Article: Fundamentally misunderstanding gender critical feminism

[Prawnofthepatriarchy]

Ani O'Brien has written a response to a piece What is ‘Gender Critical’ anyway? On essentialism and transphobia by Danielle Moreau.

It's well done, though Ani's statement about the pathetic skerrick of hope I have that if people who have expressed so much hate for us can be so fundamentally wrong about what we stand for then perhaps if they learnt the truth we could find just a little bit of middle ground seems a forlorn hope to me.

Oh, and Mumsnet gets a mention in both articles. Why people are surprised that people on a predominantly female forum are concerned about women's rights remains a mystery, as does the outrage that a site called Mumsnet would be full of posters with a keen interest in children and strong views on giving GNC children dangerous off label meds.

medium.com/@aniobrien/fundamentally-misunderstanding-gender-critical-feminism-baebb2e953e3

Am snorting at that quote from Danielle Moreau:

"These activists, who probably number in the dozens rather than thousands, have been joined on social media and petition websites by a large contingent of overseas allies, most notably from the UK. In the process, we have learned of the existence in that country of a trans-exclusionary subculture that has been radicalised by, of all places, the parenting forum Mumsnet."

TRAs can't help revealing just how much they hate women, can they? And mothers in particular. Because everyone knows that women who have children no longer have a functioning brain with which to form a political opinion. (And that's even though a quick google suggests that Moreau has children.)

These activists, who probably number in the dozens rather than thousands...

Let's remind ourselves of this jolly stat:

Number of people entering the MN site via the Feminist Chat topic:
June 2016: 15,000
June 2018: 177,000

There's no way of knowing precisely what those many thousands are here for. Could be the recipes. But Danielle is clutching at straws here.

It's been remarkably clever though, hasn't it? Persuading some people - including women - that GC feminists are evil, hateful people.

Rather than people concerned about the impact of things like the removal of sex as a protected characteristic, either actually or by default (if there's no proper definition of 'woman', there's no sex-specific protection.

But the mere yelling of insults and conflation of GC feminism with "hate" has allowed them to completely shut down any sort of discussion, let alone exploration of the impact.

wow thanks for posting this! i loved this paragraph from Ani near the end:

I really hope you read some of this at least. I’m not telling you how to think, I’m telling you how we think. You have seriously misunderstood our position on things that seem to form the basis for why you hate us. It is your choice if you wish to still paint a picture of us as the antithesis of decency, but I wanted to make sure you’re at least hating us for positions we actually hold.

in the original article, Danielle Moreau repeatedly refers to gender critical women as "TERF"s. am i alone in finding that painful to read? there can be little doubt, now, that "TERF" is an extremely dehumanising slur. to label somebody as such is a dog whistle for activists to threaten and carry out doxxing and violence. see all the explicitly violent memes circulating twitter. see that list of GC university staff circulating facebook and see how professors such as Rosa Freedman were treated. see the reason so many women are silenced as they recognise this very familiar male pattern of misogynist violence.

i cannot understand how anybody with an iota of intellect can continue to use that word in good faith about other human beings even if they disagree with them.

I was in Asia last week, and had a drink with a journalist friend. She had heard of Mumsnet and the free-speech battle!

Because they have relied on guilt tripping women, Vicky. Which many women have been socialised to feel by men. And to put the well-being of others first.

The issue seems to be that actual 'gender critical' view points are forbidden from being heard or read, let alone be grasped and understood. And so the Tras go on shadow boxing with an 'enemy' they do not understand at all.

This was also very evident on the BBC2 new programme this morning. The panel did not have a clue what they were talking about - and in the case of the young man-child, Tom Harwood; he probably would not be prepared to seek out and inform himself of the issues from any source that he may have been led to believe might be a " bad " one.

"These activists, who probably number in the dozens rather than thousands...

Yes, this seems to be a common misconception. That is is just a handful of women here and there. The fact is that the more that people are informed about the issue - the greater the numbers there are.It is the lack of information, and the closing down of speech across so many platforms that means so many people remain informed.

• uninformed

"because women were originally oppressed to some extent because of their bodies, their rights should be forever tied to qualities within those bodies, when in fact the precise opposite is true"

"To some extent"? How else have women been oppressed apart from because of and through our bodies? She has to minimise it or she's left with no argument.

I guess human rights shouldn't be tied to human bodies either but should be extended to all types of bodies, like fly bodies and fish bodies. Ridiculous.

This dismissal of the female body is rooted in absolute misogyny. Only a misogynist could deny the significance of human femaleness. Only a misogynist would want to.

Their reactionary ideology, with its
obsession with binary gender essentialism, is actively harmful to all genders.

Translation. Men don't like it if you won't pretend to believe them.

I'm going to tell everyone that I've been radicalised by Mumsnet.

What makes TERF ideology reactionary rather than radical is its dedication to binary gender essentialism.

I have one question for this person. Are you deliberately lying, or just badly mistaken?

You'll be in a huge crowd - and in very good company - if you do, jay55.

"Dedication" is hardly the word for the radfem position on gender, is it NotTerfNorCis? I suppose you can't be surprised genderists seem incapable of logic when their ideology itself is so woolly and incoherent

You'll be in a huge crowd - and in very good company - if you do

Glinner, " Id like to collect some anecdotes about when and why you first became involved in the debate about gender ideology and activism. I've also asked on Twitter but thought this might be good for longer answers.

Please tell me your stories!"
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3518546-help-a-brother-out

'Danielle' seems to have things completely back to front.

If Danielle knew this, I wonder if Danielle would still hate 'terfs'.

What makes TERF ideology reactionary rather than radical is its dedication to binary gender essentialism

There's everyday not understanding the difference between sex and gender. And there's willfully conflating the two to suit one's ideology. I don't buy that people cannot understand the differences once explained.

I hate it when these current "feminists" dis the first and second waves as if what they acheived for women was nothing. Women's lives were changed totally because of what previous generations of women did for us.

There's so little respect or gratitude. The third wave has achieved nothing for women and in many ways are working to roll back our rights in various areas, all the while turning feminism into a man-pleasing exercise. The sooner we see the back of that type of "feminism" the better.

Excellent. I hope Ani O’Brien’s seen this thread.

Translation. Men don't like it if you won't pretend to believe them.

Indeed.

The piece it's responding to is awful though, and the author claims to be a feminist

Don't they all? Same old same old man pandering queer theory nonsense.

They forgot to say we are all funded by the Kremlin. Theres only a few dozen of us but we are able to raise £100,000 for two or three worthy causes.