In-fighting within the GC feminist movement

*Prompted

Even though it was I who use the word spat, I was just coming on to say the same, Michelleoftheresistance.

Promoted by this:

It's been a long standing feature of feminism that it sometimes can be very unpleasant in terms of personal disagreements and tearing people down.

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

It's only when you stand back, that you truly see the double standards. Men in parliament tear reach other's heads off on a regular basis, even in the same party. Even in the same family.

Women doing it is deemed far more shocking and worthy of criticism. Sexism in action.

Side note, but reading the last few pages it stands out: the terms such as 'women falling out' and 'spats'.

Do you often hear in every day reporting and conversation descriptions of men disagreeing with each other referred to in that way? We live in a time of a heavily male dominated parliament that's been unable to agree on anything on a daily basis for about three years now, and it's not described in those terms.

Odd how terms are chosen for women that make them disagreeing sound childish, petty, tedious.

There's in-fighting within every feminist movement. Were that not the case, there wouldn't BE a feminist movement. Or any other 'ism', for that matter.

OP don’t take any terse responses to heart, people are just wary of the screenshot hunters! Agree that getting offline can be a healthy step sometimes.

Sometimes it’s good to just get away from online stuff.

Get Offline thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3329362-Get-offline

Stickering latest:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3698192-sticker-woman-strikes-again

It's been a long standing feature of feminism that it sometimes can be very unpleasant in terms of personal disagreements and tearing people down. I don't mean the kind of disagreement you see over important issues, or even disagreement over unimportant things that just remains a disagreement. It generally involves trying to get a some kind of social hierarchy to turn on the other people or faction, discredit them, or shut them down.

It reminds me a lot of being 14 in school. I'd say it's best to ignore it but it can be a real pain in the ass when the people doing it are running things, in a local group or on a message board or something like that. I think it's somewhat worse now than it used to be, it's somehow dovetailed with call out culture and the rest to become very toxic at times.

Women are people; we’re going to argue and disagree and say rude things and slam doors. Holding women to a higher account than men is pretty much what this fight is all about; the expectation that women would continue to behave well and be polite and give up their spaces without argument.

DancelikeEmmaGoldman summarises very well. Plus there are plenty of women of every conceivable political stripe who agree with me that human beings can't change sex despite holding other views I find repellent.

Also. What Barracker said.

Human nature means that people will fall out, often publicly & nastily but you just have to keep your eyes on the prize and affix the blinkers.

There are a lot of huge egos about and people wanting to tear each other down in ways which are unhelpful.

But when someone makes a blistering personal attack on you completely out of the blue, including saying stuff that is not only malicious but also demonstrably false, that could hurt your family and devastate your children, then I can understand why people furiously fight back. I’ve done it myself.

Bitter experience has demonstrated that the best way of handling is not to amplify it because to the casual observer like OP it’s unedifying and forces people to choose sides.

Sometimes hard though it is, the only solution is to ignore & vent privately. Especially when you are dealing with someone using you for supply.

These hideous obsessive personal attacks and streams of random accusations, blaming you for every woe that has befallen them because you are a puppet member of the evil lizard illuminati, speak for themselves.

The problem is, GlitterToast, 'women falling out' is constantly leveraged by anti women activists to divide and conquer or undermine.

Frankly, I think people have become rather used to spats, because strong, determined or bolshy women often fall out with each other. Disregarding one's socialisation to be nice will result in, well, the opposite.

That's the reason you may find not much take up over this sort of discussion. It tends to be rather unproductive.

GlitterToast I don't think you've gone about this in the wrong way. I find the response surprising.

I would also have liked a discussion on infighting more broadly and hypothetically.

This thread doesn't say a lot for our ability to be self critical! Women are allowed to behave badly too feels a lot like a cop out to me.

Nothing to do with feminism. Pointless. Time wasting. And at least as divisive, if not more so, than the original Twatter spat.

OK Yes, I'll give you that!

I did try to leave this thread last night, got sucked back in!

I think It's OK for the OP to let off steam about this though, It's frustrating and disappointing when you see women you otherwise admire acting in ways that work against our collective aim, because of no more than the airing of grievances or even, on occasion, unfounded personal attacks.

And they don't all do it. I can think of so many women who stick their head above the parapet to campaign on GC issues who don't do this, and/or don't rise to it when others attack them and I reserve my right to admire them for it!

I'm surprised there hasn't been more discussion of social media. This is a huge part of the problem isn't it?

The lefties disputes and fallings out I remember the adults constantly having, from my childhood weren't played out on social media - I can't imagine the level if psychodrama if they had been able to!

Of course green infighting is played out on social media today (plenty of moaning about XR at the moment) but I don't see the same level of abuse towards individuals in public. Perhaps I'm not in the right circles to see it, but I wonder if the GC movement is more intense in this way as so much of the activism happens on social media.

Social media is hugely relevant to this movement- indeed I suspect without it, the whole thing probably wouldn't be such a problem in the first place as if there was no social media, GNC young people wouldn't be being groomed in such large numbers into thinking they're trans.

Unlike, say, the green movement, we're fighting something that's happening in large part, online. Perhaps that makes the online context all that more intense? I dunno...

The way I look at it is this.
Each and every one of us is marketing an idea. That sex is real, it matters, and gender is made up and damaging.
When we tweet, or debate, or write articles; when we speak publicly, or lobby, or take on legal cases; when we distribute leaflets, booklets, stickers or memes, even when we just add +1 like to a post - we are making a difference. We are adding to the pull towards society recognising that sex is important, and it's recognition is under threat.

Sometimes, in those activities, attempts to pull things in the right direction has a complementary backlash effect. Two steps forward, one step back. C'est la vie. This is inevitable.

As long as the NET effect of efforts pulls things forward, I see individuals' contributions as worthwhile. As part of the bigger picture, as valuable. Because the big goal is sex > gender.
And the goal isn't to get the people we like agreeing with us.
It's to get the people we don't like.
Across the entire political spectrum.

This perspective helps me to ignore, mute, roll my eyes at people who I disagree with, often vehemently. If their net effect is positive, that's enough.

I might argue, in fact I do, with people I think are behaving obnoxiously. But it tends to be when I perceive they are doing more harm than good.

I haven’t ever experienced the alienating in-fighting you describe from other GC people. On the contrary, I’ve found GC people to have kindness and humanity, and sometimes great senses of humour.

Yet another post from someone who obviously has no idea what the OP is talking about but has decided to comment anyway.

The OP is not talking about GC people in general she's talking about public spats between specific women with very public profiles.

I can think of 10 of them off the top of my head. I'm not counting Linda Bellos and Cathy Brennan btw. That was ugly behaviour from Cathy Brennan and utterly nonsensical. But it was a disagreement about a political point not a personal and public spat of the kind the OP is referring to.

I hope you find the support you need

Did you mean this to be quite so patronising?

I don’t believe OP was being disingenuous, although I know why everyone is in high alert for the same, of course.

There's a certain irony to posters publicly disapproving of the OP's criticism of others while telling her it's fine for feminists to publicity attack others in any way they want, don't you think?

Did I say it was fine? I said it was irrelevant to the cause. Two different things.

I am sick to the back teeth of disingenuous threads containing endless dark and disapproving hints about the behaviour of women being started in order to drag FWR into whatever personal Twatter spat broke out the day before. It's like fucking clockwork.

Nothing to do with feminism. Pointless. Time wasting. And at least as divisive, if not more so, than the original Twatter spat.

And that's sufficient of my time wasted on it now.

She’s allowed to be frustrated with discord for similar reasons.

Or any other reasons.

It doesn’t mean she’s gossiping

This.

There's a certain irony to posters publicly disapproving of the OP's criticism of others while telling her it's fine for feminists to publicity attack others in any way they want, don't you think?

Morning OP. I haven’t ever experienced the alienating in-fighting you describe from other GC people. On the contrary, I’ve found GC people to have kindness and humanity, and sometimes great senses of humour.

I hope you find the support you need.

I totally get what you are saying Glitter. Some of it is unnecessary as it just helps the enemy.

Have decided that I cant do anything about it except be committed to supporting women across the normal political divides because these issues concern every woman. And encouraging women who may have disagreements to keep talking to each other

So, like I say, in it for the gossip then.

That’s a bit harsh @LangCleg

We’re all, always, perfectly aware of who is reading and watching everything that is written. (Which is why OP got such a disproportionately hostile response, in fact.) She’s allowed to be frustrated with discord for similar reasons.

Or any other reasons.

It doesn’t mean she’s gossiping.

I suppose the idea of it being a movement stuck out to me because I see that as being mainly a TRA tactic - to paint us as a small group (handful of women with a load of socks) of political outliers. (I'm not accusing the OP here, just having a bit of a brain dump)

Oh yes. The conspiracy organisation funded by the far right US southern baptist pro-lifers?

I reserve my right to view myself as part of a rag-tag straggling caravan of a movement. [Not funded, but open to sponsorship from real butter companies.

To be clear, by "in-fighting", I am referring specifically to personal attacks not debate/ disagreement.

Dear goddess.

So, like I say, in it for the gossip then.

You're not bothered by philosophical or tactical disagreements such as trutrans vs women only, or speaking to right wing outlets vs maintaining leftist political purity.

You're just interested in disapproving of women who have the temerity not to behave in a sufficiently ladylike manner when they're knocking seven bells out of each other on the Twatter because of dislike rather anything to do with GC issues.

What a waste of a thread.