In-fighting within the GC feminist movement

This was written over 40 years ago - so it would seem not much has changed. The Dark Side of Sisterhood

Jo Freeman who wrote this was credited with helping create the concept of consciousness raising as well as the infamous Tyranny of Structurelessness www.jofreeman.com/joreen/joreen.htm

And although it is maybe easier to focus on the individuals or personalities that think calling other women names is somehow a vote winner, in the end it is only as important or influencial as the number of us who join in or fan the flames.

And certainly on facebook threads like this seem to take on a life of their own and can keep going for weeks with women who just cant let go of the opportunity to make personal comments rather than a critical analysis or alternative theory to a political position.

So my personal way of going about things is this: take a position on the issues; accept that women of good conscience are going to have some disagreements even though they share the overall goals; support every woman who is working as she thinks best for the overall goals regardless of where I stand on the specifics.

It bears repeating. Thanks Lang. Again.

I didn't realize it at the time but constant repetition of the slur "TERF" was an effective way to conflate Feminism, the political movement for the liberation of women with gender critical people who come from all different political positions.
I recommend reading "Right Wing Women".

There's been some bitter in-fighting between TRAs as well. McKinnon alienated a few with McKinnon's 'if you're not pansexual you're a bigot' remark. It put the rest of them in a difficult position. They must have agreed with McKinnon on some level but didn't like to say so.

All this effort that has gone in to try and stop women talking about the issue actually makes it look like you want to derail the discussion, a sort of move along here, nothing to see.

That tends to be how I read these as well. It makes me more suspicious usually.

And if that isn’t a symptom of the patriarchy I don’t know what is.

I'm not so sure about that. I've never been convinced by the idea that women suffer less from the desire for power than men. I do think women tend to behave somewhat differently than men, and organise themselves differently, in trying to accomplish either useful groups, or when they want power. I don't really find the idea of patriarchy useful, but if we notionally had a society based on women's way of doing things, what would women's attempts to assert power over each other look like? I'm not sure but I tend to think it would be less physically aggressive and rely on other methods.

All this effort that has gone in to try and stop women talking about the issue actually makes it look like you want to derail the discussion, a sort of move along here, nothing to see.

Look, I'm not doing that, honest.

I could give you the belt and braces of some of the instances of intra-GC feuding but not others - from luck, not judgement, just where I happened to notice something start and how it evolved into a monster obscuring the actual issue that began it.

We all know most of the basic bones of contention - for example, trutrans vs no XYs ever; talking to the right vs maintaining political purity, etc etc.

Generally, an original fall-out will begin over something like that. Then, because you have to be big, brave and bolshy to be a prominent person in this dangerous environment for women, the row over the issue gets heated. Then the gossip machine goes into overdrive, everything gets exaggerated and Chinese whispered. Then everybody forgets what started things in the first place and, before you know it, everyone's flinging abuse at everyone else, regardless of where they stand on the actual contentious issue that broke out way back when.

So my personal way of going about things is this: take a position on the issues; accept that women of good conscience are going to have some disagreements even though they share the overall goals; support every woman who is working as she thinks best for the overall goals regardless of where I stand on the specifics.

And yes, I do get shirty when the rows over process and personality take centre stage. I'm a moany old bag with saggy tits. Shoot me!

That's it really.

I think the problem is that the OP herself is factioneering but doesn't want to admit it.

This is exactly the problem. You maybe right you may be wrong.

Who are you to say someone has the wrong motives behind a post.

As I said earlier if you think a topic has not value dont post.

All this effort that has gone in to try and stop women talking about the issue actually makes it look like you want to derail the discussion, a sort of move along here, nothing to see.

There is something to see even if it is only a minority of women.

It probably happens more on social media as others have said.

But it also creates bad feelings and lack of cooperative working if, as in the example I gave earlier, someone post about the basis on which they work, and two of the responses she gets (on social media) dont respond to her points but slag her off personally.

But it also mean women with less confidence and experience or a good support network start to think, I dont want to be active, you just get someone telling you you arent a fit person to be saying things.

I was glad to see that not many women bothered to comment on the thread someone started about how could a woman been campaigning on an issue when her husbend apparently didn't share the same view point.

I suspect if that was a valid point the majority of posts on FWR would be discredited.

I think you should care WHY the falling out happens though. At least, I know I do. I want to support and follow women who have integrity, not those who will do a 180 as soon as they possibly can.

There’s a lot of talk in the feminist movement about supporting other women: mental and emotional support, but it’s frequently not genuine. Perhaps it’s on me for thinking that I would find comradeship and support amongst other women because we all have suppression and an aim in common. Maybe I’m naive. But actually, when you scratch underneath all I have found is a huge pile on of women climbing over each other to get to a perceived ‘top’.

And if that isn’t a symptom of the patriarchy I don’t know what is.

LangCleg
I really don't give a flying fuck who falls out with whom, although I find the endless "I'm right", "No, I'm right" and dark hints about sins of the other side all over the place extremely tiresome
Well said, I totally agree with this.
Especially when those "I'm right and you're a total Nazi if you don't agree" statements are repeated endlessly over and over again.

The Elephant in the room in GC discussions tends to tell the wimmin to move over while they tell them what to do.

Then there are the nice allies who don’t see, or haven’t yet experienced the safeguarding implications of self-I’d.

Frankly, as someone who does worry about the safety of biological women and girls you can call me whatever names you like. I still see you.

Clearly there are factions here, and sniping, and a great deal of dismissive snide towards OP for having the temerity to raise the general issue of friction amongst GCers.

I think the problem is that the OP herself is factioneering but doesn't want to admit it.

I really don't give a flying fuck who falls out with whom, although I find the endless "I'm right", "No, I'm right" and dark hints about sins of the other side all over the place extremely tiresome.

If you're in this to work for the interests of women and child protection then I support you. Regardless of your chosen tactics, platforms, methods. End of.

It’s quite fascinating to follow this thread from a position of not knowing what the big fight is about. Clearly there are factions here, and sniping, and a great deal of dismissive snide towards OP for having the temerity to raise the general issue of friction amongst GCers.

Hilarious, really, that what results is the most aggressive thread in quite a while.

I think It's a shame we can't discuss this freely without so many people saying "nothing to see here".

Public arguments have been a feature of the GC movement and It's not unreasonable to think of them as damaging to the movement and explore why they happen.

Yes similar happens in other movements too but we're not here to talk about them!

One feature of the GC movement that is perhaps different to others because of time and context is how much happens on social media. Arguments between, for example, the lefty factions of my parents time would no doubt have been viscious played out on social media and dragged in many more people. And a record left of them.

Does social media amplify disagreements? I think so.

Also ours is new movement. And women are finding our feet, working out who we can work with and who has other agendas (e.g. ego). That's worthy of comment and discussion I think.

Saying "women are just being people" is disingenuous I think. It's deflection from what is a real issue that's worth discussing.

If by people you mean back-stabbing, egotistical people who don’t give two fucks about anything other than their opinion, then yes. People.

If you can't stand to see women acting like people instead of like the Borg I think stepping away is a good call.

Your observations and experiences are as valid as anyone else’s OP.

OP, you’re right. The vast majority of it does go on behind the scenes, and most individual women who have not been part of specific organising groups are unaware of how bad it is.

Disagreements, differences of opinion, critiquing other methods of campaigning should all be fine. There should be, at the very least, some sort of basic respect for other groups and their differences. There should be communication. However, in my experience if you don’t tow the line, if you don’t have the right opinion, if you dare to disrupt the status quo, then you’re mud.

I was naive enough to once think feminists were in it for women’s rights on the whole. That the important part was the fight. In my experience this isn’t the case. The big players are in it for their own personal gain.

It’s just another version of the same tired, old politics.

I never understand why some threads seem to get a few women's backs up and then they just become relentless in trying to misdirect the discussion. If you think the thread is stupid or irrelevant just dont respond.

Yup.

It would be nice to think that mumsent was politically aware enough to have a discussion and not attempt this suffocating of voices some dont want to hear

I don't understand. Is Mumsnet a person? Suffocating voices?

I think it is really unhelpful not to try and understand the impact of what seems like very personal and spiteful attacks in response to someone stating a political opinion.

For instance in response to a recent article of the principles on which some one says they work gets comments that says: "You wrote it because you're a gutter snipe, an unemployed trade unionist, a housewife chained to the left and hopeless, and you have no understanding of what this case is about." And "She wouldn't know a 'principled women's movement' if one came and bit her on the Kristina Jayne Harrison." from other GC feminists it is not just the impact of a personal attack out of the blue, but the impact on women with less confidence who are trying to get involved, take a stand. Why put yourself forward if other women so disrespect you that dont even engage with what you are trying to say but just slag you off.

It would be nice to think that mumsent was politically aware enough to have a discussion and not attempt this suffocating of voices some dont want to hear.

And the arguement that it can be used against anyone us just doesn't wash. Not for instance when there is a thread that Pink News then decides to tell everybody shows how mumsnetters are happy to work with white nationalists. Obvioulsy I am not saying we should moderate what we say because of Pink News or whoever will misinterpret it, but it is important to know that we will be listened to.

I never understand why some threads seem to get a few women's backs up and then they just become relentless in trying to misdirect the discussion. If you think the thread is stupid or irrelevant just dont respond.

It hasn't been a long-standing feature of feminism - 🤣. It's been a long-standing feature of humanity.

I suspected someone might say this.

It's true to some extent of course but I think it's ignoring that women dominated groups and men dominated groups tend to behave a little differently in terms of interpersonal relations, asserting power, and even just organisation. There's a reason I said it makes me feel 14 when it happens, and it's because 14 year old girl society doesn't behave the way 14 year old boy society does, or even 17 year old boy society if you want to account for the maturity lag.

I don't know what accounts for it, maybe as someone suggested earlier it's a way to deal with power struggles because women have often been shut out from power, or maybe it's about being more language oriented, or maybe it's because we are less inclined to resort to direct physical confrontations. But it's held true in different male and female dominated organisations I've been in and I know plenty of women who have found the same thing, and not because they are some sort of terrible sexists.
I think it's similar to the way that gay male sex scene is so very masculine in its operation. It's not because all gay males want that kind of environment, but with a group, even a small overall tendency tends to skew in that direction compared to a more balanced situation.

I'm here to discuss issues and ideas that matter to me.

I'm not here to discuss other people or their movements. (Sneaky nursey snarf at movements, ooh er).