Why do some feminists oppose misogyny but support gender ideology?

[Doodwhatareyou]

I recently ended up in the man hating side of tiktok, which is a place I tend to be in agreement with. I’ve seen several women bravely battle stupid men in the comments who manage to reinforce everything being said.

I’ve seen a pattern though that these women, who seem to be very up on rules of misogyny, and aware of how problematic too many men are, usually have pronouns in their bio, and occasionally will complain about being bullied by terfs.

I’m baffled.

How can they be so up on patriarchal nonsense yet miss the fundamental misogyny in gender ideology. How can they deny the evidence that trans identified men are just as much of a problem for women if not more as they want women’s rights and spaces.

They can make endless videos about how hateful men are because of the way women are treated, and how women have to budge up and make room, yet trans identified men are women, and anyone who says otherwise is a massive bigot. I don’t understand.

If the shoe fits…

That an individual trans person is critical of the trans movement's objectives doesn't mean they possess vetoe power over anyone who happens to disagree with them.

It's "veto". And right back at ya: that an individual woman is critical of the GC movement's objectives doesn't mean they possess veto power over any woman who happens to disagree with her. Glad we clarified this.

Women who prioritise men's desires over women's rights, needs and dignity may be many things, but I think it is fair to say they are not 'feminists' as most would understand the word.

If you don't see the degree to which this comment applies to you, I can't help you 🫠

So, no connection. Just as I thought. Thank you for confirming.

Except that this women’s rights movement has been driven from the start by individual women, some of whom found each other here. We found that we cared about the words and spaces that we need, about harm of GI to children and vulnerable people and the impact on society.

And the funny thing is, the more we talk about it, the more everyone else (bar the activists and fully brainwashed), the more people express their agreement with our views. To most it would be so obvious it doesn’t need saying but unfortunately we now find that we are required to articulate the issues more fully to push back against the activists.

Your rather fanciful ideas about ‘the patriarchy’ and its influence are simply incorrect.

My question is, why do you care about the men so much? I’d understand if your trans advocacy was skewed towards female born transpeople like Seethlaw but you dismiss those views out of hand and focus entirely on the trans identifying men.

That's not 'open-minded' that is entirely framed using a left-right discourse analysis, and its asociated tropes.

'Trans rights' appropriated traditional left wing discourse...particularly of the American variety. in the same way it has appropriated every other American civil rights type discourse.

mate. Are you ok? It doesn’t matter if a few women have decided men can be women. No man can be a woman, however much he really really wishes he could. You seem very upset with women saying no to men.

@Doodwhatareyou I’m sorry that your thread has been derailed by such an unpleasant person.

They are women who have subjugated specific female centred politics for civil rights discourses more generally; and of course TRAns ideology has been highly successful in appropriating these discourses. Nobody had even heard of it until the early 1990's , and even then it was confined to university campuses.

Posters who dislike women yet spend so much time on here frothing and complaining about women voicing differing opinions remind me of what Andrea Dworkin said back in the day:

“Men often react to women’s words—speaking and writing—as if they were acts of violence; sometimes men react to women’s words with violence. So we lower our voices. Women whisper. Women apologize. Women shut up. Women trivialize what we know. Women shrink. Women pull back. Most women have experienced enough dominance from men—control, violence, insult, contempt—that no threat seems empty.”

This is as silly as suggesting only lived experience qualifies one to a legitimate voice….even if that voice is in conflict with others of the very same lived experience.

Are you suggesting that your voice is more ‘legitimate’ than Seethlaw’s on this? Do you have any relevant ‘lived experience’?

Out of interest, how do you decide which trans voices to listen to? By my observation it seems to be very much about dismissing female voices, even if they have a gender identity.

Do you even remember any of your arguments & how they conflict? I can't keep up with the inconsistencies.

Do feel free to point out any inconsistencies in anything I’ve said. I’m all ears.

Mn is good for women’s voices. As much as it really irritates some, to the point of violence even.

And sometimes strong women create change eg FWS which is brilliant.

You are missing the point that this niche view has been manufactured into a full blown moral panic that has no great impact on women broadly in the bigger scheme of things. The overwhelming majority of women don't have any contact with trans people in their day to day living let alone that that would impinge on the freedoms.

Of course the vulnerably ignorant masses are increasing their support. Successful manufacturing consent relies on media & political power propagandising bogeyman existential threat narratives out of nothing. It's how the Iraq war got popular support.

My question is, why do you care about the men so much?

Why don't you care about women so much that you have sacrificed their freedoms for this petty ineffectual crusade?

but you dismiss those views out of hand and focus entirely on the trans identifying men.

You seem to be under the arrogant assumption people aren't entitled to their own views if they conflict with yours.

And btw your unconscionable shameless exploitation of this individual that whose existence you mock might be lost on them but it certainly isn't lost on those with a semblance of decency.

The overwhelming majority of women don't have any contact with trans people in their day to day living let alone that that would impinge on the freedoms.

Yeah, but see, unlike you, we care about the few who have negative encounters with transwomen in spaces where they should be protected from them instead.

So tell me again: who cares about women, and who doesn't?

And btw your unconscionable shameless exploitation of this individual that whose existence you mock might be lost on them but it certainly isn't lost on those with a semblance of decency.

Is this about me? In which case: I know who is mocking my existence, and it's not the GC women on this board...

Thank you 💙 I've got a great physio that I see occasionally and I'm like 90% better... cycling has done wonders for my overall core strength.

Mumsnet is just great for women helping each other. I have had (under various name changes) so so much help and advice about everything from pregnancy and breastfeeding to more trivial friendship issues etc.

This thread has been somewhat hijacked by (I am presuming, apologies if incorrect) a male person who is chitchatting about this and that, but it's fundamentally all irrelevant because he doesn't actually know about anything a woman experiences. Women aren't a monolith, no. But we do all have many shared experiences, exclusive to women, some of which, as you say, have really long term effects both physically and psychologically. That unites women from all cultures, ages and backgrounds. And that makes us a private members' club in a way. Some men really, really hate that.

Ah "I'm alright jack" and screw the vulnerable women and girls who are affected.

But we're the ones in the service of the patriarchy?

You are missing the point that this niche view has been manufactured into a full blown moral panic that has no great impact on women broadly in the bigger scheme of things.

Maintaining the legal and practical integrity of women and female as a sex class is not a niche issue. Whether they have the awareness or cognitive ability to understand it or not it, it affects every woman.

Why don't you care about women so much that you have sacrificed their freedoms for this petty ineffectual crusade?

Which ‘freedoms’ have I sacrificed on behalf of other women, pray tell?

You seem to be under the arrogant assumption people aren't entitled to their own views if they conflict with yours.

Actually I think that’s your view. I’m not the one dismissing Seethlaw’s lived experience as ‘wokey’.

And btw your unconscionable shameless exploitation of this individual that whose existence you mock might be lost on them but it certainly isn't lost on those with a semblance of decency.

So you agreeing with the views of your theoretical transpeople (that all happen to be born male) is advocacy, me agreeing with the views of an actual transperson right here is ‘exploitation’.

Oh Bailey you are a card 🤣

Btw. Please show me anywhere where I have mocked Seethlaw. I’ll pop back later and see if you’ve got anything. Ciao for now.

Many women, particularly younger women, do not and can not critically think.

Their opinions are almost entirely based on what they think is socially acceptable, and social acceptance is skewed heavily towards current left wing talking points.

Sometimes we might agree with those opinions and then it's confusing, because we now think they must be intelligent, when they then say something daft like men can be women.

It doesn't mean all their opinions are wrong. It just means they don't actually understand anything that they're talking about. And this is explains why, if there was a GE and only women aged 18-30 could vote, the Green Party would win every single seat.

Oh yawn, such a lot of disingenuous DARVO on this thread. Notably from one very angry person who is spreading disinformation about "gc" feminism in particular. I wonder why. Could it be they know they're losing?

Anyway, what you've stated here is utter crap. Of course there is a conflict. The two are directly opposed.

Feminism was always about the liberation of women and girls from patriarchy. It centres on women and girls. The material reality of female lives and women's legal and equality rights the world over. Which for centuries were deemed secondary to the needs of men.

In the UK, we were treated as male property until frighteningly recently and still are in many countries. Not based on our "gender identity". Chosen for it because of our biological sex. How we "identify" is neither here nor there to a misogynist who thinks of us as a second class citizen who is there to serve him and will treat us so.

Men who identify as women have NEVER been members of the group who this happens to. They fetishise our oppression as their "identity" instead. All the rights gained for women in the last few decades were gained BECAUSE of what you call "gender critical" feminism aka actual feminism. Many of us grew up with it. It may be new to you, you are clearly ignorant of it, but that's your problem and your poor education. Not evidence that we're something "new".

As part of fighting the patriarchy, feminism fights "gender", which is regressive stereotypes about the way women and men are "meant" to behave. Much of which is oppressive. Such as the idea that "real women" are supposed to display "subservient" traits etc and any woman who doesn't therefore can't "really" be a woman.

Transactivism loves this idea though. It elevates "gender" (backwards sex stereotypes) over and above the material reality of sex, seeks to replace sex with it law, and in doing so destroys all the rights women had to fight so hard for. It has been busily sending us back decades.

Trans IS the patriarchy. In a dress. Men colonising and fetishing womanhood (based entirely on the regressive sex stereotypes that actual feminists ditched about six decades ago), the destruction and demonisation of feminism and feminists (because we fight the very sex stereotypes that form the bedrock of transactivism and offer an alternative that doesn't promote extreme body modification, medicalisation of gender nonconformity or gay conversion, unlike trans).

Women who claim they are "inclusive feminists" are a) not feminists because they clearly don't get the entire basis of feminism or why it arose and b )have instead been persuaded to fully subscribe to the patriarchy by pandering to men and regressive sex stereotypes over and above both themselves and other women. It's pure ignorance.

Meanwhile, a remarkable number of trans activists, particularly "trans women" spout the same misogynistic abusive rhetoric at women who stand up for their legal rights as do other abusive males like incels and male domestic abusers. And their enablers turn the other way. Despite the wealth of evidence that "trans women" have very similar crime rates and types as other men, against women specifically. More so in some cases.

So for the love of god, you and the others attempting to gaslight and spread disinformation on here, stop talking such utter shite.

It is not a " niche view". It was the stirrings of a resistance movement that started at the grassroots, and which has now gone on to have been really quite successful - mainly because it chimes with most people's experience and awareness about sex and the differences between the sexes. Also because it is rooted in common sense and in the actual law.

Plenty of women have had children and husbands who have come out as 'trans'; and many others work in professions in which they encounter this frequently; and that is without mentioning all of the times we come across trans identified men in the course of our daily lives.

Are you my 7 year old grandchild? You certainly argue like a 7 year old.

Some old clunkers in that post you’re replying to. The usual lines but it’s out of date. Women are effecting change. Some men really won’t like it.

.

Apols connection playing up.