Stonewall really are throwing women udner the bus aren't they [sad](43 Posts)
Guardian aticle today from Ruth Hunt, chief executive of Stonewall.
Some believe that if people could self-declare their gender without the bureaucracy and paperwork, men will simply say “I am a woman” in order to access female-only spaces to abuse women. We all should be concerned about male violence, and we should all be concerned about preventing it and responding to it when it happens
But granting trans people equality will not make women any less safe. We live in a society where, unfortunately, women’s safety isn’t guaranteed. But trans people are not to blame for this, and often they are at risk themselves
So, basically she's saying women are silly to concern ourselves with an increased threat from male violence, as we're not safe anyway?
Domestic violence and rape crisis centres are concerned primarily with supporting the victims of male violence, and they will always find an appropriate service for anybody who arrives at their door, including trans men and women. They have been doing it for years without asking trans people to show their certificate. They know how to balance the complex needs with sensitivity and professionalism, although it’s clear that trans (and LGB) people require more direct services designed for them, such as the specialist LGBT service that sits alongside a women’s aid centre in Birmingham.
Oh and women and transwomen are not different. Except when they are because transwomen need special services. But not women.
No mention of issues like women not being able to object to a be-penised rape counsellor or an AGP in their group meeting.
Women and trans people both exist in a world where they are prevented from accessing true equality because of their gender. We must not be divided by arguments that undermine the equality we so desperately need and deserve.
And that's just minimising, patronising bullshit.
Stop whining, women, do as they say now.
AIBU or has she totally
deliberately missed the point?
I think she is assuming that people will be sensible and reasonable so it will all tick along fine. But perverts and abusers are not reasonable and we are already seeing the results of this.
Stonewall is now a homophobic and misogynist organisation and everyone should point that out at every opportunity.
I read that and it was a muddled article.
The comments below the line are good though.
I’m sad to read this. I knew Ruth at university and always admired her. Not quite sure what she’s playing at.
Yes. I went from being a Stonewall supporter and donor to being utterly horrified by their actions and wanting nothing more to do with them...but strangely enough their new most-oppressed-people-in-the-world-ever clientele seem to have absolutely loads of money to fund them so everything is fine and dandy for them....
women: "We don't want anyone with a penis in our bathrooms because many of us have been subjected to violence by men"
transwomen: "but, we are lovely"
women: "it's not about you, it's about us"
transwomen: "but, we are lovely"
women: "don't doubt it, but you're 6'4" and have a cock. Some of us find that really intimidating in small spaces"
transwomen: "but, we are lovely. And, you are mean"
Stonewall know that there are rapists in female prisons. So either some MTT are a danger to women and girls, or some abusive men are hiding behind self identification laws. Or, more probable, both scenario are happening.
Stonewall do not care that women and children are in danger from MTT and men on general. Otherwise they would not issue such a statement.
This was a good comment:
The overall feeling is of a political experiment in engineering the rights of a whole new minority as a sort of 'tribute' to the struggles of homosexual liberation. Perhaps a little of 'we missed the boat a few decades ago, so we will have to take up a new cause now'. Little wonder that the majority are confused about the speed and tenacity in which this new panoply of rights is being pursued
Haven't ever seen comments like this on Guardian trans articles before. Perhaps things really are changing!
*Because women don't count and aren't listened to, so it must be fine.
Women have to put up and shut up and be kind because we have been told*
That's absolutely it Stealtheatingtunnock
Surely lesbians are up in arms about this? Is Stonewall just not listening?
Those Guardian comments! I never thought I'd see the day.
Interesting. I would read that as saying domestic violence shelters and prisons have managed things well for years meaning that people get appropriate services without any increased risk to women, apart from the usual risks which, y'know, are just normal.
In which case, why a change in the law? What's the problem? What rights are transgender people missing out on? And how do you know that other people's needs won't be affected? Literally because the Ministry of Justice guidance says they won't?
I’m going to stop my subscription to the Guardian now. Last nail in the coffin. It’s painful to watch women’s rights being eroded.
Make sure you write to tell them why Ploppie. For a paper that’s struggling to stay afloat, its odd they are so cavalier about pissing off up to 51% if the British populaton...
She has internalised the belief that women are inherently less valuable and important to the extent that she is incapable of recognising how it influences her thinking.
Perhaps I should feel sorry for her but she rather disgusts me.
That was me!
It wasn't my finest comment ever.
At least half the comments are pretty sensible, which is unusual for a Guardian comment piece.
I notice she plays fast and loose with the statistics again - the figure of 44% of trans people avoiding certain streets out of fear is a priceless one. Who else avoids particular streets out of fear, I wonder? Oh yes, women. But we don't care about them, do we.
What she is saying, edited down a bit, is:
Some believe that men will access female-only spaces to abuse women. We all should be concerned about male violence, and we should all be concerned about preventing it and responding to it when it happens.
But granting all men access will not make women any less safe. We live in a society where, unfortunately, women’s safety isn’t guaranteed. But men are not to blame for this, and often they are at risk themselves
That is, unless she has some really sound stats that say transwomen are LESS of a risk than other XY people. Are there any?
I meant to add that clearly the edited-down statements are bollocks until proven otherwise...
And it’s not just about safety and the risk of being attacked. It’s about boundaries. It’s about women's boundaries now being controlled by men.
I was interested to see the comment from a man who said he couldn’t care less if men, women, transmen or transwomen used his bathroom, but he totally understood why biological women would.
This can’t be pointed out enough. Men aren’t worried at all. I wish someone could ask Ruth Hunt outright why she thinks this is coming from women. Why are there zero men who have a problem with this?
I was also glad to see a commenter to respond by saying it’s not just feminists. I’m sick to death of any objection being labelled a feminist objection, implying its extreme.
Surprisingly good comments there. The TRAs look pretty out of place. See for example:
Every police force in Britain deals with voyeurs, street harassers, flashers, illegal hidden cameras and spy holes, public indecency etc so man in store changing room pretending to be a woman in the run up to an attack on a woman is on that spectrum somewhere but not at all common a a means of carrying out a crime.
which is based on the belief that no transwoman could ever be in this group. In other words, when a person becomes a trans person, they become a better person.
Not just better - literally incapable of wrongdoing.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now »
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.