Over the last (roughly) ten days a series of events unfolded within the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand. The party has attempted to control the narrative around these events, which began with the censorship of it its own magazine, Te Awa. The general membership has been given disinformation around the events and the party’s response, leaving the membership to attempt to put the story together themselves.
Here are the facts of the matter.
Jill Abigail’s Article In Te Awa
Jill Abigail is a lesbian, a Green Party member and a veteran of feminist activism in Aotearoa. On August 27 the party magazine Te Awa published an article. Jill Abigail described her objection to both the Party’s marriage to gender ideology, and the bullying of party members who raise questions about how gender ideology potentially impacts on the rights of women.
Jill’s Abigail’s article can be read here.
Jill’s article reads as a moderately voiced challenge to an ideological direction within the party. he Party’s response to Jill’s article boldly illustrates one of the concerns described in the article itself: the silencing of feminist voices.
Censorship, Disinformation and Slander
Transactivists within the Greens pressured leadership to remove the article.
Moreover, Rainbow Greens immediately appealed to the executive to delete the article from the online publication. An attached request was given that all future articles touching on gender politics should be submitted to Rainbow Greens for imprimatur.
A meeting of the party executive was called to discuss the article.
The executive then pressured Te Awa to pull the article, eroding the intent of the founders who wanted Te Awa to be independant of the party executive. The editor of the magazine and at least one other volunteer resigned in protest.
The article had already been published to the print edition distributed before the executive could respond.
Party co-leader, Marama Davidson tweeted her displeasure over the article and accused the author of “putting the right of trans people to exist up for debate”.
Of course the article does no such thing. In fact it clearly expresses sympathy for trans individuals and acknowledges their right to safety and security.
A Long Email
On September 5th the party sent a long email to its members. Separate sections of the email were addressed from the party co-conveners, the Rainbow Green co-conveners, Marama Davidson, and policy co-conveners.
The email was a long mea-culpa in which the authors apologed for the publication of Jill’s article. The email accused Jill of endangering trans and “non-binary” people. And it declared that a national hui would be held to “discuss the issues that have been raised”.
Most notable about the email is that neglects any mention any of the rather reasonable concerns that Jill mentions regarding women’s rights — the actual subject of Jills article.
In fact the email the word ‘woman’ is mentioned not even once.
A Clear Over-reaction
So in response to a woman expressing apprehension about the silencing of feminist concerns within the Green Party, the party silenced the feminist. Then apologised for ever allowing her to speak in the first place. And then declared that her expression of concerns was itself a crisis terrible enough to warrant a nationwide party conference.
Support for Jill
The party’s feverish overreaction has not been received passively. The organisation Speak Up For Women posted an Open Letter in support of Jill.
Speak Up For Women have sought signatories from within the NZ Green Party community — supporters and members.
After three days online the Open Letter has received over 200 signatures, some of them notable. Veteran feminist activists such Maire Leadbetter and Sandra Coney have signed the letter.
The backlash against Jill is surprising to many given her background. And this background also explains the support she is receiving.
Who Is Jill Abigail?
Jill has been a librarian, researcher and broadcaster. She came to feminism in the 1970’s and put her training in oral history recording to use in the service of the Women’s Studies Association.
She was the first Director of Information at the Ministry Of Women’s Affairs when it was originally established in 1985.
She worked with Dame Silvia Cartwright to educate the New Zealand judiciary on gender issues.
These are but a few highlights of many decades of feminist activism.
A Complete Change In Direction
The Green Party’s endeavor to unperson Jill Abigail illustrates a complete transformation in the attitude of the party towards feminism. Jill, a party elder, asked for dialogue in a conversation concerning the rights of women.
In response the Party allowed co-leader Marama Davidson to make accusations that put Jill in the same category as violent homophobes.
It’s extraordinary that the Party has allowed this to happen.
How exactly did we get here?
If you are a New Zealander reading this and scratching your head then I wouldn’t be surprised. Gender political battles in New Zealand have, with a few rare execptions, been fought outside of the limelight (with rare exception). However, these battles have been bitterly fought with everyone involved acknowledging that the stakes are high.
Two Camps
In one camp there are trans-advocates. Also called trans-activists. This group of people believe that people are born with a gender identity. That being a boy, girl, man or woman is not related to the nature of one’s body. But is in fact a set of feelings.
They believe that if a person declares themsel to be a woman (or a man) they must be taken at their word.
Transadvocates believe that the state must make gender ideology obligatory. They are running workshops in NZ schools to teach children about their supposedly innate gender identity.
This set of ideas can be described as ‘gender ideology’ or ‘transgender ideology’.
The other camp are feminists.
Feminists have always believed that gender is a set of stereotypes into which people are socialized from childhood. That these stereotypes are not innate. And that those stereotypes are harmful. Particularly to women.
Feminists acknowledge that the world is run in the interest of people born male. Noting the prevalence of male violence, feminists believe that females deserve their own spaces for socializing, for organising, for privacy and dignity.
Transactivists believe that if someone born male believes themself to be woman then they have a right to access female-only spaces.
What Does ‘Gender-Critical’ Mean?
Often the term ‘gender-critical feminists’ is used to distinguish between two different worldviews, both often described as feminist.
One group believes that gender is a sacrosanct, deeply personal set of emotions linked to ones sense of self . Members of this group believe that these feelings are hardwired into the brain from before birth.
Most of all they assert that it is harmful to question these suppositions.
The other group believes that gender is a socially constructed system of meaning that people internalize as they grow up into a society that accepts this system of meaning as unquestionably real. They believe that this system is harmful, particularly to women. And that this system of meaning and the institutions that emerge from it should be challenged, transformed or destroyed.
These Perspectives Are Not Compatible
Although both groups are called ‘feminist’ only the latter group can be meaningfully described as such. From its inception, feminist theory has always criticized gender and described identification within this system as harmful.
The pro-gender group believes that a persons sense of the identity is so sacred, that if a male identifies as a woman then this male must be allowed access to female-only space.
This position reinforces both male entitlement and the abolition of female-only space. And it is the position that the Green Party of New Zealand has decided to officially support.
The obvious tension between these two sets of ideas has created conflict within the Party. And that Party has decided to attack the feminists within its own ranks.
Jill Abigail attempted to open up a discussion within the Party about how best these tension could be resolved. The Party’s response has been to punish her.
