Women’s Aid considers employing self-declared transwomen [i.e. men] in women's shelters(261 Posts)
The review of women’s refuges, which is not dependent on any government reform, was agreed last week by the board of the charity Women’s Aid, a federation that oversees more than 300 shelters.
Mary Mason, the board’s interim co-chairwoman, said: “We have agreed to start a review of our whole transgender policy, including the possibility of employment for self-declared transgender women without a gender recognition certificate.”
Describing it as “an extraordinarily difficult discussion,” Mason said the review, by Women’s Aid’s director of services, Nicki Norman, would take three to four months. Another board member, Sarah Forster, confirmed the move.
Where did the impetus come from? It shows yet another institution "getting ahead of the law", as a Labour MP would phrase it.
Might this have something to do with funding? A fear that they'll lose state funding if they don't do this?
I hope they don't. Feel sick at the thought of this.
It will be to do with funding. Women’s Aid organisations are heavily dependent on government funding, they don’t receive a lot of public support.
This is an appalling affront to women’s rights.
I'm not discounting the funding imperative, but my impression is there are a fair number of trans ideologues inside the women's refuge movement these days.
Gender Studies graduates gravitate towards women's refuges because it is one of the only sectors for which such a degree (allegedly) qualifies you. They are all steeped in queer/trans theory. It's ironic. The radical feminists who started women's refuges did so with nothing - it was volunteer, grassroots activism. Over time they were able to show that they provided a vital service that brought great benefit to society, so governments started funding them.
Once the movement was professionalised and funded - thanks to the hard work of feminists - people with no grounding in the women's movement, and who held attitudes that were in fact antithetical to women-only organising, started moving in on it. It's not just the trans movement. This happened in NSW, Australia, when the Salvation Army and the Samaritans took over the running of many women's refuges (after convincing government funders they were the 'most qualified'), and immediately started kicking out the radical feminists and re-orientating the mission of the refuges around 'keeping families together'.
I don't know... somehow what's popped into my head is shit like this happens not only because of male-focused agendas, but because we don't support each other as women. If numerous women aged 18+ committed to pledging just £1 per month, how much would that raise?
I feel as if online has become a great big talking shop. Whilst people with horrid agendas feel no qualms about actually getting out and invading womens' spaces.
I'm likely being naive but very out of sorts today. I don't get why the TRA issue, the invasion of womens' spaces by white male-born privilege, just isn't a big widely known issue. Or at least doesn't seem to be as I barely know anyone who even mentions it in RL.
kicking out the radical feminists and re-orientating the mission of the refuges around 'keeping families together'..
That is chilling. As is this. Was only a matter of time I suppose.
Women's Aid? Ffs. They should be holding out as long as possible and fighting all the way. I keep peak transing. It just happened again.
I've shared on FB. It's my first gender critical post, despite hitting peak trans some time ago. I'm hoping it will help get others to peak!
How horrible. Women's Aid is the first port of call for women when they are in a vulnerable position
What hope is there when LITERALLY somewhere that is supposed to be a refuge for women is even considering opening their doors to men.
If this isn't centering TIMs, I don't know what is. On what planet could this possibly benefit any woman? The question the refuges should be asking is "what can help women?", not, "should we include TIMS?".
I've just seen a vicar on BBC Breakfast doing the paper review saying that transwomen are far more likely to be abused than other women and that she is appalled that, in this day and age, when young people are coming out at ever younger ages as trans, that we are even questioning it.
There's not even balanced reporting. She acknowledged that some women might be entering refuges from other countries that might not have such good records on LGBT rights and it might be uncomfortable for them.
But essentially it's the women's problem. That's right, women who have a problem with being around men because a man has abused them so severely that they have fled from their entire life - they're the ones with the problem.
Oh and no mention of the concerns that some of these trans women will actually just be predatory men dressing up as women (or not even bothering to do that) in order to gain access and abuse already vulnerable women and reassurances of safeguards against that.
I've just seen that too. You would think that, if TIM truly were at such a heightened risk of sexual assault, they would have emaphy with women and understand that their presence would be upsetting. But no, validation is more important.
But again, it's opinion been stated as fact and being unchallenged. On BBC news.
They’ve just reviewed this piece on the BBC news channel.
A women vicar chose it and said fab it was that WA weren’t now going to discriminate against Trans people. And how disappointed she was with The Times. Both presenters agreeed with her.
We’re fucked aren’t we?
It shows that it doesn't really matter how many nice, genuine MIT there are. All it takes is one egotistical one, and hundreds of women and girls suffer.
sorry MaturalWoman only just seen your post.
Is there now any space where biological women can be, without the presence of penises?
"Is there now any space where biological women can be, without the presence of penises?"
I think this a huge part of why trans rights are so popular. Lots of men don't want women to gather and exclude men. This is the most successful way of stopping it ever happening.
This is why we shouldnt use the term transwomen at all as it seems to feed into the ideology of being more oppressed than actual women as they have a double trump card of trans and women
The newspaper review on BBC Breakfast was abysmal. I didn't catch the vicar's name but she was so blinkered.
It seems like every single day there are more news stories celebrating inclusivity of TIMs at the expense of vulnerable women. I get angrier every time because I feel so powerless, any fighting against it could end your career and expose you to death threats from TRAs.
Something’s going to spark it all up soon. I’m considering getting a different incognito phone so I can openly post on twitter and FB pages like Mayday and WPUK. We’re all going to be gathered in each other’s houses soon, huddled in front rooms with the curtains shut. I know someone who volunteers for WA, she’s amazing, highly qualified and helpful to them, but she’ll not be very happy about that.
Schools, governments, shelters, minds.
Even though the GRA hasn't actually changed, it feels like self ID has become practice.
Retailers (Topshop, M&S) are changing policy so there are no penis-free changing areas.
Women have been placed on "female" hospital wards next to people with penises.
You can request a female practitioner for a smear test, and a person with a penis rocks up to administer it.
I'm not trying to be dramatic, but because organisations are "getting ahead of the law", it feels like the fight has been lost and there's nowhere left to go if you don't want a person with a penis in your space.
(Maybe a convent? Sounds kind of peaceful...)
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.