Please be assured
I very often think accusations of virtue-signaling are unfair, even when I do think the accused is being fatuous or censorious or worse. Even then I generally think there’s some intention of doing good. Other times, though, it’s just unmistakably “Look at me I have ascended to the highest level.”
Like this:
Too funny. Please be assured that I have told the organisers to make sure all the other people they invite are not white women like me and that they are trans not like me. Behold my saintly generosity.
I’ll bite — what’s “VAWG” and what’s so bad about it that it can’t even be discussed?
Violence against women and girls – a big (biggest?) issue within feminism I’m sure you’ll agree. And here’s Patsy demanding fewer women on such discussions!
Yeah! What business is it of women’s?! Besides Patsy of course. It’s her business obviously but it’s not their business. Stupid Karens.
If whiteness isn’t about skin color, but is multiracial, how is she going to know if the panel contains white women or not? Just because they have black skin it doesn’t mean they aren’t white!
These people are really beginning to be disturbing.
Wait a minute – has she just made it so no-one will ever again invite her to a feminist event? Is that so she can then whine all over social media that she’s been ‘no-platformed’ by those ebil feminazis?
“… just a panel of white women discussing feminist issues or VAWG.” I gather this is some sort of worst case combination in her mind, but it seems clear the main concern is the latter part “women discussing feminist issues or VAWG”, because that’s just not “trans inclusive”, you know. Women aren’t allowed to talk about issues of importance to women, ever. The “white” part is added because those damn “white women” aka “Karens” don’t care about anybody else and so it’s perfectly fine to insult them and mock them and treat them as a subhuman class.
Even though she is one. It’s so ridiculous.
Once again, the pro-trans faction seems to be aping the incel/mens-rights movement. A strict reading of Patsy’s Tweet makes it clear she equates “trans” with “black”. She’d probably regard a panel as ‘inclusive’ if it had all-white panelists, so long as one or more were trans–which is a pity, because there really are issues around VAWG that affect the black community in vastly different ways. I would say that yes, a VAWG discussion that was solely white women would be failing to reach women who absolutely should be at the table.
But not a single bit of that has fuck-all to do with trans-inclusion. A trans woman with a high degree of ‘passing privilege’ may be targeted as any woman might be, but then she should be happy to learn from women how to deal with it (since those women have been dealing with it longer and more pervasively). And most trans women are targeted, instead, with homophobic violence from straight men freaked out by the idea of a ‘trap’.
To be honest: I don’t think the idea behind it is in itself ridiculous.
In STEM disciplines, conferences have been known to mainly invite old, white men as keynote speakers and several of them have adopted a policy of not giving a keynote unless there are also younger people, women and PoC as speakers. The work “manel” comes to mind…
So if a white feminist says she will not speak unless there are also women of colour speaking, I think that is also laudable.
Of course, to transfer this to the trans issue, you have to buy into the idea that women are privileged compared to trans women.
Sonderval @ 9
That’s a good point, but it’s not the impression I get from the statement. If she had said she valued diversity and wouldn’t speak if the panel were all white, I’d see it the way you describe. However, what she did say was very much on keeping with the “liberal feminist” condemnation of “white feminism”, their term for a feminism that has the audacity to focus on (presumedly white) women’s issues and does not consider men to be women.
@Sackbut
You are right, the phrase ” a panel of white women discussing feminist issues or VAWG” gives this impression.