So trans rights doesn't mean pushing women out of women's spaces, huh?
She was asked to leave because Lily Madigan was also there and apparently 'felt unsafe'
This Dr Radfem? Good.
Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?
- Thread starter The Flying Pig
- Start date
- Status
This Dr Radfem? Good.
Treacle Toes
Time
Wow. Nice.
In case anyone how any doubt who is behind the campaign against amending the GRA by the way, Dr RadFem appears to have been one of the main organisers of the New Cross meeting that led to the Hyde Park incident and is also behind the current speaking tour which Helen Steel recently addressed. But they just want a reasonable debate of course.
Athos
Well-Known Member
What do you beleive is the proper response to women like her?
For the record, I disagree with much of what he says, and think her style is deliberately offensive and provocative.
weepiper
I fix the machines that fight climate change
So, women who express views you disagree with or find troublesome should just shut up, and if they don't shut up voluntarily then ejecting them from a space where they have a paid-up right to be is a suitable response? Ok, just so we know where we're at now then.
I think people shouldn't turn up to their meetings or support their organisations if they sincerely want a reasonable debate about gender between trans questioining or sceptical feminists and transpeople. I think people should recognise that she is a loon, who believes 'evil' big pharma are secretly controlling trans-activism, and as such the propanganda put out by her organisation should not be trusted (or handed out at anarchist bookfairs). I also think people should recognise that her ultimate stated aim, and so presumably the aim of her organisation despite denials, is the removal of any legislation to protect transpeople at all including the 2004 gender recognition act. And that her colleague and hero, who she recently gave a platform to, Shiela jeffries, wants to ban trans healthcare.
If people want to support such an organisation fair enough, although they can hardly expect transpeople not to be pissed off about it and probably protest their meetings. But lets have cards on the table eh.
Are any views acceptable at a Labour Party Christmas Party? I'd have hoped an open racist would have been dealt with the same way. Not that I really give a shit what goes on in the labour party.
Given her alleged prominence, it’s bizare that you’d never mentioned her until weepiper did.
Her views are not unique amongst the people currently leading activity opposing the GRA reforms who I have consistently said hold opinions like this. The only reason I highlighted her personally was to give some background to why she might have been kicked out of the Labour Christmas party.
trashpony
Hag
I've been in plenty of rooms with people whose views I disagree with. Ejecting her is fucking insane unless she was haranguing Lily Madigan and I've seen zero evidence that she was (although if she was, fair enough). Being a gender critical feminist isn't the same as being a racist. Believing people can't change sex isn't the same as believing some humans are lesser being because of the colour of their skin.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
Some people feel that people of colour are not fully human and feel they have a right to exclude such people from human spaces.
So, do you still feel that 'clashing rights' in this case is actually a thing - or is it just bigotry?
Do these very few women actually have a good reason to exclude trans women from women's spaces, because all the reasons I've seen so far have been lies. The only reason I can see for it is "feelings" which is not a reason to exclude anyone.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
it's exactly the same and the reasons I see used to exclude trans women are even the same reasons that in the past have been used to exclude black women from women's spaces.
That predatory men might try to claim to be black women in order to get into women’s spaces to attack women? 
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Starting to look like she may have been excluded from this event not for being a woman, but for being a cunt.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Transgenderism is a men's sexual rights movement because look this other person said that transgenderism is a men's sexual right's movement. What do I mean by transgenderism? I mean a men's sexual rights movement. What do I mean by men's sexual rights movement? I mean that thing that transgenderism is. For more information, read all that again.
I take it Doctor Radfem's PhD was not in the field of critical thinking.
I think any alleged bullying or prior confrontation happened on sociala media and seems to have been deleted, although there is a suggestion that Dr Radfem was surreptitiously taking photos of Lily:
And you're right, there are of course differences between racism and Dr RadFem's style of transphobia, but both are bigotry, both are ideologies driven by prejudice and not evidence, both seek to demean and damage already marginalised people and neither I hope should be tolerated in the labour party.
I bet all those cunts in the Labour Party selling off housing stock, slashing funds for services etc weren’t suggested for expulsion by the safer spaces policy.
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
According to the FT, Venice Allan (DR RADFEM) is an international property developer.
Was the irony deliberate?
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
It wasn't me doing the disagreeing or the ejecting. And there seems to be more to it than 'expressing views'.
But let's assume there wasn't. Can you think of any views the expression of which might lead you to remove the expressing party from a gathering or event? If I was round your house for example and I said something utterly heinous like 'calling all trans people stupid, mad, evil cultists is not the behaviour of a reasonable person', would you kick me out?
Last edited:
According to the FT, Venice Allan (DR RADFEM) is an international property developer.
Was the irony deliberate?
The irony is that’s apparently fine at a Labour event, whilst her views aren’t.
bemused
Well-Known Member
By incident, you surely mean assault and robbery?
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Swap it round and she'd still be kicked out. Now that's irony.
I mean incident that is presumably currently sub judice so should be discussed with care.
bemused
Well-Known Member
It's in the public domain, here's a Met police public domain statement about it - UPDATE: Arrest made following assault in Hyde Park.
I don't think we need to use coded language mentioning an event where a 60-year-old woman was punched in the face by a man for the egregious crime of having her own views about what she felt it meant to be a women.
Athos
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure the two situations are identical, for philosophical and practical reasons.
Philosophically, black people are undeniably human; that's a simple biological fact. That trans women are women isn't so straightforward. You believe it to be true because you feel it. I believe it to be true based largely on pragmatic, compassionate grounds. But neither of us can offer any compelling evidence or logic that, philosophically, trans women are women.
Practically, black people's humanity was denied to justify the most appalling abuse. I'm not sure most of the women who are reluctant to redefine womanhood to encompass trans women are: a) motivated in the same way; or, b) committing abuse of trans people that is meaningfully comparable. Isn't it actually men who are e.g. killing and raping trans women?
I've explained, personally, I don't consider the arguments in favour of excluding trans women persuasive.
That's a slightly different thing from bullying them to silence their views. Something that a minority of trans advocates appear to be doing increasingly.
Some of those on the other side of debate would say that you should be excluded for the simple reason that you're not a woman (in their opinion). And that your claim to the contrary is just your "feelings".
It does feel like a bit of an impasse, sometimes.
By all means carry on, The Editor might have something to say about you placing both the site and yourself at risk of prosecution for contempt of court though.
bemused
Well-Known Member
I'd imagine he knows how contempt of court works so wouldn't be bothered.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
We know an assault took place, we don't know that the reasons for it were what you suggest.
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
Clearly you've got something wrong as the Met police seem to have arrested a 26 year old woman.
bemused
Well-Known Member
That is true, it is merely my conjecture that someone protesting this woman didn't like their views and felt the need to stick one on the nearest women they disagreed with. I could, of course, be wrong - it wouldn't be the first time.
- Status
Similar threads
