Liam redux

, , ,

Socialist Resistance women's liberation dayschool MP3s

Here are some MP3s of the SR women’s liberation dayschool. There will be a report of it in the next day or so. The first is Penny Duggan. The second is Penny Duggan again. The third is Terry Conway. Apologies for the sound quality which isn’t great. I was at the Hands Off Venezuela conference…

Liam
1–2 minutes

Here are some MP3s of the SR women’s liberation dayschool. There will be a report of it in the next day or so.
The first is Penny Duggan. The second is Penny Duggan again. The third is Terry Conway.

Apologies for the sound quality which isn’t great. I was at the Hands Off Venezuela conference (report tomorrow) on the same floor in the same building and the young person entrusted with the recording seems to have found the idea of pointing the microphone in the speaker’s direction rather challenging.

13 responses to “Socialist Resistance women's liberation dayschool MP3s”

  1. Louise Avatar
    Louise

    Firstly, apols as I woulda liked to have gone to the dayschool but for various reasons couldn’t. Good to hear Penny (haven’t heard her speak for years) and Terry’s contributions.

    I hope a fuller report is put up as I would be interested in it. Terry makes some interesting observations re how the defeat of the miners’ strike impacted upon women’s liberation and the self-organisation of women (and how as socialists feminists we claw back the gains).

    Also, Terry’s contribution connects with the previous thread, on this blog, re sexism and socialists esp. over Galloway.

    Where I do have disagreements though is on the issue of the rise of raunch culture.

    But overall I found the contributions interesting and hope to see more posted.

    Like

    Reply
  2. Tom Avatar
    Tom

    I have checked out a couple of these clips. I assumed that Terry Conway was male, since the female spelling ends with an I, I thought. However from the voice sounded female, which lead me to believe this clip had been incorrectly labled. I have to say that I found this contribution worth listening to. She (I am assuming it was a she) took the subjects on abortion and sexist comments seriously, and refered to the comments on this blog. I am afraid she is going to disappointed if she expects ISG pressure will pull Galloway into line, vis-a-vis the latest assault on abortion rights, or on pandering to prejudices that create the political climate whereby millions of men say that no does not always mean no, and a significant section of this number put their sex organs where their mouths are.

    As far as raunch culture is concerned, I think we should debate this. Because my attitude is not what might be infered by others who have criticised Galloway’s remark about Kylie Minogue.

    Notwithstanding a bizarre couple of criticisms of me by Alex, I am not opposed to the sexuality of men or women. I am not in favour of banning sexually provocative images, so long as children are protected from them. Porn, including hardcore porn, can no longer be banned by the state. Not without giving the state the kind of powers of China, Saudi Arabia, Burma etc. Men and women use porn to enhance their sex lives. A lot of it is degrading to women, but not all of it. Men and women, ugly as well as beautiful, old as well as young, those with disabilities as well as the able bodied, the shy as well as the extrovert, gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual, transexual, black, white, asian, Muslim, Christian, atheist and everybody else need sex. They need this not just in order to reproduce the species. We need it for our psychological health. Evolution has programmed this into our brains, even the brains of those who do not want children.

    Children need to be protected from some of the things adults are into. They are incapable of appreciating what goes on in their parents bedrooms and elsewhere. Some questions have to be answered about where babies come from, about why some children have two mummies and no daddy. They need to told why some people love members of their own sex, and why this is natural. For them. The question of consent has to be ingrained in children long before hormones make them want to have sex. Chidren, in other words, need preparation for what is to come.

    Porn for most men, and some women, is a substitute for not being about to find a partner. Socialists need to be sensitive to the plight of such people, not condemn them, and not take away what little they have. Socialists should campaign for greater resources for such unhappy people to get psychological help on the NHS to get what they really need: a partner.

    Lap dance clubs are another symptom of a society where sad individuals have their inadequacies exploited for profit. They should be banned where they could cause offense: houses of religious worship, schools, for example. However, to the extent that there is a demand by working class people for such places, socialists can only tackle this problem by fundamental changes in society. Only when the education system and mass media is in the hands of working people can socialists create the conditions by which such institutions wither away. In the meantime, socialists should support the unionisation of sex workers, to improve their health and safety, and to earn a decent wage.

    As for prostitution, I am strongly in favour of decriminalisation. I utterly oppose the SSP’s approach, which will make the situation of prostitutes much, much more dangerous. The state should keep it’s grubby nose out of consensual sex between adults. Adults with serious mental health problems, and those with the mental faculties of children need to be exceptions. The rest of us need to be allowed to make our own choises. If some people (male or female) choose to sell sexual favours in return for cash, nightclub tickets, a three course meal, or a marriage licence, then this should be up to the individual. We can question the society that has produced those with a commercial attitude towards sex, but that is a different question. Decriminalisation would help enormously in identifying child prostitutes, and getting them out of this. It would help identify trafficked women, and put a stop to this also. Socialists need to fight for well-paid jobs, help with drug addiction, access to education and training with decent grants, help with debts, homelessness. Tackle these problems and the supply of prostitutes will dry up. With the sole exception of those women (and men) who have no problem taking money for sex. No means no where prostitutes are concerned. Women (and men) have to have the right to turn down a client, without giving a reason. This should be the socialist attitude towards prostitution.

    Anyone want to take issue with any or all of the above?

    Like

    Reply
  3. terryconway Avatar
    terryconway

    Would like to know more about what you disagree with me on raunch culture Louise. Glad you found the contributions useful – I found it a very positive day and feel invigourated by the discussion.
    Tom I dont know why you should assume that people have to fit into gender sterotyping by how they spell their names.. I decided to challenge this a long time ago..
    Two reasons I think more women dont spend time posting on blogs is
    a) too many posts which decend into personalised attacks
    b) too many posts that are entire essays
    For myself I prefer the conversational exchanges in which people actually listen to each other… or is this asking too much?

    Like

    Reply
  4. Tom Avatar
    Tom

    Hi Terry,

    Thanks for responding. I had come across posts by you previously, and had always assumed you were male, because of the spelling of your name. There is only one reason I asked you about this. And that is so I don’t use the wrong pronouns (he instead of she, and him instead of her) when commenting on what you say. I can’t see why you might want to object to this.

    I listened diligently to your contribution, and from memory, did not disagree with much of it. I think you made reference to raunch culutre, and I made assumptions from what I heard about what your position was. I might be guilty of jumping to conclusions. However, my own attitude has been explained in some detail in the post that you are responding to.

    I have to say that I disagree with you on the converstional use of internet exchanges. Such short exchanges can be useful. However, they need to be supplemented with more substantial pieces. For example you seem to have ignored the substantial contribution that I made about lab dance clubs, legalised pornography, decriminalisation of prostitution, the importance of creating the conditions for the withering away of sex work by a variety of methods under capitalism and in the positive transcendence of this economic system. And you seem not to have noticed that I was socialists to focus on protecting chidren from so-called raunch culture, without surpressing adults need to express their sexuality.

    I can only assume from your references to raunch culuture that you probably disagree with me on many of these things, and if I am wrong about this, I would welcome some clarification. And I assume that many of those who have been taking up the cudgels against Galloway will denounce me as a hypcrite for supporting the decriminalisation of prostitution, and refusing to denounce pornography in the way they do, and refusing to support pickets of lab dance clubs. If you can find time to answer my questions, and in the process educate some other readers of this blog, i would appreciate that, as I am sure others would. If, on the other hand, you lack the time to do so, I will understand. No pressure.

    Comradely,
    Tom
    P.S. I would appreciate responses from other participants on this blog, vis-a-vis prostitution, internet pornography, picketting of lap dancing clubs etc.

    Like

    Reply
  5. Louise Avatar
    Louise

    Hi Terry,

    Before I go into any discussion about raunch culture is that I only heard a small piece on the Mp3 (and sorry Liam to say it but the quality wasn’t good…) as regards to it and that was connected to GG’s sexism. And that specific connection you make between GG’s remark and raunch culture is what I disagree with.

    It did sound like a v. good day and sorry I couldn’t make it.

    I will re-read your piece again and give a fuller reply (I promise to keep it less than 200 words). If that’s ok?

    Btw: my views, Tom, in rapid succession on sex work (support decriminalisation and unionisation), internet porn (I am against the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill that will prohibit downloading images of consenting adults indulging in sexual activity including S&M). And am against picketing lap dancing clubs ‘cos that is sounding the wrong message to the sex workers. More about solidarity as opposed to hostility.

    Terry, I will get back to you later…

    Louise

    Like

    Reply
  6. Louise Avatar
    Louise

    PS: Terry, I do agree with the points you make re why women don’t participate on lefty blogs but what i would also say is that I think it is around 56% of women make up the whole blogosphere but when it comes down to issues, say, politics, the number of women suddenly diminish.
    Surely, as well, sexism in wider society will be reflected in the blogosphere?

    And that needs to be tackled (and have arguing re lack of women on the blogs for some time and sometimes don’t feel heard…ah, precisely)

    General issue – also, the nature of the blog world is a very different beast. For example, it lacks the real life interaction of a public forum where people see each other and face to face. Also the debate isn’t flowing as opposed to real life and responses stare at you in b/w and sometimes you can misread and misunderstand what is being said. Again, in the “real world” you get to see how the person is reacting (NVC, facial expressions and so on).

    One of the probs of the blogworld is anonymity as we can all hide before the ‘puter and type what we like many times in haste. And the unfortunate reality is that so much bad behaviour comes across and comrades aren’t good at self-reflection and self-awareness. We all do it and sometimes…my own feelings in the way I conduct myself is asking myself, “Would I say this in a public meeting”…?

    And sometimes you can lose yourself in a debate and forget what you are writing and the end result can feel like male-dominated cyber pub where women can indeed feel excluded (and I know how that feels even in the “real world”) as to reiterate the point, the blog world reflects the sexism in this society and the Left aint immune to bad behaviour.

    I dunno, some self-awareness, self-reflection also treating people with respect and on an equal basis. And when women feel invisible or dismissed then that has to be understood and their experiences taken on board. Support and solidarity.

    Sometimes many blog debates can feel like a “war of worlds” a spat, a fight, which is kinda understandable and sometimes necessary but there are times it can degenerate (frequently does) therefore comrades need to be mindful of their behaviour and think before they engage their brains/fingers on a keyboard.

    Like

    Reply
  7. Louise Avatar
    Louise

    ““war of worlds””… Oh dear, meant “war of words”…

    My mind was wandering off thinking of sci-fi…

    Just also to say that when women feel dismissed, belittled, bullied, rendered invisible, put-down and so on then the Left has a duty to accept these experiences as true and valid. Again, the form of communication e-mail like can also worsen the situation as opposed to face-to-face. In a public meeting you are psyched up and it’s the forum to debate.

    The norms of human behaviour are different and so it the engagement. In the blogworld you can be sitting at home, workplace , your own space and then all of a sudden you see a post/comment that’s bad tempered, angry, something unpleasant and that kinda has invaded your personal space.

    You are not psyched up. It feels like the person is sitting by your desk or in your living room telling you off and rippling apart your critique etc., or simply denying your experiences of oppression. Ans society has a tendency to deny oppression and your expectations are higher amongst comrades in the Left who you expect to be understanding and aware.

    Not to ignore or dismiss but to focus on ways to make the lefty blogworld a safer, honest and engaging place for women and people who experience oppression in this society and actually, men will get the benefits as well.

    There is a tendency and over-indulgence in point-scoring and so and so said this that can get tedious and be excluding and also brow beating an opponent into submission, that can get personalised as well. That will be off putting as well and exclude people.

    Sorry Liam, well gone over my 200 words…

    Like

    Reply
  8. Tom Avatar
    Tom

    Hi Louise,

    It appears we have an identical attitude towards intenet pornography, prostitution and lap dance clubs. Excellent. However, I don’t share your solidarity with Terry on internet exchanges. Many, and probably most, of those who have criticiised Galloway’s Daily Record column are likely to oppose prostitution decriminalisation, a tollerant attitude towards pornography on the internet (apart from child pornography and other non-consensual sex), and our attitude towards lab dance clubs. The only way for the left to reach some workable concensus on how to respond to these issues is by substantial polemics. Partly this will take the form of articles in magazines and other periodicals. However, the internet gives us the ability to communicate with each other, presenting relatively complex arguments without waiting for weeks or month for the copy to hit the news stands. I have read pretty much Trotsky’s collected works and a substantial amoung of Marx’s, Lenins, and what has been translated into English by Luxmeburg and Gramsci. I have come across virtually nothing written by these people that comes in 200 words or less chunks. They could not live within such restrictions, and there is no reason why we should either. Whether others want to take the time to read what we write is, of course, another matter. We all need to exercise our judgement, to discriminate between who contributions to the sum of our knowledge and whose ideas we find ludicrous. Sometimes many of us on this blog, and on other blogs will agree. Sometimes we won’t. Nothing wrong with that.

    Like

    Reply
  9. terry conway Avatar
    terry conway

    Louise I think the point you make about the way that face to face reaction is very different from the blogosphere is right. Its easier to tell when people are joking, when they are smiling at home and when frowning. Its also easier to interupt, indicate to people that they are hogging the space etc.
    I certainly agree with the point about hiding behind anonymity is right – it drives me to distraction.
    Of course your point about reflecting sexism in society is right – which is also why I think we need to demand that men challenge each other on these questions and not leave it all up to us.
    Tom I dont think you heard what I said about my name. I wasnt going to be told that I should have a name that defined my gender when I was 15 – Im certainly not going to be told that when I am 52.
    In terms of your comments about prostitution etc I do disagree with you strongly. I dont think women have the same choices as men about how to sell their labour power in a patriarchal society. I dont think any workers have a real choice under capitalism. You seem to me to have bought into a notion of choice which I find very alienating and alienated.
    Having said that I also not favour of the state policing our bedrooms (or where ever else). But I dont agree with Louise about not taking direct action against eg lap dancing clubs…

    Like

    Reply
  10. Louise Avatar
    Louise

    “Of course your point about reflecting sexism in society is right – which is also why I think we need to demand that men challenge each other on these questions and not leave it all up to us.”

    Totally agree with you on that Terry. I think male lefties have a duty as socialists to challenge sexism and all forms of oppression and not to get all defensive or offensive by dissing our experiences.

    I would hope it is possible and it is good in theory but in practice…it doesn’t really happen.

    Like

    Reply
  11. Tom Avatar
    Tom

    Terry, I can’t understand your problem with my question about your name. You are accusing me of a sexist attitude, whereas if you listened to what I argued you would realise the exact opposite is the case. Let me explain yet again. There is only one reason I asked about your gender. Women take offense when others make assumptions about their gender. In the absense of an explanation about whether someone called Terry, Chris, Alex, Pat etc is a male or a female, there is a tendency for others to use the male pronouns (he, his, him) because it is too unwieldy to keep using both. You ask me to keep my contributions as short as possible, but also insist on a situation whereby I must waste time, and keystrokes using both the male and female pronouns when it is more efficient to use only the appropriate ones. Where is the sense in this? If I did not know better, I would assume you are attacking me on this score purely for point-scoring purposes. BTW, I NEVER said you should spell your name differently to make life easier for me. What I did do was ask as to your gender SOLELY for the purpose of my being able to use the correct pronoun when I refered to you. Please do me the courtesy of not putting words in my mouth.

    As for your strong opposition to my attitude towards prostitution, internet pornography and lap dance clubs, you have had two opportunities to explain your differences with me. You have chosen not to take advantage of either opportunity. Why on earth not? The Bolsheviks, PCI members and others engaged in sharp polemics, to make them unite, making their interventions in the outside world more effective. This is why socialist in Britain today should seize the opportunity to engage in discussions with each other. You, unfortunately, seem to prefer to duck debate. And this is the attitude that leads to so many fragments of the left undermining each other, of cancelling out each others interventions in the outside world, to the benefit of our exploiters and oppressors.

    Like

    Reply
  12. Louise Avatar
    Louise

    “Having said that I also not favour of the state policing our bedrooms (or where ever else). But I dont agree with Louise about not taking direct action against eg lap dancing clubs…”

    Fair enough, people have a right to demonstrate outside Spearmint Rhino, for example, but it is also the incorrect tactic for socialists and feminists to take. Surely, it is about reaching out and engaging the women who work in these clubs as opposed to alienating them by showing hostility?

    The women who work in these clubs are being rendered invisible by ignoring their demands. What exactly do sex workers want? I know that many feel pissed off when the club they work in is picketed and many who may have been sympathetic to feminism are put off.

    I still think it is a case of solidarity and support as opposed to pickets.

    Like

    Reply
  13. Hamish McSqueamish Avatar
    Hamish McSqueamish

    Tom – since you asked for feedback: I agree with your
    position almost entirely, and I feel that most of the population
    would. But I can’t see that Galloway’s remarks about Kylie
    are sexist, just normal heterosexual behaviour, and I feel any
    milieu in which that is controversial is one that will be given a
    wide berth by all but a miserable few. Practically everyone
    supports equal rights and pay for women, control of their
    bodies, maternity leave and all the other practical
    improvements women have fought for and are fighting for,
    but feminism is quite another matter – that carries a whole
    strata of connotations which most people, especially working
    class women, want nothing to do with. They can argue all
    they like about it, but they’re arguing in tiny sects or obscure
    blogs, or, unfortunately, in the upper echelons American
    academia, and the Republican party and the Labour party.
    It’s one of many great wheezes for keeping the proles away
    from politics. And the sheer relish with which some feminists
    (and George Galloway) decry the ‘degradation’ of prostitutes
    – it’s plain that they want prostitutes to feel degraded and
    inferior( to them!).
    Also your remarks about the mentally ill: I’m sure they
    were well intended, but excuse me for pointing out that
    ‘seriously’ mentally ill covers as many varying conditions as it does people, and some people can be seriously mentally ill sometimes but not always. The mentally ill have sexual
    desires too, and more importantly have a need for
    companionship and acceptance. Any blanket prohibition
    puts lovers, friends, carers, associates, acquaintances of
    the mentally ill at risk of prosecution as a ‘nonce’ (as they
    say), and would effectively restrict the mentally ill to the
    company of other mentally ill people.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Louise Cancel reply

Trending