Women's Place UK: Filia event: the elephant ignored yet again

[pattihews]

I attended the WPUK event at Filia yesterday and came out feeling disturbed by what struck me as a very heavy-handed event designed to avoid talking about the elephant in the room. For what it's worth, I've voted Labour at every election since 1979. I imagine 90% of the audience had a similar track record.

Put briefly, we had 90 minutes of:
Feminism=socialism and if you're not a socialist you can't be a feminist and if you're not a feminist-socialist you're the enemy.
The right is sly and will lie and try to draw you in (illustrated with a video from the US about the right-wing origins of many apparently liberal groups, including the Heritage Foundation) and you must resist any temptation to get involved with them.
The way to do it is to join unions and change them from within, hold socialist women's salons to recruit and inform and get involved at grass roots level.

There were also regular warnings about racism, which seemed odd and extraneous because WPUK is all about gender ideology.

And then the penny dropped. Though her name was never mentioned, I suddenly realised that the whole tightly-managed event (no talking unless you're holding the microphone) was a warning not to fraternise with Posie Parker.

At lunchtime I encountered several other women, all of them furious about what they'd sat through. Furious in particular because of course the elephant in the room was the fact that the Labour Party, to which WPUK is loyal to death, is the biggest threat to women's rights in this country. And they'd used PP to deflect from that.

I'm not a Posie fan. Posie's clear she's not a feminist. She says things that make me cringe. I have doubts about her motivation and we wouldn't be friends in RL. But I went to one of her events when she came to my area and she can mobilise women the left will never reach and for that she's important and valuable. When I go canvassing for Labour I meet working-class as well as middle-class women who vote or have voted Conservative. They include aspirational minority ethnic women. They have their reasons, and some of them I can understand.

A woman I've never seen before and may not see again joined my table for lunch and explained why so many women were feeling really disturbed. These are TRA tactics.
The huge issue that concerns so many of us (should we vote Labour?) was avoided and we were instead lectured on how to be good socialists and feminists.

Was anyone else there? What did you make of it?

Not necessary. I don't personally fear the threat is as serious or real as you do. I do now have significant doubts it ever was as serious or real as apparently it was so significant & so real, no one has bothered to do more than blame women for the men feared most.

Well you are acting like a monolith.

I think you all need to step away from your screens.

Why do you keep quoting me to respond to things that I've quoted rather than said PopcornAnyone?

As a long term lurker you should know that when we do this around text it means we are quoting.

All I've seen is pressure on women to capitulate to imagined support for those men & their dodgy orgs & apologise for it. And been absolutely trashed when they refuse to play the 'when did you stop beating your wife' game.

Exactly @GrumpyMenopausalWombWielder all the KJK et al must say this, should say that, must do this, must do that and yet I've not seen one founder, member or supporter of WPUK criticise those founders, members or supporters who are name calling and trashing other women and women's groups, not one.

Jean has come the closest to criticising but even then that is followed by a BUT.

Are you identifying as our collective mother?

🤣

Honestly. you lot are unreal. So now you are telling me off for using the quote function to ... QUOTE!

good grief, woman.

Do you have an actual contribution, Popcorn, or are you just here to tell women off?

This is a talk forum. It's whole purpose is to talk.

I'm trying to make the point that you are directing your questions to the wrong person popcorn because the things you want a response to where not said by me. But keep going if you want to waste your own time.

Maybe your nan.

If you're good, you can have the good biscuits 🍪

Were not where! Bloody autocorrect

Who is acting like a monolith? Can one person act like a monolith?

(Philosophical question. I don't like pile ons and I understand it's hard to discuss when in a minority.)

I can't have any biscuits but I would like a cup of tea. Anyone else?

She’s long dead.
Before the internet was even a glint in nerd’s eye!

Are the biscuits vegan?
You will be sorted into a head girl/other team dependent on your answer 😃

I haven't read any of the thread but I would like a cup of tea and biscuits if there are some going.

Although I have found the resources on the WPUK website very useful (saving the recent slagging off the bad GCs and utterly-evil-KJK articles) I have never been to a WPUK meeting and I didn't know who "the WPUK women" actually were. All I knew was that Kiri Tunks was involved and that Ruth "Domesticated Zombies" Serwotka had left but I didn't know who else was involved.

It doesn't say on the WPUK website so I looked on Companies House. If there are other "WPUK women" I have no idea who they are, but it would be good to know.

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/13308625/officers

9 officers / 0 resignations

All Appointed on 1 April 2021

CAMERON, Gail
CEESAY, Ali
EPSTEIN, Debbie, Professor
GREEN, Judith, Dr
HARVEY, Philipa
INGALA SMITH, Karen
JOHNSON, Sarah Antonia
TODD, Selina, Professor
TUNKS, Kiri Elizabeth

I know who Ali Ceesay is from her relentless, obsessional hounding and shit-posting about KJK and SFW on Twitter but I didn't realise that she had anything to do with WPUK.

From a quick look at Twitter and that deranged Facebook Group, "Actual Gender Critical Left", Karen Ingala-Smith is well aware of this thread (screen shots).

archive.ph/twitter.com/K_IngalaSmith/status/1585962216800636928

www.facebook.com/groups/904109420071073/posts/1482834102198599/

Talking of which, will the FB "Actual Gender Critical Left" socialist feminists give FILIA a pass for inviting (according to them) those "fools" and right-wing collaborators FPFW to speak at FILIA? And WPUK for appearing at the same conference and failing to denounce both FILIA and FPFW?

That is how this purity thing works, isn't it? The dowsing rod of Guilt by Association detects the witches and if you are associated in any way you can either denounce them or be thrown on the pyre with them?

E Graham:
"ADF, Heritage Foundation, Concerned Women for America, Family Policy Alliance and all the usual radical/gender critical suspects: Fist, Fair Play for Women, Sex Matters, Standing on Women, Transgender Trend, WoLF, WHRC

The noise the elite women are making about "what is far right anyway?" is just smoke and bullshit. ADF and their Council for National Policy (CNP) cohorts are the only ones in this coalition that has money, lawyers and access to international courts and heads of state. US and UK radical/gender critcal feminists have made their choices as to who they feel will help them achieve their political agenda and they have chosen organizations who seek to eliminate lgbt rights and abortion rights and secularism.

Bunch of fools."

Some highlights from that thread to illustrate the point about purity politics - I could have chosen many more:

N Fraser:
"Is that Feminist Current on there as well?? YIKES"

EG:
"it's all of them except WPUK, basically"

"This from few years back. Now we have Lois McLatchie of ADF UK giving positive press to Maya Forstater in far right Christian press. Forstater speaking at an ADF UK co-sponsored event along with Transgender Trend lady who is platformed with head of ADF UK.

Nothing to see here! How dare I insinuate that ADF is establishing a working relationship with UK radical/gender critical feminists! How dare I question the motives of ADF who want to roll back all civil rights for lesbian, gay and trans people along with criminalize abortion and end secularism! How very unsisterly of me! The shame!"

S Honeychurch:
"I don't think that these women are radical feminists, I don't even think they are feminists. I agree they are a bunch of fools though, and I don't care if others call me a purist for not wanting alliances with the far right/religious right."

J Brown:
"I’m confused. An org called Save Womens Sports has a list of campaign groups based on sex not gender. What have FPFW, Sex Matters and Transgender Trend done wrong?"

M Matarazzo:
"? Do you know the purpose of this group?"

J Brown:
"I asked a straight question. Is it possible to have an answer? Or is the purpose of the group to nod along?"

S Honeychurch:
"J Brown making an alliance with people who want to remove rights to e.g. abortion is not a sensible thing for women's organisations to do As Audre Lorde said, 'There is no such thing as a single-issue struggle because we do not live single-issue lives'"

J Brown:
"S Honeychurch I was asking a question about the specific post above which I don’t understand. Can anyone explain?"

S Honeychurch:
"J Brown I just did."

J Brown:
"S Honeychurch so are Transgender Trend and Sex Matters making an alliance with anti-abortionists? Is that what you are saying or what the OP is saying?"

S Honeychurch:
"J Brown that is what the OP is saying."

J Brown:
"S Honeychurch No evidence is presented."

S Honeychurch:
"J Brown read the link."

J Brown:
"S Honeychurch obviously I did that as otherwise I wouldn’t have asked the question. It’s a list of organisations on the website of an organisation called SaveWomensSports. Still doesn’t show that Transgender Trend et al are anti abortion."

S Honeychurch:
"J Brown but as you can see when you read the web page, they are making alliances with e g. the ADF who, as has been explained, are."

J Brown:
"S Honeychurch No there is no ‘alliance’ at all. No evidence. This sports organisation has just pulled together a list of organisations that support ‘no males in female sport” and listed them on its website. Those organisations are not even in an alliance with each other let alone some far right org. They are just recommendations on this website. This is ridiculous - a worryingly fake assertion. I know the women at SM and TT. They aren’t right wing or “far right” or anti abortion. They have no connections with any far right orgs."

M Matarazzo:
"J Brown OP never stated those orgs are anti abortion, just that they are working with anti abortion orgs with huge money and huge international reach that are driving RW policies in the US and other countries."

J Brown:
"M Matarazzo but Sex Matters etc are not, expressly not, working with any anti abortion orgs! A link to SM etc has been put on this website. They didn’t do it!"

S Honeychurch:
"J Brown Yes they are. They say they are. Look at that web page. They are happy to ally with them over sex based rights. We are saying they are playing a dangerous game."

J Brown:
"S Honeychurch it says “As a non-partisan coalition, we do not endorse all of the opinions represented within these links. They are shared due to their common interest in preserving female sports.”. Passive voice: “they are shared”. No mention of any action on part of the UK groups. It’s SaveWomensSports who have collected them together. This is palpable nonsense."

S Honeychurch:
"J Brown I don't know how to say what I have said in words you will understand. What do you think 'coalition' means? That's a rhetorical question, I am not going to respond here again"

J Brown:
"S Honeychurch you don’t need to patronise me. These are words chosen by Save. I’d rather someone had some concrete evidence of an active working relationship rather than one buzz word in a short bit of text with some links underneath. You cannot make allegations like this based on one word and no evidence. If this group seriously thinks Forstater et al are actively working with a far right org then I’m out."

M Matarazzo:
"J Brown I don't think all the groups work directly with RW groups, although I believe there is more of a connection between SWS and ADF. However, it's not great for feminist orgs to be associated with RW orgs, and at this point they can't pretend the links aren't there."

J Brown:
"M Matarzzoo Good to get an honest comment that is rather different from the OPs overblown claim. So no actual connection between the UK groups and the far right. Just that they all appear as links on another organisation’s website!"

M Matarazzo:
"J Brown That's not quite correct and at this point I think you're trolling. But if you don't recognize the far right as a threat infiltrating feminist groups using trans issues as a Trojan horse, you're going to be unpleasantly surprised at some point."

J Brown:
"M Matarazzo you said you don’t think “all the groups work with RW groups.” And you’ve provided no evidence that ANY UK group “works with” US RW groups. So I fail to see any problem here. And no I don’t see any potential risk of UK groups being allied to the far right because it’s not going to happen. The actual risk for women is future PM Starmer doing Pink News events and saying he supports self ID. Accusing me of trolling is crazy stuff when I’ve just tried to find out if big claims made have substance. They clearly don’t. I’m out of here - this is Dave Spart politics"

J Egerton:
"J Brown They are named as part of a coalition. Some members of this group are British and know individuals in those orgs too - and have supported their work. You shouldn't assume that we are seeking to tear down those orgs. But this group exists to have honest debate about the right ward drift in gc feminism. You may not think that such a coalition undermines the credibility of the participant feminist groups, but we do."

M McClure:
"Why do you list FIST? I am a FIST member an we do not take funds from the right, nor publish in their media. FIST is not a single issue group. Evidence that FIST belongs on this list!"

E Graham:
"M McClure FIST put themselves on the list."

M McClure:
"Oh I understand your position now. FIST signed a petition that was also signed by Heritage Foundation. Got it guilt by association. Not in my wheel house. I organized with all sorts of groups to fight the Viet Nam war back in the day. No one every played this game."

"Wow so FIST has endorsed Fair Play as have some right wing orgs and this is colluding with the right??? I guess you would not have participated in any anti-war demos back in the 60s-70s because many religious and conservative groups did also. Guilt by being against a bad thing? This is way off base to me. Very divisive to make accusations based on this. Sad very sad."

M Matarazzo:
"M McClure FIST needs to take a stand against working with "feminist" groups that work with far right orgs, like ADF, but that hasn't happened."

M McClure:
"M Matarazzo well I suggest you talk with Ann And Carol who run FIST. When I was on the assembly they did not “work” with any rightwing endorsing feminist groups. If it is guilt by association for signing a petition that a rightwing group might also sign well I am not into guilt by association. But hey if I violated some aspect of this group I’ll gladly leave."

M Matarazzo:
"M McClure Why are you in this group if you don't want to acknowledge issues with feminists groups associating and allying with RW groups? What would it take for you to admit there's an issue? Would a feminist org have to explicitly claim the relationship? Ant why would any feminist organization that holds itself to even a minimum level of feminist ethics and principles associate with a group allied with RW orgs?"

You get the picture? There are other threads focussing on equally fictitious "alliances" between various women and organisations.

Thing is, FPFW are on their black list for signing a petition in support of Save Women's Sports - because the petition was also signed by some US right-wing organisations.

I really wish those witch-finders would go after Filia and WPUK for their promotion of and "association" with FPFW - it might make them realise that no organisation is safe unless it completely isolates itself from all but a dwindling circle of sufficiently politically pure women's rights activism.

(Sharing content produced by trans activists is OK by the way, as long as it dunks on women on their Black List. As is generally dissing all "GCs" and RFGCs in particular (Rad-Fem GCs) and saying that GCs and RFGCs "hate trans people". I assume that "Actual Gender Critical" in the Group name is like the subreddit for
"Actual Lesbians" that is for penis-havers?)

www.facebook.com/groups/904109420071073/posts/1475243479624328/

Four of the nine WPUK Officers are members of the "Actual Gender Critical Left" Facebook Group but only two of them are active enough to very occasionally create posts or make comments. Two of the members of the Filia WPUK Panel are also members and Katherine Acosta is one of the most active members.

Reading the WPUK Panel blurb on the Filia website, it is obvious that attendees would be expecting presentations focussing on the UK and the Labour Party in particular - it was a WPUK Panel, after all. Reading posts in the "Actual Gender Critical Left" FB Group, it is easy to imagine that Katherine might might, to a limited extent, have been able to talk about the UK but that her focus would much more likely be on the USA.

The confounding factor on the day, as has been mentioned repeatedly, was reference to the Heritage Foundation, as most of us have only heard of it in terms of repeated misinformation about KJK "meeting with" the Heritage Foundation in 2019 (ie. the "meeting" that never happened).

The title of this thread sums it up the problem very well: "the elephant ignored yet again"

It is beyond reasonable for audience members to have turned up expecting that WPUK intended to discuss the Labour Party. The room would have been full of UK women desperate to hear anything positive to make them feel that they could vote for Labour.

I have yet to watch the videos so I might change my mind but the overriding impression from the comments in this thread is that what they got instead was, "They are not as bad as that lot over there - and if you don't vote Labour then you are not a feminist".

Which comes horribly close to Biden telling Charlamagne tha God, "‘If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black’."

I can't have any biscuits but I would like a cup of tea. Anyone else?

If you're putting the kettle on, mines a decaf Earl Grey.

I have everyone's favourite biscuits. 🍪

And I have popcorn! 🍿

I've just made a cup of tea Arabella, happy to pour one for you!

I talked to Claire Heuchan a couple of times over Filia and really enjoyed her session. I liked her very much. No idea what she made of me. Now I feel a little bit heartbroken. I don't think women who claim to be feminists compare other women to piles of dog shit or all the other things that have been lobbed around.

We have to be for women, even for the women we don't agree with. Andrea Dworkin said: 'Feminism is a political practice of fighting male supremacy on behalf of women as a class, including all the women you don't like, including all the women you don't want to be around, including all the women who use to be your best friends whom you don't want anything to do with any more. It doesn't matter who the individual women are.' That's where I stand.

Fab. I post this advisedly:

Seriously? How can you even think of commenting of you don't read the thread?

Mines a rich tea biscuit. The least you can do is bring the damn biscuits to make up for being too lazy to read the damn thread!

Just don't anybody bring out any Garibaldis.

Fine!

Hobnobs anyone?

Bourbons are the great leveller.

Vegan AND cheap and cheerful.

Actually @Jeanhatchet. Do you want to make a comment on the way this was done by Katherine Acosta? I think she has left the thread otherwise I would ask her.

Did anyone at WPUK watch this and think ... hang on.... maybe this is not appropriate?

If this video was going to remain neutral for a session where there would be plenty of people in that audience that think that these women, some of them career feminists, had made positive contributions, did WPUK think that using a video that directly shows them and then uses them as examples of 'sinners' may not be welcoming to those who had different opinions?

Do you feel this video encourages alternative view points that you and many on this thread agree should be embraced within this movement? Or do you consider in hindsight that it could be a misstep?