In-fighting within the GC feminist movement

[GlitterToast]

I've been following/ participating in the GC feminist movement for about a year, which makes me a newbie compared to many of you.

One thing that stands out uncomfortably is the constant and prevalent in-fighting. This refers to both the men and women in the movement.

I know that none of us are doing this professionally, so we don't have to act professional. I also think that everyone is entitled to their personal opinions, and they can express themselves however they wish.

But for me, the in-fighting is really off-putting and upsetting. It makes me want to step away from the whole situation.

I won't name names/ organizations as I don't want this thread to become a "he said/ she said". I started this thread to see if anyone else had similar feelings and wanted to talk them through?

Of course women disagree with each other! Just like men! OP, why are you surprised at this?

Sometimes, people who generally agree, will clash and argue on some point! Well, strike me down with a feather!

But basic elements remain: national law should defend women and children against male violence.

Infighting over what?
I'd be interested to discuss it if I knew what it was over?

Of course women disagree with each other

OP has stated- and come back to clarify- she's not talking about disagreements in general

I wish I knew specifically what this about. Overall, I think there is a lot of unity.

Disagreement is normal and healthy. I think the younger crowd has grown up on cultish purity cancel culture, which is toxic. They don't know how to debate, they just name-call and censor which leads to living in a bubble. Make your arguments, agree to disagree, find common cause. It's the only way to get things done.

CodenameVillanelle
At the moment it's the American funeral parlour case - Cathy Brennan and some US radfems are very angry with some UK radfems for joining forces with some US right wing orgs to protest something she thinks they have got very wrong, and it's creating a lot of friction.

That's the only instance in which I thought someone behaved out of line. Not for Cathy's positionthat's validfor shouting through a megaphone that Linda Bellos is a homophobe. That was a shameful TRA clown tactic.

Cathy Brennan is an unpleasant person for sure. I think she's probably correct on the principles here but her behaviour there and in other places is vile.

It seems there are different ways of viewing this 'funeral parlour' case. Bellos and Brennan have drawn different conclusions. As far as I can tell, Bellos is arguing that sex and gender identity are not synonymous. Brennan reads the situation differently - that this case could lead to the enforcement of gender (in the sense of sexual stereotypes). I'm not sure where shouting 'homophobe' at a well known lesbian campaigner factors in though.

As far as I can tell, Bellos is arguing that sex and gender identity are not synonymous.

To clarify, Bellos is arguing that biological sex carries more weight than gender identity, so a man who identifies as a woman isn't actually a woman. Any judgement made about this person should be distinct from judgements made about women.

This, OP (she says, waving her arm vaguely around in direction of the thread) is why I’ve been taking a break from FWR.

I’ve also been taking a long break from Twitter, but I gather from this thread there’s been a rift between Joani and Jean?

Some people are naturally more abrasive than others. You just have to carry on and not let it detract from the overall cause.

I’ve been following the Self ID, GC issue pretty closely for several years now and it does seem to happen fairly regularly. Different kinds of disputes each time. It would probably be less frustrating if the whole histories and intricacies were known to us. But what can you do?

I’m sorry you got such a hostile response from some posters here for raising it. Onwards and upwards!

And everything @exLtEveDallas and @AllTheNameAreTakenEvenThisOne said

I have no idea what this thread is about!

What is 'the GC feminist movement'? I'm not part of any movement.

I'm here because apparently it's hateful to say that people can't change sex. I'm here because reality is transphobic and I don't understand this.

I don't understand how so-called 'in-fighting' is supposed make me change my beliefs and think that actually, TWAW after all. That's ridiculous. And even if it did, it's not like I'm not going to find it in TRA-land where they'd in-fight with a mirror if it looked like it misgendered them.

The opinions of other feminists aren't what made me GC. It was 'educating myself' and listening to TRAs and the total lack of logic.

Movements don’t have to be formal or organised. Why is everyone so hung up on that point?

I think OP was just upset and letting off steam, maybe?

Feminists don't always get along, because they're human beings not mythical heroes, and often they're independent thinking, stubborn, difficult human beings at that - they have to be. It's always been that way but the movement doesn't fall apart just because some of us fall out. We're not Fleetwood Mac.

I'm on twitter sometimes, follow Jean, would have to google Joannie, it's a name I recognise. I have no interest in the particulars of their spat and it doesn't affect me personally or the views I hold and sounds very storm in a teacuppy

People who (possibly very sensibly) aren't on Twitter obviously have no idea what this thread is about.

(Again) this isn't about principled disagreement. It's about unnecessary and public personal attacks.

(Not all on Twitter, but most of them are.)

Ok, I'm coffee fuelled now.

I suppose the idea of it being a movement stuck out to me because I see that as being mainly a TRA tactic - to paint us as a small group (handful of women with a load of socks) of political outliers. (I'm not accusing the OP here, just having a bit of a brain dump)

But the point is we're not. Whilst some GC feminists have come together to form groups, I firmly believe there are many, many more of us who are just individuals who are here on FWR (or reddit/twitter/spinster etc.) because at some point we heard or read something that made us think "hang on a sec, I don't actually agree with that" whether it be women's sport, women's prisons, the medication of children, males calling themselves lesbians or any of the other issues.

I don't generally go on twitter, so if it isn't on FWR then I don't usually know about it. I do think it's very difficult to have a proper conversation on twitter. There are frequent misunderstandings on MN (not just FWR - AIBU is far scarier) but because we can't block people, generally things get resolved.

I suppose my point is that whilst I'm not interested in in-fighting, I don't see my opinions as something that I can walk away from.

Big secret (mainly for our monitors) - most of us aren't massively organised and funded by the right wing! We're just women with opinions.

I'll bite.
I do see thIs ("don't share Breitbart" "they are the only ones reporting" "don't let transsexual men speak over women" "but nobody is listening to women"). Also some "I think X doxxed me but I've no proof but now she is complaining she isn't in this group any more".

My strategy is ignore them. I won't share Breitbart but I won't stop talking to people who do.

(Loved reading that book as a child Tottie. A little bit freaky.)

People who (possibly very sensibly) aren't on Twitter obviously have no idea what this thread is about.

(Again) this isn't about principled disagreement. It's about unnecessary and public personal attacks.

I think probably the reason I’m sympathetic to OP is I remember being over there previously when a spat kicked off on GC Twitter. Metaphorically crouched behind the bar while the stools flew thinking “Why can’t they do this by DM?”

To be clear, by "in-fighting", I am referring specifically to personal attacks not debate/ disagreement.

Dear goddess.

So, like I say, in it for the gossip then.

You're not bothered by philosophical or tactical disagreements such as trutrans vs women only, or speaking to right wing outlets vs maintaining leftist political purity.

You're just interested in disapproving of women who have the temerity not to behave in a sufficiently ladylike manner when they're knocking seven bells out of each other on the Twatter because of dislike rather anything to do with GC issues.

What a waste of a thread.

I suppose the idea of it being a movement stuck out to me because I see that as being mainly a TRA tactic - to paint us as a small group (handful of women with a load of socks) of political outliers. (I'm not accusing the OP here, just having a bit of a brain dump)

Oh yes. The conspiracy organisation funded by the far right US southern baptist pro-lifers?

I reserve my right to view myself as part of a rag-tag straggling caravan of a movement. [Not funded, but open to sponsorship from real butter companies.

So, like I say, in it for the gossip then.

That’s a bit harsh @LangCleg

We’re all, always, perfectly aware of who is reading and watching everything that is written. (Which is why OP got such a disproportionately hostile response, in fact.) She’s allowed to be frustrated with discord for similar reasons.

Or any other reasons.

It doesn’t mean she’s gossiping.

I totally get what you are saying Glitter. Some of it is unnecessary as it just helps the enemy.

Have decided that I cant do anything about it except be committed to supporting women across the normal political divides because these issues concern every woman. And encouraging women who may have disagreements to keep talking to each other

Morning OP. I haven’t ever experienced the alienating in-fighting you describe from other GC people. On the contrary, I’ve found GC people to have kindness and humanity, and sometimes great senses of humour.

I hope you find the support you need.