Men of the far right and the women's movement

[SapphosRock]

Excellent article from Jean Hatchett about the recent fascism debate.

https://thecritic.co.uk/men-of-the-far-right-and-the-womens-movement/

This bit really struck me:

On one side of the fence are aggressive men screaming “fascist” at women who are clearly not. On the other side, skulking in the shadows, beneath the banners of women, are men who clearly are.

I think we are going to need an awful lot of pears in the coming weeks.

pattihews this is hilarious, I didn‘t know about the pears post. This is precisely how I envision Tala writing this nonsensical post, which she will never back up with facts…. 😂😂😂

Oh I was wrong. Tala did come back. But, of course, not to back up their allegations with facts. Which makes the whole affair all the more toddleresque. 😂😂😂

Tala should listen to black women.

I think we're going to need to crowd fund and orchard. Will we be able to afford it in addition to the fascist hunting pig?

It could be that Jean Hatchett, Suzanne Moore and many other feminists in the UK have lost their minds, have a personal vendetta against Posie Parker and want her women's rights campaign to fail out of spite.

Or it could be they have a point.

Any supporter of free speech should support these women using theirs, especially when they are using their free speech to speak out against racism.

There’s denouncing racism and then there’s pillorying a group of women for a pair of non entities filming a public event, completely overshadowing the women who were brave enough to speak publicly and also the absolutely shocking behaviour of the TRAs at the event.

I don’t understand how this is going to help anyone- it doesn’t help protect trans kids from irreversible medical experimentation, it doesn’t help women get single sex spaces, and it doesn’t help the fight against racism. It is a purity spiral and smacks of zealotry.

I’d also like to remind the people so concerned about anti-racism and left wing political success that telling people who were Euro-skeptics during the Brexit campaign that they were all racist gammons was about as effective a way to persuade people around to the alternative way of thinking as slamming your head in the fridge door.

I don't think anyone's lost their minds, they're just wrong.

And who are you accusing of racism?

Sappho you have it upside down. Nobody here infringes on these women‘s right to free speech. They are free to speak and we are free to agree or disagree.
It is you guys who tries to shut Posie down by smearing her by guilt of association. And with a registry of all her ‚wrongthink- positions‘, no less.

I wish you were more invested in achieving the goal (end transing kids, preserve sex segregated spaces…) than in preventing it, just because the ‚wrong person‘ may get it done. Priorities…

What's their point though?

I don't understand what the point is. Has anyone made the point clearly? Can anyone summarise the point in a sentence or two?

It seems to me that there is no point, only vague accusations of wrongdoing and insinuations of racism. But no evidence.

No point, no evidence... it's weird.

What's their point though?

Yes, indeed. Perhaps Sapphos can answer it.

Because, to me, even the attempt to explain comes across as she is undermining the cause due to her associations with far right wingers.

When a) she obviously isn't, because she is incredibly popular and effective.

And b) the only people promoting the idea that she associates with far right wingers, are those who are claiming it then undermines us.

it doesn't make any sense. And so people are naturally looking beyond it for an explanation.

beastly I think for some their own brand is simply more important than the political objective, and the brand might get tainted by even the suspicion of association with ,other‘.
Can‘t be easy winning material rights and protections for women while being cheered on by some critical race theory averse dudes or even pro-lifers. What will the colleagues say back at the Guardian….
Priorities…

Or it could be that a faction of feminists are known for doing this.

But I also see guilt-by-association used by feminists against other feminists. And indeed I have used it in the past myself. Within left-leaning feminism, as within the Left generally, it is a heavily used tool. There is sharp criticism of any feminist who would associate for strategic reasons with those on the Right, and in particular with the Christian Right in the US.

Note in this paragraph ‘indeed I have used it in the past myself’.

Wasn’t Dr Kathleen Stock on your list of respected feminists on the other thread, Sappho? This is a quote from her work.

kathleenstock.substack.com/p/on-guilt-by-association?utm_source=twitter&sd=pf

Nobody has removed any feminists right to speak. To make their points. They have been free to make points and continue to do so.

Pressed submit too quickly.

However, others understand that it has crossed into bullying. Yet, those bullying fail to see that.

Those people who create a sin page for the people who are generally fighting for the same things, just differently, and publish it, are bullies. The sole purpose is to highlight that full submission is expected or you cannot be part of us.

Sounds like fear.

The main lesson I'm taking from this is that Real Feminism is caught up in a purity spiral and as such is thoroughly corrupt.

I have not identified as a feminist for a very long time now, and this debacle is confirming that this was a good choice for me.

It has also made me see that the most effective campaigning is done on the basis of freedom of speech, honesty and integrity. That's what KJK does and it's why she matters, as opposed to the Real Feminists, who do not seem to be able to make an impact. They are hobbled by their commitment to ideological purity at all costs - even the cost of their own movement.

Not sure how Real Feminsim think they‘ll ever get anything done, though.

What‘s the strategy, convincing half of the country of their precise teachings and only then starting to fight in this new-built, pure coalition for what would have a majority now, but with the ‚wrong people‘? This may be good for clout-building and resume polishing but does nothing to achieve the goals at hand.

It all boils down to what I said previously: they are not in it to win it.

I‘d like to add: people who are isolated from the repercussions of certain policies are usually much more willing to go for incremental change that doesn’t upset anyone than those who suffer the consequences of said policies.

Or it could be they have a point.

Any sort of point they had has long been swallowed up in grandstanding and petty, childish, factional behaviour.

Kids don’t have time to wait for The Real Feminists of Brighton to fix things.

2 years til mine could theoretically chop her tits off with the cash in the Child Trust Fund that New Labour gave her.

Looking at the state of their hometown, The Real Feminists of Brighton are the least qualified of us all to prevent teenagers from self harming via the teachings of Queer Theory.

Maybe second after Joe Biden, if I’m feeling generous.

ClogLady

From watching this Brighton debacle, I get the feeling that the Real Feminists would be fine with many of the tactics that TRAs use, as long as they weren't on the wrong side of it.

The nature of the complaints against KJK seem to be evolving as each one is shown to be unfounded.

1.The fascists should have been asked to leave.

It was an open invitation to an event held in a public space, how would that work? If asking undesirables to leave was effective we'd have used it on the TRA's long ago. The undesirables in this instance appear to be free speech advocates how do you square that with fascism?

2.The women who spoke should have been asked for their consent to be filmed by a right wing organisation.

They chose to speak in a public place, there is no law against randoms filming them and doing whatever the hell they like with the footage. A forensic analysis of the available footage reveals that every woman and her dog was filming on their phone and the much discussed inner circle was a space ANYONE could enter without invitation. Is it reasonable or even feasible to establish the motives of every single person filming?

3.Associating with fascists damages the cause.

No one knew who they were and they appear to have had very little interaction with anyone else at the event. Most of us had no idea who they were until the real feminists™ told us. The video footage was of poor quality and HoO have had very few views and most of the comments on the video suggest few, if any, of their viewers have any idea what the event was about. It's the real feminists™ insisting that there is a relationship between SFW and HoO, the evidence does not support this claim.

4.The movement will be taken over by fascists/violent men if we allow them to attend and film these events.

Thanks for the vote of confidence in women's intelligence. Women are not responsible for the behaviour of men.

5.Right wingers oppose gender ideology for different (the wrong) reasons to feminists.

Feminists don't "own" the campaign to oppose gender ideology, how is this any of my business? Feminists do not think the right is looking after our interests and we know the left isn't, we're on our own. I don't have the energy or inclination to argue with people who agree with me on this just because I may not like the rest of their politics. A man or woman with a camera phone, whatever their politics, has less impact on my life than the politicians of all stripes who are shitting on women.

6.You're trying to silence the real feminists™ right to free speech.

Pure fucking Darvo.

The OP used to be a TRA IIRC from her earlier MN posting.