We are a group of radical feminists campaigning on women’s issues from a leftist and anti-racist perspective.
Our previous article provoked considerable debate amongst feminist groups about alignment with the right and about Kellie-Jay Keen’s tactics, highlighting divisions over strategy and political approaches. This article reflects on KJK’s Australian and NZ tour and the resulting consequences for gender critical feminists in Australia. We argue that the fallout from the tour has been disastrous, and consequently, this is a conversation that we need to continue. This article is an attempt to continue that conversation from a radical feminist, anti-racist and left perspective.
First, although we disagree with KJK’s ideology and methods, we condemn the scenes of misogyny against the Let Women Speak (LWS) events in every location they were held, but which escalated significantly after the Melbourne event.
Source: Who won? Who lost? The fallout from Kellie-Jay Keen’s tour downunder – Feminist Left Australia
So disappointing that FLC is targeting KJK so savagely and unnecessarily.
This cannot be in the interest of any of the women & girls that FLC ‘says’ it supports.
I find it quite disturbing that FLC now says it ‘sees an opportunity for radical feminists to build a feminist movement aligned with leftist principles, rejecting all alliances with the right.’
This limited focus on a pathway that eliminates all the good/effective men & women who font identify as left and radical feminists – I find quite anathema & ultimately unproductive.
Exactly.
As for ‘a difference in strategy’. Strategy suggests action and the only person taking action here is KJK.
What has this faceless, nameless, group of negative nellies of the Left achieved? What action?
I agree.
KJK is one of a handful of women putting themselves in harms way and encouraging other women to be strong in defending our sex-based boundaries & human rights.
The common cause crosses many party lines & other ideological differences.
Women can’t afford to be ‘precious’ about our survival as a sex class.
Totally agree with your criticism about the negative reactions to KJK as she was not worth listening after all
You have completely misunderstood the purpose of KJKs rallies which was to reclaim space for other women to be heard. And THAT she has achieved. Internationally.
This is a news digest which posts extracts from a variety of news sources. FLC has not made any statement about KJK but has posted extracts from articles expressing a range of opinions including this extract from Feminist Left Australia. FLC is not focused on any pathway that eliminates anyone.
I apologise to FLC unreservedly for my error in ‘assuming’ that the views of ‘Feminist Left Australia’ were in fact the views of FLC.
I obviously did not look as closely as I should have @ the provenance of the views in the article.
I am relieved +++ that FLC is neutral, and also glad that all views are being aired transparently.
Again, many apologies to FLC.
Feminist Left Australia would likely achieve more for all women if they focused their work on defeating the unprecedented waves of misogyny facing Australian women and less on this petty, half arsed analysis of the LWS tour. If left wing British feminists had similarly taken the high road years ago when they chose to exclude And alienate Kellie Jay from their elite left wing mean girls club then we could all have made more progress by now than we have.
I agree Jazz.
‘Feminist’ left wing women publicly turning on any woman who is actively fighting for the same objective (women’s human rights) are playing into the hands of those who wish to harm women.
Totally agree, Jazz
It is concerning that this post is attracting more comments than all our other posts. There needs to be room to disagree on strategy without women focusing their venom on each other rather than the real culprits.
Indeed!
Absolutely. Without room to have diversity of opinion, it is just LGBTQ fascism all over again. Let us argue the issue not try to demolish the human.
So: everyone:
Here is the issue: one perspective is the single issue view of alliance. It argues: let me align with those who share my views on this single issue of the erasure of women by gender ideologists. If I am picky about my friends, I will be alone. United we are more powerful. Let us align, and let us win. We should not drag down those fighting the same battle.
The other perspective says: let me align with those who share the foundational values from which my commitment to challenge the erasure of women springs. If we join yet again with those who share our views on one single issue, we will be again trapped in yet another destructive collaboration just like we are in LGBTQ after gay rights and marriage equality were won. I cannot align with those who support oppression of women in other ways.
So what do you think? I need to hear what you think, to develop my own perspective. Can you present your perspective so that you persuade but do not bully and demolish? Different views are not a betrayal, they are the gift that will hone and grow our philosophy and strength. Dear women, do you remember how to argue? Constructively, effectively , compassionately? Do you remember how not to be defensive? Do you remember the pleasure of opening to the possibility of being right? Of being wrong? Do you remember the fruits of an open mind?
Please, tell me what you think, and your rationale for thinking it.
I believe that we need to align with those who share my views on this single issue of the erasure of women by gender ideologists.
If I am picky about my friends, I will be alone.
United we are more powerful.
We should not drag down those fighting the same battle.
Let us align, and let us win.
Let us win this right to exist as women, as a sex class – which will give us the breathing space of survival to fight another day on the subject of other women’s rights.
Thanks for that Anne. Your presenting an argument for your view, rather than just attacking the other side or just asserting it, helps me to breathe and provides me with much- needed food for thought. The new idea for me in what you have said is that we need to unite on this single issue so we can survive to fight another day. This is persuasive for me as I know the current threat is very dire. At the same time I do remember 30 years ago when I chose to let go of seperatism to align with gay men to fight for lesbian and gay rights, and I remember the warnings now from separatists which I dismissed at the time. I wonder if someone on the other side of this issue: someone who does not believe in single issue alignment would mind helping me think further on this by presenting a perspective to counteract the “ live to fight another day” argument for single issue alignment? I would really value the opportunity to develop my thinking further on this.
Thanks Dawn,
I would also welcome someone else presenting a persuasive perspective to counteract my own “ live to fight another day” argument for single issue alignment.
Like you I would really value the opportunity to develop my thinking further on this.
I entirely agree with the criticism about the negative response about the scary undermined and disrupted performances of Posie Parker in Australia and New Zealand to let Women Speak, as if after all she came with views which would have been unwanted and not correct acceptable ‘pure leftist’ anyway. We should be glad that an overseas feminist dares to speak in public in cities in Australia, and be disgusted and ashamed that we were not capable to make sure that she got the chance to speak in Australia.
Exactly