What follows is the speech I gave to members of the Women’s Rights Network in Derby on Saturday, 10 May 2025. Thank you to all the women who made the event such a success.
We have much in common. I've been organizing radfems online and off since 2005 when I started the forum at Genderberg, led several feminist groups in Portland which I had to abandon for similar reasons as you, and also continued my writing career.
I'm a founder of WoLF (Women's Liberation Front). When you wrote, "Put people in boxes according to their skills" it painfully reminded me of an early 2013 meeting where I suggested we ask WoLF volunteers to share what skills they have- any skills they have -so we could plan how best to take actions.
My suggestion made me evil according to a detransitioned woman on WoLF's first organizing committee. She accused me of coldhearted, ruthless use of skilled volunteers (we never collected the list of skills), and berated me as a terrible feminist with, "What about women who don't have any skills? Why don't you care about them!?"
It's not a pleasant memory, but it's one I'd forgotten and I appreciate you reminding me of it. Thanks as well for braving the topic of how challenging on multiple levels feminist organizing has been these past twenty years. The full story of how WoLF came into existence would paint an intriguing and not very flattering portrait of modern feminist organizing.
"women who don't have any skills. . .Why don't you care about them!?"
Yikes.
Is this a political action organization or an emotional support group? Could she not tell the difference? Does she assume that if it's about women there is no difference?
Listening to people smugly rationalize and justify modern internet "porn" has morphed into realizing that yes, there is a problem with young men being angry and misogynist and yes, young women are depressed and anxious - yet they refuse to connect the two things. Insane.
Fantastic speech Jo. I wish I was there to hear it in person. I especially liked this part, as it's something I strive for myself: "I unlearned the rules of femininity & began to break free. I no longer cared if I was liked." I too was a hard-left middle class teenager (how I cringe to write that!) who went off the rails and I've been re-radicalised in my 50's by this male-centric trans ideology absolute horseshit.
AGPs have caused the most problems, don't get me wrong... but 2/3 of transgendered people are XX, and gender studies departments are where the bathroom boundaries were first broken.
Transgenderism's success owes at least as much to radical feminism as it does to the LGB movement. There's a direct line from Dworkin and MacKinnon's definition of pornography as “the graphic sexually explicit subordination of women through pictures and/or words” to “trans women are women.” All it took was the question “what about gay porn?”
Radfems will lie about everything now, just like the Zios and troons. 🙄 Obviously conservatives are not really much into radical new surgeries based on radical new ideas about gender.
But you know who is? Gender studies departments, which is what those formerly known as women renamed their on-campus masturbation circles a full generation ago now.
> Sitting in the flat I shared with my partner, a young man, a student — who had accompanied his largely silent girlfriend —took a red pen to a position paper I'd written opposing the sex industry.
Sorry, what exactly was your relationship to this guy? Given that he was tagging along with his girlfriend, how did he end up with your paper? Does his girlfriend being “largely silent” imply he was NOT silent while reading and writing critiques on your paper?
> Leaning back comfortably on our sofa, he scrawled notes all over my paper with comments like: "all work is exploitative — why is selling sex any different to waiting tables?"
It's 100% reasonable to expect the author of an anti–sex work position paper to be able to answer that question intelligently. It wouldn't be unreasonable to expect that answer to appear in the position paper itself.
> I didn’t say anything at the time.
How could you have? Were you reading over his shoulder while he scribbled his notes? I really am not getting a clear picture of what transpired here.
> But inside me, something snapped.
So far, this male student has:
* accompanied his girlfriend to your flat
* sat comfortably on your sofa
* read your position paper
* noted in the margins a central question you had apparently not addressed
* used a red pen
THIS triggered you do something you (1) admit was severely passive-aggressive (aka toxic femininity) but which you (2) proudly and unapologetically make your hill to die upon nonetheless? I really do NOT understand.
> And I realised: I didn’t care about offending fools, and I started to recognise that being hated by dimwitted prats was a sign I was doing something right.
The guy wrote down a question your paper should have already answered, so you lost your shit and rage-blogged about his “typical maleness” behind his back. He and others were offended, so you dismiss them all as foolish, dimwitted prats you're better off being hated by?
That’s for sure a sign you are doing NOTHING right.
We have much in common. I've been organizing radfems online and off since 2005 when I started the forum at Genderberg, led several feminist groups in Portland which I had to abandon for similar reasons as you, and also continued my writing career.
I'm a founder of WoLF (Women's Liberation Front). When you wrote, "Put people in boxes according to their skills" it painfully reminded me of an early 2013 meeting where I suggested we ask WoLF volunteers to share what skills they have- any skills they have -so we could plan how best to take actions.
My suggestion made me evil according to a detransitioned woman on WoLF's first organizing committee. She accused me of coldhearted, ruthless use of skilled volunteers (we never collected the list of skills), and berated me as a terrible feminist with, "What about women who don't have any skills? Why don't you care about them!?"
It's not a pleasant memory, but it's one I'd forgotten and I appreciate you reminding me of it. Thanks as well for braving the topic of how challenging on multiple levels feminist organizing has been these past twenty years. The full story of how WoLF came into existence would paint an intriguing and not very flattering portrait of modern feminist organizing.
Show me a woman who doesn't have any skills! Puh-lease!
Right?
"You--you're a woman who doesn't have any skills. Sit over there so we can care about you."
Please write that book. I'll buy it.
"women who don't have any skills. . .Why don't you care about them!?"
Yikes.
Is this a political action organization or an emotional support group? Could she not tell the difference? Does she assume that if it's about women there is no difference?
Listening to people smugly rationalize and justify modern internet "porn" has morphed into realizing that yes, there is a problem with young men being angry and misogynist and yes, young women are depressed and anxious - yet they refuse to connect the two things. Insane.
What exactly are you claiming?
Fantastic piece, I love both your attitude and your writing, never stop
Brilliant! Spoke to me in so many ways. Will repost this on my own Substack blog. Thank you :-)
I remember so many of those events, but I'd forgotten that fuckwit that came to your flat - was it him who suggested sandwiches for sexworkers?
Thank you for standing up for us, Jo. Never give up. Never surrender!
Fantastic speech Jo. I wish I was there to hear it in person. I especially liked this part, as it's something I strive for myself: "I unlearned the rules of femininity & began to break free. I no longer cared if I was liked." I too was a hard-left middle class teenager (how I cringe to write that!) who went off the rails and I've been re-radicalised in my 50's by this male-centric trans ideology absolute horseshit.
AGPs have caused the most problems, don't get me wrong... but 2/3 of transgendered people are XX, and gender studies departments are where the bathroom boundaries were first broken.
Transgenderism's success owes at least as much to radical feminism as it does to the LGB movement. There's a direct line from Dworkin and MacKinnon's definition of pornography as “the graphic sexually explicit subordination of women through pictures and/or words” to “trans women are women.” All it took was the question “what about gay porn?”
What are you on about?
Women's rights and gay rights are the antithesis of the misogynist homophobic transgenderism lobby.
Transgenderism is a conservative men's fetish:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BkIQTu7BV2nifZ3sbSFpS7spWb9od3YU/view
Radfems will lie about everything now, just like the Zios and troons. 🙄 Obviously conservatives are not really much into radical new surgeries based on radical new ideas about gender.
But you know who is? Gender studies departments, which is what those formerly known as women renamed their on-campus masturbation circles a full generation ago now.
Thank you, I have much admiration for your work . It needs to be heard/ read by many.
Great read. My understanding of Feminism is that it’s politics that centers women at the heart. We men have no place in this. It’s not difficult.
Excellent, Jo
This is Beautiful. Thank you for this, tonight. Perfect.
You are pretty damn cool.
All best 😘
> Sitting in the flat I shared with my partner, a young man, a student — who had accompanied his largely silent girlfriend —took a red pen to a position paper I'd written opposing the sex industry.
Sorry, what exactly was your relationship to this guy? Given that he was tagging along with his girlfriend, how did he end up with your paper? Does his girlfriend being “largely silent” imply he was NOT silent while reading and writing critiques on your paper?
> Leaning back comfortably on our sofa, he scrawled notes all over my paper with comments like: "all work is exploitative — why is selling sex any different to waiting tables?"
It's 100% reasonable to expect the author of an anti–sex work position paper to be able to answer that question intelligently. It wouldn't be unreasonable to expect that answer to appear in the position paper itself.
> I didn’t say anything at the time.
How could you have? Were you reading over his shoulder while he scribbled his notes? I really am not getting a clear picture of what transpired here.
> But inside me, something snapped.
So far, this male student has:
* accompanied his girlfriend to your flat
* sat comfortably on your sofa
* read your position paper
* noted in the margins a central question you had apparently not addressed
* used a red pen
THIS triggered you do something you (1) admit was severely passive-aggressive (aka toxic femininity) but which you (2) proudly and unapologetically make your hill to die upon nonetheless? I really do NOT understand.
> And I realised: I didn’t care about offending fools, and I started to recognise that being hated by dimwitted prats was a sign I was doing something right.
The guy wrote down a question your paper should have already answered, so you lost your shit and rage-blogged about his “typical maleness” behind his back. He and others were offended, so you dismiss them all as foolish, dimwitted prats you're better off being hated by?
That’s for sure a sign you are doing NOTHING right.
You must realize by now that nobody ever reads your comments.
Contemporary radfems make a point of not reading anything they don't already (think they) agree with, so I don't take it personally.