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

It's worth considering whether feminism is 'sited' in academia, or whether it's a lot broader than that. I'd suggest the latter. Nobody needs a degree or to have read the canon to work for women's rights.

Oily Moyley!

😬

(as an aside I used to quite like that new prospective parliamentary candidate for the other Brighton seat’s band, back in the 90s)

Wow! Those women......just appalling.

This is what social justice activism looks like. The demeanour and lack of ability to engage in reasoned discussion is the hallmark. They so easily resport to name calling and abuse......every time. And even in the face of a young child.

when you watch Peter Boghassian you tube videos - this is always the case whenever he attempts discussion. Toddler tantrums - and mainly from young women.

I agree with you Arabella. Though the snooty, sneering ones who have read the canon would no doubt disagree.

Feminism seem to be the only identity where lived experience isnt enough.

It amazes me how many 20 year olds think they can tell me im doing feminism wrong because i haven't completed an undergraduate module or attended a joint feminist/labour meeting.

It did come up at least once that they were very concerned about KJK's policy that women at Standing For Women events take precedence in the speaking order over men, because this could potentially mean a right-wing woman would get to speak and a left-wing man wouldn't.

So much to take from NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision's post that I missed this on the first read: A feminist group where the word of the right kind of man has more value than the word of the wrong kind of woman.

Did any of the Brighton feminists say anything about Cavanagh? Or did they remain silent because 'labour'? I cannot remember.

Incredible isn't it Floisme so much for feminism including all the women you don't like, including all the women you don't want to be around, including all the women who used to be your best friends whom you don't want anything to do with anymore. It doesn't matter who the individual women are

I disagree. No longer identifying oneself as a 'feminist' is a personal devlopment away from adhering to dogmatic articles of faith. For me, dogmatic ideological and party politics has become a big turn off.

I hate how many non-women's rights people (not you or women who feel as you do, but, others like conservative male pundits) have made feminism a dirty word, so I won't go along with that for myself, ever. Just like I won't go along with being called 'cis'. To me, what you describe is capitulation, and I'm stubborn.

And who can define what those articles of faith are? Plenty of women, around the globe and some far in the past (and now dead) call themselves feminists but don't agree on articles of faith, and most of these women don't speak English but would translate their word for woman's rights into the English word, "feminism."

I always wonder when JCJ pleas with us lessers to watch what we say lest we ruin the delicate behind the scenes negotiations with the Labour Party, who are we supposed to believe is conducting these negotiations on our behalf? Her? (Doubt it) WPUK? (Labour hate them), Labour Women's Declaration? (Bless them but no) Lachlan and his GAMP mates? (Perish the thought).

Yes, and given it's been years - they're clearly getting nowhere, are they?

I presume we're supposed to believe that Labour supporting the Equality Act, which was their act in the first place, is progress

It's ironic that those women are worried, and claim people like KJK undermine feminism, when it's own actions that are causing women to deny they're feminist in the first place.

Anything Starmer says seems to be influenced by media, rather than any feminist principles.

I suspect he either isnt listening to any feminists, or the feminists he's speaking to do support the inclusion of men.

Either way, it would follow that 'the feminists with a seat at the table' would be angry at other women for being unimpressed with their performance.

Starmer is not thinking about it. He just doesn’t want any challenge

Hence the no one is talking about it line

The one time I’ve seen Starmer speak live (not about this) he just looked nervous and avoided committing himself to anything. I wasn’t impressed.

I'm not a fan of any labels to be honest. I am a human being, of the female variety. That will do me. I can think for myself - nothing to do with male pundits.

I did a Sociology degree with a Women's Studies module back in the day when 'Women's Studies' was still a thing. I know all about the academic 'patriarchy' stuff. I also used to be a Labour party member - but have also disavowed that sort of tribalism.

Why do we need a label to be interested in women's rights, integrity, views and perspectives. As this thread shows, when we start attaching labels and claiming narrow identities - the ground becomes very contested and people fight over precise definitions.

I do get it that in societies without formal equalities legislation and equal rights women call themselves feminists. I don't want to become like Stonewall, though - once the goal has been achieved, you feel compelled to turn your attention to creating new battles just to justify your existence.

There will always be more work to do - that the nature of life - I just don't feel the need for a label anymore.

Hypocrisy on so many layers.

WPUK have always favoured the "right" kind of men over the wrong kind of women.

At the same time as they de-platformed KJK for saying something they didn't like, they were happy to have males like Kristina Harrison and self-confessed Malaga airport fan Debbie Hayton speaking at their meetings (at least 3 times each).

Yes I remember when WPUK dropped Posie Parker as a speaker. I was pretty new to it all at the time and didn't particularly question the decision itself, but I do recall even then thinking it was a little odd to so it in such a public fashion. It felt performative, as if they were signalling to someone, which I guess is exactly what they were doing.

Actually just to be clear, the post I was quoting was talking about the Brighton Collective, not WPUK, although it sounds like there's some overlap between the two.

Same. It was as though they'd been told to do it, and were having to backtrack on their initial friendliness.

Her shock at being treated so shabbily was quite stark. Which it would be if she had initially been treated as an ally.

Can they not see the hypocrisy of speaking out against males in women's sport and also platforming Harrison when they know KH participates in a women’s football team?

I've never been to a KJK event but admire her consistency in platforming women

I agree, and I'm not giving it up on that basis. I don't see feminism as an identity or that I'm part of a group, more that it has helped me to better understand and articulate thoughts and feelings that I already had from personal experience. It describes my motivations for certain actions.

I think that in the main, anti-feminist backlash is straightforward misogyny. Women like KJK rejecting the label feminist as a result of head-girlism/leftist purity mentality are a minority of anti-feminists. I don't think men will necessarily appreciate this nuance. Also, (?third wave) feminism that turned traditional objectives on its head e.g. sex work is work, has a lot to answer for in confusing feminists' agenda both inside and outside the movement and rendering 'feminist' a meaningless word. At the end of the day the label doesn't really matter over actions, but I won't concede it to men who would love a woman who demonises feminists with them. That's not the same as defending any and all criticism of feminism.

Did he not join the male football team? In 2020 he was intending to.