This is my second letter in my exchange with Julie Bindel, in response to the question: "Can feminist causes be furthered by working with right wing or religious people and groups?
"What does it mean to “ally” with someone?" This is such an important question. I've rarely seen the vaguely-defined idea of allyship used for anything but silencing women. It's not only happening with women who make up their own minds about with whom they will associate but with women who will not adhere to the notion that anyone deemed an "ally" is not to be criticised, publicly or otherwise. Women are now instantly and enthusiastically censored for "attacking allies" even when our concerns are not only justified but painfully obvious. We're told to be discreet and bide our time even as the "allies" tear down the basics queer theory style before our very eyes and replace them with enforced hero worship. I've watched from a small and utterly captured country as people who are supposedly fighting for women and girls exploit this idea to raise their own public image to cult like proportions while the women on the ground, pointing to the danger of creating another sacred caste, are framed as villains and lunatics. It's a dire situation. I hope you will write more about the ally question.
If you want to define "ally", first I think you need to distinguish between an alliance vs. allyship.
Alliances have been around for millennia and are based on reciprocity. I scratch your back, you scratch mine.
'Allyship' is a recent concept invented by the woke movement, and it's completely a one-way street. One could summarize allyship as "You scratch my back, I check your privilege".
Women are constantly told they need to provide *allyship* to the transgender community, and that they should never, ever, ever attempt any kind of *alliance* with socially conservative men. It seems to me that of the two options, women are better off in an *alliance* with socially conservative men, because at least it can be mutually beneficial (e.g. Fox News gains legitimacy by hosting gender-critical feminists who agree with pushing back against transanity, while the feminists themselves gain wider audience exposure. Both sides get something out of it, so it's a useful if shaky alliance of convenience).
Providing *allyship* to the trans community, on the other hand, is never going to yield any benefits for women apart from some opportunities to virtue signal, because allyship is NOT a reciprocal arrangement. I personally think it takes a certain amount of narcissism to expect allyship from anyone; it reminds me of what Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie once described as the woke mentality (though she didn't use the word woke):
"In certain young people today...I notice what I find increasingly troubling: a cold-blooded grasping, a hunger to take and take and take, but never give; a massive sense of entitlement; an inability to show gratitude; an ease with dishonesty and pretension and selfishness that is couched in the language of self-care; an expectation always to be helped and rewarded no matter whether deserving or not; language that is slick and sleek but with little emotional intelligence; an astonishing level of self-absorption; an unrealistic expectation of puritanism from others...I find it obscene."
Thank you Meghan, I understand you. But I am repelled by men like Carlson and most all US Republican men, and women. I won’t share a good gender critical article on social media when it’s promoting an anti-woman, anti-choice, patriarchal publication or viewpoint.
Maybe it’s good that you can. Hopefully you can shed some Feminist cells!
No! I don’t. I am repelled by the politics of the Republican Party (And don’t think much of the Democrats either) And also all patriarchal religions.. not the individuals, the beliefs, the politics. Why would you ask me if I think I’m toxic?
You are so brave and so strong! Thank God, we have people like you who refrain from sharing articles from the men who are openly against the objectification of women, the deadbeat dads who never pay child support, and those advocating to nullify biological sex-thus placing women in danger. I’m not saying that I agree with all of their conservative values, I don’t, but please point to some “far left” liberals supporting all of the above 👆.....I’ll wait
Interesting! This all really does reinforce for me, though, that when feminists are accused of "allying with the far right," that could mean all sorts of things (and does)....
I don't see any feminist or feminist group publicly allying with a far right group... Personally I don't care who attends my events, what political beliefs my security have, etc., but we tend to do woma-centered stuff, usually, which counts out actually officially allying with far right groups. This is why I'm always asking, in response to such accusations, WHO is actually doing this!?!? Because I don't actually think any feminists are...
"What does it mean to “ally” with someone?" This is such an important question. I've rarely seen the vaguely-defined idea of allyship used for anything but silencing women. It's not only happening with women who make up their own minds about with whom they will associate but with women who will not adhere to the notion that anyone deemed an "ally" is not to be criticised, publicly or otherwise. Women are now instantly and enthusiastically censored for "attacking allies" even when our concerns are not only justified but painfully obvious. We're told to be discreet and bide our time even as the "allies" tear down the basics queer theory style before our very eyes and replace them with enforced hero worship. I've watched from a small and utterly captured country as people who are supposedly fighting for women and girls exploit this idea to raise their own public image to cult like proportions while the women on the ground, pointing to the danger of creating another sacred caste, are framed as villains and lunatics. It's a dire situation. I hope you will write more about the ally question.
If you want to define "ally", first I think you need to distinguish between an alliance vs. allyship.
Alliances have been around for millennia and are based on reciprocity. I scratch your back, you scratch mine.
'Allyship' is a recent concept invented by the woke movement, and it's completely a one-way street. One could summarize allyship as "You scratch my back, I check your privilege".
Women are constantly told they need to provide *allyship* to the transgender community, and that they should never, ever, ever attempt any kind of *alliance* with socially conservative men. It seems to me that of the two options, women are better off in an *alliance* with socially conservative men, because at least it can be mutually beneficial (e.g. Fox News gains legitimacy by hosting gender-critical feminists who agree with pushing back against transanity, while the feminists themselves gain wider audience exposure. Both sides get something out of it, so it's a useful if shaky alliance of convenience).
Providing *allyship* to the trans community, on the other hand, is never going to yield any benefits for women apart from some opportunities to virtue signal, because allyship is NOT a reciprocal arrangement. I personally think it takes a certain amount of narcissism to expect allyship from anyone; it reminds me of what Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie once described as the woke mentality (though she didn't use the word woke):
"In certain young people today...I notice what I find increasingly troubling: a cold-blooded grasping, a hunger to take and take and take, but never give; a massive sense of entitlement; an inability to show gratitude; an ease with dishonesty and pretension and selfishness that is couched in the language of self-care; an expectation always to be helped and rewarded no matter whether deserving or not; language that is slick and sleek but with little emotional intelligence; an astonishing level of self-absorption; an unrealistic expectation of puritanism from others...I find it obscene."
Thank you Meghan, I understand you. But I am repelled by men like Carlson and most all US Republican men, and women. I won’t share a good gender critical article on social media when it’s promoting an anti-woman, anti-choice, patriarchal publication or viewpoint.
Maybe it’s good that you can. Hopefully you can shed some Feminist cells!
You are repelled by Republican men and women? Simply because they are Republican? This is pretty toxic don't you think?
No! I don’t. I am repelled by the politics of the Republican Party (And don’t think much of the Democrats either) And also all patriarchal religions.. not the individuals, the beliefs, the politics. Why would you ask me if I think I’m toxic?
Because I don't think it's good to hate people we don't know, just because they vote for a different party than we do...
I don’t either. And I don’t hate anybody.
Sorry... 'repelled' I should have said. Repelled implies disgust, no?
You are so brave and so strong! Thank God, we have people like you who refrain from sharing articles from the men who are openly against the objectification of women, the deadbeat dads who never pay child support, and those advocating to nullify biological sex-thus placing women in danger. I’m not saying that I agree with all of their conservative values, I don’t, but please point to some “far left” liberals supporting all of the above 👆.....I’ll wait
Interesting! This all really does reinforce for me, though, that when feminists are accused of "allying with the far right," that could mean all sorts of things (and does)....
I don't see any feminist or feminist group publicly allying with a far right group... Personally I don't care who attends my events, what political beliefs my security have, etc., but we tend to do woma-centered stuff, usually, which counts out actually officially allying with far right groups. This is why I'm always asking, in response to such accusations, WHO is actually doing this!?!? Because I don't actually think any feminists are...