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/

Filia is a feminist campaign group not a newspaper, they’re not obliged to share “both sides” for balance. We don’t expect them to share fathers for justice response to The Hague mothers campaign, for example. Maybe they didn’t publish the response because they didn’t agree with it, or didn’t think it was written well.

So it's definitely about KJK. Not that there was any doubt.

This is seriously fucked up.

Thank you @InWithPeaceOutWithStress for stating the basics so simply.

Im not interested in the factional fights and conspiracy theories of Mumsnet feminists. I’m interested in effecting change in the real world.

And for me, that change has consistently come from the left and from feminists working with systematic theories about patriarchy and thus developing strategies of resistance.

i don’t think that far right conservatives have feminist interests at heart - they are currently using opposition to extremist gender ideology as a vehicle for instituting anti-woman ideas. I don’t think Matt Walsh, for example, is an ally.

And I don’t think racist anti-Muslim protestors are acting in the interests of women and girls either.

And that’s why I signed.

I can't imagine signing a "feminist letter" written by men. Then working to gather support for the words they've written for me. But I guess that revelation is too much for some people to face. I understand it, we know how deep internalised misogyny can be.

Particularly when that letter is singling out a particular woman who they know is out on the front line and who has been attacked before.

It's really something.

As I said many pages ago, I wish to put a line in the sand to make it clear that I am not on the same side as a political party which is totally captured by gender ideology, to the extent it literally defines women as non-men, and which promoted and sheltered the Challenors.

Why are the signatories happy to align themselves with that? Because purity politics only ever goes one way, left/academic/middle class=good and right/populist/ working class=bad. These women prioritise their academic socialism above their feminism, and it's their choice to do so, but I wish they'd leave off attacking other women who choose differently.

Completely agree with the Green Party/Challenors point. What that signals to me is that there is a willingness to put party or clique above child safeguarding. Safeguarding should always, always come first.

Several posters in this thread have explained why they signed the letter. None say anything prioritising academic socialism (or indeed that they are an academic).

What makes it so hard to listen to what these women say about their motivations.

Why is it so incomprehensible that some women are concerned about the impact of far right thinking on the 'GC' movement?

Agree safeguarding first. Also wonder at signing a feminist letter written by 2 blokes. Green Party chap pretty coy about being a co-writer of the letter in his pinned tweet.

Because I would like to understand why they're not concerned about the impact of green party thinking on the 'GC movement'.
This letter was written by two men from the green party, so I think it's fair to question whether they live in glass houses and should be throwing stones.

The green party is captured by gender ideology and has thrown away child safeguarding. But I can't see any hand wringing about the pernicious influence of greens on GC. If we're going to be worrying about well known GC women aligning themselves with problematic political movements, let's look left and right.

Imagine being so bent out of shape about a woman in the movement that you'll utilise Tommy Robinson as a stick to beat her.

That's it! Cardinal Richelieu!

I kept thinking it was Voltaire, but I knew that wasn't right.

I won't Google things that i simply can't remember; only for things that i don't know.
It's much more satisfying!

Who knows what the politics or beliefs of the vast majority of people who signed that letter are. Most are not well known names, could be anyone.

In terms of the well known names, if they start reverse ferreting on gender ideology, promoting puberty blockers, criticising the Cass Report and so on, I'll start worrying about the reach of the Greens.

In the meantime, I'll continue worrying about the reach of anti-Muslim, populist conspiracy theories and what this means for women, girls and minorities.

They've changed the wording?? They can't do that. The document's been signed!

change has consistently come from the left and from feminists working with systematic theories about patriarchy and thus developing strategies of resistance

I agree with you about a lot @YellowAsteroid (although not about the letter), but this paragraph made me snort a bit.

The academic researchers and professional opinionaters, on the one hand, and the on-street/YouTube polemicists, on the other, already agree about the ideology: they differ only on tactics.

(And yes, the polemicists may attract all sorts of fellow travellers, but they're also raising consciousness (sorry!) in voters, which politicians do care about.)

As alluded to by @TempestTost both factions are dwarfed by the majority GC contingent, made up of ordinary people who can't or won't speak up.

Meanwhile, the Establishment takes no notice, or rolls its eyes and mutters 'the transphobes are banging on about not being Nazis again. Well, they would say that wouldn't they?'.

JCJ is trying to do a good thing - to get the entrée with government decision makers - in the wrong way (and she's the wrong person, as is PP).

The TRAs did a bang up job of worming their way into the corridors of power. How can we match that? How do we get Sir Keir to invite Rosie Duffield into his office to talk about what he can do to help? Answers on a postcard....

Because there is no movement. Honestly how many more times?

The people that oppose mutilation and sterilisation of kids and vulnerable adults are going to cross political lines. These self appointed hall monitors do not get to tell anyone what to do with their stupid letters and it puts actual women who leave the house to meet up and talk in actual danger.

That's why people are so fucking angry.

The academic researchers and professional opinionaters, on the one hand, and the on-street/YouTube polemicists, on the other, already agree about the ideology: they differ only on tactics.

(And yes, the polemicists may attract all sorts of fellow travellers, but they're also raising consciousness (sorry!) in voters, which politicians do care about.)

As alluded to by @TempestTost both factions are dwarfed by the majority GC contingent, made up of ordinary people who can't or won't speak up.

Meanwhile, the Establishment takes no notice, or rolls its eyes and mutters 'the transphobes are banging on about not being Nazis again. Well, they would say that wouldn't they?'.

This.

So the well known people who signed the letter aren't going to be influenced by the bad ideas of the people they're aligned with, but the well known people the letter is about will be influenced by the bad ideas of the people they're aligned with?

It's really not a mystery why some observers might think that the letter and it's signatories are patronising elitists who might need to clean their own house.

It's written by men??
Seriously?
Fucks Sake
<Closes thread>

Now JCJ is slagging off Lorelei on Twitter.

Lorelei is one of the kindest, most woman centred feminists I've encountered in this "movement".

They’re shouting because they don’t by hunk people should have signed presumably. They’re very vocal on this. Less vocal on the racist tweets, but there you go. Everyone has different priorities. I don’t really understand the ‘find it superior’ comment.

Believe. Rather than ‘by hunk’. My autocorrect is wild

If you're on an iPhone, the autocorrect gets more and more mad with each iOS update!

I use the word 'movement' lightly - I should hAve probably put the apostrophes around the while phrase. 'People who are critical of gender ideology' if you prefer.

I'm a bit confused about the targets on the back stuff. Who is a target and who will be doing the targeting? Is is violent men or the police or Kier bloody Starmer or all of them or someone else?

Lorelei is not kind she is always to be found stirring things up whenever there is trouble. It’s an absolute joke to describe her as kind