Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

'The GRA and safety of women-only spaces video' by Meg John Barker and Nina Burrowes Dr Nina Be

20 replies

R0wantrees · 11/10/2018 21:55

From YouTube:

"Dr MJ Barker (author of Rewriting the Rules and How to Understand Your Gender) and Dr Nina Burrowes (a psychologist and activist specialising in the psychology of sexual violence) talk about the Gender Recognition Act, the safety of women-only spaces, and how people are responding to the government's current consultation."

links to a briefing guide for journalists by 'All About Trans' www.allabouttrans.org.uk/journalist-covering-the-gra-your-handy-briefing-sheet/

www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=31&v=ddbwZ4HfZc8

OP posts:
R0wantrees · 11/10/2018 21:56

apologies, not sure what happened to the title!

OP posts:
cheminotte · 11/10/2018 21:59

Err sexual violence is perpetrated by MEN mostly! Not kids fgs!

R0wantrees · 11/10/2018 22:03

Dr Nina Burrowes on the FP4W advert.

'The GRA and safety of women-only spaces video' by Meg John Barker and Nina Burrowes Dr Nina Be
OP posts:
heresyandwitchcraft · 11/10/2018 22:04

There's no space where sexual violence doesn't happen.

True, but literally 98% of all rape and sexual assault by penetration is committed by MALES.
This is WHY we have same-sex, female-only spaces!
You do not understand the issues AT ALL!
And the reason this "conversation is being pushed back decades" is because you DO NOT UNDERSTAND MALE VIOLENCE.

LemonJello · 11/10/2018 22:05

So Nina Burrowes finds Karen White reassuring?

Ereshkigal · 11/10/2018 22:06

So fucking dismissive of women's voices.

R0wantrees · 11/10/2018 22:07

What is going on here?

I am Confused

OP posts:
heresyandwitchcraft · 11/10/2018 22:07

We should learn from history - women's rights are incredibly fragile and can be rolled back in a heartbeat.
Women are exhausted from having to defend their very existence.
This is a couple of queer-theory addled females who care less about women's safety than the rights for men to call themselves women and erase the very meaning of the word female.
I will remember you.

Ereshkigal · 11/10/2018 22:07

Oh sorry for derailing the process of shitting all over women for the last few years by speaking up about it!

R0wantrees · 11/10/2018 22:09

Is there no awareness of the Freedom program?

OP posts:
heresyandwitchcraft · 11/10/2018 22:10

Sorry, R0... Got very angry and forgot this was your very well-researched thread. The "you" is obviously directed to the people in the video.

Ereshkigal · 11/10/2018 22:12

This is a couple of queer-theory addled females who care less about women's safety than the rights for men to call themselves women and erase the very meaning of the word female.
I will remember you.

This. One is the ridiculous Meg John Barker, partner of the ridiculous Edward Lord. A perfectly dull male/female couple yet non binary so "queer" and "trans". Ridiculous.

Author of the ridiculous BACP guidelines which originally suggested being strong and even Northern wasn't feminine.

Can we see a common theme in her life?

Ereshkigal · 11/10/2018 22:12

This is a couple of queer-theory addled females who care less about women's safety than the rights for men to call themselves women and erase the very meaning of the word female.
I will remember you.

This. One is the ridiculous Meg John Barker, partner of the ridiculous Edward Lord. A perfectly dull male/female couple yet non binary so "queer" and "trans". Ridiculous.

Author of the ridiculous BACP guidelines which originally suggested being strong and even Northern wasn't feminine.

Can we see a common theme in her life?

R0wantrees · 11/10/2018 22:12

O no I understood. I meant what was going on with the video. I am confused Smile

OP posts:
Ereshkigal · 11/10/2018 22:13

Is there no awareness of the Freedom program?

It doesn't sound as if Nina would be a fan.

R0wantrees · 11/10/2018 22:14

What is the deal with Dr Burrowes though?

OP posts:
R0wantrees · 11/10/2018 22:16

I hope she (I presume I am ok to use she as I know Meg-John B prefers they) listens to the many women on the transwidows thread at some point.
Also perhaps listening to Karen White's victims?

(I'd start a list, but I need to go and look at the stars and breathe out)

OP posts:
heresyandwitchcraft · 11/10/2018 22:19

Dr Burrowes started the Consent Collective, apparently?
twitter.com/ConsentCollectV

You would think she would know the importance of women's boundaries, then.
Women are saying NO!
Why can't she actually respect that?

EmilieDuChatelet · 11/10/2018 22:24

Have watched the video. I remain underwhelmed by their lack of critical thinking (polite view). I take it both are academics? Also I don't understand the tweet by Dr Burrows up thread - I have read it several times trying to make sense of it and I can't.

R0wantrees · 12/10/2018 15:09

This is an important report by Fairplay for Women.
I would hope that Dr Burroes would read it and consider seriously the findings:
Executive Summary:

  1. Women are afraid to speak.
Our whistleblowers reported widespread silencing of any and all discussion about self-identification policies and reform of the Gender Recognition Act that affect the provision of services for victims of violence and abuse: n  Professionals feared – or had directly observed or experienced – targeted campaigns of harassment against individuals aggressively trying to intimidate women expressing doubts about self-ID policies. Accounts include people losing their jobs and organisations losing their funding. n  Women merely asking questions about sex self-ID or GRA reform are labelled ‘TERFS’ and subject to threats of harm, death and sexual violence. n  Organisations and activists involved in lobbying for trans-inclusive policies, or even advising and training organisations supporting vulnerable women, have suggested that violence against so-called ‘TERFS’ is justified. Government, LGBT and women’s organisations alike have failed to condemn this. (see section: Violence, threats and TERF as hate speech). n  Several organisations did not take part in recent Stonewall research on this topic because they were too frightened to speak openly, or because they did not trust their views would be properly reflected by Stonewall.
  1. Biology matters more than identity.
Whistleblowers and survivors were concerned that people were labelling the evidence-based demand for single-sex spaces as somehow transphobic or hateful. They were clear that: n  If a refuge chooses or is pressured to adopt a self-ID policy (and thus does not make use of the sex exemptions which the Equality Act allows for) this means in practice any fully intact male will be allowed to use the service simply because he says he is a woman. Contrary to public perception the overwhelming majority of male-born transgender people retain their penis and are fully male-bodied. n  The potential threat to the physical and emotional safety of the women using their services came from biological males – however they describe themselves. n  There is no evidence to show that risk changes when a man says he is a woman. n  Professionals and service-users wished to be able to exclude individuals on the basis of their biological sex (as they would any other male-bodied individual wishing to use the service) rather than on the basis of their proclaimed gender identity.
  1. Risk assessment will become impossible.
Professionals said that existing systems for assessing the risk posed to users and staff by a potential new service-user are already limited and imperfect. Allowing anyone who identifies themselves as a woman – and preventing any questioning of that identification – to access ‘women-only’ services will render those safeguards wholly ineffective. n  It is naïve and wrong to assume risk assessments can identify abusive men. It is simply impossible to tell someone’s intentions. Many abusers are extremely skilled at deception. n  Male perpetrators of violence will go to any lengths to gain access to vulnerable women and children. This fact is not adequately recognised in public policy debate over this issue. n  Over-the-phone assessments done at weekends or in the night are of necessity basic, and some refuges assess post-arrival.
  1. Survivors have been ignored.
Survivors’ concerns have been dismissed. Women have been told to accept a male’s interpretation of reality. n  Survivors have been given no formal voice in the Government consultation on GRA reform. n  Some feel that lobby groups like Stonewall, who compare female survivors’ concerns to racism or homophobia, are themselves acting in an abusive manner. n  Some feel that service providers and policymakers are in danger of throwing out lessons already learned: from the painful acknowledgement of the risk abusers pose to women and children, to the necessity of single-sex spaces for deeply traumatised women and children to heal.
  1. This is a matter of life and death.
Among advocacy groups and some policymakers, there is a profound lack of understanding or consideration of the potential impact these issues could have on vulnerable women and children. n  Self-ID policies mean effectively giving the keys of women’s refuges to abusive men. One whistleblower warned that widespread adoption of these policies would lead, “without a shadow of a doubt”, to women in refuges being murdered by perpetrators. n  Deeply traumatised, vulnerable women who felt unable to use single sex services would find it harder to escape abusers and may even end up returning to their abuser. n  Self-ID policies would have a disproportionate effect on some women, for example Muslim women of south Asian and east African origin, who can face significant cultural penalties for the use of mixed-sex spaces. (continues)

fairplayforwomen.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/FPFW_report_19SEPT2018.pdf

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page