Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

The New Misogyny

60 replies

BadasIwannaB · 18/07/2018 19:23

Reading the March thread (www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3309913-March) got me thinking, we need a name for the problem we want to draw attention to. And it needs to be a name that makes it clear that it’s not that we are ‘transphobic’/denying transgender people’s human rights/right to exist etc.

I think people - especially journalists - can be lazy, and when they reach for a name to give to our concerns, the closest things - to their mind - to hand are things like ‘anti-trans’ etc.

And this isn’t helping us get listened to.

And it is making it very easy for us to be ignored and dissed.

So how about a name that makes it clear at a glance what we are taking issue with? So here’s a suggestion: ‘The New Misognyny’ or maybe ‘Misogyny 2.0’.

I mean, I’m sure both expressions have been used before in slightly different contexts, but here’s my thinking:

It makes it clear that what we are objecting to is the way that this supposed right-on-ness/wokeness is really just a free pass to ignore the concerns of women (summed up very nicely in comments from Wanderabout and Popchyk on the www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3309903-Sexual-assaults-on-Vulnerable-Women-Prisoners thread:

‘The report references risk of harm to the male offender, not the female inmates forced to share accommodation 	with them.
This sums up everything that is wrong with that report and the 	state of the worldwide debate on this issue.’

and to threaten, intimidate and dehumanise women who dare to challenge the dogmas.

What do you think? Could it catch on? Could it help make clear what our problem is and get us listened to?

OP posts:
longtimelurkingtrans · 18/07/2018 21:10

You will never defeat lazy journalism as some news rags will always go to lowest denominator or just deliberately dumb it down. What's needed is a red hot publicist along the lines of those used when politicians or celebs use for damage limitation if you see what I mean. A hard one as the TRA's are a tricky slippery lot.

Racecardriver · 18/07/2018 21:04

Well let's start with the issue. Natal women's rights are now second to the rights of trans women because they are apparently more deserving of women rights than natal women. The problem with calling is misogyny is that it is trans exclusionary as it comes across as trans women aren't actual women because they aren't the ones being targeted. There needs to be an exclusive term for trans women walking over natal women's rights failing to understand and respect the inherent disadvantages and vulnerabilities that female biology present. Rad fems need a term that says yes, trans women need women's rights too because they suffer many of the injustices that natal women suffer but many of the inequalities faced by natal women are exclusive to natal women because they arise from biology not socialisation. Just like trans women have their own problems, inequalities and injustices that arise as a result of being trans. It seems that the problem is that everyone is ignoring the fact that biology is in many instances a disadvantage to natal women because it goes against the sex is socialisation rhetoric. Perhaps something like uterophobe or sonething else that bares an undeniable link to biology so as to draw attention to the real reason why women a vulnerable in society. Gender can be overcome (trabsacticists are proof of this if anyone is), biology cannot. It can be suppressed with hormonal treatments like cobteaceptives, hrt or gender reassignment drugs but it cannot be changed and it cannot be denied with leading to the extinction of the human race.

thebewilderness · 18/07/2018 20:44

I think that if the homophobia and misogyny of formerly LGBT organizations is pointed out to the media and people in general they will recognize what they are seeing, hearing, writing, and reading.

Snappity · 18/07/2018 20:38

I don't think the word is the problem.

Search for "Mumsnet transphobia" on Google.FWR has a reputation for being very transphobic. If the same views are expressed in the wider world, do you really think that the assessment is going to be any different?

Original poster
BadasIwannaB · 18/07/2018 20:05

Thanks Hotrocker. Good point - I can see I hadn’t done a great job at distinguishing the two. But I think either could potentially be helpful - a name for what we are against that is transparent about what our problem with it is. Or a name for our position that’s transparent about the motivation for it.

OP posts:
Original poster
BadasIwannaB · 18/07/2018 20:04

Thanks Errol and Confessions. I hear ya. I totally agree that it’s never gonna get the total extremists to listen.

But in a way the thing that frustrates me the most is that many people I had thought were on the same page, people who would be horrified at misogyny usually and who see themselves as feminists, think we’re being bigoted etc.

I know there’s no name we can choose that will fix all the problems, but I thought it could help get THESE people to be less dismissive.

OP posts:
HotRocker · 18/07/2018 19:51

I’m not quite sure what you mean. Do we need a name for our movement, or a name for what we feel is happening to us?
Either way it has to be female centred, but if you’re after something palatable I don’t think it’s going to work. If we’re too blunt we’ll just be dismissed with the usual disdain women are treated with when they complain, but if we are too nice it’ll lack impact.

ErrolTheDragon · 18/07/2018 19:41

I agree with the thrust of what you're saying, just not sure that terminology quite does it.

ErrolTheDragon · 18/07/2018 19:32

Yes... misogyny is all too normal, not taboo.

ConfessionsOfTeenageDramaQueen · 18/07/2018 19:30

The problem is misogyny isn't a dirty word like "phobia". What we need is something more literal - like femphobic.

Swipe left for the next trending thread