Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Mad Green Party LGBTQIA motion coming to their AGM

139 replies

Lysistra65 · 03/12/2023 21:52

Calling on the Green Party of England and Wales to Recognise ‘Gender Critical’ as an Inherently Hateful Ideology & Movement - Allan McLeod

LGBTIQA+ Greens Note:

The recent disaffiliation of Green Party Women from the Green Party of England & Wales which from our members we understand failed to represent its membership, had a culture of bullying, and at times treated its ‘Gender Critical’ stance with primacy above other issues, despite fierce internal disagreement on this stance;
The online conduct of Green Party Women since disaffiliation suggests a scorched earth response and no desire to resolve either constitutional or philosophical disputes. This includes:

◦ criticism of members by name;

◦ sharing content from former or suspended members;

◦ Creation of a new mailing list independent of the Green Party of England and Wales.

· The decision of Scottish Greens to end its formal association with the Green Party of England and Wales due to a perception of GPEW’s failure to address transphobia.

LGBTIQA+ Greens Resolve:

To call on the Green Party of England and Wales to recognise the Gender Critical movement as a hate movement seeking the eradication of all gender diverse (including but not limited to trans, non-binary, agender and gender fluid) people through social exclusion, legislation & physical violence;
To call on the Green Party Executive Committee, Equality & Diversity Committee, and Standing Orders Committee to provisionally adopt the appended statement entitled Green Party of England and Wales Philosophical Stance on the ‘Gender Critical’ Movement as our philosophical stance on the Gender Critical movement, until it can be debated and voted on at party conference;
To call on the Green Party of England & Wales to invite the group ‘Feminist Greens’ to affiliate itself to GPEW as the liberation group/special interest group to represent female and non-binary members post disaffiliation of Green Party Women, as a successor entity.

Green Party of England and Wales Philosophical Stance on the ‘Gender Critical’ Movement

The Green Party of England and Wales notes the rising visibility of the ‘Gender Critical’ movement in the UK and overseas, and hereby states our moral & philosophical opposition to a socio-political movement which we find to be a transphobic, extremist, violent and eradicationist hate movement. This statement is based on the ‘Statement on the Genocidal Nature of the Gender Critical Movement’s Ideology and Practice’ published by the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention on the 29th of November 2022 and is adapted to British circumstances.

The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention defines ‘Genocidal Ideologies’ in their statement from November ‘22 as ‘ideologies that deny or seek to erase the existence of a specific group because of the supposed threat it poses to holders of the ideology’. Further, the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention described the Gender Critical movement as ‘a fascist political movement furthering a specifically genocidal ideology that seeks the complete eradication of trans identity from the world’.

Various Gender Critical groups and individuals express support and agitate for the Gender Critical movement in different ways and expressing different (and sometimes contradictory) views, such as (but not limited to):

· Expression that a trans or gender diverse identity (that is a gender identity which does not match an individuals sex observed at birth) is a mental illness;

· Portrayal of trans people as dangerous by portrayal of individual trans people who have committed crimes as representative of trans people either in general or through collective responsibility;

· By describing trans identity as a sexual fetish rather than a trans persons’ authentic sense of self;

· Condemning family members and health professionals who support a trans persons decision to seek and receive gender affirming care as encouraging harmful behaviour;

· Claiming that a large portion of trans people who medically transition later detransition and express substantive regret over an irreversible medical procedure;

· Portraying trans affirmative medical care as mutilation or as an abusive act against a trans person;

· As men who wish to access female only spaces through female impersonation, presumably to cause them harm or fear of harm;

· Allegations of predatory sexual behaviour, including paedophilia, against trans people and trans supportive individuals and groups;

· Denial that trans people exist claiming there is no such thing as a ‘trans person’, sometimes citing as evidence one or more of the previously mentioned arguments.

The claim that trans people are largely a group of men pretending to be women who are a danger to women, or who diminish women’s rights, appears so often in their discourse that it has become such an overarching theme in their arguments it has succeeded in gaining a degree of undeserved centrist & liberal political acceptance. This occurred despite the adherents sometimes holding otherwise far-right beliefs and associations, including (but not limited to):

· No-exemption anti-abortion political standpoints;

· Opposition to same sex marriage;

· Support from hyper-conservative media outlets;

· Support from Christo-fascist churches and religious groups;

· Support from Ethno-nationalist & national socialist political groups;

· Support from assorted petty criminals including thugs, racists & domestic abusers.

Multiple political parties in the UK have a number of Gender Critical members and politicians. This is most notable in the Conservative & Unionist Party who have at times openly begun using Gender Critical tropes and suggesting trans-discriminatory legislation and policy as a part of their ‘culture war’ against all minority groups in order to appease their hard right support base, and parties perceiving themselves as ‘progressive’ adopting a ‘middle ground’ approach indicating an attempt to placate Gender Critical people with at least acceptance in principle of the false dichotomy of ‘women versus trans’ or ‘feminists versus trans’.

Throughout the period of Conservative government, beginning with the Liberal-Conservative coalition and subsequent Conservative administrations, we have seen multiple attempts to attack marginalised, vulnerable or minority groups within our society such as migrants, refugees, the disabled, the unemployed and now trans people. It is our belief that the public backlash that many of these policies or actions inspired halted the worst of successive right-wing governments cruelty, and that the reason that the Conservative Government has turned its attention to marginalising trans people is that they believe that it can be portrayed as an attempt to find balance between women’s and trans rights.

The Green Party of England and Wales does not believe such conflict in women's and trans rights exists, and views the governments ‘culture war’ against trans people as a cynical attempt to violate the human rights of a minority group assumed to be so small in number that the negative impact would be felt by a minimal number of people, so reducing the condemnation from the public all-the-while establishing for themselves the authority to repeat this behaviour on other groups. This would be made possible as once the dehumanisation and withdrawal of rights & acceptance of one group has succeeded the government will have gained the tacit approval from the public that such behaviour is acceptable under some circumstances against other minorities.

Over the past few years, coinciding with the Gender Critical movement becoming increasingly vocal, there has been a documented increase in the number of hate crimes committed against both trans people and other queer folk. This seems to be a repeat of the ‘Boris Johnson effect’; for context after former Prime Minister Johnson described Muslim women as looking like letterboxes there was a noticeable increase in recorded hate crimes against Muslim people; and therefore we accuse the Gender Critical movement of inspiring hate crimes and discrimination against British trans citizens through deliberately hostile behaviour and language, reaching the state that there have been instances of British trans people living overseas as refugees because of how trans-hostile the UK is becoming/has become.

The association between the Gender Critical movement and the far-right has reached the stage of Gender Critical protests and demonstrations being supported by Nazi or neo-Nazi groups, sometimes brandishing Nazi imagery such as the swastika or individuals making the obscene ‘Roman Salute’. Far right groups and individuals have mobilised to ‘protect’ Gender Critical protests and demonstrations from counter-protest, enabling them to portray themselves as the defenders of women.

There have been instances of assaults against trans people being videoed and broadcast online where the trans person under attack was simultaneously portrayed as violent if they attempted to defend themselves, of neo-Nazis protesting drag events bearing inflated banners bearing the bloodied face of a trans person they had previously beaten broadcast as both a threat and a trophy. The families of trans individuals who have killed themselves or been murdered have become targets for abuse by Gender Critical activists, including on at least one occasion serious consideration being given to disruption of a deceased trans persons funeral.

The support of Nazis to the Gender Critical movement is both disgusting and unsurprising. The Lemkin institute statement from November ‘22 reminds us that the Mangus Hirshfeld Institute for Sexual Science was among the first libraries to be burned by the National Socialists in Germany which studied human sexuality & gender, and that prior to Western colonialism many societies held a place for 3rd gendered people outside the gender binary.

The harm that the conduct of the Gender Critical movement has caused is not limited to trans and other gender diverse people; there have been incidents of cis people with an androgynous or gender non-conforming appearance or aesthetic being subjected to discrimination or hate crimes due to a perception that they were trans. This suggests that the Gender Critical movement is a danger to the entirety of the queer community, as well as cisgendered women. This danger to cis-women becomes all-the-more apparent and chilling when we consider that the defenders of Gender Critical street protests claiming themselves the defenders of women has included men with a history of domestic violence. That the Gender Critical movement ignores the fact that it is being proactively exploited by men who are an active danger to women to sanitise their reputation is hypocritical in the extreme considering the some of the claims they make about trans women, and informative that the Gender Critical movements goals are more to do with trans exclusion and providing people who hold a hatred of trans people an outlet to express this than about protecting women.

It is our assertion that if every claim made by the Gender Critical movement about trans people were wholly true and accurate (however by-and-large their claims are disprovable with minimal to moderate scrutiny) then there would be no possible way for trans people exist without violating the rights of cisgendered women; and if a person violates the rights of others through no action other than mere existence the only way to not violate the rights of others would be to not exist.

Based on this we conclude the Gender Critical movement to be eradicationist, totalitarian and fascistic in nature; whose methods are sometimes adapted from the methods of the far-right & have at times crossed the line into domestic terrorism, and whose end goal (despite being impossible as trans people always have and always will exist) is the complete eradication of trans identity from society both as gender diverse individuals and as a distinctive cultural group of people. This is to be achieved through the cultivation of negative tropes & conspiracy theories (including repurposed racist or homophobic tropes), criminalisation, discrimination, violence (sometimes including homicide), harassment & targeted abuse (sometimes to the point of inflicting suicidal ideation) and outright denialism of the existence or validity of trans, non-binary & other gender diverse identities.

We assert that their can be no place in truly progressive political parties for adherents to the Gender Critical ideology, or within society at large, beyond the grudging tolerance granted to holders of objectionable beliefs & philosophies who have not (yet) expressed themselves through discrimination, hate speech, criminality or other proscribed behaviour. We consider it the social & moral obligation of progressive political movements, groups and parties to attempt to dissuade people from continuing to hold harmful or objectionable beliefs or philosophies such as those of the Gender Critical movement. To that end the Green Party of England and Wales will not allow itself to be used as a platform for Gender Critical individuals to broadcast or advocate their vile and fascistic beliefs or message.

OP posts:
LondonLass91 · 07/12/2023 16:43

Datun · 04/12/2023 08:29

Incels gonna incel

Aint it so...

PomegranateOfPersephone · 07/12/2023 16:50

SquirrelSoShiny · 07/12/2023 14:38

Yes I think the bit that galls me is that the Green Party has basically cut its own throat to support a handful of incels and fetishists, rather than addressing the existential threat of our catastrophic climate disaster. I honestly sometimes wonder is it right wing oil magnates who have funded the whole trans lobby under the counter, knowing damn well the left would eat itself alive.

As someone involved in breastfeeding support I also wonder sometimes if formula companies are funding gender identity pushers.

Gender identity ideology is actually quite convenient for a number of industries. This is perhaps why the majority of businesses seem to be celebrating/pushing it. It is quite the money spinner for the fertility industry, infant formula, pharmaceuticals, but yes look how captured the Green Party is and any other organisation which was originally set up for the environment. Gender identity infiltrates organisations and rots them from within. Then the original mission of the organisation is actually hindered because it has basically been abandoned or the organisation even begins to work against the original mission. No one can argue that gender identity is irrelevant to environmental issues or breastfeeding support, or autism awareness because… the risk is to be labelled a bigot and maybe lose your job, but how did that come about?

WitchWitchWitch1 · 07/12/2023 17:14

@PomegranateOfPersephone yes I've also often wondered whether formula companies are funding it. So many young women who have had their healthy breasts removed but in time conceive, whether they detransition or continue to think of themselves as 'trans men', will of course be reliant on it. I don't know whether anyone has researched it.

LondonLass91 · 07/12/2023 17:35

WitchWitchWitch1 · 07/12/2023 17:14

@PomegranateOfPersephone yes I've also often wondered whether formula companies are funding it. So many young women who have had their healthy breasts removed but in time conceive, whether they detransition or continue to think of themselves as 'trans men', will of course be reliant on it. I don't know whether anyone has researched it.

Blimey, that is really food for thought.

WarriorN · 07/12/2023 18:13

I've often wondered about the formula link too. I used to think it was a big conspiracy theory but nothing is outwith them now I don't think.

PomegranateOfPersephone · 07/12/2023 18:15

WitchWitchWitch1 · 07/12/2023 17:14

@PomegranateOfPersephone yes I've also often wondered whether formula companies are funding it. So many young women who have had their healthy breasts removed but in time conceive, whether they detransition or continue to think of themselves as 'trans men', will of course be reliant on it. I don't know whether anyone has researched it.

Exactly this but also the language shift and the loss of emphasis on supporting the mother-baby dyad.

Now instead of supporting mothers who want to breastfeed their babies breastfeeding organisations are talking about supporting everyone who wants to feed a baby human milk. This implies that anyone giving “human milk” by whatever means is equal to a mother breastfeeding her baby which diminishes the importance of the mother-baby relationship. Additionally, while mother’s milk in a bottle is superior to formula, there are important benefits from actually feeding directly from the breast which will be lost.

Also because the word mother is becoming taboo (along with the word woman) breastfeeding counsellors and health professionals are increasingly using phrases like “supporting parents and families with feeding babies”. This removes the mother from being the centre of the process which is happening to her body. In my opinion it is the mother who should be the decision maker on how she wants to feed her baby and other family members have the job of supporting her decision. How she feeds her baby should be recognised as the mother’s prerogative.

I am aware that many breastfeeding organisations are spending inordinate amounts of time and energy on “educating” their volunteers about not using the word mother anymore and policing their language in order to be more “inclusive”. This is a drain on resources and is driving volunteers away. So just like with environmental organisations, the intended goals are being neglected and eventually the organisations may collapse entirely.

It seems that every charity, political party, and other organisation whatever the original aims were, now gender identity ideology and queer theory must take priority. In the end I wonder if all charities will basically be just doing the same thing as each other, promoting and celebrating gender identity and “queerness”.

WarriorN · 07/12/2023 18:15

Though I must point out that this person believes that trans people should be able to self identify and have no surgery or medical interventions.

PomegranateOfPersephone · 07/12/2023 18:20

WarriorN · 07/12/2023 18:15

Though I must point out that this person believes that trans people should be able to self identify and have no surgery or medical interventions.

The thing is though it seems to be that men identifying as women are more likely to avoid surgery and in fact if they have it to do so after fathering children but women identifying as men or even non-binary seem to end up having a double mastectomy in early adulthood before becoming mothers. So whatever the Green Party end up adopting as policy I wonder if that trend will change.

WarriorN · 07/12/2023 18:21

Oh apologies- a different individual is putting this motion forward at the same time (I've seen the original document.)

Motion on Trans Rights

To propose that LGBTIQA+ Greens campaign for the rights of trans people. Specifically for self identification without medical intervention, and the rights of trans women to compete in women’s sport. Chipping away at recognition of trans rights is an attack n all LGBTQ people. it is also an attempt to police women’s bodies.

The danger of cis women being attacked by ‘fake’ trans women is real, but the danger of trans people being assaulted, murdered, denied care, and taking their own lives is an order of magnitude greater.

Confused
WarriorN · 07/12/2023 18:22

(Spelling and grammar is their own.)

WarriorN · 07/12/2023 18:23

Yes you're absolutely right @PomegranateOfPersephone

Meanacademic · 07/12/2023 18:42

Has anybody pointed out already that the author has mis-spelt Magnus Hirschfeld, the famous sexologist? (“Mangus Hirshfeld”) It’s obviously not the biggest problem with this motion but why can’t these activists get even the basics of their movement’s lore right?

duc748 · 07/12/2023 18:44

WarriorN · 07/12/2023 18:23

Yes you're absolutely right @PomegranateOfPersephone

Indeed. That very much all makes sense. Language as a weapon.

ArthurbellaScott · 07/12/2023 19:06

PomegranateOfPersephone · 07/12/2023 18:15

Exactly this but also the language shift and the loss of emphasis on supporting the mother-baby dyad.

Now instead of supporting mothers who want to breastfeed their babies breastfeeding organisations are talking about supporting everyone who wants to feed a baby human milk. This implies that anyone giving “human milk” by whatever means is equal to a mother breastfeeding her baby which diminishes the importance of the mother-baby relationship. Additionally, while mother’s milk in a bottle is superior to formula, there are important benefits from actually feeding directly from the breast which will be lost.

Also because the word mother is becoming taboo (along with the word woman) breastfeeding counsellors and health professionals are increasingly using phrases like “supporting parents and families with feeding babies”. This removes the mother from being the centre of the process which is happening to her body. In my opinion it is the mother who should be the decision maker on how she wants to feed her baby and other family members have the job of supporting her decision. How she feeds her baby should be recognised as the mother’s prerogative.

I am aware that many breastfeeding organisations are spending inordinate amounts of time and energy on “educating” their volunteers about not using the word mother anymore and policing their language in order to be more “inclusive”. This is a drain on resources and is driving volunteers away. So just like with environmental organisations, the intended goals are being neglected and eventually the organisations may collapse entirely.

It seems that every charity, political party, and other organisation whatever the original aims were, now gender identity ideology and queer theory must take priority. In the end I wonder if all charities will basically be just doing the same thing as each other, promoting and celebrating gender identity and “queerness”.

There was already a move away from 'breast feeding', in, as I understood it, a genuine attempt to help support all mothers, however they were feeding their babies. At least, it made sense when that was explained, as a response to a backlash against the 'breastfeeding gestapo' and what was described as a very authoritarian, anti-formula image that breastfeeding advocates had had.

So we were 'infant feeding supporters' instead of breastfeeding supporters.

ArthurbellaScott · 07/12/2023 19:07

And fwiw, that seemed fine to me, as I'd want to be able to help mothers primarily, whether they were breast or formula feeding.

Now, though, I have wondered if that was the beginning of neatly sliding away from 'breast' and 'mother'.

PomegranateOfPersephone · 07/12/2023 19:16

ArthurbellaScott · 07/12/2023 19:06

There was already a move away from 'breast feeding', in, as I understood it, a genuine attempt to help support all mothers, however they were feeding their babies. At least, it made sense when that was explained, as a response to a backlash against the 'breastfeeding gestapo' and what was described as a very authoritarian, anti-formula image that breastfeeding advocates had had.

So we were 'infant feeding supporters' instead of breastfeeding supporters.

Yes I understand the rationale for infant feeding support in healthcare settings but not in relation to charities like the Breastfeeding Network, La Leche League and the Association of Breastfeeding Mothers. Volunteers with breastfeeding charities are not generally trained in supporting bottle feeding or making up formula.

I still think that mothers should be centred in infant feeding and the importance of the mother-baby relationship recognised in healthcare settings rather than “parents”, “families” and I am hearing “patients” returning to maternity care now as well. Twenty years ago that was dropped in favour of women because pregnancy is a normal part of the life cycle and not an illness. However she is feeding her baby a mother should be centred in maternity care and her partner and other family members should be supporting her in her choices.

HermioneWeasley · 07/12/2023 19:40

He seems normal

given that GC beliefs are protected in law, how do they propose outlawing people with that protected characteristic? They shouldn’t even be talking it, it’s unlawful discrimination. Can you imagine them allowing a motion that says “no Muslims allowed in the Green Party”.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 07/12/2023 20:10

but yes look how captured the Green Party is and any other organisation which was originally set up for the environment.

Yes the same kind of TRA takeover appears to be happening in every Green Party I can think of worldwide.

WarriorN · 07/12/2023 20:38

HermioneWeasley · 07/12/2023 19:40

He seems normal

given that GC beliefs are protected in law, how do they propose outlawing people with that protected characteristic? They shouldn’t even be talking it, it’s unlawful discrimination. Can you imagine them allowing a motion that says “no Muslims allowed in the Green Party”.

Given it will soon be emphasised in law that single sex spaces can be maintained, I have no idea how they can get away with disallowing GPW and bringing in their own mixed sex green feminists group.

To be honest, there's no reason why they can't have mixed sex 'green feminists' and single sex Green Party women (though of course they will deny that.)

Boiledbeetle · 07/12/2023 20:53

Formula companies would have a vested interest in supporting trans issues as currently they can't advertise or have offers on baby formula until it's for over 6 months I think. They must be currently trying to think of arguments that means not being able to advertise and offer incentives to buy is transphobic and therefore they should now be allowed to do something they've been banned from doing for years in order to be inclusive! And soon they'll be back to handing out free samples in the bounty bags for trans chest feeders AND mothers perfectly able to breast feed.

We'll be back to Nestle kill babies banners!

HagoftheNorth · 08/12/2023 06:46

Persephone and of course the original victims of this hollowing out - Stonewall and LGB. TRA’s are turning these organisations into monsters which not only abandon their original aims, but turn on those who still support them

We either need a group to gather and retake the Green Party, or a new political party focussed on environmental issues

Winnading · 08/12/2023 06:58

Eric1926 · 07/12/2023 13:07

There are less than 300 who are pushing this trans extremist position in the Green Party. As a moderate who has published films showing the problems faced in the past by genuine trans people I appeal to people who conside the climate crisis of great importance to join the Green Party and change these stupid and unscientific policies of the extremists who seem to have captured my party.

No.
They (the party) were stupid enough to get into this whole mess, they are going to have to extricate themselves without me or my money or my voice. Frankly I will not pay to then have to see diatribes like this.

If they cant see whats happening within their own party, then I dont see why I should take any flak for joining and pointing it out.

Crankywiddershins · 08/12/2023 07:27

@WarriorN "The danger of cis women being attacked by ‘fake’ trans women is real, but the danger of trans people being assaulted, murdered, denied care, and taking their own lives is an order of magnitude greater."
Did someone in the Green Party just say that there are some"fake" transwomen who might want to attack actual women? The transphobic, terfy bastard! I hope they get kicked out of the party and hunted down on twitter and all their friends turn on them! What an utterly shameful attitude! If you have a name for them we could start the Ball rolling by asking them how they can tell the difference between real and fake tws. I mean, it's in their own best interests to be re-educated, right side of history and all that.

Crankywiddershins · 08/12/2023 07:35

Boiledbeetle · 07/12/2023 20:53

Formula companies would have a vested interest in supporting trans issues as currently they can't advertise or have offers on baby formula until it's for over 6 months I think. They must be currently trying to think of arguments that means not being able to advertise and offer incentives to buy is transphobic and therefore they should now be allowed to do something they've been banned from doing for years in order to be inclusive! And soon they'll be back to handing out free samples in the bounty bags for trans chest feeders AND mothers perfectly able to breast feed.

We'll be back to Nestle kill babies banners!

This is the first time I've come across the formula milk supporting an idea that would greatly increase their customer base. I was going to make a joke about how an honourable company such as nestle would never do a thing like that, but even my dodgy sense of humour doesn't go that far! As soon as I read it I thought "it's Nestle, of course they would do anything to make a profit!"
I mean if you're willing to sell dried baby milk to mothers without access to clean water...

NotTerfNorCis · 08/12/2023 07:45

All becomes clear - an MRA has found an angle of attack.

What he's pushing is a distilled form of what many TRAs believe, though. E.g. that GC feminists are violent and evil.

MRAs also believe feminists are evil. Both TRAs and MRAs tolerate a particular branch of feminism that they claim agrees with them. For TRAs it's intersectionalist genderist types. For some MRAs it was 'equality of opportunity but not outcome' feminists. Or perhaps 'women are better off in traditional roles' feminists.

Swipe left for the next trending thread