You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Radical Feminism’ category.
Books should never be banned; they are the life blood of an educated population. Yet banning books, specifically feminist books in The Vancouver Woman’s library is a priority for the group called Gays Against Gentrification. This sort of violent repression is a heinous crime against the notions of the promotion of rational discourse, civilized protest, and of course women and their liberty.
So… friends, let’s understand that if you decide to start banning books that are integral to the movement you want to be a part of, it is a really big hint that you need to be in your own fucking movement. Colonizing Feminism for your particular set needs is going to fail; therefore it is time to take wing and make a movement that really can be all about you, because, Dear Transactivists/queer ideologues/men etc. :
Feminism. Is. Not. All. About. You.
Erasing ‘heretical’ female texts and thus female experience isn’t what is expected of feminists or their allies – is this your #notmytrans movement moment? (Too fucking late for that now, the jackboots are already in motion in Vancouver.) – yet this is the shit move (banning feminist books in a library for Women) undertaken by the queer group GAG. (see the entire petition on Facebook here). Are you feeling the inclusive love from this group that is dictating what females are allowed to read? I know I certainly am.
Let’s follow Charles Rae in his article on The Fifth Column as she describes the situation –
” This has got to be the first time a library was accused of violence. In an interesting display of the blooming neoliberal tendency to turn the world into their self-defined “safe space,” an organization ironically called GAG (Gays Against Gentrification) has demanded the new Vancouver Women’s Library (VWL) ban books written by women. Feminist Mary Lunetta already created a petition in favor of freedom of thought, urging VWL not to ban any books.
The trend of the neoliberal left controlling and condemning thoughts and words is widespread, and damages the movements they are attempting to protect. In this particular example as a case study, GAG came out of the gate demanding an outright ban of women’s books instead of asking for a respectful dialog. But then, what would this dialog consist of? What books (and therefore thoughts) are allowed? Anyone who champions freedom of thought wouldn’t entertain such a debate, and women shouldn’t be demanded to comply to such restrictions.”
Follow the link to the petition and sign it. Better yet, go to the Vancouver Women’s Library website and donate to them.
“These demands presume feminism, and women, are or should be completely monolithic. That everyone should already implicitly and entirely understand their ideal of accepted language and thought. If you don’t know or accept their concepts, there is no conversation to be had. You are a bigot, and you should get out (like the books).”
How about NO. The sifting sands of your ideology serve only to reinforce the patriarchal conception of gender. No one should take a knee to such a corrosive ideology which, essentially, is the antithesis of radical feminist theory and praxis.
“The reasoning presented in their introductory paragraph is because “the ongoing violence against trans women, sex workers, and IBPOC (Indigenous, Black, and People of Colour),” and as was quoted, “settler-colonial violence”. But what connection a Women’s Library has to the violence anyone anywhere faces remains to be seen, and is not detailed in their demands. As seasoned feminists know and center in their messaging, violence is perpetrated (in a large majority) by men. Furthermore, violent males aren’t taking their cues from women’s books and libraries.“
Harassing libraries is easy, fixing male-violence isn’t. Looks like its coming up harassing libraries all across the board, because actually being an ally and working with women is too fucking hard.
“GAG goes on to say that “TERF”s and “SWERF”s are complicit in violence and liken them to Nazis. How long have feminist been called Feminazis? Where was the Holocaust perpetrated by “cis white women”? One of the SWERFy books they want banned is called Not a Choice, Not a Job: Exposing the Myths about Prostitution and the Global Sex Trade by Janice Raymond. Doesn’t that sound more like a book which exposes violence rather than perpetrates it? I’m going to have to give it a read.”
Men do need access to prostituted women after all. Definitely should be a priority for Feminists amirite?
“GAG’s attempt to give proof of violence was to call out women who stand in opposition to the sex industry, and the particular exclusion of a male who identifies as a woman into a woman-only space. Their demands to silence women are ill-founded at best, harmful to the women’s movement at worst, and ironic on all accounts. GAG says they will not sit down with the women of the VWL for discussion because they claim they are being gaslit– as they call women nazis and violent without a shred of hard evidence of physical violence. “
Typical male supremacist behaviour. Sorry folks, you can’t identify out of being part of the oppressor class, and shit like the GAG list of demands to silence women only proves that point.
“Furthermore, the books and ideas they are looking to ban are ones that are still under debate within the feminist community, such as the example of the sex industry, and whether it should be abolished or embraced. These demands are an attempt to control this ongoing dialog, as well as the outcome of it. Any kind of a book ban would, without a doubt, hinder feminist movements. Feminists, all movements with all ideologies, would be strengthened by robust debate and spaces of free thought, something libraries stand for, and something women have been denied time and again since men took the mantle as head of the home and state.”
Yep. What Charles said. My conclusion would have had more swears in it, but Charles sums up the situation nicely.
Stay Tuned, I’ll have the feminist books to be banned list up in a jiff.
**UPDATE** – Queer Transactivst Group Vandalizes Library
**UPDATE** – Video of dudes and handmaidens at the Library.
A book-banning campaign by Gays Against Gentrification (GAG) is demanding the Vancouver Woman’s Library (VWL) remove and ban over twenty feminist books from their collection. These works — written by renowned women authors who have a long history of engaging in critical analysis against the oppression of women as class — focus on female exploitation, male supremacy, violence against women, reproductive freedom, lesbian identity and women’s health. As a matter of principle and in defense of freedom of speech and thought, no library should ever ban any books under any circumstance – especially ones written by and for women at the VWL. As authoritarianism takes deeper root throughout the world, it is more important than ever that any attempt to silence women in their struggle for liberation is resisted by all, at every moment. We urge VWL to keep these books on their shelves.
Source: Petition: Protect Feminist Books at Vancouver Women’s Library
If this isn’t okay, then why is the converse considered acceptable. Contemplate that, especially if you have problems believing that patriarchy exists or you have a firm belief that feminism has ‘come far enough’.
**UPDATE** And then Sweden said, “Håll min öl.“. (Hold my beer).
“Sweden’s deputy PM is causing a stir after posting an image appearing to parody Donald Trump’s signing of an anti-abortion executive order.
Isabella Lovin, who is also the country’s climate minister, published a photo that shows her signing a new law surrounded by female colleagues.
The image has drawn comparisons with Mr Trump’s photo in which no women were present.”
The referral of the Swedish climate law is signed. All future governments will be obliged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For a better planet and a better future.
“The vagina centric theme of the *woman’s marches* was entirely offensive…”
Heaven fracking forbid that women are able to identify with the material reality of their oppression.
No no, let’s not offend the men-folk…*that* should be the priority.
The idea that feminism is the movement to liberate women from patriarchy (a notion lost to much of the befuddled third-wave) is finally beginning to (re)gain some traction as more women see what the unctuous morass of neo-liberal identity politics inflicts upon their mass movement.
“It saddens me to see the inclusive liberal feminism I grew up with reduced to a grab-bag of competing victimhood narratives and rival community-based but essentially individualist identities jostling for most-oppressed status. We need a better reaction to the election of a man who cynically responded to the center-left’s fragmentation by celebrating his own angry populist’s definition of white identity. Can’t we rise above the sniping about “privilege,” “white feminism,” “intersectionality,” and hierarchies of grievance in the face of Trump and the dangers he poses to the American and international liberal world order and women everywhere?
Such an approach doesn’t mean ignoring the differing experiences of women, or the history of racism between women, but confronting them empirically and resisting blaming each other for systemic disadvantage. Despite rampant inequality in the U.S., the word “class” doesn’t get a mention in the ‘Guiding vision and definition of principles’ of the march. Yet trans women/youth/migrants receive six references.
Cursory attention is given to the structural inequalities that limit all American women, regardless of their race, religion, sexual or other identities. American women across the board face huge barriers to labor force participation and achieving work-family balance compared to their sisters in Europe and other comparable developed countries. The vision document doesn’t even call expressly for nationally mandated paid maternity leave of at least three months — it describes “family leave” vaguely as a “benefit” rather than a right, in contrast to LGBTQIA human rights.”
It is almost like Ms.Symons is getting annoyed by the fact that the issues that are directly affecting women aren’t being centred in the march by and for women.
Fancy that.
Let’s see some transactivism in action shall we? Elizabeth Harrington, reporting in the Washington Free Beacon writes:
“Transgender activists are upset that the women’s march over the weekend was not inclusive to biological men who identify as women, as the protest presented an “oppressive message” that having a “vagina is essential to womanhood.”
Saturday’s event to oppose the inauguration of Donald Trump was largely a “white cis women march,” with too many pictures of female reproductive organs and pink hats, according to trans women and “nonbinary” individuals interviewed by Mic.com.”
Wow! Are you seeing the benefits of inclusivity? (I most certainly am!) I mean, the feelings of men at a woman’s march should definitely be prioritized as their gender-feels are profoundly more important than the onslaught women and their rights are being subjected to as a class.
“The women’s march had an over-reliance on slogans and posters depicting gender norms, like using pink to represent women and girls, said some transgender activists who boycotted the march.
“The main reason I decided not to go was because of the pussy hats,” said one transwoman from California. “I get that they’re a response to the ‘grab them by the pussy’ thing, but I think some people fixated on it the wrong way.”
“I believe there’s a lot of inequality that has to do with genitals—that’s not something you can separate from the feminist movement,” the transwoman added. “But I feel like I’ve tried to get involved in feminism and there’s always been a blockade there for trans women.”
The ‘blockade’ being that effective feminism is about he liberation of females from patriarchy. If you aren’t female, then this particular movement just isn’t about you. If you would like to show support for, and be an ally and reinforce the Feminist movement – that would be great – but have the common decency to not co-opt the feminist movement for your own agenda.
“Signs that said “Pussy grabs back,” “Resistance is Fertile,” and “Pussy Power” sent a “clear and oppressive message to trans women, especially: having a vagina is essential to womanhood.”
The article explained that transwomen are weary of “trans-exclusionary radical feminists.” “TERFs” are people who “equate womanhood with having a vagina” or feminists who “argue trans women are actually men in disguise trying to infiltrate their spaces.”
I’m guessing that women (and by that term I mean adult human female) are quite weary of having men (for centuries) try to define their reality for them.
Clearly, acknowledging sex-based oppression -in a feminist movement – is quite beyond the pale. Reflecting on the quote above, if one cannot distinguish between the notion of women being nothing but vaginas versus the notion that women have vaginas, then one probably shouldn’t be speaking about woman’s issues in the first place.
Finally, hopefully we can see what the transactivist movement brings to the table –
So ya, it is time for transactivists to acknowledge the fact that feminism is for females (this should not be controversial) and work in solidarity with Feminists toward feminist goals – or start your own movement that centres your own particular goals.
**UPDATE** – Trans solidarity with women? F*ck that noise. Further evidence of the need for a strong cleavage between feminists and transactivists.
http://tehbewilderness.tumblr.com/post/156776500409/did-the-national-womens-march-call-for-pussy
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…