Women's rights general conversations - Thread 10

For the record I think he looks amazing and he seems very talented.

He does indeed.

Just seen this

https://youtube.com/shorts/z7cSi9civ5g?si=vFQk_hlE7bKGRDdT

With a few tweaks it could be a transwoman talking. Imagine how ridiculous it would be though if he insisted on being transgeorgian and everyone else had to go along with it or be a bigoted hate criminal.

For the record I think he looks amazing and he seems very talented.

Were their coats really that snug?

Bad ass, I love it!

Instant justice.

https://youtube.com/shorts/qNJAvYBZMaI?si=SYn-J3HnEPvd-5VF

Re M Foran, others offer the explanation that the accout deactivation was a planned break for writing anyways, and has nothing to do with the disagreements.
https://nitter.poast.org/quineofthenorth/status/1950856472289579264#m

some other posts by Ms Asteriti about having made points earlier which where later repeated by "more reputable" people (often men, it seems) while she was attacked for them first, makes me wonder what is going on between contributors to the debate.

https://nitter.poast.org/AlessandraAster/status/1951934103005077800#m

https://nitter.poast.org/AlessandraAster/status/1945931793539956879#m

and a disagreement with Sex Matters (though others interfere and suggest things are not as extreme as she is reading them):

https://nitter.poast.org/AlessandraAster/status/1951254077045669958#m

I am mainly curious about a) whether any of that is actually true and b) do the disagreements divide the opposition (classic tactic) or will this help to clear the way in the long run as it's of course important to debate about definitions and clear language.
I had the impression that many groups like SM, FWS, freelance academics and activists and others cooperate and coordinate their work, but seeing this I wonder whether behind the scenes there are still disagreements.

I noticed Michael Foran's Twitter / Nitter page is down (probably temporarily), and I saw some of the women's rights Twixens discussing his view. There seems to be an (academic) debate about whether the current lawsuits and the academics, researchers and supporters are even going far enough.

There is a legal researcher called Alessandra Asteriti
https://nitter.poast.org/AlessandraAster/status/1951154857999843509#m

If you google her, you'll see she was a professor in Europe (and she says in UK, too), thus should know a few things about the law.
She's criticising Michael Foran in the above tweet, and in other posts on her timeline you can see also Helen Joyce and Maya Forstater being adressed.

Her main point is that the careful language about "gender critical belief" is still giving in to TRA and ceding the point that there are different beliefs, but in an area where the science is so clear, that you might as well discuss the earth being flat. Others are of course free to have different beliefs, but the main angle is how far this belief translates into laws that affect everyone else (I don't mean the psychological research about gender and sex, but the main point about sex as binary).

It's as if believing the earth is flat converts into hindering anyone from going more than 200km away from their home lest they fall over the edge.

The quote Asteriti reposted from Foran might be from a specific context, which I don't know. Thus I'm careful to judge that on its own. Additionally, anyone taking part in the discussion, giving the general political climate in the past decade, would be careful about what they say as an expert in public. I see this kind of language about "belief" as a step forward from before (esp. the Forstater case) and not as final conclusion. Foran was likely trying to avoid prejudice towards one group (rightly so) and focus on the legal side only.

Ms. Asteriti was mentioned in a thread a while ago, too, about repealing the GRA:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5224792-5224792-wdi-uk-safeguarding-campaign-end-sex-falsification-repeal-gra

(first post, more towards the end)

nitter.poast.org/AlessandraAster

It is an avenue that can be pursued.

Charities receive public money, for example, through exemption from paying corporation tax, VAT rebates, and Gift Aid, so they must comply with responsibilities under the Charities Act and comply with regulations governed by the Charity Commission.

Stonewall hasn’t posted on X since last year, but I’m sure they are on other sites and any images of hate banners could be reported.

I wasn't sure where or even if to post this

www.gov.uk/government/news/places-of-worship-warned-by-regulator-over-inflammatory-and-divisive-language

I didn't know the Charity Commission could do this

The regulator engaged with the trustees, who were unable to explain how the posts furthered the charity’s purposes for the public benefit.

Has there been anything similar for all the charities that have hosted abusive if not downright violent talk aimed at people who don't follow trans dogma?

That's really good to hear, thanks for the report and for going along and representing!

I went to my first Let Women Speak event yesterday in Hyde Park. Not a large gathering but some good speakers and KJK was on form. Got to say hello to her and she was very nice. At one point we went to Speakers Corner where she got on a stool and had a good shout. That part I didn't enjoy as the place seemed to be crammed with religious extremists and the crowd was almost all angry men, but the police stayed close to us and they were friendly. All in all a good day.

This thread is worth reading as is the full decision that was published yesterday

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5299380-scientists-at-porton-down-dont-believe-in-biological-sex?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share

Interesting (well, to me anyway) snippet: Ben Cooper KC (he of Maya F's ET and EAT) appears to work out of the same Chambers (Old Square) as the legendary RMW. I can't imagine they are going out for coffee buddies, but who knows? The Inns of Court are very strange places.

Today at the tribunal, a woman declining to strip off in front of a man or to watch him stripping off is a hate incident. Noticing that he is male is confrontational.

Even if she scrupulously refers to him by his chosen name and uses his preferred pronouns. Mentioning that he is male, behind a closed door, to another woman who knows he is male, after he has harassed her, is a crime deserving maximum punitive response.

all good

To be very charitable, it's out of date. It's what people were saying around the time of the Carani fight. Headlines saying "Khelif isn't trans" always seemed to me to be massively missing the point: he never claimed to be trans, and neither did his critics say he was. But right now, the only honest response is that Khelif has refused to give proof of his sex.

Disappointing, I’ve not read it all but it seems very biased. I would agree Khelif isn’t really ‘trans’ - but he is male, albeit one of the rare people with DSDs who was misidentified at birth.

Snopes. I always thought this a decent, accurate fact-finding site. Maybe I was naive. But pretty disappointed to see this today (coincidentally, whilst looking for something else):

www.snopes.com/news/2024/08/05/imane-khelif-not-trans/

They didn't exactly bellow it from the rooftops.

Not forgetting the WI trying to convince people of the rightness of their arguments that are very (suspiciously) similar to the Hampstead Pond arguments. But it does seem the ice is cracking. Plus didn’t Labour say women are women (and therefore TW are not women)?

Honestly, I've had a few unrelated glasses of wine but I'm feeling pretty cheery about things right now even if the ridiculous Hampstead Ponds are still trying to let men into the women's pond.

a door was cracked open on the question of TW having male-pattern criminality, and on which sex can commit rape. I will be surprised if that isn't revisited.

It's been a helluva day.

I'm sorry Linzi Smith and Sandy Peggie have been dragged through stress and turmoil, but so grateful to them and all their supporters.

Or genitalia.

Someone tell her about amniocentesis 😂

If the police have to stop promoting Pride because it is political and indicates bias, does that ruling apply to other publicly funded institutions? Schools? Universities? Hospitals? Broadcasters?

oh, a woman who works in a senior (non medical) role in a hospital has claimed that 'No one knows what their chromosomes are.'

And that she can't tell what sex people are.

I have the impression that in the course of today: Sandy Peggie has been cleared of four charges laid by Fife; the police have been advised that they should not be involved in promoting Pride; Beth Upton has been repeatedly publicly described as 'he' and also as looking male; that it has been suggested that a DEI representative should represent everyone equally, not ally with any one group; and that the wrongness of attempting to police thought-crimes has been brought into the open.

Anything else?