California's Women's March cancelled for fear of being "too white"

[Terfing]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6539997/Womens-March-event-canceled-rally-goers-fear-event-overwhelmingly-white.html

Women's March planners in Humboldt County, California, canceled the event because it was 'lacking representation from several perspectives'

Critics decried the decision pointing out that the particular region of California is overwhelmingly white to begin with

I find this quite sad. To cancel the event for this reason just causes further divisions, I feel. I'm not particularly a fan of the Women's March because of their thoughts on gender, but I probably would march if there was one in the UK.

I am totally mystified by people who think that political change is achieved by alienating potential allies and never, ever building coalitions.

They were going to have a women's protest march in Ireland this year when Trump was to visit (he didn't in the end). There was talk of "pussy hats" being worn but they were deemed by our libfems to be "white colonial feminist" and rejected. Ireland is about 96% white, as a north European island with very little immigration up to 20 years ago, so either this is something we have to apologise for or we have mindlessly adopted American identity politics and buzzwords forged in an entirely different social and cultural climate.

None of the people ranting about this were anything but white either. "White feminist" is just another stick to beat other women with, like T**F.

"White feminist" is just another stick to beat other women with, like TF.

Absolutely.

And the pussy hat thing is so blindingly stupid. They have cat ears. Cat=pussy. It's a pun fgs. They are pink because of the sex stereotype of women having a natural affinity for pink. They are not about the color of (some) white women's labia!

This whole 'white/cis/het/middle-class/middle-aged' thing is a way of making people feel small and worthless, like their opinions are intrinsically flawed and don't deserve to be heard. It's usually deployed by other white/het/middle-class people, too.

Often marches are attended by those with a degree of privilege (you need to be relatively able bodied, not caring for somebody, not working that day etc). It doesn't necessarily invalidate the reason for the march. I'm really grateful for the people that protest climate change when I can't, for example.

White women, as a class, have more power in this country than black women as a class. This needs to be acknowledged for sure and I believe that includes taking some personal responsibility for being the change. However I think the forces behind the promotion of this idea (that white women are only representing their own interests) are seeking to divide women and divide the left. White women are disempowered by this but the power lost isn't actually afforded to black women is it? Who wins when the women's march is cancelled?

And the pussy hat thing is so blindingly stupid. They have cat ears. Cat=pussy. It's a pun fgs. They are pink because of the sex stereotype of women having a natural affinity for pink. They are not about the color of (some) white women's labia!

I might be wrong but I understood the shape to be like the inside of the vagina - a labia/vulva hat would be a totally different shape and probably require string to hold it on. We're all pink on the inside even though our vulvas vary in colour. I thought it was typical male ignorance about female reproductive system that led people intent on dividing and further disempowering women to try and discredit the pussy hats as being "white".

Pachyderm I’m with you o this. I also heard the what about the trans women like we had to go & big tgwm to March.

I am totally mystified by people who think that political change is achieved by alienating potential allies and never, ever building coalitions.

You're mystified by this? Really? cough Pretty much all of feminism.

It's clear that the "Women's March" has quite a few issues other than its racial demographics, so I'm wondering if this was just a convenient excuse?

I think one of the problems is that the Women's March (now trade marked in the States) isn't a genuine organisation. By that I mean, a lot of women, not just in the States reacted really negatively to the election of Trump.

Many joined in the Marches on that basis. Not because they thought the organisers were their "leaders" or had a political analysis they subscribed to.

But what it did represent because of the huge media focus on it, rather than say the myriad of genuine grassroots women's groups and individual activists. This made the organisation a target for what I call media feminists, ie women who get their credibility, not from other women, but from the patriarchal media deciding (on a whim) that this is the latest version of feminism that they (the media) want to promote. And of course there are always entryists.

What should have been an amazing opportunity for women to build on contacts that national, or state wide marches gave them access to, somehow became the silenced followers of unelected groups.

It has just turned in to "Event" feminism where you display, usually thought saying all other feminists are wrong, that you are currently the most cutting edge representation of feminism that the media will want to talk to and promote. (Look at the idiocy of them announcing the concept of a women's strike through of all place, the Guardian. Guardian readers can maybe afford to take part in a day of political action and not worry about losing their job or zero hours contract, but most women cant.)

Here is another story about how this is essentially a competive feminism rather than a collaborative one. This is what happens with top down organising. It represent nobody but the egos involved rather than something, probably a bit fuzzy, but is representative of all those taking part.

www.nytimes.com/2018/12/23/us/womens-march-anti-semitism.html

White women are disempowered by this but the power lost isn't actually afforded to black women is it? Who wins when the women's march is cancelled?

Yup. Does this kind of thing ever happen in other movements? After 20+ years in the LGBT community, I can tell you that I've never heard of anything being cancelled because it was too male, despite women being massively under-represented (and actively marginalised).

It makes me laugh when (white) libfems are shocked that their woke events aren't flocked to by women who aren't other White libfems.

As if a Hispanic or black woman struggling to access women's healthcare, finding work or bringing up a family on a low income is going to give a shiny shit about some of the nonsense that libfems campaign for.

They're too blind to see that having the time, money, access to information etc in order to worry about your gender identity is itself a privilege that racial minorities don't have.

Woman's March, Vancouver had Hayley Heartless, a self proclaimed 'transsexual dominatrix' lecture speak at their event.

Part of the speech was this -

When you welcome us into your spaces, and allow us to be open and honest, you'll find that we have so much knowledge to bring you, and not just about how to have amazing sex.

We can teach you life skills, like how to take amazing selfies, how to use bitcoin, how to build a following on social media.

We can teach you lessons about yourself, like how to practice excellent hygiene, how to do amazing contouring for low light venues, or how to practice radical self care.

We can also teach you valuable lessons about boundaries and consent, and how to quickly spot potentially harmful people.

Heartless has recently been one of the main TAs involved in banning/harassing feminists including Meghan Murphy. As well as a campaign against Vancouver Rape Relief.

mobile.twitter.com/4th_wavenow/status/1068182105400598528?lang=en

Woman's March is a joke and does not support women.

Stillathing you are right. I think acknowledging that the California match was mainly about white women is a good thing.

I've always been ashamed to see that in a place like London, that is very diverse, most if not all women's event are geared completely towards white women's issue. The feminism agenda has seen the sisters and mothers of white men move up the various ladders. Other women have been left behind.

Diversity has mainly been about white women. Most panels remain completely white - white men and white women.

Look around you at these women's events. Why are non-white women opting out? It's because they do not feel included.

... Oh and please don't do the usual thing of blaming them. It's always easy to say that they are the problem but they are not. These so-called feminist things are not inclusive. They address white women's issues and not issues affecting women more generally or different women.

Isn’t 21st century feminism (at least in this country anyway, where in law women and men do have exactly the same legal rights) essentially just another form of identity politics? Identity politics, like class based politics, always ends up this way. I have to agree with this vide, this is just the bed intersectional feminism made m.youtube.com/watch?v=g-a7UCyynDo

“They were going to have a women's protest march in Ireland this year when Trump was to visit (he didn't in the end). There was talk of "pussy hats" being worn but they were deemed by our libfems to be "white colonial feminist" and rejected.” - hilarious, it’s like that old monty python comedy sketch...

‘White feminism’ is used sneeringly to shut women up. All discussion of privilege has been rendered useless by the co-opting of it as an exercise to discover the most oppressed person in a situation and ignore everyone else.

I am fascinated by the idea that transwomen can teach us about hygiene and also that bitcoin and selfie taking can be categorised as life skills??! But mainly - why do we need teaching about hygiene? Where on earth does that come from??

@weightsandmeasures I totally agree with you.

@CaptainBrickbeard is it though? Or is it highlighting the lack of diversity in the feminist movement? Even in this thread there are women stating that black women have no privilege, that’s why they don’t show up to these events and other unsaid things (there is some serious racist undertones). Some black women do have the ability to attend these events so why don’t they?

Faithless, it’s really important, which is why I’m frustrated by the way ‘White feminist’ has been used to belittle and silence women instead of the concept of privilege being used productively to actually engage more women in feminism. It’s used as an insult across social media instead of provoking thoughtful discussion and productive action.

But Humboldt is a poor county and about two years the last practicing obstetrician-gynaecologist left the county. The women there have to drive over a hundred miles to access female health care. I doubt the Women’s March organisers are even aware of that.

This is very telling about their level of engagement with actual women and grassroots feminist movements.

Some black women do have the ability to attend these events so why don’t they?

Possibly because they realise the Women's March is not an actual feminist event. It's a day out with silly hats that achieves precisely nothing, unless you count the participants having a nice day out and taking lots of selfies.