Why do some feminists oppose misogyny but support gender ideology?

What is the difference and why?

How would one be able to tell the difference?

Because they are women and GC feminists are the only ones who make sure they retain their female sex based rights, such as maternity leave and so on.

No, people who identify as men can be excluded.

I dont think all that many trans men would feel comfortable in the folds of GC feminists who see them as women. Some might. Many, many more would not. Why would they?

Yeah, that's the thing, isn't it? If men are women and women are men, then everybody is already equal and feminism as a concept doesn't even need to exist, so what are we arguing about?

I dont think all that many trans men would feel comfortable in the folds of GC feminists who see them as women. Some might. Many, many more would not. Why would they?

So I suppose you would say that Libertarian Socialism is a perfectly congruent and reasonable stance to hold?

In effect, the are centring everyone because nobody can be excluded, which is lovely and fluffy, but it's a meme on instagram, not a serious political philosophy.

In effect, the are centring everyone because nobody can be excluded, which is lovely and fluffy, but it's a meme on instagram, not a serious political philosophy.

So I suppose you would say that Libertarian Socialism is a perfectly congruent and reasonable stance to hold?

I'll say it again

The term you are using is incorrect. GC feminism is not exclusive of trans identifying biological women.

The term you actually need here is 'men inclusionary feminism'

Some females will never have pregnancy as a risk to them

Is your argument really that some women are infertile so these rights don't matter?

Fertility treatment is sex specific, and a far greater burden on women than men, so should a woman want to become pregnant (regardless of her feelings about her identity) she will need sex specific rights e.g. to attend appointments and to receive appropriate care.

You could argue that women are privileged to be able to bear children, and that men are at a disadvantage, but then you get into the rights women need to avoid exploitation e.g. if they are used as surrogates.

And even if a woman cannot have children and doesn't want children, take away general rights to birth control and society assumes that it is not worth employing women.

You can put forwards all the points of why you believe trans women aren't women, but that doesnt detract from the topic of the thread.

I actually think that your main problem is that you can't define 'trans women' because 'trans' is such a vague term that it could include anyone. As previously explained, it's impossible to fight for the rights of a group that can't be defined.

But if you see TW as W, you aren't centering men. You're centering all women.

The thing that is in dispute is whether trans women are women which is a whole separate debate to whether trans inclusionary feminism is feminism which is kind of where this whole thread started. The OP.ponderimg why they resonate with trans inclsuinary feminists. Answer: because they are feminists and typically cis women, too.

It does work because trans inclusionary feminists see trans women as women. So the idea that they are centering men is non-existant. They arent centering men, they are centering all women, including trans women, who they see as women. And that is broadly what feminism is about.

It does work because trans inclusionary feminists see trans women as women. So the idea that they are centering men is non-existant. They arent centering men, they are centering all women, including trans women, who they see as women. And that is broadly what feminism is about.

Its not about true feminists. Its about people thinking they are 'feminists' whilst also thinking men are the oppressed ones, which puts them in the category of completely the opposite to feminists. Trans feminists if you like. Or totally upholding the patriarchy.

It does work because trans inclusionary feminists see trans women as women. So the idea that they are centering men is non-existant. They arent centering men, they are centering all women, including trans women, who they see as women. And that is broadly what feminism is about.

It does work because trans inclusionary feminists see trans women as women. So the idea that they are centering men is non-existant. They arent centering men, they are centering all women, including trans women, who they see as women. And that is broadly what feminism is about.

No. I said upthread you cannot call yourself a feminist if you prioritise men over women.

Which you are arguing against via the mechanism of TWAW.

They aren't. You know that. Everyone knows that.

Ok.

Some females will never have pregnancy as a risk to them so your point is totally irrelevant to why they believe self identity is enough to make someone a woman is they say they are.

You can put forwards all the points of why you believe trans women aren't women, but that doesnt detract from the topic of the thread. Trans inclusions feminists are feminists, just like you're a feminist. You just have different beliefs about equality and how to achieve it. And that is why a lot of trans inclusionary feminists will still have experiences and ideas that you relate to and support. They are also feminists (like you).

No you dont need to because it would verge on being off topic. All the things you believe won't make it untrue that trnas inclusionary feminism exists as a branch of feminism.

I think the ones misunderstanding are the ones arguing about who is a "twue feminist" and who isn't.

It's like year 9 debate club.

You can debate why you think that isn't the best approach, just like Socialists debate the merits of Marxism in the context of Socialism, but Marxist Socialists are still Socialists and Socialists who are not Maxists are still Socialists.

The analogy doesn't work. It's more like debating the merits of Libertarianism in the context of Socialism. It just doesn't compute, and Libertarians are most definitely not Socialists.

I think you sre so entrenched in the argument you want to have, that you can't see the wood for the trees. You just want to talk about whether trans women are women. I am talking about the existence of different branches of feminism. All as real as each other as feminist approaches.