THEGAYUK

Tag: Germaine Greer

All the latest breaking news on Germaine Greer. Browse THEGAYUK’s complete collection of news, articles and commentary on Germaine Greer.

  • COMMENT | Germaine Greer And The Case Of No-Platforming

    Irony is dead, and Germaine Greer killed it.

    Last week, the legendary radical feminist went on Newsnight, the BBC’s flagship current affairs programme, to complain about being no-platformed. She was meant to give a talk about “Women in Power: The Lessons of the 20th Century” at Cardiff University when the student union’s women’s officer, Rachel Melhuish launched a petition to disinvite Greer because she has “demonstrated time and again her misogynistic views towards trans women….” Greer was indignant, indicating she would not speak at the university before reversing course and agreeing to appear as planned. This hasn’t stopped the chattering classes from fiercely debating the merits of no-platforming, with the consensus being that it’s an unacceptable affront to free speech.

    They’re missing the point, the lot of them. No-platforming doesn’t infringe on anyone’s right to free speech.

    Rather, no platforming is an exercise in free speech. As the feminist blogger Stavvers wrote, no-platforming is a “bottom up” movement where “those who organise events can democratically and transparently decide who to invite, and who not to.” We can choose to whom we listen, which she rightly contends is an oft overlooked exercise of free speech.

    Yet critics of no-platforming argue it “censors” controversial opinions—a baseless claim in light of the fact that we’ve spent much of the last week debating Greer’s position on trans people and her right to espouse it wherever and whenever she likes. That’s partly down to the fact that Germaine Greer already has a massive platform. Hell, simply being protested landed Greer right back on the BBC, where she makes regular appearances. So she has plenty of opportunities to speak her mind.

    But just because someone has a platform doesn’t mean we have to listen. Earlier this year comedian Kate Smurthwaite’s gig at Goldsmiths College was pulled because of low ticket sales and a student protest. Smurthwaite’s views on sex workers and Muslim women, in particular, were singled out by those against her appearance. Opponents of no-platforming rallied to her defence, leading the writer and long-time opponent of no-platforming, Ian Dunt, to write that “the potential for offence is trumping the right to free speech.”

    But this completely ignores the fact that the feminist group which organised the protest was itself exercising its rights. It’s not some Orwellian conspiracy that kept Smurthwaite from performing, but rather the free market. People have a right to choose whom they see, support, or engage with. Even if Smurthwaite wasn’t going to reference sex work or hijab in her performance (the same as Greer wasn’t invited to Cardiff to speak on trans issues), her positions were known and unpalatable enough to spark a backlash—one that worked.

    And this is where opponents of no-platforming miss the mark. Freedom of speech does not actually guarantee you a right to a platform, nor does it guarantee you freedom from the consequences of your speech. It doesn’t mean that you can say something incredibly offensive and then expect it to be forgiven or ignored. It, quite simply, guarantees that the government won’t arrest you for expressing a dissenting opinion.

    Several years ago, I wrote a blog defending Pauline Howe, a Norwich grandmother who was visited by the police for writing a letter to her local council about “sodomites” like me and our “perverted sexual practises.” Six years later, I still stand by Howe. But I sure as hell wouldn’t share a platform with her, because I’m not interested in debating my identity or equality with someone who clearly disparages the former and denies the latter.

    Yet even at 23, I could still recognise that Howe had the right to expressing her opinion without the police knocking round. When I blogged about Howe, I was still a student, a fact that may come as a shock to opponents of no-platforming. Many of them have designated universities as ground zero in the battle over free speech. The ever-enlightened Brendan O’Neill (himself a frequent target of no-platforming) penned a scathing indictment of what he termed “Stepford students” but what I would consider people with better things to do than rehash the previous generation’s culture wars. “Where once students might have allowed their eyes and ears to be bombarded by everything from risqué political propaganda to raunchy rock,” O’Neill whinges, in today’s PC-gone-mad world “the ‘no platform’ policy of various student unions is forever being expanded to keep off campus pretty much anyone whose views don’t chime perfectly with the prevailing groupthink”.

    It’s a gross oversimplification, particularly when it comes with no-platforming those who would deny trans identities. When earlier this month both the radical feminist Julie Bindel and, later, the conservative gay writer Milo Yiannopoulos were effectively no-platformed by the University of Manchester’s Student Union(ironically in debate they were to square off in over free speech and feminism), pundits were outraged, with the Telegraph’s Rod Ardehali writing that “it is not up to unions to start creating their own laws and policing which views are acceptable and which are not.”

    Except, that is exactly the role of student unions, who are meant to represent the concerns of the students who elected them. The University of Manchester’s Student Union were concerned about some particularly vicious comments by Bindel and Yiannopoulos and the climate their presence (and likely comments) would create on campus. They valued the emotional wellbeing of their trans students over allowing a debate between a couple of cis people with a record of pretty terrible comments on trans individuals (Milo has referred to trans folks as suffering a “psychiatric disorder,” even though this is medically inaccurate). They also, likely, didn’t wish to be associated with such prejudice.

    This isn’t an affront to free speech, but rather a democratically elected union doing its job and refusing its platform to speakers it feels do not advance intellectually rigorous or particularly relevant arguments. Universities should be a place for debating ideas, not people, and both Bindel and Yiannopoulos have a history of doing the latter. By no-platforming them, the Student Union are not saying they don’t have a right to speak, but rather that they will not co-sign on oppressive and divisive bigotry by offering them a platform.

    Critics contend that Greer, Smurthwaite, Bindel and Yiannopoulos were all invited to speak on issues apart from those for which they were no-platformed, and this is a valid criticism. After all, we are all problematic in our own ways. We are also the sum total of our ideology, though. Writing at the Guardian, Kate Lyons pointed out that for those who advocated no-platforming Greer “it’s not a matter of weighing up the sum of Greer’s work and deciding that on the balance of things she has done more for women than not,” but rather taking a principled stand for transgender people and letting it be known that “as long as she speaks in certain ways about trans issues, she will not be listened to on anything.” Lyons is decidedly sceptical of this approach, but it’s a perfectly valid response to oppressive rhetoric, as well as an excellent tool at highlighting problematic views and drawing attention to just why they’re so damaging and, well, wrong.

    That’s the great triumph of no-platforming. Rather than limiting the debate, it is opening it up, but with marginalised voices centred. Yes, Greer still went on Newsnight, Bindel still wrote for the Guardian, and Yiannopoulos is still contributing at Breitbart. Their platforms are intact. But the national conversation being had about trans identities and even free speech would not be happening had a few plucky students not stood up and exercised their own right to speak their minds by saying that “no, actually, we won’t tolerate your intolerance.” So cheers, kids. I’ll share a platform with you any day.

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • COLUMN: Why I Am Outraged by LGBT People’s Outrage

    If there’s one thing that really annoys me these days, it’s people being ‘outraged’ over things that do not require any amount of outrage.

    Particularly with social networking sites being so popular, it’s easy to log on to the likes of Twitter and jump on a bandwagon of outrage against something.

    This week there have been two stories in the news that have resulted in LGBT people claiming outrage. The first is about the comments that Sir Tom Jones made regarding his former views on homosexuality. In an interview he said he was paranoid about homosexuals in the 50s and 60s when he was starting out in the music industry. When I read the article I had no doubt that he was referring to a certain period in history and that his views are surely more open minded now. However, the outraged brigade failed to see that and leaped on to the Tom Jones bashing bandwagon to call him out for being a homophobe. As Tom Jones himself has since said via his Twitter feed, let’s put this story into context. He was clearly talking about a period in history when homosexuality was illegal and people had very different views to ones that are held today.

    In another part of the interview he said that he soon realised that most people “were normal” before going on to clarify that “homosexuals are normal” and that “he shouldn’t have put it like that”. From my point of view he had said something that could cause offense, realised what he had said and then corrected himself.

    Therefore there’s no issue, right? Apparently not so, as swarms of people took to Twitter to berate him for saying homosexuals are not normal; something which he never actually said. I wonder how many of those people criticising him actually read the article or considered the context of what he said, and how many blindly jumped on the bandwagon of being outraged by something that he didn’t actually say.
    The second story that caught my eye is regarding the calls to ban Germaine Greer from speaking at Cardiff University due to transphobic comments she has made in the past. I’ve long been an advocate of trans rights and actively campaigned on behalf of trans people. However I have to disagree with any calls to ban Germaine Greer from speaking at Cardiff University (or indeed any other university). Although I do not agree with the comments she has made about trans women, I also do not believe in silencing or censoring people who have differing views, regardless of how offensive people may find them. As long as no laws are being broken and there isn’t any incitement of hatred, I am all for freedom of speech. Surely it is much better to organise a peaceful protest or actively challenge Germaine Greer over her views than to act to silence her. Doesn’t that make us as bad as those who act to silence our voices?

    The link between the two stories and the views I hold, is the outrage and offense that people claim they feel. While I cannot tell people what they do or do not feel, I can’t help but think that people need to read between the lines, see things for that they are, and perhaps open their minds a bit more before getting angry.

    Another example is when I recently organised an equality rally in my hometown of Leamington Spa to peacefully protest against a rise in violent attacks on LGBT people. Although not a dangerous place, attacks on the community have been slowly rising over the past couple of years and I decided to do something about it. As well as organising the rally, I also spoke to many local councillors, my MP and the Police to alert them to the situation and call on them to do more to support the LGBT community. The concerns were positively received and in particular the Police were incredibly supportive. They agreed a series of strategies to combat hate crimes against LGBT people, encourage reporting and support the community. I posted about the positive outcomes on social media so that those attending the rally could see what was happening behind the scenes. While the news was welcomed by the majority, there was a sect that became outraged that I would allow the Police to be involved with LGBT people and LGBT events.
    A number of very angry individuals, who were acting on behalf of a militant LGBTQ+ group, began aggressively posting their thoughts on how the Police actively murder people from our community and stated that the Police should be banned from all LGBT events. My response was to again explain the context of Police involvement. I told the individuals that the Police were being supportive of our community and that they were not attending local LGBT events to ‘police’ us. It was about positive community engagement and trying to learn how they can do better for our community. My clarification fell on deaf ears and the outrage of that sect became increasingly intense. Along with their outrage and aggressive posts came personal attacks on me, including racism.

    Ultimately what happened was a group of people became outraged over something they completely missed the context of and refused to listen to any kind of reasoning or explanation. I guess that’s the same in the case of the Tom Jones and Germaine Greer stories; people are becoming outraged over something without really understanding the context or considering the alternatives.

    As I keep saying, the LGBT community is sometimes its own worst enemy.

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, it’s management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • COMMENT: Germaine Greer, Bruce Jenner, and the Fight Against Transphobia

    I’ve long been a campaigner for trans rights and the elimination of transphobia. In recent times I had been thinking that the public are finally starting to understand what it is to be trans and that societal progress is being made.

    Then I started to read about comments made by Germaine Greer, hurtful gossip about Bruce Jenner, and of course the tragic case of Leelah Alcorn. It is now clear to me that the fight against transphobia needs to be stronger than ever before.

    Earlier this week Germaine Greer made an appearance at Cambridge University Students’ Union, where she was giving a talk. During this talk, Greer was questioned about her previous comments regarding trans women, including saying that being trans is a “delusion” and that trans women seem to be “ghastly parodies”. Her response to the questioning was that she “didn’t know there was such a thing as transphobia” and that trans women don’t know what it is like “to have a big, hairy, smelly vagina”.

    Obviously Germaine Greer’s comments will be highly offensive to trans women, but the most disturbing thing is that she cannot see that her unpleasant views are offensive, that transphobia exists, and that she is guilty of it. Unfortunately I feel that there is no hope of changing the views of bigots like Greer, who hold such outdated and prejudiced opinions, but the fight against transphobia is one that must be fought.

    Recently there have been a lot of articles about Bruce Jenner in the media. Normally the Kardashian-Jenner people are not on my radar, but I have read the stories and gossip about Bruce Jenner with interest because along with the gossip has come the ugly face of transphobia.

    I had heard rumours that someone called Bruce Jenner was preparing to transition, but it was only when I saw the cover of In Touch magazine, that had a photoshopped picture of Jenner on it with a full face of makeup and feminised features, that I understood who he is and what the stories were about. The magazine ran a story about Jenner now living as a woman, without having any actual truthful quotes from anyone, and certainly not from Bruce himself. It was simply gossip and speculation.

    From there TMZ ran a similar story and a video emerged of their staff being transphobic and mocking Jenner, with comments such as “well he’s not doing a good job of being a man” in response to somebody saying that Bruce wasn’t living as a female. This hateful stuff in certain sections of the media gives the impression that it’s ok to mock trans people and that they are a source of entertainment. That is certainly not the case.

    Although I’m no fan of the Kardashians, I have to admire the way they are handling the speculation surrounding Jenner’s gender identity and how they are rallying around him. It shows their strength and love as a family unit and I think as a family they are doing exactly the right thing. It’s clear that Jenner has their support regardless of whether he is living as a male or female.

    The way to tackle transphobia (and any other kind of discrimination) is to educate children from a young age so that future generations become more enlightened and informed. I also think we need to call out the media when they say or do something that is transphobic. They need to be held accountable for their comments and the damage they can do. Prejudiced, discriminatory comments and actions have the power to kill. You only have to look at the tragic story of Leelah Alcorn to see that’s the case. However, I believe that by standing up together as allies of trans people we can help to reduce and perhaps one day eradicate this issue.

    If Bruce Jenner is living as a woman and in the process of transitioning, then I wish him all the best with his journey. It’s not an easy process for any person, never mind such a prominent celebrity with the glare of the media on them. I hope that in time he is able to be open about who he is and not be ridiculed for it. However, if he isn’t living as a woman and is simply experimenting with his appearance, that is ok too. Everyone deserves to be able to express themselves freely without prejudice and I hope that in time Bruce Jenner and every other person on this planet is able to do that, regardless of gender identity.

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.