babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » feminism   » actions against the GAP

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: actions against the GAP
swirrlygrrl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2170

posted 06 February 2004 11:39 AM      Profile for swirrlygrrl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hey all:

Heard word that the local anti-abortion group on campus is planning to bring the Genocide Awareness Project here in a bit, and a few people are starting to get together to do a general pro-choice campaign, and to mobilize to prevent it from being able to come onto campus and to counteract the propoganda if they manage to. Was hoping that people could help with the brainstorming process.

I'm thinking right now of the usual of speakers, movie nights, speak outs/personal testimony, letters to the editor, leafleting, stuff like that, in the lead up, but I am wondering if people have found effective, non-violent (preferably non-confrontational, or at least respectful) ways of dealing with the GAP. There's already been vandalism and the level of rhetoric and emotionalism will only heighten if things progress.


From: the bushes outside your house | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 06 February 2004 11:44 AM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't think banning them from campus is the way to go. Allow them in, and make damned sure that there is opportunity to debate their position at every turn. Instead of using this as an opportunity to suppress a repellant position, look at it as an opportunity to highlight how truly repellant the GAP position is.

Keep the pro-choice people in line, and make sure that being seen as taking the high road is impressed upon them. That will take the wind out of GAP's sails. If you respond to the anti-choice provocations in kind, you end up looking as bad as they do, and you undermine your credibility.

[ 06 February 2004: Message edited by: Rebecca West ]


From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 06 February 2004 12:00 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It would be important to explore their ties with other far-right groups. Are they linked to Human Life International?

I personally don't believe in "free speech for fascists", but that is a huge debate on the left. Their name is hideously insulting to survivors of real genocides. The tenth anniversary of the Rwandan genocide is coming up in April.

By the way, although I agree with your concern that actions against these women-hating scum be non-violent and perhaps even non-confrontational (the latter is a tactical matter) but I don't see why they should be respectful. Such advocates of reproductive slavery are not worthy of respect, any more than racists are.

[ 06 February 2004: Message edited by: lagatta ]


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
terra1st
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4605

posted 06 February 2004 12:22 PM      Profile for terra1st     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
there used to be a group called baycorr (bay area coalition for our reproductive rights) that did a lot of research linking far right anit-choice people to the far-right white supremacst groups... I think their website is still up somewhere, but they were active in the late 90's.

just found their page....web page

there is also some CSIS papers on their website - one is called single issue terrorism. In typical CSIS style, jerks that they are, they do the paper on anti-choice people, and enviornmentalists and animal rights groups!

The csis paper can be found here:web page

hope this helps. Highly recommend the Baycorr stuff. you might also want to check with the ARA in your area - though they aren't interested in "peaceful and respectful" confrontation with G.A.P. scum.

[ 06 February 2004: Message edited by: terra1st ]


From: saskatoon | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 06 February 2004 12:51 PM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lagatta:
I personally don't believe in "free speech for fascists", but that is a huge debate on the left. Their name is hideously insulting to survivors of real genocides. The tenth anniversary of the Rwandan genocide is coming up in April.
We have hate laws that protect groups from some of the crap spewed by the far right. But if you don't think the rights of free speech should extend to everyone, then you probably aren't in favour of extending the right to a fair trial to the perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide.

A concept of human rights is worthless if it isn't universal.

Censorship is censorship, whether you agree with what the person/group is saying or not. You limit another's free speech, what's to stop them from limiting yours?

quote:
but I don't see why they should be respectful. Such advocates of reproductive slavery are not worthy of respect, any more than racists are.
I agree. However, I never said this group should be treated with respect. Taking the high road doesn't imply respect. It means you don't lower yourself to the tactics employed by your opponents.

From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 06 February 2004 12:52 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think it was swirrlygrrl who was mentioning respect.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 06 February 2004 01:01 PM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oops. Sorry.
From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
swirrlygrrl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2170

posted 06 February 2004 04:41 PM      Profile for swirrlygrrl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Thanks for the links Terra, I'll check 'em out.

On the respectful, its hard for me to be calm, because is so loaded, but I think that in a lot of cases, engaging in dialogue with "the enemy" can break down some barriers. Yeah, there are people who are obnoxious jerks, who don't care who they hurt, who revel in the pain they cause others, but most people in the anti-abortion movement aren't bad people (even if I completely agree with what they think, in a lot of cases they have strong moral beliefs that don't come from places of control), and I think that getting angry and confrontational and disrespectful (especially from the outset) makes people defensive and closed and unwilling to listen and learn. It reinforces the boundaries between us, when in many cases, a pro-choice person can find common ground with an anti-abortion person (as compared to an anti-choicer - my lingo), and in that common ground we can at times agree to deescalate, and to take action on common fronts (ie I think a powerful movement could be built for progressive measures like adequate welfare funding, child care spaces, sex eduation, contraception, valuing parenting and family, reducing the stigma of teen or unwed pregnancy, etc. with links between people who dont' want to control women, but want to ensure that women aren't put in situations where they feel the need to turn to abortion, whether they label themselves anti-abortion or pro-choice).

If respectful dialogue has a chance of getting the group just to not even try to bring GAP to campus, I think that's the best option. And after that making sure people are educated and trying to ensure they can't come on campus with it (I really feel strongly that its hate speech, Rebecca, and that the situation is inflamed enough that control might not be possible), and if not that then we don't let them have the reaction they want when they get here. There's enough hate and anger and pain on this issue, and unneccesarily going for confrontation doesn't sit well with me. Not that I haven't given as good as I've gotten a few times past, but I don't think I ever felt like I'd accomplished anything.


From: the bushes outside your house | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 06 February 2004 05:29 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I personally don't believe in "free speech for fascists"

Unfortunately, people who hold this belief are typically all too willing to volunteer for the task of deciding who's a 'fascist' and who isn't.

I'd rather see the really wacko ideas exposed to the harsh light of day as the wacko ideas they are.

My University has had an ongoing problem with a right to life group that wants to claim student group status (and receive funding from the school to propagate their crap). I don't think the school owes them any cash, nor an office, but I'm glad they're being humoured as the fools they are. Their ideas won't go away just because most of us don't agree with them, and as long as they'll be here forever, I want them where we can all see and keep an eye on them. Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca