Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Reclaim These Streets have been captured.

231 replies

stumbledin · 16/03/2021 17:55

It was inevitable of course. Whatever the original intentions of the local women who set up the facebook event page, given the huge response they have had, it was just to tempting for those who always want to be in control not to take over.

So now there is a Reclaim These Streets facebook group www.facebook.com/groups/282187170119807/ which of course loads of women have joined. And although it is meant to be about sharing your experiences, your ideas, your whatever, turns out the group admins will not let your voice be heard if you dont express yourself in an approved way.

No need to detail what that is, but once again the vanguard of well schooled stonewall students are definitely in charge.

And of course this also applies to the now in excess of half a million pounds raisde for women's projects. It has been decreed - by knee jerk tweet that only trans inclusive groups will get women.

Tough luck on those providing women only services as legally allowed under the EA. So rape crisis helplines, women refuges, many BME groups will be deemed not worthy of financial support.

How come there are never enough mumsnetters out and about on facebook or wherever to capture groups? Sad

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
stumbledin · 16/03/2021 23:33

Just Giving Guidelines:

Community Guidelines

Campaigns can be removed from JustGiving for violating the spirit of these principles. We may remove any campaign, at any time, at our sole discretion. The following types of campaign may be removed, though this is not an exhaustive list.

JustGiving is for Good, so we cannot permit campaigns:

. if passing funds to you or your intended use of the funds would be illegal, including where the provision and/or use of the funds would be in breach of applicable financial or other sanctions.

. that promote or seek to fund terrorism, rebel groups, militias or gangs.

. that incite, promote or enact violence, defamation, hatred or harassment of any individual or group for any reason, including race, ethnic origin, religion, gender, age, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.

. that pose an obvious and significant threat to individual or public safety, including but not limited to medical treatments by unlicensed practitioners or facilities, prescription drugs without a prescription, or the purchase or procurement of weapons.

JustGiving is for the Community, so we cannot permit campaigns:

. if you are unable to fulfill the stated purpose of the campaign

containing adult or obscene content (we are a safe place for all of our users to browse).

. that promise equity or other returns for financial support (as we cannot guarantee these promises)

. to collect donations to political campaigns or candidates (as we cannot ensure adherence to country-specific campaign finance laws)..
. for legal defense of violent crimes.

If you think you've spotted something that breaks these guidelines, please let us know by clicking here and reporting the campaign. We’ve worked hard to make these guidelines as helpful as possible, but they may not cover every scenario. Therefore, we reserve our general rights to remove or edit any content – including any Crowdfunding Page – as is described further in the “User Conduct” and “Termination” sections of our Terms of Service.

help.justgiving.com/hc/en-us/articles/202748761-Getting-started-with-JustGiving-Crowdfunding

No surprise that their list of groups they think need protecting from harassment does not include sex. So no chance of saying the fundraiser is dicriminatory towards the female sex. Angry

OP posts:
stumbledin · 16/03/2021 23:28

I am just wondering whether in fact I was right to say that the facebook group was set up by those who created the facebook event page. The event page is still open and I haven't seen on it any mention that they have set up a group to continue discussion.

If anyone has seen such a message can you post that info.

I am raising this because it is more thanpossible that an other group may have just coopted the name knowing that it will immediately get huge response.

In the meantime I am looking forward to Sisters Uncut whose trademark is letting off pink flares in publis will soon announce they have money for enough flares to be let off for the next decade!

OP posts:
Espirito · 16/03/2021 23:23

@Delphinium20

I'm glad OP you pointed out that the FB is a very white group, so it's easier for them to have luxury oppressions.

I wish intersectional feminism focused on what its original intent was to focus on - that being female AND Black (or from another class who experience oppression) is a double oppression and how there are unique issues based on your particular intersection as a woman. Because you are a woman PLUS another oppressed group. It seems now that intersection potentially involves every human on the planet.

YES
ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 16/03/2021 23:12

Took me a while to realise it was "Reclaim these streets" not "Reclaim the Streets".

Would have been more honest to use a different name (unless they are related?)

NiceGerbil · 16/03/2021 23:12

'"Whoever came up with the concept of woman," is a fun line of thinking to go down. You should look into that a little more.'

What on earth do you mean?

changeofnameforthispost123 · 16/03/2021 23:06

Well, I've changed my name for this.

But I just want to say something.

Yes, it feels very lonely.

But ...

We're clearly not, in fact, the line group of out-there extremists some posters would like us to believe we are.

Time and time again, I see social media posts telling GC feminists they are out of touch, that the future belongs to the TWAW ideology, refusing to countenance the problems with that position.

And, of course, we do see institutional capture, and consumer capture.

But ... what we see are captures of areas that are particularly vulnerable to social media pressure.

We also see the results of the initial Consercstive Party endorsement of gender self-recognition.

That lady was quite damaging.

But the Conservatives have pulled back.

Why?

Because, despite all claims by the TWAW, no argument, no platform group - the majority of the country is not with them.

Being GC is not, in fact, a statistically lonely position to be in.

And - in the secrecy of the ballot box - people just quietly vote against it.

And the Conservative Party know it.

And it pains me. Because I want a Labour government.

But we are so far from getting a Labour government, I wonder if I will still be around to see one.

And this is - in part - why.

And I suspect Keir Starmer knows this, too.

But, weirdly, despite all evidence to the contrary, the TWAW and anti-SWERF types continue in the delusion they are, in fact, a righteous majority.

They're not.

They bully and bully. And scared groups capitulate.

But in the secrecy of the ballot-box, the electorate says, 'No'.

Because you can't force an electorate to accept a position they really don't want.

You can try to persuade - but they don't do that.

They bully.

And the electorate says, 'No.'

And they will go on saying, 'No.'

Which is bloody depressing for all of us who would like something other than a Conservative government.

Hibari · 16/03/2021 22:44

@Ereshkigalangcleg

So how do you define women if it isn't by our sexed bodies?

The "science nerd" Hibari subscribes to a rather bizarre quasi-religious belief that anyone who declares they are a woman, even if male, must necessarily be so and this can never ever be questioned.

Because of course it's really silly to wonder how anyone ever came up with the concept of women if it had nothing to do with biological sex and of course has nothing to do with sex stereotypes, perish the thought.

Yes, the science nerd follows the direction the science has been going since the early 1900s.

anyone who declares they are a woman, even if male, must necessarily be so and this can never ever be questioned.

Not a position I've ever actually stated here, and my actual view is a little more nuanced than that, but... you're pretty close?

"Whoever came up with the concept of woman," is a fun line of thinking to go down. You should look into that a little more.

Delphinium20 · 16/03/2021 22:44

I'm glad OP you pointed out that the FB is a very white group, so it's easier for them to have luxury oppressions.

I wish intersectional feminism focused on what its original intent was to focus on - that being female AND Black (or from another class who experience oppression) is a double oppression and how there are unique issues based on your particular intersection as a woman. Because you are a woman PLUS another oppressed group. It seems now that intersection potentially involves every human on the planet.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 16/03/2021 22:34

So how do you define women if it isn't by our sexed bodies?

The "science nerd" Hibari subscribes to a rather bizarre quasi-religious belief that anyone who declares they are a woman, even if male, must necessarily be so and this can never ever be questioned.

Because of course it's really silly to wonder how anyone ever came up with the concept of women if it had nothing to do with biological sex and of course has nothing to do with sex stereotypes, perish the thought.

NiceGerbil · 16/03/2021 22:32

Not RTFT but had a quick look at the Facebook thing.

So depressing. This massive amount of women thinking enough is enough. We need change. A moment to get together and really push for something tangible.

And all that's happening is women bickering over who is more oppressed than who etc.

Shame that can't be put aside for a bit to harness this feeling and get something done.

Espirito · 16/03/2021 22:31

I got in to a discussion on the Facebook page this afternoon, on a post demanding confirmation that RTS is trans and sex worker inclusive. All very civilised, polite and respectful (on my part anyway). Comments were closed within minutes.
So many things to say about this. So few I can. Angry

Ereshkigalangcleg · 16/03/2021 22:27

You have paraphrased “born female” to “reproductive capabilities”. Interesting.

Isn't it.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 16/03/2021 22:26

The core axis of defining women by their reproductive capabilities?

Are you SURE that's feminism?

You don't understand what it's about, do you? That's a really lame take.

EightiesRobot · 16/03/2021 22:26

So how do you define women if it isn't by our sexed bodies?

Hibari · 16/03/2021 22:24

@EightiesRobot

Are you sure that defining women by what they wear is feminism?
Immediately falling back onto the standard strawman argument that does not represent any reasonable person's position, I see.
AIMD · 16/03/2021 22:20

“Fighting a system of structural oppression based on inherent biology?
Pretty sure, yes

I'm curious as to your definition of feminism”

I’m curious to hear it too.

continuallyconflating · 16/03/2021 22:15

The core axis of defining women by their reproductive capabilities?

Are you SURE that's feminism?

Fighting a system of structural oppression based on inherent biology?
Pretty sure, yes

I'm curious as to your definition of feminism

Logoff · 16/03/2021 22:11

@ValancyRedfern

Yes they were very upfront from the start about being twaw. I decided not to go to my local vigil as it was for 'all those who identify as women' so I concluded it wasn't for me.
I wish that I had researched them properly. I feel so let down.
accessorizequeen · 16/03/2021 22:09

You have paraphrased “born female” to “reproductive capabilities”. Interesting. Why don’t you think females should be at the heart of FEMinism?

WootMoggie · 16/03/2021 21:57

I mentioned all of this three days ago but Mumsnet HQ decided to delete the thread.

I was, shall we say “disappointed” that in doing so, Mumsnet facilitated further donations to a group who said “every single penny” would go to charities that included transwomen - when it’s clear that many felt that was inappropriate.

As for Sisters Uncut “honouring” the deaths of men who had raped women and children, there’s no words for that.

Mainstream media don’t seem to have plucked up the courage to expose this, but on the plus side, apparently JustGiving is giving refunds to those who ask.

AIMD · 16/03/2021 21:43

I’ve come off the group both because I didn’t feel I could share my thoughts without being labelled transphobic and didn’t think the arguments on the group were respectful or useful for anyone.

I’m fed up of reading the same stock phrases dropped about left right and centre.

EightiesRobot · 16/03/2021 21:32

Are you sure that defining women by what they wear is feminism?

Hibari · 16/03/2021 21:30

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Most "intersectional feminism" is nothing of the sort, as it ignores or dismisses a key axis of oppression, being born female.
The core axis of defining women by their reproductive capabilities?

Are you SURE that's feminism?

SunsetBeetch · 16/03/2021 20:55

I get the impression that perhaps this all ran away from them a bit and they didn't realise how much attention and money they would receive.

However, it is still poor form and unprofessional to not decide what you are doing with the donations until after the donation page has been set up. What a mess.

FloraFox · 16/03/2021 20:43

This group has raised more than half a million pounds on their JustGiving website. According to the website, you can only raise funds for one specified registered charity per page or for local or personal causes. They haven't specified which charities they will give the money to but have indicated on twitter that it will likely include Sisters Uncut who are using the response to Sara's death to campaign for rapists and murderers of women.

You can complain about the fundraising generally using this link (which isn't so easy to find on the webpage). I think most of the donors would be surprised to learn their donations might find their way into the pockets of people campaigning for rapists and murderers.

help.justgiving.com/hc/en-us/requests/new?ticket_form_id=137825