The article reminded me of the category of people who are nominally progressive, or woke, but reenact the same bigotries as before from a different direction. You see this with how misandrist a lot of terfs are.
Edit: for clarity, the way the article repeatedly jabs at men reminds me of the inverse way women are treated by mysoginistic writers
I do think it’s worth distinguishing from the run-of-the-mill transphobe and the TERF. Both exist wherever you go, but the latter is notoriously much more common in TERF Island, while the orange fascist’s state has more regular bigots. And not just because there’s one prominent example from said island.
You’ll find that if the concept of trans people never comes up, most TERFs will genuinely come across as progressive on gender issues. They’ll be, for example, the kind of person who runs a YouTube channel about swords and showing how women are very capable of learning to fight with them. (Sadly not a hypothetical.) They obviously carry somegender essentialism—that’s basically a prerequisite to transphobia—but they often apply it much more narrowly than the average transphobe.
Fair correction, the point I was mostly trying to make was that I call it woke bigotry because terfs pretend to be feminist, the same way those racist black people in the US pretend to be anti-racist.
Yeah, I guess so. Misandry and misogyny aren’t exact inverses of each other, same as internalized racism isn’t quite the same as say a white man being racist would be.
I disagree with the implication that a minority being bigoted, like misandry, is an internalized version of the “larger bigotry”, if that’s what you meant to say. Some queer spaces are legitimately just hostile to men for no good reason with the same force misogynistic spaces are to women, and there are racial minorities who are legit just racist against white people.
Of course, those are less harmful societally, since they have less power, but on an individual level they’re still just as bad.
Yes it can, in the context of a specific case. In the case of a school club, say, a man (case A) and woman (case B) can be discriminated against with the same force, albiet in different ways within the walls of the club (A or B), because social groups can have different rules than wider society.
In the same way that being white in some countries makes you a minority that is being discriminated against, whereas in others you’re not.
The fact the woman gets discriminated against more outside the club is important, but it doesn’t make the discrimination better or more excusable in the case of the man being discriminated against.
It could be (not taking a side on whether it is) a difference in degree rather than kind. The effect would still be markedly different in many cases (being excluded from a bathroom is annoying, being excluded from nearly every bathroom is a different matter entirely), but that doesn’t mean the intent isn’t similar.
I hate that shit so much, it’s just bigotry but woke™
Don’t get what is woke about it
The article reminded me of the category of people who are nominally progressive, or woke, but reenact the same bigotries as before from a different direction. You see this with how misandrist a lot of terfs are.
Edit: for clarity, the way the article repeatedly jabs at men reminds me of the inverse way women are treated by mysoginistic writers
TERFs are usually rather misogynistic and lean into patriarchal norms for their exclusion of trans people.
Adhering to strict gender norms is a product of the patriarchy.
TERFS hate trans women because they view them as men. This is a view directly tied to the patriarchy.
I do think it’s worth distinguishing from the run-of-the-mill transphobe and the TERF. Both exist wherever you go, but the latter is notoriously much more common in TERF Island, while the orange fascist’s state has more regular bigots. And not just because there’s one prominent example from said island.
You’ll find that if the concept of trans people never comes up, most TERFs will genuinely come across as progressive on gender issues. They’ll be, for example, the kind of person who runs a YouTube channel about swords and showing how women are very capable of learning to fight with them. (Sadly not a hypothetical.) They obviously carry somegender essentialism—that’s basically a prerequisite to transphobia—but they often apply it much more narrowly than the average transphobe.
Fair correction, the point I was mostly trying to make was that I call it woke bigotry because terfs pretend to be feminist, the same way those racist black people in the US pretend to be anti-racist.
Yeah, I guess so. Misandry and misogyny aren’t exact inverses of each other, same as internalized racism isn’t quite the same as say a white man being racist would be.
I disagree with the implication that a minority being bigoted, like misandry, is an internalized version of the “larger bigotry”, if that’s what you meant to say. Some queer spaces are legitimately just hostile to men for no good reason with the same force misogynistic spaces are to women, and there are racial minorities who are legit just racist against white people.
Of course, those are less harmful societally, since they have less power, but on an individual level they’re still just as bad.
It literally can’t be with the same force because those minorities are not in positions of power the way that the larger majority is.
Yes it can, in the context of a specific case. In the case of a school club, say, a man (case A) and woman (case B) can be discriminated against with the same force, albiet in different ways within the walls of the club (A or B), because social groups can have different rules than wider society.
In the same way that being white in some countries makes you a minority that is being discriminated against, whereas in others you’re not.
The fact the woman gets discriminated against more outside the club is important, but it doesn’t make the discrimination better or more excusable in the case of the man being discriminated against.
Do you get what I mean?
It could be (not taking a side on whether it is) a difference in degree rather than kind. The effect would still be markedly different in many cases (being excluded from a bathroom is annoying, being excluded from nearly every bathroom is a different matter entirely), but that doesn’t mean the intent isn’t similar.