Hi! The Lemmy elections are coming up soon to vote on the Supreme Lemmy Mod. I'm running!

Part of my plan to make Lemmy a better place is to specifically ban you from using Lemmy.

I know that may not be a policy you're a fan of, however, my opponent is promising to ban you AND anyone with 5 letters in their username.

Obviously, I'm the better choice to vote for, since I'll only ban you permanently once. My opponent, will ban you permanently twice.

but im not an opp,

Either you have no opps, or you are your opps' opp

Is the undocumented black disabled Trans woman in your city safer under the leadership of someone who is a bigot in all regards, or is she safer under the leadership of someone who is transphobic but otherwise supportive?

You just invented intersectionality, but in a way that defends the oppressors. Here's the classic example of intersectionality:

Say there's a company. They have an office and a factory. The factory hires white men and Black men. The office hires white men and white women. Black women are not hired in any part of the company. That is an example of how someone at the intersection of two marginalized groups (Black people and Women), faces discrimination that are unique to that intersection. The company isn't disciminating against all Black people, and they're not discriminating against all women. But when the two are combined, NEW FORMS OF OPPRESSION ARISE

Let's go back to your example of the undocumented gay Black autistic disabled homeless albanian furry nonbinary trans woman... SHE is going to face types of discrimination you and I would never dream of. She would have a complex multifaceted life that we would only understand the most basic contours of. Whether or not she's "safer under the leadership of someone who is transphobic..." is just an insane hypothetical without enough details to be any use as a thought experiment.