Is it okay to work with groups whose principles you dont share as a feminist, but there is a common cause?

[IwantToRetire]

Education not indoctrination
The events was organised by a coalition of groups including the Christian Institute, which opposes abortion, same-sex marriage and euthanasia, Stand By Me Scotland, which opposed the wearing of facemasks in schools during the pandemic, Academics for Academic Freedom and For Women Scotland, which opposes Scottish government plans for people to be able to self-identify their legal gender.
www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/education-not-indoctrination-tickets-426737442177

Glasgow venue cancels booking for cancel culture conference
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/04e3fa4a-6696-11ed-9c3b-2d9184d0076f?shareToken=4ffe4f56d755905a476b686c75b65dd0&fbclid=IwAR1UHupPu9Xu4bD_gF0JoJb0A9u-bE2RDTcRqmbt9c8bpRUird9JTGbG8o8

The clue is in the sponsors. An event sponsored by certain groups will influence the topics covered, the speakers selected.

Would you not recognise this if it was a mermaids event designed to talk about teaching children about transitioning I wonder? Would it just be considered a healthy talk about education then?

Or would the source of the information suddenly then become extremely relevant?

Talking to people are trying to find any common ground or areas of consensus is helpful.

no person or group shares all your views. We all have to learn to live with differences and manage to get things done regardless.

Insisting on ideological purity and division is extremely harmful. It just makes everything worse. Especially when you’re determined to demonise anyone who holds different views.

Especially when you start utilising the languages of war to describe everything. Categorising everyone as ‘enemies’ and ‘allies’ is a huge problem in the 21st century. It’s all picking sides and having to be seen to be on the right one.

There are no opposing view points there.

the thing about cancel culture is that there never will be. Let’s all just shut down and shut out anyone we don’t want to hear from. We’ll pretend they don’t exist except where we want to use them as a bogeyman.

And we’ll stop anyone else from trying to talk to them too. We’ll insist they are ‘collaborators’ (in the language of war) and shun them too.

just brilliant.

Would you not recognise this if it was a mermaids event designed to talk about teaching children about transitioning I wonder? Would it just be considered a healthy talk about education then?

Or would the source of the information suddenly then become extremely relevant?

If Mermaids were hosting an event like this, which was open to all and where other groups with different views were also sponsoring and being platformed, then I would support that. I would be very happy to attend such an event and would look forward to asking many questions and trying to get many points across.

Again though, there is a huge spectrum of morality between "purity politics" and using your critical thinking and nuance to reflect on the context your beliefs are existing in.

It's very nice to acknowledge that holding x view doesn't make one a bad person, or that it's the only view they hold. But you still have the responsibility to not go too far down that path. In my personal view, no it is not okay to nurture a political relationship with groups that represent ideas that I cannot abide. I can respect everyone's right to personal belief especially over emotive issues like abortion.

But I cannot respect or abide anyone who feels that it is okay to try and legally remove other women's right to choose. Any sort of collusion with those groups (groups are not individuals subject to the same nuance as a human being and therefore do not need or deserve the same empathy as a human).

You also can't conflate political groups with individuals for the above stated reasons - being emotive about how it's not right to judge people and it's denying their free speech blah blah doesn't cut it when what you are actually talking about is rejecting an organised group pushing for certain policies.

And mermaids would most certainly not be letting in anyone who might threaten the ideological purity of their event by asking uncomfortable questions.

Because they’re not looking to talk to people and find ways forwards. They’re looking for allies to help them defeat their enemies.

You're more than welcome to support those people most vociferously but you may find somewhere along the line that rather than "cancel culture" there simply isn't the appetite for the views they hold in wider society.

In my personal view, no it is not okay to nurture a political relationship with groups that represent ideas that I cannot abide

good job you aren’t tasked with international relations then, isn’t it?

Especially as, when relations fail entirely, you end up in situations like the Ukraine war - and everyone suffers.

finding ways to work with people you don’t agree with is important.

Because they’re not looking to talk to people and find ways forwards. They’re looking for allies to help them defeat their enemies

Yes. You've hit the nail on the head. That is the answer to the OP and why it doesn't work to club together with people pushing narratives you disagree with in order to target the "enemy". It's not a good faith and honest approach is it? It falls down to scrutiny when you pick an "ally" with such unfavourable views. It brings your own judgement and point into question, and negates your credibility.

Do you even understand the difference between talking to or engaging with and supporting?

Except that the whole allies and enemies model is STUPID.

Especially when you start utilising the languages of war to describe everything. Categorising everyone as ‘enemies’ and ‘allies’ is a huge problem in the 21st century. It’s all picking sides and having to be seen to be on the right one

It's really not though, it's the opposite when you genuinely hold conviction in your beliefs.

Look at me, I don't fit in anywhere. I'm GC in so much as I believe in single sex spaces to protect women on a legislative level against men who could abuse the system to take advantage of women, but I don't believe being GC extends to denying trans peoples' ideas about themselves and day to day dignity, so I support pronouns, living as women, the concept of genuinely just "being" trans which is so rejected here, yet I'd never be considered a trans ally despite all that because of the fact I do believe in single sex spaces.

On the contrary to wanting to be right, it's a very hard and lonely place to be in, when everyone on one side is screaming at you HAND MAID and everyone on the other is screaming TERF.

FWS are part of this event, along with many other groups. If it's a front for some kind of brainwashing scam, why would FWS be involved? Makes no sense. You could just as easily claim that FWS are using the event to push their pro-choice views onto the other groups or attendees.

Really, it's just a diverse collection of people talking about a topic of shared interest.

That sounds all well an good. But it’s all about where you draw the line, isn’t it?

People who are anti-abortion, believe that abortions aren’t merely ‘hurting others’, but murdering innocents.

So by your own logic, you should be intolerant of your own pro-choice views.

Or is it ‘Oh no! I don’t consider a foetus to be an ‘other’’? Or ‘Foetus’s can’t be hurt’?

It is only where you choose to draw the line and you are intolerant of others drawing the line differently….

Basically, you think you are right and good and justified and others are wrong and bad and unjustified. You are intolerant of those who hold different views.

Using the ‘I am a harmless, person who is anti-hurt’, is just a lie you tell yourself, to excuse your own intolerance.

You're more than welcome to support those people most vociferously but you may find somewhere along the line that rather than "cancel culture" there simply isn't the appetite for the views they hold in wider society

Hahaha.
You have a very linear idea of history which does not concord with reality.

For someone has never heard the reasons why the right to abort is necessary, the pro-life argument could be very attractive and "kind". Next thing you know there is a pro-life voting majority. For many women believed that we had achieved a good position in society, then the TRAs found a way of driving us back to Victorian times.

Yes of course I do. My point was that those people you are talking to and engaging with, you may find that they haven't been cancelled at all, it may just be that their views are unsavoury to many people. That's not cancel culture, that's just a lack of interest.

Okay, we're making progress! So you don't object to people meeting to discuss education, dreamwhispers; the problem is the event sponsors, yes?

'This event will bring together academics, parents, teacher, students, and the wider community to discuss recent changes in Scottish education.'

The sponsors are from various different political backgrounds, by the look of it.

'SPONSORS: The Battle of Ideas, The Christian Institute, Academics for Academic Freedom, Stand By Me (Scotland) and For Women Scotland.'

On the contrary to wanting to be right, it's a very hard and lonely place to be in, when everyone on one side is screaming at you HAND MAID and everyone on the other is screaming TERF.

I hope you don't think anyone here is screaming at you.

Really, it's just a diverse collection of people talking about a topic of shared interest

I wonder why it was cancelled then

Not on this thread at all, but on other threads where the topic has actively been about transwomen then yes, I have definitely been called hand maid, naive, etc, in not very neutral terms by any means.

Presumably because that's exactly the kind of thing that the TRAs and woke millenials don't want to happen.

Oh look, I was right! "It was forced to move to a new venue after the original hosts claimed that the topics they planned to discuss were offensive to LGBTQ staff members." - from the Times article linked in the OP.

It was cancelled because staff refused to work it.

the original hosts claimed that the topics they planned to discuss were offensive to LGBTQ staff members.

I wonder if the staff were really offended.

I posted a meme on fb and got accused of being prejudiced against LGBT, when in fact the meme was written by a gay man and supported by a transsexual acquaintaince.

It hasn't been cancelled. Did you even look at the links in the OP?

As the Times article points out:

It was forced to move to a new venue after the original hosts claimed that the topics they planned to discuss were offensive to LGBTQ staff members.

And the new venue?

The conference will now take place at Glasgow’s evangelical Tron Church — which split from the Church of Scotland after it voted to accept gay clergy.