Radical feminism, again.

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Dec 30 2006 15:05
Radical feminism, again.
ticking_fool wrote:
Actually arf, Revol is not the only person who's asked you direct questions you've refused to answer, he's just the only one who can be bothered chasing you up on it.

So, just to remind you:

Would you defend excluding trans people from rape crisis centres?

Would you defend physical attacks on lesbian s&m clubs?

Are you going to give us your definition of radical feminism and say something about false consciousness?

Or are you going to continue ducking any serious engagement in favour of vague assertion and slinging accusations of misogyny, rape complicity and sexism whenever someone doesn't agree with you instantly and unconditionally?

arf wrote:
or in other words you want me to show my papers?
Quote:
Would you defend excluding trans people from rape crisis centres?

Rape crisis centres are unable to offer much help to anyone - like I said my local one only runs a helpline twice a week, and they offer counselling to as many people as they can.

If it was my refuge that I ran and got funding for and spent my week volunteering at, and all decisions were down to me alone, then I wouldnt turn away anyone who needs help or support based on their gender. I couldn't do it myself. But I do think that women-only space, especially in the context of escaping male violence, is necessary, and i would try to ensure that there was space for women born women (and i hate that phrase) to be seperate if they needed to be.

I think it's worth noting, once again, that transmen are accepted into most women only comunities. And I also want to say, again, that I think it's fucking outrageous the way that aspersions are being cast on refuges and rape crisis, i mean noone here has offered any evidence of transpeople being turned away from anywhere. There has been no evidence or discussion of any specific circumstance - just insinuations that the women who set up and run these centres are all transphobic cows that either enjoy or dont care about transpeople who are hurt.

It's like the hypothetical that wont go away - topic: feminists, specific may be radfems. "I demand to know, would you turn away a transwoman from a refuge?" I don't see this sort of harassment as any different as if I were to stomp around demanding of any of the men here, Would you rape a woman? There hasnt even been any pretence at discussion - just a set up of an extreme view with no context whatsoever, and then demands that I state my position on it.

As usual in these discussions, nobody cares to discuss the men who hurt them in the first place, and as usual, it is mostly men who do the hurting. Of course, I'll be seen as making a horrific and anti man generalisation by saying that most violence against transpeople, as against everyone else, is committed by men. But it's somehow okay for people here to make generalisations about the women who work at and run refuges - what an interesting contradiction.

I havent time to answer your other demands right now, but I encourage you to examine why you think it's okay to set up these hypothetical extremes, then demand that I answer to them, as if they are in any way connected to me - it's fucking out of order, and no less out of order than if i insinuated you are all rapists until you prove otherwise. I also think you should examine how a bunch of you have continued to harass me with the same questions across a bunch of threads despite all this. I guess some people are just guilty until proven innocent.

revol68 wrote:
arf you really have no shame, the criticisms that ticking_fool and me offered weren't aimed at women who work in refuges at all, they were aimed at radical feminists and their theories. Now some of these radical feminists work in refuges but to try and portray ticking_fools issues as being generalised attacks on refuge workers is just alice in wonderland stuff, it's like if I criticised doctors or nurses who refused to refugees and they tried to portray it as an attack on all doctors and nurses.

I think i'm just no going to bother discussing anything with you anymore because not only aren't you the sharpest tool in the box, what intellect you do have is put to the service of twisting and manipulating arguments to suit your victim complex.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Dec 30 2006 15:08
arf wrote:
Rape crisis centres are unable to offer much help to anyone - like I said my local one only runs a helpline twice a week, and they offer counselling to as many people as they can.

You keep throwing this up, and frankly, I think it's a red herring.

Lack of resources is no reason to deny a fair share of those resources to transwomen, any more than it'd be a good reason to deny the same to lesbians or black women or any other group.

arf
Offline
Joined: 25-11-06
Dec 30 2006 16:42

i have been specifically asked about radfems turning away transwomen from refuges several times - noone has given me any examples of that happening of course, its just the big bad bogeyfeminist hypothetical.

you tell me who denied what resources to which transwomen.

as for "Would you defend physical attacks on lesbian s&m clubs?"

you tell me who made physical attacks on which lesbian s&m clubs.

then, explain to me why i should be expected to 'answer for' any examples you can dig up. i mean, you don't have to 'answer for' men who rape, right? and you don't have to 'answer for' people who do all sorts of fucked up stuff in the name of anarchism, right? so you explain to me how it's ok to harass me from thread to thread as if i or any of my friends have done either of those things in the questions? you havent even demonstrated that either of them has actually happened let alone even theoretically linked it to anything i or anyone i know has done. "chuck her in the water, if she floats, shes a witch!".

i've given my own definition of radical feminism, i dont intend to keep repeating myself over and over to people who just ignore my response. i dont know where the question on 'false consciousness' has come from, but what i really want to know is - what gives any of you the right to demand all this stuff from me?

ticking_fool
Offline
Joined: 12-03-05
Dec 30 2006 17:14
arf wrote:
what gives any of you the right to demand all this stuff from me?

Because you're quite happy to accuse us all of being complicit in rape and to scream 'misogynist' in our face, but you're unwilling to face up to the history and implications of the position you defend (and anyone who questions you is being 'fucking outrageous'). You're unwilling even to entertain theoretical debate, as far as I can see because you basically don't understand it, so we're forced to drag you to concrete examples, which you then twist out of shape so you can scream 'victim'.

Frankly, I can't be arsed any more, which is a shame because I would really like to talk about this stuff with people who understand it. You, however, simply do not know what you're talking about and have only a set of manipulative 'tactics' to put in the place of your basic inability to grasp the foundations of even your own position, let alone anyone else's.

See, if I use long words and complicated sentences it's not a flame, although my intention is far from comradely.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Dec 30 2006 17:24

An article from Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's shelter, which not only attacks both BDSM (lesbian or otherwise), but actively adovcates excluding transwomen from women only spaces. The logical consequences of such an argument on such a website are pretty obvious.

And a reply to said article.

magidd
Offline
Joined: 23-09-06
Dec 30 2006 17:57

I am sorry but what happan with priviouse page where feminism was discussed?
Anyway here is artical of american anarcho-communist Bob Black
"Feminism as Fascism"
http://www.inspiracy.com/black/abolition/feminism.html

James Woolley
Offline
Joined: 18-11-06
Jan 1 2007 21:13
magidd wrote:
I am sorry but what happan with priviouse page where feminism was discussed?
Anyway here is artical of american anarcho-communist Bob Black
"Feminism as Fascism"
http://www.inspiracy.com/black/abolition/feminism.html

The article is one big straw man argument. I quit reading it when he makes the comparison with fascism where 'the chosen people' are both oppressed and superior. Even though radical feminists never say that women are superior.

The article is utter ordure and completely worthless vituperation.

magidd
Offline
Joined: 23-09-06
Jan 2 2007 02:51
Quote:
The article is one big straw man argument... The article is utter ordure and completely worthless vituperation.

Comment
Well i wood like to say this is good article. I am sorry but your reaction just demonstrates that. What do you mean to say things like "man argument"? It sound like "jewsh argument" or "gipsy argument" or... My english is not perfect and may be i did not understand something but it sounds unpleasant.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Jan 2 2007 03:03
magidd wrote:
What do you mean to say things like "man argument"? It sound like "jewsh argument" or "gipsy argument" or... My english is not perfect but it sounds unpleasant.

A "straw man" is an misrepresentation of somebody else's argument that somebody sets up so that they can knock it down, instead of adressing the actual argument.

magidd
Offline
Joined: 23-09-06
Jan 2 2007 03:08

O'key. i am sorry for missunderstanding.
I wood like to say big magority of feminists i see were realy agressive anti-man separatists or just anty-man.
I saw many time they provoke agression and split between men and weman. They have nagative ifluanse to anarchist movement- this is what i see in Jermany and Russia