Talk

Advanced search

Stonewall report into domestic and violent services

(68 Posts)
Bronners78 Fri 03-Aug-18 00:33:34

I have just come across this report by Stonewall into supporting trans women in domestic and violent services.

I know this is often a concern of those on these boards regarding risks with trans service users, but the report confirms that service providers are taking reasonable steps to protect all concerned.

Well worth a read 😊

www.stonewall.org.uk/supporting-trans-women-domestic-and-sexual-violence-services

thebewilderness Fri 03-Aug-18 00:48:09

How very odd when a freedom of information request just revealed there have been five sexual assaults on women in women's shelters that admitted transgenders.

Wanderabout Fri 03-Aug-18 00:51:02

It really doesn't confirm that at all despite Ruth Hunt trumpeting it as doing so

Among other things the Stonewall report:

* Revealed providers are concerned that the female victims of male violence they support will be frightened by having to share their single sex refuge spaces with male-bodied people that they will not access services they need

* Showed that 1 of the 15 experts interviewed raised concerns that risk assessments would not be enough to prevent abusive or violent men misusing the services

* Likened the concerns of women wanting single sex spaces while recovering from male violence to racism or homophobia

* Suggested that women with such concerns should be 'reeducated'

* Highlighted the impracticality of policing/deciding on whether males enter or not once you have a 'self-id' policy

* Highlighted that many providers believe that contrary to Stonewall's lobbying demands, the single sex exemptions must be available and usable in practice as a safeguard

That is before you even look at the selective, qualitative and biased nature of the report.

Wanderabout Fri 03-Aug-18 00:52:02

How very odd when a freedom of information request just revealed there have been five sexual assaults on women in women's shelters that admitted transgenders.

shock

Let me guess it wasn't Stonewall that submitted that one.

theOtherPamAyres Fri 03-Aug-18 00:52:04

Based on 15 telephone interviews?

Stonewall cannot be serious

Wanderabout Fri 03-Aug-18 00:54:20

I guess this person was right then Bewilderness:

"Showed that 1 of the 15 experts interviewed raised concerns that risk assessments would not be enough to prevent abusive or violent men misusing the services"

Stonewall (or someone who gives a shit about biological females) should follow up with that person to discuss their concerns in more detail and ensure they are fully addressed.

theOtherPamAyres Fri 03-Aug-18 00:56:12

Based on 15 personal opinions with no evidence to back it up?

The report even concludes with the caveat:

"As with all qualitative research, the views expressed are the individual thoughts and experiences of the participants, and
so may not represent the views of everyone within individual organisations or the organisations as a whole, nor can they be
taken to represent all organisations in the sector."

Too right.

Did they exclude people with a different opinion? asking for a friend.

theOtherPamAyres Fri 03-Aug-18 01:15:34

Anyone spot the problem with this random stream of consciousness, philopsohical 'evidence' from an interviewee?

*The category of woman has always been contested, and we have to be really careful around very short memories, around
the fact that actually, at different points in time, that’s excluded woman of colour, that’s excluded working class woman,
like we excluded lesbians, you know. So we need to think about this very, very carefully, and actually think about the kind
of society that we want, do we want one that actually insists on reinforcing hate, or do we want one that actually starts to
build community and transformation, I’m much more interested in the latter.*

Well bully for you, mate confused

I know Stonewall has a history of flawed surveys and extrapolating dodgy conclusions from people's feelz, but this report takes the biscuit smile

MrsTerryPratchett Fri 03-Aug-18 01:19:19

Speaking as someone who has worked in shelters. There is no power on this earth that would compel me to tell a researcher commissioned by Stonewall my thoughts. I would assume that any information would be used to have me removed from my post.

theOtherPamAyres Fri 03-Aug-18 02:11:01

Note that the representives of the 15 organisations were contacted between January and April 2018.

This was a time when women's voices were shut out and the mantra of 'transwomen are women' was the prevailing orthodoxy. How times change.

Reading the excerpts from interviews, the particpants seem eager to show that they aren't transphobic, that they've had the right training, that they feel willing and able to take on men who identify as women, and that TWAW. Apart from the anecdotes showing how sensitive they have been, there are no numbers, no data, just stories.

A week's a long time in politics. Four months and the political landscape has changed completely. The focus now is NOT on how inclusive your service is for men identifying as women, (men-iaws?) but how safe it is for the users that it was designed for.

You have to wonder whether the interviewees would give the same responses in the current climate?

Terrorbird Fri 03-Aug-18 06:06:55

Thebewilderness, can I ask for more information on that foi request? I want to put it into my response to the GRA questionnaire

Thanks

Ereshkigal Fri 03-Aug-18 07:01:27

It sounds as loaded/biased/misleading as all their other "research" on this subject.

Speaking as someone who has worked in shelters. There is no power on this earth that would compel me to tell a researcher commissioned by Stonewall my thoughts. I would assume that any information would be used to have me removed from my post.

And this.

How about an anonymous survey of a large number of refuge staff and service users, Stonewall? Otherwise, you and your supporters can fuck right off with this.

It's despicable how much the deck is being stacked against women.

Tryingtolisten2 Fri 03-Aug-18 07:18:18

Hmmm...

Let’s play stats.

“Showed that 1 of the 15 experts interviewed raised concerns that risk assessments would not be enough to prevent abusive or violent men misusing the services”

If I turn that around it shows 14 out of 15 experts didn’t have concerns.

But why focus on that hey!

Just concentrate on the echo chamber.

Ereshkigal Fri 03-Aug-18 07:22:59

How about you concentrate on the fact this is not a fair or unbiased survey. Speaking out and being branded as transphobic potentially has both personal consequences and consequences for the organisation.

Ereshkigal Fri 03-Aug-18 07:24:40

Many people in the sector, anecdotally, have concerns. They can't express them.

OrchidInTheSun Fri 03-Aug-18 07:26:45

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/kristi-hanna-human-rights-complaint-transgender-woman-toronto-shelter

This woman was forced to share a room with a man. This will happen in the U.K. because predatory men will do anything to access women

Jeanhatchet Fri 03-Aug-18 07:49:38

This report is a disgusting manipulation and betrayal of women and Hunt knows it.

Women's services are under intense pressure to obtain funding. With government bowing at the knee to the trans juggernaut and the escalating and incessant demands of a tiny majority - those actually working frontline in women's services are powerless to express their real opinions.

Of course these cherry picked quotations are manipulated or guided by a few trans clappy women within large orgs. But the vast majority of women within the services would tell you quietly over a cup of tea and in a hushed voice ..... "nah it's fuck**g nonsense"

Hunt has paid to silence women. Shame on her.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel Fri 03-Aug-18 07:56:36

It's a laughably inappropriate research methodology for the supposed research question.
Which can either mean the people who did the research are incompetent or that they have no interest at all in finding out the truth.

Ereshkigal Fri 03-Aug-18 08:02:37

I think it's likely they started from the premise of the answer they wanted and then they worked out how best to get it.

Wanderabout Fri 03-Aug-18 08:05:23

Let’s play stats.

“Showed that 1 of the 15 experts interviewed raised concerns that risk assessments would not be enough to prevent abusive or violent men misusing the services”*

Hmm let's not play stats with vulnerable people's lives. Let's create an environment where we listen to the concerns of experts rather than dismissing them.

Turns an FOI request showed that person brace enough to point out the obvious was right, see up thread.

Note you also completely ignored the other issues I mentioned from the report. As did the report.

Ereshkigal Fri 03-Aug-18 08:09:24

This report is a disgusting manipulation and betrayal of women and Hunt knows it.

Women's services are under intense pressure to obtain funding. With government bowing at the knee to the trans juggernaut and the escalating and incessant demands of a tiny majority - those actually working frontline in women's services are powerless to express their real opinions.

YY. There's not much lower that they can go with respect to women's rights.

Wanderabout Fri 03-Aug-18 08:11:24

Just concentrate on the echo chamber.

Seriously, someone has just posted an FOI response showing the expert who raised concerns in Stonewall's own report was right to pick up on an obvious major issue the others either missed or were too frightened to raise.

And your response is to point out that the other experts missed this - and call us an echo chamber.

Unbelievable.

Melanippe Fri 03-Aug-18 08:16:39

I wonder: was this posted by the same person who posted it yesterday, a PBP with a sock puppet also posting?

The research methodology was flawed. If you cannot see that, then posting about "playing" with stats would suggest that you are ignorant of how statistical analysis functions and should probably just remain silent in those discussions.

Ereshkigal Fri 03-Aug-18 08:23:12

TRAs on Twitter seem to think we're scared of this. I'm not. Happy to have a long thread about it.

LangCleg Fri 03-Aug-18 08:26:55

What Wanderabout said.

And adding in my usual remark about all our corporate-sized third sector orgs being dominated at the top by pomo-addled nitwits who have no idea about the needs of their service users.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »