NUS

by

NUS Women’s Campaign recognises gender complexity

I have a special place in my heart for the National Union of Students Women’s Campaign. The Campaign is (broadly speaking) a truly inclusive, progressive body. I met some amazing women and learned a great deal about the contemporary feminist movement during three years as an elected volunteer on the Women’s Campaign national committee.

However, I was disheartened to hear about the Campaign’s poor record on trans issues in the past year; most notably, a female-assigned genderqueer committee member’s very place in the Campaign was called into question after they explained to other committee members that they do not exclusively identify as a woman. The poor manner in which this democratically elected representative was treated flew in the face of both the spirit and the letter of trans-inclusive policy passed in 2009.

I therefore find it heartening to hear that NUS Women’s Conference 2012 today passed new policy to ensure that this never happens again. Delegates voted unanimously for a motion that will change the Women’s Campaign standing orders in order to permanently clarify the membership of this autonomous liberation campaign.

The motion, entitled “Gender complexity and inclusiveness in the NUS Women’s Campaign“, notes that:

That not all those who are oppressed as women necessarily identify exclusively as women, or would choose the word ‘woman’ or ‘female’ to encapsulate their gender identity […]

Whilst the NUS Women’s Campaign does not have a large amount of explicit policy on issues specifically related to people with complex gender identities who self-define into the campaign, it has a duty to make its spaces safe and welcoming for them.

The following is therefore added to the Women’s Campaign standing orders:

The NUS Women’s Campaign is open to all who self-define as women, including (if they wish) those with complex gender identities which include ‘woman’, and those who experience oppression as women. The NUSWC affirms that self-definition is at the sole discretion of the individual in question.

This really should have come about without an individual being treated poorly, but it’s great to see Women’s Conference so ready to address the Campaign’s mistakes. Full credit to everyone who voted through the change!

by

“Censoring Julie Bindel”: a response

Beatrix Campbell has written a delightful article about Julie Bindel’s involvement in feminism’s “trans wars”. I couldn’t help but noticed that it’s riddled with inaccuracies…

“Airing the complications and troubles of transgender politics is being traduced as “transphobia”.”

No. Arguing that transsexed people shouldn’t exist, consistently belittling and propagating prejudice is being characterised as transphobia. It’s possible to air the complications and troubles of ‘transgender poltitics’ without being a bigot.

“Transgender people who used to live as men and now live as women persuaded the May 2009 NUS women’s conference to mandate its officers to share no platform with Julie Bindel.”

The motion wasn’t proposed by trans women.

Moreover, characterising trans attendees of women’s conference as ‘transgender people who used to live as men’ merely demonstrates your own ignorance.

“The NUS women’s campaign shows no solidarity with women who are offended by the presence in their safe spaces of people who used to be men.”

That’s true! Well, minus the ‘used to be men’ bit…but that’s a whole other kettle of fish which I’m sure others will address at length. We also show no solidarity with straight women who are offended by the presence of lesbian women, or white women who are offended by black women. In fact I might go so far as to argue that it is these ‘offended’ people who undermine the ideal of a safe space…

“This month, her enemies mustered a picket outside Queer Question Time in a London pub. They’re not censoring her, they say, you can read her, they say, just don’t go to hear her.”

“The transgender vigilantes should listen up, wise up and grow up, participate in, not proscribe, the debate they started.”

First off: it’s worth noting that the NUS has nothing to do with the picket outside Queer Question Time, which was organised by independent activists.

Also, you’re inaccurately depicting the arguments of those who would prefer not to see Bindel given a high-profile speaking slot at a supposedly queer-friendly venue. Unlike journalists with newspaper and magazine columns, we usually don’t have access to an audience to listen to our side of the story outside of blogs and community publications. We don’t have the opportunity to ‘participate’ on the level that Bindel does.

This doesn’t mean that we want transphobes to be entirely censored: rather, we wish it to be recognised that there are events at which it is inappropriate to invite a bigot to speak. Moreover, in what way is it fair for people to ‘debate’ our very existence? This, incidentally, is why we’re so ‘offended’ – and why we don’t give much credence to the ‘offence’ experienced by those who would discriminate against us.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/31/julie-bindel-transgender-nus
by

NUS Women’s Campaign No-Platforms Transphobic Speakers

The NUS Women’s Campaign passed a motion at its annual national conference today to ensure that it never again offers a platform to transphobes.

The clauses ensuring this read are copied out below in full.

That the women’s officer or members of the committee shall not share a platform with Julie Bindel or others transphobic speakers.

The NUS Women’s campaign shall not offer a platform to a transphobic speaker, nor shall it officially support any event that does.

The motion makes an example of Julie Bindel, a journalist who has frequently written articles attacking trans people, amongst others. A couple of years ago, the NUS Women’s Officer found herself in the difficult position of sharing a platform with Bindel at the rally following London’s Reclaim The Night march. The new policy means that similar incidents should not happen in the future.

The motion, entitled “T is NOT for Tokenism”, also calls for a broad discussion with trans students about how best to advertise NUS Women’s events in a trans-inclusive fashion, and ensures that the NUS Women’s trans caucus is open to FtM spectrum individuals who “experience discrimination rooted in their having been assigned a female gender role” or “their being perceived as women”.

The NUS Women’s Campaign is already inclusive of trans women. Policy passed in 2007 ensured that campaign events are open to all women on a self-defining basis. There is a trans representative on the Women’s Committee elected by members of an autonomous trans caucus at the campaign’s annual conference. This year’s event featured a workshop exploring links between LGBT activism and feminism, and another discussing the role of trans people in women’s spaces.

Other significant policy passed at the conference included a call for greater representation of black women within the campaign (the vote for which followed a dignified protest the previous evening by most of the few black women present at the conference), a condemnation of sexism from student marketing “specialist” NUSSL, and continued support for pro-choice organisations, sex workers’ unions and groups fighting against the exploitation of women’s bodies in the media and Student Unions.