Are feminists getting played?

[Maniak]

It makes me sad that feminists are spending so much time banging on about bathrooms in a world that has women still working for no pay, old women still more likely to be poor, surrogacy, underfunded maternity care, and poor support for carers. And other stuff.

Yes, the trans thing is annoying, but have you noticed how it always fires up before major elections? It's like Afghanistan in the 80s when the US provided just enough weapons to keep the war going so Russia would use all it's energy and get weak.

I feel like feminism is getting distracted with the trans stuff. At most, it should take up 10 percent of our feminist attention. But I rarely see feminism these days that isn't all about trans. Seriously. Do you think we're getting played here? Is trans really such a big deal?

@Endofthedays and @SuperLoudPoppingAction

Thank you ... I understand that now.

"But I honestly don't know what you're trying to get from this thread anymore."

All through this thread people who question (not even disagree with!) the idea that GC is vitally important to feminism are told to leave or post on another thread or that their comments are a waste of time. But why? That's the topic of the thread! If people have opinions about what should be the focus of feminism, this is the right place to talk about it. I agree with Sakura, it seems like people are derailing, but I think I'm probably not understanding their (your) perspective.

The fact that a GC feminist doesn't understand how terrorism, war and conflict can be discussed from a feminist perspective really saddens me. These are exactly the sort of issues I think are getting drowned out at the moment.

I have another theory.

I think that the left, traditionally the female friendly wing of politics, in its support of the welfare state, in particular its support single mothers and the disabled, is now starting to look infinitely ridiculous to women, because they seem to be the main supporters of trans.

Women are starting to think the Tories look sane.

And considering most transwomen are middle class white men, it is insane that the left is supporting them when it's supposed to support the working classes.

Trans is making the left look ridiculous and I'm so angry that the men on the left hate women so much that they would rather lose our vote than put pay to the trans madness.

I want the left to return to its support of single mothers like it has done in the past

The fact that a GC feminist doesn't understand how terrorism, war and conflict can be discussed from a feminist perspective really saddens me

There are so many women who don't think war is gendered. War and nuclear disarmament is a major feminist priority because it's men who build nuclear weapons and its men who bomb. It's not women.

WDIT

In fact I would say one of the the feminist issues that makes me the most angry is the cries of WDIT when it comes to war crimes and genocide

Whatever the main topic, we should always be welcoming of people asking x,y or z has to do with feminism.

It isn’t sad. It is one of the best things about this board - that women can ask about an issue they are unfamiliar with, and someone else will share knowledge.

It is the exact opposite of the social justice ‘educate yourself’ that goes on elsewhere.

But if we are not allowed to define what a woman is then how can we discuss anything from a feminist perspective?

There are so many women who don't think war is gendered. War and nuclear disarmament is a major feminist priority because it's men who build nuclear weapons and its men who bomb. It's not women.

It isn't that I don't think war is gendered, it was that I had not made the immediate connection that feminism had any influence on it. I had not realised you were referring to using feminism as a means to influence a deterrent. My misunderstanding what you wrote, that's all.

And, I think this could be an interesting discussion.

What I mean Maniak is that from my reading of the thread we already are discussing what you want to discuss.

If you want to discuss why MN is at the centre of trans issues, why many feminists centre trans issues, and what other issues are as or more important than trans issues, there are 400 posts on this thread already doing just that.

If you want to discuss those other issues specifically, you should start a thread about it. Or engage with some one else's. I posted a thread myself yesterday to discuss the different political party manifestos from a feminist perspective. Only one of the people saying on here that we only talk about trans stuff bothered to come over and post on it (your input was appreciated btw).

The question of why women are centring trans issues, and whether that's a valid use of feminist energy, is a worthwhile one, but we are having that discussion. That's this whole thread. 400 posts of women explaining why they think the answer is yes. So it seems like when people say "you aren't letting us discuss this" what they really mean is "you aren't agreeing with me that other issues are more important".

You can't make people agree with you about that, all you can do is try to change the balance of topics posted and engaged with on this board by posting and engaging yourself.

If none of those things are what you're getting at then I have to ask again what you want from this thread, because I honestly am not getting it.

My thread, btw, if anyone's interested

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3649056--1-Lets-talk-about-Feminist-issue-policies

I would say one of the the feminist issues that makes me the most angry is the cries of WDIT when it comes to war crimes and genocide

If the definition of 'women' is meaningless and male-bodied people are also women, then it seems feasible that WDIT in terms of war, in the same way some women have penises.

Which is why genderism and the subtle shifts in language from talking about sex classes to talking about gender classes is so important to every feminist issue.

All through this thread people who question (not even disagree with!) the idea that GC is vitally important to feminism are told to leave or post on another thread or that their comments are a waste of time. But why? That's the topic of the thread!

For me, a core aspect of the feminist agenda is the abolition of gender, not just being critical of it. So, yes, issues around the patriarchal tool that is gender are critical to feminism, since gender is patriarchy's control mechanism.

So, I disagree that feminists are "being played" here. Transgenderist ideology is the biggest threat to the very existence of feminism, since if it becomes impossible to define women as a distinct sex class it becomes impossible to define feminism or for feminism to exist.

What is WDIT please?

WDIT is like NAMALT

Anti feminist arguments disputing feminist class analysis

"Not all men are like that"
"Women do it too"

JackyHolyoake

I think eliminating gender is an interesting theory.

I'm a bioeseentialist. I think men and women are fundamentally biologically very very different. So I don't know what eliminating gender really means in this context.

I want men to stop with their nuclear weapons, with their utter destruction of the environment, with their mass rape, mass femicide. You can argue that this is socially constructed. I think most feminists are beyond caring whether it is or not. We just know it's men that are doing it, and they must, somehow, be stopped.

Sakura did you see my question. It was a simple question

I'm a bioeseentialist. I think men and women are fundamentally biologically very very different. So I don't know what eliminating gender really means in this context

The way I view sex and gender is this:

Sex = female; gender = learned stereotyped behaviours described as feminine / femininity [subordinate].

Sex = male; gender = learned stereotyped behaviours described as masculine / masculinity [dominant].

Gender is the set of behaviours imposed on either sex from birth by our patriarchal society to ensure that males are always dominant in every sphere.

This is a genuine question, not goading, I'm still learning.

Men make war. Women want to stop it. How? The only way I can think of is by getting more women into positions of power and influence. I'm not sure how we do that but if we can't define who a woman is how can we even try? If statistics are not sex-based how can we even monitor it?

I know that is a very simplistic explanation but It's where my understanding is at right now.

On the subject of WDIT I saw a politician on Twitter the other day arguing that WDIT in regard to violent sexual offences, citing as evidence a list of sex offenders which included - you guessed it - men identifying as women. Putting male crimes into the female category and then using it to say that Yaniv's behaviour was female pattern predatory behaviour. Exactly as feminists predicted would happen. Males crimes are being used to promote the belief that VAWG is not in fact gendered.

Same with the endless WDIT posts by Lord "sexual offences by women have increased dramatically in the last decade" Rudolph. Have they now? Some one remind me how long that FOI request said the police had been recording crimes by self ID for...?

War and nuclear disarmament is a major feminist priority because it's men who build nuclear weapons and its men who bomb. It's not women.

A few points in response:

1. Taking ISIS as an example, it's not just men's way of life that is fuelling their hatred of our society. It's also women's refusal to be subjugated and wear burkas etc. Our (primarily male) army are fighting for your right to live as you see fit.

b) What do you think would happen without our nuclear deterrent? Do you trust people like Kim Yong, the successors of Bin Laden, etc. Do you think they'll hold back if they know we have no means of retort?

We are being played, and it's from a lot closer to home than you are implying.

All through this thread people who question (not even disagree with!) the idea that GC is vitally important to feminism are told to leave or post on another thread or that their comments are a waste of time. But why? That's the topic of the thread!

You can't have many topics that you think are important enough to warrant their own thread if you want to keep them all in one thread here. I thought you were going to astound us with all your insights and observations on a myriad of things that the silly one-track-minded mumsnetters just hadn't noticed.

Oh well, maybe next time.

And on the very slim chance that you are feeling sad about it all, I feel sad that you cannot see what a HUGE issue this actually is

The only way I can think of is by getting more women into positions of power and influence.

And if men succeed via law in being included in the classification of women there is no hope of achieving anything since those men displace women and will necessarily dominate all the discourse.