Nimko Ali and Lynne Featherstone MP

[Macareaux]

This exchange on twitter is something to behold

'Uber-feminist'. Yeah that doesn't sound at all like totalitarianism

I think it's like being uber-poor.

feministsunknown.wordpress.com/2014/08/17/i-am-uberpoor/

They should be welcoming and understanding to these new women. They should have humanity, kindness and inclusiveness in their souls

I don't ascribe to the idea of souls, gendered or otherwise.

That is the politest response I can muster to your patronising, condescending and insulting comment, Baroness Uber.

Featherstone's appalling and insulting comments place women in danger. She's absolutely no friend to females.

She's called for women, who have been socialised to be ‘nice’ to show humanity and kindness to make men’s lives easier, including those who have been subjected to rape, abuse and control. Who is being nice to women? Certainly not this self-styled 'uber' feminist.

'New women'? Is that the same as 'New clothes'?

Oh I like uber-poor

I just saw a tweet from Lynne Featherstone to Olympian athlete James Ellington

He has been tweeting on the topic and this is one of his tweets

mobile.twitter.com/Jellington100m/status/1186388703175942144
"If I decide from now on I want to be recognised as a woman and break all the WOMENS british sprint records, is that fair 🤷🏽‍♂️
Living in ridiculous times 😂."

She said this
mobile.twitter.com/lfeatherstone/status/1186631812044464128
"That’s a ridiculous statement"

The rest of his tweets mobile.twitter.com/Jellington100m/with_replies

5th rule of misogyny: Women and Feminism must be useful to men or they are worthless.

They should be welcoming and understanding to these new women. * They should have humanity, kindness and inclusiveness in their souls*

No, it's men who should be doing all these things. We women already are.

It's men who should be welcoming and understanding to other males, who are widening the bandwidth of what it means to be a man. It is men who should have humanity, kindness and inclusiveness to accept people who present differently or think of themselves differently.

Feminists are not saying that men cannot present differently or think of themselves differently, merely that this does not change who or what they are.

Feminism is about females and includes all females. It is not about males and must not be forced to include males.

What is with the Lib Dems and talking about souls?

So many good points on this thread. But particularly:

Why is it up to women to give support to a group pf people wholly unconnected to them ? Fine to support whatever cause one wants, obv, but why is it seen as an obligation?

It beats me and I agree that the mothering expectation is partly at the heart of it. Making that whole philosophy that extra bit more misogynistic, authoritarian and creepy.

Nothing wrong with contesting elections but as a side note, Catherine West MP is the MP who raised the questions about the recent death of a baby in a UK women’s prison after the mother went into labour unsupported.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3709234-Baby-dies-in-prison-after-pregnant-mother-gives-birth-alone

West says she will be continuing to be active on issues affecting women. It’s such an important set of issues that some of us have been sending her messages or cards to thank her and encourage her.

It won’t take long for that MP to get onto the creepy authoritarians’ radar if she carries on with this line of questions, so I’d imagine she can do with the support. She’ll be bound to start wondering why single sex prison accommodation should be allowed to be mixed sex and what are the risks of that, and then maybe she’ll say something publicly to that effect and they’ll all pile on.

Lynne Featherstone’s attitude is shockingly complacent. She’ll definitely know what the issues are if she’s mates with Nimco Ali so it’s hard to think it’s anything other than self-interested man pleasing that she’s coming out with.

Why is it up to women to give support to a group pf people wholly unconnected to them ? Fine to support whatever cause one wants, obv, but why is it seen as an obligation?

I think it's that idea again (and I wish I could remember who came up with it) that some feminists see trans women as refugees from maleness, and some see them as colonisers of femaleness. Featherstone obviously falls into the first category and thinks that we should welcome these people who have rejected manliness and want to be female. Perhaps she even thinks we should be flattered.

I can kind of see why some women think like that, but the problem is it's an idea that doesn't survive contact with reality.

some feminists see trans women as refugees from maleness,

Enjoy Your Erasure Faye and Wax My Balls Yaniv perform masculinity far more than they perform femininity.

some feminists see trans women as refugees from maleness

Interesting idea. Does this then mean feminists such as these have such a dislike of males that they see males who reject their own biology as ‘worthy’ of female shelter. Is it that such feminists rather than seeing the sexes as equal but different, see men as a class to be hated? Inclusiveness then becomes less about equality but more about reducing the power of the male class by taking away from it, widening the definition of female means access to more power?
Except it doesn’t in reality as the males accessing female spaces are predominantly misogynists. The males accessing female spaces use it erase us rather than support - the access is their goal not the lived experience.
The idiocy of women such as Featherstone then starts to be understandable (for me anyway).

Does this then mean feminists such as these have such a dislike of males that they see males who reject their own biology as ‘worthy’ of female shelter.

I think the idea is that some men find masculinity oppressive and reductive, and feel more comfortable if they don't have to live up to traditional expectations of maleness.

Obviously we know that's nonsense as so many trans identified men lead very high-powered, successful (in conventional masculine terms) lives before they decide to transition. And we also know that many of them retain male patterns of aggression and violence. But I think that's the logic - maybe Featherstone could explain it.

I think the idea is that some men find masculinity oppressive and reductive, and feel more comfortable if they don't have to live up to traditional expectations of maleness

That makes sense but I don’t understand their hatred of women.
It seems to me these are men rejected by other men in some way and rather than tackling this issue, they begin to consider themselves to be women (to make sense of being lesser men) and then oppress women from within (because the whole scenario is based on self hate?).