WPUK and Lyra McKee

Well yes quite stumbledin - this is not a monothought clique and I resent the implication that it is.

And to return tangentially to the OP's abortion analogy - I am vehemently pro-choice. I can still condemn the assaults on the women who protest against abortion clinics because male violence is still male violence, no matter the beliefs of the the women being assaulted.

Sometimes you just have to do what feels like the decent thing, irrespective of whether everyone likes it. I think waiting a few weeks / months would have smacked of image management and been the worst possible move.

As for worrying about your reputation - I've been in arguments on FWR. I may have argued with people on this thread. I don't remember and anyway who cares - with the greatest respect to other posters, they are not my friends or family and this is an anonymous forum.

You’re right sorry - still there. I’m glad.

Yes OP I don’t think you needed to NC for this, hope you’re not feeling too beleaguered.

I think some of the terseness in replies is because a new name might be a covert op by the Anime Army, fishing for screenshots.

My grandad was active in politics. When he died, many from the opposing party (whom he vehemently opposed on every issue and fought against) sent my family respectful condolences.

Those tribute added to our comfort in our time of grief. Even those he opposed, respected what a fine and wonderful man he was.

Paying tribute to someone does not imply they agreed with you on every issue!

Some of those comments to WPUK seem to frame Lyra purely as a “trans ally,” not a person in her own right.

WPUK have NOT deleted their tribute.

Still on facebook: www.facebook.com/womansplaceuk/photos/a.496713437349514/824031574617697/?type=3&theater

And on twitter: twitter.com/Womans_Place_UK/status/1119522242940026880

-----------

I find a lot of posts on mumsnet hard to follow as they aren't threaded. having replies to a particular point grouped under that point.

So have only just seen the information that the poster has changed their name to make this post so as not to "tarnish" (?) their reputation on mumsnet???? I am not sure what is worse. That somebody feels they cant be honest as they might lose friends. Or the implication that mumsnet is an intolerant forum that does not accept anyone who doesn't toe the line.

We will simply have to respectfully agree to disagree on this issue.

If I wanted to post a tribute to an adversary, I would. Honouring that person's memory would be more important to me than the views of my remaining adversaries. The only people I accept have the right to ask me not to do this are that person's immediate family. If they did, I would then weigh up what I would consider more important, but most likely I would chose to find a different way to show my respect.

If you wanted to post a tribute to an adversary, presumably you wouldn't? You'd rather not honour a person than be accused of being somehow morally lacking in some way?

WPUK decide who is an icon for them. They don't insist we must agree, they have no need to ask for permission. They share their appreciation for women they think made worthy contributions. That's it. You LassOfFyvie are free to take it or leave it.

As it isn't clear from my post, I'll rephrase:

Anyone who denies WPUK (and the gender critical in general) the right to post a tribute to a murdered woman who was raising her voice in one of the UK's most violent ongoing issues as well as an issue specific to lesbians because that woman disagreed with WPUK's position on a completely different issue, is purity policing.

Such people imply thereby that WPUK are only allowed to pay public tributes to women who agree with WPUK without facing criticism, a thoroughly objectionable position. It's also saying that they deserve the accusation that they could not possibly be posting this tribute in good faith, but seek to mock the person or to exploit their death and should have been silent instead lest they look discourteous or tactless.

That's a view I find reprehensible - one that says adversaries cannot honour and respect those who disagree with them without deserving criticism. It's basic human decency to share a community's sorrow at a person's death and to express appreciation for that person's contribution to society.

Whatever grieving friends and relatives may be thinking is anyone's guess. Their grief is their business, and whoever they want to be angry at, they will be angry at, however justified or irrational. That's what happens in bereavements. I've found irrational anger helpful. It was a welcome distraction from my grief. I'm not saying it's healthy or welcome or needed. It's just what happened to me.

I do know for a fact that if my adversaries posted a tribute on my death, my family would be saying - Look, even those bloody bastards have to acknowledge she did good (or some such) because that is precisely what I've seen them and many other people saying in connection to other deaths. And if not with appreciation, at the least such tributes were greeted with satisfaction.

WPUK have removed the tribute to Lyra.

A woman who died because of sectarian fighting should be mourned by all of us.

And I'm still mystified why you felt the need to namechange OP. There is room for differences of opinion here.

I’m glad that WPUK paid tribute to a wonderful woman and talented journalist. I cannot see anything in their words that would cause her partner or family pain.

If it did and they requested WPUK to delete it, I am sure they would.

I know some of the commenters are genuinely grieving a friend. But others seem to be using the tribute as a weapon to attack WPUK... which seems more appropriative than what WPUK did.

Maybe none of them give a stuff what WPUK said or didn’t say, maybe some of them do, who knows. Totally their call and I don’t thinjg it’s in to presume or disbelieve that they might be pissed off about it, amongst all the other things you get angry about when violently bereaved.

Some people seem eager to believe WPUK - an organisation that supports women - are acting in bad faith but refuse to consider that TRAs might do that.

Remind me which group openly and frequently wishes violent death on the other group?

Thank you significant

This is just absurd. If the leader of the DUP is welcomed at an impromtu gathering to show respect for Lyra McKee, a woman's organisation that has an established recording of acknowledging women who have taken a stand, is more than able to post a message of support.

Who are these unpleasant individuals exploiting Lyra McKee in death to further their anti woman narrative. Even if someone can produce a public statement attributed to Lyra McKee specifically against WPUK it wouldn't matter any more than if there is a record of her speaking out against the DUP.

Lyra McKee was a lesbian (not "gay") and wrote / spoke movingly about how the patriarchal enviroment she grew up in impacted so negatively on her feeling secure in her sexuality.

There is only one group exploiting her and that is the trans activists. There seems to be nothing they will not stoop to.

--------------

This just shows the utter insanity of thinking twitter is a place for serious discussion. I really do wish feminists would just put their energies into places where they are actually going to reach other women rather than expending negative engery on a medium that is one of the smallest virtual platforms. And least used by women. Why do women think feminism is advanced by wasting time there. Its like going to a town to do outreach on behalf of a women's group and you think where is the best place to make contact with women. And you go, I know lets go to that really run down pub full of drunks and start a discussion.

She probably does now

It strikes me as a bit vainglorious of WPUK to decide they will determine who is or isn't an icon

Well isnt that the whole point of saying someone is an icon

Someone says...Lady Gaga is a gay icon

Gaga doesnt say it

And as for choosing her as an icon - WPUK is choosing a great number of female icons who also held opinions that different groups of women may disagree with

If we are saying that no woman can be an honoured as an icon who does not also share a gender critical viewpoint we are not only guilty of the reprehensible practice of purity policing so beloved by today's left, we are also saying no woman is worthy of our respect who does not agree with us

That's an unacceptable position for me as it moves those who disagree with us into a lesser category of being, one unworthy of respect and appreciation no matter how important their contribution to society

Who is this "we" and "us" you are referring to? Do you mean WPUK? Posters here? Me? I don't know anyone on here has said she should not be honoured. A small number of posters, including me, have queried WPUK doing so.

It strikes me as a bit vainglorious of WPUK to decide they will determine who is or isn't an icon ; particularly a person who is extremely unlikely to have given them the time of day when she had any say in the matter.

I agree with WhoopDe's post.

Appropriation: you liked/wore/did something that I feel you shouldn’t have and in some way it devalues my group of people. I think, or how it seems to me.

A friend is a staunch Labour supporter. If they were murdered and the BNP paid tribute to them a lot of people would be disgusted, me included. That's an extreme group, certainly controversial (which I don't consider WPUK to be) but some would hate a Tory tribute too.

The BNP use and (not very tacitly) espouse violence. They may use democracy and free speech, but ultimately they want to end it. That's the line.

No matter what your politics, if you are a reasonable person then the Tories are not the line and WPUK are not the line.

If you (not PP, we all know who) think mainstream groups should not be allowed to offer condolences or should be stopped from speaking then you are watching mainstream, reasonable politics from the wrong side of that line.

How does this appropriation thing work then?

Ive often heard people being described as an icon

I really can't believe that anyone who was really one of her loved ones could possibly object to the tribute- has anyone heard from (eg) her partner, parents, siblings, grandparents....they can't all be rabid TRAs can they....

Im sure you didn’t mean to lump her family in as rabid TRAs - that’s just awkward phrasing, right?

...wouldn't a grieving parent be more likely to think 'ah, she really was respected, even by people who disagreed with her'...and that might just bring some comfort.

Grieving parents, and siblings, partners can think and feel all sorts of things, especially in the wake of a traumatic and highly public loss. I think it’s completely plausible for loved ones to take umbrage at things that seem like grief hijacking, appropriation, or someone or something the person didn’t support giving a public tribute.

Maybe none of them give a stuff what WPUK said or didn’t say, maybe some of them do, who knows. Totally their call and I don’t thinjg it’s in to presume or disbelieve that they might be pissed off about it, amongst all the other things you get angry about when violently bereaved.

PlonitbatPlonit

Lovely post at 17.27. Thank you.

Agree with much of above, and Rosa Freedman on twitter with "if we can't engage with, honour and mourn women with different views then what hope is there"

I see Mitch Benn has added heat by retweeting the call to pile on "anti-trans" group to his 60k twitter followers.

“So if I died and an anti-abortion charity posted a tribute to me soon after, I think my loved ones would see that as an insult.”

Don’t be daft, an insult is only an insult if it’s an insult.

All my cousins believe that abortion is murder but I suspect they’d still squeeze a tribute into the family newsletter....

AlwaysComingHome you're right. No timing would have satisfied.

And as for choosing her as an icon - WPUK is choosing a great number of female icons who also held opinions that different groups of women may disagree with.

If we are saying that no woman can be an honoured as an icon who does not also share a gender critical viewpoint we are not only guilty of the reprehensible practice of purity policing so beloved by today's left, we are also saying no woman is worthy of our respect who does not agree with us.

That's an unacceptable position for me as it moves those who disagree with us into a lesser category of being, one unworthy of respect and appreciation no matter how important their contribution to society.