What is a TERF?
Photo Courtesy: UCL Women’s Liberation Twitter
TERF stands for trans-exclusionary radical feminist. While the term was first coined to refer to a group of radical feminists who refute that trans women are women, it has since broadened in use. TERF is now often used to refer to people who are not necessarily aligned with radical feminism, but maintain trans-exclusionary views, such as protesting the inclusion of trans women in women's spaces and transgender rights legislation. Trans-inclusive feminists generally equate being a TERF to being transphobic.
On the 4th of February, UCL Women’s Liberation SIG and Woman’s Place UK (WPUK) held a one-day conference entitled Education for Women’s Liberation at UCL’s Institute for Education. It was advertised as “a day of feminist thought and women’s activism.” UCL has faced criticism from its students and staff for hosting the event, as it did in 2020 when a similar event was held. WPUK is largely perceived as a TERF organisation, and has been accused of transphobia on several occasions, due to their views on self-identification and single-sex spaces. Since the previous event, UCL became the first university to formally cut ties with Stonewall, claiming that maintaining ties to the LGBTQ+ charity could inhibit academic freedom and discussion around sex and gender. This could lead to students and staff feeling unsupported and cut-off from their university, despite UCL’s commitment to supporting trans, non-binary and gender non-conforming students and staff.
Many people who have been labelled TERFs have begun to describe the term as a bullying tool, and even a slur. It has also been claimed as a way to shut down discussion around sex and gender, by refusing to take part in a critical dialogue: attacking the individual, rather than the points and argumentation. WPUK told me they “understand TERF to be a misleading and misogynistic slur used to dehumanise and silence women who understand that sex matters.” But what is a slur? So much of what makes a slur a slur comes from pragmatic and contextual enrichment. There is little consensus even among linguists and language philosophers as to what makes a slur what it is. What is generally agreed upon, however, is that slur terms denigrate individuals based on “out group” membership (e.g. in terms of race, sexuality, religion etc.) and thus inherently have a neutral counterpart, that merely picks out the group. It is worth considering the contexts in which the term TERF is generally and conventionally used in order to investigate whether derogation is inherent to the term itself. Indeed, if people labelled as TERFs then themselves turn the discussion to criticise the language use of another, are they themselves not guilty of also attempting to silence others and divert away from the true matter at hand?
UCL’s SU strongly objected to the WPUK event taking place, releasing a statement signed by UCL Trans Network, UCL LGBT+ Network, UCL Women's Network, the Equity and Inclusion Officer, and the Activities and Engagement Officer. They believe, ‘WPUK is an organisation hostile to trans people, particularly by advocating for the exclusion of transgender and gender diverse people from certain spaces.’ WPUK have refuted accusations of transphobia and hostility to trans people on multiple occasions, often citing their hosting of trans speakers at events—though this does feel very similar to ‘I can’t be racist; I have a black friend’ argumentation. WPUK told me, “Our refutations of accusations of transphobia are not limited to our many trans supporters, but are based on the reality of our campaign. This is evident throughout our meetings, our blogs and considerable number of government consultations, all accessible on our website.” They have in the past claimed to ‘applaud the commitment to ensuring that transgender people are able to live free from persecution.’ This is, however, a rather overly general statement, and fails to truly speak to trans inclusion. Today, racists refute their racism, abusers protest their innocence, sexists deny their sexism—the list goes on. Parallel to this, trans people can be transphobic, women can be misogynistic, any marginalised person can hold views that cement their own marginalisation—internalised or otherwise. There is something to be said for being an active bystander.
I can say I don’t think it’s right for trans, non-binary and gender non-conforming people to be subject to exclusion and abuse, but if I don’t actively include them and combat the persecution I see them facing, then I’m complicit in the problem. While perhaps a cliché, it is true that if nothing changes, nothing changes. If problematic viewpoints and behaviours are not challenged and critiqued, then they will persist—along with the marginalisation that necessarily follows.
It is of course important to note that many accusations of trans exclusion and hostility made against organisations like WPUK often come as a result of the words and actions of individual supporters. WPUK told me, “We are subject to a continued smear campaign that entirely misrepresents our work. We will continue to work in a considered and principled fashion, modeling respectful dialogue whilst advocating for the sex-based rights of women and girls.” It is not necessarily fair to perceive these sorts of organisations as monolithic groups who stand for everything each of their individual supporters do. However, in the case of WPUK, when these accusations are so frequent, there is perhaps more of an onus on the organisation to look at how they are perceived, not just by the rest of the public, but by those attending their conferences. Even if they do not explicitly endorse the exclusion and hostility towards trans people that some of their supporters may undertake, they do so tacitly in their lack of condemnation towards these behaviours. As pointed out by qUCL in their statement prior to WPUK’s event, “freedom of expression is a fundamental right; however, this right does not extend to limiting or undermining the human rights of others.”
UCL’s statement has been the topic of some contention. WPUK said their claims were “not only offensive, but some are clearly defamatory, such as the equation of discussing women’s rights with eugenicists.” While referring to eugenics, anti-semtism and colonialism in their statement may seem like an incendiary move, it is important to look at their statement as a whole. There is a difference between equating two things and merely drawing links, as qUCL did in their statement.
WPUK may not be a transphobic organisation in and of itself, but many of its vocal followers, who—like it or not represent them—are. A quick Twitter search of #Ed4WomensLib pulls up countless tweets revelling in being called TERFs and belittling gender non-confirmity. WPUK may feel smeared, but if nothing changes, nothing changes. They cannot ignore the behaviour of their supporters and expect it not to affect the overall image of their organisation.
Correction, an earlier version of this article implied that WPUK was a membership organisation which it is not.
WPUK provided the following quote on their recent #Ed4WomensLib event at UCL's IoE:
Woman’s Place UK are grateful to UCL, the first university in England to admit women on an equal basis, for hosting our sold-out event with over 900 attendees. Claims made by qUCL are not only offensive, but some are clearly defamatory, such as the equation of discussing women’s rights with eugenicists. Particularly egregious is the claim that our conference, and by implication our speakers, are in some way ‘limiting or undermining the rights of others.’ This claim reveals a profound ignorance and misrepresentation of the issues addressed at the conference, and of our speakers, many of whom are leading barristers working in the field of human rights law, including an EHRC commissioner. It is also patently absurd to imply that a conference visibly addressing and platforming women’s sexualities and gender non-conformity, where three out of the five invited keynote speakers were lesbians, is somehow in tension with UCL’s commitment to LGBT inclusion.
Protestors outside the venue were under similar misapprehension. The conference was neither hateful nor exclusionary – tickets were on open sale and anyone could attend to make up their own mind. Instead of doing so, or putting their case, a small group of protesters chose to shout and displayed highly offensive, misogynistic and obscene slogans – for example calling women ‘cunts’ – and at one point began aggressively banging on the windows of the lecture rooms in the wing of the building, where several conference workshop sessions were in process, yelling obscenities at the women inside. Police were called due to concerns that the escalating aggression on the part of the protestors may result in windows being smashed and/or attempts to violently enter the building. UCL security officers ended up standing in front of the building to prevent any such action, but the police presence did not deter the protestors from continuing to shout their vile slogans. It later transpired that a woman had been physically assaulted and had her property damaged by one of the protestors in the vicinity of the IoE. We understand that this incident, which was reported to the police, is under investigation.