Evidence re GC women and white supremacism please?

[Froodwithatowel]

I'll quote JCJ here as I do not want to derail the other thread:

From my, and many other people's observation, over the last couple of years, the UK GC space, especially on twitter, has progressively merged with both the US MAGA/Christian nationalist space, and those of UK white nationalists.

It is not easy to make sense of that X thread, but this statement is one I want information on. I don't do parroting, I believe in critical thinking, evidence and independence of thought, and I have learned to be deeply cautious of being accidentally vaccuumed into the 'so and so smells so do what I tell you' strategies so very tediously rife at the moment to get people in line and useful to others, we live in very grotty times.

So please would some kind person provide me with evidence that women wanting rights, equality and single sex spaces are entangled with religious extremism and white nationalism? Actual evidence. Not aspersions, but evidence.

My discomfort is more around the impact than the history/ origins.

Have you watched the very interesting documentary by David Harewood on BBC? I'd recommend it if not.

The thing about comparisons is that they aren't saying the thing is the same, but just similar in some ways. They don't even have to be comparable in terms of seriousness. So I don't really get the argument that a comparison like drag and blackface is "offensive" even if you don't really think the particular comparison works to show what the person wants.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/christian-right-feminists-uk-trans-rights/

this is a good place to start if you want evidence

🤣🤣

Indeed! 😂

There's this little treasure in there:

"Women's Place UK" 🤔

I assume that the authors of that nonsense intended to refer to "Woman's Place UK"?

JCJ: "From my, and many other people's observation, over the last couple of years, the UK GC space, especially on twitter, has progressively merged with both the US MAGA/Christian nationalist space, and those of UK white nationalists."

Who's going to tell JCJ that those authors tend to agree with her - and that they also unmask the culprits as . . . Woman's Place UK? 😱

Wow that’s some quality journalism right there. 😂

I am curious since comparing 'drag' to 'black face' is a legitimate comparison. Both are a) pretending to be what one is not and b) giving a racist/sexist interpretation of what they are.

Racism in GC circles in my experience comes from men who think they're allies and they double down when challenged. I'm not white (British/Chinese) and I have not been made to feel uncomfortable by any GC women because of my race.

Not overly keen on Graham Linehan tweeting last night in praise of Morrissey and saying that there is zero evidence that the latter is racist. I mean he called Chinese people a "subspecies". If that's not racist I don't know what is. I'm as much a human being as Graham Linehan or Morrissey are.

NC as no doubt his ladies in waiting will come to defend him and tell me why I should just suck it up. 🙄

You've nailed it

I mean he called Chinese people a "subspecies".

Completely agree with you. Unacceptable and racist.

I suppose the question is does that make him forever untouchable. Or is he a man who said a wholly unacceptable and racist thing that you would strongly challenge him on, but may say other things that you agree with.

Of course that's racist.

Morissey has said a lot of stupid things, and from a brief Google, some totally unacceptable things.

No idea about Morrissey. But knowing humans can’t change sex is such a fundamental fact that everyone knows and that includes saints and sinners. Lineham has suffered a lot for speaking up against gender ideology but we don’t need to pretend he is faultless. No one is. It doesn’t mean he is any less correct about not being able to change sex.

As for ‘suck it up’ what do you mean by that? You don’t need to accept his assessment of Morrissey but how ‘pure’ do you need people to be before they are allowed to speak on this topic? Will you be like an opposition politician who refuses to support a bill you agree with purely because it was proposed by the other party?

Completely agree with you. Unacceptable and racist.

I suppose the question is does that make him forever untouchable. Or is he a man who said a wholly unacceptable and racist thing that you would strongly challenge him on, but may say other things that you agree with.

I suppose that’s what it comes down to, where do you draw the line. You’re never going to 100% agree with other people about absolutely everything, but you’re also never going to 100% disagree with someone else about everything either.

For me, a lot of it comes down to if they are making money or otherwise profiting off something. So for example if I know someone to be racist I would not pay to watch their material, or watch it in a way that would give them money (E.g YouTube video with ads) but that doesn’t mean I’m necessarily opposed to the content itself. I watched Matt Walsh’s what is a woman documentary on some dodgy site and was happy to do that although I do not like him and would not want to give him or the daily wire money. On the other hand I was more than happy to donate to Rachel Meade.

I think it also depends on the balance of their views, if by helping them increase their platform so they’ll have more engagement with their GC views that’s one thing, but if they are also going to use that platform to spout racist and misogynistic views then I am not going to do anything to promote them.

Morrissey has been a prick since the 80s. This is not a revelation. Few people in the Manchester music scene have good words to say about him.

It's all about Marr.

What Morrissey said about Chinese people is deplorable and it’s disappointing that Glinner has not acknowledged that.

As for ‘suck it up’ what do you mean by that? You don’t need to accept his assessment of Morrissey but how ‘pure’ do you need people to be before they are allowed to speak on this topic? Will you be like an opposition politician who refuses to support a bill you agree with purely because it was proposed by the other party?

By suck it up I mean being told it's not important because they happen to be GC or sympathetic.

I'm left of centre but admire Tory MPs like Kemi and put aside differences on say economics to do so. I won't tolerate racism or denial of it from anyone though. I am increasingly concerned about the racial politics of some men who consider themselves a part of this fight.

The point about men is good - I think they will naturally come from being GC from a very different viewpoint simply because they have different things to be worried about.

I can’t think of many other areas of feminism where men are so prominent. Where are these same men when it comes to other fights for women? Are they speaking up against male violence against women, are they using their platform to bring attention to the disgustingly low rates of rape conviction? For Americans in particular, what were they saying about for roe vs wade? It speaks a lot about their motivations.

The things about Linehan and Morrissey is surely the same discussion being had about GC and the relationship to other views. Because someone holds a similar view on one topic it does not associate him/her with all the other topics the other might hold.

We need to deal in the argument alone, acknowledging where an argument intersects with other arguments and drawing boundaries. KJK also makes the point clearly, that if you don't speak to people who disagree with you, then there is zero opportunity to influence in a positive direction.

Slightly off at a tangent maybe, sorry! I have seen no evidence of association between the majority of UK GC women and right wing views particuarly. The two things are not associated except that some right wingers will hold GC views. The opposite is not necessarily true.

There is no evidence, but mud sticks. I was at a Jeremy Corbyn talk last year and a bloke selling ' The Socialist' outside, described KJK as being ' Nazi adjacent '. I think if you're describing a middle aged mum like this, you've really lost the plot!

@PinkFrogss

For Americans in particular, what were they saying about for roe vs wade? It speaks a lot about their motivations.

You mean American conservatives?

They were obviously happy about Roe vs Wade being overturned because they see abortion as immoral.

I assume you are correct that conservatives have different motivations to GC feminists to some degree on this issue, but are their motivations bad?

I'm guessing they are motivated by things like:

(1) It's obviously unfair in sport
(2) It's a crazy new ideology that the left is trying to impose on everyone
(3) It's unfair/harmful to destroy single sex spaces
(4) It's harmful or very questionable anyway, to be transitioning minors.

Those motivations would overlap a lot with GC feminists.

Now for conservatives, of course they would see the "left" as their enemy anyway, so they would have tribal reasons to be against this stuff; and they would also often view the LGB movement as a cultural enemy, and so this is just the next step in something they have been fighting for a long time.

And for those motivations, they are probably on a different side to the GC feminists.

Conservatives will have a different view of "gender roles", and the reality of gender, but I honestly doubt that makes much of a difference here. The objections to trans-activism, I suspect, for conservatives, are just on a different level to worrying about whether gender roles are "good", "natural", or "sexist".

Someone could suggest that conservative motivations are "genuinely transphobic", whereas GC motivations are focused on "women's rights", but it's not clear to me that mainstream conservatives are really using different rhetoric or arguments compared to GC feminists.

When it comes to violence against women, I don't think conservatives really focus on it. But they do focus on crime in general, and sex offenders will certainly get a mention. So they tend to want a tougher approach to crime just in general, even if they aren't spending their time on conviction rates for rape.

Really it comes down to 'is women having equality of rights a right wing extremist view?'

Er, no. Really not.

The deeper question underpinning much of the current stuff: 'are there times and situations in which it is necessary to sacrifice a woman's body/access to the wishes of a man' is however unfortunately a question with a history of difficulty at the extreme end of all political spectrums.

It's a misogyny/sexism question rather than a political question, and it needs to be dealt with as a cross party issue.

Who was it who said “The right wing see women as private property, the left see them as public property”?

Honestly, my heart sinks to hear that Morrissey may have admitted he thinks humans can't change sex.

(5) it’s a lie that men can become women

And I don’t care who I share that belief with.

I believe murder is wrong.

I think many alt right Christian Americans hold this view. Does it matter that we agree, or that their reasons for doing so are rooted in religious doctrine whilst mine are rooted in a secular moral code? Does the fact that alt-right believe the same mean that I am heinously misguided or even, simply, wrong in everything I believe because our beliefs intersect on this issue? If a Labour party member also holds this belief, does it mean they have suddenly crossed over to the dark side?

It’s all rather pathetic, frankly.

Next, it will be fascist to enjoy coffee because Rees-Mogg has been seen in Costa buying a latte macchiato.