To think we should actually 'just piss off back to the 1970s'?

[TheMythicalChicken]

So this is in response to a TRA on Twitter who said that all those women objecting to proposed changes to the GRA should 'just piss off back to the 1970s'. And it got me thinking - maybe that's what we need to do, at least in terms of women fighting to be heard and for certain rights to be protected.

In the 1970s we had women's groups, we had our own feminist newspaper, 'Spare Rib', women were powerful and strong and we gained so much for women of the future. Most women of that generation gave up feminism, because we didn't feel we needed it anymore. But when I look at what's happening now, in terms of men in women's spaces, erasure of lesbians, etc. it makes me think that we need to organize and fight in the same way we did back then.

What does everyone else think?

But I can't help thinking that in some ways things have got worse for women and girls

Oh ITA - that was my point really I suppose...

So many threads I've seen on here where the OP says 'I have saved for my maternity leave but have run out of money, I am borrowing money from DP for nappies'. They are reluctant to marry, yet expect that any DCs will of course have their surname

The 70s taught me that marriage was a crock of shit - I know many 'happily' married women of that time who fed families on their part time wages because the husband's wage was his....

But yes, generally I agree with you. I think feminists spent too long campaigning for special rights for mothers and not enough on women's general equality or for men to do 50% of the domestic labour, but that's another thread.

What is "the erasure of lesbians"?

I think the main elements are:

1. Lesbian sexuality being re-defined from same-sex attraction to attraction to people who identify as women (which is why lesbian protesters holding the sign at Pride saying that lesbian = female homosexual caused such a reaction). Being a woman attracted only to biological women is considered 'transphobic' and makes you a 'vagina fetishist'.

See for example this video on how 'genital preferences' (ie being a lesbian who isn't attracted to people with penises) is transphobic:

Or this article on how to have lesbian sex with someone with a penis:

www.autostraddle.com/how-to-have-trans-woman-lesbian-sex-with-a-penis-414839/

Whereas 70s feminists wanted to smash the 'glass ceiling' (break down the barriers to women getting access to the boardroom), transactivists have coined the term 'cotton ceiling' - The cotton being lesbians' underwear as they feel oppressed that lesbians won't have sex with them and want to smash down this barrier:

tgforum.com/wordpress/the-cotton-ceiling

2. A culture which encourages younger especially butch lesbians to transition to 'become' straight men:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/meet-alex-bertie-the-transgender-poster-boy-z88hgh8b8?shareToken=19d4331ca9cd49841fab6e0f0bc0dd36

3. Historical lesbians being trans-ed.

E.g. The Stonewall riots were started by a black butch lesbian but transactivists have decided that she was really a transman and transactivists repeatedly trot this line out and write lesbians out of the history of our movement:

www.afterellen.com/general-news/561237-we-need-to-talk-about-misogyny-and-the-lgbt-communitys-erasure-of-black-lesbian-history

Just this week a plaque was unveiled at the place where Anne Lister (often described as "the first modern lesbian") made (obviously unofficial) marriage vows to her female partner. The plaque does not use the word lesbian or same sex or describe her as a woman because she was butch so transactivists argue that Anne may have really been a transman (and, therefore, heterosexual).

4. The closing down of events like MichFest following pressure from transactivists and male transactivists with baseball bats policing us at Women's Marches and Dyke Marches:

gendertrender.wordpress.com/tag/pastel-bloc/

5. Lesbian under-representation (or complete lack of representation) being made invisible because we are "represented" by biological males (with intact penises) who are attracted to women (ie what 10 years ago would have been referred to as straight men):

www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1807/S00140/don-t-you-dare-say-anything.htm

6. Lesbians being re-branded against our will to 'queer' which is considered more 'inclusive' (of men):

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-didnt-you-say-something-sooneryoure-asking_us_59d560dee4b085c51090ad64

I was going to try to write a brief response to the previous poster's question but it was longer than I expected! I still feel I've barely covered the topic and but I have to go out now.

(I bet someone else will have succinctly responded by the time I press 'post' but nevermind!)

@Birdsgottafly I think you're assuming I'm older than I actually am! My profession has a proud history of being pretty non sexist and I have always lived in affluent areas, so yes, my experience has been very different from yours. Like a couple of previous posters, because my own life wasn't really being affected I didn't really notice the gradual erosion of the rights my mother's generation had fought for. It's only now that my own children are becoming adults that I am noticing just how much insidious misogyny is built into our society.

As an active feminist in the 70's - yes there were many issues we were organising around from equal pay to lesbian rights, but it's because we were organising that those things began to change and facilities like refuges began to be set up. And, if you think it was only white middle class women, you are very wrong. Many working class women got to universities at that time, the first in our families ever to do so. There were black women's groups, Jewish women's groups, working class women's groups, lesbian groups, disabled women's groups - you could set up whatever you wanted and many women did. The women's Liberation Movement was very diverse also in the different things women chose to work in, setting up women's centres or fighting for abortion rights (or learning to do self-exam and abortions), or campaigns for legal and financial independence - or more diverse representation in the media -zillions of things. We wrote and published and learned how to print in order to control those things ourselves..... It was an amazing time for activism, we squatted houses too so we could live collectively (not always harmoniously). So when you talk about going back to the 70's, yes, for all of that. And, actually going to meetings such as Woman's Place UK have organised on transgender issues has reminded me more of those days than any other time since then. I think a new women's movement is being formed. And how it is needed!

OP wasn't talking about rolling women's rights back to how they were in the 70's. She was talking about women getting their act together, like women did in the 70's.

Yes, that’s exactly what I meant.

"" There were black women's groups, Jewish women's groups, working class women's groups, lesbian groups, disabled women's groups - you could set up whatever you wanted and many women did""

As I said, there wasn't a inclusive Feminist movement, so Women who didn't fit in, or wasn't wanted, had to start their own groups.

""Many working class women got to universities at that time, the first in our families ever to do so.""

Yes I know, I was around in the 70's.

""I think feminists spent too long campaigning for special rights for mothers and not enough on women's general equality or for men to do 50% of the domestic labour, ""

I think it went very idealistic. It some ways, Women were expected to change, their entire socialisation (be financially dependent on a Man, not work once the children came along etc, or be left behind.

There are still echo's of "you got what you deserved based on life choices" (SAHM) on these threads, including the Feminist board. There was a lack of recognition, or an "i'm alright jack" attitude to what we now call everyday sexism. Or the ingrained sexism in our Work laws, Welfare provisions, Laws in general and the responsibilities (or lack of) placed on Men.

The structures of the Patriarchy wasn't attacked enough. An understanding why some women couldn't upset the status quo and didn't have choices was missing.

It was said by one poster that they thought Feminism was no longer needed and that amazes me. Was there no knowledge of what life was life for the majority? Because non University educated, stuck with children, low waged (for those that don't know it was pence per hour, even in the 80's, for a lot of Women), controlling relationships, threat of DV/removal of children was the majorities experience.

Hi Birdsgottafly, there wasn't one group called feminists who spoke for everyone or one organisation to belong to. Many of those groups were set up to explore our own personal experiences of oppression, recognising difference and what the political implications were. It was a necessary process. But many came together too, on demonstrations, at conferences, socially. When you talk of inclusivity I think we need to remember that we were starting out in building a movement and we couldn't just assume that all women's experiences were the same. We learned much about how power works by exploring our differences as well as what we had in common via consciousness raising, and just talking and reading and writing. The fact that we argued about race, class, disability, sexuality and all was not always harmonious is a fact of doing real politics. There was/ is no 'one voice' tho there are times when as women we can identify with one another and understand what we share especially when it comes to issues like male violence which affect all of us. I think the work done in violence was some of the most successful and long-lasting partly because we could all work on it tho sometimes in different ways. And the fact that we will try and support one another's struggles, sisterhood. I'm not pretending it was all simple and easy, but there was also a real attempt to understand and take in eachother's realities.
That's my understanding and experience of the 70's movement, tho I know there were very different ones. Sometimes I think it would be great if those of us who were there could get together and think about what worked and what didn't. We now have the long perspective of time and maybe that would be useful, if only to counteract many of the fallacies put around by people who didn't live thro it.

That's my understanding and experience of the 70's movement, tho I know there were very different ones. Sometimes I think it would be great if those of us who were there could get together and think about what worked and what didn't. We now have the long perspective of time and maybe that would be useful, if only to counteract many of the fallacies put around by people who didn't live thro it

A fantastic book project! I remember the US publications 'Notes from the First, Second and Third Years' ... Maybe 'Notes after the Revolution' or similar would be a great title? And not just from the 'big wigs' - Rowbotham, Mitchell, Orbach, etc. - from a diverse range of activists! I'd love to see 'Joreen' write though, even if she is American.

Yes, I think we need to be more active in the promotion of all biological women's needs. Division of Labour needs to acknowledge home management and parenting as work, for instance. Ensuring that feminism include lesbians. The WEP is hearing a proposal to recognise transwomen as women which I find pretty problematic; it includes the idea that you don't need your wife's consent to change gender. It seems pretty shabby to me to marry somebody when you're not the gender you say you are, so although you shouldn't need anyone's consent to change, I think your marriage should be immediately nullified with compensation to your spouse if you decide you are somebody they didn't choose to marry.

and intelligent women like my mother were given the option of secretarial college or childcare because they'd 'give it all up when they had babies anyway' and 'university is really only for the well off'. Yes let's go back

1970s ?????

A friend of mine who got to be a senior officer in the RAF with an engineering degree (she won a Guardian award for "female engineer of the year") was advised on leaving - in 1994 - that being a mother was the best career for her. This was official RAF careers advice, apparently.

She left, because it was the only way to guarantee being with her RAF husband, and the setup was easier for wives to stay with RAF husbands than vice-versa.

As I say: 1994.

Absolutely - YetAnother Spartacus. Not the big names, they have had a lot of exposure. Something which reflects the diversity and passionate activism. Notes - was very useful.

Division of Labour needs to acknowledge home management and parenting as work, for instance

It needs to make sure that men do 50%.

Notes - was very useful

I loved those books. They didn't pontificate or obscurify - they just built theory from the ground, built on women's experiences. Wonderful.