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.

You're missing the point that in order to be a maternity service user in the first place, a transman has to be granted the same rights as other women. And so their rights as female-bodied people, aka "women", have to be maintained - which is something that GC women support, but not all other feminists.

A basic tenet of 'feminism' is that is is about women and girls, these are what we call the half of the human population that is female.

Men might have fooled you that they need to be included in this, but it doesn't mean that just because you have been fooled, that everyone else needs to be fooled too.

The thing about this is that many women who believe TWAW have experienced male violence and/or rape. Even unwanted pregnancy.

The idea that the only women who supprt trans women as women are those who have not experienced male or sexual violence is ridiculous.

Women can have different opinions, even when given the same information. Have more faith in our individualism.

It isnt men that have fooled me, it's just a fact. As I have said many times in this thread, if you believe trans women are women, then including them in your centering of women is logical.

We all know you view them as men, but this isnt about you and your views. It's about women who feel differently to you.

The more you keep arguing that they arent feminists and you are the biggest and bestest feminist, the more uneducated and overcome with personal bias you appear. If you want to argue why your approach to feminism is the most productive, then that is different. That's like arguing why Marxist Socialism is the best approach to Socialism.

I wonder: would you agree that Tradwives are feminists? Because many of them think they are - the very best feminists, even.

They are men.

I might have the view that they are or the view that they aren't. They are still all men.

They still need prostate exams, because they are men. They are in the half of the human population that is male. Men.

These are the facts.

If women think they are somehow women and are here arguing that they are and that this is somehow a 'fact', how have none of these women been able to explain how men change into women upon saying 'I'm a lady'? This seems like a huge failing on these women's part. Maybe gather yourselves together and come up with your explanation to educate 'us' on how this came to be?

There's this thing called 'trans gender'.

?

Freudian slip?

You seem to have forgotten that many people who identify as trans don't claim to have a feminine gender identity and many people whose sex is female do...

Most of these people will be female, and your disregard for them is telling.

Yes, that is basically how people who believe in gender ideology see identity. You feel, and so you are.

To be able to talk about something enough to refute it, you have to be able to understand it enough to teach someone else. I don't think you and others really understand enough about the philosophy behind identity or feminism to contribute to these conversations productively. You think if you understand how "the other side" see this issue, you might join them. So instead of trying to learn some new about humans and our differences, as in, how humans come to different conclusions and interpretations about life generally, you don't even bother trying to learn and you dismiss actual academics who are trying to teach you.

It took some of you several posts to recognise (thanks @Seethlaw) that I hadn't actually given my personal views, I just spoke about what some people believe. As soon as you get a sniff of "blood,", it is like intelligence leaves the body and you all start gnashing. Intelligent discussion becomes impossible.

I have said many times in this thread, if you believe trans women are women, then including them in your centering of women is logical.

men are not and never will be women

women who centre these men above actual women are deluded aunt Lydias

Yes that's right all us daft old thicky women here eh believing that no one can change sex because no one can you know change sex

everything else is just dancing on the head of a pin to justify giving deluded men what they want

To be able to talk about something enough to refute it, you have to be able to understand it enough to teach someone else. I don't think you and others really understand enough about the philosophy behind identity or feminism to contribute to these conversations productively.

I really wouldn't assume that. Some of us understand perfectly well what is being talked about here, have thought through it a long time ago, and that's why we can say with so much assurance that the "philosophy behind identity" is pro-men and thus anti-feminism.

That's because you believe that your anatomy is what dictates your sex and that gender as a separate entity to that doesnt exist.

Other people don't believe that is the case. They may believe sex is irrelevant and your gender identity, which may or may not match your sex, speaks more about who you are.

Different people believe different things. And the thing about identity is that it is unique to individuals. For example, English might be a core part of one person's identity, but their twin feels that it speaks little about who they are. They are both factually English, but one feels that Englishness is core to their identity and the other does not. So someone can feel their biological or natal sex is core to their identity, and others may not and feel their gender identity is more important.

When it comes to GI, you can say that you don't have one, you can say it aligns with your sex, ir you can say it doesn't. What you can't say is that someone else who does feel they have a gender identity doesn't have one.

i think there are plenty of us who understand very well the philosophical theories that support a group of male people who claim that their subjective belief about their identity should be treated as if it is materially real when it is not.

Well from the way you talk about it, no you don't. If im having to teach the basic types of feminism, then you arent informed enough IMO.

That isnt demonstrated by this thread.

You're arguing points nobody made.

GC people don't argue that some people claim to feel this or that way. They only argue that those feelings are irrelevant when it comes to making legal policies. Address that point and you might get the intelligent discussion you wish for.

Note:

you believe that your anatomy is what dictates your sex

Well, yes, sex is literally about anatomy. That's not something to believe or not, that's just a fact.

You see the fact that people still think arguing their personal opinion is relevant to what I am saying just don't understand being the most elementary level. They think that arguing whether TWAW is still being called for in this thread.

Let's put it this way:

On the one hand: "Some people believe that 'trans-inclusive feminism' is a valid form of feminism:"

On the other hand: "Some people believe that 'trans-inclusive feminism' is not any kind of feminism:"

It's all about beliefs. How do we determine who is right or not? Assuming that someone is right in the first place, of course.

So you've pivoted to its not your thoughts but you are speaking on behalf of the women who do think this nonsense, and who are themselves speaking on behalf of the men who say they are women?

Why are you so invested in something that is so blatantly nonsensical if you dont believe it?

That's not true..if that was the case, this thread would be full of people saying "they say feminist stuff you agree with because they are also feminists". They'd simply argue why those feelings, as valid as they may be in an individual's identity, shouldnt overrule policy.

There wouldn't be this leaning on trying to cast trans people and their supporters as stupid, predatory or otherwise dangerous.

I've never pivoted at all. I have said the same thing throughout.

The fact is that it is a branch of feminism. There isnt any arguing about that.

Just like one can't argue that I was labelled female because I have a vagina and that is indicative of female sex. That is a fact.

What is opinion based is whether that anatomy dictates my gender and whether my natal sex is core to my identity.

Arguing that trans inclusionary or exclusionary feminists arent feminists is stupid and makes everyone in the debate seem ignorant. It doesnt matter what "side" does it.

I honestly think biology should not be as important as some new gen feminists make it out to be. I spent my whole life fighting to be seen as good as a man at my job. Starting out forty years ago, women of child bearing age were seen as risky because we’d get pregnant and then no longer be committed to working. While we were unmarried and childless, we were still seen as soft touches, unable to make difficult decisions because our hormones would make us emotional instead of having hard headed logic and business acumen. We would get passed over for critical long term projects, which then meant we didn’t have the gold stars to be up for promotions. Even if we worked hard, there were always the whispers of oh well she goes on lots of business trips with male boss x and I wonder if…(on her back, slept her way up). If you dared to actually have children, you had to fight tooth and nail to not be consigned to the mummy track where you’d come back nominally at same level but often given work below where you were and often first in line if any personnel cuts were needed.

We fought long and hard to prove that we could do the jobs just as good as a man- even with kids.

Now, since around 2015 or so I’d say, younger women who never had to fight this battle to prove that despite biology we are just as good as men are stirring things up again demanding period leave, talking about a bogus ‘fourth trimester’ which forces women to be the default parent and making a huge to do about how debilitating menopause is not for the few, but almost all women.

I see this as a significant regression for our equality. Now there is no part of a woman’s life that makes us seem not like a liability to an employer instead of an asset. I don’t agree with the latest trend of placing too much emphasis on female biology. I think it’s sexist. Why aren’t employers thinking hmmm men are risky because they often have anger management issues and often will make bad decisions from over-confidence? Why is it that a man is the model employee and we are measured against men and it always is put in terms of our biological differences?

this thread would be full of people saying "they say feminist stuff you agree with because they are also feminists"

I don't understand that bit, sorry.

They'd simply argue why those feelings, as valid as they may be in an individual's identity, shouldnt overrule policy.

Which is exactly what we're doing: it doesn't matter how a man feels about himself, he still doesn't get to access female single-sex spaces. That's the most basic GC argument!

Arguing that carnivore inclusive vegans arent vegans is stupid and makes everyone in the debate seem ignorant.