For those critical or curious about Tran Agenda

[MercyMyJewels]

Please watch this. It's long, but compelling, Mary-Lou Singleton in particular is brilliant

www.heritage.org/marriage-and-family/event/biology-isnt-bigotry-why-sex-matters-the-age-gender-identity

Just watched the whole thing, agreed, it was fab. And such a breathe of fresh air to hear women speaking without interruption, without being shouted down. I've seen Miriam Ben Shalom before, think she did a video proclaiming to be PERF, nor TERF. She's fab too. And Kaeley Haver was also great, really liked what she had to say.

I'm off to google them all & see what else I can find out about their work on this. Thanks for posting. Well worth the watch.

I've also watched the whole video and agree with Plectrum, I kept expecting for the women to be interrupted and shouted down.

Thanks for sharing.

Maria Miller should watch this.

It's the best thing I've seen on this subject. And you are right - women being allowed to speak, even when as they acknowledged, they are far from allies in the political sense.

Well done to the Heritage Foundation. Isn't it bitter irony that a conservative forum is giving women the means to discuss an issue that the Left no-platform?

Harriet Harman too

This is them: Hands Across The Aisle. It is an excellent video.

I'm really pleased about this coalition because so often I have read 'you sound just like a right-wing christian' in response to a feminist posting something gender critical. This coalition is saying yes, women on the right and the left agree on this, and think it's important enough to come together to campaign, even while we completely disagree on other issues. It takes the wind out of the sails of those 'you sound like ...' arguments.

It is so heartening to hear women's voices without interruption. I've been watching some of the videos from last year's Thinking Differently conference in London and I thought the same while watching them.

I'm halfway through that video. I just realised something. One of the women read out a case which said you can't claim sex discrimination if you are fired for breastfeeding at work, because men breastfeed too so it's not discriminatory.

Is this the logical conclusion to gender trumping sex? Sex discrimination doesn't exist any more? It is, isn't it?

Plus the redefining of the bathroom law to say 'you can look but don't touch'! Ugh. I was worried about voyeurism being allowed through the back door, I didn't realise they could actually make it completely legal.

Is this the logical conclusion to gender trumping sex? Sex discrimination doesn't exist any more? It is, isn't it

Yes. Exactly this.

This was so good.

The comments about sports rang true with me. It pisses me off so so so much.

Women's sport is so far behind men's sport. In recognition, in funding, in interest, in respect, in media reports. So far behind.

In cross country running events, I observe the spectators reactions to the boys races, and to the girls races. Girls - polite applause as the girls run past, occasional shouts of "well run" etc. Boys - jumping and shouting and cheering "GO ON LAD"and crucially - helpful fucking tips yelled out! "Lean forward" "open out your legs" "work your arms" "you are at x distance, in y minutes". Every. Single. Time. The boys races are taken more seriously. No doubt about it.

Running as a lone woman I get comments, cat calls, harassment, car beeps, groups of men running alongside me, laughing. I get scared. I feel shame for my "fat arse". I feel stupid for thinking I can run. It makes me not want to do it. But I need to run several times a week to train. I can't only run when I am feeling brave, or when someone is available to run with me, or when it is light outside. I wouldn't get my training in.

As a teenage girl, I found competing in sporting events awful. It is hard work. It is embarrassing. It is uncomfortable. I worked as hard as the boys, but was taken so much less seriously. It isn't 'cool' to like sports as a girl. Hell, it isn't 'cool' to like sports as a woman in my social group. I was told it was boring to watch. I was boring for doing it. I looked stupid/awkward/fat. People laughed loudly at me. I was told I don't look like a runner. I was too fat to be good at sport.

Anyway - all these things. And then the showers, and periods, and breasts, and the outfits, and the comments about my body, and the doubts about my ability, and the creepy teachers and coaches and other people's dads...

It is hard to play sports as a girl and woman.

And then on top of this...
On top of all of this...
They want males to compete against us.
And they call it "fair".

It makes me angrier than almost anything else in the whole debate. I feel passionate about safe spaces, protecting women generally, transing of children, gay eugenics etc btw, but for whatever reason the sports side of the issue, although not life threatening in a way some other trans issues are, I find triggers absolute rage in me.

The thought that boys and men can claim scholarships for women, take women's medals and podium places, take women's dignity ffs.

And then call it fair. Makes me rage. And weep.

God, I feel for you elusive.

And, along with so much else, I think sport will absolutely get people up in arms. People, parents spend vast amounts of money on their children to pursue a sport. I can't see them taking it lying down, when a man pips their daughter to the post.

It's yet another consequence to the ideology that people aren't currently fully aware of.

One of the women read out a case which said you can't claim sex discrimination if you are fired for breastfeeding at work, because men breastfeed too so it's not discriminatory

Under UK law you would not be claiming sex discrimination at the moment if you were fired for breastfeeding.

You would not be fired for breastfeeding- you would be fired if you spent so long breastfeeding or expressing that you weren't actually doing your work.

This is the current UK law on breastfeeding in the workplace. There is no reason why this would not continue apply to any breastfeeding person.

Working Families | Returning to work while breastfeeding – a guide to the law
www.workingfamilies.org.uk/articles/returning-to-work-while-breastfeeding-a-guide-to-the-law/

I guess one thing to remember is that workers have little protection in the US, so being in a protected group becomes massively more important. I live in Canada which is a bit of a half way house and here it seems that if you are mistreated at work and you can't use your contract to argue against it you really have to look at Human Rights legislation for protection. You can't just argue that you've been treated really badly as you might be able to with an Employment Tribunal.

I haven't watched yet but intend to. Just a comment for what it's worth, the Heritage Foundation is a vile ultra conservative anti-LGB (and now T) think tank, which has influenced American policy to the detriment of gay and lesbian people since Reagan.

I'm not saying that takes away from the points made in the video or the importance of people hearing it. But if anyone is going to share it or point people in its direction, I just would want them to be aware of the fact that association /agreement with the Heritage Foundation will inevitably fuel accusations of right wing bigotry.

I really wish the progressives would wake the fuck up about this issue.

Lass your own link very clearly states that to treat someone less well due to breastfeeding would give rise to a complaint of sex discrimination. The point that was made was about sex as a protected characteristic, and that conflating sex and gender will impact on this.

222

They actually make a joke about their political positions being on the opposite side. But coming together over this one issue.

Lass

If you are dismissed or treated less well because you are breastfeeding you may have a claim for sex discrimination.

I'm trying to get my head around this. From a legal viewpoint, if someone wanted to claim they are being discriminatedagainst on account of their sex, could that be opposed by saying men (legal, not biological) breastfeed too, therefore you can't use your sex as a reason?

Lass as a lawyer, can you think of any instances where this is going to cause trouble?

222, feminists and conservatives are making a conscious choice to campaign together on this issue while acknowledging they disagree fundamentally in many other areas:

On the subject of whether a woman is an adult human female, feminists have been made thoroughly unwelcome on the left. So if liberals think it’s very strange for feminists to work with conservatives, they should probably stop telling us to “drink bleach” or looking the other way as online mobs demand that we be fired. (from here)

I think it's a powerful stance to take - it's saying this issue is so important it's worth putting aside differences for, and it pre-empts those accusations of right-wing bigotry.

Critical Sisters has been formed to campaign from a left wing standpoint for exactly the reasons you mention 222. It's early days, but you can follow them on Twitter I think.

Pencil

Thanks for posting that, it's very powerful

222

I am aware of what the Heritage Foundation is. What you need to ask is why left wing women agreed to be on their platform. The answer is: because no left wing body will allow discussion of this issue. Please watch the video and read Pencil's link.

I was a bit at first about an alliance with Christian conservatives but that was a terrific panel. It was interesting that Miriam Ben Shalom (shero) said that working together they were finding other areas of common ground. I think there is great opportunity for consciousness raising among conservative women through initiatives like this.

The Christian Right may as well wear T shirts saying "Better Trans than Gay"

Caveat. I haven't watched the video yet, I may have to come back and eat my words.

Please do Bertrand I would be interested in your thoughts

Fair enough, I know there's been a conscious alliance made there, and having now watched the video (it was an excellent panel) I saw the friendly and passing reference to the unlikelihood of some of the speakers appearing at the Heritage Foundation and the fact that it might not be too comfortable for them.

As I said in the first place, it doesn't negate the points panelists made or the importance of those point being heard. But there was no mention in the OP of what the Heritage Foundation actually is, and I (maybe mistakenly) thought that the average UK based MNer might not be aware of just how well known their extreme views and their tremendous influence on policy have been in the US over the last 40 years. As well as pushing draconian cutbacks of social welfare, they actively promote a "behaviour based" approach to AIDS prevention, advocating that the US takes its "lessons from Uganda"), and were the main opposing political voice in the fight over Marriage Equality (arguing to the Supreme Court that gay and lesbians getting married would kill 900,000 babies. The position papers drafted by the Heritage Foundation have already been and will continue to be the basis of executive and legislative assaults on women's rights and women's health the Trump years: including the reintroduction of the 'global gag rule' prohibiting AIDS prevention funding from going to clinics around the World which so much as offer advice or referral on abortion in unrelated service departments; the total defunding of Planned Parenthood; the removal of protections for women in accessing health care related to contraception and abortion.

They're not just from the other side of the aisle, they are extreme in their views and dangerous in their influence. I am not trying to undermine the video - I agree with earlier posters that it's fantastic to hear these positions put forward so articulately, without the women being shouted down by transactivists or having to capitulate to the delicate sensibilities of LibFems to remain on the platform. But I will be conscious of the nature of the likely backlash should I choose to share the video or direct people to it, I'll be ready to make the argument for why it's worth watching anyway, and I thought that others might wish to be aware of this too. Maybe I misjudged the situation and it's as well known in the UK as in the US that 'Heritage Foundation' is shorthand for anti-feminist, anti-gay. The transactivists will LOVE pointing out that "TERFs" are linking to the Heritage Foundation page, they will take the view that it proves their point that we're just bigots, and many many people who might otherwise take on board the issues raised in the video, won't get past seeing the source before they make up their mind about the terrible transphobia of whomever is sharing it. I'm not saying that's a reason not to share the video, but surely it's better to be aware of it than not.