An interview with Julie Bindel

[FirestoneD]

www.radfemcollective.org/news/2015/8/29/an-interview-with-julie-bindel

"feminism that means they have to name men as the problem, because they know the punishment they will get if they do."

Rape threats, death threats, doxxing, to name but three.

Oops, didn't refresh before posting.

Yops, ridicule is "stupid feminist, bet you're all hairy"

Rape threats are explicit descriptions of violence, often accompanied by evidenced that the poster knows where the woman lives.

'or something darker?'

Did you deliberately ignore that? I am minimising nothing. If I was minimising, I might choose to counteract Bindel's points, to misquote her as others have done, and to hone in on some of the other ideas within this article. But I didn't. You have taken an open question that I posed, cut some of it out and focussed on a small part of it in order to make out that I said something that I did not.

Which ironically is what happened to this very article when some MRA sites got hold of it. Says it all, really.

Punishment takes many forms; speaking out is punished by creating an environment of fear and threat for the speaker.

Justine and the other swatted MNer have had real life reprisals from internet interaction.

Rape and death threats are "something darker" than ridicule, don't you think?

I find it difficult to take her seriously when she says things like I hope heterosexuality doesn’t survive, actually. I would like to see a truce on heterosexuality. I would like an amnesty on heterosexuality until we have sorted ourselves out. Because under patriarchy it’s shit and similar comments.

It's a favourite theory of hers isn't it? All women are really lesbians/ought to be lesbians/ lesbians will be the saviour of women.

On incomparable the primary meaning is ^without an equal in quality or extent; matchless.
"the incomparable beauty of Venice"
synonyms: without equal, beyond compare,^

So I stick to saying feminism and nazism are not comparable.

You chose the word ridicule as an example of what you thought women were scared of. You didn't choose death threats or violence. That is minimising. You equated 'vicious internet trolling' to ridicule. That is minimising.

I took Bindel to be referring to the wider populace, not just high-profile spokespeople. Take the example of my wife, or my daughter. What if they pipe up with comments like Bindel's in that article to their mates in the pub, or down the gym. What are they exposed to then? They too are raising their head above the parapet, albeit on a smaller stage.

Plenty of low profile twitter users get the threats too, Yops.

What do you think would happen if a group of guys overheard your daughter in the pub saying "women should be political lesbians"?

Women get abuse for just going about their business Yops. There have been enough sexual harassment/street harassment threads on here for you to know that. So what do you think would happen when women actually challenge men and male privilege or go outside societal gender norms?

That was my point. So when we have the threads on here about why more women don't engage with feminism, or call themselves feminists, or when we get Facebook pages about women who reject it outright, is Bindel saying that it is because they are afraid for their personal safety?

I think people here are saying 'yes'. I think people in those other groups would say 'no'. So are they in denial? Is UK society a far more dangerous and deadly place than we acknowledge?

What do you think would happen if a group of guys overheard your daughter in the pub saying "women should be political lesbians"?

There are a number of possibilities. Some men would but in to the conversation, probably aggressively, to challenge what they are saying.

If the men in question were my husband and son they would , if they did anything at all, ask me if I knew what they were on about, but beyond that they would do nothing.

I can't imagine any of the men I know well doing anything beyond possibly talking about it amongst themselves. There is one exception who, I think, if the conversation were loud enough for him to engage without it seeming as if he were eavesdropping, would be interested in the discussion. He would be extremely polite and listen to what was being said and would not seek to rubbish it.

"There are a number of possibilities. Some men would but in to the conversation, probably aggressively, to challenge what they are saying."

Yes, I would agree with you (plus the other possibilities you list). I think fear of the first possible reaction could constrain some "down the pub" discussions though (not just about political lesbianism but about, say, restrictions on porn)

" is Bindel saying that it is because they are afraid for their personal safety?"

Well, that could be one of several reasons, or a reason for some of the women you mention.

Actively opposing feminism on FB or whatever probably comes from a different place than "keeping your head down in case you are turned on"

I just want to emphasise that I don't think that not sticking your head above the parapet for fear of ridicule is invalid. Ridicule isn't pleasant. But ridicule by men on women has the constant undercurrent of violence and it is also supported by society. It goes hand in hand.

Your questions have an element of not believing what women are telling you, Yops. You didn't ask whether Bindel was saying that because women feared for their personal safety. And Bindel wasn't talking about women not engaging with feminism. She was talking about men dictating and framing areas of feminism and why some women support that.

Now you are telling me what I did and did not mean. I may not have expressed myself very well, but it is exactly what I meant. Which is why I linked my question directly to why more women do not engage with feminism.

But the vast majority of women that spout that kind of nonsense are doing so because they are scared of the feminism that means they have to name men as the problem, because they know the punishment they will get if they do.

When I read that, I read it as the author saying that women are afraid of engaging with feminism because of the consequences. The consensus in here seems to be that they fear for their safety.

I took Yops' questions to be more general as to why women don't engage with feminism and/or the Julie Bindel version.

The reason I don't engage with Julie Bindel's views is not a fear of my personal safety but because I don't agree with much of what she says. I agree with her in relation to porn and prostitution but not her views on heterosexuality.

Her extreme views make it very easy for detractors to ridicule her with the unwelcome side effect her (more) reasonable views on issues such as prostitution are also discredited simply because it's Julie Bindel saying them.

Yops, I think the issue was more the subsequent post which seemed to be equating threats of violence with ridicule.

Anyway - yes, I am careful not to post identifying details about me on MN and MN is the main place I discuss feminism because it's anonymous. Several posters such as SGM have had some or all of their posts deleted when eg F4J was harassing them.

Do I fear someone would track me down and rape me? Probably not. Do I want to receive rape and death threats even if I believe the real risk of harm is minimal? No.

Sorry - the real risk of PHYSICAL harm. Rape and death threats are intrinsically harmful and I believe the police can take action against those who threaten, so it is something beyond "you hairy feminist" type ridicule.

But the vast majority of women that spout that kind of nonsense are doing so because they are scared of the feminism that means they have to name men as the problem, because they know the punishment they will get if they do.

I think this paragraph is pretty self explanatory really. Especially when taken in context with the rest of the interview. Women placating abusive and often violent men has been a feature of inter personal relations between the sexes since time immemorial. Nothing's changed in that respect. It's not so much that women are afraid of engaging with feminism as afraid of engaging in the kind of feminism that places the blame for the violence in the world where it should be, once you do that, the reprisals are often swift and can be extremely nasty.

IIRC, it wasn't just F4J who hounded SGM off here, but a regular poster who hounded her endlessly in full view until she got to the point where she literally couldn't say anything without that poster making some kind of snidey "but, I've never seen that, so it isn't true" type comment. That poster is still around SGM isn't, so even on a site whose demographic is predominantly female, women are punished for naming the problem, if that makes sense?

Oh, sorry Plays. F4J hounding MN wasn't long before IIRC so I thought the two were linked.

ARSE, p'heads and p'net all have members sufficiently incensed by feminism to come here and be horrible. It's usually on the scale between "ridicule" and "threats" - that rapidly banned refugee troll, for example, clearly wanted to disgust any readers who thought he/she was in some way speaking for a feminist position.

I think they were linked, but the poster was like the final nail in the coffin, if you will.

There are posters who have basically become regular trolls, who feel enabled to post endlessly circular arguments from their lofty male entitlement who have been enabled to do this. If those people weren't regulars, they and their posts would be zapped.

Anyway, sorry for the slight derail.

It is all about people you know in real life. If your male partner, brother, male friends would stop speaking to you or give you a very hard time if you had these views, then it is easier to stick with more mainstream feminism.

It is ALSO, not all