I hate feminazis

Post Reply New Topic

Well, my point was she is obviously not representative of any modern feminists anymore, or why would they want her not to speak? Her brand of (second wave radical) feminism is a dying breed, and anyone who can look at the issue of feminism without biased blinders on (the kind that make you think we're all radical "feminazis") can see that she is not representative of what mainstream feminism is today. If she were, they would have supported her right to speak about how trans women aren't "real" women. No contemporary feminist I have ever spoken to supports her view about trans women--in fact, there is a label for her type among feminists: TERFs (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists). TERFs are not taken seriously (other than the threat they pose to trans women because of their discrimination against them) by any of the feminists I know. They are dinosaurs.

She wasn't doing a talk about trans-women.

Why wouldn't they support her right to speak? That would give them an opportunity to critisize her views. I critisised her comments after she was rebuffed.

Censorship isn't the answer. Third-wave feminism is big on censorship, they are no better than Greer. The whole trigger warning and safe-place ideas are censorship through the back door.

I don't agree with Greer, but she is a lot smarter than most of those radicals infiltrating universities at the moment.

For one she at least has some concept of self-criticism.

And this is really a hopeful sign. That 3rd wave feminists actually placed their principles before their group loyalty and blacklisted her. I'm glad she got censored and to some extent I do support censorship of hate speech in certain arenas/

Say you censored hateful speech in a university, that mean those ideas would be discussed behind closed doors meaning that they wouldn't get the criticism they deserve.

The "Prevent" program in the UK has come under criticism in Parliament for precisely that. Censorship as result of the program, for risk of causing offense or supporting extremism as backfired meaning these idea aren't getting scrutiny in front of those likely to be sweep up in extremism.

Even if the subject incited violence. They can be arrested, however there is still public scrutiny which is important. Behind closed doors this neither might happen.

The problem was that in her last several public appearances before this was scheduled she mentioned several times that she believes trans women are not real women, and that was why people didn't want her to speak--because it was likely the subject would come up again and she would repeat her transphobic remarks. From the article I posted:

"Greer’s statements prompted a petition circulated by Cardiff University students. The petition, aimed at having Greer barred from giving a speech on campus, was started by Rachael Melhuish, women’s officer at the Cardiff University Students’ Union. It claims that Greer has“demonstrated time and time again her misogynistic views towards trans women, including continually ‘misgendering’ trans women and denying the existence of transphobia altogether.”

It's likely, because of her recent remarks about trans women, that she would have been questioned about them at her talk at the university and would have repeated her transphobic sentiments there. That's why the students didn't want her there.

Which is precisely the point, use the opportunity to criticise her.

When we're talking about discrimination and hate speech (intentionally misgendering trans women and all the other nasty things she said about trans women are hateful and discriminatory, as well as plain old incorrect) people can decide beforehand (if they know hate speech is what's on the menu) that they don't want to listen to it. That is what the university students did. Trans students should not be forced to hear time and time again from a "respectable source" (being invited to speak at a university lends her view respectability) how they are "not real". It's harmful, it does real damage in the lives of trans people, being exposed to those sentiments in their places of learning, in their workplaces, in the media, etc. There is a reason why trans people are at such high risk for self-harm and suicide, and it's not because they are "crazy"--it's because of the pervasive transphobia in society that they have to wade through every single day of their lives. It's dehumanising, it wears people down, and it needs to change. Preventing people we know harbour those ideas from expressing them in schools where trans and cis students go to learn is a step towards eradicating such hatred, fear, and ignorance.

Transphobia is already discussed at universities all over North America and the world--it is possible to have such discussions without giving hate speech a platform.

No one was forced to listen to anyone.

No-platforming is a terrible approach. It only serve to weaken your point, such that it needs such protection it can't stand up on its own.

It is a really harmful to free expression that something as subjective as offense can be the gatekeeper. This is dangerous precedent to set.

Hate speech is saying trans-women deserve to die, encouraging violence/harassment against them, etc.

She didn't even come close to sharing those views. She expressed a views counter to the status quo.

Btw universities students will sign anything.

I remember when I was in freshers week. There was a violent radical direct-action leftist group, people were signing their form to become a society. No one but me actually bothered to ask what their views were. I said "left like what, Tony Benn?". She explained they were more radical than Tony Benn, revolutionary and pro-agitation. Although she avoided answering at first. I passed after that.

I when to see Tony Benn speak once. I don't align with him, not even his own son does, however he was a great speaker and very personable. It was sad when he died.

Last edited by 0_equals_true on 01 Jan 2016, 7:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

So discriminatory speech that contributes to people wanting to commit suicide should be considered legitimate? Should be propagated by universities and given a platform as if it were a legitimate "side" to an argument? I live in a country that has laws about hate speech that are different from the American take on the issue, so I don't think we are ever going to agree on what it constitutes because of cultural differences in our respective countries and how we deal with discrimination. Why can transphobia not be discussed without inviting actual transphobes to express their transphobia? Surely we can take apart her "arguments" about trans people without having her there to express her transphobia. As I said, these things are already being discussed on university campuses all the time. She doesn't have to be there sponsored by the university and spouting her nonsense for people to talk about it and take it apart for the non-scientific garbage that it is.

That's anecdotal. I was under the impression that most people don't consider anecdotes to be legitimate evidence for or against an argument.

How are we to assess what causes someone to commit suicide? Other than those who actually tell people to commit suicide. There was trial recently where a woman repeatedly pestered her boyfriend to commit suicide, and goaded him for being too cowardly to go through with it. She gave him a lot of instruction, it was clear he was unsure about it and in need of real help. That is causing someone to commit suicide, if anything is.

Are you suggesting she be put on trial? What is the burden of proof in that case?

There are are many things that cause someone who is experiencing depressive episodes to commit suicide. I have talked people out of it, becuase I recognized they were in that microcosm. However literally anything could have triggered it. However you cannot attribute cause simply becuase someone said something unpleasant.

Greer never advocated for discrimination against trans people, she was talking about whether she considered them female. She even said out of courtesy she used the desired pronouns.

It is kind of absurd given women can be infertile or have hysterectomies, gender has a spectrum from intersex to trans. However she has a sort of has point that they don't fit the absolute idea of female, however like I said that absolute breaks down when you consider hormonal and genetic conditions.

The most absurd thing about is was calling it misogynist, which I criticised heavily, especially her views on Caitlyn Jenner.

Btw those transitioning still need to go through a process to make sure that is what they really want to do. It is down to the individual not all go through with it. I will use the desired pronouns whether they choose to operate or not. I will make an educated guess if I don't know.

To me identity is entirely personal. However the pronoun thing can go too far sometimes. Personally I use whatever pronoun they like, however it is understandable that people are sometimes confused.

I was surprised when biologist and feminist friend used he/she when I told her someone who she had once known as a man was now identifying as a woman (and I was using "she"). However I don't think she meant anything bad by it. She is not anti-trans by any stretch.

Trans people are not universally praising third wave feminism either. Some are critical of it, especially its hypocrisy.

Yes trans people are more likely to commit suicide, men are also more likely to commit suicide than women. However each person is different. Hurtful people are always going to be there, so it is important that there is support network to help them deal with it. Rather than to coddling them, so they never become resilient.

This is more to do with general attitudes not one person. You don't solve these issue by censoring people, you do it by proving people wrong as when they experience it more they realise it is not a threat or something to worry about.

Why are you defending a REAL feminazi like Germaine Greer? The fact that she's been excommunicated from the feminist movement is a step in the right direction. I doubt you'd be putting up a fight if muslim students petitioned to have a radical Islamic speaker on campus preaching the glory of Jihad and promoting terrorist violence. The feminist movement needs to excise the lunatic fringe elements and put this kind of extremely toxic, hateful strain of extremist feminism in the dustbin of the movements history.