46

70 comments

[–] sensusquaeram 26 points (+29|-3) Edited

So much yes.

Wednesday morning, U.S. -- the votes weren't even close to being tallied, and in the press the lack of a Blue Wave was already being blamed on a) overwhelmingly widespread racism and b) women as an accessory to that, including treasonous WOC who hadn't voted blue.

We need a term equivalent to "soft racism" -- maybe "soft sexism," the misogyny of low expectations. Because, you know, women are too _______ to ________ (pick your fav words from the journalism outlet of your choice). 🤦🏻‍♀️

[–] au_dela 21 points (+24|-3)

American leftists are so adoring of their echo chambers, so the enthusiasm over the "blue wave" and subsequent disappointment and lashing out doesn't surprise me. If they surround themselves exclusively with other leftists of the exact same type, they're going to get the sense that everyone feels the same way.

[–] wildpansy 18 points (+20|-2)

They make it super clear that anyone that dares utter one word against their dogma gets cancelled and then they also expect to have an accurate view of the views of those around them? You can't have it both ways, you either force the nonbelievers into silence or you get an accurate view of what people really believe.

[–] sensusquaeram 5 points (+7|-2)

Yeah. I don't know what they think "accurate" really means. I'd kind of like to see them diagram it out.

[–] sensusquaeram 10 points (+12|-2)

Yep. And looking online, it seems like Woqueism is already conflating soft racism with microaggressions.

When I first learned the term "soft racism" (from U.S. Black academics, mostly liberal) its specific definition was the racism of low expectations. It's one small step away from saying "They can't really help themselves . . . they're uneducated savages, they don't know any better." Soft misogyny would be one small step away from something like "They can't really help themselves . . . they're simple hysterics, they don't know any better."

If you brought up that distinction online today, though, you'd probably get clobbered. Nuance is verboten.

[–] hellamomzilla 17 points (+19|-2) Edited

I really wish someone would tell Teigen that she is a know-nothing who might want to take a little time off and spare the rest of us her uninformed opinions. I'm sure the former food writer from the NYT who Teigen got fired wishes the same thing.

[–] diapason 3 points (+5|-2)

We need a term equivalent to "soft racism" -- maybe "soft sexism," the misogyny of low expectations. Because, you know, women are too _______ to ________ (pick your fav words from the journalism outlet of your choice). 🤦🏻‍♀️

Closest I can think of is maybe benevolent sexism?

[–] womenopausal [OP] witch babe 23 points (+25|-2)

MEGHAN MURPHY: Over the past five years, we’ve seen an endless stream of hand-wringing and hysteria around the misogyny of Donald Trump. The President is the White Patriarchy epitomized: a man who believes women are objects for his grabbing, useless unless they are pretty to look at or satisfying their husbands. What a jerk!

To be fair, Trump is a jerk. And, in my opinion, a misogynist. But he’s not the only one.

There’s a group that prides itself on #MeTooing the world, tweeting the words cishetero patriarchy as much as possible in an effort to really stick it to the man (Jack Dorsey must be tormented) and repeating, ad nauseam, that Trump’s win is proof that Americans just loooove their bigotry. Yet they don’t seem to have much respect for women themselves.

On Tuesday night, queen of the wokes, Chrissy Teigen, tweeted:

‘It’s insane what our fears are if we lose, compared to their fears if Biden wins. like we will prob all die or be handmaids and they’re worried about bathroom safety.’

Yeah Chrissy. If Trump wins, you and your rich friends are all going to die.

I have no idea who this ‘our’ is of whom Teigen speaks, but let’s assume she means ‘women’, since she drops ‘handmaids’ in right after her mass celebrity genocide prediction.

There was a lot of talk online (and by ‘talk’, I mean all-caps accusations of Nazi love) about the American women who may have decided to abandon the Democratic party this time around, in favor of Trump, due to blue allegiance to gender identity ideology. In January, Joe Biden tweeted, ‘Let’s be clear: Transgender equality is the civil rights issue of our time. There is no room for compromise when it comes to basic human rights.’

It seems, though, that there is compromise when it comes to women’s human rights.

The Democrats have not only paid endless lip service to ‘trans rights’ throughout their campaign, but Biden has committed to enacting the Equality Act during his first 100 days as president, which would ensure males have the legal right to access women’s facilities, including washrooms, locker rooms and dressing rooms, should those males claim to be female. After committing to rolling back regulations instituted by the Trump administration, Biden would also likely allow trans-identified males to access women’s shelters and be transferred to female prisons, endangering some of the most marginalized women in the country. Not only that, but Biden has also said that male athletes who identify as transgender should be permitted to compete with and against female athletes in sport, essentially rendering women’s sport redundant.

In other words, Teigen’s dismissive comments about ‘worrying about bathroom safety’ are a direct dig at women who have genuine concerns about losing their rights and safety if gender identity legislation should come into effect.

You might think a bastion of women’s rights like Teigen, a member of the great ‘we’ herself, would avoid mocking women as silly for wanting to maintain their sex-based rights. Maybe she’d feel a sliver of concern for the women who will be made vulnerable as a result of Biden’s commitments.

While Chrissy’s concerns are imagined, thousands of women around the world continue to fight for basics. One tweeter pointed out to Teigen, ‘You know women in third world countries are still fighting to have their own toilets so they won’t get raped as much?’ There has long been problems with access to women’s washrooms in the US, even, because the public sphere and workplaces were not designed with women in mind. Perhaps Chrissy Teigen is not the every woman she imagines herself to be, speaking up for the downtrodden, who would have no understanding of their oppression without a Hulu subscription.

The speed at which Democratic supporters seem to have forgotten not only the history of women’s struggle for rights — which continues in other parts of the globe — but their more-feminist-than-thou bonafides is impressive. The moment progressives were faced with the reality that many women were indeed choosing to vote against the Democrats, the shallowness of their ‘feminism’ was revealed.

The notion that a woman might make an autonomous, educated choice to vote for Trump was so impossible for these people to parse, within the insisted upon narrative that the current President is only supported through the Power of White Patriarchy, that they resorted to the most sexist of stereotypes. These female Trump voters were simply ‘voting as their husbands told them to’, or making emotional choices, so overwhelmed with anger at the Democrats they were no longer thinking rationally.

It’s funny, because about a little over a century ago, before women gained the right to vote, after fighting for many decades, they were said to be too delicate, emotional and irrational to be involved in politics. Their husbands were there to speak on their behalf, after all, so women needn’t worry themselves with complicated things like voting. Now, a hundred years later, those claiming to be on the feminist end of the political spectrum are feeding women the same sexist bullshit — dismissing them as stupid or too enthralled by men to make decisions of their own.

Feminists are announcing that women’s legitimate fears about male predators and concerns about women’s same-sex spaces and their abandonment of a party who has so fully abandoned them are irrational, silly and fueled by an inability to think rationally in the face of so much uncontrolled feminine emotion. Maybe we have to face the fact that ‘our side’ is not as progressive as we would like to think.

When we dismiss swaths of voters who chose to support Trump as evil, stupid monsters — not even human beings — we are in dangerous territory. Women have long fought to be considered as full, autonomous human beings — not so they could do the bidding of a bunch of bullies on the internet and be treated like irresponsible children, but so they could make educated choices about their own lives and what they consider to be the betterment of society. And whether you like it or not, that means some women aren’t going to see things your way.

My recommendation is that, if you do indeed claim to be an ally to women, try to understand those who don’t share your views. Treat them with a modicum of respect, rather than discarding, dismissing and condescending to them in the same way all women were, not so long ago.

Meghan Murphy is a writer in Vancouver and the host of The Same Drugs.

[–] babayaga 14 points (+18|-4)

Over the past five years, we’ve seen an endless stream of hand-wringing and hysteria around the misogyny of Donald Trump. The President is the White Patriarchy epitomized: a man who believes women are objects for his grabbing, useless unless they are pretty to look at or satisfying their husbands. What a jerk!

🙄 Okay, Meghan. I guess it was just silly, hypocritical hysteria to worry about the man who said he would imprison women for having an abortion. Or, have some qualms about a man who was accused of raping and beating his first wife, sexually assaulting or raping over twenty women, talked about wanting to have sex with his daughter, ran a "teen modeling agency" that was accused of sex trafficking girls, and admitted to watching teen girls get undressed at one of his beauty pageants.

[–] bumpyjerboa 10 points (+10|-0)

I really think people outside the US do not understand what it is like here.

I had an abortion in my early 20s. I had to reschedule the appointment twice because of the protestors. This was in a liberal city. They would link arms, block the sidewalk, take pictures of you and your license plate. It was terrifying.

The left is bad but they've only gotten this bad recently.

[–] sensusquaeram 6 points (+6|-0)

The left is bad but they've only gotten this bad recently.

That's what I find most alarming tbh. At the very least they respected science and held a fallback level of sanity. That changed so fast.

[–] [Deleted] 22 points (+24|-2)

Now major US political figures are on Twitter suggesting that there should be "lists" made of wrong thinkers. We're talking an open call to dox people, recruitment of "software engineers", etc.. Even if I don't like Trump, I know my account history is tied to GC people and "wrong think". I use precautions, but I'm not STEM major, so I'm sure I make mistakes that would allow any doxxer to identify me.

I'm seriously considering nuking my Twitter account based on my Reddit experiences.

Undoubtably, anyone who liked any tweets that are "wrong think" will be added to some "list", and I'm sure Twitter's employees are complicit in this and of thing.

[–] wildpansy 12 points (+14|-2)

What's the use of a communication platform if you can't communicate freely? Stop waiting until the harrassers find you and get rid of it.

[–] [Deleted] 13 points (+14|-1) Edited

Unfortunately they don't delete twitter accounts immediately after you "deactivate". The account still remains up 30 days after you delete it.

I love how someone downvoted me. OK, then. You think you won't be on the "bad list" after leaving a TERF trail on the internet? Many people automatically assume all "terfs" are conservatives. You ARE "the enemy", too.

[–] wildpansy 12 points (+14|-2)

You ARE "the enemy", too.

It's amazing how some still haven't understood this and are all for the thought police just as long as it doesn't affect them. First they came for the Karens...

That 30 day thing is rather prevalent on those platforms. They don't even care if you use them, but they want to use your data. Like Facebook and its shadow profiles, you're on there even if you don't want to be or even know about it. What can people do about it? Most will tell you it's a private company and so they can act however they want. But with the disproportionate amount of attention they get and their potential to seriously influence public discourse, people really ought to speak up. Too bad twitter is a woke platform though, so the people you'd think would be against them are actually their biggest supporters.

[–] sensusquaeram 12 points (+16|-4) Edited

Okay -- seriously -- WTAF with the downvotes here? This isn't fucking Reddit. Can we all not drag that culture over here, please?

In response to your privacy concerns, you may want to check out Proton Mail (free), use DuckDuckGo or Tor as your search engine, and install a VPN, all easy to do. Be safe!

[–] goneharolding 8 points (+8|-0)

Yep, this fight is finally coming. That’s a good thing. Create yourself a new, anonymous account but we can’t bow out now.

[–] feralfeminist 16 points (+23|-7)

You can't make an "educated" choice to vote for Trump. The man has no self-control (HOW many times has he gone bankrupt now? Once might be a mistake. Five or six? Nah, and how many times has he remarried all due to his cheating?), no sense of propriety, no political or historical literacy. He's broken the law several times in office, including violating the Emoluments Clause. He beat and raped his first wife because her hair guy messed up his hair, but spousal rape was legal in NYC at the time so there were zero consequences. (She has now changed how she characterizes the attack, but maintains that it happened.) He slapped his eldest son to the floor in Junior's dorm because Junior dared to dress in a baseball jersey instead of a suit to go to a baseball game. There were witnesses. He lies, lies, and lies some more, and has double standards for everything. I try not to be looksist, Glob knows I'm no stunner myself, but the man can't even look happy. All his smiles are fake. What do you call Resting B*tch Face when a man has it? Because he has it in spades. Even his signature is a nightmare -- I once read a book about graphology when I was a kid but I never thought I'd actually see a signature that says I Want To Stab You In The Eye.

Who the hell looks at that and goes, "You know what? This is my dream candidate." You want to do an educated vote? Vote for a person who will actually do well in office. The last four years have been a fucking trainwreck, and now we've had something like 300,000 excess-mortality deaths in the United States just this year thanks to that fucking virus that he ignored until it was too late. That's just the deaths. Surviving it is no damn picnic either. It's going to take at least four more years to even begin to restore public trust in public health.

But no, okay, fine, you go ahead and tell me voting for this guy is "educated," Meghan.

Not everything a woman does is feminist. Not everything a woman does is intelligent, or rational, or compassionate.

Part of the liberation process is acknowledging that sometimes we're fucking awful too.

Republicans have been single-issue voting (abortion) for decades. Look what it did to them. Do we want to be like that in another fifty years? Because fuck that, I'm not going there. We have a responsibility to the larger community to not vote for the guy who puts kids in cages because we want to be called a word again.

Gah. Okay. Calmer now. I KNOW we can do better. Let's.

[–] gnarlyfem 13 points (+16|-3) Edited

Republicans have been single-issue voting (abortion) for decades. Look what it did to them. Do we want to be like that in another fifty years? Because fuck that, I'm not going there. We have a responsibility to the larger community to not vote for the guy who puts kids in cages because we want to be called a word again.

Totally agree with everything you said, but this passage in particular. I get the rad fem movement, I really do. But we had a choice of two old white men.

One has so much of a moral deficit, there’s literally never been one redeemable thing about him (Seriously. No positive personal anecdotes from anyone. Including his own children.) Not to mention his cabinet made up of demons like Stephen Miller.

The other one thinks he’s helping people by supporting the trans movement. How many women in all of those Peak Trans posts said they too supported the trans movement before they realized how misogynist and stupid it was? Come on.

Women voting republican because they don’t buy trans bullshit, is the ultimate cutting off your nose to spite your face. All American women would be affected by having abortion and birth control banned. Trump is torturing immigrants. He’s kidnapped children and babies from their parents, even breastfeeding mothers, and put these kids in literal cages with no schooling, and not even giving them basics like soap and bedding. He either sent the parents back to their countries, or imprisoned them when they did nothing wrong (while giving unwanted hysterectomies to some women). They admitted to not keeping track of the children’s parents. Trump orphaned almost 600 children and infants. But we should consider this piece of shit an option because he hates trans people?! Fuck. That! While voting for republicans because they hate trans people, did you also notice they hate anyone not white, oh and also ... checks notes... WOMEN?!

Women who vote republican strictly because they’re against the trans dogma, are selfish assholes. Yet again, some of the people posting here are really showing their racist asses.

Also, Meghan is a white person from Canada. She doesn’t understand jack shit about racist American culture. I’ve lived in the south my whole life, and I know for damn sure no white Canadian better start talking to me like they understand life here while living under a racist president. Trump has made life miserable, and often times, terrifying for anyone not white in this country. Fuck Trump and his supporters.

[–] mycelium 7 points (+11|-4) Edited

Seriously. I will gladly call idiots by their foofoo pronouns - yes, fae/faer even - if it means that women can get the abortion or health care they need. My concern for women's lives and safety far outweighs my disgust for the gender cult. Yes, the gender cult poses a serious threat, but they are not worse than someone enforcing forced sterilizations. I'm so tired of seeing feminists proclaim that they literally cannot tell the difference between the two candidates - are we radical feminists or not?

[–] worried19 12 points (+12|-0)

Yes, the gender cult poses a serious threat, but they are not worse than someone enforcing forced sterilizations.

I don't disagree with your overall point, but I have to point out that the trans movement is indeed sterilizing young children who cannot give informed consent. Johanna Olson-Kennedy regularly prescribes testosterone to 12 year old girls after giving them puberty blockers, thus ensuring that they will never experience menarche.

[–] sensusquaeram 10 points (+10|-0) Edited

It's tempting to downplay the political importance of gender issues -- unless you've been caught up in them directly, with a spouse or child or relative wreaking complete psychological and economic havoc and a medical system enabling and promoting it. For some women it's still about hypotheticals, but for an increasing number it's about real life. Moreso in Canada, even moreso in the UK.

ETA: We're not all radfem here. Some radfem, some GC, some emerging from libfem and still thinking it all through.

[–] gnarlyfem 6 points (+6|-0)

are we radical feminists or not?

Thank you!!! No group is going to get everything they want from a politician, but the number one issue for rad fems should be body autonomy. I’m not willing to give that up to support someone who doesn’t agree with the gender cult (and for completely different and opposite reasons than us).

Rad fems who think republicans are a good choice, either aren’t paying attention to politics and government, or aren’t rad fems. I know they reference older feminists who are quoted as siding with republicans at times, but the Republican Party has only gotten more misogynistic and xenophobic over the last few decades. They’ve always been racist though. Always.

[–] remquarqk 7 points (+13|-6) Edited

Yes, agreed 100%.

This is just a trash article. It also does lefitist radial feminist women an injustice by conflating us with women who vote for Trump (let's be honest, a very few minority of them are radical feminists, most of them are conservative women who would also gladly vote to ban abortion.)

I'm tired of this nonsense black/white way of looking at all of these issues. I will never say it's okay for anyone or any woman to think voting for trump was okay and totally rational---it's not and we shouldn't pretend it ever was. Anyone who voted for him is severely confused and there is no getting around that.

[–] finn-again 15 points (+17|-2)

The notion that a woman might make an autonomous, educated choice to vote for Trump was so impossible for these people to parse...

I’m adamantly opposed to this line of thinking. It’s so reductive that it makes the radicalism of trans opposition seem parochial, pinched, and flailing about in defense. Trump is a tyrant who gets one thing right for all the wrong reasons, and GC women, in any social sector, are supposed to vote for this divisive, racist, sexist demagogue, who also happens to be a reactionary, manipulative, militaristic, whose just itching for a war with China. We’re supposed to defend voting for this jackboot just because he follows the wishes of his Bible Belt base and appears to oppose transgender. No way, this is a big issue, but it’s not worth sacrificing the reason and reality which informs our criticism.

[–] sensusquaeram 4 points (+4|-0)

With Trump specifically, or downballot partisan as well?

[–] bumpyjerboa 2 points (+2|-0)

I think with down ballot it depends. Old coots like Hickeylooper probably pay lip service to the TRA movement but I don't buy it for a minute that they actually believe a man can become a woman. Young candidates like AOC are more dangerous, and I'd understand voting against her.

[–] sensusquaeram 2 points (+2|-0)

My thoughts too. I was asking out of curiosity -- I also oppose that line of thinking as applied to Trump (all the reasons). What I'm seeing more in the press, though, is repudiation of all red votes. Downballot, regionally, locally, it really does depend.

[–] Boudicaea 12 points (+17|-5)

Interesting how often we attack Democrats here, but seemingly never Republicans. I am starting to wonder if I am hanging out in the wrong place. I thought we were against patriarchy here.

[–] sensusquaeram 14 points (+14|-0)

I think that's because so many women here feel utterly betrayed by the Democrats. I've lost track of how many times I've seen women here and on Spinster, r/GC, s/GC say in all sincerity that they feel politically homeless, including longtime UK Labour supporters. And yes, criticism of Republican policy is usually implicit.

[–] [Deleted] 7 points (+7|-0)

I'm one of those politically homeless. I have always been a Labour voter, idk what the fuck I'm going to do next General Election.

[–] hedy 14 points (+14|-0)

I think it's just that it's more than OK to express anti-Republican views in plenty of other spaces, whereas spaces for expressing views that don't hold Democratic party positions as a non-negotiable package deal are fewer and farther between. This is one of relatively few places where it is OK to attack certain Democratic positions without being assumed to be a Republican, sympathetic to Republicans or simply a monster.

As for this article, I don't like the way that it tries to legitimize a dangerous brand of politics, but does reiterate the point that the far left is willing to sit down and listen to just about every cross-section of people by natural identity but, oh no, not women, they're just hysterical. Since they appear to be willing to take a hard look at seemingly every ingrained bias except this one, what way is there to get through to them?

[–] sensusquaeram 9 points (+10|-1)

This is one of relatively few places where it is OK to attack certain Democratic positions without being assumed to be a Republican, sympathetic to Republicans or simply a monster.

Or banned, doxxed, deplatformed, defamed, etc. from within.

[–] Marmorsymphata 11 points (+12|-1)

Patriarchy is in both parties. I mean it was literally the leftists that banned all of us from reddit and forced us to create Ovarit.

Criticism of Republicans is usually implicit. We don't really need to specify what political party we're talking about here when we complain about abortion do we?

[–] sensusquaeram 7 points (+7|-0)

Patriarchy is definitely present in both U.S. parties. Also third parties -- doesn't matter what banner they're flying (socialist, green, whatever). If they're invested in or promoting the silencing or disempowerment of women, or cementing in the status quo viz women, they're upholding the patriarchy.

You have to keep in mind that radical feminists are a minority on this site, as we were on reddit.

The old GC reddit board(s) were made up of mostly women that acknowledged that no one can change sex and women need sex based protections from men in some circumstances. This is not a high bar to clear. It's a mix of actual radical feminists, basically liberal feminists who disagree TWAW and maybe have some problems with some other aspects of third wave feminism like prostitution/surrogacy, detrans and desisted women (many of whom still have varying levels of internalized misogyny) and basically apolitical or conservative women who are entirely focused on TIMs because they don't want men in their changing rooms or giving them pap smears but don't care about anything that doesn't personally affect them. For the last group, as long as they believe that their wealth or whiteness or connection to a male will enable them to circumvent any otherwise inconvenient restrictions placed on women by Republicans it makes sense to see Democrats as the larger threat.

[–] mycelium 7 points (+12|-5)

We should never forget that Republicans have always been ideologically opposed to us; they have been our enemy far longer than the Democrats. Some people here are just salty as fuck (like the one going down the thread downvoting half the comments) and don't want to accept reality.

[–] [Deleted] 11 points (+12|-1)

I agree with Meghan on a lot of things, but can we not basically give a free pass to this appalling President? I'm as radfem as they come, but if I were in the U.S. you can better believe I would've voted Biden. And then started to fight like hell to protect women's rights, because we all know that day is coming.

It IS possible to fight against it. Self-ID is dead in the UK, it can die in the U.S. Articles like this make the rest of the world think that radfems are all conservative. We're not. I'm as lefty as possible, but I have no party here in my country that aligns with a) my political views and b) my radfem views.

TL;DR Meghan - this is not it.

[–] sensusquaeram 5 points (+5|-0)

I get the strategic core of her argument:

The moment progressives were faced with the reality that many women were indeed choosing to vote against the Democrats, the shallowness of their ‘feminism’ was revealed.

But I think Trump was a poor tactical choice to cite as an example (all the reasons).

If we could say (more squarely counter to U.S. op-ed pages) that voting is sacrosanct, women have the same moral facility to decide and cast votes as men do, and women should bear no more public criticism for their voting choices than men do -- then cite conservative candidates in general (rather than Trump in particular) -- I think it would have made a much more compelling argument.

"Trump" can't be functional shorthand for Republican or conservative, even though U.S. journalism is grossly overstating everything as "red" or "blue" and morally condemning groups (read: female voters) accordingly. Replace it with a better descriptor, and the argument begins to hold water, make sense, and clarify what the subtle sexism is and how it works.

[–] IronicWolf 4 points (+4|-0)

Joe Biden thinks trans rights are the civil rights issue of the time in a country which still doesn’t have maternity leave and which is the only rich country to have increasing maternal mortality rights? Men putting men first as always.

[–] emptiedriver 1 points (+1|-0)

subtle sexism is a problem, but it's better than blatant, overwhelming, non-stop free-range sexism. Those were the choices we had.

[+] [Deleted] -1 points (+9|-10)