White supremacist patriarchy to blame for Palestinian deaths, declare Sisters Uncut

[IwantToRetire]

(The Times article headline actual says that this is what feminists are saying, so part of the point in posting is because this headline is sloppy reporting implying all feminists think like Sisters Uncut... and there are no commenting options.)

Explaining its alignment with the Palestinian cause, Sisters Uncut said: “As intersectional feminists we know our struggles are connected; nobody is free until we are all free. The same colonial logic of white supremacist patriarchy that oppresses feminists the world over is murdering Palestinians right now, through isra*l’s [sic] racist apartheid settler-colonialism.”

More recently, the group has campaigned for the rights of transgender people and minorities. On its website, the group describes itself as “women and gender-variant people who live under the threat of domestic violence”.

In July it supported Sarah Jane Baker, a transgender rights activist who told a Pride event to “punch a Terf” [trans-exclusionary radical feminist]. Baker had previously spent 30 years in prison for kidnap and attempted murder. Baker was later acquitted of a charge of inciting violence in connection with the Terf comment.

Other members of the “joint struggle bloc” include Soas Detainee Support, which supports detained immigrants, and the social justice group Land In Our Names. Also listed are the Dyke Project, which describes itself as “a collection of trans, cis, non-binary lesbians and queers of all persuasions”, Queers for Palestine and London Trans Pride.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sisters-uncut-pro-palestine-protests-feminism-oppression-london-32qcf0s5g

Full article can be read at https://archive.ph

So just to repeat I am not posting this to aggravate the really strong feelings the terrible situation between Israel and Gaza is provoking. But because it is an example of how over the years Sisters Uncut, through mounting sucessful media eye catching events, leads to false reporting that they are representative of feminism/ists. The reality is that their political practices is to piggy back on other events, an example being of their gate crashing the peaceful and respectful Sarah Everard event, intentionally to provoke the police now means the media, as in this article, say it was their event. I would have thought the Times would have higher reporting standards than this. Which makes me wonder what their motive is in reporting what seem to be so many supportive articles about women's sex based rights.

No idea why.

Because Sisters Uncut have for years exploited other women's demonstrations to get on the front page, but for instance letting off smoke bombs etc..

They know the media will go for a good photo op rather than substance.

Hence the phoney "I am being mishandled Patsy the Patsy" at the Sarah Everard event.

They are a bit like a contemporary Wages for Housework who would regularly turn and at marches and demonstrations (in the days way feminist put their feet were their mouth is!) and rush to the front with their banner to make it look like they had organised an event.

Because they know the media is happy to prioritise an eye catching picture over words.

There have been lots of threads on here about Sisters Uncut.

I think I was taken aback that the Times would be so sloppy in its reporting.

They're basically a group who co-opt feminism to validate the dubious causes they actually support.

Given that Hamas is an Iranian proxy it may be in favour of transgenderism, as Iran essentially offers gay men the choice of sexual reassignment surgery or death.

Yes, but why has all that eluded The Times? Even the lightest of searching raises questions marks about them.

Times contact email (ie not for sending a letter for publication)

Corrections or complaints: [email protected] (which also happens to be the editorial contact.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/static/contact-us/

Janice Turner of the Times has been in this right from the start. I remember sitting near her at the first ever We Need to Talk event back in 2017, when the original venue was bullied into cancelling, Maria MacLachlan was beaten up by transactivists and when we made it to the backup venue, the speeches were made to the background of protesters chanting BURN IT DOWN.

Indeed. I remember leaving and having to jump in a cab very quickly on my own, I completely peaked the driver!

There is something to be said for accepting a group's description of themselves. I suspect that do believe they are feminists, and all the other things too.

But they see these all as fundamentally movements to destabilize society and create the revolution.

Yes, but the utopian revolution they have in mind is not the one that they are helping to forge......

I don’t know anything about sisters uncut, but I do know that left wing groups and organisations are often riddled with anti-semites and terrorist sympathisers. You need to be really careful about giving left wing groups a platform because you could end up platforming anti-semitism if you are not careful.

Palestinians deserve land rights and a state but they are not native as such, they are merely descendants of prior settlers.

A large number are the descendants of Jewish converts to Christianity and then Islam. But that's a discussion for another thread...

I mean, we all have ancestors that arrived at some point or another. None of us sprang out of the soil we're standing on now.

It's like "woke". Redefine meanings so that anyone feminist or on the left or LBTQ or whatever can be attacked by right wing nut jobs like Braverman.

we are all descendents of prior settlers though if we go back far enough. This should never be a reason for ethnic clensing .

Agreed. This is a great example of the problem.

There is no one ethnicity amongst Palestinians. 'Palestinians' is a relatively recent construct. What there is and was are many and various arab clans, often hostille to each other; also including bedouins/nomads. One of the most notorious Gazan clans are the Dughmush - and they originate in Turkey.
The Philistines - the originator of the word 'Palestine' - were from Greece.

Antisemitic, anti-west, entitled, badly educated narcissists. And very vocal/ energetic at that. The worst kind.

It doesn’t matter RebelliousCow how we as westerners decide to class other ethnicities, either ethnic clensing which is removing one set of people from a place and replacing with another is either wrong or it isn’t. I think that is perhaps the issue with white westerners. We only recognise one type of oppression.

Agree. Anyone can "identify as a feminist", but it's quite clear that some people doing so aren't feminist in any conceivable sense.

Another thing, now that I have got over the Times so grossly libeled feminists (is there a free lawyer on FWR?!) the other thing that is so depressing about this sort of politics posturing, is that it doesn't go any way towards achieving the aims they say they are fighting for.

As with just stop oil, people just get irritated. Some one rang in to any answers and went on and on about how upsetting it had been for his daughter who had missed her train and arrived home in tears. (She also didn't like the shouting.) So not trying to say the daughter should have just shrugged it off, but it illustrates that these type of demos are counter productive.

Another aspect is that it is also about a sort of inter group competitiveness. You invaded Liverpool Street, so we are going to invaded Charing Cross. And they compare a media count. Did you get a front page? We did (one up to us)

And of course totally missing the point of the original demo in NY. Not that a train station was taken over by protestors. But that those protesting were members of the Jewish community in the US, saying "not in my name"

I think so many of these protestors are in fact white middle class people who thanks to a level of privilege are never going to be sugject to forms of oppression or worse violence. So they go out of their way to try and make out they are somehow as virteous.

And in fact Suella Braverman's over the top rhetoric is helping them achieve this.

Does this actually matter? A sense of some kind of group identity often comes out of some kind of relation to another group, or place, or event. In this case it seems to have emerged from the 20th century political events in the Middle East.

And ethnicity is not the only kind of group identification either.

I don't know that I want to leave it up to newspapers to decide which are legitimate and which aren't.

Readers can decide if they think their self-assessment is plausible.

It was a general point I was making, not about this article specifically.

The primary identity is that of arab and, increasingly, muslim. The Palestinian flag is just one version of the various Pan-arab flags that came about through the Baathist movement. The Palestinian 'identity' revolves around a sense of displacement - encouraged by the permanent refugee status accorded to even second generation American, and other, 'Palestinians'.

Of course 1.5 million Palestinians have Israeli citizenship, and 3.0 million have Jordanian citizenship.

What's a feminist besides someone who considers themselves a feminist?

It’s someone who prioritises women. As simple as that.

RebelliousCow unless you are Palestinian yourself it’s not up to you to define their identity.

I didn't notice RebelliousCow doing that?

I think they were just describing how they generally self-identified.

A man can define themselves as a "woman" if they want, but in some contexts, it may be important to point out that this self-definition is wrong and that they aren't really a woman.

So yes, in theory, you can "define" people in a way different to how they like.