Is this a woman lead movement?

Batman's bat I think another thread would be better and I'd find it really interesting!

I don't agree with the fundamental point in your opening bit though so not going to reply here as both our posts run to length and it's a derail for sure!

If you start another thread with a couple of your posts from here on and say it's about religion historically good/ bad for women in sure there will be interest! I'll post for sure :)

@NiceGerbil

I enjoy your posts as well. I have been thinking about this and I believe that my topic may be related after all.

Hear me out. Religions often start with something good, something that is extraordinary and in many cases (Islam and Christianity) positive for women given the time. Then it all goes tits up and become a vehicle of oppression. Many women participate in this, just like in the trans movement.

I think that people who are lost, feel that they have failed in society or generally not are very happy where they are in the social hierarchy use both religion and trans rights (and other movements) as an alternative structure where they can obtain a higher status. This goes for both men and women. Women generally score higher on agreeableness (as a personality trait) and are therefore possibly more prone to groupthink as they are more keen for the others in the movement to like them.

How many of the truly successful/powerful people in society are fanatics (religious, TRA or other)? Sure, they will pay lip service to it, say the right thing etc, but are they driving this movements? Not really!

You have some exceptions where they are related to a TRA or they are trans themselves. But part of driving the movement? Nope!

How many times do we have truly intelligent posters here arguing the TRA case? In the way that you get the feeling that they are a successful academic or business person? I have yet to come across this. It is all an absence of arguments and “lol” and “don’t be transphobic”.

So coming back to the topic of the thread, is it woman led? You have some women, some “prominent” academics but never the most clever ones. Given how they write, how would they stack up against the sharpest brains we know elsewhere? How many successful business women do we see as part of this? How many truly successful writers or actors? Some pay lip service but not more than that. The driving forces have found a place where they perceive themselves in an alternative social hierarchy where they have a higher status than they ever could have achieved elsewhere. And they keep driving it because they worry about upsetting others in their new friendship group.

What do you think?

Ah sorry.

It's a really interesting topic and I'm enjoying your posts.

I do think it's off topic for this thread though. Happy to carry on, on new thread in feminism chat if you want to start one though!

I didn’t mean to go off on a tangent. And English is my second language so I meant contemporary as at the time of Christ. Sorry if that came our wrong.

I am just interested in how religions, which seem to have had some bright sparks for women at the time of introduction (Christianity was better for women and slaves, I believe the prophet Mohammed encouraged private property for women and that Khadija was a business woman).

Then they seem to be captured by patriarchy and used as a tool to suppress women. I am wondering if it is less the religion in itself and more how males are using it to gain status.

The Roman empire isn't contemporary though surely!

NOW religion is fucking up millions of lives all over the world. Especially for women. With Christianity being the largest global religion.

The idea it is/ was good for women I find baffling and it feels like s strange tangent as well.

'I do think that Christianity was friendly to women in the light of the contemporary environment. '

Globally?

I very much strongly disagree. I put some info upthread about the impact of Christianity in the world right now.

Yes it probably is a power grab, I agree.

And also similar behaviour coming from the recent graduates, who are really keen to be seen as right-on, same as the the older boomers in very senior posts and in power, I think they wan5 to be seen as down with the kids, and have one eye on the exit just waiting for their executive retirement.

Meanwhile, I clock the virtue signallers and those who have pronouns in their signatures and see that as a 🚩 that it does not say good th8ngs about their critical thinking skills or integrity. If I’m doing this, I’m pretty sure I’m not the only person to do so.

Jostling for position in what they perceive, correctly or incorrectly, as the new order is one way women behave.
I've done it in the past. Now I'm older, I adopt the two fingered salute and fight back model. YMMV.

I agree with you OP, it is women led. I was thinking about this very same thing recently.

Whilst the prominent figures are trans identifying male, at the grass roots it is mostly women pushing this for some strange reason.

For example, the men at work either don’t know what’s happening, or if they do they think it’s nonsense. Whereas the women, OMG, it’s all ‘let’s be kind’ and ‘let’s be inclusive’ , especially those in HR and diversity roles. And I can not fathom whether they are stupid or if they really believe it.

And for the record, I don’t think any benign good could judge people for whom they love (homosexuals).

I have a confession here. We do actually raise our children as Christians. I tell our children that the bible needs to be interpreted in the light of its times. And that the chance of an omniscient being being able to explain details that goes against their culture to mere humans is low.

I do think that Christianity was friendly to women in the light of the contemporary environment. I believe that it was competing with the Mithras cult in Rome but that it spread wider than the Mithras cult as Christianity also allowed women and slaves to take part.

I think any religion were the scrips were written thousands of years ago and where some muppets interpret it literally had the potential to be hostile to women.

Adam was tasked with naming all the animals. And Eve. God named Adam, and Adam named Eve.
Eve doesn't figure anywhere in this.

The church gives men power over women. Women must be submissive to men, not speak out of turn (especially in a holy place); woman must cover her hair and her body in case it offends a man or leads him astray.

You know who else hates gay people? The religious right.

Yes and no. Transphobes are doing the work of the Religious Right and the patriarchy, but some of the leaders of the RR and patriarchy are female.

Great reading all the perspectives on this thread. May I ask that we don't get derailed by the TWAW posters please. A separate thread can be created to discuss those arguments.

(Local as in engaged in local politics - not local to me.)