The Mary Beard Appreciation Society

[ArcheryAnnie]

Professor Mary Beard was one of about 130+ people who signed a letter to the Guardian this weekend, saying broadly that universities should be a place of discussion and debate, and the current habit of "no-platforming" women (it's almost always women) some students disagree with was inimical to the very purpose of education.

Out of these 130+ signatories, Mary Beard was the one the usual suspects piled on to, and she dealt with the barrage with such grace. The attacks were mostly divided between the "OMG transphobe" type" and the "very sad to see this nice old dear who didn't understand what she was signing" type, which is breathtakingly patronising when referring to one of the most brilliant academics we have. Most of the other signatories weren't attacked at all in the same way or in the same volume, although some signatories who are PoC were labelled "tokens" by the usual suspects, which is also amazingly patronising and dismissive of their choices and their expertise.

When I grow up, I want to be Professor Mary Beard. (But I would probably have to grow an extra couple of brains to do it.)

I believe very few people truly believe it stilllost but they are afraid to say so. Look what happened to Rupert Read a few weeks ago for saying that the issue of what is a woman is something that should be determined by all women. Now he's been brought to heel and says transwomen are women and he does not side with TERFs. I don't believe he really believes that and I'm sure he justifies it to himself intellectually by adding a silent qualifier like "in the social sense". I bet there are lots of politicians who are shitting bricks at the thought of someone asking them the same question.

House it's a complete misrepresentation of feminism, isn't it? Mind you as a gay man, feminism is a cheap trade off to keep on side with transactivists.

For sake of clarity in my last post the words It's no concern of mine w in bold should not be there. I fouled up the quote.

Flora I totally agree with you re Rupert Read not really believing the "trans women are women" mantra. I think this is actually true of almost everyone who repeats this ad infinitum, incl. many trans people - why defend it so aggressively otherwise? Why be so upset by misgendering? If someone called me "he" I'd be surprised but I wouldn't think it was violence!

Signing in.

And I have said it before but will say it again, by the definition of what constitutes a terf by many TA, I am one.

Which is fucking rediculous. ((lowers tone))

I like Peter Tatchell. He's always included the 'T' in TBLG even when Stonewall didn't. Saw him at Brighton Pride one year. Was going to thank him but I felt too shy.

Love Mary Beard. She did a great interview with Richard Herring here. (Summer 2013). A lot of running jokes from previous episodes, and a lot of talk about cocks. She seems very nice through it all.

I'm against no platforming unless there's actual incitement to hate/violence. The best thing to give an idiot is a microphone.

TiggyD you're very much in favour of policing how women talk about gender and trans issues though.

love 'best thing to give an idiot is a microphone'!

mary is your position that feminists should not be no-platformed because the best thing to give an idiot is a microphone?

And lovely people you agree with.

And lovely people you agree with.

What does this mean?

No, I think this is the same misapprehension that I came across on Twitter last night. The point was about no platforming as a concept rather than the decision to no platform certain individuals or groups. That stifling debate is (nearly) always a bad thing and that if you disagree with a person's viewpoint it may be better to let them express it freely and have the audience judge its merits than to silence it. I think Mary's point (certainly on Twitter yesterday) was in opposition to those who support no platforming. Not that universally those who are denied a platform are idiots.

mary... just in case you're still watching the thread. What you said in the Varsity piece was excellent. I'm really sorry that you've had to deal with the endless onslaught you had. I hope things calm down soon on that front, if I recall, you're supposed to be writing a book?

trib I'm pretty sure TiggyD is associating the feminists who are being no-platformed with idiots to be given a microphone, in the same way the man on twitter last night was drawing a comparison between the feminists being no-platformed and Nick Griffen. That's why I asked Mary what she thinks of that.

Flora, I understand what you are saying, but I also think it's a bit unfair. You and I and other women here have a history with TiggyD, so see what they say as coming with baggage and implications, but we can't - and shouldn't want to - expect women without that history (whether its Mary B or anyone else) to pick up on that.

I would really like there to be a culture where there's an expectation of good faith, and I know we are very, very far away from that, but maybe a start would be to accept that it's possible for someone to take what a stranger says at face value, and find value in that, without knowing the back story or any hidden meanings which might make it seem like a hostile act to a third party.

Tl:dr I can't stand this thing where we have to watch who we agree with just in case they are the wrong person. It's bad when anybody does it.we shouldn't do it either.

Nice to see you back on MN, Mary.

Glosswitch, in case you are lurking.

Agree with ArcheryAnnie's post above.

You sure like to read into things whatever you like.

No platforming/censoring views could be about hunting to immigration, from creationism to fracking. If you believe their views are totally and utterly wrong and "an inverted pyramid of piffle" let them say it. So long as they don't want to encourage violence.

Who better to turn people from far right hate groups than the EDL chap talking against muslamic infidels?

I would also like to say that I admire everyone who signed that letter.

I am proud to 'know' at least 3 of them. On here or fb.

And I am gutted that glosswitch has been hounded from twatter, and her blog.

archeryannie I agree with what you've said and I certainly don't want there to be a culture of not being able to agree with someone because of other things they believe. Quite the opposite. In fact it's a major reason I disengaged with party politics. That sort of thinking is exactly the problem that leads to this excessive no platforming.

I'm not making any assumptions about what Mary believes and I have a great deal of admiration for her and sympathy with what's she's going through.

Owen Jones in the guardian prefers not to engage with what feminists actually think - it's far more satisfying to write an article about what he reckons we think:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/18/stonewall-trans-issues-neglected-progressives

It's amazing how interested everyone is in any aspect of this debate except what women are actually saying. Mind you, women are always going to be at the bottom of the pile.

And not a single peep about transmen, and how vaginas can now be male and how transmen are now to be classed as biologically male.

I'm just getting tired of people misrepresenting what feminists think (or, more accurately, not bothering to find out, only stupid women after all, we can all just guess what they think) and hen using us to demonstrate that they're all open minded while we're bigots based. Look at them! So-called "women"! They're the real problem. Again. Male violence? Never heard of it.

I'm just sick of it.

Regarding the biology thing, I think it smoothly glosses over a genuine issue for women. We don't choose biology as destiny, but all over the world women are abused, enslaved, discriminated against because of our reproductive capacity. To pretend that it's bigotry from women to state that biology forms many women's lives and isn't a matter of choice is astonishing.

"Male violence? Never heard of it." A significant number of transactivists do not recognise male violence as an issue and in fact are in the "women are as bad as men" camp. They really don't like naming the problem. Remind you of anyone?

I find this very difficult to think about. The one thing I know for certain, however is that women need to be very careful to hold on to their hard won rights and freedoms. We have had them a very short time and they are always under attack. Yes, we must have a care for the rights and freedoms of other groups. But if a woman in a woman only space is going to be intimidated by the presence of a person with a penis then she has a right to not have a person with a penis there. Even if that penis has been re conceptualised as a female sex organ.

Well yeah. The assumption that women need seperate spaces from men because of male violence but should automatically surrender those spaces to anyone who has reconceptualised their penis as female is bizarre.

We are completely responsible for policing our own safety but also for not making anyone feel excluded by policing our own safety.