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.

Is ought problem….

Try & keep up.

Are all men.

Well done. You finally got there. Men are men no matter what their diagnosis or indeed their costume.

The irony.

Well, I respect the many many attempts at a serious conversation but it’s too painful to watch this unfold anymore.

In response to @Doodwhatareyou‘s question, my conclusion is that women who oppose the patriarchy but support gender ideology are mostly doing so because they’re kind or want to believe that they’re being kind.

Plus, they don’t think much beyond ‘I’m being kind and inclusive’. We also see how many universalise the personal over and over again on these threads. Seemingly incapable of understanding how other women might not want a man in single sex spaces as they themselves don’t have direct experience of gender ideology harms or impact. Whilst others are your Aunt Lydia types and some are a bit dim, even if they’re academics at Oxford. So, an interesting question but I can’t see the discussion going any further.

"Basic logic" 😂

Yeah, it's "basic", alright. Nonsensical. Fact-free.

Give it up, Bailey. Try and support something with even a smidge of "basic" integrity and evidence next time. Otherwise, you'll end up wasting your life tragically, coming onto forums like this, spending all your time desperately trying to cling on to a batshit ideology that dies in the sunlight, making entirely false claims, feebly attempting to gaslight people who know considerably more than you do and unlike you, have the facts and evidence to back their views up. We don't have to resort to projection and abusive DARVO tactics like you and pretty much all other transactivists do because we really don't need to.

Your ideology is built on sand. It's built on appropriation from genuine civil rights movements which NEVER had to behave the way you and other activists have done for years, misogyny, bullshit and fantasy. It can't take even the smallest bit of scrutiny. You have nothing. It's failing. Your faith system is collapsing.

Absolutely batshit.

So what is your problem?

Nobody is preventing anyone from believing whatever they want about gender identity.

We aren't even using 'woman' to refer to gender identity.

We just need language that clearly defines sex in policy and legislation so that the rights and services required by women are protected.

Could not just find a different word to refer to the group of people who believe that they have a feminine gender identity?

Don't worry OP, you've found your people. But then you knew that. 🙄

Ahhhhhhhh, the sweet sound of screeching & gnashing of teeth at the realisation that the four little words an is is not an ought has single handedly brought down gender critical ideology into the crashing heap of bogas 'common sense' that it is.

Um, according to you lot the 'problem' is your inability to get any 'answers'….except you don't really want answers only domination…..just like the patriarchy.

Could not just find a different word to refer to the group of people who believe that they have a feminine gender identity?

There's this thing called 'trans gender'.

Aaah, the sound of the patronising male angered by women speaking and knowing there is no rebuttal to actual logic.

“Screeching”.

Nothing disguises the male disdain for women so much as pouring scorn on our high-pitched voices and mocking us when we are angry. It’s an attitude as old as time;

Have it your own way, then.
"Trans people exist", as we're told ad nauseam.
So what?, *An is is not an ought."
So it doesn't follow that the rest of society should take any notice or make any accommodations at all.

….

Ah, but there's this thing called 'equality' that feminism kinda noticed. In other words, what's good for the goose….

I thought you guys didn't 'approve' of 'stereotyping'? Ho hum, the inconsistencies never end.

That's... That's six words, not four... Or are we going to argue the meaning of "four" now 😨??

More to the point: what "ought" do you think GC women are formulating from the "a woman is an adult female human being" is?

'is' not an 'ought' = 4 😂

Reproductive sex distinctions existing 'maketh' the woman/man is an is ought statement.

Categorisations (of gender/man/woman) are moral human constructs.

Reproductive sex distinctions existing 'maketh' the woman/man is an is ought statement.

No it's not because it's not a moral statement. As its name indicates, the Is Ought Fallacy is concerned about deriving morality from fact.

GC women don't deal in morality, only in legal rights: "Transwomen are biological males (biological fact), therefore they don't belong in female single-sex spaces (legal fact)". There's no appeal to morality in this.

You, however... "Transwomen feel like they are women (fact), therefore they ought to have access to female single-sex spaces (morality)"...

An Is is not an Ought (6 words), indeed.

Exactly. Equality. Which, in a society which tends to treat maleness as the default setting, entails certain accommodations for women's sex-based needs, but doesn't entail special privileged access to those accommodations for men who happen to feel they want it. They already have the same sex-based rights as anyone else.

Wrong.

Legal rights and societal values are fundamentally intertwined. The law acts as a codified reflection of what a society deems just, ethical, and important, translating abstract ideals like equality, liberty, and human dignity into enforceable, structural guarantees.

And don't lie about GC women not dealing in morality when their whole value system is based on biological sex determining right & wrong.

If someone is a maternity service user, then the maternity service has to provide inclusive, safe and individualised care for them. For a trans man, that would include gender neutral language that recognises their identity.

No i think the man has to believe they are a woman, not just say that they are.

Yes ive had to repeat myself several times for the most basic messages like "there arw several types of feminism including trans inclusive and exclsionary feminism" because these simple messages have taken so long to be accepted by members here despite being year 9 standard sociology.

All right. Then please educate me: under what conditions is it acceptable to derive an Ought from an Is?

Note : it can't be "never", because as I pointed out, your entire position relies on such an "Is means Ought" connection. So obviously, you think that sometimes it's all right. When is that?

This is true. That is why we must accept that brother trans inclusionsry and exclusionary feminism is feminism. It is a fact.

The point of mentioning equality here is to highlight that facts & morality/ethics/values are distinct. Facts don't decide societal values, society does.