I think for me the issue is that I don’t see these men conceding anything - it’s not like they enter into dialogue with women or feminists and then say, “since I’ve talked to women about biology mattering I’ve come to see that my opposition to universal health care harms mothers and pregnant women so I’m reconsidering that” or “I see now that private immigration prisons that sterilize women and separate families are bad public policy” or whatever. They’re happy to use what is a woman for social outrage but it doesnt follow that therefore mothers need health care and the ability to feed their children and safe schools and universal affordable daycare…I think Trans extremism threatens safety for women but so does eroding social assistance and public services.
It’s the left wing that is supposed to give up “woke” positions in the name of agreeing on one point, but all that seems to happen is our positions get eroded and theirs never change. Matt Walsh or whoever is not budging on abortion, on adequate funding of public schools and free lunch programs, on migrant children dying due to harsh border policies, on black people being criminalized and over-incarcerated, on arming police, on gun control, on unions and workers rights and mat leave, on the importance of a social safety net and affordable housing, on taxation of corporations, on safe supply and decriminalizing drugs, or on whatever position is part of the endless culture war and outrage machine today.
So what do I, as a black woman, materially get just because I also think Dylan Mulvaney is ridiculous and harmful or that men don’t get periods. Like, I agree men shouldn’t play sports against women, but without skipping a beat the same outlets/people who said they were defending womens sports against Lia Thomas have been screaming because ESPN covered women’s NCAA basketball and complaining about “woke coverage.” And being racist to the team of black women who won. So what are they actually protecting? There’s a difference between womens’ principled protection of single sex spaces and people who just think Trans is gross or who want traditional gender roles. I think it’s reasonable to critique that and think about where their ally ship takes us and what the long term consequences are…and it’s not that you can say “we agree on one issue and that’s enough,” because for example the whole idea of “wokeness” is also an attack on black people and a backlash to the gains black people are making (like the Stop Woke act in Florida pulling books about black history from libraries) so can you separate out the part you agree with when it comes wrapped in everything else?
In order to be productively allied with those who disagree with us there still has to be some possibility of moving together or compromise in my view. I’m not saying that has to be everyone’s view, but it is mine. I don’t have a problem with dialogue with those who disagree but dialogue has to take us somewhere imo.
And I think the same about people on “the left” who also feel they have to support harmful and stupid positions because it’s “our team” - why can’t we all just admit men shouldn’t play sports against women, for example. It’s also frustrating and pointless to go round with people who pretend to or actually genuinely believe in the female penis or that men magically become women or that lesbians like dick too or that evidence based medicine is an attack on trans kids. I’m not supporting nonsense because it’s “team left” either. If everything is transphobic then nothing is. I think we all have to be willing to critique “our side” but I don’t see that happening on the committed right either, no matter what cruelty or violence occurs…