So who went on a(119 Posts)
Anti Bedroom Tax march and what one?
So it's official then Sabrina and LRD as well as others are saying that since I have different views on sex work, which incidentally I challenge you to say what they are as I doubt you even know what views I hold.
My views on anything and everything else connected to feminism and women are questionable? Fine just wanted it made clear.
Yeesh, I'm glad I live abroad!
I'm a feminist, but not sure how feministy compared to you, OP.
This is turning into a very nasty thread - chocolate, anyone?
I can't follow that sentence leith, does it have something missing?
What I said - just to explain again, though I have already said it clearly - your views on sex work make me disinclined to go on a march with you.
I'm terribly sorry if that's upsetting for you. But why it's a surprise is beyond me. I also wouldn't choose to go on a march to support the Tories - because I am not a Tory. I don't go leafletting for the BNP, because I am not a racist. I don't attend pro-life demos outside abortion clinics, because I am not pro-life and don't enjoy threatening women.
Do you get the picture?
In the same way, I wouldn't want to go on a march organized or promoted by people whose principles I disagree with.
I'm fine with you going on the march, and if you wanted to (which you clearly don't), I'd be fine with you explaining why you see this as being a feminist march.
But yes, to me, anyone who is pro-sex work has views I find questionable. Did you honestly not expect that?
And FWIW, yes, I agree with the poster at the start of the thread who raised concerns about identity.
I would not want to go to a real-life event if I were worried about being identified, and especially if I thought other attendees might not be legit. Sadly, on the internet, these are things we all have to worry about. Dismissing them suggests you are very naive, or you think women's safety is unimportant. I have to admit I suspect it is the former, but seriously - please think about the issue. For every person who's organizing a legit meet-up, there will be someone who is really, really not.
Think what you like LRD it does not make it so. aAgain feel free to report me and this thread.
I asked you how other feminist issues could be covered, I doubted I needed to say within the context of the subject, but apparently I do.
"Direct quote "Is there a conflict between this and, say, your stance on sex work that may have put feminists off associating with you?"
That seems to be a contradiction, but see here we go again twisting words, the truth is you do not like my views on one thing so you ignore me about other things. Did I come and start attacking you on this thread, no I did not you came hear to attack me. That says enough I think.
I don't like your views, so I don't want to go on the march. I would speculate other feminists may feel the same. And yes, sorry, but me feeling this way does make it so. I do feel disinclined to go.
I'm not attacking you, I'm saying why I don't want to go on a march. Of course I dislike your views on some things, and yes, that's precisely why I don't want to listen to you on other issues - because, to me, your views are tainted and I don't want to promote any of your issues.
You seem to think you've winkled out a shocking truth here, but I am admitting it quite freely and I am gobsmacked you think I shouldn't do that.
It cannot be news to you that, if you hold views that some feminists find offensive, those feminists will not want to march with you or meet up with you in RL. Why on earth should we?
The point of the thread was to ask who went on Marches, marches organised and run by trade unions, anti cuts groups, faith groups, community groups, all kinds of people. The fact that you know nothing about the Marches means you can say you would have issues about identity, if you had been aware you would know how silly that sounds, so again my point in starting the thread about who knew and went was to speak to those like a couple of the posters here who do not think your fears about identity are real.
Neither were the many hundreds of women, a fair few I would imagine would identify themselves as feminists. In fact I know 6-7 who went and do identify themselves in that way. So LRD you defend yourself why is your identity at risk when so many other feminists disagree with you.
I go on some marches, and those I go on, I know quite a bit about.
I'm not sure it's a 'fact' I know nothing about them.
I would have been interested to know more about this particular march, but wouldn't want to attend a march promoted by pro-sex-worker types.
That's my right. Plenty of others wouldn't feel the same as me.
My indentity isn't threatened by that - plenty of feminists are anti sex-work, plenty are pro. All I did was to suggest to you that this might be a reason why people didn't want to go on your march.
Why should I 'defend' anything?
You seem outraged at the idea that women are not just there to support your own cherry-picked causes. Well, it may be news to you, but some women actually have their own principles and their own causes.
If you had bothered to write a thread that wasn't all about berating other people for failing to be interested in cryptic OPs, I would have more time for you. As it is, I think this thread is purely stirring.
Btw, of course my fears about identity are real - some people don't want to go to a real-life meet up until they know it is safe. This is basic internet safety.
no I haven't been on a march regarding the change in housing benefit policy.
it is not something i disagree with & i don't see it as a feminist issue.
Here's an interesting article about feminists on a bedroom tax demo:
Isabela: It was a faction within the SWP who brought shame on the whole march in Glasgow, for some reason probably lack of knowledge about the sap, they were allowed to steward the event. Tommy Sheridan was in effect booted of the organising committee of the March in Glasgow when it was discovered that he is a very divisive figure on the left.
The organisers of the March to some extent are not involved and do not support the sap, any of the internal factions, or in fact share any political goals that the sap have. They are concerned with the effect on people across the country.
Similar incidents did not happen or so I understand at any of the other Marches, even ones with SWP stewards. It is always unacceptable to behave like this, even more so when an internal fight amongst a small political cadre detracts from the main message.
Your repeating the fault line of your argument LRD. First if you were aware of the marches you would have known who was organising them and you would know that it was "safe" Secondly in a crowd of 1000 people at a public demonstration you are certain that all of those people would share the same views on sex work, and therefore it would be a "safe" environment.
As I suspected you have no idea about what I am for, your assertion about me being "pro sex worker" is way off the mark and basically means you are working from a false set of assumptions, but hay never let a good prejudice get in the way of facts eh? If you want to try and find something I have said in my many posts that show I have promoted and agreed with prostitution, trafficking, or sexual abuse of women and children you go right ahead.
Now whats the word that describes when women dismiss men out of hand?
IsBella that is a shocking article.
Must admit, when I saw this thread I just thought isn't this already being discussed in politics/elsewhere on MN.
Read through the thread and the aggression displayed by the op towards individual posters on here puts me off even answering the question.
leith - I never said I was aware of these specific marches - I asked you for information, which you repeatedly failed to provide.
Why are you pretending I did claim to be aware of these marches?
Secondly, no, sadly, as you would know if you knew anything about feminism, crowds are not necessarily safe places for women. And yes, as a particular kind of feminist, I do expect not to demonstrate with pro-sex people. I don't care if only some of those demonstrators are pro-sex, and I certainly don't find it surprising. But I don't want to join forces with any of them.
Why does this surprise you? It is called 'having principles'. Do you not expect feminists to have principles? If so, why?
I judge your views from what you post on here. I have no wish to know more about you. Why should I? What have you done to suggest I would want to know more?
Nothing. You refuse to clarify or provide information - it's been asked for many times. Clearly, you don't actually care about this issue, you just want to have an argument about why you think feminists should sign up to a cause you like, without knowing anything about it. Well, sorry, no: I would prefer you to put your cards on the table before you start berating me for exercising my normal and typical right to have an opinion on what I do and don't choose to align myself with.
yes IsBella that is the story i am thinking of. i have no interest whatsoever in making common cause with people who hate women and don't see them as people
what a crazy ass thread this is
FWIW, leith, if you're wondering, here's just two of your posts that made it clear to me I would be put off any demonstration you took part in (or anyone with your views took part it). In the first you're discussing whether or not people's 'right' to a sex life trumps the rights of women not to be abused.
I am not saying that these views have never been put forward by people who say otherwise sensible things. I'm not in the least questioning your right, or anyone else's right, to hold these views.
But I did suggest that, perhaps, these views are one reason why you're not getting many feminists here saying they'd take part in your march.
No doubt these women go on other marches for other causes, and possibly a lot agree that the bedroom tax is wrong - but you can't be surprised that some feminists would want to distance themselves from anyone holding these kinds of views.
'The independent living movement although not explicitly talking about sex does actively work towards each person being able to make decisions about their own lives, so if they choose to pay for sex, buy drugs, be racist it is there choice.'
'And did you look at the links Franz sent and will you acknowledge that legitimate and fully independent organisations of women who have or still do work in the industry and who oppose criminalisation exist?
What would make everyone a nicer person would be to get sex workers off the street and either accepted or abolished.'
(I find this particularly unpleasant because the focus is on sex workers ... as usual ... and not the people who abuse them. It's the happy hooker myth, plus some disturbingly misogynistic language about 'abolishing' abused women, or getting them 'off the street' so we can all feel 'nicer').
Chibi, you realise that you just tarred thousands of women with that brush? In It is clear from the blog post that the issue is entirely tied up with the internal wrangling of the swp and Scottish politics, nothing to do with the anti bedroom tax.
"One Solidarity activist, Joyce Drummond, was telling the woman making the threats that it was good on her, and pointing out ex-SSP members she saw in the crowd as grasses. Drummond was formerly best known for being Tommy Sheridans most virulent supporter, and for being caught out in Sheridans perjury trial as one of the group behind a motion calling for the minutes of a Scottish Socialist Party meeting (where Sheridan admitted that he had done the things which he later denied in court) to be destroyed but now shes best known to those who have seen the above video as that awful woman.
You think women can't disagree with women now?
Why shouldn't chibi say what she thinks?
That link perfectly illustrates why we are better steering clear of all of this, IMO.
Nice work LRD, I knew you would rise to the Challenge. However having selected and carefully presented out of context, you still do not show why these are pro sex work or prostitution, you show examples that you do not agree with or find problematic.
The fact that you say these quotes mean I am in favour of one persons rights to abuse others is an interpretation which your entitled to make. Your not entitled to extrapolate nor or you correct to extrapolate that I am in favour of prostitution or trafficked women or young children which is what you imply by using the "pro sex work" tag.
The last quote is particularly interesting, as you say "I find this particularly unpleasant because the focus is on sex workers ... as usual ... and not the people who abuse them. It's the happy hooker myth, plus some disturbingly misogynistic language about 'abolishing' abused women, or getting them 'off the street' so we can all feel 'nice"
Out of context you make a fair point, if though I remember rightly I said that in response to a discussion about why on these boards discussion of any sex work related topics gets turned in to a vitriolic and personal bun fight. So hence the only way to stop the level of Vitriol from both sides and actually make some progress on the main issues, would be etc. More a comment of the entrenched views of people like yourself LRD than that of the rights and wrongs of sex work.
But see this is more passive aggressive stuff from you, and here I am defending myself, yet again. If you and others have an issue with working with, or joining protests that might contain people with dodgy ideas, then the return is that all your hopes for feminism will be thwarted as it will only be by mass action that change will take place. You wont be there though so your not going to get what you want, you will have to rely on the likes of me and other dodgy women and men to deliver your feminist dreams.
I agree with chibi & LRD. You need to be careful who you stand with. I don't personally agree with the bedroom tax but I wouldn't stand with an organisation that brushes the rape of a teenager under the carpet.
Should also add that I am not in favour of abuse full stop. But I do not see that anyone trying to live the life that they want to using legal and consensual practices as abuse.
leith - I disagree with your views, as I understand them, in quotations such as those. Because of that, I don't want to go on your march.
Why do you think this is something I'm not allowed to make up my own mind about?
This isn't me being remotely passive-aggressive ... this is just me explaining why I wouldn't want to go on this march.
If you had a serious desire to promote this march or this cause, I think you would talk about it, instead of taking pot shots.
Your expectation that feminists should not be principled, and should be instantly available to support an agenda you're too lazy to explain for yourself, is pretty depressing. You do get that we might actually have an agenda of our own? And marches of our own?
Your posts suggest to me that you support the abuse of women. Sorry, but they do. If you seriously meant something else, I'm so pleased to hear it. But, sadly, I don't feel keen to join the march. You'd have to do a lot more to convince me that it's a worthwhile thing to do.
Anita, apart from the swp, would you stand with the other people who were on the protests?
Btw, issuing threats to feminists is really not the way to get anyone on your side.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.