H Brunskell-Evans - resigned from WEP

I have cancelled my membership of WEP today

ST's tv career will be in danger if she speaks up.

She's happily making comments on TV about lesbians not being into penis though, which suggests she's not entirely on-message.

Their "inclusiveness" and not wanting people to disrespect each other can be translated as "let's not be nasty to the menz". They don't seem to mind anyone being nasty to women [baffled]

I too am disappointed in Sandi Tosvig. but it will be hard for her, being so much more in the public eye, to walk away. The general public won't care about HBE, but ST's tv career will be in danger if she speaks up.

They started the WEP with such high hopes

Little I don't think the general public have a clue about any of the stakes in this. I think raising awareness of the issues in the first place is the key.

That's great @Bumblebzz

I think there will be more and more who do this, and who spread the word.

Very good article, thanks for sharing. Lucy Bannerman has written on the power of the trans lobby before and come up against Owen Jones. Positive comments too. More articles like this could help swing the tide of public opinion and get rid of the notion that any criticism is transphobia. Also that it's not just a 'feminist cat-fight' as a comment suggests.

So wait, this leaves Sandi Tosvig, who I used to love but she's a comedian, and who else? I'm not seeing how they can rationalize losing established and well respected women's rights activists as a plus in terms of what the purport to be trying to achieve.

All of this WEP nonsense has prompted me to sign up to the London Woman’s place UK event...something I’d have never considered before, but reading about how an intelligent, articulate, qualified academic is being silenced makes me very angry indeed.

Open access link for the Times article. www.thetimes.co.uk/article/barred-academic-heather-brunskell-evans-warns-of-cowardice-over-trans-issues-wlvj3l7bz?shareToken=5a0db51ef52ebf3b0399a453b3f62ca6

THIS:
This is not a general standard applied to all, it's about some specific groups' beliefs being too politically taboo to apply normal standards of critical thought and common sense to.

How do you violate a belief and should that really be a concern.

And some beliefs are deeply concerning, and it's built into law that we don't unconditionally accept and respect them. The TRA lobby for example have absolutely no concerns regarding violating people's beliefs about biology, safe spaces and language, and not even the government are sufficiently concerned about the belief in punching and threatening murder to non compliant women to refuse funding on publically speak out against it.

This is not a general standard applied to all, it's about some specific groups' beliefs being too politically taboo to apply normal standards of critical thought and common sense to.

There is a piece in the Times about this

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/barred-academic-heather-brunskell-evans-warns-of-cowardice-over-trans-issues-wlvj3l7bz

I guess Heather was free to be concerned about the well being of the children so long as she did not express her concern as it violates the beliefs of some members of the public and the organization.

How do you violate a belief and should that really be a concern. So we can't question or even ridicule Scientology? We can talk about child sex abuse, as long as we don't violate the beliefs of some priests? #NAPALT. How about paedophiles? Can we talk about issues that might question their beliefs?

Truly ridiculous.

WEP is such a huge disappoint

Because gender identity is codified into anti discrimination law in the UK.

Why bring gender into it at all?

Because people giggle if they hear the word sex

I guess Heather was free to be concerned about the well being of the children so long as she did not express her concern as it violates the beliefs of some members of the public and the organization.*

What could possibly go wrong in a democracy operating like this?

The tide of supportive messages on twitter is quite encouraging.

Sadly, the WEP are so politically clueless that they will learn neither from that nor from this thread.

I guess Heather was free to be concerned about the well being of the children so long as she did not express her concern as it violates the beliefs of some members of the public and the organization.

They are objectively in favor of drugging and surgically altering children to transition them and any concern for the children's welfare is a violation of their constitution.

2.2 above = so the WEP strives for gender equality! What is that? A good balance between blue tool belts and glittery ones?

Being that so many feminists reject gender outright the WEP really need to wise up and change that to equality between the sexes.

Itsall thanks for that. Still can't see how HBE breached the constitution. I can't see how questioning whether children should be given puberty blockers is intimidating, harassing or being disrespectful to anyone even TRA's. It's not logical. Is it a case of if you say you feel you have been hurt/harassed then you have been?

Just leaving this here.

It would force the post-modern bollocks to confront the biological reality every time a debate was had.