Is feminism all about man hating?

Whatme I have no idea who you're referring to with the "MNRadFems" - I'm not a radical feminist but I see the benefit of women-only spaces when women want to talk about surviving sexual abuse.

"And yet these are the selfsame people who won't let anyone with a willy come near their conference " ... if you're referring to Conway, I believe that they did in fact let people with penises come to their conferences, but they proposed a workshop for women surviving sexual abuse that would have no penises there at all.

Since these women had been attacked with penises, it doesn't seem outlandish to me to offer them a penis-free zone in which they could talk about the abuse.

Is saying "I am not comfortable with you here, and I would like to perserve this little space as a space without you in it." - to the person possessing a penis like the one that raped you - is that really radical and extreme and anti-men

Good God! Next thing you'll be saying that having female toilets is anti-men. Or female changing rooms at swimming pools. Must all spaces that women use be open to men at ALL TIMES, lest the poor men's feelings get all butthurt? What about the women's feelings?

Shitting crikey!

Agree.
There are plenty of places where men only meet up and talk about how awful it is that X woman is now 'allowed' to have such and such a job.
Or where women are actually kicked out (using brutal force) because there shouldn't be there.

I am wondering why some women are trying to reproduce the very same things that men have done in the past and that we have (and are still) fighting against.
Why doing something that we know isn't working?

Unless of course, you have actually bought into the very male way of looking at things 'If I ain't at the top, I am at the bottom and I don't like it'

'I don't know of any spaces in which men get together in order to discuss how they are institutionaly oppressed by women or to discuss global female violence against men, or to discuss their lower status due to their biological sex. Or to discuss matriarchal society and how it harms and disadvantages men. Or to discuss how men are disproportionately affected by prostitution and sexualised violence.

I wonder why that might be?'

There are plenty of spaces exactly as you have described here, plenty.

Doh! No reponse from MNHQ, sorry.

I'm with you on the basic premiss, Beachcomber, but I quailed at the thought of going through it all over again. And the people who never post here unless there's a bust-up in the offing piling in.

No response to MNHQ on why the posts were deleted. I will chase that up.

Beach, I could be childish and ask you to ignore my question and return to kicking out at trans people instead. I see an oppressed community within their ranks, but you have issues with them. I don't want to go down that road because I have no idea how they as a community feel or what issues they face.

All I would ask is that you accept that I posed a question in all sincerity because I thought it relevant to the discussion. If you don't, fine. I know from past encounters that you have an issue with me, so I suggest we drop this.

Whatmeworry's post of Wed 11-Jul-12 13:28:37 suggested that it was relevant to the notion that feminists hate men. That the idea of women only spaces is extreme and makes feminism a laughing stock. It seemed to be a follow on from the argument that some feminist hate men

Here we are on a thread about "Is feminism all about man hating?". Most of the reasonable people on thread say no, its not all about hating men, but there are some Feminists who probably do hate men, stands to reason.

Oh no, say the MN Radfems piously - we have never met anyone who ever hated a man, no neverevereverever.

And yet these are the selfsame people who won't let anyone with a willy come near their conference - even if these people are in the process of becoming women (they are not there to disrupt, but to join). No, rather ban them and go through astounding mental gymnastics (see some of the above posts) to justify why this isn't blatant discrimination and hypocrisy. Because an (internal) Radical Feminist analysis says We Are Right.

And if you don't support this you are Not A Proper Feminist, it seems.

Can't you see how unhelpful it all is? All it does is create a (totally unnecessary) rod with which opponents can beat Feminism overall with, and neutrals just walk away shaking their heads - they don't discriminate.

I don't know of any equivalent men only spaces.

I don't know of any spaces in which men get together in order to discuss how they are institutionaly oppressed by women or to discuss global female violence against men, or to discuss their lower status due to their biological sex. Or to discuss matriarchal society and how it harms and disadvantages men. Or to discuss how men are disproportionately affected by prostitution and sexualised violence.

I wonder why that might be?

Well, I am familiar with this concept of of the slaves barring the masters from their hut, as was expressed on here earlier. I can see a fundamental difference, but I can also see a parallel. The fact that Augusta until recently had a ban on non-whites too doesn't add any weight to their case. I just was curious to see if there were any differing views.

Um, no.

That isn't a political parallel.

The privileged oppressing class excluding the non privileged oppressed class, is entirely different to the non privileged oppressed class excluding the privileged oppressing class from a space in which they wish to discuss their oppression.

This is basic basic politics.

On the subject of women-only spaces, I think they are a grand idea if somebody wants one. However, do they not dredge up the old, old argument of equivalent male-only spaces? I am thinking specifically of places like the members room at Augusta (a golf club for the non-golfing heathens amongst us). There was a massive furore earlier this year when women CEO's of companies sponsoring a golf competition were not allowed in this particular space, purely because they were women. Is there a parallel here? It is a private club with it's own rules.

I'm happy to drop it but I think the reason the subject came up at all was because Whatmeworry's post of Wed 11-Jul-12 13:28:37 suggested that it was relevant to the notion that feminists hate men.

That the idea of women only spaces is extreme and makes feminism a laughing stock. It seemed to be a follow on from the argument that some feminist hate men.

Certainly there are people who think that women only spaces are evidence that radical feminists hate men.

Eldritch, I have money on this!

Unless we've all finished with this thread topic, I think a discussion on the trans people in single sex spaces issue is really for another thread, personally. It is a massive, emotive, difficult topic and we know how it tends to go.

Mr Gin the shitstirring was referring to the OOH women look at that nasty post about men you didn't say anything you hypocrites

whatme So yes they would have to invite them? Because by not inviting them they would be excluding them wouldn't they? So in that case no minority group with rights not to be discriminated against can any longer hold a conference focused on an agenda discussing issues unique to their experiences as being a member of that minority group without being aware that their conference will be stopped if they refuse entry to someone from another discriminated against group?

So the police would have no power to stop a group of BNP members who insist on attending the Black Lawyers' Conference? Because refusal to allow them attend would be racist? Really?

Same link as above

However, the exclusion of men by women and the exclusion of women by men are certainly not the same thing in the first place. In an excellent analogy that I owe to Marilyn Frye, it is nothing extraordinary for a master to bar his slaves from the manor, but it is a revolutionary act for slaves to bar their master from their hut. The attempt to classify women?s separatism under the same rubric of "sexism" or "discrimination" neglects the reality of power differences between the sexes as classes. In short, it ignores the reality of male privilege.

Beyond the politics, there is also simply a practical element: speak-outs and consciousness-raising simply do not work in the presence of men. No matter how committed the men may be to feminism, no matter how much the women may accept them as feminists, decades of pervasive psychological conditioning will still cause women to react defensively to the presence of men. It is well-known that women will not speak about their experiences of sexual and physical violation with anywhere near the honesty that they do in women?s-only groups, as in groups with both women and men (the same is true of men speaking about how they interact with women, in men?s-only and mixed groups).

What all this means is that there are times for feminist activism in which it is absolutely crucial to maintain women?s-only spaces. Committed male feminists must learn to overcome the personal feeling of rejection or "discrimination" that may come along with women?s-only spaces, and they must learn to respect women?s decisions to create those spaces where necessary. It also means calling out other men who do not respect these spaces (a perpetual problem with women?s-only meetings is that whenever they are advertised, men invariably try to sneak in or find a way to gain access), and making a committed public stand in favor of women?s right to create women?s-only spaces. They are profoundly not sexist; they are a radical strategy in the fight for justice.

glad to see the shitstirring will subside from hereon in .

Well again, that wasn't my intention, I'm just giving my opinion, but honestly if it's seen as shit stirring no doubt better if I disengage.

OK Mr Gin - glad to see the shitstirring will subside from hereon in then. Did you take a look at the link? What did you think of the site? Ever seen a site dedicated to hating men as much as that one is dedicated to hating women?

So I am guessing if the MTFtransgender community wanted to organise their own conference they would need to invite all born women as well?

All they need do is not ban them.....

It just requires you not to discriminate, which we all believe in - don't we?

It is about radical feminist analysis which concludes that a biological woman (an adult female) and a MTF transperson are not exactly the same thing. A position which strikes me as perfectly valid and logical

Let me rephrase that:

It is about Patriarchical analysis which concludes that a biological woman (an adult female) and a man are not exactly the same thing. A position which strikes me as perfectly valid and logical

Most people can see the hypocrisy a mile off and really don't give a shit about arcane Rad Fem analysis, as the answer is clearly wrong by 2012 mores. You can't complain about oppression while oppressing.

And when they throw this crap in my face, because "you are a Feminist, so you must also believe in it", it really isn't helpful.

So I am guessing if the MTFtransgender community wanted to organise their own conference they would need to invite all born women as well? Which presumably is what they did having succeeded in getting the other conference cancelled? When is this all-inclusive MTFtransgender conference happening?

I wonder what the reaction would be if as a born woman I rocked up to a MTF conference and insisted in sitting in on discussions about the trauma of deciding whether to go through drastic body-altering surgery and sympathised along with comments about how I find it really difficult to decide whether to wear trousers or a dress somedays or insisted the agenda be changed to include discussion about giving birth or menstrual cycles. Or if I turned up at a the Black Lawyers annual conference and bemoaned the fact that my addiction to fake tan may be limiting my career prospects and this was something they needed to address.

Transgender people have a very real need to be protected against discrimination, as do women. Doesn't mean that either groups have to include the other in a discussion/conference on their rights and experiences - it does mean that they both have a right to have their own conferences though.

As far as I'm concerned it is about women only spaces. That is the real feminist issue.

Wheezo. Well I did initially question if the entire post was a response to me or more generic.

There are some reasons why I concluded the post was a response to me, more analytical than emotional or irrational. but I'm not into point scoring here so lets just leave it at that.