Are we a cult?

[CyclingSam]

I keep reading that sex realists, of which I am one, are a cult. Perhaps a genderist could be so kind as to explain what a cult is, and why we qualify. Sometimes one of us calls them a cult too. Who has a better case, hmmm?

If women would dress like many transwomen do they would be be mocked for their fashion choices, the fact that people like Eddie Izard aren't mocked for how they dress shows that nobody thinks they are actually women.

"If that were true (& its not) then why viciously mock trans women & not trans men as sexual deviants?"

Where? Evidence please of this vicious mockery of, I assume you mean all, trans identifying men as sexual deviants.

What do you even mean by "sexual deviants"? Coz I don't think men who wear skirts are sexual deviants (well I am Scottish, I quite like a man in a kilt), but I do think that men who insist on being present around non-consenting females who might be in a state of undress ring some alarm bells. Male pattern offending stays consistent regardless of gender identity, and prison stats have shown that trans identifying males are over 5 times as likely to be in prison for sex crimes than males with no trans identity.

Why would we mock, again I assume you mean all, trans identifying women as sexual deviants? Women tend not to have fetishes in the same way men do (in women they are relatively rare, in men they cluster), and women so very, very rarely commit sexually motivated crimes in comparison to men who commit almost all of sexually motivated crimes. Women as a sex class are not a threat to other women. Men as a sex class are a threat to women as a sex class.

"The case that gender is shared by the sexes..."

Whut?

"...doesn't require the mocking of feminine expression in males as perverse...."

Whut?

"...And why assert as they routinely do that women's traditional expression of femininity is only a patriarchal cultural imposition as if its an indoctrinated sexually perverse phenomena?"

Just what are you warbling on about? I'm sure you're going to call me stupid, but all that you've just written there is meaningless. As in devoid of meaning. Aka complete and utter mince.

"I suspect trans women in particular are the conduit for which this severe aversion to feminine expression is channelled under the guise of 'women's rights' when it is anything but by demeaning feminine expression."

Ugh I'm so tired of you, this is just ridiculousness to the extreme.

No I have no problem with "feminine expression" if that means men wearing makeup, long hair, and dresses no problem. If that means women wearing makeup, long hair, and dresses no problem.

I don't care how they identify, what they wear, or how they act as long as they act like considerate members of a functioning society which affords all people their rights. That includes women, thank you very much!

I have a real issue with men saying "I'm a woman/female/girl" and using that as an excuse to get into female single sex spaces etc etc etc. Men are not and can never be women.

Sex still matters and men need to keep out of female single sex spaces, and leave women's rights alone.

Men dressing in their interpretation of ‘feminine’ doesn’t mean commentary about their clothing choices ‘misogyny’. Because people are commenting on them as female people making clothing choices, they are making comments about a male person’s clothing choices.

Just because they might be clothes typically worn by female people doesn’t make those male people female and it doesn’t mean that are experiencing misogyny.

Mocking pictures of trans women in feminine attire, 'men in dresses' 'woman face" 'parody of women' 'cross dresser' 'AGP' 'stereotype'.

Please don't act as if you don't know what's routinely going on which is an attack on femininity.

“Just what are you warbling on about?”
Some people make their posts deliberately impenetrable because they think it builds credibility in what they write.

None of those are mocking terms.

So it's pretty obvious you just want women to stop talking about the harms done to them by men claiming womanhood.

Men can't be and aren't women. Pointing that out is not an attack on femininity.

It is misogynist to hate on female people, not "feminine expression". Your ability to appropriate, tweak and then throw our words and definitions as weaponry towards us is sophisticated, I'll give you that. But it's also devious and sly. There is no attempt being made to gain our trust, just attempts to manipulate and fool us. You just try to wear us down and waste our time and energy while we are trying to hold a line that no-one should be trying to cross. We see it, and we won't be confused by your word-play.

It’s not about Rowling having written a children’s book / not the bible…. The art people make is political, and I’m just observing that returning to the books as an adult, the disgust around bodies (particularly fat bodies) I immediately encountered in them is quite shocking.

I think what’s she’s doing is transmisogyny. You don’t have to believe someone is a woman to target & devalue femininity / feminine presentation. But I can see there’s already a bit of an argument about the idea of trans misogyny further down the thread!

Oh aye I know, I might not be the brightest bulb in the box, but I'm not totally daft. I see what that poster is doing. I'm pointing out what total guff it is 😆

I'm sure people who do that think it makes them look intellectual and articulate. That is not the effect it has on readers 😆

It just makes them look like a bad faith poster trying to hide behind obscuring language. A bit like in Friends when Joey wrote a recommendation then used the thesaurus to replace every word to make it look as though it were written by someone much smarter.

@thegoodnews

Its misogyny to hate on feminine expression

So not only have the trans lobby appropriated the word, they have as true to form, twisted its meaning to suit their purpose.

I couldn't find it last night, but Willoughby tweeted the photo at the time and criticised Fred's outfit. If I find it again, I'll post it.

I don’t think it is appropriating the concept of misogyny. That still exists. It’s specifically about describing the intersection of transphobia and misogyny, and I find it helpful a helpful approach to thinking through the types of argument and behavior I see from gender people critical people (including on here) - for example, sexualisation / fetishisation of trans women in particular, with little attention paid to trans men.

Have a whole hour and 13 minutes of Fred displaying his wares. You'll notice Helen, the actual woman on the panel, managed not to flash her inner thighs to the audience, whereas Freda, the man, rather enjoys the wine and the flashing to the audience.

But yeah sure get your knickers in a twist over a photo JKR reposted.

(search DEBATE: Does transgender ideology threaten liberal values? On you tube)

‘Get your knickers in a twist’

surely you can see the way you speak to other women is a bit… misogynist?

Nope.

Fred spoke about his sex dungeon and fucking men with his penis whilst on a stage with his thigh hanging out in full view of all the women in the audience.

If you think he pointing this out as bad behaviour is an 'attack on femininity' then I really do not know what to say.

And again, at what point did this disgusting excuse for a man become a 'woman'? He seems to have pulled the fishnets over your eyes thats for sure.

I mean, even Peter Tatchell told him to stop drinking and to behave.

PETER TATCHELL.

Absolutely. Gaslighting, obfuscation and meaningless word salad is all these arguments ever amount to...howse that for logic?

oh. I thought I was in a feminist forum. I think in other feminist spaces I’ve been in, most people would understand that that sort of ‘calm down dear…. Don’t get your knickers in a twist’ language IS misogynist.

@Stonehenger Any thoughts for the women? Or is your kindness only extended as far as men?

A male person dressing in how they perceive femininity doesn’t necessarily support their actions as being ‘feminine’ at all.

this is part of the inherent sexism in labelling stereotypes as ‘feminine’ and ‘masculine’

Its misogyny to hate on feminine expression.

And gynaecology is a specialism covering the treatment of everything from fibroids to head tilts.

Truly desperate stuff.

If another poster said that to you or another of the regular posters, I can just imagine the outrage though. Each time I post I overthink every single word as the posts usually get picked apart, word-by-word, and anything that could be possibly be construed as an insult to women - ie. things that were not intended to offend at all - are happily tossed around in an effort to discredit.

I do worry about women. That’s why gender critical people starting to blur the boundaries about whether upskirting / using photos of people’s bodies to embarrass / shame them is acceptable is frightening to me and worth challenging. I think feminists, gender critical or not, need to hold the line on that together - it’s NOT ok.

I haven’t defended Wallace at all. I’m been saying Rowling’s action is not an acceptable ‘punishment’ for ANY behavior.

Mocking female associated behavioural traits is misogyny because its an attempt at punishing/shaming/demeaning feminine behaviour which is designed to enforce gender policing. Its also misogyny to mock female associated behavioural traits because its applying double standards: Holding feminine presentation or behaviour to a harsher standard of scrutiny than equivalent masculine or neutral expressions is gender bias.