Amnesty International's Updated Abortion Policy

They lost me over their stance on prostitution years ago.

I don't think we should consider this as such a rare occasion that it doesn't really warrant any special effort being spent on these females being able to access abortions. All female people need to be able to do so, however they identify. And there's nothing wrong with specifically targeting a campaign at females who identify as trans. There's everything wrong though with erasing 99% of females who need to access an abortion for the sake of being inclusive to 1%. You don't alienate the vast majority in the name of a tiny majority. That's not exactly a winning strategy when you seek to increase acceptance for the latter.

But much much worse than alienating most women on this issue through "inclusive" language that erases women is that having to carry a child to term when you don't want to is a human rights issue that only ever affects women, regardless of what courtesy title is bestowed on or used by those of us who would rather be men. We are the only class of humans who can carry a baby. And this nonsense about pregnant men leaves us in a much weaker position when fighting for our reproductive rights.

Whatever female erasure anyone is engaged in in the name of inclusivity, I now believe this is the most damaging result of this ideology. If women and girls no longer exist as a sex class, we cannot fight any of the many disadvantages we suffer because we are female. I have not seen a single coherent categorisation in lieu of sex that provides us with the same power to fight the oppression of women and girls worldwide that organising as as a political class on the basis of our sex does. None of these genderists ever even suggest one. Which all makes sense when you understand that this is an ideology in aid of men's (sexual) rights.

Absolutely this.

Felt like that was what happened. I joined up around the time there was a big Stop Violence Against Women campaign but can't imagine the linguistic knots that would now entail.

It feels like erasure. Language really does matter if it frames how you see the world and it should matter even more if you are looking at human rights.

Did young idealists take over?

I was a very active member for a long time.

With hindsight I think the start of the rot was campaigning for abortion. I realise that seems a perfectly reasonable thing to support but it marked the start of a move from a politically neutral dedication to human rights (we didn't even campaign for Mandela's release because he'd used violence) to simply pushing views the members supported.

It made it easier for right wing governments to ignore us, put off a lot of older members who didn't agree and (at the time) meant opposing democratically chosen policies in some countries.

So - who needs abortions? I’m confused...

Amnesty International has updated their abortion policy in order to be more inclusive of those who are not 'cisgender women.'

Amnesty International has updated their abortion policy in order to more inclusive by denying the existence of the sexed based group who need abortions - women and girls

Whatever female erasure anyone is engaged in in the name of inclusivity, I now believe this is the most damaging result of this ideology. If women and girls no longer exist as a sex class, we cannot fight any of the many disadvantages we suffer because we are female. I have not seen a single coherent categorisation in lieu of sex that provides us with the same power to fight the oppression of women and girls worldwide that organising as as a political class on the basis of our sex does. None of these genderists ever even suggest one. Which all makes sense when you understand that this is an ideology in aid of men's (sexual) rights.

I'm assuming and I shouldn't have done that

The only exception would be rape

Usually if transgender men become pregnant its through choice with the intention of having a baby to raise. (Physically they're still female)

I used to be very involved with Amnesty but can no longer support them for all the reasons above.

An aside: I thought that one of the challenges of living with a DSD is loss of fertility. Are intersex people likely to need access to abortion or is this another example of co-opting DSD issues without consent?

I lost any respect for Amnesty International when they started campaigning for transwomen to be held in women's prisons. And on their website they refer people to Mermaids, Stonewall and Gendered Intelligence to learn how to be allies to transgender people.

Frankly I now distrust what they say about political prisoners because they've so blatantly misrepresented transgender issues. How could I have any faith in what they are saying on any other topic?

They're erasing the category of sex. That leaves female people without a recognised, defined category, which is essential to mount any sort of defence against sexism - in a world that remains acutely aware of which sex is which, when oppressing the female half. Nobody cares about gender identity when sex-selective abortion, or genital mutilation, or child marriage and other forms of rape are at issue. Nobody is confused when seeking a surrogate.

It's straightfowardly abusive and oppressive to erase sex, most especially when discussing reproductive and sexual vulnerabilities and harms. They underpin women's subjugation throuighout the world, and by erasing them, you remove women's capacity to defend themselves against that subjugation.

It bemuses me, that people who earnestly believe themselves to be human rights activist can collude in this destruction of one of women's most basic and fundamental right - the right to exist as a collective legal entity at all.

They're in the paper today for other dodgy behaviour too. Glad I'm no longer a member. www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/amnestys-secret-800-000-payout-after-suicide-of-gaetan-mootoo-lqnq79c99

Been watching the slow drift of Amnesty to policy positions I cannot agree with on this issue and also as regards prostitution with despair. I am involved with a group and the only reason I can still stomach it is because of the long running friendships and because I am able to ensure that the campaigns we are involved with do not stray anywhere near those areas. I do wonder how much longer I can take it.

This degradation of language where 'women' and 'girls' as terms are divorced from biology becomes an utter joke when you are discussing the biological reality of pregnancy.

These individuals often face multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination when trying to access health services.

I have never seen any evidence to support this apart from anecdotal accounts of feeling 1) pain is being dismissed or trivialised (i.e. a very familiar female experience) or 2) 'invalidated' because of pronouns or other language used that is sex-specific.

Is this a bit like the thousands of trans deaths JKR caused? When does this merry-go-round of insanity end?!

How many intersex people can become pregnant without the need for assisted reproduction services? One would think the number of intersex people requiring an abortion would be limited to the incredibly tiny number of people who are intersex, capable of achieving pregnancy with help, and then have a wanted pregnancy that must be aborted due to fetal abnormalities or the mother's health. Surely the vanishingly small number of abortions this would result in are much less important to focus on than the tremendously more common ways women end up needing abortions?

If you can achieve a pregnancy without the need for advanced assistance and invasive procedures, you're a female -- not "intersex."

I wrote Amnesty International off a long time ago.