Actual gender critical left

It would seem so

let’s hope trump doesn’t announce he believes gravity is real too

so you believe in gender stereotypes and that men with long hair and dresses are in fact women and if they want to attend any group for women they are welcome

that's good to know

WaitingForTheDoubleDecker You got in bed with actual fascists ..
Who exactly is this 'you'?

It looks like you think you are addressing people who voted for Trump - you don't seem to be aware that [a] the majority of posters on here didn't have a vote in the US presidential election and [b] if you read a broad selection of posts here and elsewhere that mention Trump - even the ones that praise two specific EOs - as often as not the post contains something like 'I despise Trump' 'I disagree with everything else Trump has done' 'I hate everything Trump stands for but even a stopped clock is right twice a day' [or once a day obvs if its working on the 24 system]. There was even a very intemperate 'I hate Trump and wouldn't care if he died..

Not exactly a Trumpian lovefest, is it?

Getting into bed with 'actual fascists'? as opposed to pretend ones or something? 'African toilet twinning?' sorry WaitingForTheDoubleDecker , your post doesn't make much sense.

Yet again, what are we supposed to do here? Denounce a policy that we know to be sensible and important because it comes from the big orange man?

What exactly is the complaint here? That we think it's a good executive order?

Are we supposed to pretend we think it's a bad one because Trump?

Yeah, I don't understand this either. What's the 'appropriate' response that they want here?

😆 I'm not a GC. I feel no compulsion to find excuses for the shitstorm you've all been foolish enough to tag along with, whether you're one of the big brain MN regulars or the WPUK lefties.

If your side can't come up with better policies than Trump, what does it say about them?

Okay, that's slightly badly phrased - sure, the Democrats do have many better policies than Trump.

But the problem is that they have many catastrophically worse policies, with this at the top of the pile.

If you're in a competition with Trump, and want to beat him, voters should not have to be weighing up the catastrophically bad policies on each side.

You should be making sure you don't have any catastrophically bad policies, so he can't make you look like idiots.

This was an epic fail from those who claim to oppose him.

And if you think Trump is so bad, why are you making it so easy for people to prefer his policies?

This keeps getting asked

Well done.

What exactly is the complaint here? That we think it's a good executive order?

Are we supposed to pretend we think it's a bad one because Trump?

Or are we just failing to make enough snide remarks about him and those who vote for him while discussing it. Are we not centring Trump enough in this discussion of women?

And if you think Trump is so bad, why are you making it so easy for people to prefer his policies? If your side can't come up with better policies than Trump, what does it say about them?

And yet one EO has GCs pretending a far right US administration has provided the new bedrock of women's rights.

Absolute bollocks.

Please provide any evidence where anyone has said anything even approximately that position.

That's exactly the same sort of sweeping statement quoted in the OP.

Most women are adult enough to see that a policy they agree with is not the same as supporting the source of a policy.

Honestly talk about ground hog day.

This is just dragging this thread back to where it started.

And yet one EO has GCs pretending a far right US administration has provided the new bedrock of women's rights. It would be funny if it wasn't so serious. Ruth S and co are supercilious arses without a doubt, but GCs patting themselves on the back because they're only in the foothills of fuck around and find out mountain is quite the delusional bollocks. You got in bed with actual fascists cos you thought you were being pragmatic, but you got played to leverage their power, as was always going to happen. Now Trump et al is going to ride roughshod over everything, but hey, at least you get to bully gnc women out of the women's bogs and bring up African toilet twinning as an excuse. Well done.

Exactly. Almost feel bad for making it more public.

But all I am trying to say is this group is totally hypercritical.

And in fact I am sure it would be of huge benefit if a genuinely left group of women was formed to discuss, campaign for women's sex based rights.

I think some of us thought WPUK would be a sort of middle of the road left group.

But at some point, as someone on facebook posted in response to their last post, they decided their followers just weren't politically pure left enough, so were all dumped.

In fact there are so many disenfranchised left feminists on FWR, maybe someone should start of group.

Or at least a thread that isn't bogged down by the antics of AGCL eg

How to campaign for women's sex based rights as left wing women

And one of the response from a founder member of ACGL was:
"Bev is a ding-dong and is normalizing fascism to protect her ego."

That's awful. Bev is lovely and has had loads of crap thrown at her by TRAs over the past few years. This kind of stuff just makes me sad.

I agree with them that Trump is terrifying and aligning with the far right is hardly a recipe for women’s rights being upheld. I’d imagine most moderately left wing or centrist GC women would agree. It’s hardly a radical position to think Trump is not the answer.

I hate Trump and wouldn't care if he died.

I'm also gender critical and always have been, because I'm a feminist.

TRA love to love GC because it fits their narrative.

Well clearly we were supposed to carry on throwing ourselves, other women and vulnerable children under the gender ideology bus because the purity of left wing politics matters more than anything else. Even more achieving the thing we’ve all been striving for.

There is quite blatant scaremongering on this issue.

To go by some of the narrative swirling about you’d think Trump was reenacting The Handmaid’s Tale. For the record, I don’t like him or his politics but he’s not fucking Hitler.

I spent most of my life being very left wing, but had the tribalism knocked out of me by hard experience. Now I consider myself politically homeless.

It's all about tribal identity. All about who's in the club and who isn't. And I don't even think they're being in good faith with their purity spirals. Because ultimately there's a particular type of socfem who is almost identical to TRAs in background and ideology, and their main grievance is their own exclusion from the lefty club.

Kara Dansky isn't part of AGCL's club. She Who Shall Not Be Named is definitely not part of the club. So, definitionally, everything they say and do is wrong, even if it achieves a good result.

I'm willing to bet they view unrepentant MRAs like Owen Jones or Dickie Seymour as basically good comrades who just happen to be misguided on this one issue.

Oh, was that her?
Domesticated zombies?
She can bugger off then.

(For the absence of doubt, I despise fascists. I'm also not keen on the modern Left.)

Was just coming to post this. See also Jane Clare Jones. Absolute chumps the pair of them.

Alexa, what is a 'pyrrhic victory'?

The majority of the group (well the inner circle) are American but seems to have attracted some UK women eg Jayne Egerton.

Their focus seems to have been to put up a counter arguement to WoLF. The problem for them is WoLF went from strength to strength and they just floundered in a small pool of self congratulartury purity.

I am not sure they have ever bothered with the Democrats. They just seem to focus on saying why other women are wrong.

So for instance someone posted about a recent comment from Bev Jackson of LGB Alliance saying

" It expresses the 'middle ground' position being taken by some of the gcs who think of themselves as on the left. She generally deplores Trump but supports the two EOs & thinks we shouldn't be scared to say so rather than contribute to political polarisation. I struggle as much with this position as I do with the full on Trump supporters."

And one of the response from a founder member of ACGL was:
"Bev is a ding-dong and is normalizing fascism to protect her ego."

And yet they have this stern warning about being part of the group that says
"Be polite. Be civil. Make evidenced-based arguments. No vitriol. No ad hominems."

You also get kicked out of the group if you question one of the founding women's analysis.

So suggest if you want meaningful discussion on the conflict in being left aligned and gender critical, I dont this this is the group that will help this happen.

Her real problem is purely about tribal allegiance.

Also this. The progressive left seems to have become so addicted to its vision of itself as the 'good guys' it will do literally anything to maintain that. Including barefaced lying.

I agree. There is quite blatant scaremongering on this issue.

It seems to be rooted in this 'all or nothing' mentality where people cannot seem to cope with any nuance at all.

Something I wonder:

At what point is it ok for people to look at the complete shit the Democrats, or the Labour Party, are spouting, and the often shitty policies they are implementing,

and then look at the policies coming from the other side,

and then say, actually, on balance, it kind of looks like the left is in bad faith and doesn't give a shit about anyone, and the right is maybe a little better?

The two arguments she puts forth here are firstly, that Trump will somehow make things bad for gay and lesbian people - which is just a made up lie, there is no reason to think that and in fact his actions suggest it is bs. And then the question of abortion, which I appreciate still rankles, but actually is still being managed by democratic, responsible political institutions, just at the state level. It hasn't been taken over by dictators, and citizens may even be able to have more input than they did before.

Her real problem is purely about tribal allegiance.

It's just another thinly veiled jab at KJK as usual.