Hannah Murphy 
Member since Mar 11, 2013

click to enlarge 10577148_805772862787990_6397915010389977169_n_jpg-magnum.jpg

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Latest Review

Re: “Screening: "Not My Life."

This is a screening of highlights of the film, followed by Q&A with Laura Lederer, former Senior Advisor on Trafficking in Persons to US Department of State. Joining Laura Lederer for the Q&A will be the film's producer, Robert Bilheimer.

This event is part of a March series sponsored by Feminists Choosing Life of NY in collaboration with A Season for Nonviolence.

Posted by Hannah Murphy on 03/17/2013 at 3:49 PM

Recent Comments

Re: “Activists track local hate movement

Step aside Antifa...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardi…

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Hannah Murphy on 09/01/2017 at 8:58 PM

Re: “Activists track local hate movement

@Eric- exactly.

Hi Tom, yes, I do find the middle finger and profanity (when directly targeted at a person/group) to be actual violence. I make use of profanity, don't get me wrong, but I try not to
use them at people- and I do not use them when attending events that promote nonviolence and civic engagement- not when I know the profanities have the potential to be a catalyst for physical violence.

Follow the link below - these were the folks at the Women's March who distracted from the greater collective cause. I'm sorry, but I really don't get the whole wearing black and covering our faces strategy- is the goal to look intimidating? To look cool? Not sure. What I do know is these groups who show up at ROC events (and elsewhere), seem to be interested in attracting attention so they can in return scream and yell about how they don't want attention. It's quite confusing, you see. I remember one of my brothers-in-law, who works security down near Alexander and is a black man, talking about the BLM protest last year...he said he was so fed up with this group of white people who were acting like fools- seemingly trying to get attention and cause confrontation. So yes, again, I do think profanity has a valid place in our dialect; but I do not think it should be used as a tool for provocation (or as a way to garner publicity).

And again, I'll reiterate that I admire much, much of the work Metro Justice does. My point in commenting was to share 1. my disappointment in the voice chosen for this interview and 2. my experience with some members of MJC. I would've shared the same comment had a man been interviewed about anti-feminism or had a cisgender person been the voice about the anti-trans bathroom bill.

I never said Mr O'Malley shouldn't run MJC nor that he doesn't have the right to be within the movement to dismantle fanatical-white supremacist-Trump loving-nazis (we ALL must be involved in this fight as much as we possibly can)...what I'm questioning is why his voice was the ONLY one present for this particular piece. One must always look at the list of names and ask: Who is missing..? If City really thought O'Malley should have his voice in this, they should have also included other nonwhite voices. And one would think O'Malley would want this, too. And it's okay to make mistakes...to speak when we should pass the mic...we all do- but not to own the mistake is problematic; it is weak or selfish or ignorant or what have you (I won't claim to know a person's motives).
http://www.whec.com/news/seven-protesters-…

I'm sorry Mr O'Malley has been intimidated by fliers left at his home and workplace. This is never okay. That said, if you choose to engage in intimidation yourself (and yes, I have experienced it first hand from Mr O'Malley and a couple of his close comrades), I find it a bit nonsensical to be shocked when you become the recipient of similar acts. Just sayin.

8 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Hannah Murphy on 08/30/2017 at 1:12 PM

Re: “Activists track local hate movement

Colin, with all sincerity, thank you for your response- although you do seem to get a bit aggravated (understandably so) after your apology. I would definitely substantiate my claims had this been a formal piece. However, this is just the comments section- so I didn't and don't think it necessary that I do so. My experience has not been positive with you- literally you, Colin O'Malley. I'm not making wild claims here- just stating what I have experienced as an activist here in ROC who has wanted to work with MJC but has been pretty much shunned and shamed by some (and I'll reiterate again- not all) of you.

All that said, and intersectionality of issues aside, let's get back to what's important here (and not focus on my hurt feelings)- this piece was about white nationalists and white hate- so the voice should have been one other than a white one. I grew up off Genesee Street- my parents still live there. Half of my family members are POC; but as a white person it can't be my voice that is published. I can speak, yes, but only as an aside- not as the focus. I understand your speaking about this is good in and of itself, but it isn't what's needed. White voices cannot stop white nationalists- we can support the fight and engage and provoke and on and on, but the problem Howard spoke of needs to be respected - because he's right- there are plenty of POC who could have taken this interview, so why was it yours?

3 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Hannah Murphy on 08/29/2017 at 4:29 PM

Re: “Activists track local hate movement

Love City for not only covering but truly dedicating much space to crucial issues.

That said, I agree with Howard J. Eagle on this, and also echo what Cupid said. Metro is an amazing local group that has done terrific work over the years; they are comprised of many solid volunteers who give much to ROC. I agree with most of what Metro stands for, and have many friends who give their time to this thriving organization. (But with a big) HOWEVER, Metro leaders I've engaged with and seen demonstrate have been anything but nonviolent. They tend to like using their middle fingers and profanities toward people they disagree with (and not in defense but in selfish provocation).

They aim to provoke for attention like a child does - distracting from the activists who actually have something to say and even want to listen to those with whom they disagree. Mr O'Malley and his colleagues speak and act with a mightier and greater than thou kinda vibe..."we are the movement and if you disagree with a single thread of who we are , then your opinion is garbage." Not all MJ people are like this, but Mr O'Malley and some of his close volunteers are- in my observation over many years of attending rallies and protests and parades, their collective goal seems to be gaining publicity and not a true focus on the disenfranchised populations they claim to put at the forefront. Many of these guys and gals provoke fights so they can get coverage. And it's kinda messed up because that's not what the true leaders of these movements are about- those who are actually disenfranchised. At the anti-Trump rally following the election, these were the people wearing masks and bandannas- I'm not sure if this is an attempt to intimidate? To be cool anarchists? Feels more like angry white kids who think they know suffering and think it's their right to lead the fight. I didn't find it cool when they provoked violence in front of kids all because a guy was taking their picture.

What MJC should consider is intentionally hiring people who are fighting the movement not as allies but as literal fighters- POC should be talking about Charlottesville and Mr O'Malley, when approached for his input, should know it's his job to find a more authentic voice than his to take the mic.

Howard J. Eagle hit it right on...the only darned person you could find to talk about local hate is a white man? Kinda just a little embarrassing, ROC.

6 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Hannah Murphy on 08/29/2017 at 1:13 PM

Re: “Activist wants changes in anti-abortion movement

For clarity, I thought I should comment:
I more than appreciate City covering this topic and doing so with a perspective that is often ignored within the feminist movement. I do, however, think it a reach to call me "Pro PP". It would be fair to say I am a proponent of the non-abortion services they provide and the way in which they serve community members who have been disenfranchised by the greater healthcare system in this country (e.g., young people, people of color, the disabled and LGBTIA+).

I do wish PP would do more to prevent abortions. Because although there are certainly situations wherein abortion is necessary, I find the cheerleader chant of "Abortion on demand and without apology!" to be trite and lacking clarity. Context is essential, and I find sweeping statements like the one stated to be yet another way to divide those who really just want to support women.

When I say I do not want abortion to be illegal, I say this because I do not trust the government to protect women who need abortions. I think about those making the decisions (and yes, it's become a cliche, but they are mostly older white men), and it scares me because I do not believe them to be prolife or nonviolent; here we have a VP who thinks conversion therapy for gays is somehow humane- this is not a person I trust with protecting anyone's rights.

I received Medicaid and WIC for two of my four pregnancies. These services are good and necessary. We cannot defund or even reduce funds for these programs. We cannot defund organizations that provide birth control and sex education. These actions are counterproductive, and by supporting the defunding, I think people put the life of the fetus over that of others involved, and I do not believe this to be prolife or nonviolent.

Some of the comments here reflect the problem within the feminist movement. Anger is good when it is constructive, but otherwise self-serving and destructive. There are many proL and proC folks who are caught in the middle of this volatile conversation (if you can call it a conversation); people who are sick of the screaming and name calling and judging and downright meanness. These are the people who find themselves disengaging or remaining on the parameter- hoping that the fanatics will realize that communal work is not possible without conversation, collaboration and some civility.

It was a difficult decision to accept this interview. I have received much support, but have also been labeled disloyal to the prolife movement. Herein lies the problem: on both "sides" we are afraid to speak up -not only for fear of what our opponents will think of us, but what our allies will. Within any movement there will be disagreement - it's our choice to acknowledge that we will always have this or continue to tell each other to shut up. I will not be silenced by anyone. I will not silence anyone. I choose to engage with people who I know to be earnest in their support for women - whether they be proL or proC.

18 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Hannah Murphy on 04/14/2017 at 10:48 AM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

© 2017 City Newspaper.

Website powered by Foundation.