Eliza’s brilliant Substack.)