WTF is the 'female patriarchy'?

[ArabellaScott]

twitter.com/wornoutmumhack/status/1597625219081871360?cxt=HHwWgICluYLr86ssAAAA

'Rachel Adamson of zero tolerance says their new report discusses the “female patriarchy” - that voices not heard before need to be promoted.'

Is this an actual attempt to kill off women's rights entirely?

The female patriarchy?

Nicola Sturgeon was 100% right to say no whataboutery on the TW issue in a meeting specifically for a VAWGs.

Nicola Sturgeon should accept that, as first minister of Scotland, she is personally responsible for any violence women in Scottish prisons experience as a direct result of her policies to allow biological males in women’s prisons.

That is not whataboutery. It’s asking her to take responsibility for the safety of women and girls in the care of the state.

It’s probably the only aspect of male violence against women and girls over which the state has absolute control. And her policies choose to make them vulnerable rather than safeguarding them.

This matters a great deal. Because, if we cannot trust the state to look after women
in prisons and protect them from
male sexual violence, we cannot trust the state to protect ANY woman or girl from male violence.

Is not a minor, insignificant distraction from the real issues. How women are treated when the state is in control of their entire life is fundamental to how women are treated when the state has less influence or control.

Well said Rocksludge!!

I see it as a form of DARVO.

I see. Is this your response to Reem Alsalem, too? Is she 'derailing' the important work of Mridhul Wadhwa in helping bigoted rape victims reframe their trauma?

I’m asking you to not derail the work of other feminists by riding in on a high horse and going “what about TW?” every fucking chance you get. Its hindering, not helping.

It's interesting, Onnabugeisha.

My initial post was about the 'female patriarchy', and that's what posters were discussing, until you came in to criticise us for feministing wrongly. Have you any comment on the initial post, on the 'female patriarchy', or do you just want to keep talking about transwomen?

So now we have a hierarchy of women who deserve to be protected from male violence do we?
Smacks of victim blaming and othering to me.
Bit like how a white Mc mother being raped or murdered would provoke more outrage and probably a more determined Police response than a black prostitute.
ALL women deserve to be safe, wherever they are and whoever they are

Any woman who supports the placing of violent male sex offenders into female prisons is supporting the patriarchy. Do you think that's what

....Rachel Adamson was going to discuss?

Sorry posted too soon.

Ah, that would actually make the most sense out of the phrase, 334bu.

Interesting. Glasgow womens aid
archive.ph/2022.11.29-233715/www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3f7ea796-7004-11ed-8a5b-f385de7508fe?shareToken=f4ee833af1df85b5e2462ddc32bb4644

@Onnabugeisha

Your argument makes no sense even if I give you the benefit of the doubt in your motivations, and assume you are not simply trying to distract us from focusing on this issue of single sex spaces for women.

Protecting vulnerable women in prison from being raped by convicted sex offenders would be an easy thing to do. Just stop putting them in women’s jails. So your argument about how we can’t possibly focus on that so called ‘small thing’ because of all the other bigger problems is a nonsense. The government could stop it happening today if it wanted. And then we would have plenty of time for the other things that you are so concerned we address.

Why do you not see this as the obvious solution?

And what is this group ZT actually doing.

police Scotland have recorded increase in domestic violence for past 5 years

www.gov.scot/publications/domestic-abuse-recorded-police-scotland-2020-21/pages/2/

Yep. Don’t put men in there.

GWA are a great organisation. I really feel for them trying to navigate this.

'Angela Devine, chief executive of Glasgow Women’s Aid, criticised the decision by Zero Tolerance to make “the definition of a woman” a taboo subject prior to its 30-year anniversary celebration where Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister, provided the keynote address today.'
...
'“Completely and utterly let down! How can I preserve single sex safe spaces in this climate, with this utter disregard for all the amazing women in Scotland all the fabulous women we support, all the experiences that go with it. We are being silenced and silently sidelined.”'

glasgowwomensaid.org.uk/

Several ways to support/donate on that website.

They are not being out at the front of the queue though. As their basic rights have been removed. The basic right to a male free environment when they are vulnerable. The right all of us should have.
Feminism is for all women.

Zero Tolerance. I went to a training event of their’s once. Poor quality, trainer out of her depth. Yes, confused language and incoherence.
And utterly captured.

That's a shame to hear, foggydaysun. Just having a look at them, now.

Our core priorities continued to be to:
• raise public awareness of violence against women and girls , particularly lesser-known forms of violence and under-represented groups of women subject to it
• improve media reporting of violence against women and girls . Too often our media presents this violence as surprising and unusual, rather than the direct consequence of a society that perpetuates harmful attitudes to VAWG
• support early years care and education providers to challenge gender inequality and end violence against women and girls by providing clear guidance, training and advice for frontline practitioners
• advance the education and support young people receive around gender inequality and the prevention of violence against women and girls, helping them to challenge and change the attitudes around them in their lives
• support decision-makers and influencers to better understand what they can do to help end violence against women and girls by making our society more equal

...the Scottish Government commissioned us to develop a framework for an organisation to change public attitudes towards the equality and rights of women and girls. We worked with researchers from t The Collective to produce the ‘ We need this to do things differently ’ report, which provides ground-breaking insight into what is most needed to tackle harmful social, cultural and gendered norms that fuel the root cause of violence against women - gender
inequality.'

So their whole raison d'etre seems to be influencing public discourse, is that correct?

-I meant to give the reference, that's from their last accounts Trustee's report.

www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=SC023484#notes

raise public awareness of violence against women and girls , particularly lesser-known forms of violence and under-represented groups of women subject to it

This aim is really odd. ‘under-represented groups of women subject to it’ would seem to suggest their focus is on groups who are subject to less violence.

support early years care and education providers to challenge gender inequality and end violence against women and girls by providing clear guidance, training and advice for frontline practitioners

how they’re going to challenge gender inequality while forbidding discussion of gender and gender ideology is beyond me.

what clear guidance are they going to give when they aren’t willing to even clearly discuss what gender is or it’s harmful effects in society?

Just rhetoric. Poorly thought through but righteous sounding rhetoric.

Yes. I hadn't much awareness of them before - vaguely presumed they ran shelters or something.

But they're apparently in the business of winning hearts and minds, of informing and shaping public discourse. This is their remit - engaging with people to try and educate, inform, and influence.

And they've decided women just shouldn't mention this issue at all.

Given that their aims are to inform and educate and shape debate and opinion, I am even less understanding of wtf the 'female patriarchy' is and how discussing it is going to lessen VAWG.

Zero Tolerance have a position statement on "Inclusion and respect of trans women"

It is our position that trans and non-binary rights are integral to, and contribute to, feminism. Scotland’s violence against women services provide trans inclusive services and trans inclusion plans have been in place since 2012.

This inclusive approach has not given rise to any concern or challenges. Rather, trans women have added to our movements through their support, voluntary work and as staff members. You can find out more about our stance on our blog.

Violence against women, homophobia and transphobia are all rooted in misogyny. We are committed to working with partner LGBTQI+ organisations to end this inequality, discrimination and violence.

No surprise that they support including transwomen in women's spaces, but I was amazed by this sentence:

This inclusive approach has not given rise to any concern or challenges.

Gender ideologues usually try to minimise and deflect such concerns and challenges by claiming they are not evidence based or describing them as "dog whistles", "transphobia" or "moral panic". Saying that concerns about and challenges to their inclusive approach simply haven't arisen is a really bold claim.

Zero tolerance isn't zero tolerance anymore.
They have learnt tolerance and accept female prisoners , for example, as acceptable collateral damage.

Tolerance and inclusion - who knew they could have such negative connotations.

This inclusive approach has not given rise to any concern or challenges

Wow. I mean, it clearly has. They're just lying.