clovenhooves
Article GC Purity Politics: A Threat to Unity? - Printable Version

+- clovenhooves (https://clovenhooves.org)
+-- Forum: The Personal Is Political (https://clovenhooves.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Gender Critical (https://clovenhooves.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Article GC Purity Politics: A Threat to Unity? (/showthread.php?tid=1100)



GC Purity Politics: A Threat to Unity? - Clover - Apr 28 2025

RadLeft Unity Substack, January 16 2024.

https://radleftunity.substack.com/p/gc-purity-politics-a-threat-to-unity

Quote:The balance of purity politics, a double-edged sword that has plagued leftist movements since time immemorial, has seen a resurgence in recent years.



RE: GC Purity Politics: A Threat to Unity? - Elsacat - Apr 28 2025

Quote:Frustrated and genuine people in the GC movement may point out how a majority of gender critical feminists do not support extreme right wing views and may often spend their time defending themselves tirelessly, much to the glee of trans rights activists who seek to use this image regardless of the truth to demonize feminists and hold people hostage within their own movement. It becomes increasingly difficult to defend GC movements as progressive or pro-woman when people hold increasing tolerance, or platform fascists on a regular basis.

I get so tired of that happening.

Quote:There is also a difference between moving the same direction with another movement on a single goal (conservatives, for example) vs actually including them in your movement and allowing them to “wear your skin” and political identity.

That too.

Quote:This does not mean engaging in petty infighting or witch hunts; rather, it requires a willingness to have difficult conversations and to challenge each other's assumptions, even our own.

I agree but I also wonder what that actually looks like in practice.


RE: GC Purity Politics: A Threat to Unity? - Clover - Apr 29 2025

(Apr 28 2025, 9:42 PM)Elsacat
Quote:This does not mean engaging in petty infighting or witch hunts; rather, it requires a willingness to have difficult conversations and to challenge each other's assumptions, even our own.

I agree but I also wonder what that actually looks like in practice.

Good question. I assume both the "petty infighting" and "witch hunts" refer to the dreaded purity spiral. With witch hunts possibly being like, going through a woman's posts/writings/content and maybe "nitpicking" on bits and pieces for not being "feminist" enough. And along with petty infighting, I assume it can all be grouped into what is defined in TRASHING: The Dark Side of Sisterhood as "trashing:"

Joreen, TRASHING: The Dark Side of Sisterhood What is "trashing," this colloquial term that expresses so much, yet explains so little? It is not disagreement; it is not conflict; it is not opposition. These are perfectly ordinary phenomena which, when engaged in mutually, honestly, and not excessively, are necessary to keep an organism or organization healthy and active. Trashing is a particularly vicious form of character assassination which amounts to psychological rape. It is manipulative, dishonest, and excessive. It is occasionally disguised by the rhetoric of honest conflict, or covered up by denying that any disapproval exists at all. But it is not done to expose disagreements or resolve differences. It is done to disparage and destroy.

She also talks about how to distinguish between politicial disagreements and trashing:

Joreen, TRASHING: The Dark Side of Sisterhood There is, of course, a fine line between trashing and political struggle, between character assassination and legitimate objections to undesirable behavior. Discerning the difference takes effort. Here are some pointers to follow. Trashing involves heavy use of the verb "to be" and only a light use of the verb "to do." It is what one is and not what one does that is objected to, and these objections cannot be easily phrased in terms of specific undesirable behaviors. Trashers also tend to use nouns and adjectives of a vague and general sort to express their objections to a particular person. These terms carry a negative connotation, but don't really tell you what's wrong. That is left to your imagination. Those being trashed can do nothing right. Because they are bad, their motives are bad, and hence their actions are always bad. There is no making up for past mistakes, because these are perceived as symptoms and not mistakes.

The tragic irony of feminists trashing each other is also a good read on "trashing." (It references this article by Joreen.)

These writings might help at least identify the trashing, witch hunts, petty infighting.

I think having difficult conversations and challenging assumptions only works when both parties are willing to actually see the others perspectives. There needs to be humility and the understanding that there can be deep-rooted reasons for another woman's understanding and viewpoint of a topic and may take time to unearth. And most importantly, there needs to be the common belief that both parties are working towards women's liberation. So even if they may not agree with each other politically, they can at least show understanding that the other woman is trying her best to help other women.

I think another thing is that sometimes a woman can be politically aligned with others in a feminism movement but as a human being, exhibits antisocial characteristics that makes it difficult to work together. I wonder if that is what happens in a lot of the examples given in the Joreen's trashing article. Like, all those women were part of "the Movement," how could this have happened so much? (This can happen in any social movement, not just feminist ones, but it seems very common in feminist movements. I agree with Jill Filipovic's "fighting over crumbs" analogy.)

I might be going off topic/rambling cuz it's late. I think the key, if one is trying to be "big tent" in a GC movement, is to keep the goal extremely clear and prevent scope creep. There needs to be a firm boundary. Fighting for sex based rights: a woman is an adult female human. Dress/act how you want, it doesn't change your sex. A mission statement that is unwavering. But then again, if the movement doesn't encompass all of what it means to be gender critical, is it a gender critical movement? Maybe it needs to be called something else then. I don't know how much the GC movement got watered down as opposed to it just getting hijacked and misused by a louder "just anti-trans" group. (Like now I'm getting into semantics on if "GC" is referring to "GC" as "gender abolition" GC which was probably always "small" as part of the feminist movement or a new "anti [trans]gender ideology" GC which was branched off of "gender abolition GC" with more focused criticism on how transgenderism was a modern twist on promoting/enforcing gender roles, which was easier for the right-wing to co-opt into just anti-trans.)

Okay I've rambled enough and it's bedtime.


RE: GC Purity Politics: A Threat to Unity? - Elsacat - Apr 29 2025

I'll have to reflect on this more, given that I just ranted pretty heavily about TRA handmaidens and right-wing Serena Joys in another thread. It probably ticks all the boxes for "trashing." Sometimes I just get really angry and resentful and my mental filter taps out and says "I'll come back when you've cooled down." like no, NOW IS WHEN I NEED YOU, FILTER!


RE: GC Purity Politics: A Threat to Unity? - Clover - Apr 29 2025

(Apr 29 2025, 10:44 AM)Elsacat I'll have to reflect on this more, given that I just ranted pretty heavily about TRA handmaidens and right-wing Serena Joys in another thread. It probably ticks all the boxes for "trashing." Sometimes I just get really angry and resentful and my mental filter taps out and says "I'll come back when you've cooled down." like no, NOW IS WHEN I NEED YOU, FILTER!

lol tbf I don't blame you. Also I guess it's strange because this concept of trashing is used in reference to the feminist movement. Are the "Serena Joys" and TRA handmaidens actually a part of the feminist movement..? Imo, I don't think so. So I don't know if I'd call it trashing. I mean, I guess it's trashing in like a general sense, not in the feminist movement sense described in these articles. Of course, it doesn't dismiss that yeah it's "wrong" to put the blame on women, but at the same time, expecting women to not feel anger at fellow women who seem to willingly aid in dismantling women's rights and promoting patriarchy seems like expecting women to be ever-patient Madonnas, which in itself is like internalized misogyny or something, imo. Like, seriously, how did trying to "work with" the right help? Yeah congrats now Trump is president and there are some EOs in place against transgenderism (while having sus right-wing elements sprinkled in), meanwhile so many programs and initiatives that help women are being dismantled and destroyed. Missed the forest for the trees, big time. And we're supposed to just gently coo while shit crumbles and be like "it's okay we will clean up this mess while consoling every person who is harmed, because we're womenfolk and cleaning and nurturing is in our nature uwu." I'm just rambling at this point.


RE: GC Purity Politics: A Threat to Unity? - Iota Aurigae - Apr 30 2025

Most of the people who I see complaining about purity spirals or whatever are conservatives who think they should be allowed to describe themselves as TERFs because they think it's about ragging on the trans every moment of the day


RE: GC Purity Politics: A Threat to Unity? - komorebi - Apr 30 2025

(Apr 30 2025, 1:47 AM)Iota Aurigae Most of the people who I see complaining about purity spirals or whatever are conservatives who think they should be allowed to describe themselves as TERFs because they think it's about ragging on the trans every moment of the day

You could say...they identify as TERFs... 🥴