"The only dignity and value women get is as mothers... having children is the one social contribution credited to women --- it is the bedrock of women's social worth... Without [childbearing], women know they have nothing. Homosexuality for women means having nothing; it means extinction." - Andrea Dworkin, Right-Wing Women.
Yeah I think a lot of conservative women feel that way. I don't really get that because motherhood is so incredibly gendered so much of the process etc has always made me dysphoric/uncomfortable. Like the process of biologically having kids always bothered me so I always thought surrogacy was a better option, or if I had a partner who could get pregnant that would be ideal.
Then you're expected to take on this binary role in a relationship with someone else who takes on the masculine role and that doesn't appeal to me either... I've never really wanted that relationship dynamic with another person.
The incredible fixation of these women on the fertility of trans masc people is incredibly gross to me too. Abigail Shrier's book cover (which I think publishers have actually attempted to change recently to make it more palatable from what I saw on twitter.) Is honestly mildly triggering.
I don't see that as being the only thing a woman can be valued for and I think it's very depressing that some people see their options as sex object vs mother. First of all why are you rating your value by what patriarchal men think? Secondly there are obviously women who have contributed to science and art, literature etc that are valued for that.
Did Mary Shelley have kids? I don't even know I would have to Google.
And yeah their threat response is so great that they're all trying to block research into artificial wombs. They're fine with sperm donors for lesbian couples but hate the idea of surrogacy even if it's a friend of the gay couple who offers.
Also oh good she's addressing Posie Parker. I've been aware of her insanity for years and years but high people have only started to pay attention over the past year or so.
Lol yeah I remember her tweeting that. Was very mask off. There's a lot of elitist and reproductive chauvinism. So, separating childbirth or female reproductive organs from womanhood deeply offends these people."Women who call themselves men should be sterilised."
I ultimately (and not surprisingly) disagree with her feminist framing a bit towards the end. I think it's a bit more complicated and deeply rooted than just terfs being handmaidens of the patriarchy and useful idiots. When transphobic cis women freak out about trans women and create a fear narrative it attracts the attention of men because men, generally, want to protect women. It's also just part of the male gender role to protect women so, men who are very into performing that role (as of course right wing men would be,) will be particularly drawn to do that for social reasons. And women like Posie Parker know this on an instinctive level. When she makes appeals for men to show up in women's bathrooms with guns to protect women by appealing to their traditional masculinity she knows exactly the impact it has. I really believe she's a psychopath. I've listened to her unhinged comments about her husband and what she'd do if he ever left her.
I don't think they're just the face of the movement and useful idiots to allow for male violence. They are inspiring the violence in the first place and influencing men and they in some cases desire that violence themselves, but even if they don't they want complete separation and safety either way.
tl;dr It's all mostly just romantic/sexual fantasy projected onto 'politics.'
Hegemonic men do dislike feminine men and trans women (for the same reason they dislike feminine men,) quite often and I already posted one of the main theories that exists for why (that from a young age many boys organise themselves into groups and then weak boys and later men have to be filtered out as potential liabilities for warfare and combat.) So they often don't have protective feeling for trans women ('moe') unless they view them as women which some men do and some men don't, and it also varies per trans woman, and they usually rank cis women above trans women either way. Probably for instinctive/reproductive reasons.
When it comes to cis men the guys who spend more time trying to protect trans women are chasers. Yes even that abysmal Scottish guy I've argued with a few times who hates most trans people except the feminine transsexual straight women he finds attractive. His wife is trans and he devotes most of his time to posting on social media - YouTube, Twitter, his blog, to defending straight feminine trans women.
There's also this kind of guy they tend to be quite sexist towards cis women and favour trans women instead:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10....7184X221148208
But not all chasers will do this some are very transphobic and that's probably connected to romantic attraction. The chasers who just like the idea of fucking a trans woman and trawl social media responding to trans sexworkers while at the same time retweeting transphobic stuff (I've seen these guys around yeah lol.) Probably not so much.To begin to fill this gap, the author analyzes over 200 online discussion board posts and threads on Reddit by cis heterosexual men who discuss their romantic and sexual desires for trans women. The author coins the concept of transamorous misogyny to capture the paradoxical process of how cis heterosexual men?s desires for trans women is in and through their contempt of all women. Specifically, the author shows how the cis heterosexual men expand ideas of sexual identity as attraction toward gender expression. However, the men expand the definition of heterosexuality in ways that construct trans women as hyper-feminine, hyper-submissive, and as not real women. The men also discursively work to reassert their cis heterosexual masculinity through discussing how trans women are better than cis women. Ultimately, transamorous misogyny works to devalue all women and allows cis heterosexual men to desire trans women in ways that help the men invest in their own cis heterosexual masculinity.
I'd expect there to be more women defending trans women because women are more likely to have solidarity with trans women and also obviously care less about masculinity and policing it. In fact the deconstruction of masculinity in certain circles just becomes more and more popular as time goes on. Look it's moe again with a different label and exclusively referring to men:
It's kind of gross when you view it through that lens lol."He's so babygirl" is the new submissive and breedable, a phrase used to describe when a man is so primally attractive that you want to provide for him that became mainstream in 2021. Babygirl a term of endearment for when a man is being cute, comfortable in his masculinity, or weak in an evocative way. Women reclaimed babygirl and used it as an adjective to infantilize grown men.
So when Posie Parker gets outraged and talks about annihilating women well yeah, she's going to have to. They will make up the biggest demographic against her and other transphobes and that's going to be very awkward moving forward. It's sort of been the elephant in the room for a while now lol.
The right wing men won't change their position because they like taking on a masculine role and the women who are just as often non-binary or trans men and post on tumblr (tradwife tumblr aside.) That just isn't ever going to appeal to those guys.
#I want to carry him in my arms #and spoon him but shhh#my wife is so beautiful fr <3#he is sooooooooooo #girlcodedYou know and they're talking about a man. I'm using such an extreme end of set of examples haha oh well.#he looks so sweet and dorky I can?t #I wanna hold him in my lap and kiss him
At best they have fantasies about raping us back to submissiveness that are triggered in response and start entire political movements about the emasculation of men or whatever. And shut down entire websites in China. So they're going to continue to try and find women who want them to play hero. It boosts their self esteem.
And Glinner lost his actual relationship to this so all he has is the fantasy now.
And there's a lot of straight women into that too. It's kind of a form of heterosexual heteronormative roleplay. There's more than just that going on, but that's definitely a huge part of it. There's a lot of gatekeeping you know the 'female chauvinism' thing I mentioned. Like on both sides there's a lot of gatekeeping. 'Men have to be masculine stop wearing dresses. No one should transition. 'they're(tm)' destroying Western culture by emasculating it. Less masculine cultures will fall to other cultures because they're going to invade. 'We'll lose our position as mothers' it's all very instinctive. I don't know if people are acknowledging that. Like you probably have to find a way to integrate different reproductive styles into the culture and we haven't so it's chaotic. It seems really difficult for people not to feel threatened by certain groups. We had a 'sexual revolution' and all that happened is people started having more casual sex and then we organised people into a few different sexual orientations based on genetic sex. No that won't do looking at things. Instead of going to bed I'm just going to sit here writing this and eating chocolate my dad bought me for Easter because it's there. I have great impulse control. It's really only laziness and risk aversion that explain why I'm not a crack addict now or something honestly.
I don't really like infantilising women and making it seem like they're sort of victims in this scenario. Especially Posie Parker. Some of these women have trauma from domestic violence etc but I really do just believe she's a psychopath.
There is something very gross about white women weaponising their vulnerability to appeal to the violence of fascistic and hegemonic men. And not in an ambiguous way in many cases literally 'calling on men to eradicate these monsters from society' Like [BEEP] do your own dirty work at the least. Fucking pathetic.
I do agree the excessive focussing on female bigots isn't good. Firstly don't really get it I tend to focus on male bigots myself haha don't think about JK Rowling as much. I think about Posie Parker because she's a psychopath and they always trigger me. One sidedly demonising female bigots is sexist. But also if you attack women people instinctively get defensive and make you out to be a monster. There's stuff you can get away with saying to a guy that you're less likely to with women. And that's partly because men will just be stoic about stuff and more aggressive on average. People just take it more seriously if you hurt a woman's feelings compared to a guy.
Edit: I dunno I think she's biased in favour of women and it shows in a bunch of her videos. The left in general is but for her specifically I think it's partly because of the radfem stuff she reads and because she's a lesbian. I don't want to be 'that guy' but I mean come on lol. The idea that you should ignore someone like JK Rowling who is a billionaire and just respond to male bigots is incredibly biased lol. And again I say this as someone who doesn't really pay as much attention to JK Rowling as: Jordan Peterson, Posie Parker, Matt Walsh, Glinner etc. I think the reason not to respond to her if anything is it's always going to be used against you because she's beloved and very protected. 'The attention should be on the US Republican party' Um Contrapoints please stop being American and doing the American thing. Some of us don't live in your country. She also brings up the conservative party but both labour and the conservatives in the UK are transphobic. We are [BEEP] out of luck here and she has no idea again. There are communist parties and groups here that are very transphobic.