Women’s Aid considers employing self-declared transwomen [i.e. men] in women's shelters

not lost yet. they're consulting. do we have an address for women's aid? maybe some lobbying is in order?

also, I was heartened to see that Justine Greening has changed her position to wishing to consult with women's groups over self id. If true this is a major step on from #nodebate. I assume Women's Place will be getting a call sometime soon...?

Shed - let's hope so! If they are using this opportunity to ringfence women only spaces after a thorough risk review that will be excellent and I will increase my donations. If they decide 'yeah whatever self ID for the win' then they will never get another penny from me.

I wonder, are they being proactive in discussing this with no time pressures in order to clearly set their own terms and exemptions should self id come into law? If they already sometimes take in trans women, maybe they can factor a small part of the whole service as trans inclusive, in which setting trans employees might probably be appropriate. If they can set out researched, evidenced reasons for women only spaces, they will be in a stronger position.

I think Solace are women only. And Nia.

FFS. FFS. FFS.

This is what happens when charities become large and more like corporations than charities. The "boards" become so far removed from the purpose of the charity, they make ludicrous decisions for the mission because they make perfect sense to a capitalist/neoliberal entity. It's like Amnesty going pro-prostitution.

I think we need to start making lists of women's charities that are still women's charities (I can't believe I'm bloody typing this). I won't be giving any cash to any male-inclusive women's charities in future.

To be honest, I'd rather support smaller charities who are more cognisant of the actual need of their users in any case.

So, anyone know of any small, local, SINGLE SEX women's charities I could redirect donations to?

Do idiots like the vicar on BBC even vaguely understand how traumatised and vulnerable women in refuges are? How terrified of men they and their children often are? How vital it is that they can go to a safe haven where they will not encounter any males? Even the adult sons of women in refuges are banned from visiting!

But no, of course the main priority here is ensuring the trans women’s feelings aren’t hurt.

No decent trans woman who understands how upsetting her presence might be to traumatised women, would take a job in a refuge. So you’ll end up with wankers like Danielle Muscato applying, who don’t cars about the women in refuges but just want validation. So the women in refuges feel unsafe and go back to their abusive partners.

I am incandescent about this.

Full text:

Share
Rape and abuse victims in women-only refuges face being looked after by biological men after England’s biggest group of women’s shelters decided to review its ban on transgender staff.

The move, which could overturn almost half a century of refuges being run by women for women, was described by some feminists last night as the most significant erosion of female spaces yet.

It comes after the government promised to consult on letting people change sex on demand. Activists insist that “self-declared” transgender women — most of whom retain male organs — should be allowed to enter and work in woman-only spaces.

Justine Greening, the former equalities minister who drove the sex-change reforms, admitted for the first time last night that the concerns of women’s groups must be taken more into account.

She told The Sunday Times she still supported change, but stressed that the government should be “absolutely listening to the voices of women’s groups in all this and their concerns”.

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.

Prominent feminists expressed concern at the development. “Recent victims of male violence need women-only spaces where they can feel safe from men,” said Stephanie Davies-Arai, of the campaign group Transgender Trend. “This risks retraumatising vulnerable and victimised women for the sake of ideology.”

Karen Ingala Smith, head of the women’s sexual and domestic violence charity NIA, said she was concerned.

“I hope refuge providers protect the ‘for women by women’ vision of the feminist survivors and activists who built the refuge movement.

“A women-only space is one of the ways we can create a sanctuary for women to begin their recovery from men’s violence. Women and children escaping violent men should at the very least be able to expect this of a refuge,” Smith added.

A rape victim who stayed in a Women’s Aid centre said: “I am terrified for other women if this happens. I went through a patch where I feared and could not bear the sight of any man. The wonderful support I got just could not have been provided by staff who, to all intents and purposes, are men.”

Women’s Aid stressed that local refuges would be fully consulted in the review and would still have a say over who they employed.

Refuges already allow trans women as clients, though they are permitted to exclude them on a case-by-case basis. Women’s Aid’s quality standards say its services must be “accessible to transgender women”.

Currently, staff who are on the premises all the time with access to all areas are not employed in refuges without a female birth certificate. All refuge job ads on the Women’s Aid website say the applicant must be a woman.

Only people born female — or who have gone through the Gender Recognition Act process to change sex — can get a woman’s birth certificate. The government promised to consult on making the process easier, but has delayed the consultation amid growing controversy over the issue.

Equalities legislation allows providers of single-sex services to discriminate where this is “a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”.

Women’s groups also fear predatory men could use any change to access shelters. Such cases are rare but in Canada, a sex offender, Christopher Hambrook, posed as trans to obtain entry to shelters and commit attacks. This view was attacked by trans campaigner Sarah Brown, who said it “punishes vulnerable trans women for hypothetical acts of infiltration by men claiming to be trans women”.

As someone in the sector I'm horrified by this as many people will be.

Wrote a long reply but there's no point is there? "Women" no longer exist, so it stands to reason that "Women's Aid" won't for much longer.

Fuck donating to them ever again.

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

Exactly.

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.

Quite.

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...)

Schools, governments, shelters, minds.

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.

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.

The newspaper review on BBC Breakfast was abysmal. I didn't catch the vicar's name but she was so blinkered.

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

"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.

Is there now any space where biological women can be, without the presence of penises?

sorry MaturalWoman only just seen your post.

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.

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?

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.

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 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.