Anarchist networks, anarcho-activists, flaky shit?

"The only position for women in SNCC is prone." Stokely Carmichael, 1964

"The system is like a woman; you've got to fuck it to make it change." SDS, 1969

right and this relates to John's post how?

...?

Flint - I'd read this and this before bothering to talk about women in anarchism on this board.

There is a lot of legacy of sexism, even within radical groups.

Odds are, though, you'd think whatever I have to say on the topic is stupid.

So, it'd be about as useful a discussion as suggesting people should find a better insult than "cunt".

and that sexism is dealt with by patronising women through stacking. It's just pathetic tokenism that assumes as granted that it's mens space to give over in the first place.

Surely a better thing to do is to just make new people feel welcome and allow for less forward people to speak, though at the same time they shouldn't be forced into a position of thinking they have to say something when they don't want to. We had a women in our group who was twice as macho and assertive as any of the male members, if anything we would have stacked the chair against her to let other people speak. Another guy I know actually dominates meetings by always banging on about how we need to do this and that to make sure everyone has an equal say, the irony is lost on him.

no start the thread and then see your whingey american arse get kicked across the pacific. Youse uptight sexually repressed yanks might not be able to hear that word without thinking of giant vaginas but over here it's just an insult like anyother, used by men and women alike, in Scotland it's the national greeting ffs, 'Alrite y'cunt yae!"

You don't think there's also a legacy of racism? in that case why don't you stack black people before whites? What about discrimination against the young, old, or disabled? Or gay? Why don't you stack them before as well?

It's just silly and patronising. When you chair you prioritise people who haven't spoken or people who look shy or uncomfortable speaking, and you shut up the loadmouths - whether they're men, women, black, white or whatever.

Are you seriously saying you would always have a woman speak before a man even if she was trashing the meeting by talking shit all the time?

Priorities in stacking doesn't force anyone to speak. We also prioritize people's first comments on a topic over anyone else's second (or third, etc...) comment on a topic. we've found that this bit of weighted stacking is quite welcoming both in encouraging people to speak up, and particularly in encouraging women to speak up.

Lady could gut you like a pig, and she's a vegetarian.

Perhaps you missed the part where it's really simple to prioritize people's first comments, over others who have already spoken on a topic. Combined with the ability to "call the question" if there are people are still on the stack after at least three people have commented; goes pretty far in cutting off the folks who try and dominate meetings (regardless of gender).

But hey, we're stupid and tokenistic.

Well the response is on the level of John's post . 'I think your position is stupid' is not normally considered much of an argument and probably didn't deserve that much of a response. And while I can see theoretical problems in the method NEFAC uses its been criticised by people from organisations that have almost no women members and in at one case by someone quite widely considered to be a sexist bully online - if quiet as a mouse off line,

Er, no, that's just sensible. That is not the same as prioritising a gender.

absolutely. "compensatory" measures like that only reinforce notions of victimhood.

I was aware of the bully accusation but this sexist one is new. Fancy backing it up? And if you'd like to inform me whose make such claims i'd like it if they could back them up to.

Tell me how many discussions on gender and sexuality have you actually been involved. On these boards you don't seem to engage the discussion at all.

I think this american lot aren't quite as sensitive is you so I thought they could handle it.

Hmmm that's a bizarre point. I'd be willing to bet that my union branch say has a few orders of magnitude more women in your group. But so what? How many black people are there in the WSM? Does that mean I can say that your views on race are irrelevant? That's a pathetic cheap shot joe.

If there is anything I'm not, it's sexually repressed.

P.S. We are divided by the Atlantic ocean.

What about compared to Mr Bearsuit?

no but the word cunt didn't take on it's cultural significance in you or your gimps head did it?

p.s. I know we are divided by the Atlantic, the point was your ass would get kicked soo hard you'd clear the Atlantic, the Americas and the Pacific.

I try not to make direct comparisons between thugarchist and my own fetishes. To each, their own.

As I said, I don't think it'd be a productive discussion.

yeah and you were clearly making implications so don't act otherwise now.

Still waiting for a response Joe Black.....

Actually its not - there is no point banging on about how good your theory of how to deal with such situations is when in practise your organisation doesn't seem to show a successful result. BTW I'd say the same thing of the WSM even though our gender ratio is a good bit better.

If you want to call someone stupid you need to be on firm ground to do so - otherwise keep it polite and a bit less arrogant. For instance I'm no fan of quotas but if I'd discussing them I normally bring up the fact that the libertarian organisation with the best gender balance (SAC) seems to have achieved at least in part through imposing quotas.

Trade unions are a different kettle of fish because people join them for different reasons. However a hell of a lot of unions have serious gender problems as you rise through the ranks, its not unusual to have a union most of whose members are women to have an executive largely composed of men.

Revol - like it or not you seem to have stopped or greatly discouraged at least two women from posting here (and that is a large percentage of the total) by actually bullying them in posts where they were illustrating how sexism impacts on their lives. You do laddish irony to death on these boards. I reckon you need councilling of some sort and if your friends were actually friends they'd tell you this rather than sticking up for you when called.

I'm not responding publicially to you any further on this, PM me if you wish

What? We're a website collective. What difference do our genitals make to how "successful" we are?

And so you seriously would accept the point that you can't say anything about racism because there aren't many (any?) black people in WSM? That's taking the guilty thing a bit too far.

Also even by your reasoning my opinion would only be invalid in terms of Flint if his group had a big proportion of women. Does it?

They actually have quotas? So if there aren't enough women they just won't let men join? I'll happily call that stupid as well.

Wrong Joe, I made a snide remark at how Soviet Pop articulated her annoyance in terms of his lack of work ethic rather than his sleazy sexist antics, the other woman i'm not aware of. And considering how my bullying is meant to have engulfed the entire forum surely it would have transcended the petty boundaries of gender. I mean if i am a bully i think i can honestly say i'm an equal oppurtunities one.

The laddish irony? Last I knew the point of the irony was to lampoon, or has taking the piss out of laddism became sexist, infact is laddism itself sexist? All interesting questions i've discussed and would be prepared to discuss in the future, when was the last time you engage in such discussions?

It's also bad form to speak for women in order to further your petty little vendetta. If Soviet Pop wants to call me a sexist bully then she can do so and we can have a discussion, you on the other hand are playing the cunts trick of speaking through others, allowing you to make the accusation without having to back it up.

As for my friends, well as much as i hate to play the whole "my mates black" card, I think it's significant that the majority of my friends outside of politics are women and i can't remember any of them (or infact any women i know) calling me sexist.

What's more pathetic is that you assume stacking was given rather than taken.

I don't know how much you know about Ireland but minorities are a pretty tiny percentage of the population. If I was to try and work out the ratio I think we'd be OK.

But even if none of our members were from ethnic minorities I wouldn't see this as a reason not to 'say anything about racism'. I would however see it as a reason not to simply dismiss a practise designed to deal with the problem as 'stupid'. I'd make a detailed argument as to why I thought this was the case and I'd be quite open to the idea that maybe I should experiment with it before forming a very definite judgement.

what so new women in the meetings met you outside and demanded it?

i know loads of women who would either cringe or be offended at the idea they were being stacked, whether such a policy was pushed by other women or not.
Remember there is no "woman".

Wow, we're really getting it from both sides now, with you pointing out there is no "woman" and John. sputtering on about genitals.

I didn't decide it was stupid on a whim joe. I've been to enough political meetings, and the main problems I have seen in this vein are - new people and shy people not being encouraged to speak (as I've pointed out these people will be predominantly from more "oppressed groups"), and loudmouth dickheads who love the sound of their own voice, and often seem to attend meetings to feel important. These people seem to be pretty evenly spread through all sections of society, though a disproportionate number seem to be american

I believe good facilitating means getting through things quickly and in order, encouraging the first lot to speak and shutting the second lot the fuck up, possibly embarrassing them in the process. Not treating people differently because of their skin colour or reproductive organs.