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/

Islam is a younger religion than Christianity, it may well evolve along similar lines.

Have you ever asked them? I met a young ex muslim woman in my city a few years ago...she was working P/T as a hotel receptionsit and P/T in an asian women's refuge. She had left Islam, and as a result had been excluded and cut off by her family. Her great heroine was Ayaan Hirsi Ali. It was very difficult for her to be separated from her mother and sisters, but that was the cost of her no longer adhering to Islam.

Are you really trying to suggest that Islam is not more fundamentalist or more essentially 'right wing' than mainstream Christianity?

Rather we see Islam becoming far more fundamentalist in many places.

What signs do you see of an Islamic reformation?

I was at that meeting too and was staggered that a discussion about the impact of the far right on feminism became interpreted as some some of veiled attack on KJK. None of the speakers mentioned her, or alluded to her, but there was a 1000 post thread on MN saying something similar to this one - that any mention of the Far Right must be about KJK and couldn't possibly be about, um, the influence of the Far right on feminism.

I've said before that the stand out part of that meeting for me was Pragna Patel talking about organising against fundamentalism, the far right ,and anti-women agendas, saying that the far right is a danger to black and brown women.

Crikey, that sounds a very familiar argument. You sound just like one of the event organisers who joined the Elephant thread to tell everyone off for not listening well enough and not asking the right questions.

Dozens of us — women who didn't know each other, women who weren't KJK fans, women mainly of the left, mainly feminists — all experienced the same dissonance and the same 'wtf is this all about?' reaction and reached a similar conclusion.

You might have been so ideologically in tune with the speakers that you were deaf and blind to the sub texts and nuance. Thank goodness most of the audience weren't.

Here's the Elephant thread for reference:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4662757-womens-place-uk-filia-event-the-elephant-ignored-yet-again

Do you not think it shows support, to go to a rally?
Support for the purpose/subject of the rally ‐ yes.

A sample of one, really isn't proof of anything. I have spoken to many Muslim women who say they choose the separation, who am I to say they are telling untruths?

If we are going to talk about right wing politics and fundamentalism let's at least be equitable in where we turn our gaze.

It is true that some highly educated muslim women seem to be taking the full veil, though I tend to see that as a radical political statement, rather than as a personal choice. It is an inflammatory political statement too....certainly when it is practised in a country/culture in which women do now have a face and a voice, and the concept of 'shame' and 'honour' are not so firmly entrenched as they are in some other ethnic cultures.

This 100%.

Do you really believe we haven't 'turned our gaze ' on Islam? Feminists have been critiquing Islam for years. This reminds me of "why does no one mention 'Muslim' grooming gangs", again feminists have been talking about this for years. Certainly long before TR and his merry band came along. No one really listened (or apparently still don't listen), maybe because they usually go for a more nuanced view than "these men bad because they brown". For sure parts of the left haven't turned their gaze on these things, but usually because they're the parts that don't really want to hear from women either. On anything.

How bloody patronising. Do actually know anything about Islam. The Islamic enlightenment brought Greek philosophy etc to the west.
https://www.whyislam.org/fatima-al-fihri-founder-of-worlds-very-first-university/

The name Fatima Al-Fihri crowns the annals of history with the distinction of having established the world’s very first university. Yes, it was a Muslim woman who pioneered a model of higher learning coupled with the issuance of degrees of various levels.

The Arab slave trade was an atrocity.
Have you never heard of the Ottoman Empire.

Islamic fundamentalism has turned it's back decisively on modernity. If you are so enraged by Tommy Robinson and not what's going on in Islamic politics you're being hypocritical.

I'm going to go for a long lunch. With luck the religious derail will be over by the time I get back.

I'm an atheist. I critique all religions. They're all patriarchal constructs.

I remember Harriet Harman getting flack for holding a segregated hustings, about the pink bus time. I was sympathetic - better to have a segregated audience than the women be excluded.

My blood ran cold when I saw Angela Raynor addressing an all male group. Their dependence on the Muslim vote doesn't fill me with confidence.

You perceive Muslim women wearing a veil as “an inflammatory political statement”. What are they inflaming? What are you holding them responsible for?

Anyone who attends a Tommy Robinson led rally is doing rather more than "being adjacent", it is giving the message that you agree with him. That means being racist, anti immigrationand all that goes with that, if that is your position, then fine, but expect others to not agree.

Is that what all the TRAs are doing at LWS events? Agreeing with them purely because they're there? I think they'd disagree with you that attendance = agreement!

When did the sudden shift to ‘attending isn’t agreeing’ happen. From what I remember the position of the women involved was they agreed with the subject of the demo and/or it wasn’t far right. Surely that’s why some accounts have been saying ‘TR isn’t far right’

Surely you can see that attendance isn't always agreeing? I'm not making a comment about the TTP rally which was attended, by the way, just a general comment that simply going somewhere doesn't = agreement.

Edit: and don't some people go to things because they're interested in the topic, but don't know if they agree yet? Or want to see other sides to arguments?

I think attendance = agreement is way too simplistic in many cases.

No. They are counter protesting.

LWS isn't a protest. They aren't countering a protest!

Do you never go to events to learn more about what's being talked about? Or do you only ever go to stuff that you know you have full knowledge of / are in full agreement with?

No wonder people are so closed-minded if it's the latter!

And yet another refusal to engage with the issue of the far right's influence on some elements of 'GC' or whatever you want to call it.

But tbh, given Pragna Patel's decades of organising against fundamentalism, the way the justice system treats black and brown people, and for women's rights, autonomy and freedom of expression - yes, I am probably quite ideologically aligned with her.

I haven't the energy or heart to trawl back 30 pages looking to see if anyone has linked to the response published on Word Press to the initial GC letter, so if I'm just repeating what's already been said then scroll on by.

I've just come across the response in my backlog of WA, Twitter and FB messages. Here's the link for anyone interested. I haven't read it closely, but it raises some important issues and highlights the questionable nature of the original letter's anonymous accusations:

https://gcletterresponse.wordpress.com/2024/08/16/a-gc-letter-response/

I think the lesson I'm learning is to steer well-clear of all those who adhere to strong ideologies of any kind — political or religious or gender or whatever. I want to live the rest of my life conversing and debating with people confident enough to be able to change their minds, listen to people they don't agree with and work together. As for all the feminists who don't want anything to do with women who don't think exactly the way they think, here's Andrea Dworkin on the subject:

“Feminism is a political practice of fighting male supremacy on behalf of women as a class, including all the women you don't like, including all the women you don't want to be around, including all the women who use to be your best friends whom you don't want anything to do with any more. It doesn't matter who the individual women are.”

Do you think that TRAs are attending LWS events to “learn more about what’s being talked about” or because they oppose what LWS are talking about?

Is anyone on this thread disagreeing with Andrea Dworkin's statement? Or indeed anyone involved in these debates?

This idea that being opposed to the far right's influence on feminism means that you don't think that women who sit on towards the right wing shouldn't be included in feminism/shouldn't have rights doesn't seem to be one that anyone can identify the author of, but a convenient statement to trundle out when you haven't got an argument imvhe.

Who are these women who think that some women shouldn't be included in feminism or women's rights movements?

Have you heard of paragraphs? They separate topics within your writing.

The second para onwards doesn't relate to TRAs.

The first para says they aren't counter-protesting, as LWS isn't a protest. They may be opposing, but they aren't a 'counter-protest'. A counter-protest is like what occurred in Liverpool the other week, when idiots turned up to riot and others turned up in (peaceful) opposition.

The rest of the post is a general question around the topic of going to events not necessarily meaning you're in any / total agreement, but because you're simply interested.

Basic comprehension skills required.

And yet another attempt from you to dictate the agenda. This is your equivalent of 'quick, sign this letter or you'll look like a racist.' It's so PA.

The irony of this is that it's exactly how you and the other WPUK women responded on the Elephant thread after the Cardiff event went down so badly. You insisted that it was the fault of those of us in the audience who didn't use the structured debate session properly. You expected us to only pick up on the superficial narrative and like good little feminist-socialist robots parrot it back to you. Instead we received your sly subtext loud and clear.

Yeah, the thing is, many of us have been around the block quite a few times with WPUK and their friends. And we've seen different iterations of the open letter tactic.

It's a bit like Cold War Kremlinology, where Radio Prague is denouncing Albania and you deduce that the USSR has fallen out with China. The subtext is not difficult to pick up, and the only reason for Voldemorting the person they're obviously talking about is so we can get more disingenuous responses along the lines of "But all it's doing is criticising racism. You don't have a problem criticising racism, surely? Eh? Eh?"

So let's talk about the far right influence on GC feminism. How many known GC feminists have appeared on platforms with Tommy Robinson? Can we have names? Is the number greater than zero?

Is the number greater than the number of socialist feminists who have appeared on a platform with Weyman Bennett, the rape apologist SWP member who runs Stand Up To Racism?