Why are the WI now policing thoughts?

[Marmaladelover]

I posted about this on the feminism board but I am posting here because I think members of the WI who are not on that board need to be aware of what is going on

Last December the WI finally agreed somewhat reluctantly did to the court ruling to not allow transwomen (men) to be members. That said people were appalled at their statement saying the WI believed “Transwomen are women”, this was shown by the threads and polls on here at the time.

The WI have just written and published the updated Equality, Diversity and Inclusion policy
which now states that

• Transwomen are women
• The WI offers support and fellowship to Transwomen
• That transwomen enrich the WI
• That all members must accept these values
• That all speakers must accept these values.

Link to policy https://mywi.thewi.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/720327/NFWI-Equality-Diversity-and-Inclusion-Policy-April-2026.pdf

Moreover they have issued a new form that every member must sign in order to remain a member . (Photo of this attached when approved by mumsnet ) This says the member agrees with all policies including this one . Failure to sign the form means you can no longer be a member.

I really hope the press pick up on this post. If you are a member of a WI then please draw attention to this to your other members.

Even members of political parties and churches do not have to say they agree with every teaching or manifesto to be a member.

I thought the WI had come to its senses and albeit reluctantly were going to follow the law. This is a new low for them. I am not being unreasonable am I ?

Their stance is bonkers
centring men - what a shit show

That’s a fascinating example of cult think. It’s so obviously unreasonable. It’s reminiscent of attempts to root out heresy. I think Elizabeth 1 said something about not policing people’s thoughts.

If I was a member (a) I would already have left based on their original statements (b) based on this one I would now leave. Actually I’d be forced to as I couldn’t sign up to this policy.

It begs the question - what is the alternative WI that people can decamp to?

It's crap, but it's not "coercive control" (and I think it's a bit insulting to people in actual abusive relationships to use that phrase). Membership organisations can set their own rules, insist that their members adhere to their values etc. Nobody is "coerced" into being a member of the WI, and if members don't like the direction it's taking, they can leave. The same with religions, and anything else that isn't mandatory - if you don't like their rules, you don't have to be part of it.

@ElizabethsTailor

https://nwr.org.uk/

^ Female membership organisation

It's not coercive control FFS.

Every organisation has a code of conduct and policies you agree to when you sign up. Even MN does!

We might not agree with those policies, but that doesn't mean it's coercive control.

YABU no way is this "coercive control" or anything remotely approaching it.

That's the law according to Stonewall, GLP, Robin White etc

The actual law says something else

It isn’t coercive control. If you don’t like it, leave or don’t sign up and I say that as a gender critical woman.

• enrich the WI
• That all members must accept these values
• That all speakers must accept these values.

Can you do that?
Are they values or rules or what - not sure it’s quite legal.
Does it have charitable status?
Dodgy I think.

You have no idea what coercive control is. This is at best insensitive and at worst offensive and upsetting to those that have suffered. Please get this removed OP. @Marmaladelover

Make your point (which is also offensive) but not using this language.

Its shocking but dont minimise actual coercive control by equating it to this.

I agree with you it’s not coercive control, but what else in the OPs message do you find offensive?

They would have to change their whole policy regarding the charity. Their charitable status relies on it being a female only group. If they want to change that they can and they can set any 'rules' they like. But it would have to be a huge change and there is no guarantee that they would retain charitable status.

I think they would have to dissolve the WI and reapply as a mixed sex group but even then I don't know how they would be able to exclude other men without it being discriminatory.

I got deleted for saying they should set up an alternative one. Those that disagree. What's wrong with that? Let's see if this one stays up?

Treasurer for WI group 8 years, President for 1. Latest subscription £54.00 keep less than half. We are resigning en masse from the WI in September and setting up our own Women's Group. Sub £30 covers hire of hall and everything else we need.
Intelligent, capable women do not need an organisation with an expensive London HQ and 70 regional offices to tell them how to behave.

It's insulting to women who have experienced coercive control to compare your experience to theirs.

Hmm well it is on the edge of coercion, some women may be very reliant on the WI for their social group and friendships. Some women have controlling husbands who don’t like them going out socially but accept the WI as it used to be women only. Social pressure can be really difficult to stand up to for some people.
Of course the women do have a choice, so it isn’t the same as being trapped in a controlling relationship, but the dictatorial aspect of it is quite bullying in itself. The WI must realise that many, many women do not believe that some nebulous idea of “identity” trumps sex, yet they are enforcing this as an entrenched belief of its members.

I left the WI over this and will never return. I was the president of my local branch for a time but this is the polar opposite of empowering women. I will not allow my name to be attached to this nonsense and I said as much in my (unnecessary but pointed) resignation letter to NFWI.

I think you are overstating it.

The policy you linked to doesn’t say “That all members must accept these values” (though it does basically say that about speakers).

The signing wording isn’t that either. “Acknowledge and agree to follow all policies” must surely refer to the requirements in the policies and these relate to WIs and federations only (ie not “members”). They also explicitly recognise diversity of belief.

The WI has acted terribly on this topic, but this isn’t quite what you are making it out to be.

I am so sorry people have rightly drawn attention to my very poor wording in the title of my post . I have reported it and asked mumsnet towers to change it .
it’s an important topic and I don’t want people to be distracted by my poor choice of wording . I am really really sorry for offending anyone ! .

I always thought the WI evolved past making jam into a place where women could be safe, learn together, grow together, educate and empower each other.
Because it was needed in a man's world.

Perhaps it's time to move on.

“We expect all those who engage in the WI movement to uphold the same values.”
good enough for you ?