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

@midgedude

That is evidence pet. Unless you think that the words from women don't actually count, that you won't use mere female experiences as evidence

I think misandry' exists.

No evidence, I just think it from my own eyes.

So people can stop telling me it's a false concept yes?

I think it has been slightly appropriated since then and repurposed to guilt women and girls into allowing male people to choose to use their single sex spaces because they feel that they don't want to use their own.

Yes.

You don't see it, that doesn't mean it's real

I have never seen a giraffe , still believe other people telling me they exist

And nobody is arguing that it doesn't.

What was the point you were making? I've seriously lost that thread now.

(Can you think from/with eyes?)

@midgedude

You don't see it, that doesn't mean it's real

I have never seen a giraffe , still believe other people telling me they exist

Get your head out of that waste paper basket. You're not 3 any more

@CuriousaboutSamphire

And nobody is arguing that it doesn't.

What was the point you were making? I've seriously lost that thread now.

(Can you think from/with eyes?)

Well done. I made a mistake. Clever you for pointing it out.

Curious, do you actually read the threads? I only ask, because it has been said hundreds of times over on these topics that it doesnt exist and is a false concept.

Evidence of what happens to me can only come from me personally

It only had to happen once to say that it can be used in that way

Evidence of what happens at a society level comes from gathering lots of this data

Suggest you post on AIBU to gather such data as that enables votes and reaches a more diverse audience

@midgedude

Evidence of what happens to me can only come from me personally

It only had to happen once to say that it can be used in that way

Evidence of what happens at a society level comes from gathering lots of this data

Suggest you post on AIBU to gather such data as that enables votes and reaches a more diverse audience

So I assume that by that you mean that someone said you must be kind and let trans womem inn your spaces? Referencing the be kind campaign directly?

Yes , Online , And IRL
Lucky I have a good verbal word memory

do you actually read the threads? I only ask, because it has been said hundreds of times over on these topics that it doesnt exist and is a false concept. Yes! And I am not the only one to point out that your understanding of some that has been typed is not what has actually been posted. You are translating, extrapolating, misrepresenting what has been said.

You've done it to me a few times and never had the decency to engage with me when I point it out.

@CuriousaboutSamphire

do you actually read the threads? I only ask, because it has been said hundreds of times over on these topics that it doesnt exist and is a false concept. Yes! And I am not the only one to point out that your understanding of some that has been typed is not what has actually been posted. You are translating, extrapolating, misrepresenting what has been said.

You've done it to me a few times and never had the decency to engage with me when I point it out.

I always engage with you. That's a total lie.

@CuriousaboutSamphire on one of these three threads, someone said 'misandry is a false concept and doesn't exist'. Quote unquote. Not sure how I can have misunderstood.

I always engage with you. That's a total lie. But not always with whole posts. I don't lie!

I'd need to see the fool who typed that misandry itself is a false concept. I have read someone type that your application was awry.

Beautiful example of the OP:

twitter.com/fawcettsociety/status/1370044882656632838?s=21

A yes, the old "sex or gender" version of female.

Tiresome! But the Fawcett has form for that , doens't it?

Rooty
Have you ever read Gavin de Becker’s the Gift of Fear.

He comments how female socialisation to be polite, kind and understanding puts us in danger from predatory males. One of the things he suggests women are very wary of are males who push boundaries, who try to push you to say yes when you want to say no. Women are socialised to be polite so we smile and make vague protestations instead of bluntly telling them to get lost. I see huge parallels with the TWAW situation. Most women don’t want an intact male in their changing room but we don’t want to be unkind to a specific, possibly vulnerable individual. I think it is our socialisation that is part of the cognitive dissonance.
Patriarchy is bad but TW are portrayed as vulnerable so our socialisation says protect them. Except that, the TWAW approach is a charter for the boundary pushers which is why we have to resist all TW in female spaces as any concessions will be misused by others. TWAW creates a path for unscrupulous men to abuse women even though TW themselves may not problematic.

It does.

One of the things he suggests women are very wary of are males who push boundaries, who try to push you to say yes when you want to say no. Women are socialised to be polite so we smile and make vague protestations instead of bluntly telling them to get lost. I see huge parallels with the TWAW situation. Most women don’t want an intact male in their changing room but we don’t want to be unkind to a specific, possibly vulnerable individual. I think it is our socialisation that is part of the cognitive dissonance.

Yes, one of the things that makes me angriest is we are teaching girls and young women that they need to ignore their feelings of discomfort around boundary pushers.

That has recently become more infuriating to me too! Watching young girls get beeped and shouted at and one of them turned and smiled. Her friend asked her why she smiled. I bet you could guess her answer!

I had to turn and walk away! They are 13/14 FFS!

What if misandry is rooted in a justifiable fear of males which leads to hatred, does that make it different from misogyny.
Do some women hate men because they are men or because they are dangerous, in which case it's not really misandry.

So.... Back to cognitive dissonance.

Outside those whose job it is to write about feminism or who are involved in politics I don't think there is much cognitive dissonance happening.

The people saying TWAW one day and then talking about the extent of male violence the next haven't even really thought about what they believe, is just repeating meaningless mantras like a child reciting a catechism.
In many cases it hasn't even got as far as cognition.

That's why we need to speak to people, ask them what they mean, discuss women's sports and prisons. For many the top of the mountain is still covered in cloud.
That's why we are constantly being deleted and banned here and on other social media. There is always mass reporting drive to stop us asking the relevant questions that will prompt people to examine their cognitive dissonance.

I do wonder, these people who I would call women who state twaw end of, how they'd feel if alone in an alleyway with a person I'd call a man. Presumably they'd confirm how they identified before deciding whether to feel nervous.

Yes the cognitive dissonance is baffling. I know that we are all guilty of compartmentalising things, especially when it comes to things we love and or feel passionate above.I can understand why someone who believes passionately in equality and the need to protect marginalised groups would find it hard to accept that transwomen might be just as much a threat to women as other males. However, the deliberate ignoring of evidence and the cynical attempts to imply that transwomen are no more dangerous than " other" women is beyond the pale.

Yes the cognitive dissonance is baffling. I know that we are all guilty of compartmentalising things, especially when it comes to things we love and or feel passionate above.I can understand why someone who believes passionately in equality and the need to protect marginalised groups would find it hard to accept that transwomen might be just as much a threat to women as other males. However, the deliberate ignoring of evidence and the cynical attempts to imply that transwomen are no more dangerous than " other" women is beyond the pale.

Or maybe they just know in their hearts howsomeone like Danielle M identifies? And can therefore be reassured that someone who is six foot, male presenting and has a beard poses no threat. That must be very useful