I don't identify as a feminist - so why does this get on my nerves?

[SophieJenkins]

I was listening in the car to WH yesterday and they were doing their 'power list', first off discussing Kim Kardashian (have a vague idea who she is but not much) and then they started off the list and after about 1 or 2 interesting women, they announced Caitlyn Jenner.

I turned it off instantly as I couldn't listen. I don't know why but it just made me really angry.

I didn't want to start another thread about this as I realise from titles that people were getting sick of them, but cant get it out of my head and wondered if anyone could briefly help me figure out why it pissed me off SO much?

If we're not allowed to discuss this then I apologise and feel free to tell me. I haven't been reading any of the other threads about it which perhaps I should have done after all.

I think I feel like being female has been hijacked by someone and used to get publicity - when a lot of women are denied even the basic human rights that come with being a bloke.

And then to be put on a list of high achieving women for what? For wanting to be a woman?

I don't get it.

If the decision was between Kim Kardashian and Caitlyn Jenner to have on the list (which is what it seems to have been, according to Sarah Vine), then I think I'd rather have Caitlyn.

When they talk about influence, just think of how many threads on transgender issues have been posted prompted by Caitlyn. Awareness has been raised. Her public outing has caused a lot of debate, and it interesting how tolerant the U.S. has been of it, because Bruce was popular.

Kim Kardashian hasn't killed anyone though, has she?

Imagine how the family of Kim Howe must feel.

Thanks TheOriginalSteamingNit - I am very interested to know how many complaints the BBC have received about this, and will be requesting that information if it is not included in their response to mine. What was the flavour of the conversation about the Power List on WH today?

Soot, Sophie and Lotta - I'm glad to share the background information about Jenner from Louise Pennington's post. I agree with you Soot about how Jenner's criminal behaviour has been conveniently ignored by the media in the hullabaloo surrounding their "transition", and also agree with Annie about the wider issues at play regarding who actually owns the press (and what their vested interests might be).

Re Sarah Vine, I've long thought that she is the worst sort of lickspittle handmaiden without really knowing much about her (beyond her being a columnist for the Daily Mail ), but thanks to Wikipedia I now know that Mr Vine is one Michael Gove. Which is interesting.

As for the Trans Trojan Horse, Miranda Yardley (a gender-critical transwoman who is often cited in these sorts of threads, and who engages with MN/FWR in person on occasion) has written about this very recently:

How to destroy feminism:

(1) convince young women to unconditionally accept men as women; and
(2) convince young lesbians they are men.

My view on the current transgender narrative is that at best it's a very nasty form of gaslighting ("some women have a penis"), and at worst it's the embodiment of rape culture (the "Cotton Ceiling").

Link to the underwear story:

radaronline.com/exclusives/2015/02/bruce-jenner-sex-change-stole-kim-kardashian-lingerie/

Compare the Women's Hour list with the Forbes list. I think WH have made themselves look like a lightweight radio version of Hello and Closer with this list, rather than the serious programme they take themselves to be. It's a big disappointment as in the past they have done some good reportage on serious issues, but they really are looking a bit tabloid-esque with this one.

"I'm not sure why I don't like her. I think I don't like her voice, immediately, but it is more than that - I don't like her attitude.

Not sure why. She seems quite rude sometimes. And dismissive"

What do you expect- she is a feminist!!

V funny, Bertrand.

Even if WH were lookign at Influencers, it's still titled 'Power List'

Hang on - he still has a penis? Seriously? And he expects to be called a woman?

Well fuck THAT!

I didn't know he was Kim Kardashian's dad either. Poor kid.

Yes Sophie, Caitlyn is still in full possession of their meat & two veg. But actual women are now apparently expected to blindly accept that the penis can be a female organ (see my pp).

Lurcio, thanks for linking to the Forbes List - that's fascinating and much more like it! Some very inspiring women there

Well, I'm not a fan of Kim K, but she owns an IPad app that made 43 million dollars in three months, just from a quick google. She's a mother who supports her child financially and is a woman so would have my vote over Caitlyn.

Caitlyn Jenner became famous as a man. Bruce Jenner used his white penis as a way to obtain superior sports funding and recognition in his field.

Caitlyn Jenner simply appeared on the front cover of a magazine with unfeasibly pert tits for someone in their 60s.

Male privilege let her leap frog over other, worthier woman, and we should call bullshit.

Meant to add that it's a false choice anyway, seeing as Hilary Clinton and Sheryl Sandberg aren't on it, or many, many other influential women.

I don't really understand what he's doing.

I don't think dressing like that and being on the cover of a magazine is anything to do with identifying as female. That's not what 'female' is about.

It's insulting to think that that is what he's suggesting a 'woman' is - a glammed up person posing in their underwear.

Sophie, exactly. It rather proves the autogynephiliac points lots of people on these threads make.

'It's insulting to think that that is what he's suggesting a 'woman' is - a glammed up person posing in their underwear.'

Exactly Sophie. Its such a hackneyed, fantasy version of what a woman is i.e. all about how you look.

Sophie, I think Kim is Jenner's stepdaughter, not daughter. Though I believe Jenner's marriage to Kim's mother is now over.

I could be wrong though, I'm not good at sleb stuff!

If only they had chosen Kellie Maloney instead..... this would be an entirely different conversation!

Yes lazyloulou we would have been focussing on someone who nearly strangled his ex-wife because of his gender frustration making a list of influential women, but that's the only thing I've read about Kellie Maloney.

It is sad that that is all you know, Sootgremlin.

A little bit more information and you would know the factors that led to it, what came after it, and, maybe, why your po-faced response is somewhat lacking!

Lou, judging someone for part- strangling their spouse is Po faced?

If it was Kellie Maloney it could have been all about the racism, is that what you mean? Or what?

The definition of po faced is 'humourless and disapproving' so yes, I don't find humour in domestic violence and I am disapproving of it. It's a fair cop.

I said I know nothing else about Frank/Kelly, so wouldn't know in what ways she would be influential. I had no need to read further, just as I don't research every newspaper article I happen across. I don't wish anybody ill, but frankly I think we could throw our net a little wider looking for powerful, influential women than those who, in their former positions of male privilege, acted selfishly and damagingly to the women around them, just because they happen to be current tabloid fodder.

Kellie (as Frank) was successful in a field he probably would never have got into had he been a woman, a role in a field that is not widely accessible to women; I'm guessing his career success and notability is the reason people are interested in his story now, similar to Bruce.

Is this the same old "well men attacking their female partners is often excusable because of XYZ excuses and anyway she probably goaded him or something" stuff?

Wasn't going to post on this thread (although an interesting read) but that comment seems off, maybe it meant something else? Lou?