Struggling with the misogyny of female TRAs

[TheirEminence]

There is something I don’t understand and I hope MN can help. What is the general psychological profile of female people (trans-masculine, non-binary, women identify as ‘cis’) who are rabid TRAs? Not just going along with things ‘to be kind’ but the true believers with total ideological commitment?

I know we discuss TW a lot on this forum and what we perceive as their male entitlement and often complete lack of understanding for the female condition but what drives female TRAs? There is a strong desire to punish, and a taste for persecution and hunting for apostates, sometimes fairly obvious self-promotion. Sometimes it seems to be strong investment in one’s own or a close relative’s transition.

What is the psychology of this, is it specific to female people - or is this a daft question?

I can't get beyond time to catch up with reality

From someone who would have us believe that a person with a penis can be a woman.

Yes, this is also my conclusion.

I think usersomerandomnumbers bobbing up advising boring, old, white radfems to catch up n get with the programme beautifully illustrates the "I'm not a Karen" point @WinterTrees made

Sigh! There's no arguing/ acknowledging specific points/ positions/ experiences is there? Just attacks. Classic DARVO.

Lol.

There's so many great responses on this thread! From my own experiences I think it's an interconnected mix of:

Political tribalism and needing to show you identify on the 'progressive' side of the American culture wars (if you're not TWAW then you're a right wing, evangelist, Trump-loving Nazi).

The impact of Twitter on creating the above.

Getting older and feeling the need to show off your I'm still a cool girl/not-a-Karen/pick me credentials.

Thinking feminism IS corporate and individualist third wave feminism - girl power/sex work is work/nudity is empowering etc etc, and not knowing the first thing about second wave, collectivist feminism and power structures. So there's just no framework for understanding the demands that our feminism be 'intersectional' of trans women is just another exercise in male power.

Generational - really relate to @Girlsontour comments about Gen X v Millennials and Gen Z and differing attitudes to gender non-conformity, especially how the 'what would you even know mum?' attitude (which we all had at 15 too!) is now made a million times worse by social media.

Hipster cultural elitism - my term for it anyway! Similar to @JustStopOilyPoshKids if you have any connection to arts and media or move in those circles, unquestioning, uncritical acceptance of all aspects of queer ideology is part of the tribal uniform.

I wasn't sure if @user1471465329 was attempting some form of humour with that post...

Dare I point out that 86% of the British population is white.. and 69% is middle class (based on the jobs they do) though 49% identify as working class but many of those who identify as working class hold 'conservative' values ... so the idea of the working class, left leaning, non white feminist is not representative of the majorty of feminists.. we are much more likely to be white, middle class and not all that radical either... but still hold the position that biologically, we cannot change sex and that we should retain women's spaces and the ability to be counted together with others of our sex class but not discriminated against on that basis.

I am trying to watch that Jordan Peterson and Helen Joyce youtube clip. It's interesting, but it's long. I am not sure if this belongs here, as it's a slightly separate point, but this is making me so angry (Peterson):

“It's complicated but you know, younger women are told in no uncertain terms that the only important thing for them - and what will be vital to their identity and what should be vital to their identity if they're decent and honourable and ambitious young women - is their career; and that's simply not true for most women, and it's also not true for most men by the way. It's definitely true for a subset of men, but for most women the optimal life - and I think most women discover this in their 30s - is well-balanced aggregation of family, marriage and career.
And I'll tell you every time I've made that comment people have clipped out say three minutes of me talking about that idea - um - I get the most vitriol comments that I've ever got when I've ever discussed anything and all of them come from young women, and they're so vicious that it’s beyond - it's actually beyond belief”

I'm so furious with this. I am not a young woman but when I was, it was very clear to me that work was rather a racket and my emotional life was just as, or more, important (and I believe that this is the case for lots of men too). I am now 51 and I work really really fucking hard because I have two children and no one supports us. But it has never, ever been the case that I have believed that work was the source of my personal meaning or identity, neither have I represented it as as such.

I think that women in general are the voices of reason that are attempting to position work as only part of a life that is healthy and happy and makes sense to us and those we love; and I'm furious that Peterson is positioning women, particularly deluded young women, at the centre of some mad mission to make it more than that. Oh yes - the mission exists - but it's a racket and it's not women's mission.

I feel so funny about Peterson. In my opinion he is violently wrong about so much. But the clarity and confidence with which he speaks makes me feel sort of calm and positive. It makes me want to do my exercises and floss my teeth properly and do a good job - and makes me feel I can. I feel as if I have spent my whole life trying to be good and flunking out, trying to be good and flunking out, and Peterson gives me the lovely feelings of being back in the game and having another shot, believing I can be good this time. Despite me having no desire to be good in any of the literal ways that he represents.

I know, I had the same reaction. I hated him to start with. Then I realised he's coming from an academic position where he's aware that women's psychology has been developed over thousands of years around the process of bearing and raising children and doing what it takes to get those children to maturity. I'm not much of an academic myself, but I think what he's saying is that the modern requirement of women to work causes strain and psychological discomfort in many women. Not me, who has never wanted children, but I can see that I'am not typical in this.

Try and stick with it till you get to the point where he cries when talking about the unbearable pressures young women are under and he and Helen Joyce talk about the psychic response to transgender issues. I think he's the father of girls and I think he does understand the issues deeply, even if his natural entitlement and egoism don't always make it seem that way. I felt (and I wasn't the only one on the original thread who to feel so) that it took the 'why are some women oblivious to the damage gender ideology does?' question into new territory.

I did watch the whole thing. I agree, it really does help with that question. he is such a funny person / thinker though, every now and then he uses a word in a certain way that exposes a deep divergence with me, in certain aspects of how he sorts values - the way he casually talks of conservative values as conscientious and self-critical as if we all accept that this is what conservatism is - when I think many people of conservative (yes, small c) values are using established rigidity to avoid self criticism and lead to complacency and therefore cruelty.
I think his, and Joyce's, chat around the 2-year-olds reflexism and narcissism was interesting.
I always appreciate it when thinkers promote values that transcend neo liberal capitalism. I am used to that resistance coming from the left but I sent my children to a faith primary school because I wanted them to be in an environment, when very young, that has the sacredness of the person at its heart rather than targets defined in money. And that calming, positive "you do matter, sit up straight and put your best foot forward" vibe that I get from Peterson comes from that, in the face of my extreme ideological difficulty with much of what he says

I don't quite see where you are disagreeing with him here. He is saying young women are sold an idea by our culture that their professional life is the most important thing for their happiness/value - that is likely to prove to be inadequate and won't make most happy. But when young, many believe it, and this is one thing that drives their conflict with older women, who have in many cases come to understand this.

I'm glad you got there in the end, trytopullyoursocksup. Here's the link to the original discussion about the JP/HJ discussion. As you will see, I was initially less than impressed!

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4632899-helen-joyce-on-jordan-petersons-podcast

I've asked the question in the OP myself a thousand times and come up with all the usual answers in the responses above, and it seemed to me that this was breaking new ground — and made me think harder about the effect that women' reproductive role has on the psyche.

I’ve yet to finish watching the Joyce/Peterson conversation (have similar feelings about Peterson as many posters here - but will watch!) but just wanted to agree with this:

Getting older and feeling the need to show off your I'm still a cool girl/not-a-Karen/pick me credentials.

I know quite a few female TRA allies who are pushing 40, and they do seem a bit desperate.

On a different note: political lesbianism? Really? That was a hoary old chestnut when I was young which is some time ago. And if ‘most women support their trans sisters’, then isn’t that just the conventional, lemming-like, uncool thing to do?

It's odd, particularly when they claim to be feminists.

One of the school mums seems very contradictory in her thinking. Has DDs and is very much supposedly against gender stereotypes, hates gendered toys, buys them 'strong women' type books they're in cubs, rather than brownies etc etc. Yet is a very vocal self-proclaimed TWAW ally...

I think part of it is very much virtue signalling, she is also a staunch advocate for refugees' rights yet was very much opposed to house-building in our village. Partly I think rebelling against her middle-class, private school educated upbringing which she still benefits from by way of financial help for house buying

Also she seems to have a weird almost a kink obsession with drag queens in the way that some straight women in their 30s seem to have.

Tbh I think she's just a stereotypical champagne socialist...

I think it's because on first glance acceptance of trans identities seems to flow naturally from rejecting gender stereotypes.

Why shouldn't a male person wear dresses? Why shouldn't a male person be soft and nurturing? Why shouldn't a male person be a simmering sexpot? Why shouldn't a male person occupy the social constructions we've historically reserved for women? Why shouldn't a male person who occupies the social constructions of a woman also occupy the physical spaces we've historically reserved for women? Why shouldn't a male person meeting society's social constructions of womanhood actually be a woman if that's who they feel they are?

The step between 4 and 5, and 4 and 6, is totally different to steps 1 to 4 in that it moves from accepting gender non-conformity and challenging gender norms for men into defining gender non-conforming men as not men at all but actually women, which is in fact the exact opposite to steps 1 to 4. But unless you think about it properly, and think not just in terms of abstract equality but also the concrete cumulative impact of patriarchy on our own minds, it could easily just all feel like the same thing.

@MangyInseam - "I don't quite see where you are disagreeing with him here. He is saying young women are sold an idea by our culture that their professional life is the most important thing for their happiness/value - that is likely to prove to be inadequate and won't make most happy. But when young, many believe it, and this is one thing that drives their conflict with older women, who have in many cases come to understand this."

I see what you mean but I think my issue is that he locates the problem with women. He seems to be framing this in a certain way as if women are silly wilful creatures who are grabbing hold of ideas they don't understand, and getting greedily involved with structures that will hurt them. Actually women are rational people forced to make their way in a patriarchal materialistic culture, who will be ridden roughshod over unless they can assert their value in the terms insisted upon by patriarchy and neo liberal capitalism.

Also - the part in the video where Peterson cries is because he says the girls who look at instagram and are influenced to do things perhaps bad for them "do not have anyone who loves them enough" to stop them. This is upsetting, I see why he struggles emotionally because it is a very upsetting thought - but it isn't quite true. Perhaps more upsetting is that the parents, the authority figures as I am sure he would approvingly see them, do not know how to love protectively, in some cases. they do not have the confidence to say no, or are not empowered to by the culture we are in.
Sometimes though, perhaps it is wrong to say no? Authority is not always right.
I think about this a lot, with my own kids (11 and 13). Often, even about really trivial things, my attempts at gentle consensus backfire - because the lack of boundaries allow the situation to devolve into a power struggle between the two of them, or for some other reason. Or because what they need and will enjoy involves getting over some initial barrier of effort. So when I say "shall we go for a walk? where shall we go?" it's a disaster. But when I say in advance, as if they have no choice, "tomorrow we're going for a walk at x" they do it. They might complain in the moment, because inertia, but we all go and and they get a lot out of it and really enjoy it. I am not sure I am always right about when to give them choices and when not but it is also true that constantly denying your children choice is oppressive. It's tricky.
I think Peterson puts his finger on something important when he says that kids need boundaries; and that people in general need to have a measure of discipline, and self discipline, to be happy and fulfilled. But boundaries and discipline are not the only important things. At their best they create conditions within which fulfillment can grow (from love, from success, from achievement, from successful relationships) but they are not in themselves fulfilling.

The most aggressive one I know is open about having massive issues with her mother. (Probably would benefit from some of the MN threads about growing up with narcissists but she wouldn't be caught dead on MN!).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_narcissism

That's a really good point and it comes back to a lack of critical thinking. I can't believe that the school mum is thinking any further than the surface level of it. I think she'd actually be speechless if I asked her how she can believe in gender ideology when it perpetrates the stereotypes she is apparently so opposed to. though only for a second as she is a huge know it all and would likely spout some bullshit

I'm fascinated by the psychology of doubling down in the face of evidence. How do they process the likes of Keira Bell?

-was never "true trans" in the first place
-is "true trans" but has been cruelly duped by a GC conspiracy
-pretend I can't see her and hope she would just STFU and go away

I know lie detectors as seen on trashy US crime dramas are quite woolly scientifically, but would an ardent TRA give the "correct" reading when asked if the likes of Eddie Izzard/Alex Drummond/Canadian piss-taking teacher were women?

If Donald Trump had a sense of humour he could have so much fun by claiming he now identifies as a woman. Imagine Owen Jones having to defend him as being an oppressed minority.

The whole culture around GI deflects critical thinking. No debate. Just parrot a mantra.

I found the Jason Isaacs twitter thing today re Jordan Gray quite telling. You can see there's a pattern of empathy. In his case he reflects on his dislike of being called 'a jew' rather than Jewish and relates that back to respecting someone different (to you) deciding how they wished to be referred to. So that's all that pronouns are. Respect, courtesy and compassion.

Its all reductive in a v emotive way. Easy to see how people can bat away the leaps between steps@FlirtsWithRhinos succinctly outlines. Kindness trumps everything.

@Beowulfa "If Donald Trump had a sense of humour he could have so much fun by claiming he now identifies as a woman. Imagine Owen Jones having to defend him as being an oppressed minority" Lol! Trump would have to be in the out group. With Caitlyn Jenner. But then someone in the 'community' would bob up to defend them cos idealogy dictates self id/ all identities are valid. We've had a little insight into that kind of mental gymnastics when the MP Jamie Wallis 'came out'.

Anti-trans feminists have been accusing other women of misogyny for supporting their trans sisters since forever. Either that or saying "you must really be a man to support trans women."

If you say so, but most people here are definitely not "anti-trans". Your average gender critical feminist thinks feminism relates to all female people, regardless of whether they are trans or not. So what another group of people who believe different things from me say about other women isn't really relevant.

You seem fairly muddled about what gender-critical feminists actually believe. Particularly if you think GC people tell women they're the opposite sex because of what they believe - you've got it quite backwards!

I know someone who transed their young child. In this case there seemed to be a strong element of self-perception and wanting to be seen as a "good mother" although it was clear she had some doubts. But she was following the advice available online and from cheerleaders telling her this was the right thing to do. There were other circumstances that had clearly challenged her self-perception as a good mother (she had previously presented herself as a sort of attuned earth mother type so this perception was obviously important to her).
This person also has a lack of considering long term implications in things, across the board.

What I find more astounding is the women who work in areas like women's refuges, counselling services, etc. who believe TWAW. I know of at least three within my acquaintance. It's terrifying that they can't actually see what is in front of them - how do they help these women of they can't understand dynamics at play between males and females? How would they react to a "trans widow" escaping harassment or a survivor of rape by a transwoman? (Or abusive man posing as transwoman).

Well, no, not all women react as you say.

It's not at all uncommon for younger people, up into their 20s or even 30s, to accept these kinds of cultural messages, and find it confusing and distressing when things don't work out. It's very very common.

That's just human, it's not about saying women are particularly silly

I think that there is something that happens when this total openness to any gender expression runs up against reality.

It's actually IMO where GC views go a little wrong, the idea that we could get rid of all stereotyped cultural expressions of sex. The fact is that there are males and females, that is very important to most people and also affect the shape of our lives. We are cultural animals, and so our experiences as human beings are transferred into cultural expression and structures.

SO long as people remain interested in sex, and continue to have lives that are in some ways different due to sex, there will be patterns of behaviour and cultural expressions.

What happens when that reality runs up against this idea that gender expression as dictated by cultural expectations is not real, not something attached to sex? It locates the patterns associated with the sexes in something other than the body.