WPUK meeting in London 20 May with Meghan Murphy, Julie Bindel, Selina Todd

The welfare of right-wing women matters just as much as the the welfare of left-wing women. Nobody's opinion has more merit than anyone else's. And nobody's rights are worth more than others.

It's a shame that Posie had her event in a right-wing building. Maybe next time, the left wing may like to host? Oh wait...

I've just read the WPUK manifesto and think it's a shame they've gone down that route. They sound like they're trying to compete with the WEP and become a left wing political party rather than representing all gender critical women. The women who left Labour may be happy with it though.

I thought it would a brilliant evening (and afternoon)
The speakers were entertaining, inspiring and informative. I may not always agree with everything but that's ok, I do feel like we are all on the same side.
It was amazing to meet so many of you. We had a good crowd in the pub both before and after the event.

We women are all we have got.

Yep

Selina Todd's speech from WPUK in London 20 May:

womansplaceuk.org/2019/05/21/feminism-postmodernism-and-womens-oppression/

Thank you MrsJemimaPuddleduck! I'd no idea.

I wish they'd all stop taking pot shots at each other and remember the FWR motto: no GC woman under the bus.

Lang ... my sentiment exactly.

We women are all we have got.

And a reminder of Selina Todd's fabulous book, which is right up my alley because she elevates the voices of ordinary people instead of the great and the good, and is eminently readable:

www.amazon.co.uk/People-Rise-Working-Class-1910-2010/dp/1848548826?tag=mumsnetforu03-21

Only £3.99 on Kindle!

Sorry I should have clarified - my previous post was for Arran

About Posie Parker, Julia Long and a few others speaking at an event in the US hosted by a right wing organisation. For ages after there were awful divisive and never ending threads on here and attacks on twitter about whether such allegiances could ever be justified

I like the manifesto but I think it's a distraction from GC activism at the minute, if I'm honest. And if the idea is to persuade the Labour Party to get on board so that we can all vote for them...

... well, I'm afraid the entire Labour hierarchy is going to have to do a massive mea culpa for its behaviour towards women and the safeguarding of children before I even begin to consider voting for it again.

One socialist feminist slate in competition with the rest of the slates in the party won't cut it for me. Sorry (not actually sorry at all).

That said, I agree with PPs who have said there is room for all. We can all find a place where we're most comfortable. Those of us who don't give the chuff from a flying monkey (reference intended) about purity politics or who doesn't like whom or who said what about whom and when, can just support everyone!

There are plenty of strong personalities involved and they all seem to be giving as good as they get. I wish they'd all stop taking pot shots at each other and remember the FWR motto: no GC woman under the bus.

choosing that question was unnecessarily divisive for everyone aware of the (very recent) rift in the GC community

I don't know anything about this. Much as it might explain a little of what happened last night, can I get by without knowing or is it a context that is useful? (Like many people, I've currently lots of friends and family in need of support; lots of commute and travel for work. No time. aka modern laments.)

they think the long-term downsides will outweigh any short-term gains.

[the Right always works against women's interests]

Hmm! I don't think we should trust UK "left-wing" politics here in terms of working in favour of women's interests currently, given the recent history of the Labour Party. Why have so many women resigned their membership over this issue and Labour's response to it?

I think none of us women can trust any existing political party right now to act in our interests.

I wonder if the recording is up yet? I'd like to hear their answers to the question again just in case I misinterpreted what they said but yesterday the message I got was that only the left can be the supporters of women's rights; only those on the left were/could be feminists.

Generally the Q&A period is not recorded for publication at WPUK meetings. It is only the speakers on the platform who are published via video. This is an issue of consent for participants and rightly so.

And, yes, I am forming the same impression of WPUK about the position of the political 'Left' in relation to feminism. The fact is nothing could be more misguided since it is the so-called political "Left" which is propagating the transgenderist ideology and practice with most enthusiasm.

You only have to observe the Labour Party's response to those who oppose transgenderist ideology and practice because it is in direct conflict with the legal rights of women and children to see that 'left-wing' politics and radical feminism in the UK are in opposition here. [Never mind the Green Party!]

I believe that diversity of views here will make us stronger in the long term

Totally agree. But the WPUK perspective - according to Selena & Julie last night - is that any alliance with the Right strengthens the Right, and the Right always works against women's interests. So any short-term advantage of an alliance is outweighed by the longer-term undermining of women's rights.

I don't agree with them, but I do think theirs is a perfectly reasonable viewpoint: they aren't refusing to work with the Right because of ideological purity, but because they think the long-term downsides will outweigh any short-term gains.

Personally, I agree with Meghan that very few people actually think, act or vote in terms of Left or Right. However, as a socialist movement, I don't expect WPUK to believe the same.

I'm not sure if anyone else has mentioned that Maya was wearing an Adult Human Female t-shirt. There were quite a few in the audience too.

My thoughts.

To be fair I was confused by the question, and didn't realise until I read comments here today there might be an agenda to it. I thought we were there for the common ground of what we could do to protect and safeguard women's and children's rights and spaces. I was there to hear people speak whom I have come to respect for their wealth of knowledge and experiences. However with Julie and Selina's answers to the question solidarity and all sense of togetherness and purpose fell away for me. I wonder if the recording is up yet? I'd like to hear their answers to the question again just in case I misinterpreted what they said but yesterday the message I got was that only the left can be the supporters of women's rights; only those on the left were/could be feminists.

At a time when we all need to pull in the same direction I was and still am deeply troubled that political views seem to be more important than allies from other political viewpoints.

I once went into an exam, turned over the paper only to see a subject I had not revised for. My heart sank. I felt the same leaving that meeting yesterday.

Perhaps the impression that is being generated by others is not a reflection of Ms Long at all but is a reflection of how others are making misinterpretations. It may be that those women who make those misinterpretations should take some time and make some effort to get to know Ms Long and her perspective?

I still very much think Julia Long is great and her perspective is very valuable. My conversation with her and when I have heard her talk has always given me lots to reflect on.

I would imagine that she, alongside others, feels hurt and upset (this may just be my projection of how I would feel) and maybe this is understandably reflected sometimes in her demeanour, causing people to misinterpret her.

I am sure that Julia can probably channel her feelings into positive action though and I am sure that she will remain as brilliantly woman-focused as ever.

I too would prefer a more focussed manifesto, certainly more woman focussed. It looks like they're trying to recreate the Labour Party. I agree with Spartacus on the relevant issues being prostitution and porn along with policing and institutional capture - that's a very precise set of issues which can appeal to a broad range of women on the right and left and, as Meghan says, those who are not on either.

If though, we (as a movement - clearly WPUK have every right to do what they want) are setting out our stall for a different society, I think we need to get away from the old tired ideas of the left with it's economic view that centres men and its instrumentalist view of the natural world.

Yes. It seems that some may be prioritising socialism over feminism, which may not be what is required in the current circumstances. [I would personally have preferred it to have been focussed but on shorter term, more urgent issues - transactivism, porn, policing and the institutional capture of our organisations.]

The current situation is not an excuse for a socialist recruitment drive.

On the matter of transwomen, Julia Long's position is crystal clear and has been for a long time. At Radfem 101, which I also attended, she spelled it out. I suspect I can't do it here.

I'm torn about this. Wanting to dress in a 'feminine' way does not make a male into a female. I used to find it very cheering to see that chap on Twitter who regularly posted photos of himself in his mini skirts and was adamant that he had very little hassle going into the men's loos dressed like that. I think he was called Hope or maninpink and was eventually banned from Twitter, inevitably.

On the other hand, I also agree with Julie Bindel that it is unfair and unpleasant to have a go at transwomen and accuse them all of indulging a fetish. Gender dysphoria arises from the very sexist nature of our society. I do believe that many transwomen, the ones trying to get on with their lives below the radar, suffer from dysphoria. I don't believe that they all have AGP.

The issue is was this question representative of the majority that were sent in or was it chosen because (1) they are WPUK friends and (2) because WPUK wanted to score a political point.

The moment is lost now. It would have been easy for WPUK to say that the prominent question was that one, asked by n% of respondents. The choice made was to avoid that approach.

It is difficult to trust any further response now.

Whilst I wish Julia Long hadn't shouted out, I understand why she did (and to be honest, probably would have done so too)

Last night was a tremendous success, all the speakers were superb, particularly for me, Selina Todd's which I'm going to listen to over and over again when it's released.

I do agree though that choosing that question was unnecessarily divisive for everyone aware of the (very recent) rift in the GC community plus, surely they were aware Julia was there???

I have a huge respect for Julia Long and tbh all the feminists I've heard speaking out on this, and I believe that diversity of views here will make us stronger in the long term.

I didn't get the manifesto last night so skimmed it online today but I'm not sure that I'm comfortable with it. I think WPUK are tremendous, however, it felt to me like it was shoehorning (this new awakened) feminism back into old socialist ideas.

I would personally have preferred it to have been focussed but on shorter term, more urgent issues - transactivism, porn, policing and the institutional capture of our organisations.

If though, we (as a movement - clearly WPUK have every right to do what they want) are setting out our stall for a different society, I think we need to get away from the old tired ideas of the left with it's economic view that centres men and its instrumentalist view of the natural world. With (rampant) capitalism l, it shares responsibility for getting us into this mess.

Not just free childcare, for instance, but a society where we truly put people first - so that parents can look after their kids / parents etc AND work rather than than higher paid parents shifting care to (other) women on a lower wage which is the inevitable result of free care within the status quo.

Selina said some really interesting things here but also seemed confident that Labour/ socialistic politics could deliver this radically different vision. I'm not sure that it can. I think the problematic views of both women and the natural world are intrinsic to socialist politics.

However, since since I also think that Selina Todd is an actual (literal? ) goddess after her speech yesterday, I expect I've misinterpreted her somewhere along the way!

Sorry .. that was very very long . Got carried away. As you were

Yes, as I recall, at the end of the panel's presentations, Ruth S said she would read out some questions and she looked down at the papers she had and said something like 'This one gets straight down to it' - that's not verbatim, but it was something that indicated she knew it was going to cause a bit of a stir, I'd say. Then she read out the question and said 'from Jean Hatchet, is Jean Hatchet here?' Somebody called out from the floor (not Julia, it was someone on the ground floor), I couldn't make out what was said, and then Ruth said 'And we have another quite similar one from Rosa Freedman, Rosa, do you want to ask the question?' and Rosa said no, she was happy for Jean's question to be the one asked as they were similar. So the panel answered. I can't remember at what point there was a shout from the balcony, but somebody here has said it was during Julie Bindel's response, or at the end of it. I couldn't see who it was and didn't know it was Julia Long till I read it here. I didn't know she was at the event. I couldn't make out what was said and Ruth S shut it down straight away by saying that questions had been invited in advance of the meeting and it was too late to ask one now. Now I know it was Julia Long I do think that was very unfortunate, but my main feeling is that planting Jean Hatchet's question like that was absolutely done to make a point, and frankly that was unnecessary.