What's the problem with FiLiA?

That is interesting @purplevipersgrass , I relate to some of what you are saying. Unfortunately I agree that there can be indirect homophobia in GC circles.

Lesbians who have children referred to as 'entitled' and compared with gay men who use surrogates.

Developing on this:
I kept my views on this private for a long time because I did not want the battle, but having seen how some of my lesbian friends and groups are being pushed out of their own movement by people colonising our sexuality, it's time to speak and defend who we are.

In the old days many, perhaps most, of the women protesting about transwomen and GI were lesbians, because lesbians were probably the first group to be affected. Not long after the GRA was brought in in 2004 we started to get a number of clearly male individuals attempting to attend lesbian events, or to shut down women's events that excluded TWs.

So we've been fighting this for years. We've been writing letters and attending council meetings and protesting locally for more than a decade. We know where our local politicians and councils stand. We know the territory and the history. Thanks in no small part to Mumsnet links we knew much of what Helen Joyce included in Trans before she discovered GI and wrote the book. I'm not knocking Helen, she changed the game, but we had been on this for years.

Many of the early groups that started pushing back were mainly or sometimes wholly lesbian, because for years many straight women were unaware of what was going on. What's happening now in my terf groups is that we are being colonised by women who until fairly recently were on the other side of the argument. Some of them come with particular specialist concerns (education or the workings of the local council) and bring expertise and inside knowledge. But there are others who are banking on the wheel turning in the next few years and creating opportunities for those with GC credentials. So they either set up their own groups and then rely on the knowledge of people who've been involved in the GC movement for years to join and support them, or they join existing groups and then use sharp elbows to establish themselves as leaders or spokeswoman. Some of them bring with them homophobia and ageism. Older lesbians who've been protesting for years are being pushed out with the tacit message that us old dykes can stand down now, the straight female cavalry have arrived and will take this issue on.

I'm really glad that Julie Bindel and Kathleen Stock have launched the Lesbian Project and gobsmacked to see that today the Guardian has published an article by Stock on the subject:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/12/i-came-out-late-only-to-findlesbians-slipped-back-of-queue

I wonder if any of the women here who are having, or might have in the future, a relationship with a man, would stop to think for a moment how their 'I think I'll choose to be a lesbian' attitude might seem to those of us who are totally female attracted. Does it not make you stop and wonder whether you don't sound rather like trans people? Born with a sexual attraction to men but identifying another way and fuck what the lesbians think, you're going to join them?

I'm bi, but if my current relationship with a man doesn't work out for some reason, I'm not sure if I'd be with another one. Can't really unsee the things radical feminism has opened my eyes to. But that doesn't make me a lesbian, even a political one, and I think the language there's become important since the time that label's been thought up; it invites myself into conversation about the lesbian experience when there are now so many not-lesbians, including spicy straights using "queer" as a battering ram, that it feels they hardly have a scrap of their own identity, culture, and community to hold onto for themselves, and it's become so normalized that they're being attacked for that like they're the oppressors.

Yes - this is where I land too. It's intrinsic AND I'd choose it. I'm not keen on the 'we can't help it' justification (which should not be necessary).

As a grouping I'm happy to share the term lesbian with women who attribute their lesbianism to their politics. At a personal level, in my own sexual relationships, I guess I want some sort of reassurance about the sexual aspect of my lover's orientation - but that's never been an issue that's arisen for me. I wonder if it's one source of discomfort around political lesbianism though.

Julie Bindel has only ever been interested in women and calls herself a political lesbian.

If someone has made a choice not to date men but only women due to their political commitments, they are still bisexual. It's grossly offensive to perpetuate the language of "choice" and contributes to the harm many lesbians still face. My sexuality does not require justification: it's simply an intrinsic part of me in something like the way I have brown eyes.

Belstaffie is exactly right on this. We don't need to single anyone out or make it personal, but we, as lesbians, do get to draw boundaries. If you're not exclusively same-sex attracted, then you're not a lesbian and no amount of theorising about politics changes that.

I kept my views on this private for a long time because I did not want the battle, but having seen how some of my lesbian friends and groups are being pushed out of their own movement by people colonising our sexuality, it's time to speak and defend who we are.

Julie Bindel calls herself a political lesbian and has only ever been interested in women.

It's a term that seems to have been used in a lot of different ways though.

I can't get very exercised about it, and I'm usually quite grumpy about language.

But would assume someone using it was a feminist who was open to relationships with women and had decided not to have relationships with men.
They might be bisexual but if they're not pursuing relationships with men, I don't see how it is that harmful.

Saying you're a lesbian out of solidarity but actually you're married to a man - that would be annoying.
I havent seen that though.
Not in the last couple of decades anyway.

I think a line of thought that goes 'you can't help being a lesbian - you're born that way and it doesn't have a political impact on society or on your life course' isn't in line with radical feminist ideas.
So if you're a radical feminist, I can see you exploring more ideas like compulsory heterosexuality.

Is it still a thing? If so, I agree, best the phenomenon has a new name.

Maybe something like ‘ManFree’ the way ‘ChildFree’ is used by people who actively choose not to become parents?

To add to my post - it seems to me that many women identifying as political lesbians are in fact heterosexual or bi, but not lesbian. An Important difference.

Belstaffie has tweeted more in recent days about political lesbianism.

To paraphrase - a lesbian is a same sex attracted women, no further explanation needed.

If we agree that a TW is not a woman and we object to the appropriation of womanhood, how can we agree that a political lesbian isn't equally an appropriation of lesbianism?

Language is very important.

I first came by the term political lesbian in the 80's and didn't question it then. But by god we've all realised how important definitions are in the last few years.

I don't do twitter or understand how to link things from there to here but if someone else can will you please do?

Relevant link upthread.

Could you explain the references to EDI vampires then , I don’t get it

And critical race theory simply means recognising that racism and institutional racism exists.

No it doesn't, any more than queer theory just recognises that homophobia and transphobia exist.

Equality, diversity and inclusion.

I went to both UCL/WPUK conferences and Filia and enjoyed them all.

Filia are quite extraordinary in their attention to global issues and very local, grass roots work.

Glad that it's in Glasgow this year, although not sure if I'll be able to go. They do have free/very low cost tickets and do what they can to coordinate lift shares and find women free places to stay.

What is EDI please?

@IwantToRetire what's your issue with the Women's Liberation conference? I went to both the 2020 one and the one two days ago, and got a lot out of talking (and arguing!) with all kinds of lovely, interesting, committed women activists all day.

Just as a reminder, Louise Perry on why the next wave of feminism will be Conservative.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-the-next-wave-of-feminism-is-conservative/

AllOutofEverything, I think what people are unhappy about was that one workshop took place at the last conference. All because some people disagree with the speakers on the panel.

Nope, that wasn't what it was about. I started that thread, I know. You also misrepresented the woman who spoke from the floor at that event who said that all the money going to the legal crowdfunders must come from the right because working class socialist women like her had no money. And then she said it was okay now because she'd married a wealthy man.

Here's the thread that opened up the worm can and you'll see that it's about an awful lot more than not agreeing with the speakers.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4662757-womens-place-uk-filia-event-the-elephant-ignored-yet-again

Filia was truly incredible. So much to think about. I will definitely be going in the future and the party was absolutely brilliant.

The party was completely sold out. No one could get an extra ticket. 🐂💩

And a more general comment - I think E all need to be verrry careful about “purity spirals” - feminism and the women’s movement is a broad church. And I’d argue it needs to be.

So many women find Kelly-Jay Kean / Pisie Parker speaks in a way that they get. They don’t want the academic feminists (like me). They want a direct acknowledgement of their experiences. Others come to feminism via socialism. Others are what we used to call in Australia “femocrats”. Women who got very high up in tne government bureaucracies to effect change. There are the separation /political lesbians (I heard a great WDI webinar featuring sheilaJeffreys on this 2 weeks ago)

And so on. We are50% of the population - of course there will be differences of approach and of course there will be passionate debate and disagreements. we don’t all think alike! And the women’s movement needs all of this diversity- we need all the girls and women!

I was at the WPUK event on Saturday. On the way there I was hailed by a former student which was very sweet. She was on her way to another Feminist conference. It was one which was set up in opposition to the WPUK one by other UCL academics (a whole nasty story there) but I wished her well. I thought it was great that she was committed enough to feminist thinking and activism to attend anything!

I’m just so pleased to see this resurgence of the grass roots women’s movement. We need it, wherever it is.

And critical race theory simply means recognising that racism and institutional racism exists.

As far as I understand it (and it’s only adjacent to my research field) it’s a bit more complex than that.

Some of the teaching drawn out of CRT (which is not the same as CRT itself) is about the inevitable positioning of any and every white person as racist, whether intentional or not.