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/

Really?

What I saw was people saying that none of us know why a few women chose to go that rally, that it was wrong and stupid to assume it meant they were fascists and unlikely they were racists, that this obsession with "contaminating" people and organizations is childish quasi-religious shit, and there was no need to "call out" anyone or put a clear line around them or any of that other immature silliness.

That's not praising someone, it's just grown up politics and life.

@ArabellaScott I think I'm a bit long in the tooth to be growing up. Do you agree with people who march with Tommy Robinson and those who call for the overturning of a general election result, a month after the vote?

Sometimes by shouting about distancing yourself from one group, all you actually achieve is linking yourself to that group in people’s minds. The association is made, even if erroneous.

I've suspected for some time this is the point for these women.

Well I've been told on here that Trans Widows Voices is irredeemably tarnished by far right associations because I wouldn't agree to shun two women who attended a legal protest, and that therefore left wing trans widows will be too frightened seek support.

Far right associations seem to be like cooties. You catch them unawares. All this is despite me being a life long Labour voter and former senior trade union activist.

Performative letter signing (or endless chiding on FWR) is the only way to truly prove one's purity now it would seem.

One GC UK woman whom I follow on X saddened and appalled me by reposting rubbish during the riots; Hayley Gaines, fighting for women's sports in the US, is obviously a Republican through and through. But two GC women on X were citing two-tier policing not as an anti-Muslim trope but because of the fact GC events have been largely policed with the police appearing not to take any action against masked and angry men with violent placards or behaving as they did at the Sarah Everard vigil. As other people have said upthread, there will be some overlap in most Western countries between Conservatives and GC because this is an issue of conserving.

Not pure enough hey

I don't agree with Robinson so I've proved my political purity. If wanting a general election result overturned makes you Far!!! Right!!!! well I haven't forgotten the riots - sorry mostly-peaceful protests - after Johnson's Tories were elected with lovely, morally pure, left-wing trainee doctors squawking to the TV cameras about how they wanted Johnson to die in agony.

Are you the board police?

You and I know that, but I don't think the sacred caste of gentry left feminists do.

They want to be clearly back in charge of feminism, speaking for women and deciding who gets to be in or out, and what counts as feminism.

The idea that other women with wrongheaded ideas, who are Muslims, Christians, conservative, or whatever, might want to speak for themselves, or consider themselves feminists, is not only attacking their source of power - it's giving them the vapours.

I have no time for it and increasingly I think they are the ones who are damaging to feminism and women's issues overall.

Hmmm. Interesting.

Beatrix Campbell has said things about Israel that I find objectionable and is one of those people who seems to hold Jewish people to a vastly different standard. However, I would never use her somewhat questionable views in an attempt to taint the gender critical movement by association. I do think it is important not to align yourself with extremists but there are constant attempts to portray the gender critical movement as a right-wing conspiracy that have very little basis in fact.

I'm quite happy to distance myself from the likes of Putin and Trump, who may know what a woman is but are also thoroughly dangerous and nasty people. But let's not forget the TRA movement has time and again been shown to be a magnet for murderers and rapists and violent political extremists and always doubles-down on defending those people.

This is worth repeating. Pragna Patel is one of the many women who DO (take action) and who also write - these aren’t mutually exclusive and both kinds of activism are needed.

There’s a fascinating Radical Feminist Perspectives webinar (sponsored by Women’s Declaration International) by Bronwyn Winter in which she argues in detail and with nuance about why she has found working with the Left on these matters achieves more than working with conservatives. You can find it on YouTube (sorry, on the run and can’t link).

I disagree. I have become increasingly concerned recently to see people with GC views supporting causes or people I despise (e.g. Tommy Robinson). Obviously I was not naive enough to assume that because we agreed on one issue we agreed on all issues, but it makes it easy for some to lump people together as "far-right", leading to GC supporters being wary of expressing their views for fear of being seen as part of a right-wing grouping.

The desire to see everything as a simple unnuanced dichotomy, and the tendency of some to see everyone as either Noble, Inclusive Goodies or Wicked, Bigoted Baddies is very childish and very irritating. The letter makes clear that such labelling is ridiculous, and it seems like a step in the right direction to me. It might not make anyone change their mind, but it makes it less likely for people to automatically assume that people with GC views necessarily agree on other issues with racists who also have GC views. It also answers the question "If you don’t agree with their views on immigration, why haven’t you said so?"

How's that working out for Bronwyn right now?

And Julie Bindel, doesn't she mainly write in Right Wing publications?

There have also been Muslim people who have made gender critical statements rooted in religious conservatism. That doesn't invalidate the central gender critical tenet of women being biological adult human females and that fact being politically salient, either.

The letter makes clear that such labelling is ridiculous, and it seems like a step in the right direction to me. It might not make anyone change their mind, but it makes it less likely for people to automatically assume that people with GC views necessarily agree on other issues with racists who also have GC views.

I disagree I think it makes people more likely to think "no smoke without fire" and that it is an admission that most of us are a bunch of far right bigots.

As usual it's "Do it to Julia".

Many of these signatories are also people who are 'grown up' enough to understand that they operate in the world at it is rather than as they might like it to be. And the fact of the matter is that people are welcome to do all the uncompromising, 'tell it like it is' holding the line they want. but much of the work will be going on lobbying the current government who will be reluctant to meet with anyone who looks like they are associated with the far right. It's a position statement

I have always been wary of Joanna Cherry - I might agree with her on some things but ultimately she is a Nationalist.

I have always been wary of Joanna Cherry - I might agree with her on some things but ultimately she is a Nationalist.

What are you implying here?

There have also been Muslim people who have made gender critical statements rooted in religious conservatism. That doesn't invalidate the central gender critical tenet of women being biological adult human females and that fact being politically salient, either.

Exactly. People from a host of strictly observed religions I don't agree with know what a woman is. It doesn't mean their women's rights and right to speak shouldn't be respected. By me anyway.

“yes, there is a difference between a materialist analysis of women as a sex class and social constructions of gender and saying that sex is binary.”

Well I would say that first part is just common or garden socialist and academic feminism. Including signatures from men also means it’s not a feminist statement. Socialist against racism is hardly a surprising statement, but I guess that wouldn’t get traction, but that’s all it is it while taking the opportunity to put in digs against people they don’t like.

What I don’t understand is why the need for another letter (and as a pp mentioned who is the target / recipient of this letter). Just call out the people directly who you think are racist. Even on this thread it’s all vague comments about who did what. If it’s true why not state who and what they did and why you disagree. Some people I can work out who they are, some I can’t.

Making it a letter that more people can sign does make it an in group verse the non signers - some of whom probably aren’t able to be public in being GC. If it was purely about anti racism they might be able to sign it.

It is my belief that one of the biggest mechanisms to subjugate women for hundreds of years has been organised religions, and yet there is a Reverend as a signatory, who clearly feels using this title gives them some legitimacy or authority. It certainly tells me something about this person and it’s not positive.

It is just another virtue signalling exercise by people who I really would have expected to have worked out by now this doesn’t work - it alienates women, it makes them feel belittled, it makes them decide not to want to be associated with those who sign the letter. And it achieves nothing - no progress is made and I doubt it even gets the signatories the pats on the back from the socialist bros.

It is just another virtue signalling exercise by people who I really would have expected to have worked out by now this doesn’t work - it alienates women, it makes them feel belittled, it makes them decide not to want to be associated with those who sign the letter. And it achieves nothing - no progress is made and I doubt it even gets the signatories the pats on the back from the socialist bros.

This.

Leftie virtual signalling shocker sneering at the women who actually get things done. Colour me surprised.

Next?

I shouldn't laugh but - twitter exchange

'Beyond the pale'! If this wasn't written by AI it was written by tra's. I'd hope leftie feminists were more erudite and nuanced in their writing.
Response from GCAFR

We have taken the helpful feedback we've received about this unintentionally hurtful phrase on board and have now amended the wording. Thank you.

Oh and

https://x.com/sarahstuartxx/status/1823978856832749966?t=Ot_w0Sef90ey7GmezvVHFQ&s=19

There are some signatories on this letter who applauded the violence from Hamas towards Jewish people on 7 October, so sorry, can't take it seriously if anyone can sign.

It's all a bit 6 degrees of separation.

Cardinal Richelieu is frequently quoted as saying,

'If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.'

People in glass houses and all that.

About 18 months ago there was a petition lead by Muslims to stop teaching PSHE in primary schools. It was getting 100,000 signatures quickly but, when it came down to it, people on MN wanted to distance themselves from it (because Muslims are against homosexuality and gay marriage?). That was not ostensibly racist, but it was definitely saying Muslim views are lesser or even despicable.