A call to all wims to challenge registered charities who claim to be women’s services who include “transwomen”

I agree all survivors should be able to access support. But most perpetrators are male, and victims female. Nowadays much of the abuse support for survivors of domestic and sexual abuse is group based, for financial reasons. And just one male in a group affects many women.

So it's fine for providers to help both male and female victims, but they need to protect female only groups- the examples of services on page 1 of this thread don't. And this has been allowed by funders eg local councils and police (trained by transactivists).

So although most victims are female, and groups will often be female only by accident to reflect that, female victims don't know if the group they are allocated to will be one of the few including a man (who says he's a woman) so women for whom it matters- many survivors of male abuse- have to self exclude if they are too traumatised to take the risk.

This is easily solveable. Female only groups and mixed sex groups, with clear info on referral and websites etc and female survivors given a choice (not lying a group is female only when actually it's mixed sex). And male only groups if there's a need .

Okay, finally caught up with the thread.

But if Councils in particularly are telling Women's groups they have to be inclusive of men then the Councils are surely breaching the Equality Act? Transwomen is not a thing in the Equality Act it's Gender Reassignment. As stated by one of the Judges in an early court case of For Women Scotland (I heard this on the Inciteful Sisters podcast I was listening to yesterday with Susan Smith). So Councils are saying in order to get funding and meet our Equality Duties you have to include this group of men who are not in the Equality Act. It's unlawful. Maybe women responding to their councils about the Sumpreme Court Judgment can ask about funding rules and if they too are SCJ compliant? I think we know they will not be.

Still would like your thoughts on Women's Day Derby.

Here is a link.
womensdayderby.wordpress.com/

I know of funders that support single sex work for women and girls. Volant and Women’s Fund for Scotland.

I think Rosa UK might as well.

This is a good point and I'm not at the end of the thread yet so this may have been said already. So the funders are forcing women only charities to say they are inclusive of men to get funding. This goes against their charitable objectives so another prong is to see which institutions are effectively forcing women's groups to go against there own objectives. Is it councils? We know nearly half of councils have done nothing to implement the Supreme Court ruling. Their funding policies need to be called out in parallel to this fantastic project.

Also what about community led things that are not charities. So in the East Midlands Derby Women's Day runs the inclusive International Women's Day Derby. You can't get a stall unless you say you are inclusive and agree to their constitution (not available online in 2026), but in 2023 this only talked about women and girls in it's aims and objectives, though did say self identifying women could be a trustee.

But it is not a charity, so what to do! It's so dishonest and exclusionary!

Ooo good news. Single sex services here we come 😀

Hello wims

I won't reveal all but just to say I have some early evidence that the campaign of this thread is starting to work.

Keep going!

Kevin appears to be extremely virtue signalling.
Someof the replies are priceless! Genocide? What an insult to the victims of real genocides- how that word is bandied around. Disgusting

What is it with these people who are so determined that women will not have anything for ourselves? What is their reasoning?? There are plenty of services and organisations that specifically assist men, without them inveigling themselves into ours.
It isn't necessary, right, just or safe. Of course, alternative services do not give that validation. Tyler Porter has illustrated just what it is and it isn't nice.

Ok so in summary he is a man on a mission to prevent women from having single sex spaces because he sees their existence as an attack on men.

We used to have a term for people like that...

That post has 6 likes. One from a charities’ governance advisor (??) and disappointed to see another is from someone working for UK Child Poverty. Surely there are enough material issues for them to deal with?

Kevin has explained more. I wish I had the confidence to try and speak to him off the record.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/kevin-taylor-mcknight-he-they-2313262_thirdsectoragainsttransphobia-activity-7434511645206290432-5taz?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&rcm=ACoAAAFSXe4BoYpKzzss48JLiWn7lsoyZydj2bg

Add to this, there are over 300 charities supporting LGBTQ++++ people many of which are dedicated solely to trans people (and frankly to TW because TM seldom get a look in). Some of these charities have been insanely well resourced, to a point that would boggle the minds of women working on VAWG. Any and all of these charities could set up refuges for TW. Any of them. They don’t have to break the law. They don’t have to terrorise vulnerable women. They could design their refuges exactly as they need them. The only reason to go after women’s charities is validation and that doesn’t stack up well against the much greater needs of women and girls.

@sarahd89your Nigel, and everyone else’s Nigels, have access to so much. Why would they choose to damage others when they could take positive action to help themselves and their community?

This is sheer nonsense. Women's services are no more for men than blind people's services are for fully-sighted people. It's only different because men greedily and selfishly demand something that doesn't belong to them for validation at best, as though women are nothing but service units and men have to get their whims don't they? I imagine the concepts of ownership and boundaries are easy to understand in other circumstances - you wouldn't help yourself to your neighbour's car and you wouldn't barge through a door marked 'staff only' if you didn't work there. This is no different and traumatised and abused women are not validation tools for any special man who rocks up to exploit them.

East London Women’s Project is also run by St Mungo’s. St Mungo’s management permits Mr Addis to visit their women’s refuge, despite the fact that they are aware of his conviction for abusing his female intimate partner. Female residents say Mr Addis has caused the women at the shelter “alarm and distress” due to his aggressive displays of “shouting, crying, threatening violence” in the presence of the “frightened, vulnerable women.” The women say that their multiple complaints to shelter staff have been ignored, and Mr Addis is able to visit daily, meet with his support worker on site, and attend the shelter’s social events.

https://www.womenarehuman.com/womens-refuge-allows-male-transgender-who-threatened-to-kill-his-female-partner/

I'm not sure you understand how refuges work. There's are risk assessment for everyone for example imagine if a woman's abusive partner has followed her and could put others at risk. And most of the housing is self contained like small studio flats with private entrances. How many incidents of trans women creating issues for women can you report, with evidence? The real issue it that we are now at a stage where over 45% of women who need a refuge can't access one because there are no spaces enough (I think this is women's aid data). Not to mention migrant women with no recourse to public funds who find it basically impossible. To me this doesn't sounds like the effort we as women should put our energy in.

It is terrifying to think of men allowed into women's refuges simply because they claim to be women. I visited a women's refuge years back and whilst there the husband of one of the women started trying to batter the door down to get at her - luckily it held until the police arrived. These days, such a man could get in by saying he was an abused woman - unless we strongly defend women only spaces.

I missed these;

This is a coordinated campaign to remove trans women from support services entirely.

No, it's to remove MALES from FEMALE support services entirely. Because they have absolutely no business being there, as they are male. They have male support services.

Trans women face disproportionately high rates of domestic abuse and sexual violence.

This is absolutely false. There is no evidence of this. And as males, they can fight off their attackers. Females cannot. In fact, data proves that transwomen sexually offend 5 times higher than other males.

Where exactly should they go?

Male facilities. Isn't that obvious? Or gender neutral. But not ever in womens spaces. And regardless of where they go, male on male violence is NOT womens problem to solve. Women are NOT human shields for the male sex. You don't put the fox in the hen house because other foxes picked on him. Transwomen should have been fighting for THIRD SPACES like we all suggest a DECADE AGO, instead of being too lazy to and just colonising ours. Why can't they get off their arses and fight for their own spaces, like they should have done, instead of expecting the 'wimmin' to do all the work and take responsibility? Why do you think that it is women's responsibility to come up with a solution to male on male violence? I'd love you to answer that.

The below is what happens when males are placed in womens shelters:

Transwomen are male. Males with penis and testicles. They have no place in a woman's shelter. There are men's shelters they can go to. A woman is beaten by her husband and abused, and she runs into a fully intact male at a womens shelter. HOW do you think she will cope with that, being traumatised? Surely common sense has to come into play here! A battered womens shelter should of course, exclude males. I would think any decent person would understand why. It's obvious why. It really should not need to be explained.

the framing that any inclusion of trans women is automatically fraudulent, that there's no possible reading of "women's services" that could include them in good faith.

It is automatically fraudulent if it's a female only space. They're a male. So by automatic default they are excluded.

But from where I sit, my daughter didn't start it either. She just exists.

If your 'daughter' is male, they 'ExIsTs' as a male. Not a female or woman.

If the goal is ensuring trans women have nowhere to turn

They do. Male spaces. Or third spaces. It's really that simple.

Trans women face disproportionately high rates of domestic abuse and sexual violence.
No, they do not. That is an absolute lie.

Where exactly should they go?
Back to the men's spaces where they belong. Male on male violence is for men to sort out, not women.