Karen Ingala Smith in Parliament now on single sex refuges

During the discussion about complaints, James said it wasn't uncommon for women in their refuge to fall out and said something about women arguing who has had the worst abuse. What a bizarre and inappropriate comment from a refuge volunteer!

It's projection again, isn't it? When your whole life is built around playing oppression top trumps when in fact you were born with a winning hand (white, male-bodied, middle class, born into a wealthy nation), the idea that there's genuine oppression out there - women having the shit beaten out of them simply for being women, people from ethnic minorities having the shit beaten out of them simply because of their race - kind of passes you by.

You presume that when they talk about what they've suffered, they're playing oppression top trumps as well, rather than having been genuinely oppressed in the true meaning of the word. So you project your idea that it's all a game onto them.

That's not "porn shaming", that's having appropriate boundaries

Amen.

However most of this is a toddler stage lash out against any boundaries, at all, ever. No one ever saying no, about anything. Any boundary creates a tantrum, no one else is allowed to have any need or justification for a boundary.

#antisocialpersonalitydisorder #clusterbpersonalities #narcissim #transisnotamentaldisorderandIjustcamedowntheTrentonabreadboard

If James said that, that's a huge issue in terms of letting service users down. Absolute disgrace.

On Diana James’ Twitter there is a complaint that when traveling to the panel, GWR’s wifi wouldn't let them access a sex toy site.

Apparently it’s “not good enough” that GWR “shames” people for looking at strap-ons in public by not letting them.

Show of hands all those women that have browsed for a new Vibrator on the bus?

Anybody? Anybody?

twitter.com/dianalouisej/status/1131224684320743425

Love Andy from GWR's "played with a totally straight bat, left elbow well up" response, though!

Handy hint for Diana (given that the watchers will no doubt be watching and reporting back): if you're in a public place where someone's four year old can peer over the seat back and see your screen (which four year olds tend to do) then no, looking at porn-related stuff isn't appropriate. That's not "porn shaming", that's having appropriate boundaries and thinking about safeguarding children.

That was so frustrating to listen to. I thought Janet McDermott was dreadful and was rightfully taken to task by Sarah Champion.

All this rubbish about what definition of woman is and waffle about presentation, I was already having the kind of day where I just want to let rip with a stream of expletives and rail incoherently and this has not helped.

During the discussion about complaints, James said it wasn't uncommon for women in their refuge to fall out and said something about women arguing who has had the worst abuse. What a bizarre and inappropriate comment from a refuge volunteer!

There was a lot that was wrong with James' comments about those who have need to access the Cornish Project.

James was not representing the needs of the women (adult human females) who use the service.

When the transcript is released more issues will become very clear.

It's outrageous that women who are victims of male violence should have to explain why they want a women's space to be women-only. Maria Miller is basically expecting service users to justify the very existence of women's refuges. They shouldn't have to do that.

During the discussion about complaints, James said it wasn't uncommon for women in their refuge to fall out and said something about women arguing who has had the worst abuse. What a bizarre and inappropriate comment from a refuge volunteer!

Which clearly shows us Kittens that we need to complain complain and complain again, making sure it's recorded every time.

I hear you but how do vulnerable women, who may be at risk of losing vital assistance not just for them but for their children, if they speak out, do that?

My frustration is that we cannot expect those women to further expose themselves to potential harm, just so we have evidence of harm.

Seriously? Seriously? It is a fucking fetish. Sex toys on public transport. No mind to who else might be able to see? Pathetic

I know, right? Can’t comprehend that looking at dildos is inappropriate in a public space but is charged with speaking on a parliamentary panel about the safeguarding of women and children from sexual violence. Yeah that seems like a total legit choice.

Which clearly shows us Kittens that we need to complain complain and complain again, making sure it's recorded every time.

Yes, FLippinfumin. What I found irritating about that panel was the assertion that because their were no official complaints that that de facto meant all women who had shared a refuge with a transwomen were comfortable with it.

Women are far more likely to keep quiet or just extricate themselves from an environment where they feel vulnerable but unsupported.

Show of hands all those women that have browsed for a new Vibrator on the bus?

Anybody? Anybody?

Seriously? Seriously? It is a fucking fetish. Sex toys on public transport. No mind to who else might be able to see? Pathetic.

Rowan has probably posted it already, but does anyone remember reading all those testimonies from women in refuges who felt they had no voice and definitely were not comfortable with males in female refuges. It was heartbreaking, I cried buckets reading it.

What makes me so bloody angry though, who are they to give away spaces built and paid for by women? They can decry older feminists all they like, we are the ones who fought for those female only spaces, who gave our bloody scraps of time and money so vulnerable women could be safe. Just so bloody angry at them all. Who do they think they are? What right do they have?

On Diana James’ Twitter there is a complaint that when traveling to the panel, GWR’s wifi wouldn't let them access a sex toy site.

Apparently it’s “not good enough” that GWR “shames” people for looking at strap-ons in public by not letting them.

Show of hands all those women that have browsed for a new Vibrator on the bus?

Anybody? Anybody?

I had to stop watching. Having lived in refuges and watching someone suggest that its okay if you send a violent man away after he has been shown where the refuge is was the last straw for me. I had to move because there was a small chance that my 4 year old had told daddy where we were.

I do hope it improved after this point.

Karen IS was awesome. you know all the things you wish someone would say when they get interviewed about this issue? she said every last one. it was frankly cathartic to know that at least someone has presented Maria Miller with the actual facts, in person.

Karen is so clear and reasonable. I can't believe this discussion is even happening.

I thought Sarah Champion did a good job in pinning down the Womens' Aid rep by a particular line of questioning.

Champion started by saying that we have an Equality Act. it defines the protectected characteristics and exemptions. It is the law and has been for nearly a decade. What guidance did Women's Aid provide to members wanting advice about excluding a man, UNDER THE CURRENT LAW.

None was the eventual answer - but there was work in progress for guidelines to embed inclusivity and the diversity of different kinds of women.

There was vigorous head-shaking from KIS and Sarah Champion's face was a picture.

There was also a point where Sarah Champion said "I find that very hard to believe' when told that there had been no complaints or enquiries from members about trans referrals or trans employees.

I would love to have been a fly on the wall of the private session that followed the panel.

Karen did - she was awesome!

Ok, deep breath Karen's confirmed they've had one transwoman employee who flashed female team members, what did they flash? Their tits? Their fanny? ‘Her’ penis?

When will people stop being so bloody pathetic and call a spade a spade (or in this case a male a man)?

I'm following a couple of other select committee inquiries at the moment (different subject entirely) where both the process and chairing is significantly more robust.

The Women and Equalities Committee is toothless because it's unable to examine women's issues without a "what about the men" angle, and time and energy is wasted on dancing around the various elephants in the room. Janet M's performance was a prime example.

Sorry ignore that last comment, am an idiot, thought Jess Philips was chairing whereas it was of course Maria Miller

Also on Jess Philips, she did make some great points, however she also gave a fair degree of nonsense a free pass (and presumably signed off that panel)

I'm following a couple of other select committee inquiries at the moment (different subject entirely) where both the process and chairing is significantly more robust.

It really shows where we are that someone representing Women's Aid seems confused about what women are. If I was techy-minded I would make a meme of that and tweet it everywhere.

It was telling that Diana James sought to focus on the issue being inclusive for 'LGBT+' The issue for women's services by definition would not include the 'G' and the issue of protecting single sex services means that the issue is not about the'T' but about male transgender people.

Janet Mcdormmot should be very well versed and able to discuss and identify the issue of male-pattern violence. THat she seemed so hampered by the language of 'inclusivity' whilst sat alongside a trans rights activist is telling.

Diane James at the end says that the issue is in the definition of sex and that this is unclear and contested.

I hope Maria Miller reflects on the role she has played in the fact such a 'problem' might be expressed.

Especially when this male volunteer was also able to speak as a survivor of DV and described that this violence was perpetrated by 'another woman' (sex unknown)

Good point - I hadn't thought of that. It's all so frustrating, we need words to mean something goddamit