-
Petition calls for university to ban Germaine Greer from event
Petition calls for university to ban Germaine Greer from event over ‘hateful’ transgender views
Scott D’Arcy
Sydney Morning Herald
http://www.smh.com.au/world/petition-calls-for-university-to-ban-germaine-greer-from-event-over-hateful-transgender-views-20151024-gkhnk5.htmlQuote:Germaine Greer has described a petition to ban her from speaking at a university event as a “put-up job”.The Australian feminist author is scheduled to appear at Cardiff University for a public lecture, Women & Power: The Lessons of the 20th Century.
But the university’s Students’ Union women’s officer Rachael Melhuish has launched an online petition urging the institution to cancel the event, citing Ms Greer’s views on transgender people.
“Greer has demonstrated time and time again her misogynistic views towards trans women, including continually misgendering trans women and denying the existence of transphobia altogether,” Ms Melhuish says in the petition.
“While debate in a university should be encouraged, hosting a speaker with such problematic and hateful views towards marginalised and vulnerable groups is dangerous. Allowing Greer a platform endorses her views, and by extension, the transmisogyny which she continues to perpetuate.”
Ms Greer, 76, said she did not understand why she should not be allowed to speak.
“I don’t really know what I think of it. It strikes me as a bit of a put-up job really because I am not even going to talk about the issue that they are on about.
“What they are saying is because I don’t think surgery will turn a man into a woman, I should not be allowed to speak.
“I do not know why universities cannot hear unpopular views and think about what they mean.”
She added that she would not appear at the event next month if the university could not guarantee her safety.
The petition has so far attracted more than 500 signatures.
-
8 Replies
-
The Guardian ran a story on this issue as well.
I think they unpack Geer’s views a little more. I did like this quote from Geer:
“I just don’t think that surgery turns a man into a woman. A perfectly permissable view. I mean, an un-man is not necessarily a woman. We don’t really know what women are and I think that a lot of women are female impersonators, because our notion of who we are is not authentic, and so I am not surprised men are better at impersonating women than women are. Not a surprise, but it’s not something I welcome.”
I am not sure why but I want to cross over Geer’s comment:
“I just don’t think that surgery turns a woman into a man. A perfectly permissable view. I mean, an un-woman is not necessarily a man. We don’t really know what men are and I think that a lot of men are male impersonators, because our notion of who men are is not authentic, and so I am not surprised women are better at impersonating men than men are. Not a surprise, but it’s not something I welcome.”
What appeals to me in doing this is that if we accept the two notions that:
1/ our notion of who women are is not authentic; and
2/ our notion of who men are is not authentic;
and there is a space between these notions. This space is where transgender feeling and behavior can exist as being authentic. The strength of the transgender authenticity is that is based around an individual sense of themselves and not social norms of what is a man and what is a woman.Just a thought.
-
An interesting and enabling line of thought Sarah.
Whilst in general I have problems with Greer’s slant on things as she saw femininity as a weakness of women not a valuable asset.
But in this instance perhaps I agree with her argument that surgery does not turn “man” into ‘woman” (and visa versa).Sara_Timms wrote:This space is where transgender feeling and behavior can exist as being authentic. The strength of the transgender authenticity is that is based around an individual sense of themselves and not social norms of what is a man and what is a woman.Just a thought.
A very profound thought. Thanks!
-
Good to read some reflective comments on this issue. I guess Germaine Greer’s prominence is an extra reason for the attack – especially as it has successfully created media coverage – but ‘no platforming’ seems to me a risky tactic when there are others which might create a better discourse and try to bridge the sometimes quite vehement divisions between some feminists, gay and lesbian people, and the transgender community: all of which are very diverse…
-
I’m very suprised that a university would try to stop transphobia. I’m getting the impression this is highly irregular.
Germain Greer is strong on opinions and short on constructivism. How much pain and anger has she and others like her caused men and women over the years? Then she has the cheek to say men can’t be women.
-
FionaP wrote:Then she has the cheek to say men can’t be women.
Before we attribute things to Germaine Greer it may be prudent to listen directly to her opinions.
[video width=425 height=344 type=youtube]8U-nontM0vM[/video] -
The Guardian has a commentary titled
Silencing Germaine Greer will let prejudice against trans people flourishhttp://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/25/germaine-greer-prejudice-trans-people
The article by Zoe Williams is worth reading in full.
Here are a couple of extracts:
Quote:Those who would deny Greer a platform have made arguments of varying effectiveness. One is that her views are hackneyed, and need no broad airing: this falls down because Greer wasn’t invited to talk about transgender issues, but rather women and power in the 20th century. Another is that her ideas incite violence against trans people, which Greer rejects as she has never advocated a hate crime; she’s on shakier ground here. Anti-trans violence – real and growing – is predicated on the idea that being transgender is wrong and unnatural. To foment that violence, one need not literally call for it, it is only necessary to dehumanise trans people by rejecting their own account of themselves.Quote:Those are both moot points, however, since the real root of no-platforming is this impervious modern absolutism. It was devised for racists and fascists, on the basis that moral legitimacy was conferred upon repellent positions just by allowing them in to debate.Quote:it is precisely because there is still so much prejudice against trans people that nobody should be silenced. In terms of social ideas, you progress from A to B – from saying homosexuality is aberrant, for instance, towards homosexuality is normal – not by shutting down homophobes but by argument, persuasion, rage and ridicule, openness and candour. -
Germaine Greer is an opinionated old bat who has done a lot (IMO) for the advancement of the cause of women throughout her life and has opinions that I sometimes agree with and sometimes not. She is not convinced of the legitimacy of the transgender argument…so what? Are we so tender that we cannot allow a dissenting voice to our cause?
How can we expect to be able to follow our own direction if we insist that those who we disagree with not be allowed to voice their opinion even though we may disagree with it? She does not spout hatred or violence toward us and she wasn’t even going to talk on the subject! In the interview she spoke of ” good manners” and respect on a personal level. That is good.I am not one of those who contends that ” political correctness has gone mad” .I agree with political correctness to a point, I think people should be well mannered and respectful to each other and live and let live but the howling down and silencing of anyone to whom we disagree , is a dangerous direction. I am afraid that it is very typical of the Facebook and Twitter Society that we live in. Let her have her opinion and let’s harden up a bit and take our place proudly in the World we all share.
-
There was also a follow up article by Eloise Brook “Please Stop asking if Trans people are a figment of their imagination”
I thought there was some great comments (The Guardian allows blogging/commenting on some of its articles) showing depth of understanding. Many other comments that could be easily ignore but challenge by other bloggers.
I think it is worth seeing the original question given to Germaine Greer
STEPH D’SOUZA: My question’s for Germaine Greer. When I was younger, I found your work a great source of strength and inspiration. It helped me resist the limitations that society, or even misogynists, could place on me, but I find really confusing views that you’ve expressed that transgender women are not real women. Why do you believe there is such a thing as a real woman? Isn’t that the kind of essentialism that you and I are trying to resist and escape?
What a great question that goes to the heart of the matter.
