Just despair - HOW do some women just not get it!

[Mynewchairhasarmrests]

Just finished a brilliant novel written by a female author about friendships, girlhoo, womanhood, and growing up as a girl. She was so absolutely on the money about what it’s like to be a young woman and the pressures of looking and acting a certain way, the awful way women are so often treated by men, the way women are portrayed in the media, how we are programmed not to recognise sexual assault and told its just boys having fun, and how we aren’t believed even if we do report it. Her anger and passion really came through and it was good, though depressing, to read someone telling it exactly like it is.

You know what’s coming. I then look on her social media. She’s a TRA. Signed a letter condemning JKR for being ‘anti trans’. Condemns Germaine Greer for being so wrong on trans issues.

I just don’t understand how these women can see the misogyny everywhere they look BUT the place where it’s in its worst, purest form - gender ideology.

Its like a glitch in the coding somewhere. Why can’t they see it? I have another friend who is on the board of a rape charity. We had long conversations about how shit it can be to be a woman. The misogyny everywhere. I was sure she must be GC. But no. A TRA. Doesn’t speak to me now she knows I’m a TERF.

I just don’t get it. Is it fear of societal disapproval? A reluctance to admit the liberal progressive cause they publicly embraced is anything but and that they’ve been had?

I meant how does she know Amber Heard is a woman?

Sorry OP got distracted by the Andy NGO. Yes, I just cannot fathom it. It makes me feel ill because you can't counter it because it defies all logic or sense of what's good and just. I really, really can't comprehend it. It's like an automatic switch flicks off in their brain that just does not allow them to join the final dot. They have to do that themselves.

I can't believe you would chant the mantra just to avoid losing sales. I wouldn't blame them for not saying anything about it but I guess sometimes they're not given that option. Guilty by ommission of the mantra.

Fucking intolerable situation. I hope we come out the other side soon. I can't countenance much more of this shit.

I think it's a combination of being deeply invested in championing the underdog, and guilt stricken over their own (often considerable) privilege. Add a dash of female socialisation (don't be a mean girl!!) and they just fall headfirst into cheerleading for people who they deep down regard as men in need a charitable dose of love from especially superior women.

I think it's to do with the human impulse to align yourself with whoever you perceive to be the most powerful in society, I think that's one of the driving forces that leads women to unthinkingly defer to men.
Also an unwillingness or inability to reflect on your own views etc

I knew it was this book before you said the author's name, OP. I really enjoyed it too, but I did clock the bit at the end where the one woman is saying well these days it's all different, you don't even have to be a girl if you don't want to be, and we're so old it's hard for us to even get our heads around that...

Shona Robison:

“there is no evidence that predatory men have ever had to pretend to be anything else to carry out predatory behaviour"

Is Shona unaware that predatory men have often pretended to be doctors, teachers, priests, policemen, precisely to access victims?

Or is she aware, and lying?

Is she unaware of Karen White, who sexually assaulted women in prison? Or Kate Dolatowski? Or is she lying?

twitter.com/andrewdoyle_com/status/1500594329139748865?lang=en

There's a huge amount of pressure on women writers to be 'inclusive'. Holly Bourne would fear losing her career if she questioned twaw. So either she doesn't question it, or she does but she's not going to admit it publically.

I think writers are quite vulnerable to this ideology because they are good with language, believe that language has power, live quite abstracted lives, often in academia or adjacent, often very well off (because it's hard to do well in writing if you have to hold down a full time job at tescos) and also they are all on twitter all day long.

Many people know trans people and know they are not predatory.

Nicola Sturgeon:

'‘abusive men are the risk to women, not trans women’'

Explicitly denies that Karen White or Katie Dolatowski present a risk to women.

Is she unaware, or lying?

Also Sturgeon:

'I've spent my entire life campaigning for women's rights, and I'm a passionate feminist with lots of evidence behind that'.

Be good to see this evidence.

Is Katie Dolatowski a transwoman?

Many people know men who are not predatory too. Totally irrelevant regarding the few who are. As with trans people.

No one is saying that trans people are predatory. They're saying that self-ID means predatory males can override what should be safeguards by saying they're trans.

Holly, until recently, wrote young adult romance (with a mental health leaning) books for Usborne, a children's book publisher who is fully and painfully woke.

My money goes on her actually believing twaw though as given the subject matter of her books she lives in a middle class lefty woke bubble.

(Speaking as someone who was in one of them until quite recently, somehow turning 38 and having a child opened my eyes to the nonsense of blindly following a political stance without applying critical thinking)

And also the same percentage of TW are as predatory as the general male population.

I don’t get it either. I have so many female acquaintances who have the cheek to call themselves “feminists” happily throwing women under the bus to appease men, including lesbians which I find particularly baffling. In the circle I’m talking about, I think a lot have been bullied by people with “trans kids” who basically weaponise their kids to bully and guilt trip people into agreeing with them.

If you’re looking to get a novel published, or keep the deal you already have, it’s best not to be openly GC. Especially if you’re writing in the teen/YA market, it would be career suicide! You either keep your mouth shut or pay lip-service to the Gender Gods.

This lacks any nuance at all.

Such a blanket statement is either attempting absolutism or it is avoiding mention of the small subset that is just as predatory as the subset of males as a whole who are predatory, so it could be said to be false.

Or antelope are you making a bold claim that all the transitioned males you know are not abusive because you know every single thing about them?

From personal experience, predatory/abusive males are often the ones who people who socially know them as being 'non-predatory or non-abusive'.

So, excuse me if I don't believe such blanket statements.

‘Most violence against women is conducted by heterosexual Cis men….’

well, of course it is. Because there are many, many more heterosexual cis men than TW or even gay men, so if you are counting heads, you are going to end up with a big majority.

What would be more interesting is what in market research used to be called rather appositely ‘penetration’, that is, what is the percentage of a particular group who have a particular characteristic or activity. If you include psychological abuse of the sort experienced by women in some of these sorts of relationship, as well as the straightforward wanking, exhibitionism, threatened physical and sexual assault and actual assault, I think you you might end up with a different result.

I’m not brave enough to speak up in my work place. I guess the same applies to authors 😢.

You've had a number of posters defending the GC position against his argument. Your argument is a trap intended to consume other people's energy defending themselves against irrelevant bollocks.

Either anyone can self ID or there needs to be safeguards (disingenuously called gatekeeping by TRA's FFS) to prevent predators from exploiting loopholes in the law. If you agree with self ID then you have to accept some predators will claim to be trans and you can't disavow them because they make the community look bad.

Approximately 15 - 20% of the male prison population have been convicted of sex offences, 60% of trans prisoners have been convicted of sex offences; either self ID encourages sexual predators to claim a trans identity for nefarious reasons, in which case self ID is a very bad idea or trans people are much more likely to be sexual predators. Which is it? You can't demand self ID and then claim any trans person who commits sexual offences isn't really trans.

It's social death for some young people to not conform to trans ideology. I got a lecture from my DS telling me he's embarrassed for me. So there's the problem, he would be the embarrassing one. I said in response that he's supporting male rapists being placed in women's prisons and he told me not to be so ridiculous, that would never be allowed to happen.

I've come to the conclusion that they need an outlet for anger and hate and it's socially acceptable to hate people that don't believe the madness, so they can enjoy being nasty with no consequences and group approval.

Absolutely agree Helleofabore and this is exactly the sort of thinking that gave us such scandals as Savile, child abuse among priests and in children's homes.

'This category of people aren't abusive'.

The whole point of safeguarding is that it applies equally to everyone and everyone has to be under scrutiny. No, it's not fun for anyone, but we've seen the consequences of the children harmed too many times to be in any doubt about where the 'these people aren't a risk' line of thinking ends up.

Anyone who objects to normal safeguarding applying to them or to any group of people or individual is demonstrating a very serious red flag.

However, let's put statements like: Many people know trans people and know they are not predatory into context.

This is actually a good example of the blind spots that people have.

Let's extrapolate it to other subsets of males.

Many people know male scout leaders and know they are not predatory.
Many people know priests and know they are not predatory.
Many people know male teachers and know they are not predatory.
Many people know fathers and know they are not predatory.

Shall I go on....

Maybe I was just unlucky to actually have female children in my family raped by male family members to know that statements like 'Many people know trans people and know they are not predatory' are not to be trusted.

I don't believe that many people actually know enough about people in their lives to know the truth if the victims keep quiet.

And if the victims keep quiet, does that mean that those males are not predatory?

Maybe I have just been overexposed to the prevalence of this to ever take statements like that at face value.

I don't understand what is confusing. She sees misogyny because she is a woman who has grown up a woman. She doesn't think that trans folk pose a danger to women because... they don't, really? Whether or not they ARE women is a totally different question to whether they are dangerous and to whether they are particualrly misogynistic when compared to the rest of the popualtion. Some of the extreme activist stuff, sure - but to think that accepting trans folk is inherently misogynistic is out there in my opinion.

Also this: Fuck off and take the word feminism out if your mouths, all of you. Right, because there have never been factions in feminism and you don't get to care about women's rights unless you have the exact same definition of 'woman' as the OP?

Fucking intolerable situation. I hope we come out the other side soon. I can't countenance much more of this shit.

You know this will never end right?, the tide will go in and out slightly but there is no 'coming out the other side'.