Women, prison and civil disobedience in Irish history: two pages from the history books

by Deirdre Clancy - The Margins of Feminism Tue Mar 09, 2004 02:21

Having sat as a student in classrooms where the suffragettes and other women activists/groups of activists were being discussed and avidly studied, I find it strange that academic feminism has stuck its head so deeply in the sand regarding the anti-war movement.

The real feminist action is at the grassroots level now. I can think of two prominent Irish feminists who have spoken out against the war, and one who has spoken in support of women in the anti-war movement who did civil disobedience. Dismal record!

Still, it's always good to be reminded of the existence of a radical heritage of Irish women - such reminders happen so rarely.

by So many more Tue Mar 09, 2004 02:53

Don't forget that in every decade of this century there were women who went to prison to maintain and expand the rights of women. I recall that in the late seventies women were sent to prison just for selling copies of 'Spare Rib', which contained information about abortion. Browsing in a bookshop recently I came across a book about the womens' movement in Ireland. and was astounded at how these incidents were omitted, it is almost as if these women have been airbrushed out of history.
And let us not forget the many republican women who have suffered the most appalling indignities. They too will be conveniently forgotten because they do not happen to measure up to someones concept of political correctness.

by JMcK Tue Mar 09, 2004 10:02

Welcome back Fintan.

At least women like Hannah here in Ireland stood by their anti war position even when the "Great" war broke out in 1913. The British sisters decided to stand by "their boys" and deserted the feminist/anti-war movement until the war was over. Some even argued that by taking over vacant posts left by men gone to war they would advance feminism more by joining the war effort than by opposing it.

The Irish ladies never quite regained their good standing at Cheltenham(!) after displaying "bad character" in the Empires hour of need. Propagandised as they were by the media, demonised by the churches as heretics, perverts and mad-women. Begrudged the liberty of their sentiments by most ordinary women who struggled daily with poverty and poor living conditions.

It is very apt to compare the smashing of panes of glass in Dublin Castle nearly 100 years ago with Mary Kelly's smashing the nose of a US Navy aircraft at Shannon a year ago : a hammer being the preferred instrument in both instances!

I agree with Deirdre that the "prominent feminists"and especially those in "appointed" positions are a bunch of middle-aged, middle-class fuddie-duddies who prefer cocktail parties , getting their photo taken and enjoying the perks of the job to getting involved in conflict with the very people who appointed them to their fat jobs. They are exploiters of womens suffering who are huckstering and misrepresenting "domestic violence" and other genuine issues for personal gain. If only a fraction of the money fed to them and their administratively heavy organisations was spent on actual women in need of help, it would be a good thing. It may explain why, since recent health board studies show over 90% of violence in the home is actually carried out by Women against Children, these groups misrepresent Men as the main attackers of Women. I suppose it would mean the Money would go to other Groups and not Theirs if the false perceptions were not floated down the media river regularly? Meanwhile children live with continual and random assaults by their mothers while men fear their wifes anger in case she will tell a judge how "afraid" she is of them, on a whim, and make them homeless. What a mess!

by Deirdre Clancy Tue Mar 09, 2004 13:07

Previous poster - I did not say that the majority of feminists were middle-class fat cats, or whatever you called them. I would not believe this for a minute, although there are elements within respectable, establishment feminism that are resting gloriously on their laurels certainly. I just said that academic feminists had been strangely silent (apart from one or two) regarding the anti-war movement. I'm a gender & women's studies graduate myself, and I have a lot of time for many of the women involved in it, and I do not feel that they exploit women's suffering at all. In fact, in lots of cases it's the opposite.

Regarding the suffragettes in England: two of the Pankhursts (Christabel and Emmeline) did indeed take the pro-war position, and several other suffragettes followed suit. Sylvia was anti-war, as were other prominent suffragettes at that time, such as the (Irish) Eva Gore-Booth (then living in Manchester) and the Manchester-born Esther Roper, and several of their followers. So it's not as black and white as the English women being pro-war and the Irish being anti. It's rather more complex than that.

The previous poster, with his wild claims about domestic violence, etc., appears to be the aspiring Indymedia version of John Waters. Women are not blameless when it comes to these issues, but they're far from being the main perpetrators of it.

by Fintan Lane Tue Mar 09, 2004 13:16

Incidentally, it should be noted that the author of the book mentioned above, Maria Luddy, was one of a number of Irish historians who signed a letter to the national press last December calling for my release from Limerick Prison. Catriona Clear (UCG), another well known authority on women's history, also signed that letter.

The history of radical struggle receives little attention these days and many gains, won through street struggle, civil disobedience, and other non-parliamentary means, are often assumed to have been won through polite lobbying. Sometimes, for instance, it seems as if the IFA are the only people who remember how the Land League operated!

by Activist Tue Mar 09, 2004 13:29

You would think that this wouldn't be lost on the current crop of the (so called organised) left. Although it would seem that the influence of London is still a major factor in Irish politics and that the respective internationals of the (so called organised) left are too worried by any negative impact on that dreaded curse of activism namely, parliamentary cretinism. What other excuse is there for their despicable Leinster house inspired orientation to anti-war work.

by JMcK Tue Mar 09, 2004 13:46

Thanks for that Deirdre.

My understanding of the Womens movement at the time of the Great War is gleaned from a womens studies course ran by Alva Smith some years ago as a satellite programme for us Culchies by UCD . I don't know if Alva is among those "acedemic femisists" you slate?

According to the history I learned on this UCD course, the feminist movement in England was behind "their boys" from the outbreak of war, as I described above. The fact that you can nit pick a few examples of anti-war women in England at that time is interesting more for your motivation at being so divisive than in that it proves me wrong.

You mention "wild claims" of studies on domestic violence! You compare me to John Waters! I don't know which is more insulting but I will let you know so you can continue in this manner.

The "wild claims" as you call them were reported on RTE radio some months ago when a social services study showed that men in fact , for the most part beat up men, in public, whereas the greatest victims of domestic violence are children and the perpetrators are women, mostly their mothers. Sorry if this doesn't fit in with the way you see the world and not just how it is. Isn't it interesting this study hasn't been more widely reported since it debunks such an old anti-man propaganda?


I note you Catholic people are very tetchy with me ever since I gave out about the Roman Catholic church and it's bevvy of child rapists. I even took flak for highlighting the number of priests who supported the war this time last year, so keep it up and know how foolish and petty your week-end Catholic Anarchists look trying to mimic a real woman with a hammer.

YA YA

by Deirdre Clancy Tue Mar 09, 2004 14:19

I don't even remember your posting of a few months ago that you refer to. I generally don't care whether people slam the Catholic Church or not - there are issues on which it clearly deserves slamming. My activism may have a faith-based element but don't presume to know what my views are on the institutional Church, because clearly you don't.

I have a lot of time for Ailbhe Smyth, because she is one of the few who did speak out against the war, so no, I was not referring specifically to her.

I have come across numerous studies that contradict that one you cite, and have also done some work myself where I've come into contact with the many women affected by domestic violence. However, I don't doubt that women perpetrate it also at times and that this is done to children (and to men also, as studies have shown too). I'm aware of all this and regard it as a major concern. But I'm also aware of statistics that wildly contradict the ones you cite.

I'd rather put my energy into my own activism than into trying to convince people who are clearly going to misread my motivation no matter what I say, partially because I belong to a movement that has the word 'Catholic' in the title. Clearly the 'agenda' you feel I have is not the one I actually have.

Also, I am not nit-picking by pointing out that there were English feminists who were anti-war. In fact, they were very significant people with significant influence on the English left at the time.

by Deirdre Clancy Tue Mar 09, 2004 14:28

"so keep it up and know how foolish and petty your week-end Catholic Anarchists look trying to mimic a real woman with a hammer."

I think the clear vindictiveness of this comment is clear proof that the person with the agenda is not me!

It's not my fault if you can't handle people disagreeing with you. Among mature adults disagreements *can* happen in a civilised manner without resorting to personalised attacks.

by Actual weekend anarchist Tue Mar 09, 2004 15:03

"week-end Catholic Anarchists"

These people spent several weeks in jail and may go down for years due to being accused of 2m euro worth of criminal dmage to a plane. Don't understand the catholic bit myself, but I'd hardly call that weekend anarchism. You have chips on both shoulders mate.

by Fintan Lane Tue Mar 09, 2004 17:00

Where has JMcK been for the past while? What is he on about? The Catholic Worker 5 (aka Pitstop Ploughshares) have already spent long weeks in Limerick Prison on remand for their decommissioning of a US warplane at Shannon, and they could potentially end up serving a few years for their action. They are brave people who have taken a stand that has cost them dearly in many ways, and they deserve our respect and support. They have my respect, and without conditions.

JMcK seems to have little understanding of the diversity of this movement, and less of the motivation behind the Catholic Worker action at Shannon. The reality is that what brought those good people together was not religious zeal (or love of the institutional Church!) but a convergence of opinion on the need to confront the 'war on terror' and Irish complicity; a willingness to take direct action; and a shared faith-based outlook.

JMcK's snide remarks about people who are facing serious jail for an anti-war action are appalling. These people badly need our support in the run-up to their trial, and commentary aimed at undermining them at this time is a disgrace.

by Anon Tue Mar 09, 2004 17:15

JMK is obviously a clown. Ignore him.

Well done, Deirdre! And good luck with the trial.

by Jagger Tue Mar 09, 2004 21:47

You "catholic" non-workers are the ones with an agenda. What's your sick trip trying to suck up to people who have genuine cred ?

Your pathetic and one might even suspect dangerous with your psyycho-spiritual American based "revolution".

Are you just trying to discredit the Anti-war movement with your petty vindictive crap.

Nutters one and all! You and your fucking pope....both of 'em

by JMcK Tue Mar 09, 2004 22:05

My opinion of the CW5 is that they are sick assholes Fintan. I'm sorry you are so taken in by the fact they are prepared to do a bit of soft time for the publicity. A long way from the Kesh Pal.

Listen Fintan, I spent a while on the white line outside Limerick prison with your face on a plackard when you were inside. Not that you know that because I didn't do it for the publicity . That's where I've been !

They're a joke , a joke , a joke. I know you feel grateful as they have been sucking up and all that but if there was anything like the revolution Dominic was talking about in his piece these would be the last people I would want anywhere near me. Watch them is all I say , they spread poison as you can see here.

I'm assuming in saying this that I am entitled to my opinion and frankness with it , as I find my Christian hecklers are so free with their abuse .

by Fintan Lane Tue Mar 09, 2004 22:50

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, but describing people as 'sick' etc. is more than frankness; it's downright abuse. The Catholic Worker 5, as I've already said, face the possibility of doing real time for their opposition to Irish government complicity with the US war machine, and they should be supported by everybody in the anti-war movement. You mention Mary Kelly in a positive way, and seem to think her action was quite different from the CW5 action; well, give her a ring and see what SHE thinks! Believe me, she will repeat what I have just said.

A long way from the Kesh? I'm missing the point here. Time in jail is time in jail. My political background is in republicanism and, hey, I don't remember anybody ever establishing a hierarchy in this regard. What are you on about? I know few republicans who would share your attitude to those arrested for direct action at Shannon, and I know none who would sneer at southern prisons.

Thank you for picketing outside Limerick Prison, but frankly your support is too selective for my taste. I haven't been "sucked in" by the Catholic Workers 5 (I am not in any sense faith-based in my outlook, and I'm not a Catholic), but I will always empathise with fellow activists when they carry out direct action against the US war machine and consequently risk jail.

And JMcK, I may as well tell you that my support is motivated by personal as well as political considerations. Deirdre is my partner and I can safely say that you haven't even come close to understanding where she and her colleagues are coming from. But then, you haven't tried very hard.

The attempt to depict the Catholic Worker 5 as something sinister is ridiculous.

by Ciaron - DCW Tue Mar 09, 2004 22:55

Have you done any prison time? I would mind a wing run by mopvement or organisation if you can organise it for me...sounds better than Pecos, Darwin, Limerick.

Come back and reflect when you have had some experience or wallow in your prejudices

Soft time...you sound a little out of your depth here baby.

by Ispy Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:00

Well? Everybody else (cept me) is using their real names.

by Ispy2 - insiders Wed Mar 10, 2004 02:31

obviously he is big on conspiracy theories. curious though how you can support one anti-war action and hate another that's similar. the catholic workers were planning their action for months and put a lot of work into it. at least do them the honor of not slandering them even if you do not want to support them.

by James McKenna (JMcK) Wed Mar 10, 2004 09:36

May I be frank? Your a b"*+~x. If someone came to protest outside a prison I was in I would not tell them ,"your support is too selective for my taste". I don't know how you started that sentence with "thank you" except it is in sarcasm? Abusive sarcasm!

As for your opinion that all prison time is the same all I can say is that you have never seen the inside of Long Kesh or Portlaoise or any of the British establishments that have housed innocent Irish people for decades. And by the way when I picketed and collected signatures for the Birmingham Six nearly twenty years ago we were spit on ,arrested and beaten up before being followed home and being raided. Not quite a picket outside Limerick prison.

Where have you been?

So Deirdre is you partner? That's nice. A couple coming on to compliment each other and pounce on any different viewpoint. You should think with your big head and you might get it staraight dude. But I guess we all know what it is to lose our perspective with respect to emotional attachments. That why they call them emotional. Take a deep breath and read this whole thing from the top and see how you "feel".

Yes, I do think Mary Kelly's action was completely different. It was genuine. The CW5 was a Johnny-come-lately attempt to mimic and copy, to jump on the coat-tails. Mary went and attacked a US Navy plane in such a manner as to render it inoperable for weeks: she hit the nose radar etc. The CW5 went and banged on the struts with a hammer causing zero effective damage. Or did the US Navy say they did? And did Ciaron plant a few spuds.....in his ears?

Their action did not put the plane out of action. It did not prolong it's repair and it was purely a publicity stunt.

As for Mary's opinion of the CW5, that is her business. I do not intend to tell her what to think or be told by her what to think . I think she and I would prefer to make up our own minds than be hustled into one camp or another depending on who we believe. That's what it is to stand on you own two feet and not be a lame drongo who has to be part of a slovenly Famous Five.

I will be careful never to attend protests, sign petitions or offer support to any more people who find themselves in Jail for "anti-war" activity, without asking their permission. It's funny tho Fintan, nobody vetted me as I stood between the traffic holding up your poster. I hope I did not cause you or any other brave warriors too much embarassment! It will not happen again.

Your polite friends:

(Catholic )Ciaron: "Come back and reflect when you have had some experience or wallow in your prejudice .....you sound a little out of your depth here baby."

"Ispy "; "Well? Everybody else (cept me) is using their real names." now there's double standards...I assume Catholic? "Jagger" and "activist" also use pseudonames as does....

"by Ispy2 " who is another "Catholic" supporter. Arn't their double standards a hoot?

by Fintan Lane Wed Mar 10, 2004 13:17

This will be my last response to you James, because there is a massive gap, in my opinion, between debate, fair criticism, dialogue, and the sort of ranting in which you've engaged.

I'm glad to hear that you campaigned for the Birmingham Six. So did I, and for Nicky Kelly, and, yes, I was followed, harassed, raided and so on, by both the Garda Special Branch and the RUC. Indeed, my earliest memories are of armed Special Branch men raiding my parents' house, and I had the RUC and Brits through the door myself when I lived in Belfast. I was stopped, threatened, harassed by them on many occasions, and had a gun put in my mouth one evening. So, I have experienced the type of state harassment that you witter on about, but, needless to say, nowhere near as much as what others had to put up with (and still endure). That said, I still fail to see your point about the CW5 and the jail time that they may be facing? Time in jail is time in jail. And they have already spent weeks inside on remand because of their opposition to Irish complicity at Shannon.

The CW5 deserve and need the support of everybody in this movement, so while my 'thank you' was genuine, so too was my remark about the selective nature of your support for jailed anti-war activists.

Finally, when you refer to my partner as 'sick' and so on, I do take it personally, so I'm sure you'll understand when I say that your support no longer interests me. With regard to my "friends", as you put it, they can speak for themselves. I am not a Catholic Worker nor a faith-based activist, but an anti-war activist who stands in solidarity with them as they face court and possible imprisonment.

by Deirdre Clancy Wed Mar 10, 2004 13:47

This is also the final contribution from me. I do think it's a bit rich to talk about someone being blinded by emotion when in fact the emotiveness of James McKenna's rants are their main characteristic.

With regard to the following point:

"Yes, I do think Mary Kelly's action was completely different. It was genuine. The CW5 was a Johnny-come-lately attempt to mimic and copy, to jump on the coat-tails. Mary went and attacked a US Navy plane in such a manner as to render it inoperable for weeks: she hit the nose radar etc. The CW5 went and banged on the struts with a hammer causing zero effective damage. Or did the US Navy say they did?"

This point is factually inaccurate. 1. Our action was being talked about way before Mary Kelly's action actually took place. To say it was 'copy-cat' is just plain wrong. There are many people who know us who would testify to this. The fact that Mary happened to do her action a few days before was something we couldn't have predicted, although it probably did work out better in the end in terms of effectiveness. The ploughshares tradition is something the CW movement is steeped in (in fact, the ploughshares tradition was started by the CW movement in the States), and members of our group have been involved in actions (ploughshares and other types) before anybody EVER took a hammer to a plane at Shannon.

2. Your account of the "damage" we are accused of causing is inaccurate (I don't see it as damage myself, I see it as improvement). We are accused of causing 2.5m euros worth of damage to the plane. We are also accused on another count of criminal damage to the windows of the hangar.

So whatever is causing your incredible hatred for our group, it appears to be something other than the actual reasons stated. I have never met you, and certainly do not wish to, so it is not based on personal encounter. It appears to me that the problem you have is not to do with us but your own deeply held misconceptions. I do not want to put any more energy into refuting you, but where factual errors are posted up in an attempt to smear us, I will definitely correct them for fear they spread. This is the only reason I am bothering to counter this hate-filled prose with the actual truth.

by Droopy dog again Wed Mar 10, 2004 14:15

Bet u 'Jagger' is McKenna. Same froth.

by Joe Wed Mar 10, 2004 20:08

Good story. Shame about the McKenna diversion.

by Ciaron - Dublin Catholic Worker Wed Mar 10, 2004 22:41

You know nothnig about prison conditions.

You know nothing about the sequence of events surrounding the 2 disarmamentt actions at Shannon.

You know nothing of the disarmament sustained by the US Navy war plane in the Pit Stop Ploughshares action.

you know nothing about the people you unloading your vitrol on.

It's hard to figure out what you do know besides a scatter gun of prejudices.

by Ciaron - Dublin Catholic Worker Thu Mar 11, 2004 03:27 087 918 4552

http://www.jonahhouse.org/jail%20witness.htm

by missus Mon Mar 15, 2004 05:17

Fuck, ive no time for the catholic church, am a feminist and athiest and i still find JMcK's comments on domestic violence problematic. He has serious issues...I dunno if he belongs to any group but they should be embarrassed to be associated with him. Unless they're called Iron men or whatever...