Dear Feminists: Be Meaner

[NonnyMouse1337]

Fantastic article that reflects views I've had for a long time. Always wished women would learn how to be more 'mean' and willing to centre women and women's rights instead of looking out for everyone else. We really won't get far unless this changes. Glad to see someone else articulate this so well.

theblisteringrebuttal.substack.com/p/4183e962-ded5-47f7-b89f-c49b9de6cbb5

I entirely agree with her. When I look back on my adolescence, I want to tell myself "stop worrying about being unkind by embarrassing that creepy lech! He knows what he's doing, and it's not an accident".

I know exactly what you mean.

Boundary pushing is a known red flag.

But that had to be modelled for me. I had to see it in action to truly understand it. And when I was stuck in fauxminist world? It was never modelled for me. I never saw it. All I experienced was female socialisation taken to an extreme—women bending over backwards to include anyone in their feminism until it wasn’t feminism at all, but rather a Trojan horse for patriarchy. I experienced women going out of their way to be caring and gentle, create safe spaces for everyone else, putting themselves last.

Wow. Worth reading again.

It was only once I encountered my first radical feminist space that I saw constructive meanness in action. And I have to be honest. It was jarring. I was scared of these big old feminist meanies. Didn’t they know how mean they were? Didn’t they know they were scaring off men and even other minorities? Didn’t they know? Yes, they knew. They didn’t care.

How is a weird man wanting to look Korean remotely relevant to feminism?

How is Prior the feminism issue of today, an idiot on Twitter.

Go on, explain why these two peripheral, irrelevant, uninteresting weirdos are central to women and feminism?

Over and over women say their feminism is about women and yet start threads about Joss Prior, some weird guy whose had surgery to make him look Korean, and a man going to prison for assaulting a man. Honestly for a board that's all about women there's a lot of stuff that's so not about women it's about men.

Gardeners'Question time is about growing plants but a lot of the questions are about pests and weeds (that's a general analogy. Not in any way a specific one)

@WoolOfBat Not feeling targeted (any more than usual) thanks. I made my points in my first post, and contributed my impression of and concerns about my children's experiences as they related to the topic. I accept that, parent or not, any trans woman is about as welcome here as a fart in a spacesuit and fully expected the phallocentric bombardment that ensued. I'll live, and continue to support women and their rights.

@Whistfulwisteria I think you have hit upon the key difference between the GC women and the libfems.

GC women will always centre biological females. This will always lead to a conflict when people with penises want to enter the safe spaces of biological women, regardless of how they identify.

I don’t recognise all your references but I believe two of them refers to biological males identifying as women and requiring access to women’s safe spaces and arguing for people with penises in women’s sport?

I think we should get back to what this thread is about. We should focus on how women can assert their boundaries and not accept any overstepping of said boundaries. Unfortunately it seems that certain boundaries (penises in women’s spaces) are unacceptable to some posters here. I am happy to discuss the boundaries we agree on and how to re-enforce those.

Go on, explain why these two peripheral, irrelevant, uninteresting weirdos are central to women and feminism?

What nice straw men you have there.

I think we should get back to what this thread is about. We should focus on how women can assert their boundaries and not accept any overstepping of said boundaries.

YY.

Over and over women say their feminism is about women

It is and it is only about women not men however they identify, issues have arisen due to men who identify as women insisting that not only should they be included but placed front and centre and due to the women who not only submit to this but sycophantically cheer it on.

Feminists do need to be meaner, the no needs to be more emphatic and boundaries strictly enforced, being kind, submissive and welcoming is the road to hell for women and girls.

Gardeners'Question time is about growing plants but a lot of the questions are about pests and weeds (that's a general analogy. Not in any way a specific one)

Well that's a good analogy. Being not kind means we must constantly talk about the weeds.
Or maybe we talk about the flowers and stop making everything about the weeds all of the time.

How do we help our girls to be more assertive when everywhere they are being told to be kind.

@MadBadDaddy I think that is a misrepresentation of the discussion here. There will be topics where we agree and can join forces and exchange strategies (sexual harassment, male violence, sexualisation of children). There will be other areas where we disagree (single sex spaces).

This is not different to any other intersection in society where people of different convictions and essence (homosexuals and conservative Muslims springs to mind) need to live side by side.

If we shut down the discussion we will be nowhere. We need to be able to have these discussions in order to form a society where we all can co-exist.

Here's a pertinent article:

'Male supremacy rests on the notion that women are hardwired to have our boundaries broken — that it is in our very nature that we are permeable, malleable, and always available to men. As girls, we are taught that our own sexual and psychic freedom is of little importance compared to that of our male counterparts.'

www.feministcurrent.com/2019/03/03/gender-identity-makes-breaking-womens-boundaries-progressive/

It is and it is only about women not men however they identify, issues have arisen due to men who identify as women insisting that not only should they be included but placed front and centre and due to the women who not only submit to this but sycophantically cheer it on.

Sure, but on the ACTUAL board about women, there's an insistence that we have to talk about men who identify as women too.

Please just see that it's ACTUALLY possible to not talk about them ALL OF THE TIME.

@334bu

How do we help our girls to be more assertive when everywhere they are being told to be kind.

No-one seems to aim clothing at boys with "Be Kind" emblazoned all over the front, I notice.

If we shut down the discussion we will be nowhere. We need to be able to have these discussions in order to form a society where we all can co-exist.

Yes, another reason splitting the feminist board in two is a bad idea. More bubbles. Less discourse.

ArabellaScott that is an interesting article.

22:07WoolOfBat

@Whistfulwisteria I think you have hit upon the key difference between the GC women and the libfems.

The GC women and the libfems.

That's some weird shit from women who are anti identity.

What is it with the labelling? Why does everyone get labelled here?

Can we get back to how important it is that women and girls constantly assert their boundaries and place in society?

My DD has been shown terribly sexist videos in school. They were made at a time when the women were supposed to get a job (often helped by being pretty) and quit working whilst pregnant. This was shown in school without any contemporary context. My DD was very upset but didn’t dare to speak out in class. Luckily she spoke to me and I was able to call the school out. This is an example of how every day sexism is ingrained in every day life from an early age. This needs to be called out and stop.

Sure, but on the ACTUAL board about women, there's an insistence that we have to talk about men who identify as women too.

So tell that to the 'feminists' who chant TWAW and insist they be included in feminism because they are the ones placing them there front and centre.

Women's issues are for and about women no need to mangle language, add useless prefixes, use descriptions based on the biological functions of women, let's just talk about women and only women.

Some women (often libfems) believe that TWAW and biological women should accept people with penises in all spaces.

Other women believes that biological sex is the main driver all all sexism. Inevitably, on most issues there will be areas where these two stances are in conflict.

I suggest we have a separate thread to discuss this fascinating divergence.

In terms of women’s boundaries, I don’t believe that we are doing enough to help women and girls to maintain these boundaries and stand up for themselves. I believe that we, as parents, at least to some extent can help our children to respect and enforce their boundaries. We can also help intercede with the schools if there is something we find unacceptable.

Well that's a good analogy. Being not kind means we must constantly talk about the weeds.
Or maybe we talk about the flowers and stop making everything about the weeds all of the time.

It's all very well concentrating on the pretty flowers and tending your vegetable patch - right up until the Japanese knotweed choking your neighbours garden starts sprouting on your side of the fence. Then you might regret not having been a bit more proactive, before it was too late.

@RedDogsBeg

Sure, but on the ACTUAL board about women, there's an insistence that we have to talk about men who identify as women too.

So tell that to the 'feminists' who chant TWAW and insist they be included in feminism because they are the ones placing them there front and centre.

Women's issues are for and about women no need to mangle language, add useless prefixes, use descriptions based on the biological functions of women, let's just talk about women and only women.

So is that your answer? That although your feminism is only about women you are always going to bring men and their identity into it? Because you can't imagine a feminist conversation that doesn't include men?