Non-men of the world unite to mock #GreenPartyFeminism

Anyone who ever said feminists weren’t funny has clearly never referred to them as “non-men” in an effort to be politically correct. Jokes aside, non-men are pissed as all hell to have been wholly erased in the name of “inclusivity,” as the UK’s Green Party did recently.

A few weeks ago, a representative for the Green Party suggested “non-male” members follow the Young Greens Women Twitter account. When some women challenged the use of the term, Green Party Women responded, defending their language:

Unsatisfied with the notion that referring to women as “non-men” will somehow address marginalization, women took to Twitter, both by mocking the ludicrous language, as well as pointing out the incredibly sexist message that is sent by making men the default human — that which all other humans are secondary and comparable to. The Green Party is clearly unaware that this is, in fact, the entire basis of patriarchy — that is to say, the existence of a gender hierarchy, upon which men are placed at the top, and women below, always less human than men.

Screen Shot 2016-04-18 at 12.09.26 PM

After days of pointed jokes and critiques, Green Party Women offered further explanation, which failed to address the impact of erasing women in their use of “non-male” as an “umbrella term.”

It’s a sad day for feminism when the marginalized sex class can’t even name themselves as such.

Meghan Murphy
Meghan Murphy

Founder & Editor

Meghan Murphy is a freelance writer and journalist. She has been podcasting and writing about feminism since 2010 and has published work in numerous national and international publications, including New Statesman, Vice, Al Jazeera, The Globe and Mail, I-D, Truthdig, and more. Meghan completed a Masters degree in the department of Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies at Simon Fraser University in 2012 and lives in Vancouver, B.C. with her dog.

Like this article? Tip Feminist Current!

Personal Info

Donation Total: $1

  • JingFei

    My favourite comment on their Facebook Post include “Richard”, an obviously male-bodied, male presenting, male-named MAN telling women they are Terf’s for being annoyed, and of course, explaining what gender is. Because if we call him “he”, we are “misgendering” him and obviously he suffers far more oppression than a female ever could, and the Women’s Party should really be about “zem”{%22tn%22%3A%22R9%22}
    Honestly, I know it’s never supposed to be said online in comments, but these are a bunch of white, privileged, first-world university kids and they are STUPID. They are stupid, self-absorbed, take themselves too seriously, have way too much time on their hands and have lived in a world of Make-believe on the internet their whole lives.

    You can ask any immigrant around you, and most of us have never heard of “Non-binary” or “Genderqueer” (Trans, yes. Third gender). It’s a western phenomenon, born on Tumblr, that is now vomiting all over first world reality.

    • Tinfoil the Hat

      Zhey have two Z chromosomes

      • Cassandra


    • Zuzanna Smith

      It’s such a waste of time too. They are young and have resources they could be actually helping people but that wouldn’t be sexy or anything and it certainly isn’t the thing de jour to rub in other people’s face as how righteous you are. People who really work to help others rarely get props or their name in the media.

    • Danielle Matheson

      As a white university student…I fucking concur! It’s maddening. Radical feminism is just common sense. I don’t know why it spoke to me, probably because I’m poor. But “gender as a spectrum” is a fucking first world priveldge. It’s so nice that these peeps think just identifying out of something means it’s not your problem…

  • Just Passing Through

    So along those same lines, why aren’t trans men and men called “non women” ? Oh that’s right, men are default human…forgot.

  • Cassandra

    It’s stuff like this that I hope will break through all the massive censorship and no-platforming in regard to what is REALLY GOING ON with identity politics. It’s postmodern misogynist poison that is designed entirely to erase the reality of sex-based oppression and rob women of legal rights and language based on said reality. The fact that it has been embraced is PROOF that it is not even remotely a threat to patriarchy. It solves nothing. It subverts nothing. It’s ruthlessly homophobic and regressive. Thank you for the awesome collection of tweets. Stick together women, and fight back against the gender hate movement.

  • This makes me wonder if it is wrong for me to use the term “non-white”. I use it because I do not like the term “people of colour”. That terms seems to imply that anyone who is not white is united by this magical property of “colour”, when in reality there are many different racial and cultural groups that are suffer from white supremacy in a variety of ways and the only thing they really have in common is that they are non-white. I do not want to imply that all non-white ethnic categories are the same.

    I guess the term “non-white” places whites at the centre of everything, but they are the centre of things, not because of the words I as an individual say, but because of the broader way society is structured. Language describes material reality, it does not create it. Change society and the language will follow, all these debates over language seem very silly and idealist to me. Get over it, liberals.

    In general I have never been very good at politically correct language. I just use what ever term makes sense as a way of conveying my thoughts and I do not care who I offend (it seems no matter what I say someone will get offended, so why bother).

    I am more concerned what the purpose of this language change is. What exactly are they trying to convey? The transsexual movement will not be pleased by this, because their whole goal is to be included within the category of “women”. They will not settle for anything less.

    I am not terribly attached to the term “women” myself. I think that if gender is ever abolished (along with race and class) then it would make more sense for everyone to simply be “human” or “a person” or for them to be referred to by their names as if they were a *gasp* a unique individual and not just an imposed social role. You would not even mention their reproductive organs or their skin colour unless it was important. That is the kind of world I want to live in.

    The term “women” is useful for recognising that those born with female reproductive systems (yes, I said “female” deal with it) are forced into a subordinate role because of that, but it should not be a source of identity. To identify as a “woman”, rather than recognising it as an imposed category which comes with a subordinate status, is to take a step in the direction of identity politics (whether one is born female or not). As silly as this “non-women” thing is, we should not lose sight of the fact that our objective is to abolish gender (the term “gender hierarchy” is redundant, gender is a hierarchy), not to preserve it or the labels “men” and “women”.

  • jdndcus

    Didn’t liberals of the sort found in the Green Party invent the word “cis” for the exact reason that they could avoid saying “non-trans”?

  • Jasper Martin

    Shouldn’t the organization be called “Green Party Non-Men”? Their very name is transphobic!!

  • John Stuart Mill

    Yeah, I’m not a non-man. I’m a woman with XX chromosomes, 40 years of menstruation under my (ahem) belt and almost six decades of being oppressed based on the fact that I was born with the Means of Human Reproduction nestled inside my pelvis. If folks with gender issues can’t respect that FEMALE HUMAN BEINGS EXIST AS A DISTINCT OPPRESSED SEX CLASS then that’s their problem, not mine.
    Women are not oppressed based our “gender identity” or our “presentation”. We’ are oppressed because patriarchal cultures rightly view our freedom and independence as a threat to male domination and control of the species. Patriarchal cultures expect (DEMAND) that women be nurturing, subordinate, dependent, etc. Here comes a supposedly “feminist” organization reveling their socialization within patriarchy by insisting that we subordinate and nurture ourselves into invisibility — again! No thanks.

    • “I’m a woman with XX chromosomes, 40 years of menstruation under my
      (ahem) belt and almost six decades of being oppressed based on the fact
      that I was born with the Means of Human Reproduction nestled inside my

      You had your period late then I guess (in your late teens)? In any case it makes 8 years and 4 months (as of now) seem like nothing. Still it is more than what those claiming to be women based on their love of lipstick and thrusting their butts in men’s faces have had. It is also something women should be able to talk about with being told that they are hateful, murderous monsters.

      • John Stuart Mill

        12 to 53, so a little more than 40 years — but who’s counting? ;0)

        Yes, I like to mention things like prostaglandins, clots and Fallopian tubes just to get called transphobic. ‘Women’ my hind foot.

  • Virginia Howard

    Laughed myself breathless XD

  • therealcie

    Fantastic send-up of a ridiculous idea.

  • yummymoussaka

    non-male good, women ungood.

  • Melanie

    So transwomen are women, but women are non-men?

  • oh the hue manatee

    I have enjoyed this entire kerfuffle, as it highlights the real aim of gender identity politics, which is to protect the social category “man” at all costs. There are masculine men, who are the only real men, and everybody else. Real men rule us all out of an innate drive/manifest destiny ***which is the “gender identity” of “cis” male*** that must never be questioned. After all, if there are all these be-penised folks who do not “identify as” alpha males, what excuse do alpha males have for upholding their power through violence? No no no, there are the real men, and then there are the garbage people.

    • Meghan Murphy

      Totally. Anyone who diverts from traditional masculinity is “other.” Great point.

  • My favorite comment (which I think may have vanished when the Green Nonmen disappeared their ridiculous post):

    As a Green Party Not-Man, I’m not sure I like “not-man”. Can we go with
    something more all encompassing please, I’d like to put forward “other”
    or better still “alien.”

  • Carol Moore

    Thanks for your great work!!

  • Kittehserf

    They are complaining that gay men aren’t interested in their manly manly selves, though.