Is transactivism doing us a favour?

[lisamuggeridge]

As trans activism mirrors narcissistic abuse pattersn so closely, is it actually doing us a favour?

So with power dynamics, you really have to have a demonstration, a visceral one with an emotional reaction before you can understand and reconstruct your understanding of power dynamics. Is why so many dv suvirvors recognised trans activism as male pattern abuse so early. You cant unlearn those patterns once that has happened, you always recognise them.

With abusive dynamics, particularly parasitic dynamics, the perpetrator has placed their victim as an object in their own identty and accuses them of their own behaviour. DARVO. So all accusations are usually admissions.

We were due to synthesise the institutions around domestic abuse years ago, then austerity happened and we didnt, gender mainstreaming didnt happen, equaliuty duty in equality act was bollocks in face of shitty economics and austerity, and through the acronynm 'terf' we see how many institutions did not have this knowledge and now need it.

Given you cant argue with narcissism and you can only use it to demonstrate for you, are we missing a trick with trans rights activism?

Women did not have the power to demand a conversation about male pattern abuse, systems shaped by it, the way in which womens roles have changed and responsibilities to identify abuse emerged. Trans rights activists did that. Women needed to and they did it.

While it is destructive behaviour to demand a safeguarding conversation, then use it to demonstrate male pattern abusive behaviour, then exclude yourself from the conversation, am I wrong to think this is actually useful demonstration at this point? Especially as we have major institutional redefinition on the cards through Brexit and one of the tasks of this period was always going to be consolidating these duties.

I personally do not believe anythig can stop the backlash now growing and most of the good will that alllowed women to let this happen has gone but is this useful?

Yep. The underlying idea that women exist to provide men with sex/children/domestic services is still there underneath a fairly thin veneer of equality, and when a man's perceived right to those things is frustrated the veneer slips away and the older assumptions can be seen in how society responds.

It's so incredibly obvious in the trans debate. If anyone really believed transwomen were women society wouldn't give a shit about whether or not they were happy or felt fully actualized.

Yes, and it’s why transmen, who society knows to be women, are totally invisible 90% of the time...

We dont say this enough/ Vagina is just a body part? That would be the body that the human race requires to reproduce, the means of production, the means of creating society and the economy, trillions of months of unpaid labour every year produced reliably and the root of our economic inequality becauise we havent yet figured out how to combine market acting and caring in economists heads. 'Just a body part'. Nope. The means of production that used to be owned with independent mothers a recent phenomena constantly attacked because men want that ownership back. This is very much a struggle between the laws and systems women built and men who want them gone.

A civil rights movement that demands children have no boundaries, there are no spaces of safety from male violence allowed, women's perception must be subordinated, lesbians must include male bodies or they are bigots, and by the way we'll doxx you, get you fired, threaten you, target you, punch you, and then accuse you of our own behaviour? Thats not even subtle and yet we even notice the dissonance and we have someone demanding we move back to accepting their identity without question. No I will not. You will be perceived as you present and if you demonstrate behaviour that says you are a risk I dont care how you identify and nor does the law at present. Yet.

The repeated presentation of rapists, attempted murders and peadophiles as marginalised women. From Pontin, Ayrton, Jeska, ALL the cause celebres here are this. And yet the Guardian says they are freedom fighters and neglects to even notice their offences or risk they pose. Its bizarre.

Yy Lisa...

Bugger. Good conversation but I have to work.

Keep going so I can come back and read later!

Guardian were also appalling at the clear abuse, again with clear signs of abuse of girls, with Kids Company and carried on doing hagiography for Camilla long after that ship had sailed. their socal affairs editor has christened people discussing basic law as 'T*rfs' cos her mates are Corbynites. I do think protection of identity and a need to be seen as good as it at core of a lot of support for this. I also think its reflex and so has to be challenged by women but this is almost an exact mirror of the way that blurring of sexual boundaries was used to hide PIE in plain sight. You'll note we barely talk about the child abuse enquiry now. Its all this? What I think is interesting is that because trans rights activists particular leading ones have been idealised noone has actually listened. I think once people starting hearing what trans rights activists actually said and realise hteir scalps are attached we might see this blow quite quickly/ But the backlash and what has been revealed by it is appalling. Actually appalling.

Possibly...

I find this stuff re ‘corbynites’ interesting though, maybe it is a southern thing... a. I tend to think of it as a ‘woke’ thing re individualism but b. Up here in my CLP the divide on it is ‘moderates’ - TRA and ‘leftwingers’ - opposed to TRA (men generally traditional on gender and women GC).

I agree. I’m a survivor of male violence and trans activism rings all my alarm bells .
It also means that it does make me extremely stressed, the whole situation, the bullying of women, the threats, the lies. If we lose single sex space then it would significantly impact on my life.

Its interesting the way its exposed the dual development of intersectionality. For me intersectionality is a working concept and a basis for REFLECTION, and is not new, I didnt know till I got to LSE, that at elite institution level its word salad to fit with existing frameworks. Economics and social policy that doesnt even recognise womens boundaries. So much of the toxic activism is young, very privileged people, who have spotted a way to present themselves as marginalised. I doubt many have reflected enough to note this, but that does seem to be about elite social closure and the emergence of a class who think they spea for the marginalised, reacting to a system where they can speak for themselves. I dont discount the way austerity targeting women by consensus laid the ground for this. Its so hard to tell how much is deliberate and how much isnt and in terms of harm, intent doesnt matter at all.

I assume it is deliberate TBH... I think it is unlikely that a govt is incompetent... though sometimes they hide behind claims they are.

YY re intersectionality and reflection - this is SO important. IMO it is just more of this modern thing of hiding regressive right wing authoritarianism in the language and clothes of ‘rights’.

And yy vix... I don’t know a woman who hasn’t been affected by male violence, though I know many who wouldn’t call what they experienced male violence TBH.

It’s about more than that for me. It’s about women’s (and children’s) status in society.

I have been putting it off cos I hate doing them but am going to do two youtube playlists one outlining HOW intersectionality shapes systems and laws, and the actual context and one looking at how this crisis is obscuring that. I think. I have a gastritis flare so I cant today, will probably do them tomorrow and Wednesday. I have to do them when sproglet goes to her dads cos she is a youtube expert and says am rubbish at them.

That would be great Lisa! Look after yourself today, doing the playlists tomorrow if you’re better is a good plan x

I think that visible TRAs are a distraction from the bigger picture.

By hitching their wagon to the LBG movement, the concept of 'trans-equality' (whatever that means) has become institutionalised. Transphobia is seen as a variation on homophobia.

Lone LBG voices that want the 't' out of their movement, because sexual orientation and body dysphoria/lifestyle choices are not the same thing, have been whistling in the wind. See for instance the comments from gay men under the Independent's article:

www.independent.co.uk/voices/anti-trans-protests-london-pride-transgender-transphobia-terf-lgbt-feminist-a8448521.html

Or, see for instance, this gay man explaining the difference to Conservative voters
www.conservativehome.com/platform/2017/07/graeme-archer-im-a-gay-man-not-lgbtq-heres-why-tories-mustnt-play-the-transgender-identity-politics-game.html

Meanwhile, Equality and Diversity units in government bodies, councils, public services, universities etc have been peddling their Trans Pledges, awareness courses and training resources.

Who is in a position to resist the LBG marketeers? To do so would be homophobic. Who is in a position to roll back their position when they've signed the Trans Pledge?

(I'm looking at you Bristol Women's Voices)

Lisa, I’m really enjoying your videos and I’m hoping that I can get a currently very vocal trans supporter to see the bigger picture through your work - she’s got decades of fostering experience but seems unable to think of this in any way other than transpeople are vulnerable and anyone trying to talk about it is a bigot :/

..........

Offred, my Labour CLP has GC women from right across the left-moderate spectrum. Men are more likely to be GC on the left and TRA-leaning (although no one is outright TRA) in the middle.

It’s definitely not the young v old picture that TRA types seem to portray - I don’t think we’ve got many student members though, our young labour group is pretty working class.

I got a song for your inter sectional playlist Lisa

That's had 20000 views. That is amazing. Internet is revealing things about human nature we dont need to know.

Is this inter-sectional?

Yes but. As usual, they saw women's lives from their own perspective, and they forgot that you don't get in between a mother tiger and her cubs.

What Upstart says really resonates with me. I'm honestly feeling like my life is hard work at times these days even doing the basics and I've let political activism totally slide since having kids - except when I think it threatens those kids. Which this does, with bells on.

When women band together we can achieve great things. That's why certain people are so keen that we don't band together and try and disrupt us meeting or even talking on a site like mumsnet.

I'm starting every conversation about this with "I'm coming at this from the perspective of safeguarding children" now. Because it's true.

Totally scared by it all though, worried about DDs future. But I continue to do what I can. Thanks to all and Offred and lisa in particular for your thoughts on this thread (and in general). Whilst I find a lot of what you're saying terrifying, better by far to know so I can in some small way fight back.

On one level the blindness of these activists to these systems and laws, and the blindness of their supporters has done me a favour. They have demanded recognition of these systems and as far as I am concerned I am only having the conversation they demanded and they could demand it. Any adult who believes a safeguarding conversation is a threat to their identity, really is telling you something you should take at face value.

relevent thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3301266-Safeguarding-girls-and-protecting-women-post-Jimmy-Saville-metoo

That is a properly excellent thread