Jane Clare Jones on purity spirals

[IamSarah]

Really insightful post on X the platform formally known as Twitter I feel it's worth sharing on here:

x.com/janeclarejones/status/1745760345954689255?s=46&t=NGJBRqkXgp1UazF5I8yjXA

Saying GC spaces have attracted white nationalists/Christian fundamentalists is not the same as saying all GC women are white nationalists/Christian fundamentalists. It's basically saying this, in words.

What exactly is meant by 'attracting white nationalists/christian fundamentalists'? Because that's just basic 'guilt by association' bollox while conveniently providing zero evidence that a) it's a thing & b) it's having any kind of impact or effect on women working to defend their rights.

People seem to take social media as evidence of all sorts of imagined doomsday scenarios & the brevity that applies to that seems to be the basis of believing that assertions can be made without backing them up with any proof.

I'm not interested in imagined scenarios. If something is so terrible it needs to be discussed endlessly & repeatedly because it's happening, has been happening for a long time & will continue to happen unless we talk about it, then that thing needs to be clearly defined, evidenced & demonstrated for all to see/understand & therefore partake in the endless discussions about this very bad thing.

I'd like to see where these groups of radicalised white nationalist/christian fundamentalist women involved in the debates & discussions on sex & gender in the UK are. Show me the extremists that have sprung out of the US right wing movement who are here, and having a tangible impact on what women are fighting for, for women, in the UK. It's not anything I've seen, it's not anything I'm aligned to, I'm not involved with, I've not gone to any meetings & found myself nodding along to such women or men. If it's such a massive threat, if it's something so dangerous & so threatening as claimed - where are these groups, these women, the ones who have had their heads turned or who have gained traction within so called GC circles to the point their influence & reach is so worrying?

I've been doing 'this' for 7/8 years. I've seen a lot of women also get involved, I've seen a lot of women from a wide range of backgrounds get involved & I've seen the shifting discourse in the sex vs gender debates. What I've not seen - and I've been to all sorts of meetings on a lot of different topics - is a) a specific cohort with overtly questionable ideas or politics take hold within those meetings b) these questionable cohorts take centre stage & groom others into their political views, at all or to the point of taking over anything c) the narrative behind the grassroots movement diverge off into campaigns for e.g. to revoke abortion rights in the UK, or to roll back on LGB rights already established.

Women are generally too fucking busy with other shit to suddenly become 'radicalised' into US Christian Fundamentalist/White supremacist groups & abandon what they were vexed about in the 1st place. I'm generally just knackered with life & specifically the fucking menopause to be arsed getting vexed on behalf of another country's political landscape & thinking the best use of my time is to co-opt shit I've never believed in, never been involved in, from a country 1000s of miles away.

Honestly, the fantasy rhetoric needs to just stop.

Agree, Grumpy.

Show us the evidence or shut up already.

When it comes to feminism I feel I am comfortable with my knowledge. I had the luck to study with some greats and read the books

But it was a long time back and now I’m interested in battling gender ideology and securing single sex spaces

Anyone who wants to join in with that goal then you are so welcome and I’m grateful that you spend the time, and sure I can learn more - I have many times on FWR

I find the moaning about FWR tiresome. It’s one of the best pro women spaces on the internet

You'll have to manage without me for a bit as I'm off to the Masked Singer thread.

And what @GrumpyMenopausalWombWielder said

Oh I see. I assumed JCJ was referring to places on the Internet where people discussed GC concerns when she said GC spaces? Do you think that's not what she meant? What do you think she meant by GC space?

Further to the ongoing discussion about Kemi Badenoch, I have now searched out her statement on X, formerly twitter.

The phrase 'woke archaeology' does not appear. Nor does the word 'woke'.

Kemi: This study is unreliable and the headline inaccurate and alarmist.

The 675 year old remains of 49 people who died of the Black Death were analysed and 9 were found to be “probably” black.

The Black Death killed over half of London. Making it a racism issue is nonsensical. (1/2)

Too many organisations (and news outlets) use misleading race statistics to alarm ethnic minorities and whip up tensions around history and racism.

This undermines social cohesion in our country. I've written to the Museum of London expressing my concerns. (2/2)

Kemi Badenoch's twitter account

The only origin I can find for the phrase remains Mr Philip Hollobone.

What I'd like to know is, why is it acceptable to call people leftist, assume left wingers are posting in bad faith, yet also a massive insult to say there are right wingers on here?
Surely either it's insulting to point out ppls politics and imply they are politically motivated, or it isn't. Otherwise its hypocrisy? Maybe I've misunderstood though

I think that's misleading. The vast majority of opinion here is gender critical not approving of 1950s style gender stereotypes, and I haven't seen anti gay sentiment here either. Where are these opinions that are "congruent" with fundamentalist viewpoints?

Grumpy everything you said. 👌

Post something critical about Miriam Cates and you'll see. Or a thread about illegal immigration.

It's happened on this thread when ppl asked me about Cates then minimised what I posted. I can't be bothered with the fight but immediately going "nothing to see here, bad faith lefty poster" isn't particularly reassuring about the motivations of Cates fans.

Paradoxically by making the space so "uncompromising" and "straight talking" (but only of you are straightly saying the right things) you are likely to be alienating a lot of other women. Then it becomes an echo chamber.

I justify my opinions more than most, but its getting tiresome to be constantly responding to demands for "evidence". I'm entitled to my views and they aren't baseless. Especially on a thread set up tp discuss a tweet that contains those same views.

I've certainly had more than enough experience of working with people like you too. There's a name for what you are doing.

I am possibly too cynical, but I think it's the same reason you get those who see themselves as leaders in any "identity group" being particularly nasty to those who are eligible members of the group, but don't toe the right lines.

It undermines their claims to be the leaders and representatives of the group, and so interrupts their access to power in the larger society on the basis of that representation.

To give another topical example of the same kind of thing, think of Claudine Gay and Roland Fryer.

If there are other prominent activists for women, who are not feminists, it becomes very clear that feminism represents simply a particular politically partisan position, rather than women as a whole. Then the demand that they be given political considerations on the basis o representing women is undermined.

I think most people round here are left leaning. Many of them feeling disenfranchised from the current system.

They aren’t at all comfortable with being called right wing because they happen to be GC and are considering the need to vote against their usual preferences.

I think leftist is only used as an insult to address the specific scolding and gatekeeping posters who accused others of being practically neonazi by association. It’s the gatekeeping element of the left that’s being insult, not people who are actually left leaning.

Apologies if I’m speaking for other people, or have misunderstood, or misremembered due to my menopause impacted wooliness . It’s the Impression I get.

Yes, it's "laughing".

Why do you think Kemi Badenoch was moved to write to a museum about scientific research?

I'll be clear. I find the way you talk about me and to me to unacceptably rude. You are singling me out for personalised insults. It is bullying.
I won't be bullied off the board because my viewpoints don't suit you.

Does this constant pointing the finger at FWR actually help?

Most of us want to talk about gender ideology and single sex spaces and not get sidetracked with the same stuff every time

So actually this is all pretty pointless now- no one’s mind is being changed, though I have learned a lot, so thanks all.

Every day’s a school day round here.

The answer to that is in the post you quoted, in what KB said in her tweet. If you have evidence that she was lying, feel free to produce it.

If you make baseless accusations then of course people want you to show your workings.

Agreed

I think Kemi expressed her objections perfectly well herself in parliament and on twitter. I have supplied both her statement in parliament, the original question from her interlocutor, and her statement on twitter, and I see no need to rephrase her words for her. She already communicates clearly and concisely without assistance.