Maya attends the Fawcett Society AGM

However, with the appropriation of "sex assigned at birth" from the realm of Differences of Sexual Development, "identify"/ "self identify" starts to sound shitty in any context in which it's used.

(nice to still have the Hallowe'en hats to indicate being a very pissed-off witch! Thanks, MNHQ!)

Belief is incompatible with science; the whole point of belief is that you make that Leap of Faith, you jump into the unknown without evidence. Reason doesn't work with bellief.

The only real antidote I have ever come across is to focus one belief onto another belief, so you can start as CofE and move onto Buddhism, but it's much harder to ditch a faith-based belief and have nothing to replace it. Those that do are often ime hard-line atheists, and can easily become zealots, 'preaching' atheism or over-compensating for their change in belief in some other way - sneering at those who continue in the old belief, or feeling anger towards tehm etc.

I think if Science can be framed within a kind of ideology which is in some way faith-based then there's a chance that some sort of conversion could take place. I really don't think there's much success to be had if we continue to see it as a simple 'belief vs reason' struggle. I'm not sure it would be that difficult in fact; I believe in evidence, in facts, in the scientific method; I believe these are self-evidently better than what was around before the Enlightenment, or whatever. I was brought up Catholic and most of my relatives still are. They all display some sort of cognitive dissonance which they see as their cross to bear, the fact that they have to include me in family celebrations is hard for many of them, but they 'offer it up to Jesus', it's the sacrifice they make in order to feel better about themselves.

I do think it's possible to present Science as a belief system, in spite of that Judge ruling that it wasn't. Does a ruling against TRAs/MRAs stop them? No. So we could ignore that Judge and insist that Science including Biology is actually a belief system; the problem is that that would be inconsistent with what Science is, so we can't really do it and retain the integrity of the scientific method. It's a bummer.

Aren't we all waiting for the Baroness' new Women's Party. I thought it was well under way.

Or has her suggestion fizzled out?

Fine by me. Maybe we want to think of a modern-day GC feminist to celebrate? Although perhaps it's better to go with a dead one. That's the only way you be certain they won't suddenly start declaring TWAW bs.

The woman in the audience asked something like "you could end up in a situation where half parliament were men and half parliament were Transwomen and would that be an OK outcome?". Sal Brinton of lib dems said (I am paraphrasing) " to the question if half parliament were men and half Transwomen, then yes absolutely happy, Transwomen are women"

Yes, I know someone who was there watching and incredulously texted me straight after that idiocy.

You know what, we need to start the Pankhurst Society and have as our motto 'I would rather be a rebel than a slave.' Is there a wealthy GC millionaire/ billionaire out there who'd like to found one?

I'm running out of words to describe the despicable behaviour of those helming the Fawcett. They have betrayed the roots of the organisation they're fronting. They've turned on the female sex. And of course they couldn't afford to let Jenni Murray speak, she would have said something similar to us.

A friend sent me this.

That erasing of Jenni Murray is a bit Stalin-lite, isn't it?

Honestly, they should be done under the trade descriptions act for "courage calls to courage". I think that phrase is ours, now.

I genuinely gasped when I read this:

" ... “It is a very important issue and I can understand where the anxiety comes from. I see many cases of women… Suzanne Moore was a case in point.

Women who have found themselves on the wrong side of this issue and as a result lose their jobs or feel that they are being silenced.

My response is that it is inequitable from their point of view but freedom of speech is not an unqualified right.

It is a balancing task between those two interests and we do not want to silence women, we do not want to shut women out of this discussion.It is also important that we exercise free speech responsibly.”  ... "

the wrong side of this issue

Speechless.

I suspect Jenni Murray now that she has left BBC and speaks more freely didn't get to say anything as she may well be leaving because just as it was with the BBC she cant speak the truth at Fawcett!

The "Do you self-define as disabled" bit is well intentioned. Some people with what are often called disabilities do not consider themselves disabled, and are unhappy when others define them in this way.

"Seem to have some acoustic problems in here".

What massive disrespect not to include a tribute to Jenni Murray.

I had to look it up but sure enough this extraordinary statement was made at a Fawcett Society event 2.5 years ago. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3310443-Fawcett-Society-Live-stream-from-5-30pm-Courage-Calls-Ask-her-to-stand

The woman in the audience asked something like "you could end up in a situation where half parliament were men and half parliament were Transwomen and would that be an OK outcome?". Sal Brinton of lib dems said (I am paraphrasing) " to the question if half parliament were men and half Transwomen, then yes absolutely happy, Transwomen are women"

From @anlaf's post early in the thread. Absolutely incredible.

jeez louise

once you start lying to yourself you can no longer act in good faith innit?

do yourselves a favour fawcett society / WEP / Labour women. allow yourself to understand that men aren't women and women aren't men.

use sex based pronuns. it's tremendously freeing

read up on agp. that'll open your eyes

then you can divest yourself of the urge to 'be kind' and stop trying to give away other women's rights and see the men's rights activism that you are enabling.

I wish I was rich (and healthy) enough to be insulated from all of this.

Just one point - 'Do you identify as disabled' has been in general use for well over a decade, because for most people first you become disabled and then you (hopefully) receive a diagnosis.

It's getting really embarrassing now, the number of people (women mostly, some are TRAs and some are clearly just trying to sit on the fence to save themselves) who pretend they couldn't hear the question, pretend they've run out of time, or throw the grenade to someone else who then feels they've no option but to start "both sides" or even TWAWing.

It was the Fawcett Society that made me realise years ago just how serious the creep of transideology had become. For an organisation that was once brilliant at crunching numbers to prove that women were still disadvantaged, once they decided that including men was neither here not there, I saw what Dittany did.

An embarrassment.

This is shocking and shameful, and the merger with the Young Women's Trust and its £17million sounds like an arranged marriage for the dowry.

I want Millicent Fawcett to come back and haunt them all. That the Fawcett Society should be supporting Sue Pascoe is sickening. These women are traitors to their sex. I am beyond angry and in the mood for revenge.

Sickening. Liers and cowards every one of them. What an absolute sham of an organisation.

FS!

Maya writes so well. A tale well told.

Once upon a time the world was ruled by powerful men. The end.

FC are the enabling servant.

'Do you self define as disabled' WTF??? Can they sink any lower? Not content with debasing what it means to be a woman, they are also being deeply offensive to disabled people.
What a revolting organisation.