Time to homeschool the GVMT?!

Didn't the WEP kick Heather Brunskell Evans out of the party for speaking about the harm caused by puberty blockers / cross sex hormones? She spoke up for the safeguarding of young girls and was kicked out of the party. I was a paid up member but was shocked by that as I always am when I see people working against safeguarding.

Heather was right wasn't she CJA47, time for an apology maybe.

When your party of men and women decide what they think a woman is and are allowed to talk about it in public do get back to us...

Like others I was excited about WEP and was a founding joiner, but then I left.

How can you talk about campaigning for fairness for women when you literally think anyone can be a woman? It makes absolutely no sense. It is our sexed bodies that make us women and are the basis of the unfair treatment. If you really can’t see that, what exactly re you campaigning for?

I too am disappointed in WEP and can't support an initiative that may help women now but not in the long run. I am still politically homeless. If we can't define what a woman is then we cannot protect women. Definitions matter and sex matters.

If the Women's Equality Party can't define "woman" it's pointless. I was excited when the WEP started but almost immediately totally disillusioned. Sorry, OP, but your party is a bad joke.

Politically homeless thanks to WEP. Sorry not interested in your (self) publicity campaign.

"I acknowledge all of the disappointment and frustration with WEP that many of you are expressing here. And I'll take that back to the party. I understand that if you've been letdown or feel deep sadness at the stance that the party takes then it's hard to be involved in any capacity. That's completely fair.

And for others, who do want to be involved then opportunities like this are small ways to use our voices for good. If we're not all united on every point, so be it.

While the current government continues to make decisions that widen inequality, disrespect children and generally f*ck things up, then I'm looking for any small thing I can do to stand against that."

@CJA37 Very well said!

Admirable and important, but I have to ask why you didn't answer this:

I'd be interested in what your thought are in this Cheryl, given the WEP's inclusive stance and definition of 'woman' (though I'm not sure what the WEP's definition is of mother).

What is a woman?
What is a mother?

Just to qualify, that is not about not accepting trans people, it just is about acknowledging the difference in needs and priorities and not lumping us in together.

I would not have an issue if authorities wanted to reserve positions for trans people. I do have an issue with trans people taking women’s positions to which are they are not entitled by reason of their birth.

I will of course all of this feedback back to the Policy Committee @gardenbird48**

Thank you and I would join like a shot if I was sure that the WEP genuinely understand and want to address the problems that face women based on our sex and don’t prioritise the wants of people who do not share our lived experience of being female.

We have seen irl that male born transgender people placed in reserved women’s positions of influence are open about their total lack of interest in women’s issues, preferring to prioritise trans issues.

@EdgeOfACoin that consultation was held in the form of a members' assembly that took place at the end of last year. The assembly heard evidence from all sides of the debate and are in the process of deciding what that means for WEP policy in relation to the core objectives. It's ongoing.

Hi @CJA37
I left the WEP when I heard Heather Brunskill-Evans describe her experiences when she raised the problems with the Party's TWAW position and how she was ultimately, and very unceremoniously, booted out of the party. My jaw dropped to the floor, and that was pretty much the end of my relationship with the party.
I think it would be a good idea to feedback what some of the posters here have mentioned. If you wanted to start a different, more focussed thread, you would get much more feedback and be able to get a better gauge of how women feel about your party.
My own position, in a nutshell, is that you cannot advocate for women unless you have a robust, coherent and meaningful definition of what a woman is. At the moment, WEP doesn't and I won't be wasting any more time on them until they sort that out.

Has the WEP held its consultation on what a woman is yet?

Genuine question - it was being discussed on here and Twitter a few months ago, but I can't remember when the consultation was supposed to be. If it's already happened, what was the outcome?

Otherwise, best of luck in the campaign.

Your website talks of women being disadvantaged by their gender. We’re not disadvantaged by our gender but by our sex.

I also struggle to see how WEP can take a tough campaigning line on anything when it couldn’t take a tough line on what a woman is and push back at the men insisting that identifying as a woman meant the same as being born a woman

So whilst I think this campaign is a good idea, it rather sticks in one throat to be told to join campaigns to support women by an organisation that seems unable or unwilling to define woman in a way that excludes men 🤷🏻‍♀️

That said, I know that there are very engaged and passionate people who believe different things in the party and that's always tough.

I think “tough” is a bit of an understatement from an organisation supposedly for women that can’t say what they think a woman is.

as @CJA37 is on the policy committee, maybe she could take our feedback to them?

It seems rather pointless to try and advance the situation for women while simultaneously supporting the very ideology that is threatening our rights and safeguarding.

Gender ideology relies on a set of very rigid gender stereotypes (we still haven't got to the bottom of what can possibly make a man into a woman other than feels and in Eddie's case some lipstick (Charlotte Clymer obviously finds it harder as they needs a gold lame pocketbook as well as lipstick to feel properly womanly) and perpetuating those is not to the benefit of women.

How do you feel about it OP?

It’s hard to feel they’re doing something genuinely positive when they’re bent on undermining the very foundations of women’s rights.

Like if you had a partner who was cheerleading for you to get a pay rise at work, but emotionally abusing you at home.

Mindfuck.

I think that it sounds like a great initiative, we don't have to agree on everything to work together for common goals

No self-respecting woman should wish or work for the success of a party that ignores her sex.

We're asking everyone who cares about this to take a photo/make a short clip of how you'd homeschool the government to be better for women.

What are women?