How to do activism wrong

Originally posted at Purple Sage

Kate Smurthwaite was raising money for refugees. When anti-free-speech idiots shut down a charity gig that is raising money for refugees, that is the opposite of activism. What Smurthwaite was doing was activism—she was raising actual money for people who need it. Shutting down good activism because you disagree with the activist on a few things is just cowardly and counter-productive.

These people who protest against nonsense phobias think they’re on the left, which just makes me want to tear all my hair out. The left should be overthrowing capitalism, not bullying feminists over daft disagreements.

When did disagreeing become a crime? Since when did disagreements require no-platforming? I am very opinionated myself, and I’m quite sure that I’m right about everything. But that doesn’t mean that I have to shut down people who disagree with me. Disagreement is how you learn and how you refine your opinions and your arguments. There are lots of people I disagree with and I like hearing their opinions anyway, because I learn from them.

You can’t stop offensive speech. I remember when Julie Bindel was no-platformed one time for being “offensive,” she remarked that she is offended at least 100 times a day, and there doesn’t seem to be anybody going around making sure she isn’t offended by anything.

Continue reading…

Intersectionality and NUS LGBT+ Conference 2016: Defending No-Platform and Condemning Gay Men

Originally published at Huffington Post

The continued expansion of no-platform policies to include feminists such as Julie Bindel, and efforts by student unions to no-platform pioneers of feminism such as Germaine Greer over her views on transgender issues, even when she isn’t scheduled to discuss them, betrays an increasingly self-righteousness by the student far-left. Not only is disagreement on the “wrong” issues immoral, but it negates your right to talk about anything. The quest for ideological purity has recently devoured ex-Muslim Maryam Namazie – who identifies as a Marxist and a feminist – with Feminist and LGBT Societies at Goldsmiths passing motions of solidarity with the Islamic Society members trying to intimidate her during her talk there, and even Peter Tatchell himself, who was no-platformed by an NUS LGBT Officer for his opposition to expanding no-platform.

Continue reading…

Marginalised voices are the first victims of no-platforming

Originally published by Sian Norris at politics.co.uk

For each controversy about free speech – be it Germaine Greer or Peter Tatchell or Julie Bindel – there’s a predictable backlash from no-platform supporters. They claim that those of us with an interest in defending free speech don’t understand the power dynamic underpinning society – that we’re protecting the privileges of the establishment. After all, how can someone like Tatchell be censored when he’s telling us about it in the national press?

The argument is logically inconsistent. Free speech isn’t a zero-sum game. Publishing an interview with Tatchell in the Sunday Times doesn’t ‘cancel out’ the attempts to stop him speaking at Canterbury Christ Church. Silencing a speaker in one arena is not neutralised by providing them with a platform elsewhere.

But more importantly, it’s a lie that the no-platforming movement is only going after establishment voices. Their main targets are actually marginalised voices.

Continue reading…

Accuracy counts

Originally posted at Butterflies & Wheels

I was indignant on Peter Tatchell’s behalf (and on behalf of reasonable discourse, truth in accusation, and the like) on Sunday when I read that the NUS LGBT officer had called him racist and transphobic in emails to a bunch of people. But now…I’m disappointed in him, because he has failed to defend other people from dishonest accusations.

Do it to her, not me? Throw Greer to the wolves, not me?

He shouldn’t be “opposing” Germaine Greer herself. He probably didn’t mean that, but just said it sloppily – but what a thing to be sloppy about. What he should (if so moved) oppose is particular claims she makes, not her as a person. And then is it fair to say she “rejects and disparages transgender people and their human rights”? She does use disparaging language, so that part is fair, but what sense does it make to say she rejects trans people? And I flatly don’t believe she says they shouldn’t have human rights.

And then there’s the breezy way he throws feminists in general in there. Do it to them, not me, eh?

But be accurate about it. Don’t accept lies about Julie Bindel and don’t make exaggerated accusations against Germaine Greer and feminists “like” her.

Continue reading…

New & improved reactionaries

Originally posted at Make Me a Sisterwich

A common misperception is that transgenderism somehow confronts and dismantles sex-based oppression. But when you really look at the claims of transgenderism, you see how reactionary it is. While feminism names male violence as the primary force of all human oppression, transgenderism denies it. Transgenderism presumes, rather, that male and female are arbitrary distinctions; therefore, it is impossible to quantify and qualify the specifics of male violence. Not even right-wing religious zealots have done more to obfuscate reality. The new-and-improved right wing queers the gender binary!

This video is a roundtable mashup featuring Sarah Ditum, Terry Keane, CN Lester, Sheila Jeffreys, Julie Bindel, and Bernie Siegel. The “genders” may change, but the anti-feminist arguments remain the same. A feminist will say, “Male violence is the problem.” An anti-feminist will deny or minimize male violence. Feminists challenge sexism; reactionaries make excuses for it. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

Continue reading…

Give Julie Bindel a Loud Hailer: Feminism Is a Friend, Not a Foe

Originally published at The Huffington Post

Last week I heard Julie Bindel speak at Challenging the Campus Censors. She was charismatic and funny and she’s spent decades campaigning against violence towards women. I feel privileged to have heard her speak – it’s not an opportunity everyone gets.

Bindel has been no platformed by the NUS due to transgender protest against a 2004 Guardian column in which she suggested a world inhabited by transgenders, with “fuck-me shoes and birds’-nest hair for the boys; beards, muscles and tattoos for the girls… would look like the set of Grease.”

Bindel has since apologised but the feminist view of gender as a cultural construct stands.

Continue reading…

Oppressive Silence

Originally published at The Morning Star

On Saturday June 6 in Sheffield, RadFem Collective, a radical feminist women’s group, and I hosted an open talk and discussion with journalist Julie Bindel to discuss the effect of the no-platforming of radical feminists.

No-platforming has been justified based on allegations of transphobia. Although this may seem to be a niche discussion, the real-world effect is both further and broader than it at first would appear. The Trojan horse of transgender identity politics dominates much feminist and women’s discourse and makes it harder for women’s groups to prioritise other concerns and causes.

This event was to some degree a follow-up of a similar talk held in Nottingham in February. That these two meetings even happened is remarkable. For each, the location was shrouded in secrecy and revealed to attendees only the day before to prevent campaigners from lobbying the venue to force cancellation.

Both these meetings were planned and organised between radical feminists and me, a trans woman. I have written before in the Morning Star about the conflicts that exist between radical feminism and transgender politics, and in the light of these problems RadFem Collective and I have resolved to work together to bring people on both sides of this debate together, as well as anyone else who may be interested. Both meetings had a mixture of radical feminists, other women who would not necessarily describe themselves so, as well as trans women, trans men and men. If nothing else, we were able to measure the success of both these events by the diverse mixture of attendees.

Continue reading…