Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Navigating differences of opinion between GC women

34 replies

womanformallyknownaswoman · 28/01/2019 12:33

I came across this podcast of Meghan Murphy and Phyllls Chesler. I don’t know the work of the latter but from what she says she’s been a tireless GC feminist academic and writer for many years in the USA. She’s also an Emeritus Prof. of Psychology as well as a psychotherapist. She refers in the podcast to navigating differences of opinions without severing the relationship altogether.

Given the recent couple of public conflicts between GC women - I thought it would make a great topic to discuss how to do that - not just in private but in public. How do you deal with a perceived betrayal when someone on your side unexpectedly criticises you in public? How do you contain the natural reaction to defend oneself and one’s reputation whilst making space to reflect upon the unexpected negative feedback, which, as luck would have it, invariably comes at times of great stress/ pressure? What are tips, techniques and phrases to use to navigate conflict? How do you deal with those who criticise the person with the dissenting opinion and cause a pile-on?

How do you discern between a narc rage attack with no self reflection plus DARVO tactics and a knee jerk defensive reaction? How do you stop mean girl playground gangs from unintentionally forming? How do you maintain focus and cohesion when people take different sides over issues?

Over to you....

OP posts:
lisamuggeridge · 28/01/2019 13:09

Has any type of activism gone through the prism of twitter and not ended up this way? Any at all? Is there a singel example of twitter based tribes forming where this is not the case? I cant think of one. I genuinely think its the platform, brings out the worst and is structured for narcissism. I genuinely think twitter is just a demonstration of somethin important and tribes formed there should be bypassed always.

Original poster
womanformallyknownaswoman · 28/01/2019 13:07

And what about those women with a valid dissenting opinion, who aren’t as robust for various reasons as other women? I’m thinking here of survivors in particular who may have PTSD from male violence, who want to be part of and who maybe don’t have the resilience of other fighting fit women, through no fault of their own but through male violence.

How do we embrace and support them, given some vulnerability, ie making reasonable adjustment for - ensuring that they aren’t marginalised, dismissed and unheard as so often is their experience in real life? They can’t stay in the boxing ring as long as others but that doesn’t mean their opinions are any less valuable. How do we GC women do things differently from “out there” so survivors aren’t unintentionally excluded from the action because they can’t keep up due to injuries previously sustained?

OP posts:
Funkyfunkybeat12 · 28/01/2019 13:04

I think you need to maintain focus on what is meant by GC. For instance, you may want to form an alliance with right-wing Christian women (for whatever reason), but it does not help the issue to suggest that these people are GC. They are the very opposite. There may be a small overlap in purpose in that they oppose self-ID, but it is important to remember that they also oppose rights for other LGBT groups and also oppose the liberation of women generally. Therefore, even if you think that this is a good way forward, it is important to recognise and respect that many women are not prepared to enter into this union and that the basis on which you are joining hands is not on being gender-critical, but specifically on opposing self-ID.

Also, calling it a playground spat or falling out is very unhelpful. Even if there is a shattered friendship between two women within this, it raises a much broader point about the movement. Is it about gender-criticism or is it about opposing self-ID? You can then determine which is more important in terms of your own beliefs, while recognising that others may not reach the same conclusions.

lisamuggeridge · 28/01/2019 13:00

Social media can only offer a venue where identity without context forms tribs, wat we did worked because we used it to demonstrate not to organise. I accepted long ago that my perspective means I hit against power dynamics and narc rage doesnt bother me cos am not involved in it and its about the person raging and am used to it and expect it. It passes, it repeats. But that isnt the case fore everyone. Some people are really harmed by it. Also we are dfeined by women with caring responsibilities. I stay away from social media activism because of that narc reflex. Period. My interest is the rule of law around these systems, and that means marginalisation, it also means that political identity bounces against them. Social relations would always have reconstructed in any social movement and so would the behaviour that defines social media activism. Its up to women to know that someone shouldnt have their life destroyed for saying they wont stand with something they find repugnant, and a narcissist in my view never destroys anything of value, they do have an uncanny ability to exploit power dynamics and demonstrate weaknesses in your environment. I see narc rage once I note it, I stay away and I dont recommend other women put themselves at risk. I dont stand with people who will fly off in narc rage because views they epress openly are described accurately and Jean Hatchett should never have had to delete er twitter account for a political position which existed long before this movement. She has had to. Women have to decide what behaviour they see as ok. Pre-existing political positins and identities have shaped the response to this, shaped who has access to resources to speak and tribalism has already produced the same effect it produces everywhere else. I figure this happens within social movements and the question is how we learn from it., I have no intention of repeating the fake anti-cuts moevement or entering intoa fake movement where allegiance to these systems and lawds and women comes second to whatever personality is now the barometer of what women are allowed to say.

TowelNumber42 · 28/01/2019 12:59

Cross post

TowelNumber42 · 28/01/2019 12:58

I also like leaving public criticism unanswered. Several opinions stated. Left there for the lurkers / readers. They think. They draw their own conclusions. Arguing online tends to make one look like a petty dick imo.

Original poster
womanformallyknownaswoman · 28/01/2019 12:53

I agree - irrespective many won’t have the time or capacity to study anything else as they are propelled into the public eye with the imperative to take action quickly to stop disastrous and ill thought out legislative changes.

I’m thinking shortcuts/shared wisdom may be helpful.

One thing that occurs to me is to be really clear about what the focus of an intiative is and what it isn’t. Thus it seems to be the focus of the USA trip is about getting all women together but particularly those on the right to prevent federal legislation that once it gets tabled will be supported wholeheartedly by the Democrats. It’s also about challenging the freedom of speech issues around TG ideology and the erasure of women and their sex based rights and concerns but is not about reproductive rights etc

And so on.

OP posts:
TowelNumber42 · 28/01/2019 12:48

Well, I avoid playground mean girl carry on by not being in the playground any more. If I see it I ignore and go back to my adult life where I make real differences to real people's lives.

It is easy to think that the public fallings out are a big deal. Just like school mean girl packs used to seem important. The reality is nobody outside the bubble knows nor cares.

Bollocks to twitter and echo chamber squabbles. Judean People's Front anyone?

Ignore. Mainstream is where it is at. Results in real life is where the adult operate.

userschmoozer · 28/01/2019 12:36

We need to study maturity. Women are infantilised.
We need to study debating techniques to talk with each other, and debating tactics to talk to the world.