Two “gender critical” events in San Francisco were stormed by Antifa this weekend, where trans activists showed up with signs threatening to murder women critical of gender ideology. At one conference held at a Hilton hotel, an employee was assaulted while trying to prevent damage to the property.
Approximately 100 members of the US chapter of Women’s Declaration International (WDI), a global group of volunteers who campaign for women and girls’ sex-based rights, were in attendance for the conference, held on Saturday at the Hilton.
Slogans such as “Arm trans women, disarm cops,” and “Dykes hate TERFs,” were seen plastered on the Hilton signage and in surrounding areas, as well as stickers featuring the Antifa logo.
But the trans activist detractors didn’t stop at vandalism, and continued to escalate the situation by taking a hammer to the Hilton’s outdoor sign.
Dansky explained to Reduxx that a hotel manager saw the destruction, and attempted to intervene to prevent further damage. In response, one of the protestors physically assaulted him, reportedly punching the staff member in the head.
In the letter, AWID and its co-signatories stated that I had “weaponized “protection of women’s rights” to advocate for positions that misrepresent and regress from international norms and standards.
I will not dwell on these false and dangerous allegations, as I have done so elsewhere in great detail . . . The letter by AWID did however contain one novelty, which I found very concerning, namely its allegation that I reportedly continue to “perpetuate narratives upholding outdated and non-scientific understandings of binary biological sex.”
There is nothing outdated or unscientific about the binary nature of sex, and I would encourage signatories of this letter to seek out biologists for a conversation around this issue.
[T]he letter also has the intention of punishing and silencing me, a fate that many women, girls, and their allies across the world continue to experience when they speak on the issues of sex, gender, and gender identity.
Hence, and 21st of June 2023, a day before my interactive dialogue at the Human Rights Council, 781 organizations and more than 2,600 individuals from over 60 countries signed a letter entitled “Let the UN Special Rapporteur on VAWG Deliver her Mandate”.
I was and continue to be gravely concerned at the way in which organizations that claim to be human rights centered and feminist, and from which a number are accredited with the human rights council, still continue to position themselves as the custodians of the feminist movement, villainizing those who do not agree with their views, and attempt to ban discussions on issues that many women and girls, in all their diversity, as well as their societies clearly care about.
Australian Feminists for Women’s Rights (AF4WR) is a collective of feminists from all over Australia campaigning for women’s sex-based rights protections. Explicitly left-wing but not aligned to any political party, AF4WR came together to provide information, analysis and advocacy on women’s and girls’ rights in the face of the imposition of the ideology of gender.
Whether it comes from the left or liberal centre—in the form of gender identity—or the conservative or religious right—in the form of a return to gender traditionalism—the ideology of gender represents an attack on the hard-won rights of women. We are here to resist those attacks and to fight for the advancement of women’s rights within a broader context of social and economic justice for all.
Dr. Gwendolyn Riddick, an OB-GYN, was murdered by her ex at a local North Carolina park last Sunday during a custody exchange. This slaughter took place in public in front of her three year-old son and park goers. Dr. Riddick’s ex had assaulted her on multiple occasions previously. She was seeking sole custody of her toddler.
Another mother halfway across the country in Texas met the same fate last week during a custody exchange of her toddler. It is not uncommon for women and children to be harmed, or even murdered as these mothers were, as a result of having to share custody.
When you back up and think about it, it is insane that a mother is forced to do this, to hand over her baby to a violent perpetrator, or, actually, to any man. Women who give life, nurture children and are the primary bond should not have to fight legally to keep or protect them. But that is what happens in a patriarchically-organized society.
It’s been so many millennia that men have had this power, it’s like fish in water. Women don’t recognize that it is the patriarchal order that underpins this insanity and that it is just not natural or normal or right. Or, if they do, they cannot envision a way out of the patriarchal swamp.
Fortunately, a network of European women, experts in matriarchies of the past and present, have a vision for how “egalitarian matriarchies” provide for mothers keeping their children with them, as well for a better society at large.
There is no traditional marriage in a modern matriarchy. Marriage has served as a means of male control and subjugation of women. Women are not given, symbolically or otherwise, by their fathers to husbands. Instead, women stay connected with their maternal clan and are free to leave the biological father without him retaining any control if the relationship does not work out.
Despite greater gender equality, some women still prefer traditional gender roles in heterosexual relationships. We set out to discover why.
We found women who preferred these romance conventions were less likely to identify as a feminist. They were also higher on benevolent sexism, which is a chivalrous form of sexism that idealises women, but also views them as less competent and needing men’s protection. We even found that they were higher on hostile sexism, which is a more overt form of sexism towards women.
Old-fashioned romance might seem benign and even enchanting. But some might find it problematic if it reinforces inequality between women and men in romantic relationships. We know that even subtle forms of everyday sexism and benevolent sexism are harmful to women’s wellbeing and success.
The essence of imperialism is, above all, to dominate, possess, own, appropriate, and thoroughly expropriate people considered inferior. One of the subjugated peoples within capitalist societies is the class of women. Dominant men, including leftists and liberals, have colluded with capitalism to carry out various forms of the colonisation of women. The most important of these industries are pornography, prostitution, and surrogacy. These are huge money-making industries and are among the most lucrative in the modern global economy. One of their mottos is ‘sex work is work,’ which is nothing more than a succinct statement that the colonisation of women’s bodies is a legitimate capitalistic agenda and endeavour. The leftists, supposedly opposed to capitalism, become spokespeople and ideologues of the sex industry, the most odious and corrupt of all capitalist industries, and promote the colonisation of women all over the world.
But, over the past 20 years or so, another form of the colonisation of women has emerged. This is transgenderism or the trans ideology movement. In the West as well as in Japan and South Korea, those who chant the mantra ‘sex work is work’ are one with those who chant the mantra ‘trans women are women.’ They constitute almost the same political movement, the same ideological current, and the same interest group.
Why did these two fuse together everywhere in the world? Why does this happen both in the West and in the East, where the cultures and histories are entirely different? Is it a just coincidence?
No, this is not an accident. The reason why they fuse together is that they have the same roots, the same dynamics, and the same essence: they are both imperialist men’s rights movements that seek to dominate and colonise women, women’s bodies, and women’s sexuality.
Let the UN Special Rapporteur on VAWG Deliver her Mandate
We, the undersigned, representatives of feminist, women’s and human rights organisations from the four corners of the world, from the South and the North, are appalled by the attacks against Reem Alsalem, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls – the latest of which is an open letter by AWID.
According to the UN Human Rights Council’s resolution 1994/45, the mandate of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women and Girls is to seek and receive information on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences, and to respond effectively to such information. She is also tasked to work closely with all special procedures and other human rights mechanisms of the Human Rights Council and with the treaty bodies, so that they systematically integrate the human rights of women and a gender perspective into their work.
We are grateful to Ms Alsalem for fulfilling her mandate and adopting a comprehensive and universal approach to the elimination of violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences, including causes of violence against women relating to the civil, cultural, economic, political and social spheres. . . .
. . .
Ms Alsalem is currently being subjected to the same practices she had expressed concerns about and wanted women to be protected from. In her May 22, 2023 statement, Reem Alsalem denounced “the escalation of intimidation and threats against women and girls for expressing their opinions and beliefs regarding their needs and rights based on their sex and/or sexual orientation”.
By doing so, Ms Alsalem has done exactly what the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls is tasked to do by the UN Human Rights Council: she is transmitting urgent appeals and communications to States regarding alleged cases of violence against women and girls.
An attack on her is an attack on us, and it is an attempt to silence us through silencing her.
Recalling the UNHRC resolution 1994/45, we urge the United Nations to protect Reem Alsalem, and provide her all possible facilities to continue her mandate to seek, receive and communicate information on violence and intimidation against women and girls, its causes and consequences.
Stories in the news week demonstrate the extent to which Oxfam has become a propaganda machine for gender identity ideology, engaging in the most disgusting misogyny and vilification of feminists.
In June 2021, The Telegraph reported on an Oxfam staff training document called ‘Learning About Trans Rights and Inclusion’.
This manual claimed that “Mainstream feminism centres on privileged white women and demands that ‘bad men’ be fired or imprisoned”, which, it adds, “Legitimises criminal punishment, harming black and other marginalised people”. The text was accompanied by a cartoon of a weeping white woman.
The children’s bingo game, ‘Wonder Women’, celebrated 48 inspirational women, including Jane Austen, Rosa Parks, Greta Thunberg and Malala Yousafzai. More particularly, JK Rowling and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie were also included, as was trans-identified actor Elliot (formerly Ellen) Page.
Oxfam withdrew the game from sale due to pressure from gender zealots within the organisation. It told staff in an email, “We took the decision to remove the game from sale following concerns raised by trans and non-binary colleagues who told us it didn’t live up to our commitment to respect people of all genders”.
Writing in Unherd, Julie Bindel reported on an Oxfam employee was hounded out of her job after questioning a claim that JK Rowling is ‘transphobic’.
This heartbreaking story came to light within days of Oxfam releasing a video for Pride Month which was not only blatant propaganda for gender ideology but also a shocking demonization of gender critical voices.
It does, however, still contain a scene which normalises the medicalisation of gender non-conforming children and teenagers by depicting a very young ‘trans man’ with mastectomy scars and a character wearing a t-shirt which reads ‘protect trans kids’.
Lets not forget that Oxfam employees, including former country director, Roland van Hauwermeiren, were sexually abusing 12 and 13 year old girls while based in Haiti, supposedly providing aid after an earthquake which killed 250,000 people.
A subsequent investigation found that Oxfam had failed to investigate allegations about the sexual abuse of children, repeatedly fell below expected standards of safeguarding, tried to cover up the Haiti scandal and failed to care for the victims.
Many people think Nazi Germany was beaten only through military violence, and mainly by men. As Barack Obama said in 2009: “Nonviolence could not have halted Hitler’s armies”. In fact, non-violent action was widely used in resisting Nazism. Brave women often led it. They later got little recognition, though this is now changing.
Some German women used overt, concentrated tactics – such as those who were thrown into jail for speaking out against Hitler, and the “Rosenstrasse” group, who protested in Berlin in 1943. These non-Jewish women shouted for their Jewish husbands to be set free, despite the threat of being machine-gunned. Amazingly, they succeeded – at least in the short term – with about 2,000 men released. Most of these men survived the war.
Resistance campaigns ranged from those waged by individuals to those involving large sections of the population. For example, about 10,000 Norwegian teachers, supported by around 100,000 parents, successfully resisted the Nazification of schools. Dutch strikes in 1941 and 1943 involved hundreds of thousands.
But secret, dispersed tactics were more common.
Flyers were written by Sophie Scholl’s White Rose group and posted around the country. Scholl was a kindergarten teacher, philosophy student and daughter of an ardent Nazi critic. She founded White Rose with her brother Hans and a group of like-minded friends in 1942.
She and Hans were arrested after dropping flyers into a courtyard at a Munich university. Convicted of high treason by the Nazis, she was executed in Munich on 22 February 1943, aged just 21.
Women led smuggling operations, hiding Jewish people and other evaders from the Holocaust. Individuals like young Dutchwoman Hannie Schaft hid people in their homes.
Groups like the National Movement Against Racism, led by Suzanne Spaak, a wealthy Belgian based in Paris, smuggled many children to remote villages.
Spying, though non-violent, often helped the Allies carry out violence.
Some women were pacifists, such as SOE radio operator Noor Inayat Khan. She came from Indian Muslim royalty, and would be shot in Dachau concentration camp. She had struggled with the moral questions of war, as her brother Vilayat explained:
[We] had been brought up with the policy of Gandhi’s nonviolence, and at the outbreak of war we discussed what we would do. She said, ‘Well, I must do something, but I don’t want to kill anyone.’
Resistance came at a cost. Exact figures are hard to establish, but it’s thought that more than 4,000 women of various ages were hanged by Nazi forces (separate to those who died in the Holocaust). Many more were shot or guillotined. Although terrible, this is a tiny fraction of the 68 million or more killed by military violence during the war.
Two “gender critical” events in San Francisco were stormed by Antifa this weekend, where trans activists showed up with signs threatening to murder women critical of gender ideology. At one conference held at a Hilton hotel, an employee was assaulted while trying to prevent damage to the property.
