Missing The Point On DGR's Transphobia and Essentialist Feminism

As many involved in radical/anarchist/feminist projects in the United States are now aware, at last weekend's Law and Disorder Conference in Portland a group of transpeople and queers attacked a table staffed by Deep Green Resistance (DGR) activists. These courageous queers threw a burrito at the head of one of the tablers and defaced their literature with markers, forcing the DGR activists to abandon their table and run to the organizers, shaking, with tears in their eyes because of the “horror” of the attack. These DGR activists were confronted because of their organization's backwards, transphobic feminist theory and policy which advocates strict enforcement of gender binaries and attacks on transgendered and queer youth. The first report of this anti-DGR action was written up on GenderTrender, a radical second wave feminist blog (gendertrender.wordpress.com). Their report is full of the type of rhetoric one would expect to see from a blog that subscribes to this brand of essentialist feminism. Their repeated attempts to portray the women who were attacked as traumatized, triggered, and inherently powerless at the hands of violent men while providing an anti-contextual depiction of the “perpetrators” as large, aggressive, inherently oppressive men aims to support a feminist praxis where men are men, women are women, and the social roles of each are unchanging despite context. DGR makes no attempt to hide their transphobia and openly declares that those who identify as transwomen (who were behind the attack on the DGR table) are actually men in disguise who aim to use their status as trans to abuse women.

In the past – save a few notable examples – most of the criticism directed towards Deep Green Resistance and its ideological leaders Lierre Keith and Derrick Jensen has taken place on blogs, Facebook, and other forums on the internet. Thankfully, this appropriate action taken by a group of transwomen and queers has mobilized many groups into concrete, real-world action to combat DGR. Many are organizing to ban DGR from radical spaces and there is a mobilization to shut down the Resistance Rewritten tour, a speaking tour spearheaded by feminist author and DGR activist Rachel Ivey.

While the most recent backlash against DGR has focused on their transphobic stances, we believe that much of this criticism is missing the point of the problems inherent in DGR's ideology. It must be recognized that this transphobia is only a symptom of the essentialist strain of feminism that DGR uses as part of its ideological foundation. While DGR's transphobia is essentialist feminism taken to its extreme, this brand of feminism has found its way into radical circles, communities, and spaces throughout the United States and it must be confronted – not just because of the way DGR has twisted it into a form of transphobia, but also because of all of the other ways that it damages our organizing.

The Politics of Victimization

In 2011 Derrick Jensen, after years of calling for the use of violence against deforestation, environmental destruction, and agents of the federal government, contacted the FBI to complain about recent “death threats” he had received on an online message board. This action, which many regard as snitching, and which seriously damaged Jensen's credibility among anarchists, was widely criticized in radical circles. Jensen responded to this criticism by accusing his detractors of failing to stand in solidarity with him, which they were obligated to do because of his newly-proclaimed status as a victim. At the 2010 SF Anarchist Bookfair, DGR's Lierre Keith was pied by a group of anarchists for her anti-vegan and transphobic stance. After the disruption she quickly called the police on those who had pied her, playing up her status as a victimized woman who had been attacked by a group of men. Despite the fact that the group that pied her was not made up of cisgendered men, Keith and her supporters stuck to the line that those involved had to have been men because of the aggressive, abusive nature of the attack.

The sharp delineation of identities around the terms “victim” and “survivor” versus “perpetrator” and “abuser” has spread like wildfire in radical scenes in the United States, primarily on the West Coast. In some cities accountability processes, which were devised as a way to deal with sexual assault and serious abuse in radical communities, have been used to settle scores with ex-partners and as ways to leverage power over others by exploiting the identities of “survivor” and “perpetrator”. More recently, a self-proclaimed radical woman in an East Coast city used feminist and accountability process terminology to justify calling the police on and testifying against a group of anarchists who were involved in a physical altercation in which she was present, claiming that her identity as a woman made these situations “abuse” despite the context which clearly showed that this was not the case. During the ongoing legal battle she repeatedly affirmed that her status as a “victim” made her decision to be a snitch for the police unquestionable. Those who would criticize or confront this behavior have been quickly labeled as abusers, perpetrators, or abuse enablers.

These justifications are pulled directly out of the essentialist second wave feminism espoused by Deep Green Resistance, the tenets of which are followed to a lesser extent by radicals throughout the country in the name of liberation and community accountability.

Moving On

The problematic brand of essentialist feminism that we are talking about didn't originate with Deep Green Resistance, but for many of us the recent incidents with DGR have brought to the forefront an issue that has been very difficult to delineate and criticize for what it is. The manipulation of accountability processes, the improper usage of terms associated with sexual and domestic abuse, and the disruption of radical action in the name of liberation and feminism must be brought to an end. The association of radicals with those who support essentialist feminism has allowed those who would openly cooperate with the police to infiltrate our circles of affinity and to undermine our work. It is important for radicals to recognize these behaviors for what they are and to be openly critical of them so that they cannot further harm our organizing and action by creating a climate of fear – fear of being labeled a perpetrator or abuser for taking action against this disruptive behavior. Radicals should understand and recognize that there is a divide that exists between these two theoretical and practical approaches to action and that no monolithic “community” exists between the two that should be respected. It is only then that we can be free of the power politics at play when demands are made for radicals to be made “accountable” to this community using processes which are inherently set up to play on essentialist critiques and assumptions of gender roles and behavior.



inb4 derrick jensen's penis

"These DGR activists were confronted because of their organization's backwards, transphobic feminist theory and policy which advocates strict enforcement of gender binaries." "These justifications are pulled directly out of the essentialist second wave feminism."

Look, I really hate DGR, but could we at least accurately discuss their positions? Like, this critique makes me embarrassed to be an anarchist. Are radical folks really this ignorant of what radical feminism is? Radical feminists hate the gender binary, which they describe as a hierarchy, because it is a creation of patriarchy. They don't support it in the least.

Addressing the second major failure of your grasp on radical feminism, Radical feminists are the opposite of essentialist because they don't think gender is essential to human beings: It is a social construction. Gender non-conformity is a primary tactic of radical feminism because conforming to gender roles is to play into the sexist categories of gender behavior that patriarchy has created. Playing into such roles is reactionary to radical feminists. Radical feminists advocate androgyny and the abolition of gender.


yeah, but DGR folks seem to be constantly confusing all of these things. during the past week or so, when shit about this has been getting discussed all over the place, i've seen DGR people say things like that they reject the gender binary, reject traditional gender roles, etc, but then (sometimes in the same breath) insist that everyone who was born with a penis inherently shares certain characteristics, or chide people who identify as one gender or another for not fulfilling the traditional roles of that gender. perhaps the article above is talking more about what DGR members and supporters have actually been doing and saying rather than what they theoretically are supposed to believe based on the traditional definitions of the labels which they give themselves.

"perhaps the article above is talking more about what DGR members and supporters have actually been doing and saying rather than what they theoretically are supposed to believe based on the traditional definitions of the labels which they give themselves."

^^this has to be the case, otherwise the article constitutes a gross distortion of radical feminism just as the earlier comment indicated. But i think it is the case: DGR'ers (and Brennan) are the ones turning "radical feminism" into essentialism.

Radical feminist are against essentialism except when it comes to men (sorry, "cis men", have to make sure to use appropriate new terms invented on the internet)

that and sex workers, and pornography.

Even if you avoid the transphobia, radical feminism is still reactionary, essentialist, and backward in a hundred other ways.

c'mon "backward" isn't a critique, it's exactly the kind of empty might-makes-right signifier of the ever-improving march of civilization stalinists used to club anarchists with.

Or "feminazis"? -R. Limbaugh-

You are mistaking "radical feminism" as a descriptor for third-wave feminism and "radfem" or Radical Feminism which is a particularly essentialist subset of second wave feminism.

I really wish we could get our terms straight here. It pains me to see people with decent analysis give people like Keith, Brennan, etc cover by using this term. The name is fucking taken. It would be one thing if there was some kind of open, knowing campaign to steal back the name "Radical Feminism' from people who don't live up to it but this failure to acknowledge the existing use of the term and deal with the fack that these people are still out there just makes it easy for them to borrow the legitimacy of others and spread their hateful garbage.

There's a reason that socialists who support national liberation struggles don't run around calling themselves "national socialists" however much an abstract, ahistorical understanding of the term might apply.

thank you! well said!

Nope, what they were stating was 2nd wave radical feminism. It's being grossly misunderstood, maybe due to misinformation for some (you I suspect), and maybe due to willful ignorance and willful distortion by others, leading to further misunderstandings.

They might say that they're against it but their actions say otherwise.

Radical feminists do tend to advocate androgyny, but in the same way that state communists advocate an eventually stateless & classless society...


what you describe is true radical feminism and the author undoubtably recognizes this. They are describing "essentialist radical feminism" and are calling them out on their bullshit disempowering version of feminism. There is no reason why this article should make you "embarrassed to be an anarchist". The author agrees with what you just said.

on a side note unrelated to the first comment, while calling out DGR for their trans-phobic bullshit is important, why aren't folks also focusing on their hierarchical structuring and the fact that DJ bashes pacifism in everything he's ever written and then makes an organization based solely on non-violent bullshit actions?

Just because you say you aren't essentialist doesn't make you not essentialist, just because you say you hate the binary doesn't mean you don't support the binary. Radfems consistently defend the binary and essentialism at every turn ergo people say that radfems defend the binary. It's not that complicated.

It's a HIERARCHY not a binary. And radfems want to dismantle it entirely.

Radfems have a different conception of 'gender' to trans*/queer theory activists. This is part of where the problem is. Trans*/queer theory says that gender is an identity, something internal, owned, yes? Radfems, when they talk about gender are talking about what you would maybe term gender roles: that is, a set of behaviours prescribed and enforced by patriarchy. It is this prescription, enforcement and hierarchy that radfems wish to dismantle.

Then, everyone can just live/dress/act/behave as they wish. Free of any hierarchy.

Thank you for clarifying the radical feminist position. It was very much needed here.

Note to all: the above IS the position held by DGR.

Androgyny: good! Misogyny: bad! Got it?

So abuse of the 'accountability' sessions in r@dical communities should be confronted/criticized? Isn't that what Kristian Williams attempted to do in his 'The Politics Of Denunciation'? His reward for that effort came during the disruption of the 2013 Law & Disorder Conference at PSU. Checkmate!

"Climate of Fear"? Isn't that the stock and trade of violent street elements calling themselves anarchists? 'Fatwas' against photojournalists aren't an effort to create a climate of fear? The women attacked at the 'Law & Disorder' conference weren't being intimidated/assaulted? Commons sense dictates the answer. The actions there were intended to provoke fear in the women and they succeeded.

One may criticize the hierarchy in DGR as an organization or point to misandrogyny as the flip side of the same coin as misogyny, but NO one chooses to be a victim, assaulted, threatened, intimidated, or violated. Violent anarchists excuse/condone such behavior on the pretext of political 'principles'. Their mantra?: "Each may do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law." Those who seek justice that provides due process instead of trial by combat are labeled 'snitches' by a loose collection of self aggrandizing juvenile delinquents and privileged dilettantes who also advocate assaulting photojournalists. (http://amicuscuria.com/wordpress/?p=9505) The article fails to distinguish between the tactics of Fascists and violence prone anarchists vigilantes because there is no meaningful distinction. Each and every instance of such violence is 'justified' by pointing to the greater sings of capitalism, how no government is fit to rule, and wrapping the mantle of 'victim' about themselves while emulating their persecutors. Now, the DGR representatives victimized at the Portland State University 'Law & Disorder' conference are criticized for donning the same mantle. Anarchists need to get their story straight. They've openly declared war against the state, society itself, repudiated all laws or even the notion of 'rights', guffaw at those who complain of private property destruction/vandalism/assault, and even advocate for the destruction of all civilization as the path to 'total freedom'. When criticized for eating their own children, they revert to type by 'labeling' them. They complain mightily of police brutality and infringement on their 'rights' but think nothing of doling out similar abuse. They resist accountability/responsibility for their actions. The distinction between them and the Brown Shirts of yesteryear is one without a meaningful difference.

"By their works, ye shall know them." -Matt. 7:16-

"by their inability to distinguish fascists from those resisting transphobia, ye shall know them"

also, who ever says that the problem with police brutality is a matter of "rights" except liberal wingnuts like this person?

Pretty sure it's camera troll trying to pretend he isn't camera troll. The repeated reference to assaulting photojournalists leads me to believe this.

Fuck that camera of yours pal.

People have a right to be as blind as they wish, to fear who they wish, to associate with who they wish. DGR wasn't advocating laws be passed targeting transgender people. They were making literature available expressing a point of view. Some DGR fans don't like men, truth be told, either. Does that justify men physically attacking them? Trivializing the assault effectively urges it continue. It must stop for everyone's sake. Injury to one is injury to all shall be the whole of the law...not hurt feelings. Invite who you like--or don't. Touch them and DIE!

"cis" male here and totally bent on destroying DGR and radical feminism.
feel justified doing so too.

8/10, i lol'd

IGTT 1/10

Whatever Amicus, go cry about your camera getting thrown off a balcony.

Calling someone "courageous" because they get pissed off enough to do some very minor vandalism of DGR literature and throw a burrito starts this piece off in a tone of hilarious agit-prop. That's not a criticism of the magic marker-waving, burrito throwers, but of this document, in case anyone was confused. Yeah I'm sure it took a little gumption, but "courageous"....

Did they hit them with their purses too?

See Derrick's comments below. from https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2013/05/13/feminists-assaulted-in-tr...
luckynkl Says:

May 13, 2013 at 8:01 am

I hope the women filed charges against these men for assault and battery?

As for “transphobia,” lol, these trans boys aren’t trans anything. Not only aren’t they biological females, they don’t embrace female gender roles in the least. Just the opposite. Trans boys are hyper-masculine and nothing more than the Taliban in a skirt. No exaggeration. I see little difference between the Taliban cult and the trans cult. They’re both cut from the same cloth. They’re both faith-based, male supremacist cults, who hate women with a passion, wish to strip women of all rights, and use a fake religion, and violence to accomplish it. Just like the Taliban, any objection to the trans cult is seen as profane and blasphemous. Unlike the Taliban tho, the trans boys can’t put women to death yet for objecting, but they’re working on it.

This is a wake-up call. If Western women don’t want to live under the Taliban, then women must throw these trans boys out on their arrogant, male-entitled asses NOW before they gain any more power. I highly suggest women stop being so passive and start investing in security guards (dykes preferred :) ) with stun-guns and attack dogs at their conferences. Trans have told me flat-out that until women are physically able to stop them, trans will continue to do whatever they please to women.

Make no mistake. Men have declared war on women and trans are just one of their weapons. Women got out of the box during the 60′s and 70′s and men are pulling out all stops to stuff them back in, politically, economically, socially and culturally. Through laws, politics, religion, the medical and psychology field, the media, porn, war, rape, violence – whatever works. LOL, men are so desperate, they even brought back the eunuchs!

Men are just going to have to get over it tho, because women aren’t going back. In the end, this is a war you can’t win, boys. Because your lives and even your very existence is dependent on women, but not the reverse. Women can survive and exist just fine without you boys – and will. :)

Derrick Jensen Says:

May 13, 2013 at 10:10 pm

The labeling of the “trans boys” as Taliban in a skirt got another piece of validating evidence today, as they called for members of DGR to be lined up and beheaded.

Derrick Jensen Says:

May 13, 2013 at 10:16 pm


I really resent your comments. you wrote:
I love DGR but its leader has been transphobic, so of course expect trans people to be upset.

This is an obviously manipulative attempt to create dissension in DGR by scapegoating one person. But DGR is proudly a radical feminist organization. So to say you love DGR but have problems with Lierre Keith’s stance on this is nonsensical. Saba stands with it. Val stands with it. Dillon stands with it. Cameron stands with it. Rachel stands with it. Alex stands with it. Lexi stands with it. I stand with it. And on and on.

And it’s absolutely extraordinary and also fucking typical that in a thread that began because women were intimidated, yelled at, and physically accosted by a mob of men, YOU talk about “expecting resistance.” Jesus fucking Christ. It was the fucking trans people–the MEN–who were the aggressors. Can’t you get that through your head? What part of that is so hard to grasp?

You hope they "file charges"? Boy oh boy, anarchists certainly have gotten flaky over the years!

You didn't pay attention to the fact that the above was just a re-post from a RadFem blog. Not anarchists talking.

It's always disappointing to hear of men being categorized with violent male misanthropes. A great many men sympathize with women who are harassed/threatened/attacked. Nobody wants to be victimized, male or female. While disagreeing with your tarring all men with too broad a brush, you're well within your rights to dislike who you choose and demand nobody threaten you, assault you, or touch you without your consent. Hopefully, you and your sisters will continue to insist on no less, not only for yourselves, but everybody. The women assaulted at the 'Law & Disorder' conference represent a breach of faith. Clubs, attack dogs, and other less visible weapons are already showing up at these anarchist events, including May Day. Sadly, women along with any other likely targets must be prepared to defend themselves because the police aren't capable/available to do so. Be certain to have witnesses/backups and document every second, visually and audibly. Violence is about the only language some of these street tuffs grasp. Have you any Hell's Angels friends? It's looking like it's that or the 2nd Amendment because the state isn't preventing force and fraud...time to sharpen your own sword.

If you think black bloc is all male than you are not only a deluded fool, but also disrespecting the countless women who have participated in bloc actions.

Whatever--those who continue to provoke in hopes of stimulating a violent reaction will get it. Many citizens now grasp they can't rely on the state/police to protect them, so are taking matters into their own hands. And the anonymity of the internet is becoming porous. It won't shield you from retribution, accountability, and being force to confront your victims. Most people already feel a sense of satisfaction when the malefactors are busted and hauled before a magistrate. Those will be the lucky ones. Armed citizens are beginning to trail street demonstrations they believe contain black bloc thugs. Y'all better start looking around. It's getting ugly.

Black bloc "victims"? Shattered windows and newspaper boxes are going to start fighting back? Those who value property above human life sound like the thugs to me.

I would add that most of us who dont have the same privilege as, say, the owners of Nike or Chase bank, already know very well that the state/police won't protect us. This is the reason people take to the street to exact revenge on this shitty, hierarchical organization of the world.

Also, thanks for conceding your entire previous argument with your childish "whatever".

The people who pied her were idiot vegans, not anarchists. Read their bullshit communique that shows they clearly hadn't even bothered reading the vegetarian myth. They also don't even mention that she's trans phobic in the communique. That hadn't really broken to anarchist communities yet. You must be to young or ill informed to know how this actually went down.


HELL NO, FUCK YOU FUCKING EUNICH SLAVE LOSERS AND UNATTRACTIVE STUFFY FEMINIST MALCONTENTS. Both of you make serious accusations about the other's stances and use that as a justification for marginalizing the other. Um, did it ever occur to either of you to actually quote and reference the specific passages of the other's written works that makes the claims in support of your accusatory interpretations. Seriously, am I going to search Lierre Keith articles to corroborate that she is transphobic? No. From what I read here, her argument is that men cannot put on a dress and makeup and call themselves women and say that they know what it's like to be women. This makes total sense. Further, Women aren't particularly keen on what it's like to be trans or to have the desire to be trans even. So the issue to me is that a lot of accusations are being made but little facts to back them up (like actually quoting Keith or the book etc).

The issue is that you are trying to draw people into serious topics so you (who?) encourage this type of sensationalism while limiting the written materials theoretical depth so as to make it more readable to a mainstream audience. It's funny because aside for queers and trans, the rest of the people supposed advocated by DGR and generally anarchist sorts, immigrants, Blacks, prison inmates, working class people, sex workers, and so on couldn't give a fuck about all this bullshit.

follow the money esse

dont tell me what i do or dont give a fuck about plz.

-a working-class sex worker

I wasn't. I don't even know you. Apparently, generalities are too difficult for you to grasp. Because I mean, you go to a strip club and all they talk about is women's liberation. Please, you are so fucking dumb it reflects on your occupation btw.

"Because I mean, you go to a strip club and all they talk about is women's liberation."
at what fucking job does everyone sit around and talk about womens liberation?

"Please, you are so fucking dumb it reflects on your occupation btw."
I met a dumb barista once. SO ALL BARISTAS ARE DUMB. True story.

(btw, theres totally nothing problematic about implying that sex workers are dumb... yup... that totally doesnt reinforce any dehumanizing, objectifying caricatures of us that makes it easy for this culture to further marginalize us and ignore/normalize violence against us. Maybe you should also throw in a bit about the presumed intelligence of ethnic minorities, for good measure...)

"at what fucking job does everyone sit around and talk about womens liberation?"
Social workers that help battered women talk about that a lot. I would guess those conversations are different than back stage at a nudy bar.

"I met a dumb barista once. SO ALL BARISTAS ARE DUMB. True story."
A lot of barristas are really fucking dumb. But I have to concede here because I've met a lot of intelligent people all over the place who do a lot of different types of work. However, sex workers and other types of gritty dehumanizing and demoralizing occupations tend to concentrate a large number of ignorant and uninformed people mostly because they are prevented from informing and educating themselves by the very same mechanisms which put them there to begin with. So it's not incorrect to say sex workers are ignorant because I'd bet most of them are. It's just that it's not their fault. And if you take it to the logic of street survival, I bet you'd find some really ignorant corpses with very high IQ's I would venture to wager. So you are partly correct but I believe I am too.

" Social workers that help battered women talk about that a lot. I would guess those conversations are different than back stage at a nudy bar."
Backstage at the nudy (sp?) bar we talk about abuse, the stigma we face in the court system, having our children taken away from us due to our profession or poverty, being denied other jobs or housing due to our profession, bodily integrity, physical and sexual boundaries, money, work, gender roles, transphobia (we sometimes have trans and other gender-non-conforming people who work with us), prostitution and its legalization or lack thereof, labor laws, healthy/unhealthy relationships, personal rants, the usual drama, etcetcetc.

Yup, we're just a buncha ignorant uninformed people who prolly dont have anything interesting to say...

"I wasn't."
Actually, yes you were. You said "...working class people, sex workers, and so on couldn't give a fuck about all this bullshit." Stop invisibilizing people. It's disrespectful and self-reinforcing.

And in actuality, I know a lot of anarchists who are sex workers. A lot of anarchists do precarious labor. Turning tricks, medical studies, seasonal labor, catering, different kinds of service...

I'm too high to argue with you. Do you want to get some coffee bro? My treat! :D

im not a guy, but fuck yeh do i need some coffee right about now. BLACK like my dark soul

yeah, I get it, I'm not a guy either. I'm a big pussy and lazy and blah. suppose you were a cop or someone i def didnt want to see because i owe them.

You swear like a guy,,,or have the consciousness of a guy...Umm, are you a 2nd wave feminist?

yes and where were you. I've been waiting at the starbucks for like an hour already. this anarchism is difficult.

ok more like 30min, but still. who is this?

Now what's difficult about anarchism. Oh, I see, you think its an identity scene, and your mind can't grasp the essential quality that is the pursuit of an individual freedom and then combining it into an in formal association. How do you like your latté hipster?

all I know is that I know nothing. Except I do like lattes, but without the accent. French accents must be phased out entirely. Portuguese accents and the rest of them. From now on, only the written Spanish language may employ accents. This is my decree I am King of the anarchists!

but just to be sure, we really don't have to do what he says, right?

He? She? Kings and Queens? Is this a gay identity crisis issue from a trendy café? Damn! At least feminists don't frequent hamburger joints. 'Have to do' is blasphemy in the anarchist vernacular.

"Stop invisibilizing people." Thank you! I feel like all of these comments missed the whole point of this article.

also "blahblahblah any of the groups i mentioned cant possibly ALSO be anarchists and/or care about trans/gender issues cuz that contradicts my weird romanticized notion of what these groups that i obviously dont belong to are actually like, also they never get on the internet cuz theyre too busy workin da fieldz or suckin cock in alleyways"

it's not. It's generalities. Sometimes they are appropriate, I'm sorry oh postmodern (rather postmortem) prophet of relativism (or rather profit right?). you don't understand anything so shut up. Your comment is a waste of valuable energy.

"I'm sorry oh postmodern (rather postmortem) prophet of relativism (or rather profit right?)"


I put the question mark in parenthesis. Damn, I guess that invalidates everything. Better luck next time, I guess.

im actually just super confused about what that sentence was supposed to mean...

ok well be confused then. do you want something, or are you responding to my comments just to annoy. I am the person you have been responding to. I can tell you straightforward and honestly. Can you? (obviously not, not with the person upstairs obviously eavesdropping, maybe that's you. It's funny because I spent the greater part of the morning berating them and instilling the very real and actual dear of litigation against extortion, the RICA as 2 chainz calls it, and this pansy ass is so weak he isn't going to last 2 days in jail. further, I can see the fear in him although his posturing earlier, before the other one cracked, was pretty confrontational. I think he regrets a lot at this point). So, coffee?

Oh puhleeeeze. "Postmodern"=a postmodern elitist's way of telling you what a shitty person you are.

and it's funny you assume I don't belong to any of those groups. I speak from experience. and yes it is anarchist's fault none of those groups generally don't give a fuck about what they're always yapping and arguing about.

most people as a whole (who arent anarchists) dont specifically care about anarchist/radical left scene drama, or more likely arent aware of it. But a lot of people DO care about transphobia (like uh, trans people, a not-insignificant amount of whom are POC, imprisoned, sex workers, etc.)

Look, barring the fact that it's here 7:30am and I am high, I am still too high to argue. Let's meet at starbucks. Here are all the ones in my area, pick one.


lol 7:30 is way too early to be high. Id just go back to sleep if i smoked that early

sleeping is hard. my pineal gland is out of sync because of nazis. I used to sleep in very very late.

If there's one point which is being missed in this controversy, it's the connection between DGR's authoritarian organizing style and their transphobia. One of their leaders believes this nonsense, so it's become group policy. When challenged, they entrenched this position going to incredible hyperbolic lengths ("Taliban!!!"), leading to an exodus of anybody who dared to disagree.

Dare I say it? This has little to do with transpeople (at least on their end). Derrick and Lierre could easily have chosen another seemingly insignificant wedge issues to drive everyone with anarchist sympathies away. Ideologues take on ridiculous positions like this all the time, almost like a fashion statement, to distinguish their gang from others. Since transgendered folks are a tiny, incredibly oppressed and terribly misunderstood minority, making them an incredibly easy target for this vitriol. Most importantly, since transphobia (quite rightly) is virtual heresy within anarchist communities, they can then play martyrs and victims when people inevitably react strongly to "innocent questions".

Politics like this go beyond their former crypto-Maoishness, they're fucking fascist. Adopting "radical" rhetoric then scapegoating minorities is a classic fascist tactic, as is adopting hardline policies on sexual/gender identity as a means of internalizing repression within one's followers. Throw in a leadership cult and a bunch of "tribal" mythology, and the picture gets even more clear....

How exactly would we react if a "radical" group started showing up at our events and taking a similar line on sexuality or race? What if they want to save the whales, end capitalism and create a liberated world where queers or Muslims just aren't welcome? What if they followed their statements directly with threats of snitching? We'd run 'em out. First, because these people are clearly not "friends" and do not share our beliefs, even if they might look similar to an idiot from a distance. Second, because "liberation" is not built on that kind of oppression. Ever.

I know there's a lot of people who are wondering why we can't just have a "reasonable debate", like all those liberals taught us. To them, I ask, why we can't just have a serious, polite debate about whether people have the right to be gay, or whether black people are just another species of monkey. Such debates are inherently dehumanizing because they assume from the outset that the viewpoints of hateful reactionaries are just as valid as any others, even when it comes to things that don't affect them personally in the slightest (and can ruin others' lives...). Some subjects are taboo for a reason, even among anarchists.

As for those who think this is some sort of insignificant side-issue, I ask what DGR has ever done which has gotten it more attention than being transphobic? For all the militant rhetoric, the only "action" I've seen them take makes selling trotskyist newspapers seem relevant and exciting. They're not fighting the state, civilization or oil companies, they're fighting anarchists, queers and (real) feminists. Bravo.

This whole mess is a direct product of DGR's power structure. Their leaders' decision to participate in larger gendered power structures in an attempt to leverage more power for themselves is not surprising - that's the kinda thing authoritarians do, and it was utterly predictable from the outset of DGR.

been saying this for days, whomever you are, you are sexy

Whom is the object; who is the subject. "Whoever you are..." Please stop trying to sound more educated than you are.

fuck you chump

ZING! Get 'em, grumps!

criticizes a group for using hyperbole
calls them fascists

never change, anews

one liner

So free speech and debate are OK so long as you agree with the speaker? Mein Kampf should be banned from the library and/or defaced. Deniers of the Holocaust should be assaulted. You might like Europe more than America. They actually arrest and prosecute deniers of the Holocaust there. Germany arrests people who attempt to sell Nazi memorabilia, even Americans if they can get their hands on them. You are, in effect, unAmerican--and proud of it. Thus, at the same time, your are not a countryman. You speak of tyranny and oppression while advocating the tired same old constructs tyrants have always sought. It is well you, as an enemy of the American people, will NEVER wield any real power and fight within your own ranks, because if you did, citizens would have to rise up and kill you just as they did with Mussolini.

"the disruption of radical action in the name of liberation and feminism must be brought to an end"

hear hear! I have become absolutely convinced that the anarchist idea and the idea that men are by definition a class of people who only abuse, oppress, and rape, are absolutely incompatible ideas. (Not to mention that one of them is simply a false dogma). I've lost track of the number of times people have mobilized their individual identities to attack and destroy anarchist/radical projects in my city. As though in every single situation, if someone is a woman, or "queer" (the definition of which is stretched to meaninglessness), or "POC", they are unquestionably right and must be unthinkingly supported in absolutely everything they think or do - or else you suffer the shame of being a "rape apologist" or something similar. This is authoritarianism and amounts to an active attack on anarchist networks of trust and solidarity.

Perhaps the worse part of this is that actual abuse and male domination, in anarchist circles or in the real world, are left completely untouched by the simplistic analyses and stupid drama stirred up by these people.

^ Big ups to this post, nail on the head as far as my experience is concerned. Come on yall, we're anarchists, not liberals, we don't automatically make judgments about how a person ought to be or how "good" or "bad" they are based on these things, what are we liberals? Sorry anarcholiberals but not all POC are great people and not all males are rapists, and before you criticize this, just check your fucking track record for actually dealing with a racist or rapist in your midst. At least if you're in North America, it ain't all that great. Seems like a lot of anarcholiberals are too keen on shutting down language that doesn't correspond to their narrow, middle-class conception of respecting other people, than actually dealing with instances of wanton disrespect and violence to other people.

One of my favorite things I've ever witnessed, was watching some white PC police guy try telling a group of radical black kids that saying "nigga" was offensive and hurtful language. Yet, the overwhelming white "counterculture" crowd that was at this event was perfectly alright to wax romantically about the fact that this group of kids showed up to an anarchist event without ever engaging these kids and treating them with the sense of a tokenized "Other." What a bunch of shit.

Wow, this is so passé, why don't we make it simple for everyone by agreeing to treat everyone as if they were our mum, hmm?

Oh yes, the time for the American Soap Opera. I'll just get the popcorn and make myself comfortable.

I'll bring the pepsi and we can all cerebrally self-mutilate our individual values ;)

fuck pepsi, fuck frito lay, fuck tropicana, fuck Quakers, the real Quakers, they owe me, fuck Gatorade and fuck pepsico as a drink, snack and food. and if you're down with pepsico then fuck you too. fuck all yall, my 45 make sure all your kids don't grow, fuck all yall!

Ha ha ha, yes. Fuck all of this.

I've often wondered why, if DGR wanted to recruit a broad base to it's top-down, regimented anti-civ movement, they would make enemies and cause controversy over statements about first vegetarianism, and then trans-folks. Even taking for granted that they are a hierarchical, cultish group, I couldn't see how it made sense to foster these conflicts if they wanted to get large numbers of people taking action to end industrial civilization.

But then I tried to REALLY think like them, and consider, if I was trying to develop a political cult with this philosophy and action plan, who I would target for recruitment and brainwashing. And that's when it all made sense.

Of course there are a lot of ways such a cult MIGHT go. But here's how I think DGR DID go:

They decided to first work from the stereotype that young vegans are prone towards becoming involved with ALF-style activities. Since Keith, Jensen, etc. wanted to build an army of people who will take extreme actions, possibly illegal and/or violent actions, they thought that if they could sway young vegans/vegetarians/animal rights activists to join them, these people would end up taking radical action not in defense of animals, but in service of DGR.

But this utility-based logic blew up in their faces for a variety of reasons, but largely because their arguments to bring vegans over to their side were ludicrous. Just go to Youtube and watch the 4 minute video filmed at a Lierre Keith workshop that's titled "Lierre Keith and her lies on veganism." As a side note, pay attention to the fact that Keith makes a joke saying "I was a teenage vegan." Anyway, I watched this video, and I'm well versed in green anarchism, anarcho-primitivism, permaculture and ecological science of agriculture, not to mention having been raised vegetarian and being pretty familiar with a range of animal rights perspectives, and what I saw here is Keith preaching a series of oversimplifications, twistings of the truth, and outright lies that are being made in an intellectually dishonest and self-serving manner. Sure industrial agriculture is unsustainable, sure all agriculture is unsustainable, sure even permaculture food systems may be unsustainable with anything close to our current population level. Yes, vegetarianism alone won't save the planet -- how many people will you find now that will say it will? And humans overall, esp. Americans, eating less meat is obviously going to have a positive environmental effect, even if eating more GMO soy isn't. Plus moral issues about the treatment of animals are pretty core to animal liberation, environmental issues aside. So why was this the battleground issue for Keith a few years back, and pursued so intesively that she eventually got pied over it?

Why? Because it was a ploy to try to recruit young passionate people Keith, Jensen and company thought they could manipulate for their purposes. Plain and simple. Except the shit didn't work.

Fast forward to present time: DGR is still trying to recruit cult members and foot soldiers. They're looking for people they think will be vulnerable to brainwashing for their cause (and let me just be clear, if their cause is ending civilization I am for it...however their methods of achieving it I find distasteful and as far as I can tell they are an abject failure). Since patriarchy still exists and women are still second class citizens even inside radical, environmental and anarchist scenes, young women in those milieus were their next target. And Keith/Jensen/DGR felt they could only successfully brainwash people into taking extreme action on their orders if they based their efforts on over-simplifications, twistings of the truth and outright lies, so they concocted a revised overly simplistic feminist gender analysis that's centered around black and white, good and evil, oppressor and oppressed dichotomies -- as documented in the video you can find on Youtube titled "The End of Gender: Revolution, Not Reform." I wouldn't advise anyone watch the whole thing, but if you just watch the first few minutes you'll notice the 23 year old person speaking say "I was a teenage liberal," echoing Keith in the other video, a sort of jingo/brand thing.

That's how I think this all fits together. Maybe I'm totally crazy, way out on left field here. But I don't see any other convincing explanation of these situations. Fortunately none of these ploys have worked in terms of building the scary cultish movement Keith/Jensen/DGR wanted. But they have succeeded in warping and wasting the time of a whole new generation of radical youth -- both the people who joined DGR, and the people who have spent so much time and emotional energy opposing them or arguing over these things. And civilization really doesn't seem much closer to collapsing.

speaking as a something of a proud fanatic (ha ha) an absence of coercion and hierarchy are the only things that keep our actions/movements remotely ethical (or replace whatever word you want that means in touch with basic decencies- yes i realize its a relative term.)

those inclined to think that extreme political views and hierarchy mix well would do well to study some of the political cults of the 70s and 80s.
the political cult of the “O” in Minneapolis comes to mind.

DGR is trans phobic but they lost my interest long before that became clear when they emerged as a hierarchical cult of personality. those are dangerous and not in the way i want to be dangerous.


Let's throw into the mix that both LK and DJ have chronic medical conditions that cause them to be in intense pain a lot of the time. They want to die but, like many charismatic figures, they don't want to die alone. Hence, they try to incite what they hope will be an apocalyptic guerilla war.

:D <3 :O :] <3<3<3 LETS ALL DIE TOGETHER!!!! (put more funny internet emoticons here)

HA! Trying to recruit lesbians while dissing vegetarians, good luck with that one. Maybe dis Ani Difranco and faux-hawks while you're at it.

I watched "Lierre Keith and her lies on veganism" and I just want to ask, what did she say that was a lie? It all seemed pretty legitimate to me. And just want to throw out there that I hate Lierre Keith.

Been debunked to buggery. Check out the vegetarianmythmyth blog and a million other debunkings.

I heard recently that email scammers try to make their scams really obvious so that only the most gullible people reply. That way they don't waste time talking to people who will smell a rat and back out when they start hearing the details.

I wonder if there is some of this logic involved in the crazy positions that cult leaders take up. Even if it's not part of a conscious plan there might be some kind of selection process where the people who don't do this get bogged down or diluted by people who just aren't stupid enough and their groups just sort of fade away.

Some comments. DGR is a fascist organization by its utilization of a position of intolerance against a certain group of people in order to isolate anarchists. Derrick has finally and ironically reformed his thorough studies of abuse into a language of political manipulation against the very uncontrollable elements of society that would be the actors of social upheaval. Lierre Keith has inserted a transphobic rhetoric into a certain sect of anti-civ followers. Veganism still makes no sense as either action nor nutrition.

-an unapologetic anti-civ primal anarchist and ex-jensenite

in other words, Jensen and CO has become the toxic mimic of the struggle against civilization.

Intolerance?--like the pot calling the kettle black kind? This may not have been a marriage made in Heaven, but the Divorce certainly was!

This critique is fucking excellent!


what does lgbt versus green anarchism & this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism_in_pre-Columbian_America & this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros all have in common?! LULZ

That both the pre-Columbian indigenous tribes of S. America and r@dicals enjoyed eating their children?

by Anonymous (not verified) <- money says that this cat is a male.

Pretty thin reed to go all public lynch mob on people who are
1) on or near your side of the fence and share at least a couple of your goals.
2) obviously within reasoning distance (perhaps if presented with a coherent arguments and evidence)

But no -- we should go and call them out very loudly and very publicly, and visibly sabotage whatever positive progress may have been made despite the problems with 2nd wave victim playing. Really? That's it? That's all? That is a reason to march around, play purity troll, encourage people to yell and scream and mark people up and throw nails and broken glass all across the road that a lot of well intentioned people are trying to travel? Despite others opinion, mine is that what Keith and Jensen were doing was not nearly as extreme or as dangerous or as destructive or as counterproductive as that.

And yeah, I am not trans, so now you can crucify me.

I listened to the interviews with some of the perps, outlining their criticisms here

The complaints are valid, but seem like that they could be addressed in much more constructive, mutually respectful and less hyper-destructive ways. Keith and Jensen, who I am no big fans of, could be cited and removed from and replaced at DGR without spectacularly mega-torpedoing the entire operation (which has a lot of committed and well meaning individuals) and going on and on endlessly and robotically about Jensen and Keith as PolPot, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Genociders, etc...

Truth be told, my vote says that the anarchs are coming off as petty, sanctimonious and self-righteous, with snot ass attitudes and gang tactics that roll straight off the school playground. And I identify as one myself. I am telling y'all this because you need to improve the game. A lot.

Again, I don't like Kieth or Jensen, but this kind of "we're going to tell DGR they're full of shit" marching about sounds more like a proto-lynch mob than a reasoned, much less practical approach to addressing these problems. Thus, despite all, I am more inclined to give the decision in this match to Ms. Keith even if she is full of flawed arguments.

Now, can we get any more nuanced than saying that she's into playing the victim? Is there anything more to this?
Can somebody please outline, in detail, exactly Ms. Keith's problematic claims and flawed reasoning, and present a coherent, refined critique which offers an alternative and a solution? Can this be done without throwing pies and hurling ad hominems?

I gotta say that the Feds and the Koch brothers are probably laughing their asses off tonight with the clownish performances of both DGRs and the Anarchs.
An auspicious evening indeed.

See you in hell Kittys - or maybe you're already there.

"Keith and Jensen, who I am no big fans of, could be cited and removed from and replaced at DGR without spectacularly mega-torpedoing the entire operation (which has a lot of committed and well meaning individuals)"

You are not familiar with how DGR is structured.

Finally, a cruddy voice of reason crying out in the wilderness! ^^ Why worry about destroying the r@dical movement when it does such a great job of self destruction on its own?

I agree that feminism is a problem and discriminates against a lot of people, like transgender people. However I don't think attacking Derrick Jensen or scapegoating him is going to resolve the issue. Most of the people behind feminism are women. Men typically support it because they feel like they have to in order to stay in the movement. We need to de escalate the gender war or it will destroy our communities. I am for human rights and gender equality for everyone, but not feminism.

IGTT 10/10

that's what feminism was before radfem essentialist degeneration!

I disagree with DGR but they shouldn't have attacked the table this could be dealt with in a discussion.

Watch some videos of Lierre Keith and then read-up on some of the debunkings of her book "The Vegetarian Myth." She's a manipulative liar, a vulture, a user. Jensen is a control freak: people who know him personally have told me this, but it's obvious from his recent public behavior. DGR is their attempt to gain power and control over others through lies. And what have they accomplished? Tell me? What have they accomplished besides wasting a lot of people's time? Now, I'm not saying that makes Jensen and Keith beyond redemption as individual human beings. But DGR's organizing structure is useless and beyond redemption. And nothing they're saying of value, none of their anti-civ militancy, hasn't been said elsewhere without all the authoritarian nonsense and lying. Now maybe you don't see a lot of people NOW talking about the need for the collapse of civilization to avoid the collapse of the ecology, but go back 5-10 years and you certainly did. But green anarchy went out of style with the anarchist youth who mostly now instead go for a bunch of substanceless nihilism, insurrectionary bullshit, Tiqqun-imitating doggerel, and identity politics in-fighting. And we in our 30s now who consittuted the previous generation of the anarchist youth movement (because, face it, the anarchist milieu is 90-99% people under 30) are largely worn out and disillusioned from losing, watching the earth die, and/or going to prison. And then there's those among us who decided to throw in our lot with non-profit activism or green capitalism (boo, hiss). But anyway, the youth don't care about green anarchy and the older people who do aren't active. So maybe DGR seems to you like the only strong anti-civ voice and group, but if so that's a friggin' tragedy, because they are really screwed up and they aren't going anywhere. They're just an updated version of all the communist urban guerrilla cults of the 1970's...except they don't even rob any banks or kidnap hieresses and create a fun media spectacle!

yesssssss.... truer words etc

I've been saying something similar for years. The saddest part isn't how fucked up DGR is, it's made worse by the fact that I actually wish the eco-inssurrectionist underground existed but it doesn't. It's just a pretty idea to make two harmless book-peddling academics seem sexy/dangerous. Jensen alludes to it constantly in his work, writers like him are to "be the public face of the movement" and "prepare infrastructure" for the underground, as if there's a secret army of illegalist eco-warriors …

HA! … … … HA!

Interesting historical @nalysis, Real. It has the ring of truth to it. Hopefully the r@dical youth of today can get behind meaningful change and constructive strategies to accomplish it. It's exhausting work and only the young have the energy for it, if not the intellect.

"We are not transphobic, and will be further responding to these allegations.
These accusations made against us were followed by violent threats (including threats of death and sexual assault). DGR members who made similar comments would be immediately removed from the organization."

From: http://www.deepgreenresistance.org/protect-women-feminism-and-free-speech/

By DGR saying "we are not transphobic" what they mean to say is that they don't believe trans people exist. There is no such thing as trans. Many right-wing religious people say, "we are not homophobic"...by that they mean they are not "scared of gays or lesbians" they just don't think they exist, they are just heterosexuals who are sinning.

I wonder if DGR and religious fundamentalists will work together against trans people. They can work together to fight what DGR would call "the transsexual empire."

Maybe DGR should try looking for foot soldiers for their militant army among pro-lifers. They're zealots who'll kill for a cause.

So what if some people don't cotton to gays, trans, militant feminists, males, women, etc. etc. It will always be thus. In fact, a 'friend' to everyone is a friend to no one. So what? Your point? Your plan of action?--attack anyone who doesn't like someone? What kind of juvenalia is that? That's going to make them like whoever better, right?

You're a jackass.

If you are homophobic or racist or advocate patriarchy, your "anarchy" will be an "ultra-nationalist patriarchy" which I want no part of...try a different website, dumbass.

Nope. Guess again.

The DGR forum has a private queer space, there are private sleeping arrangements for gender variant people where they will be safe(r) from harm. Just as there is private space for people of colour, disabled people, females. Just because someone is within an oppressed group (such as trans* people are), does not mean their needs and their experience of oppression is identical to those of other oppressed groups.

Or do you not support females -- as a class/caste defined by patriarchy -- recognising their oppression from patriarchy and organising to end it?

Before you end it, would you mind helping me find it? Is it buried with the Treasure of the Sierra Madres?

How are bourgeois perversions relevant to the class struggle?

Either this is a troll making fun of how working class obsessed class-struggle communists are.....or it is an actual working class obsessed class-struggle communist making what they would consider to be a salient point.

Towards the Bass Struggle, No more salmon-fucking

Na, they be trollin.

How are bourgeois perversions relevant to the class struggle?

Even liberals and progressives can be more "radical" than DGR. Deep Green Resistance is radically asinine.



This Anarchist wrote this critique of DGR almost 2 years to this date. Not sure if they are still around, but definitely need more foresight like this...and I'm not even an Anarcho-Primitivist and this article is dead on.

After wading through mountains of mindless rhetoric, the crux of the charges against Keith and DGR I could gather is this

1) DGR had an overnight meeting once, and a trans person was told not to stay in the bunk of their choice.
2) Keith thinks that persons born biologically male and transition to female are not in fact completely female.
3) This essentialist brand of feminism requires too much victim playing.

That's it. That's all I could get from these Anarcho critiques of DGR. Again, this is not enough to rationalize the bomb throwing, the posturing, the physical attacks, the dehumanizing rhetoric, the lynch mob mentality, the name calling or the all out effort to make everyone on all sides look like ineffectual blowhards and fools.

I am getting tired of the pure undiluted adhominems, as the practice is irresponsible and counterproductive.

Excuse me. You are ~anarchists~? Your anarcho-analysis here is anorexic thin and your praxis hangs on the psychological projection of the very tactics you claim to abhor. I am not impressed. Not at all. I need more rigor here my anar-kittys.

So DGR structure mirrors Mussolini's? or Aum Shinrikyo's? or L. Ron Hubbard's? And DGR is not in fact a resistance organization, but a group specifically dedicated to preying upon trans and other vulnerable people? Wha?

Pray tell my kittens, do educate us all on the blindingly exact and self-revelatory specifics - absent the mudslinging please.

Guess what, "kitten", we're not just anarchists, we're real people. That means that we don't just auto-generate comprehensive essays on the failings of DGR. Instead, we say what we're feeling, and right now what we're feeling is disgust. That's going to be articulated in some impolite ways...

We're not just saying that DGR resembles fascists or cults. This organization is displaying some very worrying signs, and blatant transphobia is only one of them.

I'm just saying you resemble exactly what you purport to criticize. That is just as worrying. And since you are doing it under the banner of Anarcho, some more exacting members of your clan might demand more thoroughgoing meticulousness before crosses are lit and real people are burned at the stake. There are no excuses, tabby. And yes, calm down, get your wits, show me the definitions and the facts (and maybe also the monthly blood of your angry trans friends) and then I give you permission to crucify me. Please. Until then you remain a bunch of pussys.

I'm just gonna leave this here for you, "kitten".


Ridiculous. Jensen is utterly non cognizent and noncoherent as you, my feline half-wit funknut anarcho poser. You and your crew have completely lost me and shit all over whatever anarchism was, is, or ever wanted to be . Anarchists are ___X___. DGR is ____Y_____. This whole project is ____Fucked_____. Now I finally see the light thanks to your spew on the ceiling and all over every website known to man {man-ha-snigger} and I am going to go vote republican and start sucking OBAMAs right wing cis dik and ask him to torture and drone every anarchist that every lived thanks to you donnkey diks. Good luck with your half assed fifth wit fake self-congratulatory cult revolution with the endless spiraling Koreshian/Hubbardian circle jerk for those of you pretend hyper misogynist pussys who can't figure your nuts from your vagina from your asshole from your mouth from your abusive bullshit rhetoric, shot praxis and shit action. Bakunin, Goldman (both surely full trans by now) and your trans friendly poser wankshit ideological purity platformist jerk nuts apologists will surely be wanking your fake diks in anarcho heaven you lame, degraded fake wananbe fukoffs. May the ever loving light of the fully trans god inform every level and every nuance of your ongoing trans obsessed total macho female hating posing anarch-everything-destruction wank. It's a sure bet. The world will never be safe until all of us, our moms, our dads, and all of our pets and every gender in nature is trans. Sorry if this is too complicated for what passes for your cis hating cerebellum:
Letter after E
Letter after T
Number after 1
Just me being a real person. Expressing my precious human feelings and emotions, honey.
Did that hurt? Well good. I know you like it. Or can you dish it out but not take it, shitwads?
No hard feelings morons, idiots, jerk nuts, fat assed reject kindergarten losers...

Aw, c'mon Meow. Tell us how you really feel.

I was talking to this pornstar at kink.com. She said after the shoot, they made her read DJ's book, which, she proclaimed, turned out to be the worst part of the whole ordeal. I'm hilarious.

you seem a little mad. u mad?

Oh no! We lost you?

What if we give you our preferred rate and free DVR for six months?
If that's not enough we can bundle your internet!

Assault isn't simply impolite, it's a crime. All the rhetorical baiting and trivializing doesn't change that. What's interesting is, here, the violence, the bullying, the intimidation was internal instead of those external 'others' whose humanity is most often ignored. Live by the sword, die by the sword...and claiming you didn't know the sword was loaded doesn't cut it. The assailants knew exactly what they were doing when they assaulted the 2 DGR women tabling at the event, just as the violent street anarchists know what they're doing when they destroy property and assault people on the streets. Stop weaseling! Polemics don't excuse the violence.

get fucked retard


i think cis is a good defensive tool for making privilege visible / turning the tables but in the long run feeds into a "trans*" narrative THAT ACTUALLY ALSO ESSENTIALIZES GENDER. nobody "is the gender" they were assigned at birth; gender is a cultural system for enforcing patriarchal control. we can weaken it by playing around with identities and performances, but trans* identity is emerging as a hegemonic one among gender rebels (partly because it still retains gender as a category of control/reform available to the state) and it's based on such circular logic (gender is an oppressive social construct / individuals must be free to discover and adopt their true gender) that it can't help but feed a backlash from all directions. loudly shouting that all transcritical viewpoints are transphobic, essentialist, sex neg rad fem blah blah is not a good look.

fuck DGR, already and for obvious reasons, but in the course of revolution / social war / ykwim we are going to have to engage with and convince a lot of folks starting from different perspectives, and the way this debate is playing out feels to me like many anarchists are taking the easy way out and affirming a reductionist, recently congealed trans* identity in order to score points against DGR. when really we should be more patient about groups autonomously forming on the basis of this or that specific experience of oppression, agreeing to fight our mutual enemies together, not hiding our belief that particular identities will not ever win against power as a whole. if being assigned and socialized under the female gender in this society is a specific experience of oppression, let it inspire its own forms of struggle and negation for the time being, til it reaches the end of its usefulness, not insist on united front politics (based on the idea that transwomen and cis/faab are both more essentially "women" than anything else) where they do not necessarily exist.

if i am a guy who likes to wear dresses and lipstick, then i should be able to do so. just because that's what i like to do. i don't necessarily want to have to claim a "trans-identity" (although this is an act of transvestitism). i don't necessarily want to claim a "trans-identity". i'd rather just be a guy who likes to wear dresses and lipstick.

"if i am a guy who likes to ... , then i should be able to do so. just because that's what i like to do"

i see a problem with this reasoning
the problem is this 'should', 'i should be able to'

if i want my gender identity to be fluid, then i don't want to have to identify as "trans".

Why not? There are plenty of women who like to wear pants and tattoos. Some like lifting weights, body building, and even boxing. One gal is on the local high school wrestling team. There's no law against any of this--far from it. Whether everyone's comfortable with it?...so what! Assaulting others for their disaffinity is beyond the pale. It will discredit both factions.

The sexiest gays are the ones you least expected ;)

The Spectacle of the Moment: Identity Politics Tag Team Wrestling

On one side we have the essentialist feminists, a team led by DGR. For decades they’ve been successfully flipping patriarchal essentialist ideas on their head to support their view that women’s experience of oppression makes them inherently noble, while all people assigned the male gender at birth by society are oppressors and enemies unless they submit entirely to the vanguard leadership of revolutionary females.

The essentialist feminists have been the undefeated national champions of identity politics tag team wrestling for quite a few years going, but now their crown may be in jeopardy from the new upstarts…the trans-gender identity politicians! These challengers believe that the oppression and struggle of trans-gender people makes them inherently valorous and revolutionary, while cis-people, especially cis-males, are always oppressors and reviled enemies UNLESS they follow the lead of the revolutionary trans-gender vanguard.

Keep your eyes on the spectacle everyone: nasty names will be shouted, literature will be vandalized, and burritos will be thrown – and in the end one identity politics wrestling team WILL be victorious at exhausting us emotionally, wasting our time on leveling the playing field of capitalist democracy, and just generally distracting us from the goal of tearing down the infrastructure that’s destroying the planet while enslaving and policing us, and building new anarchic experiments in living together without coercion, hierarchy and ecological destruction.

Stay tuned in to A-news as the saga unfolds!

not to sound like a hater, but i can't believe this sort of lazy piece was published but my interview with THE ACTUAL PEOPLE who were involved in the incident that sparked this all off hasn't been approved. This site is a mess...

post a link, I'd love to read it.

Anyone in Montreal (or rest of Quebec, or France): if this wasn't done already can you send an email to La Mauvaise Herbe (Quebec's low-key equivalent to EarthFirst!), so they make an official statement banning DGR from their publications?

mauvaiseherbe AT riseup DOT net

While the argument of transphobia is totally relevant, those two instances of Jensen and Keith calling the cops is fucking beyond acceptable!

Whoever calls the cops on others is neither anarchist or a comrade, they are fucking collaborators and no longer deserve any recognition or support whatsoever. Also, if we see those fuckers at next weekend's Montreal ABF, they'll get what they deserve.

I meant "beyond unacceptable" lol

As if only someone in Montreal or Quebec or France could send La Mauvaise Herbe an email? Dood, anyone can send anyone else an email, no matter where they are in the world. Because the interwebz is a series of tubes. . . .

Fuck you all. Biological men attacked women. Get that through your thick ideological purist skulls you twits. Oh gee, I feel like I'm a female, therefore I am! Bull fucking shit. Fuck you, fuck your fake sense of outrage, fuck your ignorance of physical reality on so many levels, and fuck you all for not doing anything of value for the last decade (more, really) outside of ripping apart one another over these constant personal attacks. You are all so fucking dim. And worker, fuck you for providing a space for these cretins to have a voice. You're not doing anyone favors you technophile shit.

Your tears are so yummy and sweet.

I would not be surprised if this is Thistle or another DGR member. DGR people seem to troll radical and/or Anarchist spaces online and in real life. They're trying to proselytize to people who are interested in radical ideas...similarly to RCP types. They are the Larouche cult except in a rad fem sort of a way (similar to Larouche they are anti-trans and anti-Anarchist.)

Nope, ex-anarchist who is sick of all of your shit. That's about it. Ex in the sense that the anarchist "community" is really anything but and that you're as ineffective as the liberal groups and "wrong" radical groups you all rally against. You know it's bad when EF!, a group founded by a couple of sexist and racist redneck dude brahs is coming out against other radical groups though. The only thing most anarchists are good for anymore is a swell laugh. And I'd still love to hear from worker why they censors only posts mentioning him.

Define censor. My definition does not conflate censor with the removal of posts.

If you want to criticize worker, those posts are left up. If you want to blow workers pseudonym, those posts are removed. As are the posts of other blown pseudos.

This is covered all the time but the topic is reviewed again here https://anarchistnews.org/content/meta-news-%E2%80%93-may-2013-part-ii

By "ex-anarchist" to you mean sell out or never really were an anarchist?

I mean I am not merely a scenester, like Y'all.

The delusional self-importance of anonymous posters is amusing most of the time, but this post, in one short sentence (complete with a de rigueur grammatical error), epitomizes the phenomenon. Well done!

Oh Grumpy, how I haven't missed seeing your shit. But, the above was not me.

"In 2011 Derrick Jensen... contacted the FBI to complain about recent “death threats” he had received on an online message board. This action, which many regard as snitching, and which seriously damaged Jensen's credibility among anarchists, was widely criticized in radical circles."

So 'many regard' doing something about being threatened with murder as 'snitching' and it was 'widely criticized'?
and death threats gets a quotation mark?

I think Jensen's point was that if you are under threat of violence, you are the one that gets to choose how you deal with it, not some supposed 'radical circles' or 'anarchists' that just want to shit on you

Including that little piece of wisdom in here shows that some of these other critiques may just be a bit out to lunch

I agree, I have been the subject of slurs associated with my similar predicament concerning death threats.

Bob Black --[ Pig Ffffucker and gourmet stew and spew chef]

The FBI/death threat incident -- was emailed torture threats with photographs of his house, from RIGHT WING fruitcakes. I know, I read them. If you call this 'snitching', you show yourself to be nothing more than an armchair "anarchist", one of these types who thinks posting a picture of his face covered on MySpace equates to political action. Go back to watching my little pony with your other bronies, you'd be more effective and a better anarchist if you did.

You all sound like a bunch of Havelock Ellis, circus freak, Fagg-archists!

DGR has the right to say whatever the fuck they want. These Transgendered Queer people complain about violence against them because of what they believe, but when feminists believe gender is a result of the patriarchy it's time to silence them.

What a bunch of selfish-hypocrites. Radical Feminists operate off Dworkin''s beleifs of the androgynous revolution. That's GOOD for transgendered individuals.
Yeah, I think DGR is stupid for not letting trans people have their own spaces and shit, and I definitely think it would be a smarter move if they just let transgendered people have their rights and inclusion in the movement.

But how do trans people expect inclusion when they can't even respect women, or recognize how they are drawing from male privilege when they practice their agressive masculine bullshit on women who are respectfully voicing their opinions and not insulting them?

Seriously, not all trans and queer people are this out of control and ignorant, but these douches did nothing for their cause by acting like children violently acting out to something they don't like being said.

Also this article was ass, and the whole "victimization" section was invalidated by the biased use of the word courageous to describe the attacking queers. Those women were being victimized. They were not being protected by any authorities of the conference and the violent behavior of the trans douches was ignored.

It's not like they were transdouches courageously throwing "burritoes" at cops at an xl tar sand protest, but they were courageosly throwing burritoes at a group of people who were trying be activists against probably the same causes they are fighting for.

Horizontal hostility much?

You anarchists can be some fucking nobs sometimes. Cut it out with the whole essentialist bullshit. You little black and clad pussies, what the fuck have you accomplished? Exclusive collectives dominated by privileged white males? Zines you made at college?

What are you gonna do next, throw a vegan pie in my face because I don't give a shit about how rude I sound? Liberal idiots.

Fuck this article, it doesn't make sense. Essentialism? Gender is essentialist. It's socially constructed. And its hierarchical. Men gain power by stealing if from women and oppressing them.

How is this not the case in this fucking attack by a bunch of men? You tell me how essentialism invalidates this argument or even matters?

God you guys suck. Yeah, you can also grill me on how much profanity, transphobic, and misogynistic the language I just used is. Type away, I don't give a fuck!

I'm not your PC type when it comes to political matters and I don't think any group is self righteous enough to not fall under my abusive name calling radar.

I'll call a racist radfem girl a bitch, a sexist gay man a faggot, and a sexist-racist-and downright douchey white male a pussy white boy if I have to.

As someone who got a totally sectarian blow-off when I tried to reach out to an old friend who's with DGR for the purposes of environmental direct action, I have to giggle a bit when y'all talk about "Horizontal Hostility". I'd avoided taking a public stand (no matter how much I wanted to), mostly so as to not ruin this particular friendship or sour any chances to do the kind of work we've been doing for many years before Aric met Derrick. But no. Because other anarchists said things on the interwebs, we can't be friends. And then you wonder why we think its a cult?

Does the organization really matter? Industrial civilization is a cult. Read the goddamn the book for christ sakes, it's not actually a cult if you could read the damn book and understand how it is fucking organized instead of making illogical conclusions. DEEP GREEN RESISTANCE: STRATEGY TO SAVE THE PLANET


In DEFENSE of DGR and the truth


This entire comment thread was cancer. I came to this article to read a critique of an organization that I am involved in because I question the recent feminist policies of an organization that otherwise I love. I am by no means transphobic so naturally I want to make sure that I am not blindly following something that goes against my core beliefs as a human being. I was hoping to find an article that was sourced and an intelligent discussion based upon opinions that have actually read the policies of the organization with an open mind. Instead I got to see a bunch of anarchists from all sides make complete asses out of themselves and use no logic or intelligence whatsoever. The bulk of you here have given feminists and anarchists a like a bad name with the nature of your comment. That is all, have a nice day.

whoa they really are cultists

You guys, trans people can be asshole men and snitches, just like anybody else. Trans people aren't blameless unicorns made of gummy bears just bc they have the most 'victim cred'...DGR had the right to call out the snitch trans person asshole man who infiltrated their group. and, nothing, is wrong with strategic essentialism. nothing at all. it is sorely needed in many situations. dgr tries to do good things, they're not always right, but this dgr hatred is totally uncalled for. we all like to fuck salmon now and then. cut a bitch a break.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
4 + 0 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.