Here we want to expose the order of events that took place last period. We believe that these have been greatly manipulated by 'Observant' who was guaranteed a platform to extensively write on these events.
1. The observant writes an article using the word “women” when talking about people that would benefit from menstrual products.
In April 2021 the intersectional feminist student organization Feminists of Maastricht (FOM) received a Diversity & Inclusivity (D&I) Grant to provide free menstrual products to all faculties at UM. The project aimed to be consciously inclusive of women, transgender men, non-binary and intersex people who may experience menstruation. FOM therefore never specified the gender of the product user and wanted to ensure that all people who menstruate at UM would have access to these products.
Observant (UM independent newspaper) wrote an article on the 24th of November explaining the success of FoM and their “Bloody serious” campaign. In their article, Observant wrote that the project aimed to help “when women don’t have money to buy tampons and sanitary towels''.
Free tampons and sanitary towels article: https://www.observantonline.nl/english/Home/Articles/id/57913/free-tampons-and-sanitary-towels
2. Feminists of Maastricht sends an email to reporter asking for this article to be adapted to fit their attempt to inclusivity in the campaign.
Being an intersectional feminist organization, FoM wrote an email to Observant politely asking to change the word “women” to “people”. They asked Observant to do so because only including women in the group of people that menstruate is a misrepresentation of their project and is exclusionary to those who menstruate and aren't women.
In fact, since not all women menstruate and not everyone that menstruates is a woman, transgender and non-binary people are being actively excluded.
Like some comments at the bottom of the article mention: “Not all women menstruate. Not all people who menstruate are women. Denying this reality is simply anti-feminist and transphobic. Your article is against everything we fight for.”
3. Journalist replies he won't change the phrasing because of "science"
The journalist that wrote the initial article stated that the language used can’t be changed. He justifies this by saying that it would not be scientific to use the phrasing "people that menstruate" because this is not backed by science. We are appalled by the incapacity of the Observant journalist to distinguish between sex and gender...
4. FoM asks again and sends some links and sources, inviting the journalist to educate himself on the topic.
After receiving this email, Feminist of Maastricht wrote a second email to the journalist providing some sources on the topic that show that indeed not only women menstruate. They then asked again for Observant to change the article about their campaign, to represent it properly, since they didn’t want to be associated with trans-exclusionary language.
5. Journalist replies once again that he will not change the article because he does not believe that gender is not a social construct.
The journalist answered to that email, standing by his choice that the article will not be changed, because the difference between sex and gender is still an unsure topic which, according to him, has no scientific foundation.
We think that it is important to mention at this point that the existence of trans men, women, and nonbinary people has been acknowledged by medical professionals as well as the Dutch law for several years. Claiming that a final answer in this debate has not yet crystallized showed ignorance, and complete neglect towards intersectionality.
6. FoM sends a complaint to the editor in chief of Observant
After establishing that the first author did not understand the significance of the problem and the need for inclusive language, FoM sent an email to the editor of Observant. They explained the previous uncomfortable exchange of emails and asked again for the article to be either changed or taken down. At this point, the email was written in an angry and frustrated tone, after having already tried twice. We want to here underline that this can only be a fair response to the previous exchange of emails; it is quite easy to say something discriminatory in a polite tone, which means that the aggression will not often not be seen as aggressive by those that aren't personally touched by it. FoM hence, after having read multiple emails by the journalist in what can be considered nothing else but a discriminatory aggression, wrote to the editor that if the Observant doesn’t respect their wish to have their project represented properly “they will mobilize their community”.
7. Editor says FoM is threatening them and sees this as an act of censorship
The editor responded to the email, saying that the article will not be changed or taken down and that Observant stands by the side of their journalist in this matter. Furthermore, the editor accuses the student association of censorship and threat, referring to the mobilization of the FoM community. We find it appalling and anti-feminist the fact that activist mobilization could ever be considered a threat.
8. Editor publishes column citing FoM's email without their consent.
The editor at this point wrote a column in Observant citing the email FoM had written without their consent and putting that quote grossly out of context. The column also mentioned that the discussion about sex and gender was 'recent' and 'not crystallized yet'. This is the umpteenth proof of the Observant's determination to neglect centuries of struggles of those who do not adhere to cis-normative and patriarchal standards of gender.
Why was FoM’s response not censorship?
We stand by one of the responses to the article that claimed that they would interpret FoM words “as a plea for civility”. And adds “Appealing to convention in a situation where marginalized people are being excluded implicitly says that this exclusion is okay”.
Link article: "Change the article or else...": https://www.observantonline.nl/english/Home/Articles/id/57985/change-the-article-or-else
9. FoM writes a rebuttal with D&I and CGD
At this point, FoM with the help of the UM Diversity and Inclusivity office (D&I) and of the Center for Gender and Diversity (CGD) wrote a response to the column.
The response was published by the Observant but at the very bottom of the “Change the article or else” column, which means this piece was never to be found at the top of the feed on the newspaper's website, with the result of very few finding it and reading it.
Can be found at the bottom of this article: https://www.observantonline.nl/english/Home/Articles/id/57985/change-the-article-or-else
10. The Observant writes 4 more pieces on this matter.
Even before publishing FoM’s response, Observant published an article with the title “Feel the fear and go for it anyway”. We think you should read this article yourself and then you will most probably agree that it is more than just controversial. In this article, the editor-in-chief justifies the language used in the first article by appealing to freedom of speech. The article claims that if you’re afraid of being called racist or transphobic by other people because of your actions or words, you should be strong and go for it anyway.
They’re afraid of being called racist, sexist, transphobic and whatnot. I get that; I’m not free from fear myself, either. Is anyone? But I try (emphasis on try) to live by the words that I tell my team and our students: it’s OK to be afraid, as long as you don’t let it stop you.
We see this article as a justification for open discrimination. But here’s the thing, dear editor: it is okay to be afraid, and if that fear stops you from discriminating against oppressed groups, that is a good thing. Like Maarten wrote in his article (the second one published by Observant before FoM's response): “Sometimes, the basic values of freedom and equality clash”. We go for equality, and if you go for freedom, maybe you should check your privilege.
Your own freedom ends where someone else's begins.
Feel the fear and go for it anyway: https://www.observantonline.nl/english/Home/Articles/id/58023/feel-the-fear-and-go-for-it-anyway
The louder the screams for freedom of speech, the less some people are being heard:
https://www.observantonline.nl/english/Home/Articles/id/58046/the-louder-the-screams-for-freedom-of-speech-the-less-some-people-are-being-heard