all 14 comments

[–]Bitchcraft 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I am against this.

First, it would not work. Woke, liberal feminism is doing exactly what you describe. Of course plenty of men are anti-sexist, but the majority of people who "don't get feminism" don't get it because they have a vested interest in not getting it. Feminism has been doing the iT BenEfiTs mEn ToO thing since forever. It's technically correct, but completely irrelevant. We are allowed to advocate for our interests without first making it some big pity party where everybody else is first drowned in validation, before we dare to take up a bit of space ourselves. What makes you think pandering to the alt-right will make the altright pander to us? PickMes never get anything in return.

Second, feminism, especially GC feminism, is about dignity. Debasing ourselves like you suggest would defeat the point.

TRAs and MRAs are crybullies. Like all crybullies, people get tired of their shit eventually. Like all bullies, if you give in they abuse you even more. Reddit has been dropping in Alexa ranking for a while now. The UK rejected the SelfID law. Detransitioners will eventually sue the shit out of the gender witch doctors.

It's up to us how long it takes. Keep in mind that there is nothing new under the sun.

[–]respectmyidentity[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The article makes great points. I guess the perspective I have is as an assault survivor (who are often forced to sign NDA's) and as a person who was sexually harassed and forced out of my job because of it. Recently I was laid off from a different company (due to COVID allegedly) but also I think in part because I spoke up for women's sex-based rights on the D&I committee, but in my industry, it's heavily trans controlled and influenced. I was not well-liked for rocking the boat. So I'm sensitive to being cancelled because what did I really accomplish if I can't speak, and I can't work anymore? Isn't there some way to say the same thing, convey the same idea, without closing the door entirely?

As an example, I do think it's abhorrent that men's misogyny (especially in the working classes) prevents them from investing in education, and makes them unwilling to enter jobs that are in demand (like nursing and elderly care) because they are perceived as women's work. This is material harm to men (and by extension women). I don't want to fix women's discrimination by having the men do it for us, but I'd also rather have my rights then be right all the time if that makes any sense.

Men need to yield the floor in some cases and give us our own spaces in others. But yet in others, men need to be willing to enter predominantly female spaces. The reason for this is they drive up the value of that work by their presence, which I obviously ideologically oppose. But at least you don't have the sex segregation in professions that disadvantages women due to men's unwillingness to "stoop" to women's work. It can't be women's work if there are just as many men doing it as women. And STEM can't be seen as the uber valuable profession it is now if care work gets some respect and attention.

I risk my personal comfort and safety a lot to stand up for women. And other women see what happens when I do. I don't think that is bringing all women to my side (though I am glad to see JK Rowling was able to turn some). I am a Hillary Clinton personality. A lot of women think I deserve what I get. I just don't know what to do because I am not going to change into some sweet and cuddly woman to make the world happy. I'm a bitch (in the best way in the sense that I have boundaries and convictions) and I don't mind saying so. I'm angry!

[–]Bitchcraft 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You are right in that we should avoid becoming a "circular firing squad" that is more concerned with purity of ideology than actually getting things done. Being a single-issue coalition of people that maybe disagree on other issues is powerful.

Courage is contagions. I believe one of the major reasons libfems and women's groups keep giving in to the "validation rain-dance" that currently drowns out absolutely everything is that we have been raised to apologize for speaking ("I don't mean to say x, but ...") and many men have an unconscious habit of dismissing women, even if they would agree to what is being said. As you have pointed out, men could benefit enormously from feminism, but feel humiliated by what this implies for them, like doing "women's work" or accepting that they have emotions. I don't see any other way to normalize women voicing strong opinions by getting out of our comfort zone and speaking up. Breaking the cognitive distortion field is more important than any single issue. We cannot logic people out of something that they didn't logic themselves into.

I'm sorry about your job, I hope you find a new one soon. Stay angry.

[–]respectmyidentity[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I will, I guess I feel like we are asking a group of people who have a lot to lose (and less opportunity) to risk themselves further by breaking the stereotype. I also want to voice opinions, but perhaps it could be useful to highlight opinions that actually do show it harms men. The reason TWAW works is that it harms women, not men. Women will harm themselves before they'll harm men because we are socialized that way (to take the side of men, be selfless). That's what is so insidious. Women feel validated as women when they hurt themselves. They feel like they are being good girls, and look forward to the pat on the head they get from society. Just as men get validation for fulfilling prescribed gender roles for men. Can't we try to take advantage of that as the TRA's do, but in a way that helps women instead of harms them?

[–]writerlylesbian 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The core principal of radical feminism is to centre women, women's perspectives and women's concerns. This is because women are sidelined in every other movement. Suggesting women sideline ourselves yet again is not radical feminism. That is an attempt to undermine radical feminism, intentional or not.

[–]respectmyidentity[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not sideline ourselves, not silence ourselves. Women are not in power at this point. I am not advocating listening to men, I am trying to get them to listen to us. Which they don't do.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

If a group of women try to be intersectional the causes for that group will inevitably centre men completely. The current 4th wave of feminism is a perfect example of that.

Women are the canary in the coal mine. Damages to our communities are no big deal, but once it starts hurting them they'll develop their own reasoning for being GC and start speaking of their own volition. But personally I've got no interest rolling out a red carpet to make it about them.

[–]respectmyidentity[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

We can't make it about them, it IS about them. That IS the current status quo. I am more focused on getting power and influence. Right now it doesn't matter if I speak, no one listens or thinks I'm worth listening to.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You are though, GC spaces wouldn't exist otherwise if our thoughts weren't important or worth listening to. But hitching their validity and power on whether men accept it isn't the right way to go imo. I would rather hear women speak than have our thoughts filtered through men and their view of us.

[–]respectmyidentity[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But aren't women still speaking in this case? The topic might change, but they are still speaking. I want women to be heard, I don't care what they say, so long as it helps other women and is heard.

[–]Spikygrasspod 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It harms men to be the perpetrators of violence and sexual violence? Well apparently they think it's worth it, or they'd choose not to do it.

No, prioritising men is not going to work. Men with a sense of justice don't need us to pander to them. Men who don't give a shit about justice will be pleased with being prioritised, but it won't transform them into allies.

You should argue for what you want, help influence the public discourse by speaking up where you can, and help shape policy by putting pressure on government representatives and companies. Don't centre men, centre the most important goals of your feminism.

[–]respectmyidentity[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They think it is worth it for the same reason women shit on other women. It's validation. That's not true freedom or liberation.

[–]Delia 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The gains achieved by women over the decades were achieved when women did not listen to men. This is the truth of it. When it comes to women's issues they prioritise other stuff and women use up energy on men's stuff which is better spent on women's issues. Many men are very nice people, but best for having a family if you want want and socialising..they can never truly understand women. I do not understand men either.

[–]respectmyidentity[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Don't want to listen to men. I want them to listen to women. What will that take? In most cases, not strict accounting of the facts. What else would work?