Collective article record

#RadFem2013 Hatefest At London Irish Center

Collective Archive Number CAN-0000-0272-41A3 Permanent resolver

Source Summary

Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERF) are planning a conference for June 8th and June 9th at the London Irish Center in London. Last year they planned on having this at Conway Hall but since they specifically excluded transgender women the venue cancelled. They ended up getting another venue at Birkbeck, University of London at the last moment. Statement Regarding RadFem 2012 via Democratic Underground In consultation with the organisers of RadFem 2012 and our legal advisors, Conway Hall has decided not to allow the booking in July 2012 to proceed. This is because it does not conform to our Terms and Conditions for hiring rooms at Conway Hall. In addition, we are not satisfied it conforms with the Equality Act (2010), or reflects our ethos regarding issues of discrimination. We had sought assurances that the organisers would allow access to all, in order to enable the event to proceed at

The Source Summary reproduces the first 150 words of the source article unless a Collective editor has explicitly locked a replacement.

Read the original article View inbound sources

Interpretive context

Why this article may matter

Community significance

“#RadFem2013 Hatefest At London Irish Center” may matter to community readers because it preserves a first-person or testimonial account connected to law and civil rights, while also engaging transgender identity and history. Such accounts can document how an issue was understood and experienced from within the period or community being discussed.

Historical significance

As a publication record from 2013 at The TERFs, “#RadFem2013 Hatefest At London Irish Center” provides dated evidence of how law and civil rights was being argued in relation to transgender identity and history. Comparing it with earlier and later records can reveal changes in vocabulary, evidence, and emphasis.

Policy significance

“#RadFem2013 Hatefest At London Irish Center” discusses institutions, law, or governance in connection with law and civil rights. Even without a dominant policy classification, the article may help researchers identify practical consequences for transgender identity and history.

Content analysis

Ranked themes and framings

Rank 1 is the dominant inferred theme or framing. Parent labels identify broader theme families; the relationship key beneath the diagram explains the line styles used for hierarchy, same-family relationships, overlap, and separate-but-related themes.

Themes

1
Law and civil rightsTheme family: Institutions, law, and public life
100%
2
Transgender identity and historyTheme family: Identity, culture, and community
96%
3
Feminism and gender politicsTheme family: Power, ideology, and social conflict
64%
4
Culture, identity, and representationTheme family: Identity, culture, and community
18%

Academic framing

1
Interpretive analysis
100%

Editorial function

Source topics

Relationship key

Overlapping themes
Separate but related themes

The diagram distinguishes hierarchy, same-family relationships, overlap, and separate-but-related themes inferred within this article. It does not assert that all themes are mutually exclusive.

These classifications are inferred from article text and source metadata and remain directly editable. Relationship labels express corpus-analysis judgments, not immutable facts.

Granular comparative context

How “Law and civil rights” appears across the Collective corpus

This article was published during the theme’s highest-presence year in the registered corpus (2013).

Relative presence by year

Peak year indexed to 100

5 2004

13 2005

6 2006

43 2007

38 2008

23 2009

6 2010

106 2011

45 2012

125 2013

61 2014

21 2015

13 2016

15 2017

22 2018

6 2019

1 2021

Presence by member publication

Frequently co-occurring concepts

Academic framings in this topic

Policy framings in this topic

Values measure relative presence in the registered Collective corpus, not public search interest or public opinion.

Inbound-link and citation evidence

Documented circulation and reception

No broad reception evidence has been documented yet; this may reflect unconfigured or incomplete indexes rather than an absence of circulation. These observations describe circulation and reuse; they do not assign cultural worth or evaluate the communities, arguments, or people discussed.

0distinct source records documented

0distinct referring domains

0best available scholarly cited-by count

0books or volumes documented

0references retained by the source publication

—observed years in dated evidence

Evidence by channel

Independent counts; bars are not additive

No channel totals are available yet.

Coverage of the evidence search

Shows what has actually been checked

Publisher-held referencesChecked · August 31, 2026

Scholarly indexesChecked · August 31, 2026

Book and volume searchNotchecked

Public-web searchNotconfigured

Collective corpus linksIndexed · August 31, 2026

Review scholarly results Review book results Review public-web results

No individual references have been stored yet. This can mean that source-held pingbacks have not been imported, provider access is not configured, or available indexes do not expose this work in a machine-readable form.

Counts describe documented circulation and reception in the sources currently available to the Collective. They are not a score of quality, merit, popularity, or social value, and provider totals can overlap.

Article authors

Author profiles and related researchers

Admin

98 publications · 0 inbound sources/citations