Misogyny and other gender issues. - The Bear and Badger

acemuzzy

Climate change impacts 100% of people can we talk about that instead please thanks

RedDave2

acemuzzy wrote:

Climate change impacts 100% of people can we talk about that instead please thanks

What if they are connected?The only way to save the world is to be nice to each other!

Knight

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

This is your reminder that this thread started about misogyny in the sense it means , has meant and has happened for 1000s of years affecting circa 51% of all of the people who have ever existed, and is now and has for some time been about a much smaller group of people, a much newer form of prejudice (or conversation about prejudice), much of it aimed at a subset of people who experience misogyny and conceive of it as I described above. Maybe, just maybe, this basic fact - about this thread - will give you a clue as to why some among that group feel aggrieved that the conversation has taken this turn. Someone (male) ITT recently described this woman who was in NZ as a cunt. Unironically, and no one picked him up on it.

Maybe, just maybe, as a group of mostly men, mostly straight, overwhelmingly white and privileged folk, we should reflect on that.

For what it’s worth (and coming from me I doubt it’s much Gonzo), this is a good post.

I think the way GC women are sometimes talked about, and the way biological males feel able to physically assault women protesting/ campaigning on this, is deeply misogynistic.

I note Facewon has minimised Parker’s assault in here. Pouring liquid on women - not least given the way acid attacks have historically been perpetuated against women and what your reaction might initially be in the face of having liquid poured on you, is not a ‘lol that’s nothing’ sort of thing. Or at least, it isn’t to women - which is sort of the point of this thread I assume.

Diluted Dante

I have 0 issue with Parker having cold tomato juice poured on her, in the same way I have 0 issue with Nigel Farage and Tommy Robinson being doused in milkshake.

DrewMerson

Knight

DrewMerson wrote:

Knight wrote:

…biological males…

What do you think this means?

it’s one thing to dismantle culturally contingent understandings of ‘gender’ and there is much important work to be done on deconstructing this in terms of helping those who don’t fit into typical norms but aside from a tiny minority of conditions biological sex for human beings isn’t in doubt and efforts to cast doubt on it is a good instance of the ‘no bearded man’ fallacy. There is a biological sex binary for human beings.

DrewMerson

Knight

DrewMerson wrote:

Tell that to a biologist.

Richard Dawkins was asked about this the other day as it happens.

DrewMerson

Diluted Dante

Also full lols for calling the intersex person who poured juice over Parker a biological male.

DrewMerson

Armitage_Shankburn

DrewMerson wrote:

Gonzo, if you are genuinely concerned about misogyny, then why focus on the bit of my post where I called PP/KJK a cunt, and not the bit of the post which highlighted that she has recently adopted the tactic of ‘accusing’ cis women of being trans, and highlighting physical attributes which she thinks indicate their masculinity?

Calling KJK a cunt for being a nasty person is no more misogyny than calling Boris Johnson a cunt for being a self-serving liar is misanthropy.

Because that was the misogynistic bit of it

DrewMerson

JonB

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

This is your reminder that this thread started about misogyny in the sense it means , has meant and has happened for 1000s of years affecting circa 51% of all of the people who have ever existed, and is now and has for some time been about a much smaller group of people, a much newer form of prejudice (or conversation about prejudice), much of it aimed at a subset of people who experience misogyny and conceive of it as I described above. Maybe, just maybe, this basic fact - about this thread - will give you a clue as to why some among that group feel aggrieved that the conversation has taken this turn. Someone (male) ITT recently described this woman who was in NZ as a cunt. Unironically, and no one picked him up on it. Maybe, just maybe, as a group of mostly men, mostly straight, overwhelmingly white and privileged folk, we should reflect on that.

The amplification of trans issues is more about the pushback against it than trans people taking over discussion. Trans activists will campaign for trans rights to the best of their ability - and why wouldn't they? - but they and their supporters don't have the power to make their agenda a defining cultural issue. Right-wing media and politicians have seized on this as a weapon in their culture wars, while certain feminists have taken to campaigning about this single issue, taking oxygen away from others. When all the furore about a trans rapist in a women's prison was going on a while back, for instance, no one seemed very concerned about the wider issue of safety conditions in women's prisons.

So, if there's a problem in this thread, it's that it shows how successful the Right have been in drawing attention away from women's rights issues by framing them as a battle between cis and trans women.

Knight

DrewMerson wrote:

You still haven’t watched the video I linked, have you? If you had, you would know what you just wrote is plain wrong.

Random guy on the internet makes the point that there is no sex binary in humans because of seahorses probably isn’t the slam dunk evidence you want it to be drew Merson. It was a combination of naturalistic fallacies and no bearded man fallacies. It flies in the face of actual reality.

But it’s Dawkins who’s ideologically captured!

Knight

Diluted Dante wrote:

Also full lols for calling the intersex person who poured juice over Parker a biological male.

Just checked and I didn’t actually. You inferred that but I didn’t call them that. Are you saying their biological sexuality is genuinely unclear? That’s certainly possible although the numbers are vanishingly rare.

Knight

JonB wrote:

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

This is your reminder that this thread started about misogyny in the sense it means , has meant and has happened for 1000s of years affecting circa 51% of all of the people who have ever existed, and is now and has for some time been about a much smaller group of people, a much newer form of prejudice (or conversation about prejudice), much of it aimed at a subset of people who experience misogyny and conceive of it as I described above. Maybe, just maybe, this basic fact - about this thread - will give you a clue as to why some among that group feel aggrieved that the conversation has taken this turn. Someone (male) ITT recently described this woman who was in NZ as a cunt. Unironically, and no one picked him up on it. Maybe, just maybe, as a group of mostly men, mostly straight, overwhelmingly white and privileged folk, we should reflect on that.

The amplification of trans issues is more about the pushback against it than trans people taking over discussion. Trans activists will campaign for trans rights to the best of their ability - and why wouldn't they? - but they and their supporters don't have the power to make their agenda a defining cultural issue. Right-wing media and politicians have seized on this as a weapon in their culture wars, while certain feminists have taken to campaigning about this single issue, taking oxygen away from others. When all the furore about a trans rapist in a women's prison was going on a while back, for instance, no one seemed very concerned about the wider issue of safety conditions in women's prisons.

So, if there's a problem in this thread, it's that it shows how successful the Right have been in drawing attention away from women's rights issues by framing them as a battle between cis and trans women.

When one side pushes changing language, self ID laws and allowing people with penises to be in single sex spaces like rape crisis centres and prisons and changing rooms they really shouldn’t go around accusing the other side of stoking a culture war. Sure there’s fight back, but the playground phrase ‘you started it’ has some genuine utility here.

Gremill

Richard Dawkins is definitely a cunt.

Vela

Never thought women's rights and trans rights were a zero-sum game

Armitage_Shankburn

JonB wrote:

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

This is your reminder that this thread started about misogyny in the sense it means , has meant and has happened for 1000s of years affecting circa 51% of all of the people who have ever existed, and is now and has for some time been about a much smaller group of people, a much newer form of prejudice (or conversation about prejudice), much of it aimed at a subset of people who experience misogyny and conceive of it as I described above. Maybe, just maybe, this basic fact - about this thread - will give you a clue as to why some among that group feel aggrieved that the conversation has taken this turn. Someone (male) ITT recently described this woman who was in NZ as a cunt. Unironically, and no one picked him up on it. Maybe, just maybe, as a group of mostly men, mostly straight, overwhelmingly white and privileged folk, we should reflect on that.

The amplification of trans issues is more about the pushback against it than trans people taking over discussion. Trans activists will campaign for trans rights to the best of their ability - and why wouldn't they? - but they and their supporters don't have the power to make their agenda a defining cultural issue. Right-wing media and politicians have seized on this as a weapon in their culture wars, while certain feminists have taken to campaigning about this single issue, taking oxygen away from others. When all the furore about a trans rapist in a women's prison was going on a while back, for instance, no one seemed very concerned about the wider issue of safety conditions in women's prisons.

So, if there's a problem in this thread, it's that it shows how successful the Right have been in drawing attention away from women's rights issues by framing them as a battle between cis and trans women.

I wholeheartedly agree, in fact, part of me honestly believes this issue is a sort of online psi op to divide the left /progressives. That's maybe conspiracy theory, but y'know, it's working. Just look at this thread. Look at kasperian / cenk ughyur TYT thingy recently.

Edit- re trans people taking over the discussion. If you mean trans issues, that's my point - if you mean people, you've missed it slightly. I'm talking about men talking over women, telling them shut your fuckface, figuratively speaking, calling them cubts, literally speaking, laughing at their being assaulted. That kinda thing. And specifically groupthink and backslapping ITT. I'm pointing out that this kind of behaviour can easily be seen as plain old miso by some.

I'm trying to generate empathy and talk to "my" group in a challenging way. It's interesting that the response has been strawmanbing, zero sum games, climate change and so on.

But I can live with that. I don't know how anyone can clap at a woman getting slapped, punched by a much bigger, testosterone enhanced person, or assaulted with a liquid substance and made to wonder for a split second what it is

You do that to me and see what happens. Let's see your response if someone does that to you

RedDave2

Vela wrote:

Never thought women's rights and trans rights were a zero-sum game

I'm not saying it is or should be but if some on one side feel it is that surely is worth weighing those points even if you don't agree with them? Especially given that side has itself been a bit crapped on throughout history.

Vela

RedDave2 wrote:

Vela wrote:

Never thought women's rights and trans rights were a zero-sum game

I'm not saying it is or should be but if some on one side feel it is that surely is worth weighing those points even if you don't agree with them? Especially given that side has itself been a bit crapped on throughout history.

The problem is that that logic can be reduced to the following:
I guess we can't do anything til we figure out who is the most oppressed group ever, and solve those problems first.

I'm not saying that you mean it this way, but it's the end result of treating it as zero sum.

monkey

Chicken and egg situation.

Gremill wrote:

Richard Dawkins is definitely a cunt.

Yes. But.
The thing I saw recently was Dawkins pushing back on some group that were trying to push the idea that the words ‘man’ and ‘woman’ were politically incorrect. I (and he) might have got that wrong though. Can’t remember where I saw it but that article quoted the Telegraph when describing this group.

So is that group ludicrously overreaching and deserving of pushback? Has it instead been pumped up and distorted by right-wing media who want another ‘those trans people are at it again’ story? Even if they have done that, I bet there’s some dickhead on Twitter who’s castigating someone right now for calling a man a man.

The whole things been pumped up with internet stupid juice until no one knows what’s what anymore.

JonB

Knight wrote:

JonB wrote:

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

This is your reminder that this thread started about misogyny in the sense it means , has meant and has happened for 1000s of years affecting circa 51% of all of the people who have ever existed, and is now and has for some time been about a much smaller group of people, a much newer form of prejudice (or conversation about prejudice), much of it aimed at a subset of people who experience misogyny and conceive of it as I described above. Maybe, just maybe, this basic fact - about this thread - will give you a clue as to why some among that group feel aggrieved that the conversation has taken this turn. Someone (male) ITT recently described this woman who was in NZ as a cunt. Unironically, and no one picked him up on it. Maybe, just maybe, as a group of mostly men, mostly straight, overwhelmingly white and privileged folk, we should reflect on that.

The amplification of trans issues is more about the pushback against it than trans people taking over discussion. Trans activists will campaign for trans rights to the best of their ability - and why wouldn't they? - but they and their supporters don't have the power to make their agenda a defining cultural issue. Right-wing media and politicians have seized on this as a weapon in their culture wars, while certain feminists have taken to campaigning about this single issue, taking oxygen away from others. When all the furore about a trans rapist in a women's prison was going on a while back, for instance, no one seemed very concerned about the wider issue of safety conditions in women's prisons.

So, if there's a problem in this thread, it's that it shows how successful the Right have been in drawing attention away from women's rights issues by framing them as a battle between cis and trans women.

When one side pushes changing language, self ID laws and allowing people with penises to be in single sex spaces like rape crisis centres and prisons and changing rooms they really shouldn’t go around accusing the other side of stoking a culture war. Sure there’s fight back, but the playground phrase ‘you started it’ has some genuine utility here.

I mean, that doesn't really address the point at all. People campaigning for rights, whether you agree with them or not, isn't stoking a culture war. For plenty of right-wing coverage though that's the main aim.

Also, the point is still that trans activism lacks the power to make itself the dominant issue in feminist discussion. That has to be the result of the pushback AND the right-wing media/politicians taking up the cause for conservative ends.

Why has this become such a battleground do you think?
What other areas of feminist struggle to you take such an interest in?

Knight

People shouldn’t campaign vociferously for certain things and when they get pushback from a broad spectrum of people - including the communist party now! - accuse those pushing back of stoking a culture war as if all pushback is just in bad faith and from the far right. They’re the ones wanting to overturn long established patterns, they are seeking to change ‘the culture’ and overturn heteronormativity etc. which is fine, you’re free to campaign for that, we live in a pluralistic society where people are allowed to push for their ideological positions to be accepted more broadly. But don’t disingenuously claim that it’s just a ‘campaign for your rights’ when that campaign includes the literal rejection of a biological sex binary. People are asking to be treated as women on the basis of their self ID (not just after extensive evaluation as has been claimed on this thread) and included in single sex spaces such as elite sport etc. People are pushing irreversible surgery and experimental ‘treatment’ on minors. It’s not simply about trans people being free to live without discrimination and fear and adults being able to present as a different gender to their biological sex. JK Rowling has absolutely no issue with that as she’s stated many times and yet she’s constantly accused of transphobia.

As for caring so much - I responded to some , in my opinion unfair, accusations of transphobia from JK Rowling and some misogynistic language used about her, I didn’t bring this up. I’m continuing to engage because various people, including you, have done me the courtesy of responding thoughtfully to various things.

That this issue has also been pounced on by bad faith actors (the literal far right) is also indisputable of course and in so far your post picks up on that I agree and think it deeply unhelpful.

Gremill

The whole things been pumped up with internet stupid juice until no one knows what’s what anymore.

Diluted Dante

People are pushing irreversible surgery and experimental ‘treatment’ on minors.

Who, and what?

b0r1s

Brooks

I know all kinds of what ftr. Despite using the Internet every day.

Vela

There's no real point to this discussion. No-one is engaging beyond talking at people.

I'm tapping out.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories