Gender Critical Disputes - Radical Notion special edition free to read online

[IwantToRetire]

Cant say I have heard of Radical Notion. They say:

THE RADICAL NOTION was founded in 2020 to create a space for the resurgent wave of feminist thinking and activism. This not-for-profit magazine is run by an all-women collective of radical and socialist feminists. We are committed to the materialist analysis of sex-based oppression, and to challenging the material and symbolic structures of male dominance. This moment is a historic opportunity to deepen and widen the analysis of all aspects of women’s political condition, and its foundational role in all systems of extraction and domination.

We welcome words and images from women of all nationalities, classes, ethnicities and backgrounds to illuminate the meaning of feminist politics in their lives, and to create a global picture of this political moment. Our current battle, and the social, political and environmental unravellings we see all around us are, at their root, crises of patriarchy. We want to seize this moment to speak that truth.

theradicalnotion.org/gender-critical-disputes/

It seems quite expensive to subscribe but they have made this issue free to read online. A lot of it seems to be the ongoing antagonism (meaning the issues are real but seem to be motivated as much by personal fallouts) between radical feminist and socialist feminist gender critical women.

Some may remember this thread www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4662757-womens-place-uk-filia-event-the-elephant-ignored-yet-again and the revelation that WPUK seems to now be linked to the group Actual Gender Critical Left, who endlessly snipe about Karin Dansky and KJK.

Anyhow posting in case anyone wants to have a read.

Still not sure why some women think in the day of virtual opportunites to talk directly to other women, they need to go down the routed of "publishing" as though their ideas are somehow special and shouldn't be submitted to the rough and tumble on online forums like this one!

You think I say 'fuck' a lot. And you think that saying fuck is performative or something and not an indication of genuine feeling?

Crack on NotHavingIt.

"Have to say all I've see for the last few pages here is the same few people stroking and congratulatng each other."

And here is another one of those wonderful posts intended to shame others. If you felt that my post was aimed at you, why is that?

Saying fuck is only performative when you say it like this:

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK

So tedious.....give it a rest!

I remember your tactics very well, that's why. Snide. I wouldn't have even interjected in this interminable fest if you hadn't felt the need to drag up unpleasant spats you've previously been involved in. One of those other posters ( you are referencing above) has not been seen since your thanks in large part to your and your gang. Well done! What did that achieve.

Grow up!

Nooooooooooo

I think that covers it nicely Boiled.

And then take a bow!

Crikey, the 'fuck' gifs aren't what I expected at all.

I'm identifying as a penguin today instead of a beetle

!?!

Don't do it, beetle!

Too late

And yet, February was a time where many of these 'unpleasant spats' happened. Hence why I mentioned it.

If a poster who uses inflammatory language and then makes accusations at people responding to that inflammatory language and feels they can no longer contribute without using inflammatory language that receives pushback, I do consider it their own issue to deal with. I sought to achieve that poster recognising that they posted with inflammatory language.

I believe in other posts on other threads you have stated that tone does matter. Surely you would not be so hypocritical to not recognise that a poster clearly using inflammatory language should not receive honest feedback.

You are giving me feedback right now and I am saying crack on. Feel free. It is a public forum and as long has you don't resort to personal attack, you are free to comment how you wish. I will either agree with you, or I won't. And I am equally as free to point out when I disagree with you.

I don't have a 'gang'. I am one poster. There is no 'hive mind'. There are some posters who agree and some who disagree. What you consider a 'gang' seems to be other individual posters who sometimes agree and sometimes don't but agree that posters who use terms that convey negative generalisations to the board should have that negative generalisation addressed.

The absolutely last thing that Helleofabore is, is 'snide'.

Why the need to be so unpleasant?

That is one hell of a mixed bag!

Have to say all I've see for the last few pages here is the same few people stroking and congratulatng each other.

That's because someone decided to reanimate this thread six weeks after anyone posted on it by personally insulting those people.

Do you? That's interesting. Do you swear in an attempt to look hard online, then?

Personally, I don't, because there is no way it would ever work on mumsnetters I'm too mature for chicanery. Helleofabore does frequently swear online, but it's always read to me as an attempt to convey her disbelief and horror via a solely text-based medium where we cannot hear her voice or see her expression. Oddly enough, communicating intensities of emotion is one of the main uses of swearing, so this tracks.

On balance, I trust my judgement more than yours here, but I'm going to look out for examples of other people swearing online, to see if they fit the archetype you've suggested. It's always good to expand my mental toolbox.

On balance, I trust my judgement more than yours

You aren't allowed to trust your own judgement, it makes you a bigot according to some posters.

Now I swear a lot purely because I'm uncouth.

I'm most definitely lacking in good manners, refinement, or grace.

Meh! I'm fine with that!

And @Helleofabore is a lot of things, but snide?

Nope! Not having it. That she is not.

That post was an absolute gem. Someone should frame it and use it in lectures on how to effectively alienate a constituency of adults.

I think that many posters who post where they are attempting to shame the majority of posters on a topic seem to not understand that people are fucked off at being tone policed, at being patronised, at being told who to listen to and who not to listen to, at being told what they should and shouldn't think so they think they have a wonderful new insight to deliver.

And they are then left wondering why their wonderful insightful post was negatively perceived and turn to further denigration. It is human nature. This board holds so many divergent thoughts and concepts, of course people will respond negatively to what they perceive as negative comments.

Why on earth would any person think people will respond positively to a negative generalisation or even someone telling people off for listening to someone that that person doesn't agree with? Even regulars on this very thread have made comments that received push back from the majority. They are still here though, contributing civilly.

By the way, do posters remember that misogynist who told us we were using 'fuck' and swearing a lot and that he really couldn't take anything we said seriously?

That was when I started to use 'fuck', because frankly, it conveys many things in that one word.

oh gees. Thanks..... 'gang'.

(Note: that is sarcasm! There is no gang here. I was being deliberately provocative if that needed to be said.)

Advanced search is often a useful tool.

By the way, do posters remember that misogynist who told us we were using 'fuck' and swearing a lot and that he really couldn't take anything we said seriously?

Which one? Men used to appear on MN what seemed like a monthly basis, to tell us that it was inappropriate for mothers to swear. They always seemed honestly perplexed when the rest of the MNers lurking on the thread delurked just to tell them to fuck off to the far side of fuck.