Can men pronounce on which are the "right" feminists?

[ArcheryAnnie]

So, this morning @thelindywest (a US performer and Jezebel writer with ~39 thousand followers) retweeted a post by @SarahDitum (a UK columnist with ~8 thousand followers). This post was about domestic violence.

Within a very short time, a "progressive" man, @badassperger (about ~1000 followers), had tweeted how "sad" he was that someone had tweeted Sarah Ditum into his TL, and then, with some handwringing about how he shouldn't tell Lindy West "how to feminism", he then proceeded to tell her exactly that, and that she was retweeting a "known TERF". Her immediate response was to unretweet.

Because what women need is men thoughtpolicing women about which women are acceptable to read and listen to, even on issues which are not in any way related to trans issues. Because god forbid a woman talk about domestic violence without a man's approval of which other feminists she references.

Women pointing out that it wasn't a very "ally" thing to do for a man to police which women other women retweet were then labelled with the same "bigot" nonsense. Same happened to women who pointed out that if a man's first response to a tweet about domestic violence was to claim that the woman tweeting it was "bad" in some way (rather than addressing the subject of men's violence in the home) then he was probably not an ally.

Sarah has written the incident up: sarahditum.com/2014/07/28/how-terf-works/

Honestly, I don't know how she sticks it out online - I'd have given up with that amount of casual hostility from strangers long ago. More power to her elbow.

[TheGoop]

Sorry but what is TERF?

[PetulaGordino]

Trans exclusionary radical feminist

[ArcheryAnnie]

I think what particularly pissed me off was the hypocrisy in this particular situation - he's talked before about how he as a good feminist ally should butt out of women's conversations. During and after the conversation with Lindy West he described his actions as "gross" and "awkward" - and did them anyway. If you are set on doing something entitled (butting in to tell a woman that who she is referencing is wrong), then all the handwringing in the world about your entitlement being awkward doesn't actually mean that you didn't do the entitled thing, and indeed should not have done the awkward thing.

What's interesting is that i just went to look on his TL, and he had a long conversation with what looks like one of his own crowd, who seemed to have no problem with denouncing Sarah Ditum, but did have a problem with him doing it as a man and supposed feminist ally. His response had this level of nuance: "Fine! Next time I see a woman being racist or anti-vaxxer then I'll keep quiet!1!!!11!!!"

[Dervel]

I think there is a desire when you are introduced to a new discipline to want to comment and understand. There is also going to be areas that perhaps contradict past knowledge and previously held beliefs. A less than agile mind will likely want to reject anything that challenges it's original worldview, hence why a lot of male anti-feminists will latch onto one thing they take issue with as if that somehow invalidates everything else.

I think it is also worth bearing in mind that because like it or not there is a massive difference in the lived experiences between most men and women although we can end up in the same place (equality for all), perhaps the journey to this differs for each of the genders.

Now there is an awful lot of feminist theory that I do not understand and perhaps as an extension of that I do not agree with it personally. However that is not to say it does not have validity, my understanding or agreement with something is not a prerequisite for something to be true, but then again I am very comfortable With my own ignorance. Perhaps there are some very important dimensions that are not aimed at men as they make their journey towards the same place.

Taking radical feminism which is usually what MRA's and such tend to roll out. This misconception of "man-hating" feminists is in my actual view representative of a perfectly natural and human response of anger and frustration at some unfair and harsh realities.

I'm going to paraphrase here but I recall Andrea Dworkin saying something along the lines of her particular brand of radical feminism being necessary in highlighting dimensions of the debate that more placatory approaches wouldn't. I also recall her desire that her body of work end up in a museum as an artifact of a more barbaric time. Personally reading up on her biography I think she had a lot less anger than many would have with the same experiences.

Somehow, somewhere it's suddenly not permitted to react with anger at things it is perfectly natural as a human to react angrily to. This whole trans thing that's provided the latest stick to beat feminism with is just a red herring. Yet interestingly people are remarkably quick to pick up that stick and beat feminism with it, but it seems unfashionable to pick up anything and rush to its defense.

[PetulaGordino]

that is interesting AA, because regardless of one's position on the term TERF, in this instance Sarah Ditum wasn't commenting on trans issues. so he wasn't calling her out on transphobia as he suggests in that response, he was using "TERF" to discredit her as she describes

[CaptChaos]

That SATC2 thing is just horrible. I've never enjoyed the franchise, but, fuck! That was a ridiculous piece of writing. The FGM comment at the end of it was just foul.

TERF is used by some people to shut down any and all further conversation. It's just another method a certain type of person uses to silence dissent from their PoV. It's an absolute gift to MRAs as they now have a sure fire way of shutting women up, and getting other women to agree to that silencing.

I couldn't give a shit how hand wringing the 'ally' was in his subsequent posts, Sarah Ditum tweeted about DV, Lindy West retweeted it, and he shut down that feminist solidarity moment by shouting the anti-feminist 'safe-word'.

[SolidGoldBrass]

I do get the general impression that what rams the stick up so many male leftwing arses over this issue is the radfem demand that some time and attention is devoted to things that concern ciswomen and only ciswomen. Because ciswomen, those born in female bodies, are the class who are supposed to put their needs behind everyone else's, all the time. So the average lefwing male who calls himself a feminist, or a male feminist, or an 'egalitarian', is always on the look out for any kind of oppression other than misogny that he can wave at feminists and order them to prioritize over their own issues.

[ArcheryAnnie]

Petula exactly. I don't think, on the basis of what he says, that he's likely to understand this anytime soon, though.

[ArcheryAnnie]

....and we're back to the "burn TERFs" thing again. Which is apparently just "rhetoric" and you are weak and foolish and only concerned with your cis feelz if you take it as anything else. But women talking about reproductive rights or domestic violence in any way that doesn't front and centre trans women = "killing trans women".

I can't believe the political journey I've made in a few short years. For all my life, a conversation about violence against trans people would have evoked empathy (as a fellow LGBT person) and anger and solidarity. Now I only see those conversations being used to beat other women over the head about how they (in some mysterious way) are the ones "killing trans women", never mind that women of all kinds are no strangers to being assaulted, burned, murdered. Now the feelings that these conversations evoke is anger that all the other violence against women is erased and minimised and dismissed as "cis feelz".

Honestly, I never thought I would be at this place, now. I hate it.

[Curwen]

Monty, there is a debate to be had around equality, yes. And it could and should include both men and women. It's the kind of discussion I have with my kids (I have one of each) about sexism, the pay gap, images in the media etc etc. As you said, it's separate from feminism. I'll talk to my kids about it until the cows come home. I wouldn't want to get into it in a feminist space like this one though. It just becomes a verbal brawl.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Oh, I follow now.

I guess I think that talking about 'equality' is actually extremely difficult. Eg., if I (as a white woman) claim I'm going to talk about racial equality, I may be well-intentioned, but I'll also get an awful lot wrong. And simply by speaking at all, I may be speaking over other people who know a lot more about the situation.

I think ignoring this, and claiming 'oh, I'm talking about equality, I'm not talking about feminism/racist/class bias/etc' is self-defeating really. Unless it is at that very simple level cur mentions when you talk to your kids, which obviously you have to do.

[ArcheryAnnie]

I'm depressed and really quite panicky about all this. I don't know where we go from here.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Me too.

I think that some of the level of anger is because feminism is picking up speed again, though, so hopefully it will work out.

[ArcheryAnnie]

I think I'm going to have to block a ton of people on twitter, because the flood of "right-on" men who think themselves perfectly righteous dudes, and who are using trans issues as a handy stick to beat women with, again and again, is making me seriously anxious to the point of being ill.

[SolidGoldBrass]

ArcheryAnnie: Hold on to the thought that they are knobs.

And now I really am going to bugger off and wrestle with that blog post. . Not scared of trolls, because I am an old bruiser with a thick skin (and years of being called horrible names), more anxious about hurting the feelings of a few individuals (on each side of the debate) who I actually like and care about.

[VampireSquid]

If he was a woman I would be annoyed too, tbh. Having a reasoned debate or simply not responding if the other person won't reply maturely is fine. Mocking someone is childish and immature.

[DadWasHere]

I would like to see how a man invoking TERF as a moral high horse would fare at a urinal next to a trans man using a stand to pee device.

[DoctorTwo]

I've long been a LGBT ally and always thought myself an equalist. Then I started reading the FWR board and realised that really, I was wrong. I was seeing things from my perspective, not the lived experience. MN, along with other sites, educated me and helped me to educate my DCs. So yes, my actions and opinions have changed, hopefully for the better.

My opinion then was that transwomen should be allowed into women only spaces, but I read reports about transwomen shouting down feminists, there were reports of transwomen demanding access to women only spaces, that lesbians who refused to have sex with transwomen were bigots, and my mind was changed. That probably makes me a TERF ally, and if so I definitely own that term.

[FloraFox]

For me, the interesting thing here is that Sarah Ditum, Glosswitch etc are libfems who would say "transwomen are women" (and I think Sarah Ditum has said that this week, as had the New Yorker writer). Both are realising that nothing but a complete capitulation to the notion that transwomen are not only women but female and have been female since birth will suffice to keep onside with transactivists.

They treat libfem "moderates" the same way they treat Julie Bindel or Lierre Keith. I wonder why they keep up their mantra of "transwomen are women" in the face of this hostility. I suppose it's an indication of how deep-seated women's socialisation is - the requirement to look after other people, especially the "less fortunate" even when they are attacking or exercising privilege over you.

[ArcheryAnnie]

DoctorTwo this change of position is what happened to me, too.

FloraFox this can be seen again and again, but it's never enough. Helen Lewis is, according to trans activists and allies on twitter, an evil TERF and transphobe who, like other TERFS, is "killing trans women" by denying them access to women's shelters - despite the fact that she's on the board of a shelter that includes trans women, a policy she supports. The Women's Aid thing about them being terrible, terrible transphobes, and nobody should ever donate to them again if you don't want to be an accessory to killing trans women, was despite the fact that their terms specifically include trans women. (Their crime was that the women they include should have a GRS.) It's never enough. Nothing is ever enough. I've come to a point where I don't think this is a coincidence.

[Keepithidden]

It'd be nice to believe that everyone's opinion was equally valid as long as they could argue their corner and justify their position without resorting to stereotyping and bigotry...

...unfortunately one of the big facets of feminism (as I understand it) is in combatting sexual/gender stereotyping and bigotry, which does seem to be rife within both society and anti-feminists. So, on the basis of the latter point, I thinks it makes sense for men to avoid "pronouncing" anything related to right/wrong feminism and supporting the debate rather than trying to steer it.

[happyhazard]

Why don't we just simply ignore male posters saying useless things. Just don't even go there. Ignore them. Answering back serves no purpose - it just muddies the waters.

Montyglee - no just no. It doesn't work, I've tried for years. Giving any airtime to entitled people who think we can all have a "reasonable" discussion and don't need to get so angry all the time is utterly pointless. Women have a right to be angry and have a right not to be told off for it. Men feel threatened in that environment and want to tell us all to calm down (or mock us). We do need penis free spaces.

We can have mixed debates too but we need the PF ones without men barging in and boohooing that they have a right to a voice there.

[MontyGlee]

Buffy, Curwen, LRD

Is there a problem in achieving a coherent and functioning dialogue about equality when we have a hierarchy of privilege? If an opinion has to be weighted by a factor of the privilege of the person proffering it, aren't we failing to discuss things rationally and, in effect, continuing with a social-structure where there are varying levels of power according to sex, race etc etc? It seems perverse to mitigate privilege with a sort of inverse-privilege power scale based on class oppression.

I also go back to previous comments about my belief that money has a far greater impact on an individual level. I'm left-leaning (whatever that means) but I don't doubt that a wealthy professor may have a better understanding of how to create social and economic ladders for the poor better than the poor themselves may.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Well, yes, obviously there's a problem. That's what I'm saying.

It's a failure of logic to think this is about 'rationality'.

There is nothing 'irrational' about analysing hierarchies of privilege. It is, in fact, irrational to assume they can be discounted and we can all pretend they're not there while they continue to skew the debate.