Jane Clare Jones blog on Tommy Robinson

[CassieMaddox]

Just a really great read
https://janeclarejones.com/2024/07/28/tommy-robinson-far-right-populism-and-gender-criticism/

These are my favourite bits:

The greatest danger to women and girls has always been, and remains, the men inside their own houses. This is the nature, and the devastation, of endemic male sexual violence. It usually happens in the place, and with the people, who are supposed to be most safe. It would perhaps be comforting to imagine that we could easily identify the men who are dangerous – the Muslims, the brown ones, the ones in dresses – and then we could keep ourselves safe by keeping them out. But the argument materialist feminists made throughout the early years of the gender wars applies equally here: men are a statistical danger to women as a class and there is prima facie no way of working out which ones are dangerous and which ones are not.

The argument is no longer ‘guilt by association’ or ‘purity politics,’ it is now a) What even is the far right anyway?, b) The far right doesn’t mean anything because I was called far right for knowing men aren’t women, c) You people think anyone who disagrees with you is far right, and d) He is not far right anyway. That is, it has moved from claiming that association with the far right is either not happening or if it is happening has no impact on the substance of GC discourse, to people openly associating with the far right and recycling far right talking points while denying that the far right is the far right.

But what feminist women have tried, largely unsuccessfully, to get across, is that these kinds of men are not on ‘your side,’ if ‘your side’ is genuinely defending women’s rights. These men are on their side, and their side wants a largely white patriarchal nation, in which ‘their’ women know their place and are ‘protected’ only insofar as ‘protection’ means keeping them guarded from ‘other’ men.

The pictures at the end of the article are very illuminating too.

Brava JCJ 👏

Considering how many on this board have said they wouldn't direct anyone to certain organisations as they are "captured by gender ideology" is this not just applying the exact same logic?

And on the flip side, traumatised people are vulnerable so why would i knowingly expose someone vulnerable i know to any organisation that has shown themselves to be captured by either TRA or far right.

Maybe MN could start an ‘Oppose the Far Right (but only the Far Right specifically as Cassie Defines it’)’ section?

Groundless and pathetic smears @TinselAngel - I'm sorry you're having to put up with this shit.

Ok if you disagree with Cassie's classification of Far Right, who would you define as Far Right in this current climate?

I'm using the language of the board that I hope people will understand.

I feel the same way about the far right that i do about trans activists. I am not prepared to give them oxygen. When you rant at me about how you are"not shunning women" that I have seen for myself to be far right activists then you become a risk. By implication so does your org.

As I'm a random member of the public posting my opinion really shouldn't concern you. But if it does, that could indicate a need to rethink what you are saying.

I always thought being part of the far right would involve commandeered mansions and a smart uniform but maybe I get that next year?

Trans Widows Voices is about the experiences of trans widows, @CassieMaddox. That's its raison d'etre. You do yourself no favours at all, but then I don't think you really care.

I’m “ranting” about not shunning women? Thanks for a rare and actual LOL.

I always thought being part of the far right would involve commandeered mansions and a smart uniform but maybe I get that next year?

Use some of the dollars from the Trump campaign or the Heritage Foundation in the meantime, got to keep up appearances.

While I understand you think that makes you sound accepting what does that actually mean in practice for you and how exactly do you compartmentalise women's rights to single sex spaces from other women's rights when campaigning with people regardless of if they're from a far right political background. Like actually in practice how does that work? How do you campaign with someone if for example their "strategy" for fighting gender ideology is to promote political parties or politicians who also call for restrictions on contraception or abortion?

eresh if you aren't following the conversation I don't know why you would wade in.
It's not about the website. It's about the threads on here, what happens on twitter etc. In the past I said "you should read this on MN, this great poster knows all about it". In the same situation now I wouldn't because of the other views being shared.

And as I keep saying, I'm entitled to do that.

That's what you did. With a fair few personal insults thrown in and help from the gang. A bit of "scolding" if you will.

When people cross a certain line I'm done.

Now I'm not responding again.

Like actually in practice how does that work? How do you campaign with someone if for example their "strategy" for fighting gender ideology is to promote political parties or politicians who also call for restrictions on contraception or abortion?

Like it does for many people on a single issue campaign. I don't support restricting contraceptives and abortion. That's the end of it. I'm not going to work for the Trump campaign. I wouldn't vote for him. I don't think Caroline Farrow should have been persecuted by the police. It doesn't mean I will send out petitions to ban abortions.

Of course you’re entitled to do it but it will make people think you're
a) an idiot
b) not a feminist.

It's not about the website. It's about the threads on here, what happens on twitter etc. In the past I said "you should read this on MN, this great poster knows all about it". In the same situation now I wouldn't because of the other views being shared.

And as I keep saying, I'm entitled to do that

You can do that without spreading bullshit smears about her. Grow up.

"The gang" what exactly do you think your merry band of followers are?

When people agree with me I’m “getting help from the gang”.

But of course the "thanks for posting this Cassie Maddox " when it's the same old group of posters on each thread, are totally different

What's the smear? And is it to the same level as calling her "on a par with Mridhul Wadwa"? If not, I'll take on board your requests when you apply your standards equally.

Tinsel didn't make the Wadhwa comment, did she? You've said just as bad as that if not worse to other women, so dial down the hyperbole.

As (presumably) part of my gang, you’ve been a bit remiss with the thanks and the flowers TBH Eresh.

Well I am glad you have completely clarified your position.

I did think we were in the realm of Purity Spirals and Guilt by Association but I see you have switched gear to full-blown Witch Hunt Mode.

It is not enough to be not-far right oneself (by your definition, obviously). One also has to shun and denounce any GC women who you consider to be far-right, in order to avoid being shunned and denounced oneself . . . as far right.

Is that just by you? Or is this JCJ's position too?

Don't forget to go tappy-lapping back to JCJ to boast about how you have just defamed Trans Widows Voices and said they are a "risk". I am sure she will be delighted to hear that.

Oh! I was forgetting. Tinsel said that she had already been subjected to a diatribe by JCJ on Twitter.

Is that what has emboldened you to smear Tinsel and Trans Widows Voices on Mumsnet? On MUMSNET 😂

This is what i find hard to swallow also.

I can understand fighting side by side with others who politically agree with you, but allying with organisations that agree with you on one thing and yet want to remove other rights and body autonomy just feels like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Obviously everyone has different lived experiences which creates their opinions but i don't believe allying ever even on a single issue with people/organisations that are against women having body autonomy.

Obviously most campaigning for single sex spaces aren't allying with these people but if 'big' names that are seen as pioneers or influencers of the movement are giving airtime and exposure to them, how else can i take it but that they are willing to swap my and every other female's rights to access to healthcare for the 'single sex spaces'? We can and should have both.

No, when you all queue up to kick me, smear me, call me names, etc that's "the gang". The same people who make a big deal about being at all the events irl, knowing KJK, knowing LangCleg yadda yadda. The ones that go on about "scolding"

And I haven't seen any of "my gang" saying anything like the insults I get on here. Saying "I agree" is streets away from saying "well said" on a "I saw who started the thread then closed it again" post.

As (presumably) part of my gang, you’ve been a bit remiss with the thanks and the flowers TBH Eresh.

I'm sorry @TinselAngel thank you for your reasoning, no one ever puts it quite as well as you do.