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.

I wasn't discussing that. It want me that used inflammatory language

The men in my immediate circle and family are mostly not bastards but we have to assume there is a fair few of them knocking around seeing as how, as a sex class, they commit most of the sexual and violent crime.

So are you willing to put girls and women at risk for the ‘moral high ground’ as you put it, and give them the benefit of the doubt? You never know…they might just mend their ways. It’s been the same MO over a fair few thousand years of evolution now, and you might want to have a special word with the Taliban chaps…but I’m sure your ‘fair-minded’ version of feminism will win them over eh?

God it’s bad enough that we have to deal with the misogny, but the deluded so-called ‘feminists’ are a completely different scale… 🙄

Look mate. Women are facing death threats, rape threats and violence for saying no to men. A TRA on here advocated for women to be raped with a splintery rolling pin. The only crime was saying no to men. And you want us to be civil???? CIVIL???

Well I don't support any 'feminist' who says that men can become women and appropriate stuff set aside for women.

So this is how the agenda ceases to move forward. Probably more here on Mumsnet than the real world.

Maintaining the legal and practical integrity of women and female as a sex class is not a niche issue. Whether they have the awareness or cognitive ability to understand it or not it, it affects every woman.

In other words, there's this super big important existential threat to women that affects all women but at the same time don't know about …because it doesn't impact their lives? Uh huh…..

Which ‘freedoms’ have I sacrificed on behalf of other women, pray tell?

As has already been repeated upthread, GC's effectively silence issues that do impact women at scale.

Actually I think that’s your view. I’m not the one dismissing Seethlaw’s lived experience as ‘wokey’.

Disagreeing with a view is not the same as dismissing it. And it's you that's 'wokey' for prioritising lived experience not them.

"So you agreeing with the views of your theoretical transpeople (that all happen to be born male) is advocacy, me agreeing with the views of an actual transperson right here is ‘exploitation’."

The difference being is you are only promoting their view because it supports your own. Where as whether transpeople support my views (& they all certainly don't) is irrelevant to my opinion. In other words, I rely on my own reasoning rather than weaponise the lived experience of others when convenient.

Btw. Please show me anywhere where I have mocked Seethlaw. I’ll pop back later and see if you’ve got anything. Ciao for now.

GC's on this forum routinely mock trans people as mentally ill, predatory, groomers & fetishising but exploit trans people who agree with them as perfectly 'rational' not to be criticised so don't pretend not to know. You can't have it both ways.

Fine, but we can accept others don't hold the same view

Sure. But they are not feminists.

Many of them are.

How so? How are people advocating for the loss of women’s rights feminists?

They think they are, because they have not really faced that they are in conflict with the core principle of centering women. I'm sure there are many reasons for this denial, on both a group and an individual level.

There was someone called Oxford Feminist on here a few weeks ago, who we asked to give us an explanation of her men-inclusive feminism. She never got back to us. Perhaps you would like to have a try, though I must confess I find it unlikely that you will and am planning on going to bed in 10 mins.

When you say 'move forward' - in pursuit of what? What do you want to be moving forward towards?

Oh look, tone policing.

"Be more ladylike, ladies."

Perhaps those so called "feminists" who support men in women's spaces and services and think the nasty GC ones who say no are big old not-nice-enough meanies might like to tell the not very nice at all transactivist meanies who send death and rape threats and walk around with signs at marches like "punch/kill/stab terfs" "the only good terf is a dead terf" "suck my dick" etc most vulnerable group of male "sisters" in the world who really only want to pee and are better women that we are that they might want to try being "more civil"?

It's just that as a "movement" they kind of lost credibility quite a long time ago on this because of so many of them behaving exactly like and using similar rhetoric as deranged woman-hating male incels and abusers. Of precisely the kind that women had to have single sex spaces to get away from.

No. What it says is that all men are men. Which they are.

There is nothing feminist about supporting a campaign that says women may have nowhere and nothing for themselves if a man feels he's entitled to it too.

God damn, I hate all the gatekeeping going on here. Get off your high horse, you don't 'own' feminism and you don't get to decide who is, or isn't, a feminist.
If people want to use the word then they can and there is nothing you can do about it.

By the way, TRAs say us gender critical feminists are not real feminists, and I would say that exact same thing above to them. I don't like when they do it, and I don't like when we do it either.

If people want to use the word then they can and there is nothing you can do about it.

Like 'woman'? 😂

If men want to call themselves woman they can. As long as they stay out of women's spaces, I don't care what crazy thing they call themselves.

Protecting women's spaces is only thing I care about.

How can you even be a feminist if you can't define women as a sex class? It seriously makes no sense. If you let men be women, then what exactly is it that you think feminism is representing? Like what sort of activist can't even define the thing they claim to be defending. It is absolutely baffling.

Gender identity ideology is extremely irrational and makes a fool out of anyone who believes in it.

Fair enough. Whilst I don't agree I appreciate your ability to comprehend that competing rights are a separate issue to respecting another's right to their own perspective on identity.

If there's one thing that renders GC ideology irrational it's their inability to accept how personally subjective identity is.

How are you going to stop someone from calling themselves a 'woman' (or anything else for that matter)? Would you make it a crime? As it stands people can pretty much call themselves whatever they like, assuming they are not trying to enter women's spaces then they are not doing anything wrong.

There kind of threads really irk because they highlight a complete lack of empathy within society.

I don't agree with gender ideology but I can fully comprehend their point of view. They believe that transwomen are women trapped in the wrong body. They believe that these women are especially vulnerable because not only are they women suffering the way us women do but they also have the added inconvenience of being born into a man's body and therefore rejected by a large portion of society.

Do you really not understand their point of view? Or do you just not agree?

Exactly. It's as if there's some sort of presumed ownership over someone else’s ability to define themselves. And when you think about it that's the antithesis of feminism being underpinned by self determination.

I'm not suggesting people should agree with the opinions of others but simply respect that as individuals we have the capacity to understand the world as it applies to us differently.

Ultimately, 'what is a woman/man' is a personally subjective interpretation & as such has limitless scope that feminists traditionally pointed to.

what is a woman/man' is a personally subjective interpretation

They are the terms for, respectively, a female/male human. It's no more subjective than the terms for other animals, such as doe/buck and ewe/ram. They are simple words with long-standing meanings.

Word meaning isn't fixed because it depends on social usage not to mention its a fallacious argument to suggest that tradition legitimises a position. Certainly feminists wouldn't agree.

Sure. People can call themselves police officers if they want. The minute they try to convert their self-definition into action by influencing others and/or assuming the authority of a police officer, they're breaking the law.

You can believe you're Taylor Swift but her people won't let you into her hotel room. If you make a scene about them not respecting your identity, they will indeed call the law on you.

The world's full of people getting arrested for stalking, harassment, impersonation and identity theft resulting from their claims to be someone/something else. If it stays in your head, OK. When you expect others to comply, there's a problem.