Men and Non-men

[noblegiraffe]

Interesting discussion here about men as default.

debuk.wordpress.com/2016/04/16/default-male/

Apart from wondering whether the Green Party tweet about non-men is an April Fools, men-as-default is something I've had to make an effort with when talking to my DD. I've noticed that unless the toy/picture in a book is specifically a girl, I'll call it 'Mr Octopus' or say 'What is the doggy doing? He's eating a bone'.

Honestly??? I think that is disgusting - well and truly disgusting - to further silence women and then come up with patronising remarks like that. Just dont even bother. What tokenistic crap. We let the little women say a few words, bless them, the non men were given a voice

Has anyone from the Green Party apologised for the "non man" statement?

Ok 'ingrained sexism and male dominance' is exactly what i think too

Cant you see the irony that when 'non men' are asked to give an opinion, the ones socialised since birth and raised as males in a male dominated society are still the ones to speak?

Omg this makes me far more furious than the other 'non man' comment

But bombardier if you read my post again you'll see that I actually said a couple of transwomen spoke, amongst many women who were encouraged to speak too. They certainly didn't dominate the discussion themselves.

From my perspective, the trans women I've met have been different from men in their attitudes - generally strongly feminist, believers in sisterhood, quietly spoken. I don't pretend for a minute to understand their backgrounds or their experiences without listening to them as individuals, and I haven't met any who've pretended they understand what it was like for me growing up female.

The important thing for me is that we listen to one another as individuals and create policy based on the reality of those experiences. I have no desire to further marginalise a marginalised group, and I haven't met any trans women who would want to do the same to me, at least not intentionally.

And it is quite surprising that people on this thread would be so keen to slate a party when they admit they haven't heard of the leader, the deputy leader or the very high profile candidate for London mayor!

And for the record I do find the term 'non-men' problematic for at least two reasons, possibly more. Not happy about people assuming I don't and then putting out statements saying as much on my behalf, but I guess that's my beef (or quorn) and something I'll have to address.

Where I part company with many posters on this thread is that I don't see it as a conspiracy, and I don't see it as something uniquely sexist about the Greens - quite possibly these are awkward blunders resulting from attempts to address issues other parties haven't even thought about tackling yet. So its trial and error IMO.

Has anyone from the Green Party apologised for the "non man" statement?

No, and the Green Party Women facebook page is presently backing it up. They also have main activists asserting that the Greens have no idea who local parties have standing as candidates. Which seems really odd and untrue

Its perhaps uniquely sexist for a mainstream political party to use the terms 'men' 'non men' (happy to be corrected on this) but i dont see the green party(ies) as being uniquely sexist. Society is sexist. I dont see that as a conspiracy theory either.

Sure, the non-blue Party is not more sexist than other parties. It's just that I would have expected better from them.
If they really made an effort (as they claim) to not be sexist, then such wording would never turn up.

Have you all seen the Green Party Women's "clarification" of the issue? I include it here, C&P's from their facebook page:

A recent issue, taken out of context of its intent, has arisen and caused quite a stir. As a result, the committee of Green Party Women would like to reassure our sisters that we by no means intend to erase women’s identities by forcing members to define relation to men. "Non-male" and "women" are not synonymous.

However, Green Party Women are happy with uses of the term “non-male" as an umbrella term when gender balance practices are conducted. This umbrella term groups together all who face gendered oppression; women, transgender women and individuals of non-binary or no genders. We all deserve to be recognised and included.

For too long, marginalised women have been excluded from most women's movements and circles. As a group we affirm that trans women are women, and that non-binary genders and other gender identities experience oppression and deserve respect. After all, we are part of a political party, The Green Party, which has a proud history of inclusivity.

We stand alongside our sister group, Young Greens Women, on the events that unfolded recently and apologise for any misunderstandings caused through incoherent statements on our part. We have since removed any posts that are not clear enough on this emotive issue, as some have left stances open to too much interpretation.

There will always be members who are anti-choice, anti-sex worker rights, disagree with terminology etc, as women are not a homogeneous group and occasionally members will disagree with each other. However, it is our duty to look out for and campaign with the most marginalised women in our society, and we would like to assure members that we remain committed to do so.

Green Party Women Committee

Spot the clunky and incredibly offensive attempt to conflate women don't want to be "non-men" with women who are anti-choice. How fucking dare they. It's the second-wavers, and the women who followed in their footsteps who are to thank for any of the fucking rights we still have to legal and safe abortions. Extra points for the Green Party Misogynist Wing Women for shoehorning in another opportunity to present women who support rights and safety for women in prostitution as "anti-sex-worker rights".

Fuckers. I will not trust them again, until they have thoroughly cleaned house of all the fucking misogynists who currently inhabit it.

Right. So it wasn't a mistake then. Bugger. Who will I vote for in a faute de mieux situation now?

Yes i noticed that too. Frankly they can fuck right off.

So the Women's party is now giving a voice to people who don't even identify as women? Why?

Bet they dont increase the quotas either - its just 'non men - shove up - theres more rejects to squish into your corner'

The only time this has come up for me is at conference where it actually made sense because man after man raised their hands to speak and JJ who was chairing decided she wanted to encourage women to speak. I think someone in the wings advised her to ask 'people who don't identify as male' to put their hands up Wasn't really an issue at the time and the end result was a plenery much less male-dominated than it would have been. Yes, one or two transwomen spoke alongside the rest - good for them!

Are you talking about this instance, CherryPicking? How would male-presenting Simon speaking up when women were invited to speak be a wonderful example of the plenary becoming much less male-dominated that it would have been?

Ugh.

It really is awful othering. They have effectively stated that humans are made up of men (the default) and others who are exceptions to the default.

Interesting that they haven't even considered referring to men as non-women. Because that would be ridiculous, right? Perhaps because the world is run by non-poor non-black non-women.

The more I think about this the angrier I get. I don't want to be a non- man so I am anti choice? Fuck off

Maybe we should start a Non-Misogynist party?

Now that's an umbrella term I can get behind ... I juts see the problem that many non-feminists would insist that they don't identify as misogynists and therefore should be allowed to join the party.

We are in dire need of a Non-Misogynist party, though. Sure.

I had considered voting Green in the upcoming local elections. Coming from Northern Ireland I wanted to find a party that fully supports equal marriage, changing the abortions laws and ant- drilling at our drinking water supplies.

Looks like this fiasco has whittled my vote to a new, small party.

I sometimes idly wonder if these utter douchenozzles are "plants" from other parties, given that, other than their surreal use of man as default and a couple of other anti-woman policies, they are pretty much on the money.

But yes, the conflation of thinking non-male is a shitty way to describe women, MtT and others with being anti-choice and anti-prostituted women is galling. Shows what they really think of women though, doesn't it.

Archery - that wasn't the example I was referring to. I suppose it depends whether his is a sincerely held position or not. Plenty of women don't 'present' as women. Other than stripping them naked before they put their hands up, in not sure how anyone could distinguish between them and Simon anyway. I had a female friend at school, going back a few decades, who was routinely marched out of the girls' changing rooms and toilets for 'looking male'. I guess nowadays she'd have the vocabulary available to her to explain why she 'presented' in the way she did, and people would be less inclined to hound her based on her non-binary appearance, demanding proof of her sex. That has to be progress, surely?

I suppose it depends whether his is a sincerely held position or not.

Why is a contribution from someone born male, with a male name, presenting as male (whatever that means), and taking time and space up that was supposed to be dedicated to women, anything other than male-dominated business as usual?

Whether Simon is sincere in that position or not makes no difference to the way Simon will be treated in the world - as a man, and therefore the recipient of every scrap of male privilege available.