Statement on the gender critical movement and the far right

[hellotowel]

https://x.com/GCAntiFarRight/status/1823790909462602205

"We, the undersigned, are deeply disturbed that populist messages particularly targeting Muslims have gained traction among significant numbers of social media accounts associated with the gender critical movement."
Read and sign our statement below.
https://gcantifarright.wordpress.com/2024/08/13/statement-on-gc-movement-and-the-far-right/

So that's a no then

Thanks for clarifying

But you presumably understand, that in relation to TR, who is named in the statement, you could just find out more about him

By going to listen to his words or by goggling and reading Wikipedia which as we all know, is completely corrupted.

I mean you cannot make the logic up!

I don't actually define far right because it's not a right or left issue for me. Tommy Robinson is small beer. If he's the only name you can come up with it's not a very significant threat, although I think the response to him might be.

I'm more concerned with the reckless path KS is taking. We are a deeply divided country largely because of the excesses of the left. The appalling reaction to Brexit [I voted Remain].

The totalitarianism in our universities - Queer theory, CRT, postmodernism in general, social justice campaigns, deriding freedom of speech and to top it all embracing Islamic extremism, while the police are used to silence women or any one else who argues against current orthodoxies.

If you really want the far right to mobilise just keep on doing what you're doing.

Yes, isn’t it more or less the ‘red wall’ being invited by KJK to know what is going on regarding what has happened to women and children's rights, safety, and dignity?

What do you do, not invite them? Labour wanted them, and the Conservatives wanted them, even though they also love Farage, are against immigrants, and a few may even have been involved in riots. But did anyone feel they had to bother to say, “ I want to make it clear that though I voted for Labour I don’t want to be associated with these people”?

The academics and theorists who are the top signatories of The Letter are clearly pushing for readmission to some sort of role within the Labour Party.

The seeds of this were sown here on MN during the election: all those dreary threads imploring us to set aside our misgivings and vote Labour. After the Party was in power, there would be a great reconciliation wherein persuasive thoughtful feminists could beg for an audience and get some concessions on women's rights. The academics and self-appointed feminist leaders would need to distinguish themselves from any populist, plebeian or gut-feelings GC women who had formed alliances far wider than the present Left that steers Labour. Ordinary women have been mobilising against the incursion of gender ideology into every corner of our public and private lives, listening to a broad range of voices from all over the political spectrum and - horrors - forming their own opinions outwith the Left.

This has outraged the self-appointed academic feminist leaders. They never fail to emphasise their Left credentials, history and praxis - despite the Left treating them like pariahs. They want to return to the Labour Left - but need to forcibly distance themselves from the GC movement (such as it is). Therefore, The Letter. Therefore, yet another c.5000 word essay - with footnotes, ffs - from JCJ.

But, really, how can they get back to The Left, when The Left don't want them?

You don't have to go anywhere to listen to his words. There are more sources than just Wikipedia. I very much doubt the women of FWR had to attend a load of TEA events to come to a conclusion about what they stand for.

Who cares?

I don't know what TEA events are but yes I'm sure if people want to know things without being tainted by the filter of mainstream corrupted media, a surefire way is to go along yourself and use your own eyes and ears.

I mean who the feck do you guys think you are, dictating where people go and who they listen to?

That makes sense, @HashtagLurky

A bit of sycophancy in the hopes of being let back in the club.

I’m not like the other opinionated women. I only have the right strident opinions.

I now really want to go. I had the pleasure of listening to my neighbour’s politics yesterday as he drank in his garden. There was a lot about the ‘fucking boats’.

Thinking about it, ‘stopping the fucking boats’ is another policy shared by people with very different political outlooks.

Some are racist, others worry about the dangers involved. But they all want to stop the boats. Maybe they are all racist, or maybe the racists are just liberal. I mean, you can’t share one opinion without being politically allied, amiright?!

I'd agree with some of what you say. I've argued before that a failure to engage with some of the Leave arguments, instead just branding people as all irredeemably stupid or racist goes a long way to explain the result. there was a lot of patronising going on - and not just from Eddie Izzard. Similarly not being willing to discuss immigration or the impact of religious extremism.

However I think that it doesn't follow from there that you (general you as apparently has to be made clear) then somehow say 'well what can you expect then'. Firstly it smacks of 'look what you made me do' and secondly that view seems to come from a place with a real contempt for the working class, ironically. There was a lot of "well how do you expect working class white men to behave" knocking about recently.

Typo. TRA

Still half truth.

These posters who are shouting - You forgot to mention what they were shouting about. You did however find it superior to mention what limitations you set for yourself on others. How kind.

And I'm using "forgot" kindly.

You can go where you want [well, you used to be able to in the UK].

That was the beauty of a democratic society.

Now, just looking at a protest can get you jailed.

But what people don't seem to get through their heads, is that EVERYONE is FAR RIGHT WING NOW. So it doesn't matter what the protest is, if the FAR LEFT government deem it so, it is FAR RIGHT. No matter what it is.

If people were signing letters distancing themselves from me for going to a protest I'd think 'fuck it' and go to more. May as well, it's a day out. If that's your sort of thing.

Anyway have we finally got a letter from the TQ+ groups separating themselves from rally goers who were/are paedos yet? I mean these paedos would have led their marches or marched in their midst.

Or is it still only women who have to, by public display of virtue, dissociate from other women who aren't actually the baddies but who may have been seen in the vicinity of a baddie at some point?

However I think that it doesn't follow from there that you (general you as apparently has to be made clear) then somehow say 'well what can you expect then'. Firstly it smacks of 'look what you made me do' and secondly that view seems to come from a place with a real contempt for the working class, ironically. There was a lot of "well how do you expect working class white men to behave" knocking about recently.

I think that contemptuous view of the working class is rampant throughout the left and always has been. The working class has always failed to live up to their expectations. Not that they are a monolith in the first place. What I'm talking about is a self appointed elite who are incapable of listening to the 'lived experience' of some groups while fetishising others. Changing language so people are always being corrected when they speak. KS talks about how his father felt belittled but then goes on to do the same to others.

I'm not talking about the riots which were a mixture of lots of things. I don't believe we have a coherent organised far right in this country at the moment but I don't rule it out. It's not Nazis you want to worry about it's Mussolini.

I think we also need to remember that the academic GC feminists are not very far removed, sociologically or ideologically, from the TRAs. They just want to be able to dissent on one thing.

I honestly don't say that to belittle them. They've shown real courage in sticking to a principled position at the cost of friendships, reputations, often loss of work. In a way they're like the Jewish lefties who want to be able to dissent on one thing. Even if I believe they're on a hiding to nothing, I've still got genuine sympathy with their position.

But I'm under no illusion that a huge part of their pain comes from being cast out of their social circle. They'd very much like to get back into that social circle, even if it doesn't want them. They certainly don't want to be associated with scruffy plebs who don't even have doctorates, who just happen to agree with them on this one thing.

All I'd say to them is that in my experience of left wing activism, being subjected to Scientology style shunning was not very pleasant. But it was a huge liberation to realise that I no longer cared what left wing activists thought about me.

Come over to the dark side. We have cookies.

You reap what you sow. 😀

https://x.com/BraddockBessie/status/1824802721372713390?t=FjMcrQhr95e-n4F9bpwiYA&s=19

So what about the 'ordinary people' who have signed that letter? The very vast majority are not familiar names in this debate.

Do you think they may have been motivated by concern that names/accounts associated with 'GC' views are amplifying and promoting far right ideology and persons, and a desire to distance themselves from this hate?

They've signed the half truth they've been sold. If we sat them down, how many would retract their signatures and be annoyed for being used for someone else's agenda?

Why is it only the 'White British' people that are not allowed to have any concerns about their own demographic? Why must they always worry about everyone else, but not themselves?

This is an interesting point.

The fact is that the logical endpoint of Identity politics is that "white British" people will see their demographic group as a discrete identity, with different it's own culture,and own interests apart from other groups interests, and they will advocate for it on that basis.

It's not plausible to anyone that this group, unlike others, doesn't have it's own history, culture, or special considerations.

It's a dangerous road.

Well, that's a pretty condesending, sweeping generalisation.

Do you not think these people have minds of their own?

Well judging by the well known names who are claiming the letter doesn't say what it obviously does or I was asked to sign it so I did, quite a high proportion.