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?

I wasn't at the event, and merely noted the 'talk amongst yourselves' parts of the WPUK sessions described on twitter.

It's an arrogant way to treat women gathered at your event IMO. Telling people to 'talk amongst themselves' on issues that they won't address?

The only other time I've experienced a controlling arbiter of the narrative at a ticketed event was with Engender when they were trying to control the narrative on male inclusion to ensure women didn't get a fair chance to speak openly or to challenge the preferred narrative. We had to write our Qs down & give them to 1 woman who then gave some to Emma Ritch who (re)interpreted the Q, gave the panel the chance to answer & women were not allowed to speak openly. The session I went to involved Ritch comparing women with trauma from male violence to racists. The non answers the panel gave went unchallenged & while Engender got to tick a box that said 'we've covered the GRA hot potato, phew' that session did the square root of nothing to open debate, discuss & more importantly actully hear women speak. I suspect the WPUK 'talk amongst yourselves' ploy was to achieve a similar aim.

As I wasn't at the event, im not in a position to comment on what was said or how it felt. But reading WPUK taking about "Audience invited to talk to each other about how they navigated pincer movement of 'rock and hard place" just made me roll my eyes. This is an excellent way to avoid hearing about how their chosen tactics impact others who are the collateral fallout from the bizarre obsession WPUK have with KJK.

They aren't going to do much reflection on their own shortcomings any time soon. I'd have avoided the session had I been at Filia because im not interested in being lectured to by people wholly unable to reflect on their own failures.

WPUK aren't about listening to others. They're on blast to everyone else as they seem to believe they have the answers - while not being able to articulate what that might mean. Someone commented elsewhere that there's a lot of instructions on what we shouldn't do but very little on what they think should happen. That's WPUK in a nutshell.

Yes, I think the panel tried to open up a 'what to do' discussion based on what women have done and learnt previously, but the main audience contributions didn't pick that up.

Shame as that is a key question.

Re Heritage Foundation. That's one of KA's areas of experience and research. Relevant to the growth of the religious right across the States, Europe and beyond.

A captured left and right that would deny women fundamental rights like abortion is the terrain that feminism is currently working within.

@GrumpyMenopausalWombWielder

But as you say, you weren't there and if you had been you wouldn't have attended. If you're saying that WPUK have closed minds then that is a little hypocritical. At an event designed to discuss, not lecture, and with starting points for those discussions it was possible for many things to be said. WDI USA and UK were busting a gut to speak and two members did. It could have been aggressive and shut down but it wasn't and it wasn't. There was a mix of women from the panel and their thoughts on the given topic and then audiences discussing a number of issues and then questions from the floor. In my group we discussed robustly and whilst their was some agreement some disagreement. It was exactly what it was meant to do. Air grievances face to face. Their was specific reference to how difficult social media can make our interactions with each other and how we need to do more direct talking. Make your mind up - you're objecting to women being lectured to, at the same time as finding allowing women to talk to each other a sub-standard event. You can't have it both ways. But as you've said - you wouldn't have it any way. You wouldn't come.

Is Mumsnet changing grammar? I don't think I've ever made so many mistakes in one short paragraph! Apologies!

Yes, I do.

Yeah, I didn't think the way the discussion went was productive or relevant to what was said. It was a shame that alot of the points made by the panel weren't picked up and developed.

But with the greatest respect to the individuals on the panel, nothing they said was new or remarkable. Yes, of course we have to incorporate anti-racism into everything. Yes, of course we have to be involved in our communities and with women's groups. Yes, of course we need to be wary of the far right. Yes, of course, for those in unions they need to be active.

It just seems very defensive to blame the audience. And of course, some of the people in the audience were, like me, thinking that there was something off with the event and putting two and two together and getting KJK.

Anyway, as Dr Em says, good luck going your way. I'll go mine. Which is now to work.

Women's Place has always been the bland feminist group in feminism. What they said was unremarkable and is what left groups all over the country would say. But it is all directly contradictory to what some gender-critical groups say. They say the House is on Fire, Your Children are Inside, and we need to work with anyone whether they are racist, far right, against all abortions does not matter.

This event was also the only one apart from consciousness-raising groups at Filia that did leave lots of time for questions and discussions. There was lots of opportunity for people to speak from the floor and some contributions were quite long.

*@pattihews
*
"It just seems very defensive to blame the audience. And of course, some of the people in the audience were, like me, thinking that there was something off with the event and putting two and two together and getting KJK."

Who blamed the audience? And for what?

I think, since the whole panel was focused on the wider political direction of feminism, that you are putting two and two together and getting 4 but you want the 4 to mean something else which it doesn't.

FILIA encompasses a range of feminisms. It is explicitly anti-sex trade. Apart from that, it is open to a range of feminisms. There were sessions for socialist feminists, Marxist feminists, those concerned about porn, mothers around birth issues, etc. Fawcett Society and similar cross-electoral party campaigns have been there in the past. This year with more of a focus on the trans issue many of those groups were not there. Conservatives would have been welcomed, the only women who would not have felt welcomed would be anyone who does not agree with the Trans narrative on Mumsnet.

'Of course we have to incorporate antiracism into everything' isn't a belief shared by all women though.

I'm not sure that anyone has 'blamed the audience'. I said that, for me, it was a shame that the breath and depth of discussion wasn't picked up by most of the audience, but a missed opportunity rather than blame I would say.

Other people there may have thought the audience discussion was useful in addressing the where do we go from here issues though.

@DrLouiseJMoody
keep doing what you're doing- you're not speaking into the void- despite what some may say

What terrifies me is that some of the self-appointed "proper" feminists actually alienate many people- I'm genuinely furious about that- how dare they be so cavalier with our girls - In many cases I would honestly prefer they do nothing as I believe this would be more helpful.

Thanks @bravelystunning!

Actually, if MN want to delete my reply to Jean that'd keep the thread on track. I've no interest in acknowledging her existence and find it bizarre to be tagged in an out of nowhere attack. I won't acknowledge further comments from her in order not to derail the thread.

What I'd like to see from WPUK and friends is a realistic path forward. I cannot see how it helps to post a second blog focusing on one woman: it detracts from their work and makes it look like a personal feud (I suppose it now is?). Then Jayne Egerton wrote a piece which is widely cited but, again, fails to say "This is what I think we should be doing." It's dialogically ineffective and leaves us wondering "well, you've said THAT but what about the next steps?"

I get out more these days having been floored for much of the past two years (I don't need to say why) and it's clear that people on the street are listening to us (we met curious people in Sheffield the other week who got it once we spoke about prisons). They don't need to know who I vote for (although I'm pretty obviously left wing!). We just need to know one thing: women need protecting and no obfuscation about the definition of the word.

I'll be keeping on as best I can 💛

@BravelyStunning

"The self appointed "proper feminists"" is becoming a really insulting narrative about women. No one does this. But to be told to "do nothing" is really disgusting when women have almost lost their jobs fighting this issue over many many years and I'm one of them. I'm a working class woman and constantly told I don't understand "ordinary women". I am one! I am utterly dismayed at this "head girl" insult about women who do nothing but work hard for other women and have devoted their lives to doing so. It needs to stop.

I see some real cowardice here in this thread. "I want to say really nasty things about women... but then I'll delete them" It's become a thread of incredible bad faith with a number of bad actors. I'm withdrawing.

@DrLouiseJMoody sorry you'll see I've deleted mine as I posted in anger!! But I absolutely meant it- it's difficult sometimes to hold stuff in- I am so worried for teen girls- the red mist descends when I feel that "our side" (don't really like saying that) is putting people off- it's completely reckless.

Going forward I'm going to try to keep the personal out of it, unless it's to say something positive. So, I'm thanking you in a more measured way! I'm so glad that you're reaching people on the street- so important not to alienate people.

And I'm glad to hear that you're feeling up to and able to do this.

A good way to avoid accusations such as "head girl" behaviour might be to avoid only coming onto FWR to chastise women.

OK, @Jeanhatchet , fair enough- I posted in anger then panicked and deleted- this is because, like many people, I don't like confrontation- I don't argue in real life. I'm not saying that this is a good thing- I probably get walked over far too much. And, yes, no doubt much of it is female conditioning.
I let the louder ones win. And I seethe inwardly- and I do worry- because vocal people aren't necessarily more correct, more perceptive- vocal feminists don't necessarily know more about the vast swathe of other women- i'd argue often the reverse!- they just have the confidence to loudly say what they think- and it is hard to argue with people like that.
And KJK is obviously vocal and thank god for that because there's someone I align with in crucial (to me) areas, someone who's prepared to stand up, pound the streets/whatever
And I do worry about the alienation of "ordinary" people like me in the name of purity.

I do not know what the Head Girl comment refers to. But posters on FWR are very good at chastising anyone who does not agree with their groupthink. So that comment is pretty ironic.

I think what you're describing is "discussion" on a discussion forum.

I was going to say maybe MN is suitable as a relatively neutral space where women could discuss issues and hopefully come to some kind of accommodation or entente.

Although I have to admit I haven't RTFT.

@Jeanhatchet just seen your other post- I think what is inevitable is that if you're in academic feminist circles, the culture will somewhat rub off on you.
You (and anyone in those circles) become adept and used to arguing in a way that can be quite intimidating to others- we can't think on our feet- we're not used to impassioned debate so we capitulate or remain quiet- I'm not saying this is your fault, it's just how it is.
I don't mean to discredit your background and, for full disclosure, I should say I'm dyed in the wool middle class!
We're all in tribes- I am too
Anyway- sorry, OP for massive derail- normally at this point I'd name-change- but I need to stop being such a wuss, so I won't.