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

@CuriousaboutSamphire

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!

Most have no idea, at that age, of what the deeper meaning of sexualised actions/gestures actually is.

That said, at 12 my friend started sleeping with older men. Allegedly consensually. Of course, now, I can see it was rape. At the time, it was presented as being supercool and exciting.

These two seemed aware. The youngest, the one who smiled said she did so to be sure the man in the van wouldn't get angry with her!

I could cry!

Sorry thought I had lost first post as I got an " Oops" page

That does seem to be back! Wonder what is causing it this time. Hopefully nothing too serious!

Cognitive dissonance. My lovely friend is fiercely supportive of girls, donates to a charity that funds toilets and school places for young girls overseas, organised some brilliant female only careers events for her yr 10 students, but thinks it would be ok for a child who has received the benefit of male socialisation but is identifying as a girl to attend.

Has a difficult relationship with her DH and wants to encourage girls to be fiercely independent and not beholden to male whims but thinks it is ok to help a young girl socially transition at school without permission (and maybe knowledge) of the parents.

Due to said DH relationship really appreciates social time spent away from him and all other men in the company of women but can't see the issue with male people self-identifying into women only groups.

Reluctantly conceded that it is not safe for males in general to be able to access female facilities but despite being faced with a textbook example of ROGD irl (someone we both know), shared an article claiming that it is all a load of rubbish.

We haven't been able to talk about it since then - I remain bewildered and wish I could talk to her more but daren't raise it again.

I have an ex collegaue and I can't even begin to explain.

Suffice it to say her actions years ago have come to roost, her son is no longer a boy! And she has always been absolutely fierce in her defense of the privacy and dignity of girls and women. But is now equally fiercely defensive that her 11 year old son is included in all things girl/female.

I can't square that circle and cannot talk to her about it, or many other things as they all seem to circle back round to him/her.

@CuriousaboutSamphire

I have an ex collegaue and I can't even begin to explain.

Suffice it to say her actions years ago have come to roost, her son is no longer a boy! And she has always been absolutely fierce in her defense of the privacy and dignity of girls and women. But is now equally fiercely defensive that her 11 year old son is included in all things girl/female.

I can't square that circle and cannot talk to her about it, or many other things as they all seem to circle back round to him/her.

Are you actually saying it's your former colleagues fault her son is trans?

How on earth do you get to that interpretation?

Crikey! I meant that she has long been a champion of the rights of women and girls. Staunch feminist, campaigner etc.

And now she has a transdaughter. All her old certainties are now working against her child. So she is doing the cognitive dissonance thing of championing girls and trans girls as though they are the same. She is a biology teacher!

Look at this chilling ridiculousness at the Clapham Common vigil for Sarah Everard:

twitter.com/robjessel/status/1370820643256729609?s=20

Definition of misogyny and male gaze unironically juxtaposed with a misogynistic slur often accompanied by threats of rape and violence. Nice.

"The struggle against gendered violence" according to LOJ. Nope.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Look at this chilling ridiculousness at the Clapham Common vigil for Sarah Everard:

twitter.com/robjessel/status/1370820643256729609?s=20

Definition of misogyny and male gaze unironically juxtaposed with a misogynistic slur often accompanied by threats of rape and violence. Nice.

That is sickening.

At a vigil for a murdered woman. Completely twisted.

@CuriousaboutSamphire

Crikey! I meant that she has long been a champion of the rights of women and girls. Staunch feminist, campaigner etc.

And now she has a transdaughter. All her old certainties are now working against her child. So she is doing the cognitive dissonance thing of championing girls and trans girls as though they are the same. She is a biology teacher!

No, it was very clear what you said and meant.

So is she supposed to reject her own trans child, curious?

I wouldn't worry. I don't think you will have the problem of her talking to you about it for long.

Some prime examples of the behaviour in the OP all over Twitter today.

Are you calling me a liar again rooty?

I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I am not. I am watching good friend and colleague tear herself apart trying to square that particular circle. And there is nothing I can do to help her.

Just watching Posie's video about this. She's right on the money.

Which video is that?

twitter.com/gracepetrie/status/1370362995721789444
So close to getting it. SO close.

No sound till 1:36 but worth sticking with it

God that was a depressing read!

Thanks Maud

I am baffled OP. I think the issue is that the whole TWAW thing has been presented as the only opinion for right thinking liberals to think. Also no right thinking liberal would say anything other than women have equal rights. So you deal with the cognitive dissonance where these collide by an implicit assumption that TW are somehow completely different from men and totally distinguisable from men. And you refuse to answer/listen to questions like - how does a man become a woman by saying 'I am a woman'? What has changed? People like Danielle Muscato/Jessica Yaniv/Alex Drummond are very challenging to these assumptions which is why you ignore them.

I shouldn't be, but I'm disappointed that Posie was distracted into defending herself #NAMALT and derailing the focus of the talk away from women. The people who attempted to derail that through their chat comment achieved their aims.

Yes, I agree EmbarrassingAdmissions, but it was an emotional piece and she responded emotionally, and, like you, I can't find it in myself to criticise her for it. It really did make the point that women cannot have anything for themselves without men having to insert themselves into it somewhere, however. If you feel you need a [some] qualifier before the word men, I personally think you're very much part of the problem.