Fundraisers & questions

Until such time as I receive evidence that the money I donated to FPFW is being mismanaged I am happy for them to use it for whatever they deem appropriate. I think they've done exceptionally well so far and I trust that they'll use that fund wisely.

This reminds me that I donated to the woman who was challenging the inclusion of tranwomen in all-women Labour shortlists years ago and haven't heard anything about that case at all. Can anyone update?

Pity there's not a GC multi-millionaire north of the border who could help FWS out...

Hi, sorry I know it's a slightly old thread, but just wondered if anyone else had the problem of Crowdjustice taking their £2.50 extra even though I specifically selected not to include it?

I have only realised that this has happened the last few times I have donated (mostly to FPFW, Allison Bailey, Ann Sinnott etc. so Women's Rights causes).

It's annoying because I specifically stopped giving them the £2.50 add on after how they treated Allison Bailey. And before anyone thinks I'm being unfair, they get 3% of the amount raised, so £2.50 extra per transaction seemed a lot.

Anyway, maybe I have been unlucky, I just wanted to know if anyone else had noticed this?

I dug for the FPFW census in the full knowledge that if there was a surplus they would use it to fight for other women's causes. Thus once the money left my account I had no further say over it provided it was used for women's causes.

Should FPFW wish to donate some to Ann Sinnott or FWS I trust their judgement.

I am beyond grateful that Nic Williams and co are doing what they do and the last thing I'm going to do is give them an admin headache by asking for the money back.

if a large number of people with a birth sex of male wish to record themselves as female (and possibly completely hide their trans status because they will presumably also put gender identity as female), then I’m not sure it is too much of a concern for us. in some demographic groups (ie late teens and 20s) it might be the opposite problem. But we can't prevent ppl filling in the census improperly. It's still worth getting the guidence right for the reasons others have said & most ppl generally do what they are asked.

The other really important outcome is that a public body has been told by the high court that it's not allowed to come up with its own preferred definition of sex. It has to use the definition given to it by the law. The whole situation we are in is because public bodies have been defining sex as they wish, rather than as the law says.

I also will like FPFW helps the North sisters )option D). I have also donated to Ann Sinnott and Appleby for Tavistock and others in the last few weeks. Im not getting much money in at present, but I dig and have donated for both FWS and FPFW. I like the idea of trying to pull together and support pledges.
It’s very good some cases are getting through and we should celebrate. We’ll push for the ones that need further support.
A call to dig for FSW thread would be helpful.

We ‘won’ the ONS case, yet all that happened was wording changed and trans people seemed to be ignoring it en masse.

It was a good win. The ONS were forced to face the consequences of their utter stupidity and questions will be be asked to work out what on earth happened.

One of the really important parts of this case was to ensure that the ONS, as the gold standard source of population data, are not creating a precedent where birth sex is not gathered as standard (or possibly at all) by other researchers.

It helps create a standard that we can point at when fighting with other organisations about the importance of sex data. There will be many such fights I imagine.

If a large number of people with a birth sex of male wish to record themselves as female (and possibly completely hide their trans status because they will presumably also put gender identity as female), then I’m not sure it is too much of a concern for us.

I might have it wrong but as far as I can see the main effect it will have is to make it seem like there are more women than reality for service planning etc. so while it is not ideal and we don’t want money wasted but maybe it will benefit us in the long run (I can hope).

I am very grateful for what FPFW gave done so far. The money I donated has achieved its purpose and I am delighted that the ONS has been forced to make a large donation to them.

I have every faith in them to make great use of the money in the future to do essential work for women rights. Op if you are unhappy I suggest you contact them directly.

Nothing here reassures me that we’re making any real difference, I’m even questioning if these concerns that brought me here and contribute are valid.

Whilst we celebrate meaningless victories, DV charities are being defunded, and women attacked and murdered and these aren’t linked to trans issues.

I think I have a lot to consider, but I feel I’d do more helping local women’s services rather than throw more money at this.

It might be a very good idea for FPFW to make use of some of their windfall to support those charities that have been defunded because of the TRAs. I think that would demonstrate clearly to them that FPFW are a pro woman charity.

I too supported both. And would like D , followed by A.

I would also like to support Sonia Appleby (gids / safeguard lead) but have put some in and can't afford more for the moment.

So funds diverted to her crowd justice would be very welcome too.

But I also accept that money once given is not in my control. FPFW still have my full support - even if they screw up now, I am still glad I supported them and grateful to them for sticking their necks out.

where is this happening: If FPFW think they can just keep throwing out insults instead of actually engage?

In answer to your original question OP, I'd like
D) FPFW contribute directly to FWS fund, and keep the balance.
to happen but I accept
A) FPFW keep all the money raised - it's their CF, they can do what they want
In response to the vagueness of "future campaigns", I was happy enough with that and hope they'll be ones I agree with. I don't believe it's like RTS as you didn't know where that money was going as RTS was an intermediary so I don't think they are really comparable. It is a good reminder though that people should check what happens to their donation to help them decide whether to donate or not.
In response to:
"I'll ask again - what exactly is it that all this cash is paying for?" you're asking in the wrong place, we're not FPFW

We ‘won’ the ONS case, yet all that happened was wording changed and trans people seemed to be ignoring it en masse.

No one can stop people lying on the census. It's up to the authorities to determine who is lying and whether to prosecute.

The point is that ONS tried to claim that the sex on someone's passport is their legal sex when that is not true. If it was, individuals would need a grc to change gender on their passport and that is not the case.

Have you contacted FPFW directly?

I’d have been pushed to name who was the lead for FPFW although I recognised Nic Williams name when she was mentioned. I’ve never met her or any of the other prominent members. I can’t name any of them but I’d probably recognise some of the names from having been previously mentioned here. So I’m noones cheerleader.

However I recognise everyone in FPFW have done a lot of work and I’m pretty comfortable with them using my donation for the fallback purpose they specified.

I used to be very happy to trust Amnesty to use my donation as they saw fit I’m not anymore so I don’t give them anymore money. I’d love to get back the donations I made in good faith but I recognise thats not happening and I should have kept check what they were using donations for.

So, those of you who don't like the lack of transparency about "future campaigns," did you contact FPFW before donating to ask for detail, or to explain you weren't comfortable with it? Or did you think it was unlikely the case would be won and it would be a moot point?

I don't think you're wrong to want to know where your money goes, but it seems like it would be more effective to speak directly to an organisation before giving money to them under certain terms, than to decide later that you don't like the terms and then speak about, rather than to, if you know what I mean.

I agree that transparency is really important but I also think it's unreasonable to not give it some time for the detail to be laid out.

Have you contacted FPFW?

We ‘won’ the ONS case, yet all that happened was wording changed and trans people seemed to be ignoring it en masse. The ONS has not indicated that these people will be fined for this. So what did the 100k raise actually achieve?

It raised a lot of awareness of the problems around conflating sex and gender identity in law. It's unfortunate the ONS caved before a full JR but it's important that the line is held when biological sex matters. This is what the case achieved.

As far as I know the ONS have been investigating reports of people not sticking to the guidelines. Whether anything will come of that I don't know.

FSW raised a considerable sum and the judge cited a number of cases suggesting that the idea that TWAW has been tested in law, back in 2002 and the definition of woman has included trans women fir 20 years. So, another huge sum with no actual tangible benefits.

Is this a reference to the Kirklees case? As far as I know that case wasn't able to set precedent because it wasn't at a high enough level.

In summary nobody has been taken for a fool. This discussion isn't really about the ONS case which most people here supported but where surplus funds should be directed.

I realise it looks like people in-fighting but actually it's healthy to have these discussions and police ourselves a bit when it comes to fundraising. Women have strongly disagreed with each other on this thread but questions should always be allowed to be asked. #nodebate is their strategy not ours.

I think OP the issue is you had a choice as to whether or not to donate based on the information FPFW provided. It was very clear that surplus funds would be used for unspecified other causes. It was up to you at that point to decide whether or not you were comfortable to contribute.

Having contributed on the information provided, it seems that you are moving the goalposts and want new information. It is this which is odd.

I’m a long time lurker, first time poster. Having read this thread I have concerns over how these groups are run.

I totally back the campaigns and have donated what I can. However I’m concerned about how the funds are being used and how much success we’re actually having.

Do the groups have accounts, so I can see what is raised and how it’s spent? It would reassure me to know where it’s going.

The lack of transparency that’s been raised in this thread is bothering me.

The other issue is what have we achieved, what material difference has all our fundraising made?

We ‘won’ the ONS case, yet all that happened was wording changed and trans people seemed to be ignoring it en masse. The ONS has not indicated that these people will be fined for this. So what did the 100k raise actually achieve?

FSW raised a considerable sum and the judge cited a number of cases suggesting that the idea that TWAW has been tested in law, back in 2002 and the definition of woman has included trans women fir 20 years. So, another huge sum with no actual tangible benefits.

This case also suggests that trans women without a GRC should be treated as women, so did everything with GRA reform achieve anything?

I’ve even recently found that the review of trans women in female wards Matt Hancock announced did nothing but to reaffirm that they should be placed on female wards.

Im so sorry for the long post, but I’m genuinely questioning whether I’ve been taken for a fool.

I’m sure there are those who would like to undermine confidence in the crowdfunding facilities that have helped women resist the trans ideology.

If people aren't happy about donating to a particular crowdfunder, they’re free to spend their money on something they think more useful.

We will update with the detail once the cost assessment is complete. This is likely to be a couple of months away. In the meantime, we have already instructed our legal team to undertake the necessary evaluation work to enable us to prioritise and prepare for our next legal challenges.

I have much more faith in someone who is taking legal advice, and evaluating priorities than someone doing an off the cuff vox pop survey. I'm sure when they decide what to pursue they will be transparent about why and put in the hard work to make it actually happen.

Some touched nerves on here it seems.

are sat on a large sum of cash

I doubt they've seen a penny of anything yet.

but they definitely won't be asking anyone what they should do with it.

Eh? Have any of you lot actually discussed this with them?

I'd certainly be in favour of a poll of donors, but I'm not going to get upset that one hasn't happened within a week of the case, with it never being promised, and when I've only decided to rant about it on a random message board.

Might I suggest trying this out in AIBU? They might be able to reassure you.