Helen Joyce & Julie Bindel: Should TERFs unite with the Right?

It's still used as a slur, as JB says in the debate. I do know a lot of women do use it, in a somewhat ironic "reclaimed" way. It's not an accurate term as we do not exclude trans people, we include female people as women even if they do not identify as such, and many of us are not radical feminists.

It does have the advantage of being easy to say and has pleasingly sounding plural of terven.

It all sounds so Pharisaical. “I give thanks Lord, that I am a true and faithful feminist and not like these other terrible women over there.”

That's just a rejection of the possibility of society, or political democracy of any kind.

If they want to go off and start some kind of separatist enclaves like some of the members of the radical reformation, they are welcome to it, but I really wish they would have some self-reflection on what it is they are really proposing and stop muddying the waters for those who actually want to, or even have to, live in society.

Haven't read everything but when did the term "TERF" cease to be offensive? Not trying to wind anything up just genuinely bewildered.

I've made points about protecting women's spaces to many of the caring men in my life, and been surprised that they haven't immediately seen why this is a threat to me, a petite 5'4 woman. I have come to conclude that it is because they can't imagine being within such a frame - they don't see the issue - they will never have to face it. My son now can pick me up and swing me around. He cannot imagine not being able to do that.

I kind of a had a sense of this imaginative deficiency between people with different life choices from hearing Julie speak. She said (paraphrase, so hope not to misrepresent) that conservatives want to get rid of people like me, to label us freaks and misfits. I completely heard what she said, I think for the first time, I got it.

So, I may be wrong. But I do sense a difference between the way lesbians and straight women perceive the fight. In some senses, straight married women cannot perceive the patriarchy in the same way perhaps. It is too hard to constantly view males that you love (husbands, sons) as part of your oppression.

For lesbians perhaps it is different, there are not the same chains that bind. I did really feel this is a difference of understanding. But we are women, we are good at making the leap to understanding each other. Lesbians, feel free to argue back. I was very impressed with both speakers. But in the end, Helen represents my viewpoint, but her experience is closer to mine. But I think I had more of a window into Julie's which was enlightening.

@FOJN I have had women attack me on line for being happily married and a mother of three! Being a mother and being married are some of the most universal experiences of women and the vast majority (at least in the West) choose their partner and to have children. To attack women for these reasons seems the opposite of feminism to me. It hasn’t escaped my notice that KJK is a woman who is also a wife and a stay at home mother of 4 (although I think at least 2 or her eldest are at University). I am sure this is the part of the reason she no longer calls herself a feminist because some women on the Left will immediately attack you for your life choices. Why can we not accept that raising children is a big undertaking and often the most efficient and most mother-friendly way to live is to chose to do that full time? When other women are patronizing towards other women because of these choices, or their job or their lack of education or not embracing what they consider the most fulfilling feminist way to live it’s a total own goal as far as I can see.

Like KJK the only times I have been viciously attacked online is by Left wing women! Especially a group of GC younger women. I was raised in a Labour voting family of unionists (female and male) and I have never voted Conservative in my life. Like so many women I now find myself politically homeless.

I've just watched this and although JB made some good points HJ & the "unite with the right" argument was definitely stronger and won.

Yes. Correction appreciated FOJN.

i don't mean 'everyone'. I mean the many who seem to get stuck in a kind of tribalism. On Twitter, in the media, political parties (and often expressed in debates on here too) etc.

That's why I find MN so valuable and also seek out heterodox podcasts.

I'm saying I have the same view as you and Lang, but in my limited experience ( maybe I need to seek out more discussion platforms), this seems rarer.

Happy to be wrong!

Alltheprettyseahorses I have actually considered that option!

There's been some criticism of women staying with these parties from people like Helen Joyce. I know the greens want us to go and labour doesn't care so I'd prefer to be stubborn and not capitulate.

Green women are beginning to get somewhere with some internal votes. Others are suing.

Everyone seems to be struggling so much with context, nuance, and complexity right now!

Why is it so hard to see that there are times and places where different approaches are needed? That nothing is a perfect solution to every problem? That different strengths might need to be called on.

In work situations, or friendships, we understand that sometimes we need the kind listener, sometimes the advocate, sometimes the blunt pragmatist etc. It seems so hard for people to translate this to the macro level!

I disagree that everyone seems to be struggling with context, nuance and complexity. On this board and in most other places where I have participated in discussions about gender ideology most people understand that not only are different perspectives desirable, they are necessary.

I have a huge amount of respect for the work of left wing feminists such as JB but there is no denying that it is the left sowing the seeds of division and that is what I find so unforgivable. The accusation seems to be that if we aren't doing it their way we are doing it wrong and harming women. The fact that gender ideology has taken hold in the way that it has suggests, to me, that perhaps left wing feminists don't have all the answers and they might benefit from listening a little more to ordinary women.

Until fairly recently I would have described myself as a feminist and left of center but I feel uncomfortable with declaring an association with either now because of the way that high profile women such as JB are trying to start a war within the women's movement. It feels as if left wing feminists are trying to hold onto the power which comes with being a well known authority on women's rights.

I do not know KJK and I don't think she always gets it right but she has galvanised women who may not describe themselves as feminists but recognise the misogyny of gender ideology when they see it. I hope this is the beginning of a whole new level of consciousness about how women as a class are treated and motivates ordinary women to channel their anger towards positive change.

I always feel humbled by the ordinary women who speak at SFW events. They are not practiced or polished public speakers but they speak from the heart about their experiences in a way I find powerful and compelling; this is women being given the confidence to use their voices and I cannot condemn the woman who has been pragmatic enough to ditch political and ideological purity to facilitated that.

Joining with the far right to campaign against pornography would mean working with groups with profoundly homophobic agendas.

Not many lesbians would be on board with that, whatever their political beliefs.

Perfectly put and I have come to the same conclusion Lang.

Everyone seems to be struggling so much with context, nuance, and complexity right now!

Why is it so hard to see that there are times and places where different approaches are needed? That nothing is a perfect solution to every problem? That different strengths might need to be called on.

In work situations, or friendships, we understand that sometimes we need the kind listener, sometimes the advocate, sometimes the blunt pragmatist etc. It seems so hard for people to translate this to the macro level!

Why? Neither party is going to change. More, speaking about women's rights is likely to get them thrown out. They'd be better off joining the Tories and influencing their broader policies instead.

And these people need to remain within labour and the greens in order to fight there from within.

To me this is a case where it's worth agreeing to disagree on this particular point due to differences in backgrounds.

Julie's points are worth repeating to some of my left leaning friends in order to help get them to see the rot. As they will want to remain firmly with the left as a whole on this.

And perhaps she's a stepping stone for them to Helen's pov. Or not, it doesn't matter as long as all agree that gender ideology is an issue.

Bindels point about house being on fire long term also resonated with me and I think she is concerned that if this becomes a single issue the other issues continued to be ignored. The GI is a culmination and off shoot if all the others and another symptom of the wider disease of misogyny.

At the same time it does also affect males, young boys, as well as girls which makes it more of a general medical and safeguarding issue. Which is why all groups should be concerned about this.

Of course they then become part of the problem that affects all women and girls hence the firm roots in feminism.

I'm not sure that's possible, given the wildly different understandings of what reality is among those groups and the differences in power between them.

What Julie said about the house being on fire for a long time, way before the gender debate became mainstream, rang very true to me.

Not in terms of 'where were you then?' at all though. More that the fire has really caught hold and that opposing gender ideology, sexism, misogyny and all their manifestations can't affectively be done from one side or a single issue approach.

Both women made some great points.

Maya Forstater has a short summary.

twitter.com/SexMattersOrg/status/1601294488575840256

On Helen Joyce:

"She made the case for people with different principles, be they based on feminism, freedom of speech, religion, science, concern for human rights or concern to protect children, to work together against reality-denial."

Sounds sensible to me.

@EpicChaos who is Julie Bindel?
Everyone knows who Julie Bindel is . Or at least they know of what Julie Bindel has been behind . The women that Bindel has helped . She has been around for donkeys years helping women who for some reason have ended up in prison with murder convictions after years of abuse. Julie is really well known. In many different communities. KJK not so much.

I'm waiting for someone, anyone, who can adequately explain to me what
" far right " actually is/means, precisely!
I am sick and tired of seeing the term being thrown around by middle class, snobs, that use the term as a cover for spouting their anti working class bigotry, because accusing people of being far right gives them an excuse to look down their noses at people they think are beneath them, are inferior and whose views shouldn't be listened to and can be dismissed immediately.
If anyone thinks there's no one like that using these boards, let alone in the wider context of terfery, then they have another think coming! There's one or two posters here that positively drip with it!
Some people ought to be reminded, frequently, that it's the left and far left that got us in to this mess, so the middle class snobs need to think on and stop being so judgemental, because you have no right to judge anyone!

As for J. Bindel, who she, precisely?! ( Yes, i know who she is but the general population??? not so much, i'd bet. )
What exactly is she doing to bring all this to the attention of people on the street?! I don't see her advertising any speakers corners anywhere of the sort KJK organises.
I may not know what a Bindel is but i sure as hell know what a KJK is!

It was an interesting debate with some excellent points made by both women.

Julie's final point, that it is a tactical disaster to campaign around the harms of gender ideology without locating it in broader feminist concerns like male violence, child sexual abuse, FGM, prostitution, pornography made a lot of sense to me.

Bindel and her cronies always come across as basically a bit schoolgirl bully jel of KJK snobs. . Seen it too many times at this point. There is something pathetic about it.

I think increasingly the left thinks the way forward politically is forcing change, often through mechanisms like the courts, or rights type tribunals.

They aren't interested in actually convincing people in the population overall. They don't see a need for a democratic consensus.

This seems to work better in places where the courts have more power over Parliament, It seems a more limited strategy in the UK as a whole, but even in the former kinds of places I'd suggest that it's a foolish way to proceed.

Colour me shocked.

Or not.

Bindle is the kind of person who seems to really think that anyone who is on the right doesn't care about racism, presumably even those who aren't actually white.

Thanks for this @ILikeDungs