Jess de Wahls

Think it reached desired amount of signatures

There was a petition in support of Jess but it's been closed, does anyone know why?

The RA Pride rainbow badge on their Twitter and Facebook accounts doesn't include the pink and blue trans colours.

Does that make them transphobic?

From Wikipedia:
This genus was named after the human clitoris, for the flowers bear a resemblance to the vulva. Originally the first described species of the genus was given the name Flos clitoridis ternatensibus in 1678 by Rumpf, a German-born botanist employed by the Dutch East India Company. It was regarded as appropriately named by Johann Philipp Breyne in 1747. Many vernacular names of these flowers in different languages are similarly based on references to female external genitalia.

And I think few people are familiar with clitoria or how it got its name so you could just call it a blue butterfly pea.....

Excitingly I am attempting to grow it this year, my seeds have just started to germinate!

I'm looking forward to receiving my postcards from Jess' shop.

Because you can still be accused of discrimination based on your perception. In other words if you discriminate against someone because you perceive them to be homosexual, it's illegal, even if they're not homosexual.

Exactly. Don't they have lawyers?

They seem remarkably clueless. Jess could, if she wanted, take a legal action against them (for libel, at least, if not for discrimination under the Equality Act). This case is now so high profile that it could be funded either through crowdfunding or a sympathetic lawyer taking it on pro bono. At this stage, I fail to understand why, having made the initial mistake, they didn't backtrack very quickly and offer an effusive apology. They are pissing off more and more people by the day.

Incredible to see how Jess’s online shop is almost completely empty. I had to buy a threads sketch to show my support and I’m really excited about it.

I felt exceedingly proud to spot what the clitoria flowers resembled.

Thank you! That is what I thought but also thought I had best check :)

He would be happy with flowers but I don't want to inadvertently cause him or me embarrasment by patching his trousers with a flower that has a sexual message

The other flowers are non-sexual - best also to avoid the 'big swinging ovaries' - but the other flowers should be fine. China Blue, tulips or freesias all look appropriately neutral.

I think the RA are banking on her not taking a case through the courts

^^ it's a lot for one person to do but there are soo many people backing her. I'd happily contribute and hope people in real life are there for her

I wonder why the RA are using the word perceived.

Because you can still be accused of discrimination based on your perception. In other words if you discriminate against someone because you perceive them to be homosexual, it's illegal, even if they're not homosexual.

Maybe. But that would have been easy to clear up with a quick "out of stock, other reason, mistake on Instagram" statement.

I suppose maybe what happened is:

RA ran out of Jess's stuff

RA decided for some completely different reason not to stock it for a while

RA got tweeted

Corporate social media unsavvy RA tweeter checked with the shop, found they weren't going to be stocking Jess for a while, and made up the reason to score virtue points?

This might be a bit of a silly question. I want to buy a patch or two but I am most likely to use them on my son's trousers. He would be happy with flowers but I don't want to inadvertently cause him or me embarrasment by patching his trousers with a flower that has a sexual message (he is 9). If I steer clear of the ones actually called 'clitoria' am I safe? Most things like this go over my head - think clueless about an aubergine emoji until quite recently.

If they double down on this I am writing to the charity commission. They are clearly not meeting their charitable objectives. And Jess, I would buy lots of your art to help fund the legal if you want to sue the arse off them.

I perceive their artists - especially the living artist Allen Jones, whose work they sell in that shop! - to be gynephobic.

Why are you selling his stuff, RAA?

And as pretty much anything can be "perceived" as transphobic by some people, where does that leave us?

Certainly it leaves them without an argument for presenting exhibitions like ‘Sensation’ in the future.

That is a really odd email. 'I don't know how much you have read....'. That doesn't read like a considered opinion from the RA, that reads like someone choosing to write that off their own bat.

Because there have been countless emails, tweets, newpaper articles etc.

Any reply needs to say

'The RA understand that there is a spectrum of views on this.

[This is what we think]

[This is what happened]

[This is our carefully nuanced viewpoint about how this does not imply that Jess's view, which is reasonable and which is held by many reasonable people, is hateful but why we think we are justified]

But the whole things seems odd. Because unless the person who runs the shop (or the commissioning for the shop, or whatever) also runs the social media, this is two people at least who have made this decision.

And while the social media person may be clueless, SURELY anyone stocking the shop would know that some artists are controversial?

I mean, what on earth happened?

I think the RA are banking on her not taking a case through the courts