The cognitive dissonance from 'TWAW' women

[CheeryTreeBlossom]

I've seen a few things today on social media which got me thinking: How do "liberal" feminists square up the argument that being a women is a feeling vs the experience we all know?

1. The awful disappearance of Sarah Everard has led to an outpouring on twitter of women highlighting how they are essentially bound by a curfew all the time (and not just when the police "helpfully suggest" it) and feel the fear of being followed/harassed/assaulted by men in public constantly.

2. Kamala Harris posted a video on Instagram about the 2.5million women how have left the workforce in the US (similar stats on Guardian about the UK) and it's driven by women being in lower paid work and not having access to childcare when schools close.

3. This scene from Fleabag appeared on my Facebook feed where Kristin Scott Thomas gives a powerful speech about how women are constantly affected by their bodies through the start of menstruation to menopause. Lots of positive articles from the time it aired:
   www.refinery29.com/en-gb/fleabag-season-2-episode-3

And yet these same women would call others bigots for saying biology matters and instead that feelings are more important to being a woman than anything else?
That to dislike finding myself in an enclosed public space with someone visibly male is phobic, and that our reproductively system has a huge impact in our lives and why women are still discriminated against?

Argh. I'm just sick of being the only one in my friends group that seems to see the hypocrisy.
They say JKR is a nasty transphobe but equally complain about the patriarchy and how childcare costs put women put of work

I share your bafflement. Maybe I’ll never get it but I hope one of the brilliant women on here will be able to explain the mindset in a way that makes it click.

The ones that really get me are the likes of Kate Manne. I mean how can you write an entire rather good book about misogyny, explain that it comes from seeing women as “human givers” instead of human beings, assert that misogny is directed at women who are seen (by the misogynist) to be stepping out of the role of caring/giving nurturers, coin the term “himpathy” to describe how empathy is preferentially extended to men, and still be a full on TRA?

She’s the most inexplicable example to me because that book helped me understand the success of the trans movement when I was confused about how the hell this all happened -and helped me understand AGP too. But there are plenty of other smart women who baffle me in the same way. I think I might be unusually bad at doublethink and so I can’t understand people who are good at it? I feel your pain, OP!

It's mostly a case of 'straw transwoman'. In their heads, a typical transwoman is someone who perfectly passes for female. Probably exclusively attracted to men. They also think they're such a rare phenomenon that they're making ideological exceptions for edge cases that will never have a real negative impact on women.

Not sure their straw man-who-claims-he’s-a-woman needs to pass perfectly. I suspect it’s more about seeing those men as victims and assuming any man who feels so unmanly as to want to be a woman ( of all things ) must be having a terrible time. I think they see women as lesser beings than men and probably that women have a tendency to be nasty, mean bullies.

I do agree they make the excuse that these men are so rare that we’re kicking up a fuss over something that’s not that important, in the grand scheme of things. Germaine Greer seems to agree with them on that, even if most of us here don’t.

The cognitive dissonance is mind blowing

Twitter - Women are scared of men all the time! They have to curtail their lives because they don’t know whether a man is safe or not. It’s horrendous.

Also twitter - let any man who says he’s a women into your spaces you bigots!!!!

I'm also confused. I really admire the feminist writer Helen Lewis but she does subscribe to TWAW, despite understanding the issues thoroughly. I'd be tempted to hypothesise that in some cases it's because individual women haven't (yet) been hit with the full force of the implications of their own biology (not had kids for example, or experienced significant discrimination), but that can't explain all of it surely.

Btw, it's not all liberals

They don't need to "square up the argument". They hardly need to worry about it at all. It's not like they will be formally debating anyone over it, so they need to be prepared with counter-argument and to defend their position.

All they need to know, is that to be a person in good standing, they need to think X; that's what the good people are like. If it ever comes up as an argument then, "you're a bigot", "TWAW", are sufficient to their need.

Now to be fair, perhaps some of them have thought deeply on these issues and I'm just unaware of what kind of argument they would make. But still, in practice, they don't need to worry much about consistency because it's not required of them.

They're being kind It's more important for women to be kind and think of everyone else.

I saw a young woman on twitter last night saying how awful the case was but that TWAW and they are even more vulnerable and more likely to be murdered. Fortunately there were people able to respond with the facts.

A young academic who called herself a feminist recently tried to explain to me how she believed transwomen are women. She really tried, and I really tried to understand her reasoning. I’m sorry I can’t reproduce it here, because she never said I could catch hold of and follow properly.

I was taught long ago that if you can’t explain something, it’s because you don’t really understand it yourself. If it’s a religious belief, the believer just has to accept it without trying to explain the unexplainable.

I'm also confused. I really admire the feminist writer Helen Lewis but she does subscribe to TWAW
I think a lot of people fall into the following categories-

• believe that TW are old-school transexuals who have had the op. Ok, not "female" in every cell but near enough.

• believe so strongly in gender identity that they they think that TW will behave according to female patterns of behaviour - I would argue that the same people probably think that "cis" men would be put off from pretending to be TW because they see women as inferior.

All they need to know, is that to be a person in good standing, they need to think X; that's what the good people are like. If it ever comes up as an argument then, "you're a bigot", "TWAW", are sufficient to their need.

This.

They also seem to think feminism is some catch-all dustbin for every 'identity' and 'marginalised movement' rather than something that is by women for women.

Argh. I'm just sick of being the only one in my friends group that seems to see the hypocrisy.
Sickening isn't it? I saw a very heartfelt message on Twitter about this, denouncing male violence against women - quickly followed up by an apology for not including TW who are so much more at risk.

They also seem to think feminism is some catch-all dustbin for every 'identity' and 'marginalised movement' rather than something that is by women for women.
Very true. Feminism is so important especially now. Beyond suffragettes, it rarely seems to be taught in schools.

I agree with the above but I think there is a further dimension to it. I think they are unable to assess the complexity of human nature.

I believe that trans women go through terrible struggles and in some cases faces daily humiliation. That is awful and something we need to work on as a society.

Unfortunately, in the name of acceptance, the trans umbrella is widened so much that it is impossible to keep predators out. Compassionate women believes that nobody would try to identify as trans to access women and girls. They also believe that any kind of gate keeping would further hurt already vulnerable individuals (trans women).

Finally, they are unable to see that vulnerable people who have had terrible experiences may inflict harm into others. They cannot see the complexity of human nature and therefore they cannot bear to make any decisions that may not be optimal for what they perceive to be the most vulnerable.

I agree. It is baffling

I'm more extremely fucking angry than anything else.

These self identified "cis" women support an ideology which made Scotland reject misogyny as a category in it's Hate Crime Bill.

Now they're crying all over twitter because a woman who looks a bit like them has been murdered.

They are right to cry, of course, and I've cried too, but where is the empathy when it's women who don't look like them? Women incarcerated alongside rapists? Women seeking refuge in fear of their lives?

All women deserve to be free from male violence.

Here's a tweet in response to the sickening murder of a woman from one the socially acceptable kind women on twitter. The right kind of feminist.

"Also - trying to be more considerate with how I talk about gender so by ‘women’ and ‘men’ I mean she/hers and he/hims. Anyone presenting or identifying as female is equally at risk, and trans women are fundamentally -more- at risk as data shows."

Does she get automatic entrance to some kind of afterlife for that?

YANBU @CheeryTreeBlossom

Name me a younger generation that hasn't believed they were special: ''i'm not living my life like that; my friends aren't like that; no-one thinks like that any more and anyway, stop fussing I can look after myself. Oh.'

It's infuriating but maybe it's necessary in some way. I wouldn't have wanted to grow up thinking what I think now.

When women my age do it, well then I have less understanding, and less tolerance.

I think it becomes even more baffling when you are currently living with a tween or a teen that is deeply affected by the ideology.

Particularly when you see who might be the loudest supporters fighting to have affirming only medicalised treatment paths. Misogyny comes in different packages but the result is still the same.

Name me a younger generation that hasn't believed they were special

Yes, but the irreversible medicalisation to achieve the goal is the problem.

Surprised about Helen Lewis, she gets an incredibly hard time for her feminist writing doesn't she?

I think it’s partly linked to the idea that TW have done something brave. I think it is underpinned by thoughts like:-
They have rejected traditional masculinity and given away their privilege to become more feminine. They have celebrated the idea of femininity by embracing it. They have joined our gang. They have also struck a blow against toxic masculinity that blights so many lives. In so doing they have made themselves more vulnerable and so we should protect these vulnerable members of our team.
Note how much of the dialogue is around TW not TM.

I don’t agree with this. I accept trans people are vulnerable and need protection from discrimination (their own protections alongside mine). However, many of the TRA have not given up their male privilege at all. They still expect to be heard and centred. I also don’t equate femininity as what being a woman is really about.

Some women are so completely conditioned to bow down to men that they’ll do anything to make them happy, even if that means agreeing that they’re literally a woman.

It’s such a nonsense.

Oh I agree there are many problems, I was just musing on the question of how they manage to square it.

Sorry multiple cross post