Would you support the WEP if they defined women by sex and not by gender?

"I am old fashioned enough to believe that one is not born a woman but rather becomes one."

That's the mis-application of the de Beauvoir quotation which Jenni Murray pulled apart in her Sunday Times interview.

No, I certainly wouldn't support this party with its current stance. Even if it did define women as, er, women rather than 'whatever you want', I'm not sure a party which is explicitly about the rights of one section of the population is a good idea. A 'mens' party would be entirely objectionable. So would (IMO) a Christian party, a Black party or any other exclusive grouping.

Yes to all that's been said.

I would be more inclined to support them if they had a more logical stance on self identification, men competing as women in sports and didn't think that prioritising the rights of men in a stretched maternity service was a good idea. And if they were interested in protecting women in prison from violent criminals like that Tara person and their 'eight inch surprise'.

So, if they seemed in any way interested or knowledgable about issues affecting women in today's society then I would be right with them. Sadly it does not seem as if they are. They are also rude in web chats imo, they fail to engage and think that this is acceptable.

If the WEP can't define "women" beyond a vague "identifies as a woman" there's zero point to it.

And Gallavich is right about the becoming a woman quote. Simone de Beauvoir was examining the process by which female socialization does its work.

I have no problem with the WEP's stance on this.

I've been dissuading people from voting for them too. Both online and in real life.

The idea that one 'becomes a woman' seems to imply that it is a choice. It completely fails to acknowledge that you 'become a woman' by being female and being socialised (non consensually) into the woman gender role.
Men can never 'become a woman' because they don't meet either of those conditions. It's not a matter of choice.

I too had high hopes for this party but in their rush to be achingly "inclusive" they are dismissing the very people the party was supposed to represent.
What is the bloody point?

Presumably Sophie Walker believes there are loads of adult females who failed to "become a woman"?

Who are they? What are they called?

Ugh, I'd never looked into them much but this sounds enough to put me right off. Wishy washy non-issues rather than stuff that woman really need tackling.

It's a real shame that WEP have failed at this important hurdle.

I had high hopes for them.

Given the number of posters here who say they've reigned their membership, I wonder how many members they actually have now and whether they are mostly trans women

I might support them if they defined women by sex
As it is I actively try to dissuade my friends from supporting them

Good grief I've just read the web chats.

Sophie "I am old fashioned enough to believe that one is not born a woman but rather becomes one."

😲😲😲

I'm going to have to cancel my WEP membership, as they don't seem to believe that women = adult female human. Which is a spectacular fuck up for a party purporting to seek equality for women.

It would be enough for me to look at them again and read their policies. At the moment when they are defending the very thing that oppresses women (gender) they seem pointless.

I don't know. I've met Sophie (professionally) and she is lovely and at the time I met her I thought "wow, finally a party for women", but reading through the web chats she's done on here and I find I'm shaking my head. I don't agree with her stance on trans-women or her stance on men being allowed free reign on maternity and post-natal wards. I think she's striving for equality but ignoring the very valid issues and concerns of vulnerable women and girls.

I also joined at the beginning but left when it became clear it was all empty promises, an inability to define Woman and a high handed dismissive approach to debate.

I was a founding member and started to get involved with the local party. I left due to their inability to define a woman and their embarrassing performances in any media interview including on here.

I'm hugely disappointed in them. I cannot see how they can achieve anything if they cannot name what a woman is.

No. Women are born with functional uteruses & ovaries. Transwomen aren't. Just because they are a minority group & require protection doesn't make it automatically ok to put them in with another group that sometimes requires protection.

I was a founding member but resigned my membership after the webchat.

They'd have to change their stance on trans as well as men on maternity wards for me to revise my opinion that they are hopelessly middle class and politically naive.

Every time WEP come on here they just make themselves look worse .

The WEM has been my biggest political disappointment.

I really thought they'd be amazing.

I'd never support them because they advocate for the Nordic model and ignore voices of sex workers, and amnesty who campaign for decrim instead