Gender ideology is the antithesis of feminism. Where this becomes most disturbing is that it is a central tenet to all feminism that women’s voices are welcome, even pro-patriarchal voices are heard within the feminist movement. Censoring one of the most important schools of feminism which is radical—root—looking at sex oppression of women and looking to dismantle the patriarchy, which really has no place for any discussion of gender at all so this whole debate is moot right? But excluding those radical feminists, who hold those long standing and workable beliefs, and advocate only for females because we see clearly the discrimination on the basis of sex, is frankly very frightening to me.
We understand that in an increasingly hostile conversation regarding trans inclusion from in [sic] the mainstream press and certain sects of feminism, it is important for us to reiterate that we are a trans-inclusive organisation and that we stand in solidarity with all trans people in the face of mockery, denigration, humiliation and discrimination with regards to accessing healthcare and other legal rights. We wish to reiterate as members of the collective that we believe that feminism is a political project that works in service of all of us.
I am sorry but, without denigrating "transwomen" or excluding anyone from their human rights, it is not possible to argue that these male-bodied people are women because they are and will always be of the male sex. Sex is immutable. "Transwomen" are "transwomen". The "Gender" "Recognition" Act 2004 has created a "legal fiction" of "gender" which is actually undefined.
The key to understanding is to look at the use of the word "gender". I hope that you have an Oxford English Dictionary to hand.
Gender has three meanings: (1) the original meaning is a term of grammar for languages where you have masculine or feminine or neuter nouns; (2) most ordinary people and many writers use the term "gender" when they actually mean sex, the reproductive category of human beings, because the word sex has come to mean sexual intercourse. This usage causes immense confusion! Also please note that the Victorians used the word sex correctly and without embarrassment; (3) a state of mind or a set of stereotypes based on common male or female behaviours. This meaning was coined by the psychologists Dr John Money, Dr Alfred Kinsey and Harry Benjamin in the US in the 1950s. They prescribed the newly discovered female hormone estrogen to a handful of transsexual men. Surgery was also improving rapidly. In order to justify their treatment these psychologists invented the idea of a separation between real, biological sex and an "inner" "gender identity" which somehow was separate from the body, perhaps in the mind. The patients accepted this explanation and became gradually more confident in claiming recognition for their new "gender" status. This is the use which causes a problem because it cannot be defined.
Moreover postulating a separation of the mind from the body is actually a form of insanity. The Gender Recognition Act 2004 conflates the meaning of the words sex and "gender" in a broken and illogical chain of reasoning. The word "gender" is not defined in the Act (only gender dysphoria is defined). The GRA "recognises" a term which is not defined. For these reasons the GRA is not good legislation. I am a "gender critical" feminist because I question the use of the word "gender" and I want everyone to use the word sex when they mean the reproductive category. All other consequences flow from these fundamental distinctions.
It is not possible to reconcile the sex-based needs and rights of women with the "gender"-based claims of transgender people. There is however an alternative for trans: repeal the GRA and remove the protected characteristic of "gender reassignment" (a coy euphemism for life-threatening surgery!) from the Equality Act 2010. New groups are pursuing this. GD sufferers will still be protected by the PC of "disability" - since GD is defined as and actually is a severe mental disorder (GRA S25).
I hope that you now understand why criticism of the stance of the Feminist Library on "trans" matters is unlikely to abate. No amount of "re-education" can alter the truth of sex. "Gender" is not sex. Please re-read my e-mail above and think about what I am saying.
The Billboard with a love message for Kid's Author , was taken down after one complaint of deemed Transphobia.
Well one single effing man cries Terf and Transphobia and these businesses submit on their knees. Similar thing happened with the business "Innocent" this weekend.
Thanks for this article Genevieve Gluck. It's shocking that now Women only spaces and Women only definitions need to include men. Still can't believe this madness is shaping into reality.
In 2017 its charitable object was 'Charitable objects
TO ADVANCE EDUCATION FOR THE PUBLIC BY: 1) OPERATING AND MAINTAINING FOR GENERAL USE A SPECIALIST LIBRARY OF FICTION, NON-FICTION AND ARCHIVE RESEARCH MATERIALS RELATING TO THE POSITION OF WOMEN IN SOCIETY AND; 2) PROVIDING OTHER FACILITIES FOR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH INTO THE POSITION OF WOMEN IN SOCIETY.
marvellous comment on Mumsnet about The 'Feminist' Library by BlackForrestCake 'If your veganism doesn’t include steak, it's not veganism. Be kind.'
thanks I didn't realise the connection with no platforming Selina ... its sometimes hard to keep up with the torrent of rubbish
for those interested an underground GC feminist did a little googling this morning and found some interesting stuff about the library. In 2019 it seems to have been dissolved as a legal entity and then was reformed legally speaking. Its currently a year over due with accounts https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-search/-/charity-details/5102479/charity-overview
Gender ideology is the antithesis of feminism. Where this becomes most disturbing is that it is a central tenet to all feminism that women’s voices are welcome, even pro-patriarchal voices are heard within the feminist movement. Censoring one of the most important schools of feminism which is radical—root—looking at sex oppression of women and looking to dismantle the patriarchy, which really has no place for any discussion of gender at all so this whole debate is moot right? But excluding those radical feminists, who hold those long standing and workable beliefs, and advocate only for females because we see clearly the discrimination on the basis of sex, is frankly very frightening to me.
I have written to the Feminist Library, as follows:
Dear Ladies (for I assume that you are mainly ladies),
I have been alerted to a statement which you posted on your website two days ago: https://feministlibrary.co.uk/statement-on-transphobia-and-accountability/
In particular:
We understand that in an increasingly hostile conversation regarding trans inclusion from in [sic] the mainstream press and certain sects of feminism, it is important for us to reiterate that we are a trans-inclusive organisation and that we stand in solidarity with all trans people in the face of mockery, denigration, humiliation and discrimination with regards to accessing healthcare and other legal rights. We wish to reiterate as members of the collective that we believe that feminism is a political project that works in service of all of us.
I am sorry but, without denigrating "transwomen" or excluding anyone from their human rights, it is not possible to argue that these male-bodied people are women because they are and will always be of the male sex. Sex is immutable. "Transwomen" are "transwomen". The "Gender" "Recognition" Act 2004 has created a "legal fiction" of "gender" which is actually undefined.
The key to understanding is to look at the use of the word "gender". I hope that you have an Oxford English Dictionary to hand.
Gender has three meanings: (1) the original meaning is a term of grammar for languages where you have masculine or feminine or neuter nouns; (2) most ordinary people and many writers use the term "gender" when they actually mean sex, the reproductive category of human beings, because the word sex has come to mean sexual intercourse. This usage causes immense confusion! Also please note that the Victorians used the word sex correctly and without embarrassment; (3) a state of mind or a set of stereotypes based on common male or female behaviours. This meaning was coined by the psychologists Dr John Money, Dr Alfred Kinsey and Harry Benjamin in the US in the 1950s. They prescribed the newly discovered female hormone estrogen to a handful of transsexual men. Surgery was also improving rapidly. In order to justify their treatment these psychologists invented the idea of a separation between real, biological sex and an "inner" "gender identity" which somehow was separate from the body, perhaps in the mind. The patients accepted this explanation and became gradually more confident in claiming recognition for their new "gender" status. This is the use which causes a problem because it cannot be defined.
Moreover postulating a separation of the mind from the body is actually a form of insanity. The Gender Recognition Act 2004 conflates the meaning of the words sex and "gender" in a broken and illogical chain of reasoning. The word "gender" is not defined in the Act (only gender dysphoria is defined). The GRA "recognises" a term which is not defined. For these reasons the GRA is not good legislation. I am a "gender critical" feminist because I question the use of the word "gender" and I want everyone to use the word sex when they mean the reproductive category. All other consequences flow from these fundamental distinctions.
It is not possible to reconcile the sex-based needs and rights of women with the "gender"-based claims of transgender people. There is however an alternative for trans: repeal the GRA and remove the protected characteristic of "gender reassignment" (a coy euphemism for life-threatening surgery!) from the Equality Act 2010. New groups are pursuing this. GD sufferers will still be protected by the PC of "disability" - since GD is defined as and actually is a severe mental disorder (GRA S25).
I hope that you now understand why criticism of the stance of the Feminist Library on "trans" matters is unlikely to abate. No amount of "re-education" can alter the truth of sex. "Gender" is not sex. Please re-read my e-mail above and think about what I am saying.
Thank you.
Best wishes
Una-Jane Winfield
(Organic Chemist, gender critical feminist, transwidow - www.transwidows.com)
Off topic but important, please share for the UK, last day to let the government know nobody who cares about females wants males in their toilets.
https://twitter.com/Transgendertrd/status/1354765343332433921
and here https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-search/-/charity-details/5102479/what-who-how-where they have removed 'women' from their objects and just 'mankind'. I diagnose Handmaiden Entryism
Isn't it the same thing happening:
The Billboard with a love message for Kid's Author , was taken down after one complaint of deemed Transphobia.
Well one single effing man cries Terf and Transphobia and these businesses submit on their knees. Similar thing happened with the business "Innocent" this weekend.
Thanks for this article Genevieve Gluck. It's shocking that now Women only spaces and Women only definitions need to include men. Still can't believe this madness is shaping into reality.
Thanks for this response. Can I also recommend this article which unpicks the statement beautifully
https://theblisteringrebuttal.substack.com/p/holding-the-fauxminist-library-accountable
In 2017 its charitable object was 'Charitable objects
TO ADVANCE EDUCATION FOR THE PUBLIC BY: 1) OPERATING AND MAINTAINING FOR GENERAL USE A SPECIALIST LIBRARY OF FICTION, NON-FICTION AND ARCHIVE RESEARCH MATERIALS RELATING TO THE POSITION OF WOMEN IN SOCIETY AND; 2) PROVIDING OTHER FACILITIES FOR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH INTO THE POSITION OF WOMEN IN SOCIETY.
'holding each other to account'! = Agreeing to believe in falsehoods
where is this library?