Why do some feminists oppose misogyny but support gender ideology?

[Doodwhatareyou]

I recently ended up in the man hating side of tiktok, which is a place I tend to be in agreement with. I’ve seen several women bravely battle stupid men in the comments who manage to reinforce everything being said.

I’ve seen a pattern though that these women, who seem to be very up on rules of misogyny, and aware of how problematic too many men are, usually have pronouns in their bio, and occasionally will complain about being bullied by terfs.

I’m baffled.

How can they be so up on patriarchal nonsense yet miss the fundamental misogyny in gender ideology. How can they deny the evidence that trans identified men are just as much of a problem for women if not more as they want women’s rights and spaces.

They can make endless videos about how hateful men are because of the way women are treated, and how women have to budge up and make room, yet trans identified men are women, and anyone who says otherwise is a massive bigot. I don’t understand.

That is literally just your opinion. Other opinions and definitions of feminism are available.

Are we being censured again for discussing the topic that we were foisted on because some people didn’t think that the topic belonged in Feminism and campaigned to have this board established?

Plus ca change.

I usually see it as an attempt to regain a modicum of control in a situation that completely escapes you.

Can't argue what people are discussing? => Argue how they are discussing it instead.

Can't stop being abused by a group stronger than you? => Abuse individuals who are weaker than you.

That way, you end controlling some aspect of the situation, and thus not feeling completely powerless.

Women who centre men in their feminism might call themselves feminists but they’d be wrong.

The clue is in the name.

Like the men that call themselves women - it doesn’t make it correct. Or would you want us to abandon fixed meanings of words altogether?

That makes sense. And would explain many female enforcers I’ve come across. I guess it’s a form of legitimised bullying.

If they centre men, then by definition they are not feminism, you get that right?

...and they would all be incorrect.

A sort of self-brainwashing then?

I think in many cases, there's too much at stake not to. Depending on your circle, you have to force yourself to believe because otherwise you'll lose your friends, perhaps your family, even your job. The alternative is social isolation.

I've learnt the hard way just to keep schtum about my views among most friends, family and colleagues.

Here's the link to feminism chat again for those who don't want to discuss sex and gender, and don't understand that Feminism: sex and gender is for discussing issues about sex and gender.

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/feminism

I guess, yes. It starts as normal brainwashing, imposed from the outside, presented as the only right option(*), and strictly enforced through shame and anger tactics. And then yes, you move on to self-brainwashing, because it's in your best interests if you want to remain in those circles.

(*) It doesn't help when nobody around is allowed to say otherwise, so you effectively don't have another ready option to examine. It can even make you feel bad for going against what seems to be the grain of society itself, which reinforces the need for self-brainwashing to fit in.

If you put men ahead of women in your priorities, how could that be described as feminism?

Serious question.

I can see it, actually. For a lot of people, feminism is not about centering women, but about achieving equality between men and women. This leaves the door open to putting some men ahead of some women in specific circumstances, as long as the balance is maintained as a whole.

All feminism is about achieving equality. The part of about centering women is just acknowledgement of current inequality.

I think that many women take their rights for granted to the extent that they don't even realise that they exist because it's the water they swim in.

I'm not talking about 'spaces', but rights to contraception, equality law, maternity leave; legislation that criminalises rape; a society that doesn't shame unmarried mothers; the assumption that policies should not unfairly discriminate against women. All this is underpinned by the fact that women are clearly defined in law.

Go back just a few generations and these things didn't exist, and there is nothing to stop them being taken away. Fundamentally women need resources and services that men don't, and that will mean that they will always have to fight for those resources and services.

Re: 'spaces' I think some women genuinely don't value single sex spaces, think it's rather prudish to require them and lack the imagination to understand the circumstances when other women (or they themselves might) need them. Because the conversation has focused on something they believe to be irrelevant, they can reassure themselves that it's all a fuss about nothing.

The thing that you keep ignoring but is central to your argument, no matter how much you keep ignoring it is that if one believes that trans women are women, then including trans women in their feminist approach isnt centering men.

You can keep arguing but trans women are not women, but all that does is highlight your own feminist approach which isnt inclusive of trans women. It doesnt mean those who are trans inclusive aren't feminists, it means they have a different set of values and beliefs about how to best achieve equality for women. They arent the same type of feminist as you.

Feminists arent a monolith like women aren't a monolith.

If you include some men as women you lose the ability to define women and nothing else you say about women's rights makes sense.

This isn't a value judgement. it's just how language and logic work.

If you believe so-called 'transwomen' are women, how do you believe this comes about? In order to be a 'transwoman' you have to be male (a man). How does a man become a woman?

But transwomen are men. Under all objective, verifiable, scientific criteria, that is the case. Literally everyone knows this

Some pretend that they don't. But it is a pretence.

So the question is, why will some women pretend men can 'become women' so that can centre men's desires rather than women's rights?

What I’ve seen is doubt creep in when they come across clear instances of actual appropriation and men in their lives who are so obviously not women. But then resort back to the mantras in a generic more distant sense. As if it’s too much cognitive dissonance to reconcile the actual with the theoretical.

No you don't, thats the thing. Trans inclusive feminism is a legitimate branch of feminism. It doesnt matter how much you argue about it. Just like Marxist Socialism is a legitimate form of Socialism.

You won't change that. There are different types of feminism. That is like Feminism 101. You can absolutely restrict spaces to only welcome trans exlclusionary feminists, but that doesnt make either group "not feminists".

If some feminists want to put some men ahead of some women in specific circumstances, they would need to show how this benefits women as a sex class. They would also need to be very careful that they do not inadvertently harm a particular group of women, especially a vulnerable group of women such as women in prison.

You can think that, but it won't make any difference to the fact that trans inclusive feminism is a branch of feminism and therefore, people who subscribe to it are feminists.

It doesnt mean those who are trans inclusive aren't feminists, it means they have a different set of values and beliefs about how to best achieve equality for women.

Genuinely interested to know how you do this without defining women.

As an e.g. a right wing government wouldn't have to specifically exclude women to remove them from the work place. They would just have to remove maternity rights and access to contraception. Without any acknowledgement of sex, this would affect everyone equally.

Do all women agree that trans inclusive feminism puts "men" ahead of them, or is that your view of trans inclusive feminism?