Peggie case: controversial opinion

But the issue of women being more agreeable, and valuing inclusivity and #BeKind over truth, that's absolutely a thing.

Thank the Laird for all the disagreeable women out there. And the disagreeable men, who are quite useful once you manage to wake the buggers up.

That's true I think.

But, OP, the issue exists across so many public institutions and even private businesses and they that are not run by women. I suspect you'll find many HR departments which are dominated by women have fallen victim to this ideology in a misguided attempt at being empathethic and compassionate. Or, being cynical, because it's the flavour of today and they want to advance their careers riding the wave of "progress" which in reality means we're going backwards, but they haven't thought that far or they don't care.
In terms of men in senior roles supporting this, I am really not clear. Political point scoring? Personal affiliation? Promise of a reward? Acting against women? Anything is possible, but I suspect it won't be empathy unlike women.

I also think many, many people, even in senior roles, can be breathtakingly unable to think critically.

Yeah, I think a man presenting as a man would need to have some extraordinary charisma to get away with this.

A man presenting as a woman seems to acquire it ex officio.

The only thing I can think of is, it's like those women who collect gay male friends who they treat as purse puppies, but with the power dynamic reversed. And those women are much less likely to bring it into the workplace.

Try to imagine a heterosexual man presenting as a heterosexual man who acquires this weird harem-like collection of women ...

I knew one of those decades ago when I was a student. The most toxic person I've ever met. Even as an undergraduate, he had the lecturers (male and female) wrapped around his little finger. He went on to have a glittering career in academia.

Well quiet, Aunt Lydia’s are dangerous.

It can be true that it's because of women this became embedded in institutions
And
It's because of women it's being stopped and turned around.

More men viewed it as an irrelevant side show which didn't impact them to either bother championing it or to challenge it.

Many exceptions to this of course.

Some women never escape the school playground.

They take it to the school gates. They take it to work.

I've not had time for it since I was 17 years old.

Need a link so people know what the Peggie case is.

There's evidence that women value kindness above truth more than men. They also value inclusion more highly than free speech.
They judge other women who value truth and freedom as harsh and use group exclusion and reputation damage to keep them in line.
Women are (on average) more conformist, more agreeable and more religious.

You look at those differences and it becomes quite clear that areas with women in power will support an ideology based on compassion and inclusion, and the tactics they'll use togetothers to conform.

That's exactly what we're seeing in the Sandie Peggie trial.

It's also why girl guides the WI, Academia, HR, psychology, schools have been so easy to capture.

Whether it's socialisation or innate difference or both is irrelevant. The outcome is the same.

Thank God for the brave disagreeable women who have spoken up despite the punishment

I was convent educated and the nuns used to get in quite a tizzy when a priest was around. I found it unsettling then, and am reminded of it now.

It's very strange. Try to imagine a heterosexual man presenting as a heterosexual man who acquires this weird harem-like collection of women working on his behalf.

Maybe Bill Clinton in his prime, but I don't think many others could pull it off.

It's as if, for some women, the transwoman functions as a fetish, not in the sexual sense but in the religious sense. They acquire holiness by proximity to a member of the sacred caste.

I’ve often wondered why so many young women have fallen for this bizarre, anti-women ideology. DH was quite shocked that the crowd banging on the windows, while I was at a feminist talk inside, were at least as many women as men. It’s discouraging, but there have always been women who debase themselves to please men. They want to keep in with the patriarchy.

This particular TW - who is clearly masculine and heterosexual - seems to have formed himself a “quasi harem” of besotted women who do everything they can to make him happy. His relationship with the most senior of them appears, from behaviour and testimony, to be unsettlingly unprofessional.

Men are more likely to step back and consider this a 'women's issue' and not their area to sort out (even though it involves a man, but maybe he doesn't count). Then when it blows up you don't see them for dust.

I think a lot of witnesses were picked BECAUSE they were women "see see all these real women think she is wrong she is an outlier a stand alone no-one else in this environment has an issue just her"

There’s a thread about another tribunal
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5299380-scientists-at-porton-down-dont-believe-in-biological-sex?reply=143030170?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share

in this case, the problem started with a man defending a gender critical female scientist , and being systematically bullied by his colleagues - mostly men it seems.

🙄

Op I sort of agree with you.

My experience as a young women in a male industry was my boss's were protective of me.
They wouldn't put me into a situation they wouldn't put their DD's into.
Maybe that mentality is a thing of the past.

But I can't get my head around these women who were falling over themselves to 'be kind' but absolutely didn't give a shinny shit for the women, and girls who were sharing that changing room. And some probably were only teenagers.

But there again look at the schools and the prison service. And the female politicians who don't give a shinny shit either.

Many men see it as 'not their issue'. That can sometimes be from a shrugging 'don't care, doesn't affect me', but I'd say it's also often from a 'women's issue, not getting involved' standpoint.

There's definitely a thing with some men where they see two groups of women yelling at each other and their primal instinct is to back away very quickly.

Beyond that, I'd guess that men who are more working class, maybe a little more conservative in their outlook, even if they do see it as a women's issue, they'll not believe in genderwoo for a second. The trick is to get them emotionally invested - sport is good, because the lack of fairness is very visual, and if you ask them about boys having access to their daughter's changing room they will immediately say fuck no.

It's the male feminists who are a bigger problem. Apart from the old gag about "male feminist" being a huge red flag in itself, they all seem to have decided that it's the new exciting women, the ones with cocks, who they need to support.

And of course there are men in professional environments who'll just pay lip service to what's fashionable. But, outside of a small number of gay men who think this is their struggle all over again, I don't see men going in for the kind of handmaidening that we're seeing in Fife. It really takes status conscious women to fuck women over.

“I can say this with great confidence because I'm non binary, which means my brain has womanly parts and manly parts, so I can ask it things.”

Say what now? 🤔

Many men see it as 'not their issue'. That can sometimes be from a shrugging 'don't care, doesn't affect me', but I'd say it's also often from a 'women's issue, not getting involved' standpoint.

Given the state of men who call themselves feminists, I'm not sure that's all that surprising, either.

However, if I were a man, I would be looking at it from the standpoint of authoritarianism, freedom of speech, institutional coercion, social cohesion, absurdity, and yes, probably from considering the women in my life and children.

I can say this with great confidence because I'm non binary, which means my brain has womanly parts and manly parts, so I can ask it things.

Well, the male style when you've got a problem with someone is direct confrontation. Which may or may not mean physical aggression, but it brings the issue to a head.

The female style is covert undermining, ostracism and mobbing. Let's add on women trying to win social capital by proving how nice they are when they shun the sinner.

I've known men who would have a shouting match, blow off steam and resolve their differences. I've known women who would be nice as pie to your face while covertly undermining you for literally years.

You can't really adopt the male confrontational style in a modern professional setting, especially not in a female-dominated professional setting. Which means, if you're not careful, that the female undermining style can become the default.

Also there's a huge class element to this, which is arguably just as important as the sex difference.

I broadly agree, OP.

Granted most NHS staff are women so you'd expect more females to be supporting him than males, but the imbalance is staggering. It's not just this case: every time something likes this happens we find loads of women fussing & clucking around these men

I read the other day that most people with their pronouns in their bios are women. It's part & parcel of the same thing.

I loathe it, as I loathe them.

I'm sure a lot of men believe their problems are caused by women

Does it surprise me that women are sucked into ‘be kind’? Are desperate to be seen to be doing the right thing? Of course not.

And plenty of otherwise sensible men seem oblivious to the reasons any woman might question ‘Transwomen are women’ at the point of getting undressed.

So, while it is frustrating to have watched women oversee this debacle I am not confident that men, in general, would have managed it better.