Selina Todd has been disinvited from "Women's Liberation at 50" because of association with WPUK

[stumbledin]

Have just seen this on facebook and am totally taken aback. She is listed as a speaker here www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/womens-liberation-at-50-tickets-75905313837

Everyone of the other speaker if they go ahead and dont protest should be totally ashamed of themselves.

This is her tweet twitter.com/selina_todd/status/1233456777057964035

Some of the women speaking are those I have told I should and I do admire.

This sickness that is dividing women is so upsetting.

Not sure where or how we can show our disgust at this and make sure they know they do not speak for women.

Feminist Fightback was never really a proper group. Just like so many 3rd Wave "feminist" things. What it really was about was creating supposed political background to help someone's CV as an academic.

A bit like Finn McKay who some how persuaded women the LFN was radical feminist whilst secretly waiting for the moment, which she has just done on twitter, to say you can change sex. And yes, she now has a nice academic job.

How many women are using their membership of feminist groups or networks to in fact give them "authenticity".

(Not surprised to see that the infamous Lola is a contributor to the Guardian. She must be a perfect candidate for them. Young, Black and anti 70s feminist. Almost as though she were made to measure! )

What a fucking shambles

JCJ nails it Tumblrised intersectional bullshit

To paraphrase Jamie Lee Curtis in A Fish Called Wanda, Naomi Wolfe probably thinks the London Underground is a radical feminist movement.

A bit like Finn McKay who some how persuaded women the LFN was radical feminist whilst secretly waiting for the moment, which she has just done on twitter, to say you can change sex. And yes, she now has a nice academic job.

I could never understand why so many GC women were following her on twitter.

The footage of Julie Bindel challenging the organisers is astonishing

Has the Guardian article been posted?

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/29/row-erupts-womens-liberation-anniversary-conference

The last paragraph of that Guardian article is very disingenuous indeed.

What’s with that slightly arch final para in the Guardian piece?

Is it suggesting that the expression “a self-defined sexuality” has something to do with gender self-ID? 🧐

Most pertinently – though it had different significance then – a controversial decision made at the Birmingham conference put “the right to a self-defined sexuality” at the top as a preface to all the other demands.

Sexuality and 'gender identity' are completely different things.

I can't watch the video, apparently it's private. Does that mean I'm blocked or something?

Is it suggesting that the expression “a self-defined sexuality” has something to do with gender self-ID?
🧐
I suppose it has if you are male and want to self-defence as lesbian.

I can’t decide whether the writer knows that and is just lazily opting for what might, if you didn’t think about it or care much, sound like a “clever” closing observation - or whether the writer is in fact unaware of the difference.

Both options depressingly plausible

I can't watch the video, apparently it's private. Does that mean I'm blocked or something?

Naw. It means the organisers are cowards.
They took it down as soon as the last tabled event finished.

Presumably an edited version will arrive at some point, with all the interesting bits cut out and comments disabled.

Screen shot of the last bit of the Guardian article with the time showing. Let’s see if it changes, as so many Guardian online articles do.

I wonder what the authors of this demand would say about men who transition and insist their current and former wives and girlfriends now describe their hetero relationship as ‘lesbian’?
Something tells me they wouldn’t be very keen.

I find myself in the odd position of feeling rather well-disposed towards ITV for managing a more thoughtful and respectful commemoration of 50 years of the WLM conference in a recent episode of Endeavour than today’s shambolic event did.

The logic!

1. She wasn't supposed to speak so it doesn't matter
2. She was supposed to speak but only for 2 minutes
3. If she spoke, we would have had to cancel the conference
4. But she was only supposed to speak for 2 minutes, so it doesn't matter that we didn't let her speak.

From Twitter

And then:
5) oh, you vote that she should be allowed to speak? Is she still outside? Has anyone got her
number?

I've seen it now. If that's the carefully edited version it's bad enough. How to show that your conference organisers are incapable or organising a piss up in a brewery and are hypocrites to boot.

It would have been so much easier for them if they'd just said "sorry you don't want to join in" to the bullies, shunted some timings around, asked some people who were still happy to speak to speak a bitt longer or have longer Q&As or - heaven forfend - have the see if the participants had preferences for filling. It's really not hard, and all the participants would have preferred to have Dr Todd there and their conference managers to show some gumption on their behalf.

They have shown themselves to be tired, worn out, and resourceless.

Not read the Guardian (actually badged as the Observer) properly.

But did wonder if in fact the writer did know what it meant and was in fact commenting on LGB Alliance and same sex attraction.

Although even as I type that I suspect that dont know, and as has been suggested they think trans genderism is somehow about sexuality. Afterall it is Stonewall that claims that trans is part of representing people who are same sex attracted!

asked some people who were still happy to speak to speak a bitt longer or have longer Q&As or - heaven forfend - have the see if the participants had preferences for filling.

When you think how many parallel session #WomensLib2020 ran - and how many more we all wished we could have attended it's very odd to to think that longer talks, longer Q&As or some impromptu workshops could not have been managed.

The organisers plainly anticipated the questions and still didn't manage them well. I did not appreciate the suggestion that dissenting voices should take a seat and be prepared to discuss contentious matters in private during coffee breaks etc. because of the organisers' emotional labour. Completely setting aside Selina Todd's emotional and other labour in assisting them, securing funding etc.

I think the marvellous Historian at the back might be Dr Helen Rogers from Liverpool John Moore University?

twitter.com/helenrogers19c

Yes it was Helen Rogers, she is great and worth following on Twitter.

Yes it was Helen Rogers.

Selina Todd has posted a leaflet that was distributed in protest at her no-platforming:

twitter.com/selina_todd/status/1233753161611010048?s=20

Julie Bindel is an absolute star in this. I don't agree with all her views, but she is inspirational in her courage & outspokenness. Go, Julie! And go, Selina!