“Women Up North” Feminist Conference Protested, No-Platformed, for scheduling a Female-Only Survivor of Sex Abuse Workshop

May 30, 2012

After a tumultuous week of controversial protests from the transgender community over “RadFem2012”, a small female-only radical feminist gathering scheduled to be held in the UK this summer, transgender activists against female-only gatherings turned their attention to another feminist conference, this time the Manchester Feminist Network’s “Women Up North” event.

Genderists and their allies expressed “blood boiling” anger at a scheduled workshop for Female Survivors of Sexual Abuse, claiming that such a workshop discriminates against those born male.

The Manchester Feminist Network issued the following statement on their website today:

“We don’t see it as transphobic to have some seperate space for born women. Some of the women in our group are vocal advocates of trans-women’s rights. Some of us advocate for trans-women’s human rights but still want to be in born woman space sometimes and don’t see the 2 as mutually exclusive. Many of us have trans-women as family members, friends and work colleagues. As a feminist network of different women we struggle with these differences and yet try to still work together. The compropmise that we came to for Women Up North was that it would generally be open to trans-women but that the sexual abuse survivors and sexuality workshops could be designated born women only as the facilitators requested this.

The vast majority of sexual abuse is committed on women by men. Most women seek out women only services for support and recovery e.g. rape crisis centres, survivors groups or women counsellors. This doesnt mean that all male counsellors or support services are rapists, but that unfortunately under patriarchy women are understandably sometimes fearful of and uncomfortable around men (just think how differently it impacts on women when having a man or woman walking behind them when alone out at night). Sadly, some of us would not feel as safe/uninhibited in the presence of people who have lived some of their lives as men, however those individuals feel/see themselves and whether they too are survivors of sexual violence. Blame patriarchy for this, not feminist survivors of abuse. Please work with us seperately when requested, and together at all other times to challenge male violence and patriarchy. We have alot of common ground and alot of work to do! Some of us like this article by Jenny Roberts, a trans-woman who used to run the lesbian bookshop and arts festival Libertas http://www.annelawrence.com/buildingbridges.html

This is our response on the matter and we are unlikely to respond to individual comments, apologies.”

—————————————————————————–

In response to transgender anti-female protests the entire Women Up North conference has been “No Platformed” by the same UK F-Word Feminist Network that last week called for all female-only gatherings in the UK to be legally banned in response to complaints that female gatherings discriminate against the rights of those born reproductively male. From the F-Word Facebook Page, with all comments:

.
The F-Word · 3,508 like this

Yesterday at 8:49am ·

  • I just posted a link to the feminist event Women Up North, but had not noticed the comment on the site that said some workshops will exclude trans women – my apologies. I have removed the link from this page now, but just wanted to make it clear that neither I nor The F-Word endorse this – LW
    • Maria Rosamojo, Lindsey M Sheehan, Alba Miquel and 27 others like this.
      • Virginia Pele So thoughtful ! ;)

      • Virginia Pele Some of the workshops are open to trans*women. It is said in the commentary section.

      • Lena Wånggren Thanks.

      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration Isn’t it getting a little tiresome to do all this PC policing? I still don’t understand why trans women have to be included in all feminist events now and into the future forever and ever.Not all events are conducive to combining both groups, for a lot of reasons.I hate it when feminists get all “we must police and enforce the LAWS of political correctness”.

      • Moona Limerick ‎^ I actually agree with the above post.

      • Rosa Davies I have seen more and more people speak out against this. Feminism is about exploring power structures and issues around sexism. Sexism affects all genders, and in more than one way. I don’t know what reasons Women Up North have for excluding trans women from some of (most of?) the workshops, but it is confusing to me to exclude them from the feminist conversation

      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration

        Feminism, like any form of activism, is about building coalitions. If someone says trans women MUST be included in every feminist event, you are going to foster a lot of resentment.I see this as being no different than respecting other LGBTQ only spaces, feminist women of color spaces, etc.I also see this as a manufactured controversy that has precious little to do with most feminists in terms of their agendas, which range from jobs to health care to equity in pay, pensions, etc to domestic violence and on and on.It also reminds me of the way gay marriage has sucked all the air out of the atmosphere for LGBTQ issue organizing too.When the feminsits of Occupy feel like they can’t call a woman only GA (much less a feminist only GA), I think way too feminists who want to be on the bleeding edge of PCdom might be derailing a lot of feminists’ agendas with the trans policing thing. It will drive other feminists away, guaranteed (I mean, it ain’t like feminists haven’t been here before).
      • Loni Sin

        Trans people are some of the most excluded and marginalised people in our society. They may well have interesting and vital contributions to make about gender, feminism, discrimination etc as these issues affect them too in some ways that are universal to all women and some ways that may be different to cis gendered women. Patriarchy oppresses all women and all womens experience needs to be addressed as feminism should be an inclusive movement. Barring people because of what their genitals looked like at birth is essentialist nonsense that harms trans women and feminism.
      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration

        All of what you say is true, Loni. Does that mean trans women should never be allowed to have their own spaces when they feel the need to do it?I’m not saying lock trans women out. I have no problem with including trans women in feminist organizing, relevant feminist issues organizing in conferences, etc. No problem.But don’t get all militant with the “we’re going to force all feminists to include all trans women in every feminist event, organizing issue, space, etc” or demonize, ostracize, and divide feminists who disagree with that tactically as a strategy.We can’t lose sight of the fact that millions of girls and women are marginalized, battered, mutiliated, murdered, raped, etc–NOT just trans women.Some feminists think being open minded means letting all their brains fall out.
      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration Not all feminists of color want to meet/organize with/work with white women of color. Are we supposed to go postal on them for excluding white feminists? I don’t think so, but obviously other feminists mileage will vary.

      • Julie Webster

        the thing is if a transwoman is taking hormone treatment and undergoing gender reassignment surgery, her face and body will start to look more like a woman and less like a man. When that happens she will start to get treated as a woman and therefore suffer womens’ oppression. For me the definition of a woman is someone who receives womens’ oppression. If the structures of power, the police, the courts, your workplace, most people in the street think you look female you will be treated as a woman – and you will receive sexism, since women are devalued. Therefore it seems unreasonable to exclude transwomen, based on what they USED to look like. I would be interested to know how the organisers of this conference can tell if someone is trans, do they look for remnants of an adam’s apple, measure peoples’ hand sizes?
      • Julie Webster

        for me to be honest I only define myself as a woman because of how I am treated within capitalist society. For me it is a political decision. People think I look female (whether I think I look female or not) I get sexist comments in the street, some people assume I can’t read maps, call me animal names like bird, or “bitch” or “cow”, or apply the double standard of occasionally calling me “slag”, therefore I will call myself a woman as I am treated as part of an oppressed group, if I was not treated as part of the female oppressed group I would not call myself a woman.
      • Julie Webster

        It is true that a transwoman will have different life experiences from someone who has been identified as a female externally by society her whole life, is this the reason why transwomen are being excluded from some workshops? I personally do not think that is sufficient grounds to exclude someone as I believe in judging people by the oppression they are receiving now, not whether or not they received oppression in the past. I would like to hear from people on this thread who think differently to me, since we are not gonna get this issue resolved until we have a debate about it.
      • The F-Word

        Stop Wikileaks – The point of having X only space is for members of marginalised/oppressed groups to have a space where they can share experiences and organise away from the groups that oppress/have power/privilege over them. So we have women only space with no men, people of colour space with no white people etc. However, trans people as a group do not oppress cis people as a group; indeed, it’s the other way round. So it doesn’t make sense to exclude trans women from a women-only space – unless you’re transphobic and think they are men. It does make sense to have trans only space where cis people are excluded.And this isn’t about being politically correct – it’s about tackling discrimination. – LW
      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration

        You are right about everything except that last part, F-Word admin.You seem to overlook how often agendas get hijacked in meetings/events/spaces by people who are offended at being “excluded”.I’ve lived through it with lesbian feminists, feminists of color, feminist immigrants, differently abled feminists, etc, all of whom have/are marginalized & oppressed.I have a serious problem when we get down to deciding who gets in & who gets locked out based on pretty arbitrary and rapidly changing “definitions” of who/what is a woman (as if the definitions of who/what is a feminist weren’t bad enough), and what a person’s physical appearance is like.As I said, I have no problem including trans women. I have a problem with being told what to think, by smug & self-righteous people who think they & they alone know the one true righteous way to be and insist upon imposing it upon others, regardless of the reasons why those others disagree with them.This is like saying if you oppose Barack Obama you are a racist. Exactly the same kind of thing. And that is bullshit, IMO.
      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration Why on earth are you pushing so damn hard to make EVERY FEMINIST ON EARTH conform to & agree with your opinion???

      • Julie Webster Trans people are oppressed by many non-transpeople as addressed earlier. I think the issue is that transwomen and non transwomen have an overlapping oppression – sexism, so both ought to be admitted to this conference. I would however not expect to see transmen, any more than non-transmen at a women only conference.

      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration

        And who gets to make the call as to who is “woman enough” to attend an all women conference?Also, not all feminist conferences/events/spaces are women only.Forced conformity is always just that. It does nothing to end oppression. It merely breeds resentment.Back in the day when the arguments were over lesbian agendas being forced on feminists’ agendas because of the hierarchy of oppression thing, many feminists who either weren’t lesbians, were lesbians but not particularly interested in pushing lesbian agendas and issues, lesbians in the closet, etc. there was a splintering of the feminist movement. Ditto when feminists of color began claiming their own spaces.Maybe you’ve heard of the lesbian feminist separatists?I actually don’t have a problem with feminists organizing themselves by interest/identity groups, as I think it is a pretty natural way for humans to organize themselves. That way we all learn to build bridges, coalitions, unified blocks, etc. and become more savvy organizers. We gain a whole lotta skills. Yes, there are times when we do all need to come together in one place, absolutely. But not every time we gather.
      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration Separatist feminism isn’t exactly something new under the sun.

      • Julie Webster

        One question I do have though is: I absolutely support the right for all oppressed groups to organise separately. A woman only, black only, disabled only, LGBT only conference is not oppressive, it is a reaction to oppression as these groups are disadvantaged by the dominant power structures in our society. But I would like to see an event at some point which is against sexism that is open to everyone: women and men. There is a danger that if one keeps fragmenting and fragmenting, one is in a much weaker position as the group gets smaller and smaller. I will have to declare my interest here, I am a revolutionary socialist and I think that the great majority of people on this planet have an interest in overthrowing this society, whether they are more oppressed within it or less oppressed than other groups. I think working class white people have an interest in fighting racism, even though they are not as disadvantaged as working-class black people: as a divided working class blaming ethnic minorities is weaker and poorer because it is not blaming the bosses, bankers or the government for unemployment, lack of housing etc. I also believe that working class men have an interest in fighting sexism, even though they are not as disadvantaged as working class women: as a boss which starts paying its female workers less, will expect its male workers to take accept less too, and if a working class woman is forced to have a child because she cannot afford an abortion, this makes it harder for the whole family, including the men within it. Plus I think that the pressure for men to act tough is not psychologically good for them either. I am not reducing the issue to simply about economic exploitation. Oppression cuts across classes, for example rich women, and rich black and gay people are oppressed but historically you won’t find them aligning themselves with ordinary women, black or LGBT people. Look at Thatcher, City of London female executives, Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice, and some gay Tory MPs who vote for cuts which disproportionately impact on LGBT people. I am in favour of challenging oppression and taking it seriously and also looking at what can unite the maximum number of people, even if they are less oppressed than others.
      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration

        We seem pretty close politically, Julie. I self-identify as eco-socialist feminist, rather than revolutionary socialist feminist, but that is really splitting nose hairs! I am also in the U.S. not Britain.One point (hopefully w/out being pedantic) to make is in the U.S. we are making a strong push to eliminate certain terms like “ethnic minority” because people of color as a group in the U.S. are no longer a minority group in many places, and their numbers are growing all the time. I know that is not the case in Britain, but it is an important distinction, I think.I have never felt threatened by the splinter groups in the feminist movement. To tell the truth, we can all name a minority group or two within feminism that drives us beserk, just due to personalities, preferences, etc. For me personally, it is the pop culture feminists. There–I’ve outed myself & my prejudices! ;)Because we’ve gotten so much better at self-identifying with multiple interest groups in our 21st century societies, as you articulated so well, we need to all get better at tolerance, compassion, and just plain holding space for others we may even despise. In my experience, many feminists have a LOOOOONG way to go in that regard, but I can’t say any one group is worse at this than another.I mean, why go after just the radical feminists for their intolerance, while ignoring the black liberal feminists who are a lot further away from accepting trans women than the radical feminists are, in my personal experience? Do you see what I mean? That doesn’t move inclusivity for trans women forward any faster, IMO.I think lesbian separatists have a lot to teach trans women about how to become better integrated & included in the feminist movement at large, because they’ve been there, and while 30 yrs ago I wasn’t at all on board with their radical separatism, I came around pretty quick, because I learned to first be tolerant of divergences–like REALLY diverging points of view–and also, because the lesbian separatists became some of the most right on women in the feminist movement, and as a hetero feminist I was jealous of how liberated they were!All I’m saying is boundary policing, forced conformity, demonizing and belittling one’s “opponents”, that sort of thing, is just circling the drain, and I say that from some years of experience, in a practical sense. But then again, I’ve never been much for theoretical feminisms. You don’t want your work in the feminist community to knock the heart, soul and spirit out of you, nor do you want to do that to others. Just today I came across this piece by Nadine Moawad, you might want to give it a read. I found myself nodding in the affirmative a cupla times as I read it.

        http://www.nadinemoawad.com/2012/05/feminism-and-morals/

        www.nadinemoawad.com

        The amount of work it takes to keep a free-flowing, feminist collective sane is…See More
      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration But then, of course, I also just got around to reading this critique of F-Word’s radical stance on transgender issues today too:http://allecto.wordpress.com/

        allecto.wordpress.com

        from the Infernal Dark, where the Dread Sisters have their place…
      • The F-Word So are you going to critique our “radical” stance on sexism, homophobia, racism, classism and disablism as well? Our comments policy bans those too. – LW

      • Virginia Pele There are workshops which tackle domestic violence issues , rape , violence against women as women. Those workshps aren’t open to trans people , for eg. And they’re right. That’s again b/c of our different conception of gender. We won’t get into that argument again.

      • The F-Word That “critique” does not refer to our website! – CD

      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration So go ahead and censor my critiques, F-Word. Speaks volumes about your intolerance and refusal to be open to legitimate scrutiny of your positions, not mine.

      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration Thanks for that link, Virginia. I hadn’t read it.

      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration I think you speak to the crux of the matter, Virginia. One group of self-identified feminists shouldn’t be telling another group of self-identified feminists what to think, say & do, period.Don’t like radical feminists? Then don’t associate with/organize in solidarity with them.Pretty simple, really.

      • Virginia Pele Totally agree w/ u .

      • The F-Word Not sure where we’re censoring you, Stop Wikileaks. I just asked whether you think we should tolerate racism, sexism, classism and disablism as well as transphobia. Do you?When feminists engage in oppressive, discriminatory behaviour, I think other feminists have a responsibility to call them out. Particularly when it’s done in your name – not all radical feminists refuse to accept trans women. – LW

      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration

        Well, I suppose having the audacity to challenge the lockstep view of F-Word’s FB admins, which seems to be insisting ALL feminists–every damn one of us–should be shamed, humiliated & forced into working with & organizing with trans women even if feminists disagree that such discrimination should be addressed by feminists whether they agree with that position or not, will soon get me banned anyway, so have at it, F-Word admins.Then you’ll be all cozy and safely agreeable again & all right with your world.
      • Stop Wikileaks Censorship by Obama Administration

        One more point–there is certainly no consensus among transgendered people that organizing within feminism is their best hope of ending discrimination against them.And that is a very serious point y’all keep ignoring. This split being forced upon ALL feminists by collectives like F-Word, isn’t even supported by a majority of transgender activists.There is also no consensus within international feminism, certainly, that the resources of the feminist movement should be diverted away from girls, women, the global infanticide of female fetuses, etc. and in to the fight against discrimination against transgendered people.So good luck with your self-righteous campaign in your self-appointed role as international feminism’s PC police, crusading against “bigoted feminists” everywhere.

74 Responses to ““Women Up North” Feminist Conference Protested, No-Platformed, for scheduling a Female-Only Survivor of Sex Abuse Workshop”

  1. hearthrising Says:

    Thanks for the info GM. Can you provide some more background? What does “no platformed” mean in this context–a blacklist of certain feminists from speaking at all events? Trans events? F Word UK events? The call for a legal ban on born-women-only events, is this the posturing of certain individuals or does it look like the UK might actually do such a thing? And will Radfem 2012 still happen or can it be legally banned?

    • GallusMag Says:

      It’s all in flux at this point. The conference just issued their pro-female statement today. What’s clear is a significant trend of eliminating female gatherings, meetings, recovery groups, and political organizing in the UK, specifically targeting feminist groups. In terms of this specific instance of the Women Up North conference, they have been no-platformed by the F Word UK on the basis of a single workshop for female survivors of sexual abuse. The entire rest of the conference is open to transgender males. Whether other groups will no-platform the event as they did RadFem2012 is yet to be seen, these events are still developing. The conference is scheduled for June 9.

      A blacklist and no-platforming of any feminist who has written or presented sex-role critical material that intersects with genderism/transgenderism or the medicalization of sex stereotypes has been in effect for years now, which has resulted in the sort of violence-infused death-threaty silencing that is so prevalent now in transgender activism. This trend has been widely documented on this website and elsewhere.

      As for trans events: sex-segregated events are commonplace at trans events and are not protested by trans activists, even those feminist workshops that exclude “transwomen”. As seen in this [ https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/sex-segregation-and-hypocrisy-in-the-transgender-community/ ] post, one of the prime male critics of female spaces, Joe Ruby Ryan, is presenting at a trans event this week that features a “transwoman-exclusionary” feminism workshop. Ryan and other anti-female activists have declined to answer for this hypocrisy.

      Per the loss of all female human rights to gather and meet in the UK, according to the legal analyst advocating for such a ban on the F Word UK site
      [ http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2012/05/legalities_of_e ] , court cases will need to be brought to define the anti-female applications of the Equalities Act of 2010, and the enforcement parameters of such. So it’s all still emergent, and in flux.

      RadFem2012 will still happen. What has occurred is that trans activists have threatened to use all the influence they have with patriarchal powers that be (and such influence is substantial) to disrupt the future economic well-being of the venue that had been secured in good faith by RadFem2012 organizers. This is a common tactic of anti-female activists- we saw this play out last year with the campaign against LGBT T-Shirt vendors who provided T-Shirts for female events for example.

      That is my understanding of the events as they stand at this moment that you requested clarification/background on. This post and the events surrounding the Women Up North conference is yet another documented incidence of the escalating war against the rights of females to exercise our basic human rights to congregate in female-only spaces if we choose to do so. I’m a bit short of time- I hope this answered your questions, if not let me know. Thanks!

      • GallusMag Says:

        I threw up this post without much analysis because I was strapped for time and wanted women to be aware of emergent events.
        My personal analysis is that females are waking up to this trend, this war on the rights of females to decide when and where and how we congregate. They are waking up to it big time, with all it’s implications, and saying “wait just a minute”.

      • hearthrising Says:

        Thank you!

      • GallusMag Says:

        You’re welcome- thanks for asking! :)


      • Yes, I’ve been arguing with trans activists online for years. With the last discussion that took place on my blog this week, I do feel that the fight is going out of them, whereas women are just warming up.

        They’re desperate. They instinctively know that only way they can win is by killing us: which is the age-old tactic that patriarchy has always used. That’s why death threats abound, and actual violence (against GG, an old woman FFS) is the only way they can stop us from sharing our collective experience as females.

        At the end of the day, if Radfems were just a bunch of loonies, then why do they need to come onto OUR turf (our blogs etc) to argue with us? I’ve never once commented on a transwoman’s blog, and I’ve certainly never sent them hateful e-mails the way they do to us. I don’t need to. THEY COME TO ME.

        Because they know we’re right.

      • DaveSquirrel Says:

        At the end of the day, if Radfems were just a bunch of loonies, then why do they need to come onto OUR turf (our blogs etc) to argue with us?

        Exactly right CBL.
        Because if we were just ‘loony extremists’ without a legitimate platform, then everyone would just leave us alone (including libfems). But they don’t. Which says that there is something legitimate in our assertions that must be quashed at all costs.

        And this new, vicious fight against feminists meeting in female-only spaces is yet another area where we are right, and they are desperate to quell the concept.

        I am so sick of the tranz/libfem claim that tranz must attend our meetings so that we ‘hear their side’ – we have heard their side for years thankyouverymuch – is it really too much to ask that we have a mere two days out of the year without their ‘voices’?

  2. laix Says:

    I think womon born womon should decide who they want to be around not those born male who then change their gender. Their demand to do so shows a destinct lack of empathy for born womon and a huge sense of entitlement, that is usually the reserve of those born male, to enforce their will upon womon born womon gatherings.

  3. RoseVerbena Says:

    Goddess wept.

    They really hate us, don’t they?

    This emotional violence is just the tip of the iceberg, isn’t it?

    I remain horrified that women go along with this, that I used to be one of their doe-eyed, ignorant supporters. It makes me physically ill to think of it now, my former ignorance and utter lack of analysis.

    I guess I didn’t feel the need to form a deeper analysis before they came so obviously emotionally toxic and dangerous to women.

  4. DaveSquirrel Says:

    All this is really proving that there is no moderate position to be held, no compromise to be reached. Transjacktivists want access-all-areas in all female-only spaces.

    The Manchester group are generally inclusive except for a few workshops, but transjacktivists – or more crucially their libfem supporters – won’t allow this at all. In actual fact, I think it may help to polarise many of the Manchester feminists that were trans-friendly into re-evaluating that position (“huh, the radfems may have been right that tranz are extremists that won’t take no for an answer”)

    And leading the charge of the libfems against radfems is none other than Laura Woodhouse. I notice she is one of the admins on the F-Word FB page (“LW”), she is also the one that wrote the anti-Radfem2012 post in early May. Woodhouse is a heterosexual female who will never have to consider an M2T for a sexual partner (she is probably pro-Cotton Ceiling). Woodhouse was “identified” as a radfem many years ago, except that we found out she was pro-niceporn and pro-bdsm-lite and radfems have an abolitionist stance. Ever since she left RF, she has been running a personal vendetta against radfems, and the tranz thing gives her the perfect platform to try to undermine radical feminism. Having seen her writing over the years, it is obvious that she is not actually passionate about the tranz issue, it is merely a convenient stick to beat us with. I could actually respect her if she was genuine and passionate on the tranz issue, but she isn’t. Actually it seems she is not genuine in most feminist areas, having flip-flopped through all of them – feminism is probably just a vehicle for her to become fay-mous, like a lot of libfems seem to want to do. Twenty-somethin’ libfems, ya just gotta luv them.

  5. DaveSquirrel Says:

    http://www.wrc.org.uk/includes/documents/cm_docs/2011/w/womens_orgs_and_trans_people_briefing_july_2011.pdf

    With regards to the Equality Act (2010), although it is not straightforward (in particular with regard to feminist meetings) there are exceptions for female-only services (see page 10 of the PDF) and there are exceptions for ‘associations’ of ‘an equality group’ who have a ‘legitimate aim’ and ‘purpose of preventing or compensating for a disadvantage linked to that equality group’ (see page 8). Of course the Equality Act is more directed to employers, services, government departments rather than a political/feminist activist group, which is why it becomes a little fuzzy.

    The eventual decision in the Canadian courts regarding Nixon vs Vancouver Rape Relief is inline with the female-only exception within the UK Equality Act (2010).

    The FUN group were trying to avail themselves of this legal exclusion (in the area of sexual assault, sexual violence survivors), and being inclusive in all the other areas of their programme, yet tranz would have none of that – and frankly, tranz actions protesting this could be seen as more against the Act, although untested in court. Certainly all the tranz threats against radfems in particular are against the law, and tranzjacktivists are way out of control, particularly with their new frequent wish that radfems DIAF (“die in a fire”).

    • fmnst Says:

      Dave, is “die in a fire” possibly a reference to last year’s threats outside MichFest to perhaps cause a forest fire there/orch it?

      Does anyone know if anyone has reported those threats (re: torching MichFest), on YouTube, to the Forest Service, or other federal/state law enforcement?

      In advance of this year’s MichFest?

      If that YouTube hasn’t been reported to them, it should be.

      • DaveSquirrel Says:

        Truthfully, I do not know if that was the origin. As far as I know, it is a relatively recent threat to radfems (so the connection does not seem that direct).

        It’s not often that I don’t know things! ;)

      • fmnst Says:

        Well, then I think we need to consider that that is, or might be, what it refers to, and that those threats toward MichFest are being circulated. If that isn’t what the phrase is about, great, but it would be better to be safe than sorry.


      • “Die in a Fire” has actually been around a long time. Years. It’s a stock internet threat, not confined to our political battles. It is a pretty nasty slogan.

      • fmnst Says:

        Ok, thank you, Hearth!
        Very helpful to know.

    • trap Says:

      that’s funny, i was just at Dirt’s site (dirtywhiteboi67.blogspot.com) and someone (maybe a female transitioner?) told her to die in a fire.

    • GallusMag Says:

      DIAF is some old school internet trolly bullshit. Who gives a shit about DIAF when we have men with ties to Anders Behring Breivik aligning with transjactivists to prevent females from exercising our human rights to congregate? And Conway Hall backs them up?
      When we have treasurers of LGBT organizations making public threats that they will crack specific lesbians over the head with baseball bats and run them over with their cars, when we have the Gay and Lesbian Organization Against Defamation (GLAAD) sponsoring males who repeatedly call women “fish” and “fishy” and talk about “bitch-slapping” specific lesbian feminists?
      When we have representatives of federally funded LGBT Health clinics posting the home addresses of Lesbian mothers online in an attempt to bully, threaten and inculcate fear because the women committed the almighty sin of objecting to an article where gay females were instructed that their gay sexual orientation was discriminatory against men who want to fuck them?
      When we have Planned Parenthood sponsoring male-only workshops on the subject of males corrective-rapetastically “breaking through the cotton ceiling” of lesbian underwear and sexuality?
      When transactivists who steal pictures of peoples elementary school aged children and re-post them overlaid with disgusting sexualized pedophilic captions go on to sit on the board of “transgender children’s” organizations?
      When transgender activists and elected officials lobby for removing the basic human rights of females to congregate and organize publicly?
      Holy shit.
      No need to get bogged down in internet bullshit. What we have here is a worldwide campaign against the human rights of females and lesbians: the right to gather, congregate and speak. The basic freedom to exercise our sexual and affectational boundaries and orientations. The very right to participate in public discourse around the sex-based stereotypes that are used to enslave those born reproductively female.
      Women worldwide are being splashed in the face with acid by men. Sexually enslaved in childhood by men. Murdered gruesomely by men. Being poisoned enmasse as schoolgirls by men. Raped and mutilated by men. Locked in our homes and unable to walk –or drive- freely by men. Forced to don constrictive oppressive garb, or alternately, sexualized submissive garb by men under threat of violence and/or social and economic penalty.
      Even in the so-called “enlightened” areas of the world, where it is claimed that females have sex-based legal protections, where women are allegedly legally “free”, we have a worldwide trend in “Equality Acts” and “Gender Identity Protections” whose sole purpose is to erase the human rights of females and our ability to fight sex-based discrimination legally and politically. Laws which even prevent our basic participation in public and social discourse.
      Wake your sisters. There is a crisis at hand, and all the lies and platitudes and backlash and slutwalks in the world can’t erase the status of females worldwide. That status is shit.

      • fmnst Says:

        Good post, GM. Please note, however, that that was my entire point.

        My concern was that DIAF (which I had never seen online before) might have been a specific reference to threats being passed among trans plotting to burn down MichFest this year: in other words, a specific threat against women-only space–at MichFest. THAT is why it was of concern to me, and absolutely worthy of bringing up here, for all the reasons you stated.

        Fortunately, from what you and others have posted, DIAF does not sound like it wasn’t a veiled threat to MichFest.

        As I wrote before, I have been very concerned since seeing the YouTube in which transjacktivists were threatening to torch MichFest that we take that threat very seriously, as not only women’s right to women-only space, but women’s immediate safety at Michigan would be at risk this year.


      • Brilliant round-up GM. I would love it if you copied it over to my Conway Hall thread (I am going to drop the link to the FB page!)

      • GallusMag Says:

        Thank you Davina. KICK ASS!


  6. [...] of any powerful group that wishes to silence the oppressed. They feel deep in their bones that they must prevent women from gathering together in private because that is the only way they can continue to dominate [...]

  7. Om Kalthoum Says:

    Can someone translate “no platformed” into American? Does it mean “cancelled?”


  8. This is disgraceful. We have women here, victims of abuse, and yet the libfemqueer brigade demand that those victims must be denied a safe space, that going after rape victims is their notion of social justice ????

    Actual abused female people who want to be left alone to talk and share with each other vs whiny tantrumy control-freak men who demand the attention must be all about them.

    What the hell is wrong with people !!!!!

    • RoseVerbena Says:

      I have no idea what is wrong with them exactly, but as a survivor of multiple sexual assaults over the years, I have never felt more isolated or alone. I’m not sure how I would even go about vetting a support group in advance to make sure that I wouldn’t be subjected to this kind of crap (i.e. “…you MUST accept ‘trans’ or you are evil…”) inside a supposedly “safe” space.

      Already twice in my life I have encountered situations where I was shunned/shamed for not wanting MALES in the room while I was talking with other female survivors about our survivor histories. You know, the whole “Don’t be mean to Bob, he’s your ally, for shame cuz you hurt Bob’s feelings” routine just for wanting women-only space. I’ve even had to DEMAND a female nurse in the room during an exam, something that used to be provided to me without my even having to ask! The (younger) staff acted like I was bad or weird for refusing to trust a strange man putting his hands on me without a female chaperone in the room. (News flash, kiddos, male doctors and nurses sexually assault their female patients with depressing regularity. There’s a reason why having another female in the room used to be standard operating procedure.)

      I can’t imagine what it must be like for young survivors in these pro-”trans” cliques these days, when we’re all supposed to pretend to be BLIND when Charles Bronson walks in wearing a dress. How many of them are beating themselves up with additional guilt/shame for just NOT FEELING SAFE with some hulking dude in mascara sitting next to them when they are dying inside for some alone time with other women?

      • silverside Says:

        A very close family member was raped by a male nurse. This is a very legitimate concern.

      • fmnst Says:

        Exactly, Rose, I applaud you for standing up for your rights in that exam room. How sick that you could not be examined by a woman: please tell me this was not after being raped?

        NO woman should have to be examined by a man or deal with any male nurses or male cops or male judges or male attorneys or male security guards after being raped. NONE.

        Regarding young women being guilt-tripped for wanting women-only survivor space, that is exactly what was all over the comments in a blog on the subject at the F-Word UK site. It was absolutely horrifying and disgusting and heartbreaking to see two survivors APOLOGETICALLY but persistently saying they wanted to have woman-only survivor space, to a chorus of conservative feminist jerks telling them they were being transphobic and “educating” them that trans are women, completely ignoring how these women felt and the fact that these women had more brains to know the difference between female and male than the transdefenders.

        ALL of this is very, very frightening. Women’s rights are disappearing everywhere, and our worst enemies are conservative feminists. (I have started calling them that b/c they get too pissy when I tell them they’re not feminists. Then we can return to the topic at hand, and I can talk to them about the process from which I moved from being an ignorant pre-feminist who thought she valued equality, to being a feminist (what I refer to in conservative feminists’ company as my being a “progressive” feminist, lol.)

        Differentiating between myself and them as “progressive” vs. “conservative” feminists help them to hear my message, while at the same time, puts them on notice that they have one hell of a lot to learn and cannot get away with thinking they are “progressive” anymore.

  9. Laura Says:

    I have no idea why you think The F-Word has “no platformed” this event. All I did was apologise for promoting it on our Facebook page before I realised that it has a trans exclusionary policy for some workshops. I wanted to make it clear that The F-Word does not support trans exclusion from women only spaces, as people may have thought otherwise by our linking to the event.

    No one from The F-Word was or is involved in the event, nor have we stopped or tried to stop anyone from participating in it.

    • GallusMag Says:

      You banned the conference advert, removed the listing, issued a public statement that the conference was being given no platform by you due to the FWordUKs position AGAINST the existence of female sexual abuse survivor workshops.

      That is HORRENDOUS.
      Removal of support, Shunning, and issuing a public statement of such is the very definition of no-platforming. Take responsibility for your horrendous, AWFUL anti-female, anti-feminist, anti-survivor actions.

      • doublevez Says:

        Laura helping a newbie feminist along, making it all clear what qualifies as feminist:

        “Personally, I don’t think engaging in BDSM or submissive sex holds back women’s liberation. As I’ve discussed previously, there are many different reasons why people enjoy BDSM, and I think it’s simplistic and unhelpful to suggest that it always comes down to an assertion of male power over women and that BDSM therefore furthers gender inequality (although this may well be the case in some instances). Both non-BDSM and BDSM sex can be used to abuse, hurt and oppress women, and both can be enjoyed in a positive way that doesn’t hurt anyone: it all depends on the individuals involved.”

        It all depends on the individual’s involved. See? She’s got a PhD in bullshit speak.

        “I’m going to pick up the old BDSM chestnut here because, along with sex work/prostitution, this is the area where the tendency outlined above can come in to play, and I have no experience of the latter. I have been told time and again that the only reason I could possibly like being tied up (etc, let’s not enter the land of TMI) by a man, is because patriarchy has hot wired me to get off on being “dominated” and “degraded”. The only possible reason a man could want to do this to me is because he’s been hot-wired (or, worse, it’s in his nature) to want to “dominate” and “degrade” me. No matter how calmly and carefully I try to explain that, actually, I like doing it because I enjoy the physical sensations, because pain can be pleasurable, because the trust aspect of letting another person be “in charge” of your body can be intensely enjoyable, that, actually, he likes doing it because he wants to give me pleasure, because I asked him to, because it just feels good, … blah blah blah”

        This is who were dealing with: Laura Woodhouse.

        http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2009/02/women_agency_an

      • doublevez Says:

        *This* BDSM encouraging, is in the context of her shunning WUN women rape and abuse survivors wanting to me without men present. Laura is all about the men’s right to be present where rape survivors meet.

      • DaveSquirrel Says:

        Tell it like it is, GM.

        It is an horrendous anti-female survivor position to take. Even the Equality Act recognises that female-only is valid in such cases, but a supposedly ‘learned’ feminist does not.

        So what’s wrong with this picture. Here’s a clue – NOT A FEMINIST. Not even feminist-lite. Tranz-goggles.

        The F-Word basically no-platforms radfems from its blog too.

    • audaxille Says:

      So the policy of the F Word is to deny those who have been sexually abused as women and girls the much needed safety of a place where there are no people assigned male at birth present so that they can speak of their very particular experiences together because, for some bizarre reason, the F Word believe that people assigned male at birth who *don’t* share those particular experiences MUST have access to the meeting by dint of their discomfort within their own bodies? Because that’s what the F Word are doing by declining to publicise this event. Some female sexual abuse survivors ‘up north’ may well remain unaware of this event due to the F Word’s policy of refusing to promote any event that doesn’t include trans women – even for one, highly sensitive, deeply personal workshop. As a result, those female sexual abuse survivors may go without the support and safety offered by other female people.

      I’m assuming the F Word also consider that those who experience discomfort with their assignation as male at birth should have a presence in rape crisis centres and women’s refuges too? In fact, all the places where female born women seek comfort and strength from other female born women – all the places that have been hard fought for by female born women in recognition of the *female* experience of women and girls – because the experiences of those born and raised as male who think they are/believe they are/live as though they are women relate *directly*to the female experience? And the F Word represents UK feminism?

      I don’t think so.

      The F Word are obviously prepared to throw female born people under the bus – and there is *nothing* feminist about that.

  10. BadDyke Says:

    Banning Sheila Jeffreys, well, doesn’t look TOO bad. But trying to steamroller over the wishes of survivors of sexual violence who say they don’t want you there — it’s just MORE male violence. And the apologetic responses of even those few funfems who don’t agree with this makes me sick.

    To take a quote from above:
    “as I believe in judging people by the oppression they are receiving now, not whether or not they received oppression in the past.”

    So, your past DOESN’T COUNT, let’s erase history and herstory, because letting it count (as part of what made us who we are) upsets those with a different sort of past.

    Womens safety doesn’t count:
    “Sadly, some of us would not feel as safe/uninhibited in the presence of people who have lived some of their lives as men..”

    Our past doesn’t count, our safety doesn’t count, our sexual desires don’t count, our biology doesn’t count……………

    “They really hate us, don’t they?”

    Yes, because we are a constant reminder of what they can NEVER be. Of how different the male concept of woman (gender crap) and the male construct of woman (transwomen) are from the actual reality of living, lactating, breathing, bleeding, birthing women who been treated as less than human since before they were born.

    But it’s the LACK of thought from the fun fems who support them that makes me really mad! The knee-jerk response that whatever excludes transwomen is BAD, the inability to appreciate that they have now DEFINED what it is to be a woman, whatever any actual women had to say. That transwomens annoyance at being excluded over-rides anything else. Although at least, from the posts on here, SOME women see what crap they’ve been fed eventually.

    • RoseVerbena Says:

      I used to feel guilty for seeing then as men, too. Now it’s so glaring that I think I’d have to have a lobotomy to NOT see them as men — and I’m not even sure that a lobotomy would work, either.

      Everything about them SCREAMS man:
      –the entitlement,
      –the arrogance,
      –the transplaining of everything “womanly” to women,
      –the lack of compassion or empathy for women,
      –the tendency to focus on appearance and “beauty”, including the insistence that someone who is good at performing in public as a “beautiful woman” is actually MORE of a woman than, for example, my beloved grandmother or your beloved mother,
      –the wonky, caricatured idea of what it actually means to be a woman — based almost exclusively on misogynist sex-role stereotypes,
      –the denial of women’s reproductive biology and the thousands of experiences we have during our lives relative to that, e.g. female puberty and breast development (a mine-field for many girls!), decades of menstruation, agonizing over birth control choices that often carry some level or medical danger or which could be inadequate, pregnancy (tomes have been written!!!), childbirth (ditto!), lactation, women’s unique medical crises including dealing with infertility (an emotional mind-field), ovarian cysts, ectopic pregnancies, etc. all the related social issues like access to abortion, access to coverage for birth control, access to OB/GYN’s who are not sexist cretins, access to infant care, access to safe space for breastfeeding, etc. etc. etc.), then menopause, osteoporosis, etc.
      –the disgust and distain they project when they insist that talking about women’s reproductive biology and related social/political issues somehow “erases” them as Real Women ™ and is “essentialist” because being a woman is being “more than a uterus” (hey, boys being grossed out and trying to change the subject when girls talk about menstruation — that’s been going on my entire life! they are SO busted!)
      –the competitive, arrogant Oppression Olympics they start when issues of rape or sexual assault come up, because they have NO idea what it feels like to KNOW from the age of eight or ten that you are prey for rapists,
      –the absolute denial that women might have any valid reason to not want them present, even young, female incest survivors or rape survivors who are (quite naturally) terrified of their male bodies before they even open their arrogant mouths,
      –the self-identification as The Most Oppressed People On Earth, inadvertently sounding like every footballer on earth cheering for his team,
      –the tendency to go straight to violent, sexual hate-speech when they encounter a woman who openly disagrees with them on “trans” issues, even self-avowed women rape survivors pleading for women-only space in which to heal…

      One in a thousand might pass as somewhat compatible with females to me (e.g. someone who transitioned as a teen, is pretty much devoid of “normal” male arrogance due to a naturally empathetic personality, is intelligent enough to observe and take in women’s stories going on all around them and learn from these) but I have yet to encounter ONE late-trasitioning “trans woman” who isn’t as bad or worse to women than my crotchety, overtly sexist, arrogant old father — and believe me, that’s saying a LOT about how truly MALE they really are.

      • ethicalequinox Says:

        LOL yes! Their absurd “eww eww icky gross!” attitude towards menstruation is so undeniably male. That they consider high heels and shaved legs to be ~*truly*~ feminine and menstruation to be an abomination (purdah, anyone?) is quite telling…

  11. michelle Says:

    When an M2T can get pregnant from being sexually assaulted, THEN and ONLY THEN could I get on board with their demands to be included in WBW spaces related to survivors of sexual assault. Until then, they need to realize and ACCEPT that their presence is NOT welcomed in some spaces.

    Their continued self-aggrandizing in this age of social media really just pisses me off to no end…especially when so many of them decide in the later life that ‘oh, snap…I should have been a girl…therefore you MUST accept me or else you do nothing but oppress me.’ To that I am left uttering “GTFO” (along with some other choice phrases)…

  12. fmnst Says:

    Hey, y’all, pls. check out my posts on this thread, [bad link removed- GM] and chime in!

    It would be nice if the F-Word could get more comments. At least 1 F-Word editor is being a tiny bit open-minded re: not censoring differing viewpoints, so lets help her along :)

  13. Nicky Says:

    It’s very disgusting to see so many M2T’s using terroristic threats to gain access to women’s only space. It just boggles my mind as to why would they want to use women’s only space and services when they can simply create their own. They simply have no Clue and it just makes me shake my head in disgust, every time.


  14. how different the male concept of woman (gender crap) and the male construct of woman (transwomen) are from the actual reality

    This is really key. I mean if people stopped to think about it – how is a group of adult female human beings saying “we are adult female human beings” a threat to anyone ?

    Only if we live on a world where our entire social structure relies on everyone buying into and going along with the idea that women can only exist on men’s terms and furthermore will somehow magic into existence if a man has declared it so.


  15. I also wonder if Laura, or any of the other apologists for male lies and violence, would like to explain why it is so, so totally important to deny survivors the right to meet and define their own boundaries ? Why that is in way acceptable at all ?

  16. fmnst Says:

    Here’s the correct link, I believe. The one I posted above most not be quite accurate, as it isn’t working. Please post here:

    http://www.facebook.com/TheFWordUK/posts/10150835932357227

    [This is the same link/thread posted at the end of my article- GM]

  17. BadDyke Says:

    Yep (although I hate FB and haven’t learnt how to navigate the damn thing!), some comments were amazingly feeble — transwomen get treated like women therefore they ARE women. That is laydees, our history doesn’t matter one little bit, they’re women just like us as soon as they put on a dress. Which ignores the fact that those who don’t pass — are they women according to this? But you’re probably not supposed to point that out……………

    They’re women because they get MISTAKEN for women, what a load of nonsense.

    I’ve been mistaken for a man on many occassions, does that make me one? I think not, since I’m thankfully FREE of that wonderful male socialisation.

    Other gems — transwomen get UPSET at dissent, therefore stop it.

    Although NO ONE I could find on there actually talked about the effect it might have on a female survivor of sexual violence to find a failing-to-pass transwomen in the workshop. Nice job F-word, the extra-special feelings of the sensitive trans folk are what matter, and never mind the female survivors.

    • Adrian Says:

      The question of passing is ALWAYS the elephant in the room, including on most of the trans* sites, and it’s at the root of a lot of arguments on “how to be properly trans*” over on those sites also – but always, always, it’s rude to talk about it, because it goes against the whole “if I identify as X, I’m X, and that’s it” mantra.

      Two other things about passing:
      (1) It’s rude to mention the obvious (surely?) fact that the experiences of an early-transitioned person who passes effortlessly (in casual clothed social situations, regardless of retaining a penis or not) is going to be different from that of a middle-aged transitioner who has fathered a few kids already, lived a full adult life as a man, and has no chance of actually passing even in the most casual encounter. Their immediate concerns are going to be different. But somehow “the trans* experience” is supposed to override any such differences, never mind differences in race, class, nation – even while race, class and nation differences are supposed to deny women’s ability to unite as a class.

      (2) Anxiety about passing makes a lot of people really anxious to continually collect proof that yes, yes, they are in fact passing, now, and still. Catcalls (of the sort aimed at actual women) on the street? Annoying, yes, but also proof of passing, so something to boast about. More relevant to this article, there’s a need to always have someone else admit “you’re a woman, a real woman, yes, you belong.” What better proof could such a person get than being allowed into the most inner sanctum, the one last bastion of “real women’s space,” the sexual assault survivor forums? It’s like the holy grail. Who cares if they have anything to contribute in there, or are even interested in the topic – all that matters is that sweet wonderful moment of being allowed to enter the room.

      If you try to voluntarily join a “lesser” group, then receiving abuse or microaggressions normally aimed at that “lesser” group from an unknowing outsider becomes proof of passing. As such, there’s just no way it’s received the same frame of mind as when actual born (involuntary) members of that “lesser” group get abuse. The meaning of it becomes totally different.

      • DaveSquirrel Says:

        What better proof could such a person get than being allowed into the most inner sanctum, the one last bastion of “real women’s space,” the sexual assault survivor forums? It’s like the holy grail. Who cares if they have anything to contribute in there, or are even interested in the topic – all that matters is that sweet wonderful moment of being allowed to enter the room.

        I agree with your comment, although it is only some who see that as ‘proof of passing’ (the truly delusional), it is more for most (particularly the truckers in a dress) validation – a validation of their inner-woman (bullshit) identitah. Plus, I don’t really trust a lot of those late transitioners (het males) who get off on hearing of women’s stories of rape – it is basically LIVE PORN!!! for them.

        The only ones that seem to pass are M2Ts that do it before age 22-25ish (a few in late 20s), which seems to be some ‘point of no return’, the rest would not pass in a blackened out room with the lights off. Which is why tranzjacktivists have heavily worked the disability angle, milking that for all its worth, because ‘it’s not nice to draw attention to disabilities’. Even though most of us consider them living their entire lives as dudes, and then suddenly declaring sacred-inner-womanhood not exactly some congenital disability. It’s a scam to indulge their fetish/fantasy.

        Add that to the fact that the clear majority of Gender Recognition Certificates are being issued to late transitioning males.
        http://ensuringfairness.wordpress.com/statistics/


  18. I really like the comment on fb thread that there’s certainly no global agreement that including trans in women-only spaces should be on the feminist agenda. Women across the globe are fighting back against practices such as FGM. Is making ending FGM a priority also “transphobic”?

    • RoseVerbena Says:

      Yes, because some “trans women” are now claiming that their circumcision was really FGM and we must call it such or we are “transphobic”.

      I’m anti-circumcision but…FACE-PALM…the arrogance BURNS.

      • Adrian Says:

        Wow. That’s a new one to me – though certainly there have been plenty of men (born, identified, non-trans* regular ol’ men) on the internet lately trying to claim that infant male circumcision as practiced in many Western countries is the SAME THING as FGM, just as serious, which is already just… srsly??

        I should never underestimate the internet…

      • fmnst Says:

        Rose, can you provide a link to that, please, about expecting us to call their circumcision FGM and it being transphobic if we don’t?


      • I’m anti-circumcision too, but even the “mildest” form of FGM is like cutting off the entire head of the penis! How’d men like it if that was being done to them and then being defended in the name of cultural relativity?

  19. Hecuba Says:

    Laura you are clearly engaging in male supremacist double speak wherein you simultaneously claim Fword is not engaging in ‘shunning’ the Feminist Up North Conference but you acknowledge Fword refuses to promote this event because horrors – there is one specific biological female event and yes men who claim to be women are being excluded. Your actions are identical to male politicians who attempt to claim green is blue because ‘I say so and how dare you question me!’ Splitting hairs won’t wash because you and anti-feminist Fword are attacking biological females and this includes biological females who have experienced male violence their right to hold/attend a specific biological female event. That is oppressive action and not remotely ‘feminist.’

  20. GallusMag Says:

    The new, censored version of the FWordUK’s facebook discussion thread. LOL:

    The F-Word · 3,520 like this
    Tuesday at 8:49am ·
    I just posted a link to the feminist event Women Up North, but had not noticed the comment on the site that said some workshops will exclude trans women – my apologies. I have removed the link from this page now, but just wanted to make it clear that neither I nor The F-Word endorse this – LW
    Like · Comment
    Maria Rosamojo, Lindsey M Sheehan, Alba Miquel and 27 others like this.
    The F-Word Stop Wikileaks – The point of having X only space is for members of marginalised/oppressed groups to have a space where they can share experiences and organise away from the groups that oppress/have power/privilege over them. So we have women only space with no men, people of colour space with no white people etc. However, trans people as a group do not oppress cis people as a group; indeed, it’s the other way round. So it doesn’t make sense to exclude trans women from a women-only space – unless you’re transphobic and think they are men. It does make sense to have trans only space where cis people are excluded.

    And this isn’t about being politically correct – it’s about tackling discrimination. – LW
    Tuesday at 12:58pm · 3
    Julie Webster Trans people are oppressed by many non-transpeople as addressed earlier. I think the issue is that transwomen and non transwomen have an overlapping oppression – sexism, so both ought to be admitted to this conference. I would however not expect to see transmen, any more than non-transmen at a women only conference.
    Tuesday at 1:59pm
    Julie Webster One question I do have though is: I absolutely support the right for all oppressed groups to organise separately. A woman only, black only, disabled only, LGBT only conference is not oppressive, it is a reaction to oppression as these group…
    See More
    Tuesday at 2:22pm · 2
    The F-Word So are you going to critique our “radical” stance on sexism, homophobia, racism, classism and disablism as well? Our comments policy bans those too. – LW
    Yesterday at 1:25am · 1
    Virginia Pele There are workshops which tackle domestic violence issues , rape , violence against women as women. Those workshps aren’t open to trans people , for eg. And they’re right. That’s again b/c of our different conception of gender. We won’t get into that argument again.
    Yesterday at 2:31am · 3
    The F-Word That “critique” does not refer to our website! – CD
    Yesterday at 2:38am · 1
    Virginia Pele http://www.troubleandstrife.org/?page_id=527 :)
    Yesterday at 3:16am · 1
    Virginia Pele Totally agree w/ u .
    Yesterday at 7:14am · 3
    The F-Word Not sure where we’re censoring you, Stop Wikileaks. I just asked whether you think we should tolerate racism, sexism, classism and disablism as well as transphobia. Do you?

    When feminists engage in oppressive, discriminatory behaviour, I think other feminists have a responsibility to call them out. Particularly when it’s done in your name – not all radical feminists refuse to accept trans women. – LW
    Yesterday at 7:41am
    Julie Webster I have to say that to supporting transwomen should be part of the agenda of feminism, I don’t see how one is diverting resources as I believe transwomen are as much women as disabled women/black women/gay women etc. Again it seems that just because transwomen were previously externally identified as men, does not mean that they are now. Again once some one takes surgery and hormones they start to change their physical appearance, they will start to get sexism, they will start to be treated as women therefore they are women. Put it this way – what if one fancied only the opposite sex until 6 months ago, when for the first time they find themselves fancying the same sex as well, that would make them bisexual. But this should not mean they are excluded from a conference for bisexuals because they have only been bisexual for 6 months and not 20 years. We should show solidarity with people who receive sexist oppression now because they are externally identified as women, regardless of what they looked like to others 10/15 years ago.
    23 hours ago
    Alice Linn ‎@Julie Webster You asked to hear from people who disagree with you, so I’ll offer my views. I totally disagree that just because a man has donned stereotyped behaviors and clothes of “women” does not make him a woman, nor does having surgery or taking hormones. Sadly, some groups like the F-Word have chosen to view Male-to-trans as “oppressed” by women, but not all feminists agree. I absolutely consider trans oppressors of women, not the other way around. The very underpinnings of trans politics are rooted in sexist beliefs about sex roles and sex-role conformity. Boys are raised with male socialization and male privilege from birth, onward: even if their parents aren’t conscious of it. (There are sociological studies of how girls and boys are treated differently by delivery room staff and parents, even when they perceive themselves to be treating both sexes the same. That’s because probably 99.999999% of sexism is subconscious behavior, because we are so used to it in society, we don’t even see it.sychologists tell us that 95% of the personality is developed by age 5. Being raised female vs. male under patriarchy has a lifelong influence on a person. It is well known in psychology that our early childhood experiences have a profound influence on us the rest of our lives. We can’t just leave those experiences at the door whenever we choose.
    9 hours ago · 2
    Alice Linn ‎@Julie Webster (cont.) Sorry for typos, above. (Second sentence should read, “I totally disagree with the view that just because a man has donned stereotyped behaviors and clothes that society considers should be for women makes him a woman, or has had certain surgeries or is taking hormones makes him a woman.” and toward the end of my previous post, “Psychologists…). It is very common, to the point of it being considered a developmental stage in “normal” child development, for young kids to be confused about which sex they are, because they don’t see themselves (quite accurately!) as fitting in neatly to the (patriarchal, contrived) sex roles (because the ridiculous sex roles are social constructs that fit no one of either sex perfectly. They were created by men for the purpose of helping them to oppress women, but they deny all of us our humanity.) Even if a child from a very young age perceives himself as being female, the fact that he is, at least for some period of time being perceived *by others* as being his biological sex, male, and being treated accordingly per the patriarchy, that is what results in the child being raise/socialized with male privilege (and shapes his attitudes or behaviors), and not raised/socialized with female lack of privilege (female oppression.) I have never met a 2-year old boy who does not already show profound male socialization, sexist attitudes, and a sense of male privilege and entitlement. By that age he has already gotten, nonstop, millions of messages, all day every day, from parents and caregivers about himself and how he is perceived and treated that are different from what girls are raised with and how we are raised. How that socialization shapes him cannot even be fully identified and understood, let alone be denied, willed away, repressed, therapied-away, or made to vanish with hormones, surgery, or wearing sex-stereotyped clothing for women, intended in one’s culture to announce oneself as female. In fact, this sort of behavior and sets of assumptions are, to some of us, proof of his sexism. For a man to assume that being female simply means believing he is, and by donning offensive stereotypes of women onto his body and behaviors, aping us, and getting surgeries to superficially “look” like us (a surgically-”appearing” vagina is not a vagina: a vagina is a functioning, complex biological organ) is deeply offensive. The following two are not the same things, but there are certainly parallels, between blackface, and donning stereotypes of women: stereotypes that are the chains of our oppression. In fact, in a Marlon Riggs film, he points out that while today, blackface is rightfully considered racist and conservative, back when blackface was popular with white audiences, guess of which political stripe those white audiences were? According to Riggs, it was white *liberals* who attended blackface performances. He said that at the time, white liberals considered it open-minded and progressive for a white person to consider themselves to be “a black person in a white person’s body” or to explore “being black” by donning those stereotypes that we now consider to be deeply insulting and racist today, and to attend such performances of stereotypes of black people by whites. Similarly, when a man–raised male in this culture for even a minute–then claims he is female, and that he knows what it is like to be female, is disrespectful,and invariably is based on *patriarchal stereotypes* of females. Furthermore, women have different biological experiences than men. Periods, risk of pregnancy, plus growing up dealing with sexual harassment based on our biology from a young age, all have profound effects on us we carry throughout our lives even in ways we don’t realize. To think that sexism only affects us in the present complete denies the role of socialization on our psychological, neurological, and physical develolpment.
    8 hours ago · 3
    Alice Linn ‎@The F-Word, regarding your discussion with Stop Wikileaks, I agree with you that when we perceive something as racist, classist, sexist, ableist, or a form of any other oppression, we should call it out: for the purpose of having discussions of the beliefs or behaviors, not for the sake of censoring *someone*. What is very troubling to those of us who consider transgender to be yet another extension of patriarchy, of misogyny, of part of the patriarchal oppression of women, is that transactivists routinely advocate and succeed in achieving *censorship* of anyone with even the slightest disagreement with any of their beliefs: anyone from bloggers to academics to doctors to electeds. If a person who considers themselves to be trans considers it “transphobic” to call abortion a women’s issue, they get massive support. If they consider it “transphobic” for lesbians to choose not to sleep with transpeople, massive support. If they consider it “transphobic” for a man to wear a skirt, massive support. And there have been no shortage of violent threats made by trans against people who question transgender. If even one person who considers themselves to be trans considers something to be “transphobic,” it has happened time and again, they can easily get a huge group of transactivists to hurl accusations of “hate” and “hate speech” at that *person* and get that person *censored* in all types of venues: online and offline. It is frightening to have observed this happen to people. This practice of censoring based on differing points of view is, to us, inherently anti-intellectual, and also anti-feminist. It is certainly anti-democratic. Censorship, no matter how well intended, no matter how righteous the censors consider their actions to be, is still dangerous, and does nothing to move us forward intellectually as invididuals or as a society. Censorship does not change minds. As Gloria Allred’s daughter, Lisa, points out: the (very wise) Constitutional protection against speech…is speech. Not censorship.If we disagree with someone, we can picket or speak out. We can debate. For example, I may disagree with the views of the KKK or neo-Nazis parading through a street, and certainly find it threatening, but I would defend their *legal* right to do so. Just as I want my *legal* right to remain protected to picket them, speak out, and organize against their views. To borrow from your own statement above, feminist groups such as the F-Word who censor those who speak out about transmisogyny (trans’ oppression of women) do not represent all feminists. It is in the interest of feminist study and inquiry that feminists with views on all sides of an issue be able to freely debate issues without fear of censorship. When one considers that trans medical practices such as hormones or surgery (or trans efforts to prevent even any unbiased counseling being *offered*/made available to adults or children considering trans medical procedures) will have profound life-altering consequences, it is imperative that we be able to speak openly and freely about all perspectives and peoples’ experiences with this issue. Over on the GenderTrender blog are many testimonials of people expressing trans reconsiderations or regrets who say they wish they’d ever heard or seen any of the perspectives presented on that blog questioning transgender before they had undergone any of the medical procedures or come out as “trans.” Many say they felt railroaded by well-meaning doctors or therapists, or activists with an agenda. This is serious stuff, with profound implications for peoples’ health, medical safety, women’s rights, and children’s rights, and discussion and debate on this subject needs to be welcomed and feminist space provided for it. We also need to provide women-only space, just as there should be trans-only space, and that both be respected. I hope you will share this with your colleagues. Thank you.
    6 hours ago · 2
    Alice Linn ‎@Stop Wikileaks Censorship of the Obama Administration ” it is that very sense of entitlement, of trans women DEMANDING to be accepted in the feminist movement as feminists who are the same as all cis women, that strikes so many feminists as a living, breathing manifestation of patriarchy forcing itself in to the ranks. And that just ain’t gonna fly.” I TOTALLY agree! Good post – thank you. Thanks for speaking up on this thread, Wiki. Good work.
    6 hours ago · 2
    Alice Linn ‎@Stop Wikileaks Censorship by the Obama Administration, pls. check out my other posts on this thread.
    6 hours ago · 1
    The F-Word We’re not trying to pass any laws! We just published a post looking at the law. Glad you think we’re so powerful though!

    Alice – So do you think abortion should be banned because some women regret it?

    Banning certain comments from our blog is not censorship – there are plenty of other forums in which people can voice their transphobic views. The idea is to try and create as safe a space as possible for all our readers. A bit like the idea of women-only space, funnily enough.
    6 hours ago
    Alice Linn ‎@The F-Word, then how do you define censorship? I don’t think a feminist discussion space should ban the voices of women who regret abortion. And by safe space, do you mean a space where people don’t have to read viewpoints that differ from their own? Because that is not the purpose of women-only space. Women-only space isn’t about dictating what views can and cannot be said, but in ensuring that women have the opportunity to speak and be in the company of women only. Not about *what* is said.
    5 hours ago · 1
    Alice Linn ‎@The F-Word, I still don’t get your question about banning abortion. Where did that come from? I didn’t write anything about banning trans procedures, so…
    5 hours ago · 1
    Alice Linn ‎@The F-Word, and what if some feminists consider trans to be gyno-phobic? Or just plain old misogyny?
    5 hours ago · 1
    Lee Hiley Damn trans kids, get off my lawn!
    4 hours ago · 1
    The F-Word Alice – Your views on trans women may just seem like a difference of opinion to you, but to us and to many, many trans people they are oppressive and fuel discrimination. Which is why we ban transphobic comments from our blog, just like we ban racist, sexist, disablist and classist comments.
    4 hours ago
    The F-Word Ciao, Stop Wikileaks! Why don’t you go get some fresh air? Seems you’ve been fuming over this comments thread all day.
    4 hours ago
    The F-Word ‎(All above comments are from Laura)
    4 hours ago
    The F-Word On the regretting abortion – you talked about trans people regretting transitioning, seeming to suggest that feminists should be opposed to trans rights and transgender people seeking medical treatment. Which is why I asked if you oppose abortion rights because some women regret having one.
    3 hours ago
    Lee Hiley That’s a good point about the trans-agenda-ies fabricating a generational wedge between the tough and seasoned older feminists and the naive, easily manipulated younger feminists. They’re worse than Dracula!
    3 hours ago
    The F-Word It’s interesting that people are making so many assumptions about the age of the feminists who are opposing transphobia.-PW
    3 hours ago

    • DaveSquirrel Says:

      Priceless.

      LW: When feminists engage in oppressive, discriminatory behaviour, I think other feminists have a responsibility to call them out.

      We did, we are. We are calling out the F-Word’s and Laura Woodhouse’s prioritisation of the male-born over the female-born, and rightfully calling it anti-feminist.

      LW: Particularly when it’s done in your name – not all radical feminists refuse to accept trans women.

      All radical feminists are transgenderism-critical, or they just are not radical feminists – simple. There are a lot of ‘radfem pretendahs’ out there, who claim they are radfem when they are not. Like this one, with barely any grasp or knowledge of general feminism, calling herself a radfem – there couldn’t be a clearer case of pretend-radfem (and pretend-feminist).

      I gather that Laura Woodhouse is continuing to be a pretend-radfem by that sentence, either she is inferring she is a radfem, or speaking on behalf of radfems. Given her pro-porn and pro-bdsm views listed above – there is no way in hell that Woodhouse is a radfem, even though she pretended to be about five years ago.

      Woodhouse stuck her head up above the libfem crowd to lead the charge against radfems, and so we will call her out for all her anti-female/pro-trans rubbish.

      Throw born-females under a bus? Yeah, that is anti-female.

  21. hearthrising Says:

    So I wonder if Laura Woodhouse is on a tear to get men-only workshops for male survivors of child sexual abuse to admit women. After all, men have power over women, so by her logic male survivors must admit women to their recovery groups. Somehow I doubt that the knife cuts both ways here. The use of the word priviledge when we’re talking about rape survivors is appalllingly insensitive politico-speak anyway. Woodhouse seems to meet that stereotype of the political activist who cares only for dogma, not people.

    • RoseVerbena Says:

      I don’t know of ANY “trans” activism directed at shaming/shunning male support groups or men’s workshops. Do any of you?

      I doubt “trans men” go much beyond carping about feeling unwelcome and the occasional, isolated effort to invade gay bars or men’s showers — NOTHING like the vituperous, concerted, public campaigns to invade MichFest or RadFem2012.

      • trap Says:

        And somehow I don’t think that ‘transmen’ are clamoring to get into male events.


  22. [...] read this comment which covers a lot of women’s reproductive issues that are deemed ‘transphobic’ [...]

    • RoseVerbena Says:

      Brilliant analysis. Thanks for the link!

    • BadDyke Says:

      Cheers me up immensely when I come across such a well-written and well-argued post.

      “the strongest radical feminists I have ever met have been men.”
      LOL. Well, understandable from someone who hasn’t got a CLUE what feminism or radical feminism IS in the first place.

      Radical — I think she’s picked up the wrong definition from the OED.

      #1: To act in a radical manner, or like a radical.

      Acting like a radical, and saying yer a feminist probably makes you then a radical feminist in her view (although what our universities are churning out, I don’t know!).

      Or even better:

      surfing slang: challenging; extreme;
      So being a stroppy feminist probably counts then according to the surfing usage — but given that ANY statement about being a feminist is seen as ‘radical’ in this sense, makes all lib-fems and fun-fems, ‘radical’ feminists!

      As opposed to:

      #2: Of or relating to a root or to roots.

      So, the root of sexism — because as all gardeners know, if you really want to eradicate weeds, you have to go to the root of the problem!

  23. RoseVerbena Says:

    Oh, these little pricks. They have managed to get my Twitter account suspended again. I just wrote an impassioned complaint to the Twitter mods and asked them if there is some automated way that the trans hoard can get me suspended (i.e. several of them said that they were “blocking” me just because they disagree with me…nothing cultish about blocking people not for bad behavior but just because you disagree with them.)

    This may be a blessing in disguise because I’m seriously thinking about starting a snail-mail letter-writing campaign anyway. It’s so easy in this electronic age for e-mail and on-line commentary to be lost in the swarm — who actually sends real letters anymore? Perhaps letters would get more attention just because they’re more rare?

    I’m thinking that it’s time to push the American Psychological Association, the AMA, etc. to “collect” (ha!) their wayward practitioners and force them to stop enabling and perpetuating the abuses heaped on women by these mis-educated, delusional “trans” folk.

    I want clear statements from medical and scientific organizations that “trans women” are unequivocally NOT actually women and are NOT biological females but that they are biological males who are being enabled and assisted to “pass” as “trans women” simply to ease the discomfort of their dysphoria — which is NOT the same thing as actually being a woman. Legislative bodies need this kind of clarity to pass good laws — laws that do NOT enable “trans women” at the expense of real women.

    Enough of this anti-scientific, irrational crap being forced on women, especially survivors of sexual assault who just want to share support in women-only spaces. It’s not our fault that a minor fraction of the population has GID. Enough.

  24. AJ Says:

    I think hearthrising touched on it earlier in the comment thread, but I’m a bit confounded why RadFem12 and this part of the conference’s insistence on female-born women is so disgusting to transpeople and their allies. I recall the event that hosted the Cotton Ceiling debacle was a male-born people only conference, and not too many allies of the trans movement made much of a stink about that. I don’t remember anyone kicking up any kind of a fuss about a workshop/conference for people with penises to brainstorm ideas on how to “break through” women’s cotton underwear.

  25. fmnst Says:

    Stop Wikileaks got banned from F-Word UK’s Facebook page, but some are still hanging in there and haven’t been banned yet.


  26. [...] activists and MRAs in order to quash Radical Feminist female-centric views. These groups also actively oppose female-only sexual violence workshops, which are inline with the Equality Act. Look at one of the most hateful US-based MRAs gloat with [...]


  27. [...] to have a meeting by ourselves without them present? Apparently we are not allowed to even have one closed workshop for sexual assault survivors, even though the rest of the conference was open to [...]

  28. FeistyAmazon Says:

    All so fucking tiresome. And it’s a lie that when trans MTF’s take hormones they now ‘appear’ as women. So many dont’ pass, it’s so damned obvious, and yet, cuz they are on hormones we can now ‘look the other way’ cuz their muscle mass isn’t the same as before. But you listen to that voice, and the way they dress, a throwback way, or overly sexualized way, that most born female,and certainly most Dykes don’t dress or act that way either. Everything smacks of artificiality.

    But the bottom line, and this is what REALLY PROVES they’re male, is when they don’t take ‘no’ for an answer. That if a sexual survivor of male sexual violence says: “I only want born females in my workshop, or as a counselor or at a rape crisis center, and that ANY SMACK of male energy by those born men(much less male attitudes and assumptions of privilege) will really, really trigger me”, if trans MTFS WERE really understanding of the female condition or female Way, they’d say, “You know, I understand. Sometimes we need to be around our own, and if this is a place that is too hard for you to have me in your presence, THEN I CAN RESPECT THAT!” And RESPECT we have differences, different histories, backgrounds ect.

    But NO, it’s about FORCING their way into our cotton panties, FORCING their way into Michfest and all our born female womonspaces, destroying those spaces in fact(and so many women’s spaces and bookstores and business HAVE gone up in smoke since the Lesbian movement waned and the Trans movement grew), FORCING their way into Rape Crisis and Domestic Violence shelters for womyn.

    I can accept two spirit, a third or fourth ‘sex’ or whathaveyou, like some have talked about in the past, but I can NEVER accept someone born male as a Lesbian/Dyke, and not as a Female either. We have differences, differences in how we’re raised, assumption of privilege, body parts, experiences. You will never bleed the sacred moonblood, never get pregnant or have the fear of getting pregnant, and if you retain your penis you’ll still be able to impregnate someone else! No woman has a ‘ladystick’!

    Women for the most part, don’t FORCE our way in, we can take ‘no’ as an answer, as a complete sentence, and then hope that maybe acceptance can come on another level, or there will be a time we will be permitted into other spaces. I wouldn’t dream of violating womon of color spaces, or Native American spaces, unless ASKED to participate, or I asked politely. IF I was told, ‘no, this is just for us, we need to focus on OUR issues’, I might be a bit disappointed, but I’d accept their answers, cuz I want MY SPACE respected.

    The trans movement is not respectful of born females, cannot take ‘no’ for an answer, and can never be disagreed with, and THAT in my estimation is INCREDIBLY PATRIARCHAL, and especially when considering the most vulnerable of women: those who have been victims of male sexual violence. To me, that is utterly disgusting and it’s time all women begin to organize, perhaps in secret, perhaps as a ‘religious’ group or a ‘private’ club or whatever it takes to have our boundaries, our Selves, and our Spaces, minds and spirits RESPECTED and LEFT ALONE!
    -FeistyAmazon


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 469 other followers

%d bloggers like this: