Zoe Williams opinion piece in The Guardian

[Justhadathought]

Feminist solidarity empowers everyone. The movement must be trans-inclusive: www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/10/feminist-solidarity-empowers-everyone-the-movement-must-be-trans-inclusive

Needless to say, she misses every single point.......And no, feminism has always been about centring the needs of women and girls.......

[Chiochan]

@FloralBunting
They are not perfectly sensible people.
They are; underperforming politicians, media pundits without a message, children looking to belong, money grubbing medics, social workers looking for quick solutions.
I.e. the socialy or moraly inadaquet, looking for an easy path to enhanced status.

[FamilyOfAliens]

Good for her. Provides some relief from accidentally stumbling across all the hate on this website.

You “accidentally stumbled across” the feminism board on a site called Mumsnet? Do you do your googling with your eyes closed?

[FloralBunting]

Chiochan, no need to @ me, I'm on the thread. And actually, there are plenty of otherwise sensible people who buy this nonsense. The interesting question is asking why.

[Chiochan]

Are there tho, sensible people who buy this.
Name one?

[JollyYellaHumberElla]

issues that are so technical that there is no room for compromise, yet also so abstract that there is no space for human beings

Hmm, being female isn’t an abstract idea, and as far as I know women are fully human.

So what could possibly be this abstract technical issue that has no room for compromise and excludes some human beings from its ideology?

Oh yeah ...

[SittingAround1]

Deary me, it's incredible how she spectacularly misses the point.

She recognises there is misogyny and the Harvey Weinsteins of this world exist but doesn't then make the connection that this is why sex matters and our spaces need to be defended.

Her article boils down to women you need to be compassionate so budge over and let the men in.

What kind of intellectual thinking leads to the conclusion that because we should be in solidarity with TW that makes them women?

I was fully supportive of gay rights, it doesn't make me gay or them heterosexual.

[maudspellbody]

Argh. That was an irritating read (putting it mildly)

It was, and remains, obvious which side feminism would be expected to take in this fight: the side of compassion and fellowship. We would recognise the importance of being an ally in a battle that we had been through.

No. Not a battle we've been through. A different battle entirely. An almost entirely opposite battle, in fact.

[TorkTorkBam]

Feminism, in my life’s experience of it, takes the side of the oppressed. That is our raison d’etre.

Just like anti-racism takes the side of the disabled; Marxism takes the side of the ecologists; geology takes the side of the giraffes.

Words have meaning. Feminism has a very specific meaning. Reality does not change because you choose different words to describe it.

I can call a rainy day an icy day and talk about skating being a thoroughly wholesome activity. I will still get wet if I walk out "onto" the lake.

[MarieIVanArkleStinks]

We can’t progress without at least attempting to understand the rationale of those who oppose us.

The vast majority of posters here have made valiant attempts to understand it. Their attempts have been far-reaching and consistently informative. The problem is that this is a place which can only be arrived at through rational, mutually respectful discussion. Swerve even slightly from the standard slogan 'TWAW' and you can expect to receive any or all of the following responses:

Bigot!
Transphobe!
Feminism isn't feminism unless it's intersectional!
Your concerns/identity/protected spaces are not valid!
You are a misogynist!
You cannot be a feminist and not include ALL women [be-penised]!
#DieTERF!
#NoDebate!
#Transwomen are dying!
Why are you obsessed with genitalia!
TERFS get in the sea!
#NoPlatformingWorks!
Hope you die in a grease fire!

Tell me, because I'm willing to learn something. How is it possible to employ rational debate with people who are this unwilling to use reason?

[TheProdigalKittensReturn]

The constant rhapsodizing about Belcher interests me. Even if I knew nothing about this topic, even if I hadn't given the issue a moment's thought, I can't imagine myself ever having a positive reaction to seeing/hearing Belcher speak. That is simply not a person who I would ever instinctively like or trust. So what is it that these women find so compelling? Would they still find it compelling if finding it compelling didn't earn them woke points, or is there something about that sort of personality that some women find compelling (but that makes me want to get the hell away from the person)?

[FloralBunting]

Chio, I know a few personally. I even think Lisa Nandy was quite a sensible sort until she decided to torpedo her own support.

Lots of people haven't given this any real attention, and the T has been extremely wily in piggybacking on the LGB, so most people conflate the whole alphabet soup without even pausing to examine the details. You have to understand the levels of work that specific TRAs have been putting in behind the scenes for years. Helen Belcher for one, mentioned on this thread already and helpfully linked by R0. This has been quite deliberately done so that decent, fair people don't even notice the trap until they're on top of it.

Most people here have been reading and going g down the rabbit hole for ages. Most of the wider public haven't.

[TheProdigalKittensReturn]

Biological sex is neither technical or abstract. It's so simple that a toddler can grasp it, and so obvious that any dog, horse, etc can too and will often indicate the fact that they've grasped it by preferring humans of one sex over humans of the other sex. It only becomes complicated if one is for some reason emotionally invested in lying to oneself.

[R0wantrees]

I can't imagine myself ever having a positive reaction to seeing/hearing Belcher speak. That is simply not a person who I would ever instinctively like or trust. So what is it that these women find so compelling?

Not just women TheProdigal
Brian Paddick attributed his 'dear friend' Helen Belcher when he came down firmly against those women standing up for sex-based rights & Safeguarding children and Vulnerable Adults.

Belcher seems to have considerable persuasive powers.

[TorkTorkBam]

Ah, I see what she's done there. She has half forgotten that transwomen are male by definition.

I can see this here by swapping out a euphemism for a literal description:

It is astonishing that the idea of the “women-only space” is being touted as a fundamental pillar of the movement, yet is completely stripped of the historical context of that. Women-only space was a realm protected from our Harvey Weinsteins, where we could talk about our Harvey Weinsteins; it was not a hallowed place where we communicated through our ovaries. It was where we came together in unity against people who hated us. I can’t imagine the mindset that would exclude a male who hates his body from that.

[Melroses]

I was reminded of Brian too

[SittingAround1]

MarielVanArkleStinks
Exactly, I've read numerous threads/articles/watched interviews and have never once read/heard a clear answer to if 'TWAW what is a woman?'.

I also have another question : if a man is convicted of a crime and all he has to say is I feel like a woman to avoid a male prison and be put into a female prison (which lets be honest would be much easier on him) why would any man NOT say he feels like a woman ?
I'm convinced these politicians will backtrack when the number of convicted men suddenly transition surges.

[FloralBunting]

Well yes. It's like that silly Facebook 'relationship status' of 'it's complicated'. It's not really, is it, chuck? You're either single or in a relationship. If 'it's complicated' you're either single and fibbing, or in a relationship that's a bit crap and uncommitted.

'It's complicated' just sidesteps a reality you're not happy with. Deal with reality, for everyone's sake.

[TorkTorkBam]

She has only half forgotten because she ends by writing that we should go along with the idea that transwomen are women so as to be compassionate to the men who hate their bodies.

[R0wantrees]

September 2018 TRA conference, 'We're Still Here' organised by Jane Fae

OP theHarpySings wrote:
(extract)
"6) GETTING THE GRA WE WANT

This was a workshop with 3 experts sitting with groups and talking through activism. They were:

Helen Belcher (Lib Dems, Trans Media Watch)
James Morton (Scottish Transgender Alliance)
Alex Moore (GenderJam). Moore is from N Ireland.

James Morton gave some insight into tactics the TRAs will probably start using in England and Wales as they were successful in Scotland.

He said the TRAs need to build allies in mainstream women and children’s organisations so it looks like they care about them.

He also said what worked in Scotland's was a “constructive, friendly, innocent” tone when debating or in dialogue with the GC side. To be mindful about who is watching- essentially like what we do with the lurkers on the FWR board. To make the TRAs look like the reasonable side.

James also said that in dialect with elected officials, to clarify that the trans side aren’t silencing anyone but want to clarify the misconceptions being bandied around by GC feminists.

The Scottish GRA changes will probably be put forward in the 2019-2020 parliamentary year.

Belcher has been meeting with MPs and members of the House of Lords. Most of them don’t really understand the GRA and don’t have much time to think about it thanks to the Brexit FUBAR. “Education” of law makers is needed and that’s what Belcher is doing.

Apparently the TRAs lack the infrastructure they had in the 1990s and early 2000s so they need to think carefully and coordinate.

Belcher said to re-iterate to MPs that the EA2010 is not being affected and no one is losing any rights (wtf).

Apparently in terms of political support, the Tories are split about 50/50, Labour, Lib Dem's and SNP are all onside. The Greens were NOT mentioned.

The big fear on the TRA side is that this Government won’t survive long enough to get this through- again because Brexit.

According to Alex Moore, Arlene Foster of the DUP went to a Pink News event and didn’t seem to know much about this. In NI no one really cares about the trans issues because everyone is focused on same sex marriage and abortion.

Alex then moaned about the Together for Yes campaign’s transmisogyny and that the campaign completely erased the experiences of trans and NB people who need abortions. Alex would like a legal change of gender to be free of charge and as easy as changing your name.

Helen Belcher was annoyed at GC feminists using “emotive arguments” regards rape.

HB said that the pile ons pro self-ID MPs get from the GC side if they say something supportive of the trans side are not helping the GC cause. Maria Miller told Belcher that MPs got loads of abuse in the run up to marriage equality and that abusive messages, tweets from GC feminists will only harden MPs against the GC side.

HB also said something snide about “mouthy” female Labour MPs who speak before thinking on Twitter- especially on a Friday or Saturday night after they’ve had a few drinks.

Apparently the TRAs have civil service support and that the Stonewall report and Gov survey are strong bits of evidence they have which is helping them win arguments.

They are saying there is no risk to reforming the GRA and are asking MPs “what is the risk?”

In the group I was in they also talked about how changing your gender multiple times should be allowed and shouldn’t be seen as “bad intentions”.

James Morton talked about how they can get rid of “gender” markers on things like IT systems and places where it isn’t relevant- apparently GDPR might be able to help them here.

JM’s campaigning tips were to gain trust in the local community- and to approach moderate feminists, “correct misconceptions and forgive any ignorance they may have displayed”. They want to gain trust and make themselves likeable.

Apparently small acts like helping to campaign about period poverty or retweeting the local branch of Women’s Aid will make a difference and result in some reciprocation. They want to make it look like they care about Women's issues so they don’t appear threatening" (continues)

//www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3398737-We-re-Still-Here-Conference-8th-September-A-report-from-the-inside

[ChattyLion]

‘I assumed that feminism would soon re-orient itself away from which body parts define a woman and whether or not the word “womxn” signified an assault on our sense of selves, and towards what I thought was obviously the more fundamental question of the movement: who has it worse? Feminism, in my life’s experience of it, takes the side of the oppressed. That is our raison d’etre.’

I’ve only just read the first para yet but, No. Feminism is about liberating women and advancing their cause. Not about women working to save ‘the most oppressed’ .. feminism is for women. Zoe Williams’ internalised misogyny, in thinking that it’s women’s job to nurture the whole world, is embarrassing.

[TheProdigalKittensReturn]

That's the thinking behind the loathsome Guardian article about Cologne too, though, that idea that if you can argue that someone has it worse than you then you have no right to object to anything they might do to you, because you're just so privileged compared to them. And it only works because women have been conditioned all our lives to question whether or not we really deserve anything we have.

[TorkTorkBam]

Remember the literal definition feminism is about women giving men whatever they want if the men do super sad puppy eyes. If a man threatens suicide you must do exactly what he wants immediately. It is the feminist way.

Maybe next Zoe will write about how feminists should make more packed lunches and roast dinners. Some men get awfully hungry. Have some compassion ladies.

[Melroses]

Maybe next Zoe will write about how feminists should make more packed lunches and roast dinners. Some men get awfully hungry. Have some compassion ladies.

And clean their own toilets? Oh that's been done in the Guardian already this week.

[TorkTorkBam]

It seems she thinks Twitter reflects real world debate. Oh dear. She is in for a shock now the actual mainstream feminists (most women) are waking up.

Zoe, we don't like this sexist claptrap about what makes a person a real woman. We don't like our daughters being told they are not proper women if they like maths, trains, sport and short haircuts.

People live in the real physical world. Twitter is like the MCU with it's own special rules of how the universe works. Here's the thing, in the real world if a spider bites your hand, your hand swells up, if Scarlet J got into a real fist fight with pretty much any man, he'd win easily. Reality exists. People live in it. Mostly. Get off twitter and go spend some time volunteering at a women's refuge.

[nonsenceagain]

God she's an idiot, she really is. No, feminism is not about being kind to 'the oppressed'. It's about the liberation of women who've been historically oppressed because of their biological sex.