The cognitive dissonance from 'TWAW' women

Aw, I read 'bum of the day'.

Good, though!

I'd like to think they are still stuck on the idea that all TWs have "had the op".

Only 2% have the op.

If you want to see the Burn of the Day on twitter, it's here:

twitter.com/jo_bartosch/status/1370103035830140931

My point was that it carries some of those meanings already, and has done for as long as the stereotypes have existed.

Yes, but why would we seek to legitimise those stereotypes?

I love all her poems!

The very same people who insist that women-only facilities and sports will necessitate 'genital inspections' are all over Twitter, sharing stories of being scared by men in public spaces. By their own logic they are bigots for assuming. How do they live with the intellectual dishonesty?

Wouldn't they argue that that's the purpose 'cis woman' serves? (I'm not agreeing with them, by the way.)

No, because we are including female people who fall under the trans umbrella, as they have many of the same issues as other female people.

Also, I just don't see why I should pretend I have anything in common with these male people. I don't. Why should I?

If TWAW why do I and many other women have to save up 10K to have a breast reduction when the other real women get the non-medical sexually alluring DDs for free?

Sorry, I don't know how to do the quoty thing or italics on my phone. I'll just put ^^ before the comments to which I'm replying.

^^There was a good thread on this the other day:

Thanks, will read.

^^I don't see any benefit for women and girls to have it defined in terms of sex role stereotypes. Can I ask why you do?

I don't! My point was that it carries some of those meanings already, and has done for as long as the stereotypes have existed.

^^Or even just being able to state definitions would suffice - "for the purpose of this book/bill/survey, we use 'woman' to mean human female of any age".

Yes, exactly, that's what I meant. In those contexts, 'woman' needs to be explicitly defined anyway.

^^If we invented a new word ("womyn", "superwoman", whatever) for "adult human female", they'd be just as upset.You've got it the wrong way round - ask them "why is it necessary to never have a word to exclusively denote 'human females'"?

Wouldn't they argue that that's the purpose 'cis woman' serves? (I'm not agreeing with them, by the way.)

^^And "why is it necessary to never have anything specifically for females without including any male who wants in?"

Just in case this needs to be said: I definitely think it should be possible (and is necessary) to have things specifically for females without including any males.

Thanks for all the other replies, too!

Mmm. I'd like to think they are still stuck on the idea that all TWs have "had the op"

I think the middle aged and older ones are, not so much the younger ones. They have bought into the "female penis" concept.

Which issues, which arguments?

This is a forum for discussion... I am not foot stamping, I am discussing!

And I don't mean on MN, I mean FB and Twitter.

I do think many of the women going "yay" at the male curfew talking point (which isn't a particularly original one, but I agree it is striking) are perfect examples of the cognitive dissonance referred to in the OP.

Also @CuriousaboutSamphire I don't have happy support for third spaces. It makes me sad it's needed.

In answer to your question Curious, it was an example of how we don't always nail our colours.

You are obviously anti women violence but you don't agree with the curfew.

I am obviously against many of the trans issues but see issues with some of the arguments.

It's allowed.

Because despite your foot stamping and demanding, the world is not black and white.

Why has @RootyT00t derailed this thread to discuss something there is already a thread on?

The curfew thread is NOTHING TO DO WITH TRANS ISSUES. Yey on that thread and this @Rooty is doing her(?) best to conflate the two. Why is that?

I'm not a TRA, so I'm not sure whyce you said that. I didn't say you were a TRA. I did sy that in your happy support for thord spaces TRAs would deem you transphobic!

Your belief that the us or them aggression has done any good whatsoever is interesting. And I didn't say that either, quite the opposite in many other posts, but nothing on the subject at all in that one! What are you referring to? Something I have never said! But you know that...

I don't have to nail my colours to any mast. That's my right. I would have been surprised had you said anything else!

There are already several threads about the curfew comment. Apart from the lamentable state of the Greens when it comes to actual women's rights, it is a bit of a derail here. But it would be interesting to think about as an example of the cognitive dissonance involved. Why can't men just self ID as women according to Green Party thinking such as at their recent conference when various anti women policies were passed? Do the Greens think they wouldn't, or do they not care?

"But what's the solution?"

A good start would be to look for solutions. We've acknowledged the problem, we've established the root cause... So why stop there and throw our hands up and accept that, hey, men will rape us and there's no point trying to stop it, because hopefully it won't happen to me, and anyway bad things happen to men too?

I don't think anyone is pushing in earnest for all men to have a permanent 6pm curfew, are they? Certainly, there are the practical issues you raise Rooty, like keeping domestic abusers at home with their victims, plus the fact that street rapists tend not to obey rules anyway.

I think the point is that it's a very powerful thought experiment, to imagine the freedom and safety that women would have without the threat of male violence.

And to make us think - well, can decent men be a bit more proactive here? Instead of being blissfully oblivious, as many are?