Perverted man claims to be a woman - may be housed in a women's prison

trisher there were a lot of women when I was young that were not feminist and were very disparaging. Yet feminism has achieved things and those things have been proven benificial. Now more women claim to be feminist "but not your sort of feminist" and tell me that my kind of feminism and that of the strong older women who have my respect was never the right kind of feminsim all along.

Now that is interesting

the tensions and disagreements amongst gay and trans peopple go back a long way

And much more so since Nancy Kelley became CEO of Stonewall and announced that their support and activism would focus less on the gay community and far more on trans. It doesn't help that lesbians have been pressured with threats of violence for not wanting to have sex with trans "women" (men with penis).

When a few of my lesbian friends and I decided to march uninvited in front of the Pride march in London last year to promote lesbian visibility within an increasingly misogynistic and anti-^lesbian gay, bisexual and transgender (GBT) movement, we had no idea this would cause such a ^huge backlash from the GBT community itself.

We had no idea that we would be attacked by officials of GBT organisations as well as by most of the British press. From being called “transphobic bigots”, “hateful” and “Nazis” who should be “dragged out by our saggy tits”, to having our personal details published on social media and receiving rape and death threats, the supposedly progressive mainstream seemed to have slightly overreacted to the fact that a small group of lesbians were simply marching at Pride in London.

trisher

As for the hypothetical feminists they are just that hypothetical. I have no idea if they are feminist I would hope they are but as I've never met any of them been given a potted biography by someone who was living with feminists ,and didn't apparently know they were that, I feel quite entitled to say I don't know about imaginary women.

Now you are just making personal and nasty attacks, and aren't coming over as very bright, really.

I will say it again. I was well aware that I was a feminist, and still am. I was aware that some of the women I knew then were feminist, but equally aware that many were not.

You seem to be saying that if a 'feminist theorist' says that something happened then it did, and that the little airheads who were there at the time were oblivious. I certainly wasn't. Yes, I was very young, but I was painfully aware of what was going on, and what I saw. It helped to throw my studies into sharp relief, which is why I am cynical about those who spout things that others have written as though they are gospel.

I have grown older since, and whilst I have changed/matured/developed in some ways, my political thinking is much the same as it was then, and I really don't need to be lectured by you.

I would have thought that the hypothetical feminists would be right up your street, as most of what you say is based on theory. Most of what we all say on here is theoretical - how could it not be? In this case, however, I do have the advantage, difficult as it clearly is for you to acknowledge that.

Ok then, if a feminist behaves in a way that is detrimental to women, is she still a feminist?

trisher and Gagajo you have my respect for not giving back in kind, not making things personal or treating others as less than the individuals they are.

Speechless.

Doodledog None of it is theory Betty Cook is there and she has written a book, Many of the papers are with the LSE. It's called evidence. I still don't understand why you think it wasn't feminist. Of course every woman wasn't but the movement was.
Apparently it's rude of me to question your level of involvement but OK for you to call me not very bright. Mmm double standards?
Who is judging what is detrimental to women? I think Margaret Thatcher set the cause of feminism back, but many think her being the first woman PM was a victory for women.

How can it be ok fir someone to be assaulted for wearing what you describe as a provocative t shirt - got what he deserved?
Talk about daft

Iam64

How can it be ok fir someone to be assaulted for wearing what you describe as a provocative t shirt - got what he deserved?
Talk about daft

I said no such thing!
I said ^ It was provocative to appear at a march that included trans activists wearing that t-shirt so I suppose he got the publicity he wanted.^
He wasn't assaulted he was told to leave the march.

Loath to join this discussion as I haven't got the relevant background. But my point is that I'm relieved to find that our feeble legal system has Thank God found grounds to incarcerate him. if only for a short time to deter others.
Not because of his gender issues but because he seems to have led others astray.
I suppose it's up to the Prison System to decide whether he goes in with men or women.

trisher

Doodledog None of it is theory Betty Cook is there and she has written a book, Many of the papers are with the LSE. It's called evidence. I still don't understand why you think it wasn't feminist. Of course every woman wasn't but the movement was.
Apparently it's rude of me to question your level of involvement but OK for you to call me not very bright. Mmm double standards?
Who is judging what is detrimental to women? I think Margaret Thatcher set the cause of feminism back, but many think her being the first woman PM was a victory for women.

If I wrote a book about my own experiences would it be evidence?

It is rude of you to say that I didn't understand (ie don't agree with you) about what was going on when I was there and you weren't, and the number of times I have had to say that not everything feminists do is feminist, when other posters completely understand, doesn't suggest that you are grasping what I am saying. You are not simply disagreeing with me, you are saying that I don't know what I am talking about, which is rude, yes. It would only be double standards if we were behaving like for like, which is not the case.

Spell it out for me? 'Of course every woman wasn't feminist', and the 'movement' was in support of men who were losing their jobs? Is the only thing that made it a feminist movement the fact that someone at LSE has written a paper about it? Or is it because you see it as A Good Thing, and all good things are feminist by definition?

I know that you basically 'fire' women from the feminist movement if they disagree with you (or you give them an historical title that someone else has coined), so was MT feminist? She certainly changed some of the dynamics in old mining communities. Many of the men never worked again. Their wives became breadwinners, and their daughters didn't grow up thinking that a man would provide for them. That is arguably a boost to feminism. Or is it that MT wasn't a feminist, but one of the results of her policies was?

I don't see feminism as something that happens to us. It is a way of thinking that foregrounds women, or at least sees them as equal to men. Some people live their own lives by that philosophy, and others push for rights to be afforded to others. The things that people have fought for over the years have changed in line with what has been achieved, and with societal developments, but the thinking remains the same.

What you describe is more like philanthropy - people of both sexes working to make life better for everyone. A laudable aim, and one from which women can benefit, but not feminism.

Hello, Marmite32, and welcome.

I agree with what you say, but wonder what you think the prison system should do with him? In the end, the system is just a group of people, many of whom rely on votes for their jobs. Do you support the view that transwomen should be in women's jails, or would you prefer to see them kept with others who have male hormones and penises?

trisher you are making assumptions again. Which women do you mean who do not acknowledge feminism?
How is one group of posters a gang but another group of posters are not a gang.
You see some posters backing up others as cheerleaders, whilst you and others backing each other up are not?
You repeatedly say that we don’t accept trans. We have never said we don’t accept transwomen, we say that we only challenge the rights of *those transwomen whose aim it is to harm females and overrule females hard won rights to safety and fairness*.
Even Gagajo stated on this thread “*if someone commits a sexual crime which uses male genitalia they will be liable for male prison.*” and that it “*Would solve the issue of pretend-trans in one fell swoop*”
Would you also be happier if those transwomen who fit the profile I described above at *. * were to be described using GagaJo’s pretend-trans?

Good questions Mollygo. I wish you luck.

At the risk of being accused of being a member of a cheer leading chorus by agreeing with you Chewbacca, I agree that "trans activists have rather thrown the gay community under a bus".

Not easy to follow or even identify the train of thought in some of the posts here.

Is it obligatory to be a fully paid-up Feminist with a capital F before undertaking any action that will benefit women, or are we allowed to do things that are pro-women and feminist in nature (with a small f) without nailing our colours to the mast and also enlisting as a keyboard warrior?

Is there an exam to be attempted and passed (or failed) before anyone qualifies to add mentally after their names their membership of the illustrious sisterhood of "Feminist" or "feminist" or "Theoretical Feminist" or "Intersectional Feminist" or "Black Feminist" or even (God forbid!) "White Feminist".

It seems to me that there is a whole complex industry involved here, with a hierarchy of sub and sub-sub categories. It reminds me of the Judaean People's Front and the People's Front of Judea and all the other revolutionary groups in A Life of Brian.

Agreed, Elegran.

And if you buy into the 'experts will tell you what to think' school of thought, the goalposts will change all the time, so what was feminist now will become 4th wave in a few years, and the new generation of theorists will look down their collective noses.

I prefer to treat people fairly, see them as equal, and where I can I fight for this to become enshrined in legislation. Feminism underpins my life, so it doesn't change with the times. My thinking might, and obviously the specifics change all the time, but my outlook is the same, and I am comfortable with that.

Doodledog I have said many times on this thread that in my opinion (and the opinion of many others) the miner's wives movement, because it was a movement led by women, which empowered women and brought women into activism was a feminist movement. You can disagree with that but then I wonder what a feminist movement is if not one that empowers women? I still don't understand why you would deny those women the right to be called feminists.
If the miners wives and their daughters were more empowered after the strike I would say it was more to do with this than with MT.
As for philanthropy really! Philanthropy is the voluntary gift of resources from private wealth to promote charitable causes, projects or organizations
This would of course mean that poor women, working class women or anyone without resources would be unable to participate. Intersectional feminism includes everyone and allows that they will have different experiences and degrees of oppression. Why would you question that?

Chewbacca

Good questions Mollygo. I wish you luck.

Since I don’t expect an answer I’m not too worried. The highlight of this whole thread was GagaJo’s early contribution. I’ve never used the term ‘pretend trans’ but I think she has given an accurate term.

trisher, I am not denying anyone the right to call themselves what they like. I won't necessarily agree with people's definitions, but I am not the arbiter of these things.

Perhaps you can explain to me what was empowering about losing a home, seeing your children go without, maybe having your husband go to jail for being on a picket line, and then living on the dole when the mines closed?

It's kind of you to dig out a dictionary definition for me. You're a great fan of links to the thoughts of others, aren't you? Here is an alternative one from Investopedia.com, which is closer to how I was using the term. Silly me - I relied on my own vocabulary, but it seems I am not alone in thinking that the word means what I used it to mean :

Philanthropy refers to charitable acts or other good works that help others or society as a whole.

Philanthropy can include donating money to a worthy cause or volunteering time, effort, or other forms of altruism.

Both are inclusive and open to anyone.

What a load of tosh ,Betty Crook friend of Anne Scargill claims
these women from Barnsley didn’t want the strike to end.

A fairy story of the horrors of that strike.

Sorry - that should have read 'definition of philanthropy' above.

God, this is hard work .

Anniebach

What a load of tosh ,Betty Crook friend of Anne Scargill claims
these women from Barnsley didn’t want the strike to end.

A fairy story of the horrors of that strike.

Yes, ironically, it is a partial version of events that has been mediated by trisher to tell those of us who were there how it was, but we are the ones who need to be given definitions of English words, and told that we are denying others the right to tell their own story.

Betty Crook whose husband was on strike gave up a full time
job for a part time job to campaign, good grief , wives were on coal tips picking for coal to heat their homes . Perhaps Arthur
helped with extra pennies, he had plenty.

This is all a load of the usual from the far left.

So you both dismiss other women's experiences . I have said your experiences are just that. Apparently those women are also responsible for the terrible effects of the strike. The actions of the women were empowering. They organised they spoke out. They travelled the country. They became politically active.
Blaming them for what was done to them and their families is just disgusting.

You accuse me of not being feminist but philanthropic. How is that in any way justified? Except in your mind. Think what you like, my feminism is what it is, intersectional in nature, inclusive and supportive. If that is philanthropy for you then I assume all intersectional feminists are philanthropic. At least I suppose we don't deny other women their right to be called feminist.

Elegran I wouldn't deny anyone who became active or who supported activism the right to be called feminist. It seems however that I am only philanthropic and the Women against Pit Closures weren't feminists either. It seems feminism for some is an exclusive club. As I'm apparently not a member I really can't say if you would be admitted.

More blatant twisting of people's words.

Do you ever ask yourself why you are so often a lone voice on here, trisher? You have a couple of buddies who back you up from time to time, but on the whole it is you finding increasingly barmy ways to twist what people are saying, and attempting to divert conversations when they get tricky for you. If that happened every time I posted I would have the humility to ask myself why I was the common denominator.

This is a case in point. The bloody miner's strike was mentioned as an example of how women doing something is not necessarily feminism in action, but it has dominated the evening's posts. I wish I hadn't mentioned it now.

My feminism is far from exclusive - I don't expect anyone to define their chapter, or get back-up from the internet to prove what I am saying. I include anyone who looks out for other women, whether quietly in the way they live their lives, or more obviously by fighting for their beliefs.

Anyway. I am not claiming to have been a leading light in the Coal Not Dole movement. I was a student, and not being from a mining background myself I was lucky enough to have parents who could help out. Nevertheless, I lived through it as part of what was happening, and saw more suffering than ever before or since. In case you have missed it, I refer you to my question above:

Perhaps you can explain to me what was empowering about losing a home, seeing your children go without, maybe having your husband go to jail for being on a picket line, and then living on the dole when the mines closed?

That was the reality for many, and they were not interested in articles that claim to tell them what really happened - many families were fractured and the wounds haven't healed after all this time. What was empowering about that?

The results of the strike and the pit closures were nothing to do with the empowerment of women. The empowerment of women was the way women organised to protest and support each other. Women whose husbands did goto jail have asserted the feminist nature of the movement I really do not understand why you would want to say the dreadful things that happened to people someohow negated the feminism of the movement. I accept you don't think it was feminist others think it was. Why can't you accept their opinions and experiences?

As for defining feminism you have tld me I'm philanthropic not feminist. So do you define a feminst as simply someone who agrees with you?

Incidently I think one of the reasons I'm the only person posting on this is because few can bear to read your long posts