Glinner Bullseye comment on X

[Thatcatsaflippingnightmare]

Always trying to explain Glinner to DH, today he showed me on X JD Vance defending murder of the woman by ICE. Glinner had replied something like 'bullseye', as in agreement. I tried to comprehend with "satire?" but he said no he's on Liz truss show these days. I said well he's always been about protecting women and children, he's not suddenly supporting femicide, but the post convinced DH otherwise. Any insights? I'm not on social media

I absolutely reserve my right to reject some things that feminists have said and stood for. I think that women tend to get a rough deal in life, partly through biology and partly through what is referred to as "the patriarchy".

Such as? And by putting the patriarchy in quotes do you not believe in patriarchy?

theres no helping people here. i'm not being seen with this crowd of glinner fans. lol.

Did you ever manage to work out why you think women's rights are right wing?

Tbf that was pretty funny

Ironically, the thing that made me understand that trans "women" have no sympathy for or interest in the lives and needs of actual female people -

(other than the expectation that we continue to live "as a woman", without changing our behaviour or protections in any way to recognise the new reality where "women" may have male bodies and male life experiences but pretending that all "women" are still female and that nothing has changed, so we can continue to provide the all important background of their sexist fantasy womanhood)

was Monroe Bergdorf complaining that the women wearing pink pussy hats to protest Trump's pussy comment were excluding trans women by focusing on said "pussy".

No recognition or sympathy that the pussy and the people who have one were the literal target of Trump's offensive comments, no support for the women targeted, just an entitled whinge that they were allowed to mention something that excluded him.

I’m not right wing nor left wing. I just won’t vote for a party that dismisses my legally held rights and gives them away.

Re Glinner. I’ve never seen anything GL has posted on ‘X’ nor really read anything about him.

Re the President of the USA. I don’t know him. Never had an interactions with him.

Re JKR. Never met her nor spoken to her. Never read nor watched Harry Potter novels or movies.

..but I do know that none of the aforementioned people support transgender people usurping the rights of female born people.

Nor do I.

I dont even call myself a feminist, I’m just a woman that is absolutely determined to protect my children from anyone that will do them any harm. That includes the TRA zealots who are unable to accept they’re so wrong.

I’m quite happy for trans people to live their lives as they wish but if they stray into areas they don’t belong in or try to indoctrinate others to accept their beliefs uncritically, they can get stuffed.

No, it's when posters say some variation of "You're GC so you must be right wing, just admit you love Musk, I mean you even use the same 26 letters in your posts that the MAGAs on Twitter use, how more obvious could it be?" that their motives get questioned, because it's such an odious and obvious misrepresentation it's hard to believe they do not know exactly what they are doing when they do it, even before they prove it by doubling down.

That's not the instances I'm talking about. I'm talking about instances of women raising a feminist concern about a harm to women as a cost of right wing policy and putting forth a reasonable opinion that it's possible for policy to for example stop puberty blockers without cutting funding to abortion services and being accused of supporting harming children, simply because they continue to push back on blithe acceptance of some right wingers pushing protections for children but harming women in other ways. And these are posters who have been long time regular GC posters.

ICE is checkmate.

Trump and his puppetmasters want to push people into resisting so they can trigger martial law. Classic coup.

Resist, you lose. Obey, you lose. Checkmate.

So not "anytime" now, just some instances?

Glad we got that cleared up.

Huh? You decided to completely ignore the specific examples I already gave up thread and present a completely different example? Because it is anytime someone brings up a left wing feminist concern in that vein. It's a shame you wanted to engage to completely misrepresent the left wing GC feminist women's experiences but don't have any thoughts on if that means this board veering into a mostly right leaning not feminist centred space if we treat left wing or feminist perspectives in bad faith?

Yes, but sometimes people are talking about political parties/individual politicians. Including parties that aren't left wing at all. But sometimes it's directed at posters or celebrities and sometimes ideas that can range from full blown Marxism to the sort of generic liberal democratic principles that all parties stuck to until recently. It's a nebulous insult which isn't really good because actually, being left wing isn't a smear. It's often also interchangeable with "toxic femininity" IE being too empathetic, weak, naive about the world. Also to be Left is to be out of touch privileged elite who dont understand the common touch.
Renee Good was also clearly a leftist because she objected to ICE and was a lesbian therefore she was a dangerous maniac. People protesting her death are also leftists. And Graham Linehan probably connects them to people on "the left" who harrased him (even though theres a weird cross over between TRAs and Nazis and many self described left wing women supported him). Therefore he is on the Other Side.
Elon Musk gave a speech to this county in which he said "The left is the party of murder and celebrating murder". So presumably it is a political party? Labour? But later he said they are coming for you, violence is coming for you. And I've been called a leftist many times. Am I part of this violent nebulous enemy that people like Elon Musk should be defeated? Unclear.

I AM a left wing gender critical feminist. Read my posting history.

I am what would be called a woke snowflake other than my gender critical - truly gender critical - Feminism. I would like to vote for a left wing party but cannot due to their craven betrayal of women.

But I am also old and have lived through many political moments and left the black and white thinking of my youth behind a long time ago. I see the flaws in both the left and the right.

I think Trump did some good in his initial EOs but am aghast at what has happened since.

I'm not commenting on glinner until I have time to read his tweets in context. I think it will be very sad if the man has fallen down that rabbit hole but I can also see how his kafka-esque experiences with the UK media and police would utterly burn any faith in the established political and cultural order.

But since your posts on this thread have been accusatory and divisive I don't feel any motivation to get into these nuanced discussions with you. You get what you give.

Indeed, and people huff at you just for pointing this out.

I'm not going to state my issues with (some aspects of) feminism here. I really don't think that is generally appropriate on this board. I would have thought that a man not giving everyone the benefit of all of his vast manly wisdom would be a welcome change – in other words, I want to act respectfully and not trample all over FWR in my size 14 (metaphorical) clodhoppers. So I keep some of my views to myself. Though perhaps it's safe to say that in my limited knowledge of feminism, second wave makes more sense to me than third wave.

As for the patriarchy, it's a useful concept and shorthand for a whole lot of behaviour, but I tend to react emotionally against the word in the context of feminism. A man who accepts a good deal of feminist critique can still feel "got at" by feminists, for example when Germaine Greer says “Women have very little idea of how much men hate them.” "The patriarchy" can come across as "everything bad is men's fault", which is not the most comfortable of things to hear for someone who sees more than a grain of truth in feminism.

people who proudly state they're MAGA

Can you explain what this means to you? I want to be sure we are clear on terms here.

And I was responding to the poster who decided to suddenly ignore the discussion that was about former Democrats voters who switched to Trump and start banging on about ‘MAGA’.

We do know he didn't read it properly and google the 19th amendment to find out that it refers to the right of women to vote.

How do we know? It's called common sense.

No man stands up for women's rights against his own best interest for nearly a decade only to pivot to "let's remove the right to vote from women".

If anyone can point me in the direction of any other well-known man who's sacrificed as much as the Glinner to go to bat for women, please let me know who this mystery man is. Graham has more balls on his own than the majority of men combined, most of whom have not just turned a blind eye but stepped out of the way to allow men with a fetish invade women only spaces and sports.

As for having faults - "let he who is without sin cast the first effing stone".

I've no time for pearl clutchers or women who demand perfect heroes while sitting safely and anonymously behind their own keyboard.

You have remembered that some of these voters used to vote Democrat, right?

Constantly accusing people of being racist, ill-educated or brainwashed instead of actually listening to what they are saying is the reason why Trump is President and Labour is in huge trouble.

No. The whole ‘look what you made us do’ defense for voting for Trump and his like is getting a little tired now.

I have to say that if you are standing up for Trump in any way, you really need to own it a little more than that.

Except that’s not quite a true representation is it.

Lumping all republican voters into a homogenous group that PPs then smear as racist, sexist, brainwashed etc is rather different to pointing out the failure of the left to understand why they are currently unelectable.

No one needs to 'own' anything.

You do, however, need to face facts.

The Dems lost hundreds of thousands (millions?) of votes to Trump in 2024. Now why do you think that might be?

The voters had a choice. They chose Trump. That’s how bad the Democrats are which seems to be hard for you to acknowledge.

I don't agree with the idea that all men "hate" women but...
Some of those men who read feminist critique, who really seemed to get it reacted with astonishing vitriol to women who critiqued the idea that TWAW. It wasn't just an inability/unwillingness to understand why women might not want to share a prison cell/changing room with a TW. It was outrage, often accompanied by a "I supported women's rights to abortion/agree that rape is bad so you owe us". Of course some men (including Glinner) got treated terribly as well. But a lot of the generalised backlash was directed against women/Karen's, white feminism etc.

Then you got someone like Glinner who WAS GC. He initially got involved because of concerns about trans children but he was welcomed into GC feminist groups and seemed on the whole to agree that women were people. Until someone on his "team" killed a woman on the opposite "team." Then you get shit like this tweet. Not JUST defence of the man which I could sort of understand. But casual cruelty towards a woman who had done nothing to him. He just saw her as being vaguely part of a group he was opposed to by virtue of having been killed by a man he sympathised with.

So I don't think that all men hate women. But I do think many struggle to see women as fully human and the ones that do can only do so when they belong to their in group. I think Germaine Greer's quote is a really simplified clickbaity soundbite. But I do think that its true that most women dont understand how much their humanity is conditional to many men. I fully accept I might just be having a bad day though.

Trump won the election by focusing on what most impacted working-class Americans (i.e the rising cost of living) while the Democrats focused on the luxury beliefs of men with a fetish - it was a no-brainer.