Approximately 270 women attended the Autonomous Womyn’s Gathering in Vienna in April. Workshops ranged from feminist anti-facist remberance, to anarcha-feminism, to sustainable agriculture outside of patriarchy… The event was followed by a demonstration in the city centre.
Liane who lives in the UK attended the event and gives a brief report as below detailing the women-only issue of the event:
“First of all a big thanks to the womyn organizers who made this unforgettable gathering happen.
The atmosphere was just great. There were lesbians and womyn from all walks of life and all ages which made the discussions to my surprise very positive in terms of the dialogue between “older” lesbians( some were radical feminists including myself) and “younger” lesbians (who grew up with/in the queer politic society).
I did not know 100% if it was a gathering for womyn born womyn and I was very happy to find that it was, it was just perfect even the weather was great
The FZ (Frauen Lesben Madchen Zentrum) in Vienna is the only place left for girls, womyn and lesbians being born and raised in a female body. Towards the end of the gathering there were some queer lesbians/womyn who wanted to have a meeting about this issue regarding the transgender community being excluded from this gathering and so on, I went to that meeting (I think around 20 womyn and lesbians attended) as well but I walked out quite early because I felt, I was the only radical feminist in that meeting which I said in the meeting and I could not see the point. Why some queer womyn/lesbians wanted the meeting is clear to me, to try splitting womyn/lesbians again in Vienna but in my point of view ,they did not succeed because everybody else was just enjoying the great atmosphere being in a womyn only space and enjoying each others company.”
Below are photos taken from Liane. If anyone else reading this attended the event, I would love to hear from you!. What I love about this event, is that it was unapologetically women and lesbian only, which is exceptionally rare. To all those feminists who thought radical feminism was offiicially dead in the wake of queer and liberal feminism, does this give you hope..? It does me!
8 Comments
May 22, 2009 at 12:44 am
Thanks a lot, Charlie, for a report on this gathering.
I really wanted to find out what it was like.
There were lesbians and womyn from all walks of life and all ages which made the discussions to my surprise very positive in terms of the dialogue between “older” lesbians( some were radical feminists including myself) and “younger” lesbians (who grew up with/in the queer politic society).
I know it’s often an ‘age’ thing. But, LOL, there are some womyn like me, Allecto, etc (for instance) in our late twenties, who are such radical feminists; and we have not been buying into queer theory for even one minute. I’ve also noticed there are a few radical feminists in their early 20’s out there. Hopefully, that offers some hope for the future.
Anyway, thanks a lot to Liane for the report and the pictures.
What I love about this event, is that it was unapologetically women and lesbian only, which is exceptionally rare. To all those feminists who thought radical feminism was offiicially dead in the wake of queer and liberal feminism, does this give you hope..?
Yup, sure, it does.
June 2, 2009 at 4:12 am
That is not to dismiss that some women — though it’s rare — will have a labial variance where labia ARE too long for comfort, to the point that wearing pants, sitting down, riding a bike or sex is problematic or outright painful. I’m not talking about folks like many women who will need to gently move labia out of the way sometimes, or tuck a corner inside sometimes (which is not atypical): I’m talking about those who can easily get labia caught in zippers or pinched all the time when sitting. Let’s also not forget that just like those women, for some women, labia which are too short can cause some problems too — like persistent infections or pain — including women who have chosen to or been forced into labial and other vulval excision or mutilation.
June 2, 2009 at 8:05 am
Hi Sarah, I don’t see how a womyns space would exclude such women?
July 12, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Hi,
I found your blog thanks to a link from genderberg.com and I had heard about the Autonomous Womyn’s Gathering before. So I was curious for what you would write/publish about it. It is not entirely clear to me how you feel about the exclusion of transwomen during this Womyn’s Gathering in Vienna, but I wanted to react anyway because I consider it important. I find it a shame that transwomen are still not considered as womyn by the organisers and are still divided from “biologically born” women, even by self-identified (radical) feminists. I consider myself a radical feminist (while I also take some useful things from other kinds of feminism, such as transfeminism, anarcha-feminism, etc).
A friend of mine was interested in attending this Gathering in Vienna because she is very interested and active in radical feminism. But because of her trans past she was not allowed to attend. In fact I was interested too, until I heard this. I do understand and appreciate and enjoy women-only spaces (and I understand that the division of people in 2 categories – female and male – is sometimes necessary for practical reasons, though ultimately I would like it to disappear), but why exclude transwomen?? They face the same oppressions, discriminations, exclusions, etc as you and I do (only some extra ones too). We are all sisters and transwomen should be treated as such. They should be welcome in women-only spaces because they ARE women. If we, (radical) feminists, don’t treat them as women and embrace them in our spaces and groups, aren’t we guilty of oppressing and discriminating women too?
The inclusion of transwomen is one of the things that I think transfeminism can contribute to radical feminist theory and practice. Transphobia / trans exclusion is a big flaw that I still notice in some radical feminist communities today and I find it shocking. I hope it will change (soon!) because we can and should all still learn. That’s why I found it hopeful to hear that a discussion about the exclusion of the transgender community took place during the Gathering.
July 17, 2009 at 4:03 pm
In response…
I think that it is a shame that transfeminism and trans activists still cannot accept that many women want their own space and need it.
I’m not really sure what you mean when you say radical feminists should ‘treat’ trans women ‘like’ women. I don’t like to think that I treat anyone ‘like a woman’.
Instead of me writing for you an analysis of why transwomen were excluded from the Autonomous Womyn’s Gathering, or giving you an analysis of my own opinion of women-only spaces, I suggest that you analyse your own objection to activist women organising women-only spaces.
August 1, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Hi,
I realise that using the word ‘treat’ in this sentence was not the right choice. But instead I meant something like ‘accepting’/'considering’ trans women as women.
And I DO accept and embrace women-only spaces! I certainly don’t object them. I agree that they are needed and often very inspiring/empowering. In my previous comment I already wrote “I do understand and appreciate and enjoy women-only spaces”. I just don’t understand why trans women are excluded there because they are women too.
greetings
Nessa
August 2, 2009 at 1:11 pm
What I don’t understand Nessa, is why you are conflating transphobia and trans exclusion. There are various reasons why some women want a space for those who are assigned female at birth – the most commonly cited one being their common experience of discrimination from birth, which is not shared by transwomen.
One idea of a space for those raised female is so that those those with a common experience of being raised female can be together, another is to exclude males – not transwomen specifically. It’s impossible to exclude males if you include transwomen. Because how do you define a transwoman? The only logical way of doing it is someone who defines themselves as a woman. And what is to stop any male saying they identify as a woman? Nothing, basically.
There are reasons other than transphobia for having a space for those assigned female at birth. And there’s nothing to stop you and your friends organising a trans inclusive gathering. So why not do it, instead of complaining about how other people have organised this gathering? It isn’t a social service or a basic human right to attend this gathering, it’s a group of women organising independently. And they’re entitled to do that as they wish.
It’s not a question of whether or not transwomen are considered to be women. The purpose of the gathering isn’t to define who is and isn’t a “woman”. It’s purpose is to allow women who consider they have common political interests to be together. Why do you object to that so strongly?
September 5, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Sorry for my very late answer…
I realise that the experiences of women-born-women and trans-women may not be the same from birth. But there are a lot of different experiences and different privileges or oppressions among women-born-women too (we don’t all face exactly the same kind of oppression/discrimination). What bothers me is not that one group of women would organise separately (For example if working-class women would meet separately and not include other women, I would understand and encourage that), but what bothers me is that a slightly more privileged group of women (women-born-women) meets/organises separately, excluding a more oppressed group of women (trans-women). Somehow it doesn’t feel right to me. I would also feel (at the very least) uneasy and disappointed if there existed heterosexual-women-only meetings or white-women-only gatherings (and probably they do exist too but I hope they don’t consider themselves feminist).
What matters to me is that our experiences of discrimination and oppression as women at THIS moment are similar: we all face sexism NOW (although this sexism can differ and be crossed with other oppressions). Someone’s past and the way someone was raised or in which gender someone was brought up shouldn’t be relevant in my opinion. Ultimately we strive not to be raised in a certain gender or be assigned a certain gender from birth at all, don’t we? Gender-free upbringing does sound best to me (even though it is only a dream at this moment).
Example: Poor people organise a meeting for poor people only. But obviously some people are born poor and still poor, some people are born poor but not anymore poor and some people are born rich and now poor. For me it is logical that this meeting will be for the people who are poor NOW. Because they have to fight at THIS moment and they are oppressed / unprivileged based on their lack of wealth NOW. Their past can have an influence on their lives and their behaviour, but isn’t really important in defining them as poor or not. So it would be wrong to exclude the people who are poor but who weren’t born poor (except perhaps for one small particular workshop that focuses on issues of people being poor from birth). Also, it isn’t really easy to define “what is poor” and “who is poor”. There’s no clear line to divide those who are poor and those who aren’t. So they’ll have to make use of self-definition I suppose. And this can mean that less-poor people attend or even rich people (along with their privileges and possible dominant behaviour). That’s a risk, but I assume not a very big risk (and assholes and intruders can always be removed). So this example is similar to the born-women vs trans-women question except that poor people who weren’t born poor DON’T have extra oppressions, which trans women do. Which means that it’s an extra reason not to exclude trans-women in women-only spaces.
I agree it can be difficult to define and see who is and who isn’t a woman. So this may cause the risk that men-born-men-and-identifying-as-men (posing as women) enter women-only space. I agree that this can be a problem. But it is not a reason to exclude trans-women. Trans-women shouldn’t be a victim of policies meant to reserve space for women only.
You wrote “It’s purpose is to allow women who consider they have common political interests to be together. Why do you object to that so strongly?”
I don’t object to that at all! But if this was the purpose of the gathering, then all women with common political interests would be welcome and I don’t see why trans-women can’t be part of that.
Lastly, I want to clarify that I am only responding to the topic of this gathering because it seemed such a very interesting, important and valuable gathering (and it probably was apart from this one thing). I wouldn’t have bothered writing if it was a conservative right-wing women’s meeting or even a boring liberal feminist event. So I don’t want to criticise the gathering itself, only its policy of trans-women exclusion. Because for me it’s a big flaw if trans-women are excluded from women’s spaces/meetings. And yes, I will (and do) organise trans-inclusive feminist gatherings, but at the same time I don’t think I should keep quiet if any of my sisters organise or do or write/say something I don’t agree with.
nessa