Patrick Strudwick on why feminism should include TW

[Macareaux]

Feminist academics championing trans rights.

www.buzzfeed.com/patrickstrudwick/meet-the-feminist-academics-championing-trans-rights

NothingOnTellyAgain, great posts, thanks for highlighting the rubbish that was spouted and pointing out why it remains rubbish. And yep, agree with your conclusion, it's all the same old, same old nonsense. Nothing new or original.

Yes Ereshkigal that would be nice, all the men-centric/MRA nonsense followers, go gather under the science-defying, gender stereotypes flag, get themselves badged up with their new name and leave feminism out of it....unfortunately it appears (apart from housework and childcare) the aim is to appropriate all of what females and feminism have

I'm just going to read this now. Dr Harrumph and his chums are delighted by it, so I have an idea of what to expect. Patrick Strudwick got a British Press Award at the same ceremony as Janice Turner recently, and I think I read that he made a pointed remark in his acceptance speech.

These are the five academics he interviewed. Not a biologist or medic amongst them.

Akwugo Emejulu is a professor of sociology at the University of Warwick whose research examines both gender and race inequality, and has contributed to several books on the subjects. Sally Hines is a professor of sociology and gender studies at the University of Leeds who has also written several books on gender, sexuality, identity, and transgender issues. Alison Phipps, a professor of gender studies at the University of Sussex, writes extensively on sexual violence and feminist theory. Vanita Sundaram focuses on sexual violence as a sociologist at the University of York. And Tracey Jensen is also a sociologist, working on gender, the media, and social policy at Lancaster University.

Skim read just so that I can’t be labelled as ignorant. Usual men telling women how to do Feminism in male entitled bullshit. Rolls eyes. The end.

Thank younothingontellyagain and other posters for reading and reporting this tosh. I couldn't bear to open the link.

Four out of five of these ‘professionals’, are sociologists and I absolutely despair for the discipline. Traditionally, sociologists would have been required to back up their claims with credibly conducted research. But clearly that’s just too time consuming of late. Now Sociology has coopted the TRAs strategy of elevating subjective feelings over material reality. Easier, faster and utterly contemptuous.
The worst part of it is each one of those academics will be gaining institutional brownie points for their media exposure even though they spoke s**t on topics they, in the majority of cases, have conducted no research on.

Patrick Strudwick on why feminism should include vacuous man-pleasing

Anecdotally speaking, in response to Phipps, I have never, ever been raped, sexually assaulted or beaten up by another woman in a female same sex space.
The assaults by men include rape x2, physical assault x1; groping in a public place x at least 3; flashing whilst masturbating in a public place x1.

That apart, seeing this article retweeted simply confirms my thoughts about someone I vaguely know. I checked the other re-tweets appearing on my feed, all male. 🤔

Women, know thy place.

"“The goal,” she said, referring to feminism throughout history, “was always to say that biology was not destiny because that was precisely the argument that people used to keep women in private spaces: that women with their ‘smaller brains’ were ‘prone to fainting’ and are not fit to be in public spaces, such as politics and the workplace.”"

She is talking about gender here, not biology. For good or bad, biology is actually destiny for women. Women are excluded from politics and workplaces because they have babies, (without access to contraception many, many babies) and they are excluded from some manual jobs because they are comparatively smaller and weaker than men.

Luckily in a country like the UK in 2018 we do have access to contraception and fewer and fewer jobs rely on physical strength, but there is no reason to assume we can take this for granted. Even with a high degree of control over fertility, women still bear children and many jobs don't accommodate that.

Except Emejulu is not baffled at all. For her, many feminists who oppose trans rights also ignore the rights of black, Asian, and other ethnic minority women. These exclusions are related, she said. “This has always been the dark heart of white, feminist politics: a jealous guarding of the boundaries of who gets to be a woman.”

Can never understand the supposedly 'woke' argument that excluding a black women is exactly the same as excluding a white man from the concept of being a woman.

I wonder which white feminists she has surveyed about their attitudes to bame women to establish that they ignore them? Or in fact if they are jealously guarding against them? Is that the same as ignoring. I don't really know how this manifests itself in reality. I hear this theory but the real life examples never materialise.

Is this like setting up a new maternity policy but insisting only white women are eligible?

Emejulu, like her other third wave feminist colleagues, have surveyed nothing at all. They don’t do surveys, or data or any external validation. They are busy self-IDing themselves on the right side of history.

Fucking load of old shite.

What is the fucking point of all these departments of Sociology and Gender Studies peopled by academics who are incapable of even a smidgeon of truth or reason?

Fucking unpardonable dishonesty and industrial scale internalised misogyny. Feminists, my arse. I am appalled.

Emejulu is championing her own personal experience of racism, this is not exclusive to feminism. Where is her evidence to support her statement that white feminists ignore the rights of BAME? Cheap, easy shots.
She is talking femenist bollocks.
A femenist is someone who purports to be a feminist but centres men. Since everyone else seems to making up terms ( cis, deadnaming) so am I !

we know that trans women are more vulnerable to violence, harassment, and everyday abuse than other groups of women

As you said, Ereshkigal, we don’t know anything of the sort. Absolute bullshit. Look at the fucking stats, FFS. Look at our own lives.

Presumably this is another one of those “trans sex workers in Brazil are killed at alarming rates so ALL males who identify as trans are at similarly high risk” bollock-brained “arguments”.

“Femenist”, I like it, ChewyLouie! Exactly what they are.

Thank you TalkingintheDark 😀 As far as I’m concerned femenists do not speak for feminists, they can stuff their marginalising of common sense and decency where the sun doesn’t shine.

Femenist is a very useful term Talkinginthedark!
Thanks!

Except Emejulu is not baffled at all. For her, many feminists who oppose trans rights also ignore the rights of black, Asian, and other ethnic minority women. These exclusions are related, she said. “This has always been the dark heart of white, feminist politics: a jealous guarding of the boundaries of who gets to be a woman.”

That is complete rubbish obviously but I note she omits any reference to one very significant characteristic- class.

She and her fellow ivory - towered academics' witterings are almost entirely irelevant to woking class/ non elite socio-economic groups.

If we're doing "check your privilege" (which I normally deplore) she might try taking a look at herself.

As a sociologist, does Emejulu have any comment to make about strict patriarchal cultures and how they affect women?

If I had presented what amounts to a variety of subjective opinions and no actual solid evidence to back up arguments it would not have been accepted when I was an undergraduate. We were expected to show a rigorous analysis of different viewpoint and argue convincingly with evidence for our conclusions. I despair that people are actually paying to be taught by these individuals who are pushing ideology rather than facilitating learning.

She and her fellow ivory - towered academics' witterings are almost entirely irelevant to woking class/ non elite socio-economic groups.

Indeed, Marguerita.

Mariotta
I can't even be arsed to read it, honestly. I already know just to say do fuck off, Patrick.

^^ this. And the bandwagon horse you rode in on.

Oooh, great new word: Femenist.

It is truly shocking who gets to call themselves a professor these days. Standards are most definitely slipping right throughout the education system. Too many people going to university who would not have got in in previous times; and too many of those gaining top class degrees and then going on to do PHDs.

She and her fellow ivory - towered academics' witterings are almost entirely irelevant to woking class/ non elite socio-economic groups.

If we're doing "check your privilege" (which I normally deplore) she might try taking a look at herself

This!

I'm dumfounded by these assertions, by the likes of Peter Tatchell, that feminism has always been about just middle class white women. It most certainly has not. What unites women is not their skin colour or their social class, but their biological sex and the conditions of their life on account of that.

I, for one was always deeply aware of the double binds on women on account of their ethnicity and culture. When at college, aged 16, my Sikh friend ran away from home because of the threat of an arranged marriage. Her father would come into college to hunt her down, and threatening to kill her other family members if she did not return home.

It seems for too many of these supposed academics, feminism is purely an intellectual thing, and not a real lived experience. It is as if the history of the women's movement is a new thing to them.

It is depressing how quickly the knowledge and the memory of the gains and struggles have been submerged under complacency.