what is the difference between trans ideology and male supremacy?

[VelvetChairGirl]

I googled male supremacy today

the core of it is strict adherence to gender roles.

belief that women use feminism to oppress men.

male supremacists reduce women to their reproductive function.

male supremacist groups propagate conspiracies that build a narrative of victimhood at the hands of movements for equality.

belief that men are entitled to a place in society that is superior to women, who are biologically and intellectually inferior.

Honestly after reading all that I see no difference, am I mad not to see a difference? or are we really in 1984?

• trans ideology doesn't promote strict adherence to gender roles.

• trans people don't believe that feminism oppresses them, only a few forms such as trans exclusionary feminism.

• trans people don't believe that sex = gender.

-refer to point 2

Honestly after reading all that I see no difference, am I mad not to see a difference? or are we really in 1984?

There's almost zero difference, but the TRAs have used a cuckoo strategy by colonising the language and infrastructure of feminism and been much more successful that way than the straight up MRAs have.

Notably while TRAs will posture like feminists, as soon as someone brings up the facts of male violence to them, or anything else inconvenient to their narrative, they'll fall straight back on MRA talking points.

I also think they're posturing as feminists less and less frequently compared to a few years ago. They're getting cocky and the mask is slipping.

Why should I care? I'm done with thinking about 'trans this' and 'trans that'. I'm done with thinking anything of men and their opinions. We are living in 1984 and the only way to correct this is to reject anything men do that offends us and stick rigidly to the truth. A bit like training a pet. Behave or be ignored.

@mamamia1234

- trans ideology doesn't promote strict adherence to gender roles.

• trans people don't believe that feminism oppresses them, only a few forms such as trans exclusionary feminism.

• trans people don't believe that sex = gender.

-refer to point 2

Are you joking, Mamamia? trans ideology doesn't promote strict adherence to gender roles? Trans ideology is an insistence on gender roles.

The gender movement has revived and enforced outdated gender roles, or sex stereotypes, that feminists thought had been well and truly buried before the 1980s. Trans ideology is the enforcement of gender roles, to the extent that if a man doesn't conform to the behaviour expected by men, he must obviously be a woman. And vice versa.

As for trans people don't believe that feminism oppresses them, only a few forms such as trans exclusionary feminism, this literally doesn't make sense. Feminism centres women. Anything you call feminism that doesn't centre women, can't be feminism. An ideology that allows men to declare themselves women and therefore take women's places is by definition not feminist.

Feminism, by definition, excludes males from women's single-sex spaces and roles. (It doesn't necessarily exclude transmen, since they are female. But females are rarely considered by gender ideologists.) Therefore, as it excludes transwomen, feminism has to be what you'd call 'trans exclusionary', otherwise it wouldn't be feminism.

I honestly don't care any more. I don't give a shiny shit about transwomen.

I used to be an ally, as a bisexual woman and member of the LGBT community. But this recent land-grab has ruined it for me. I'm done. And I'm not the only one.

So that's a nice own-goal, Stonewall. Well played.

Stonewall played a blinder in tacking TQ onto the end of LGB. It was done to mislead people into believing trans ideology is just another harmless and justifiable kind of sexual orientation. And it has worked. Gender identity is now accepted, from governments down, as a human rights movement.

In reality, as its actions reveal, it is a facet of the male supremacist 'men's rights' movement. The sheer violence of its abusive rhetoric and its attacks on women's boundaries, safety and livelihoods are proof of that. No wonder most people are afraid to challenge it.

But as long as it is linked with the friendly rainbow flag, those who don't want to join the dots can pretend to believe it is harmless.

trans people don't believe that feminism oppresses them, only a few forms such as trans exclusionary feminism.

They believe that any feminism which rightly doesn't centre trans issues but does correctly centre the rights and needs of women and girls oppresses them.

If it doesn't centre women and girls, it ain't feminism.

@mamamia1234

- trans ideology doesn't promote strict adherence to gender roles.

• trans people don't believe that feminism oppresses them, only a few forms such as trans exclusionary feminism.

• trans people don't believe that sex = gender.

-refer to point 2

—trans ideology enforces adherence to gender stereotypes

—trans ideology overlooks the intersection of women's rights with those claimed for the ideology

—trans ideology depends upon the conflation of sex and gender to support key aspects of it

I should think there are various parlour games that would allow everyone to rewrite these without ever making progress.

The similarities are not so much definitional (though rigid gender norms and roles are central in both) but about likely outcomes if the ideology they refer to came to rule the world.

I think in both the male supremacy case and the trans ideology case the world would be structured as sex-based hierarchies with biological women who have not transitioned as the bottom of the hierarchy.

The case for male supremacy is obvious and of course still practised (Afghanistan).

he case for trans ideology needs a little more thought, but roughly the same outcomes would come about as it replaces biological sex with femininity and masculinity as the determinants of someone's gender class.

Femininity means being submissive, passive, emotional and nurturing, masculinity means being dominant, active, competitive and risk-taking. The latter group would therefore be on top, the former at the bottom of the pyramid. The people in each gender class might not be exactly the same as in the sex-based categorisation, but the matches would be quite good as most people would NOT stop seeing biological women as the feminine class and biological men as the masculine class.

The real difference?

One is very shy about acknowledging that it is entirely and wholly based on sex based thinking. The other isn't.

Both are predicated on the view that a male person's wishes and feelings and choices are intrinsically more important than a female person's access, equality and safety. The double standards of what male people are seen as entitled to and what female people are required to just shut up and suck up (reframe your trauma, unlearn your sexuality, NAMALT, yada yada) is also classic.

See also: Lundy Bancroft. His books are also quite eyeopening when he describes the general identifiable characteristics of toxic and abusive relationships. The double standards of entitlement being one of the hallmarks.

Also interesting to reflect on the actual original meaning of 'oppression' which involved the useful and desired provision of labour to other more powerful groups.

And also the age old linked concept of female biology as being a male owned resource.

Incel writings get quite interesting on this point, and have also a considerable basis in MRA/MS theory.

@mamamia1234

- trans ideology doesn't promote strict adherence to gender roles.

• trans people don't believe that feminism oppresses them, only a few forms such as trans exclusionary feminism.

• trans people don't believe that sex = gender.

-refer to point 2

You seem confused about the meaning of feminism. There is no such thing as "trans exclusionary feminism". Feminism necessarily excludes males though, and some trans people are male.

You also seem confused about trans ideology. It is literally based upon strict adherence to gender roles. To the point where one changes one's body to match the appropriate gender role and if one doesn't adhere to either one is "non binary". Much like any religion, the position of atheist is not even acknowledged!

Gender identity ideology is an insistence on gender roles

Yup. complete with the labels, stereotypes and pronouns. The whole mess we're in is because of ideology enforced by the activists, uncritical academia, male ego's and the well-intentioned authoritarians.

Both are predicated on the view that a male person's wishes and feelings and choices are intrinsically more important than a female person's access, equality and safety. The double standards of what male people are seen as entitled to and what female people are required to just shut up and suck up (reframe your trauma, unlearn your sexuality, NAMALT, yada yada) is also classic.

Exactly this. In both ideologies, male people are the only full human beings, while female people are relegated to the role of service/support humans.

Both profoundly misogynistic. Just one more upfront about it.

Spotted this on Twitter. It seems to suggest the difference is the wearing of wigs to hide their male-pattern baldness.

Like the endless wangling on about allowing special male people to compete in female sports.

Their feelings mustn’t be hurt. They must be validated. They mustn’t be put in the impossible position of having to choose between medical procedures to make them more closely resemble the opposite sex, and their sporting career. They absolutely mustn’t be deprived of something they want.

Women, OTOH, just have to put up with all the negative impacts that arise from allowing males into their sports, because that’s being “kind” and “inclusive”, and they have to darned well be happy about it too.

It’s male supremacism writ large for sure.

If there were no gender roles at all, how would anyone even be able to be trans? What would they be transitioning to or from?

Of course it all depends on rigidly enforced gender roles and stereotypes. You can’t actually change sex, obviously, so there isn’t anything else.

I want to nominate this thread for Classics. Or at least beg MNHQ not to delete it until I've printed it out. These are simple, easy to understand posts that get straight to the heart of the problem.
We need to turn then into memes and stickers.

The difference is that TRAs try to gaslight you into believing its not a male rights movement, its the cuckooing version.

@WhereYouLeftIt

Spotted this on Twitter. It seems to suggest the difference is the wearing of wigs to hide their male-pattern baldness.

That’s brilliant

@Absurdle

Honestly after reading all that I see no difference, am I mad not to see a difference? or are we really in 1984?

There's almost zero difference, but the TRAs have used a cuckoo strategy by colonising the language and infrastructure of feminism and been much more successful that way than the straight up MRAs have.

Notably while TRAs will posture like feminists, as soon as someone brings up the facts of male violence to them, or anything else inconvenient to their narrative, they'll fall straight back on MRA talking points.

I also think they're posturing as feminists less and less frequently compared to a few years ago. They're getting cocky and the mask is slipping.

Very much agree. Male supremacists who have a bit of nous have read the room and understood the zeitgeist and realised that their cuckoo strategy actually has a real chance of success in a mainstream liberal world, compared to the trad MRA movement which has more of a niche market.

But yes. The mask is slipping. I don’t think it’s indefinitely sustainable. The ugly truth is already starting to come out, and the current sporting heroes are doing a great job of shining sunlight on the issue for those who were hitherto unaware.

Best case scenario this ultimately makes a lot more people aware of the extent and reality of misogyny in the western world, not just those other places “over there”, and makes feminism something the majority of women and girls actually want to be a part of. Real feminism, obvs, not the dick pandering kind.

@mamamia1234

- trans ideology doesn't promote strict adherence to gender roles.

• trans people don't believe that feminism oppresses them, only a few forms such as trans exclusionary feminism.

• trans people don't believe that sex = gender.

-refer to point 2

yes they do they define themselves by the gender roles they think most matchest them, and think thats more important then sex.

I also think they're posturing as feminists less and less frequently compared to a few years ago. They're getting cocky and the mask is slipping.

the mask is definitely slipping, they are getting bolder and bolder in the barefaced hate they spit.

@WhereYouLeftIt

Spotted this on Twitter. It seems to suggest the difference is the wearing of wigs to hide their male-pattern baldness.

That is quite wonderful!

@thinkingaboutLangCleg

Stonewall played a blinder in tacking TQ onto the end of LGB. It was done to mislead people into believing trans ideology is just another harmless and justifiable kind of sexual orientation. And it has worked. Gender identity is now accepted, from governments down, as a human rights movement.

In reality, as its actions reveal, it is a facet of the male supremacist 'men's rights' movement. The sheer violence of its abusive rhetoric and its attacks on women's boundaries, safety and livelihoods are proof of that. No wonder most people are afraid to challenge it.

But as long as it is linked with the friendly rainbow flag, those who don't want to join the dots can pretend to believe it is harmless.

yep and I got called turf today for asking someone if they support womens rights.

thats not my spelling mistake, I got called turf.