Facebook feminist groups and LGBT

There's also We Blame The Patriarchy, inspired by Twisty Faster's former blog. Pretty radical, though some people are probably just putting it on for the occasion. That board has a rule against discussion of transsexuals, on the grounds that the topic gets vicious very quickly.

I do find it kind of telling ... the OP says she is wondering why these feminist groups exclude the topic, and two people so far have told her it's unreasonable for her to expect them only to discuss feminism. I'm not picking up on this to be nit-picky, it's just it does seem frustrate me.

It seems to be such a common attitude whenever you discuss feminism. You want to have an occasional space for women only? 'Oh my god, you want to ban men totally from everything ever!!'

I know people are putting it more gently here, but why would you read the OP where she says that everything other than these topics is excluded, and immediately assume the situation is the reverse of what she says?

you could say the same thing about all sorts of things. You have your pet priorities that you want to be concentrated on, but its important to understand that other people have different priorities, and nothing is stopping you starting up your own group. Its also possibly something to do with supporting issues they see as closer to home. LGBT and feminist issues that affect people in the UK, as we dont really have much chance in this country of inducing cultural change in the middle east,india and somalia etc

I remembered another one btw - Being Feminist, but I think that's on my "to cull" list.

I always get them all mixed up and signed up to loads on the basis that I didn't want to miss out on anythign good, but get an awful lot of crap tbh.

And the good stuff tends to make it into all the groups anyway, so you get something posted 6 times.

Must get a less virtual life. [bugrin]

LOL, really?

What did you say?

Would love to know simply so I know whether to cull them from my list - have been thinking that I'm subscribing to far too many groups who clutter up my FB and twitter feed and would like to empty it out a bit.

in answer to the op - turning it on it's head slightly. i am a member of quite a few LGBT FB pages and I don't see much feminist theory ( can't think of any TBH)

PT I think that's totally what it's all about.

It's always been much more socially acceptable for women to work for other's interests, not their own.

Hence lots of women coming to feminism later, when they have the confidence and are just a bit blardy sick of fighting for everyone else's rights and no fucker is fighting for their's.

I think that's definitely true, pretzel.

There are a few woman-centred FB groups:

Wipeout Misogyny
Rabid feminism
Organising for Women's Liberation (OWL)
Feminists United
A Girl's Guide to Taking Over the World

Can't think of any more at present.

I have noticed that it's often easier for young women to be upset and fight for other's rights - like gay (male) rights and animal rights - than their own (issues that are specifically about women)
Perhaps this follows them into feminism. Sad if it overshadows the feminism if that's what the groups are supposed to be about.

Oh, absolutely kri. That was the point I was making - that the people I know who choose these terms do them for reasons that are personal, and to do with personal feelings (as well or instead of the political identity I guess I'm more used to thinking about with feminism).

annie - oh, that's interesting then. Very different from my lot - who don't think of it as queer theory at all, but think it's all part of feminism.

I doubt it's you, btw!

People get odd everywhere.

Yep, I getcha! :) The thing is, if one is picking a term to describe one's personal identity, it's got to feel comfortable - got to be right, because it IS something so personal to the individual. There can be a whole plethora of reasons some terms don't feel right - maybe even if they don't have a logical explanation. I suppose that's an issue with labels generally - meanings can have different connotations, can change over time and aren't always clear to others. I'm always more interested in the meaning behind labels, but of course there isn't always the opportunity for finding that out, so terms become the short-hand that we use. The trade off is sometimes there is confusion, misunderstanding and conflict (which I think is worse using a textual medium alone, like Facebook, Twitter or even here!)

Like you, I'd like to get to that place where we can accept the fluid definitions and identities - not just of sexuality, but other ways human beings see themselves. That's not going to be easy though if we already have strong feelings ourselves about the descriptors other people use, but maybe one day, we can get beyond all the language stuff and just be! :)

Do they see it as queer theory?

I'm interested, because a lot of feminists I know don't actually see what I reckon is queer theory, as queer theory. They see it as mainstream feminism. And to me that is the problem.

Ah, sorry, cross posted.

Yes, I agree, it seems to function very much as you describe, as a term, kri.

My reluctance to use it is that I feel that I've never been much discriminated against for my sexual orientation (I'm bi, but married to a man). And I know men and women who have been, and I grew up associating the term 'queer' with them - in the context of them being proud to reclaim it. I would feel as if I were kind of being an activist tourist on that if I used the term, you know? Like some terribly earnest people will tell you how very aware they are of the struggles of such-and-such group, which they're not part of, but somehow have spiritual kinship with. It's a bit patronizing, even if it's good-hearted.

I would like to get to the point where we could all accept very fluid definitions of sexual orientation (or, better, no need to comment on it at all, with it being accepted that anyone might like anyone else).

Sorry if I sounded harsh Annie, but I just wanted to be clear that there IS alot that goes on outside Facebook, and Twitter for that matter. I don't genuinely think either are representative of thinking on most subjects.

I honestly don't see that feminism is being "swallowed up" by queer theory or any other theory, other than perhaps human rights, of which it should be a part (but that's more of a legal thing than a philosophical thing.)

What I think IS challenging for feminism is the complexity of human identity. That means, for example, for a woman of colour, a woman who has relationships with women, a disabled woman, a Muslim woman, etc., feminism HAS to be about much more than just liberation of women as a generic, homogenous group of people. I don't think that kind of challenge is a bad thing at all though.

This is all very interesting. I'd never thought of joining a feminist group on fb, so are there any groups/pages that are particularly good that I should join as a starter?

I don't think it's a good idea for either queer theory or feminism to be put under the same 'umbrella'. It's one more way for the patriarchy to pretend all minorities/marginalized groups are the same. The way that if you have a group, some people seem to think that having four spaces for white men and one for a woman/ethnic minority/LGBT person is somehow helpful.

Of course often there will be loads of common ground between groups, but it is insulting when a broad range of issues are reduced to a smudge of letters.

Incidentally, I think this is why some lesbians aren't wild about calling themselves 'queer' - but I will ask if I'm right there as I'm not a lesbian and don't want to speak out of turn.

From what I understand LRD, part of it is "Americanism," (like "person of colour" where many in the UK would say Black/Black & Minority Ethnic/Black, Asian & Minority Ethinc/Politically Black.) Part of it has been an attempt to come up with a succinct term to cover Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans*gender, Questioning, which you've got to admit, is a pretty long descriptor!

Like most words, I think the meaning of "queer" (which in itself was a reclaimed slur, and still used as a slur by some,) is evolving and may mean different things to different people. I get the sense that sometimes younger people prefer it because they feel Lesbian, Gay and/or Bisexual are terms that are "outdated" and don't relate to their experience, or are too narrow to describe what they feel is their identity.

I'm aware of a piece of research done by an LBGT young people's organisation in conjunction with an education project. They did anonymous equal ops monitoring at the end of the programme, once they knew young people had an understanding of what the sexuality and identity concepts were. They were surprised to find fewer saw themselves as Lesbian or Gay, but chose Bisexual, queer or trans*, suggesting that they saw their sexual identity as more "fluid" than fixed. That could be either because as teenagers, this is the sort of thing that is an evolving process for many young people. It could also be that there is now a broader "spectrum" of concepts and terms to describe one's identity than before, and perhaps in some quarters at least, a "climate" where not fitting into a neat box is more acceptable. The latter is something I've found myself in work with young people - but stressing this isn't universal and I don't suggest that homophobia isn't alive and (sadly too often) kicking.