- Date published:
5:30 pm, March 3rd, 2023 - 6 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:
Daily review is also your post.
This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Don’t forget to be kind to each other …
With an existential crisis slapping us in the face, we get distracted by these guys.
Good. The Moldovan language was a Soviet invention to separate Moldova from Romania. The Cyrillic alphabet was imposed on Moldavian to make it look more like Russian and less like Latin alphabet Romanian.
Left wing men supporting women’s rights so long as the women agree with the men. New sexism same as the old sexism.
In New Zealand this week the answer to Billy Bragg would be No. Thankfully in New Zealand when patriarchy-supporting women seek to suppress and shame the queer community, the Police get called to stop them.
Truly left wing men will always support women’s rights – so long as what the women want accords with the principles of natural justice.
We can argue about what those principles are, and we always will. In practice, what the women say may alter our conception of what natural justice actually is. But none of that is the point. The point is that natural justice is prior to any individual's claim to certain rights. Bragg is (clumsily no doubt) correct.
although I agree it has merits, here's the problem with this argument.
In a society that is still based around hierarchical domination and where that system still privileges men, men will always have the upper hand when it comes to determining what natural justice principles we, as a society, should be prioritising.
There's a reasonable amount of evidence that if women are asked in an open and informed way should female only spaces be kept or made into shared sex spaces by allowing self-IDing males into them, that most women will say keep single sex spaces. Men also believe this, but obviously it's got more meaning for women.
Where women's natural justice differs from men's, who gets to decide in a patriarchal society? Porn would be a good example here.
In left wing spaces, where the liberal idea of self-ID trumping single sex has gained ascendancy and where part of that ideological political movement has been No Debate (meaning that people are scared to speak up for fear of losing their jobs or being ostracised), one thing that happens is that left wing men like Bragg, who are either clueless about women's needs and/or are basically sexist, get an elevated voice and the people pushing back against him/them are castigated as the evil doers.
I can't emphasise how dangerous this is, that left wing men think it's ok to castigate feminists they disagree with as being like Nazis. Because the only way that the argument for natural justice first stands is if one believes that left wing gender critical feminists are doing things to trans people that are akin to the worst of human behaviour.
I've never seen left wing men talk about right women like they do about GCFs. I'm thinking about people like Jenny Shipley or Ruth Richardson.
Consider that compared to this,
This is what happens routinely when women talk about their sex based rights. The thing that is most telling is that I never see left wing, trans ally men pushing back against this. Including on TS. They never stand up and say "I disagree with GCF politics but it's not ok to make rape threats, this has to stop now, and here is what we should be doing to stop it"
And the message from that, and Bragg, is that it's ok to abuse, intimidate, and ostracise the women that left wing me disagree with. Which is in stark contrast to the messages from lw men about Ardern and Sturgeon. Again, the good women are to be supported, the evil ones cast out.
Natural justice, eh.
Bragg can oppose anti-abortion politics, or gender critical politics. But that's not the only thing happening here. And it's the other stuff that genderist lw men won't talk about.