Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Kathleen Stock: women's organisations have decentred biological females

37 replies

arranfan · 01/09/2018 23:11

A superb, thought-provoking, all-time classic thread by Dr Kathleen Stock: Incisive analysis of women's organisations who have decentred biological females

Too many quotable quotes to attempt to pick out individual ones. Worth reading the thread in its entirety.

Sweary Godmother has added the Women's Institute to the Rollcall of Shame. I shudder to ask as I have few instinctive affections left to me but what has the WI done?

OP posts:
arranfan · 02/09/2018 09:58

AAPF - I so strongly agree.

And, beyond that, there is a discernible influence on the scientific process (after decades of women scholars' work on the consequences to science of ignoring the majority of the population). However, not quite the influence on science that, you know, scientists might wish:

Haley, seen in the video here, is one of the people PLOSONE and Brown university took as an expert (over the peer review process) in criticising the Littman study. This is now who and what dictates acceptable academic thinking from: twitter.com/mrkhtake2/status/1035938499520806914

Never mind Select Committees and their ilk, it seems now that even journals prefer unevidenced anecdote because it is authentic, lived experience or a simulacrum of it rather than boring old academic endeavour or clinical experience.

OP posts:
AsAProfessionalFekko · 02/09/2018 09:06

I've been thinking.

For centuries women have been banging on the door with regards to legal rights, votes, marriage, jobs, financial rights, rights over their own bodies, clothes, even the right to get served at the bar of a certain bar on fleet Street. Load of things. Tonnes of things.

All of a sudden a very vocal subsection of a subsection of men had launched an aggressive campaign to have what women have (apart from menopause from what I can see). And they are getting it! Men handing it over on a plate and some women (hoodwinked, bullied, brainwashed or with their own kinks) are aiding and abetting.

Arggggggggg

boldlygoingsomewhere · 02/09/2018 08:55

Prof Stock is amazing and tells it like it is again. Star

heresyandwitchcraft · 02/09/2018 08:37

This thread is excellent. Thanks Prof Stock Star!
Always in awe of the feminists on Twitter. I wouldn't be able to handle the format, but they're amazing Smile.

arranfan · 02/09/2018 07:50

Well, when the WI has lost its distinctive characteristics and decides that it would be woke to have an imbalance of Fabulous, Brave & Stunning people as senior officers, I wonder how much more campaigning we'll see on sex workers, domestic violence, child abuse etc.? The WI at 100 (lists some of their campaigns) pdf

The WI? I'm more upset about them in many ways than the Fawcett Society (whom I always felt to be over-privileged and purblind to their privilege) and others on that lengthy list.

OP posts:
Haworthia · 02/09/2018 00:11

Oh yes, the WI is all about attracting younger members, having a visible presence at Pride marches, and “all self-identifying women welcome!”

That’s a direct quote from a WI I know of.

ItsNotUnusualToBe · 02/09/2018 00:08

www.cteg.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/a-womans-place-summary-report-1-2-DT.pdf

Chwarae Teg (Welsh for Fair Play). - I don’t know how they can simultaneously believe that women face structural and personal barriers in the workplace and Transwomen are Women.

www.cteg.org.uk/chwarae-teg-chief-executive-cerys-furlong-has-spoken-out-in-support-of-trans-equality/

Kathleen Stock: women's organisations have decentred biological females
Kathleen Stock: women's organisations have decentred biological females
oatmealrats · 02/09/2018 00:05

Great, great thread. She brought up something that really concerns me. That is that all the young people going to colleges and being spoon fed a bunch of gender nonsense. How many of them have read 2nd wave feminists texts? They don't seem to know their history. They think gender critical feminists are simply old-fashioned. They think they are doing next level feminism when they aren't doing feminism at all. They're lost in sea of queer academia without absolutely no footing in material reality. Women cannot fight against their material oppression if they aren't allowed to acknowledge their biological reality and how it has been exploited, abused, and differs from mens. I just don't know what to think about the future. I say this as a young person in college who is baffled by what I see and hear around me on campus every day... I just hope GC feminists are able to build up spaces again :(.

Halfeatentoast · 02/09/2018 00:04

Thanks will have a read.

Fallingirl · 02/09/2018 00:01

Omg YESSSS! Now this is what brave & stunning actually means.

arranfan · 01/09/2018 23:54

Yes! Relating to your point about a need to return to fundamentals.

Stock wrote:

Presumably most of you were weaned on serious thinkers like De Beauvoir and Dworkin and McKinnon, or counterparts. How can you keep a straight face as your PR interns churn out, on yr behalf, tweets from the Stonewall Big Book of Nonsensical Aphorisms plus a bunch of emojis?

...But better yet, stop with the craven capitulation, stop with the patronising doublespeak, and do the right thing. (Also, give the youngsters running yr social media some 2nd wave feminist books

OP posts:
thatdamnwoman · 01/09/2018 23:38

Yes, yes, yes. Thank you for saying it loudly and clearly and in joined-up thinking, Kathleen Stock.

The contortions WA has gone through to be nice to transwomen, partly to get funding but also, it seems to me, because some of the younger workers have drunk the kool-aid, have felt like an insult to the women they are supposed to serve.

What we really need to do is start again with GC women running GC organisations that go back to feminist basics and say a firm no to any transwoman who turns up demanding his rights as a woman.

Swipe left for the next trending thread