An newspaper article which confirms what I suggest was already apparent - namely that a certain type of 'feminism' is ultimately the cause of some of the issues that women now face and that therefore such social movements are ultimately self defeating for those they have claimed to advocate for...
Trans issues in the public sphere provide an excellent example of what happens when people gain social status from prestige narratives. And, if Professor Kathleen Stock OBE, philosophy academic and author of Material Girls: Why Reality Matters for Feminism, is right, the stories trans activists tell each other and expect the rest of us to believe are fictions, albeit of a particular kind.
Material Girls was published last month to immense fanfare (and controversy) and, while it is broadly feminist in outlook, Stock’s feminism is disciplined and thoughtful. She is the first feminist advocate I’ve encountered even to entertain the possibility that stereotypically gendered behaviour has biological origins. She also acknowledges the extent to which the transgender mess has roots in feminism’s historical tendency to make political claims unmoored from scientific or statistical facts. The most egregious is an attempt to argue that ovaries and breasts are incidental to being a woman. This argument was a product of career-oriented feminism – still the most publicly popular variety – that sought to decouple womanhood from biological femaleness with a view to prising labour markets open. Transactivists have seized on this and are now making the claim that ovaries and breasts are irrelevant to being a woman: female is a feeling.