Self-excluding because of 'inclusive' language? Let's get some data.

[ThirteenPicnicBaskets]

Inspired in part by the Scottish self-exclusion survey (now finished) and anecdotal evidence from women about their experience with 'women's' activities and events, I decided to collect some data.

Survey link:

docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeWae3l4Pu9EPxEcQJhJtZsYhaV0LE-7j00ijL1eYgukNRY9Q/viewform?fbclid=IwAR27tHn26lT5CcO47opVYDHpoSrVpX-wdvSTf3x7EMpAK6I-TF2fMU8CDnI

I'm trying to understand how inclusive / social-justice inspired event descriptions appeal to women (or otherwise). If an event is meant for women, are we more or less likely to go if it's advertised as 'for femme-identified people' or 'womxn'? Conversely, if you're a woman looking for an event or course specifically for women, what language /would/ appeal to you?

The survey is anonymous and I can't identify your contributions individually - although please don't input any data that might identify you. Keep safe, and all that.

Will be closing the survey at the end of May so we have a bit of time to reach quite a lot of women. I plan to make the outputs freely available so those involved in event organising, etc, have some statistics to go on in making decisions.

Usual caveats, it's self-selecting and therefore shouldn't be taken as revealed truth or particularly scientific, however I think it could be useful all the same.

Please feel free to share around the place.

Special thank you to the women who gave me advice and help in developing this. I'm not an academic or pro researcher and it is greatly appreciated.

Done.

Bump

Thanks for this, I've done it, but it's really brought home to me how far the language of inclusion has really made women like me feel excluded! I'd think very hard before going to any event advertised as being for "self-identifying women" or "women, trans women, and non-binary folk" because I'd assume that I, as a GC radfem, would be about as welcome as a fart in a space suit. The language is supposed to be all lovely and inclusive and fuzzy, but to me it has an undercurrent of hostility which may or may not be intended.

Done
Bitchy I'm another one who finds the "identifying as" stuff totally irritating nonsense too. You also can't identify as female because that is biological sex.

I'd assume that I, as a GC radfem, would be about as welcome as a fart in a space suit
Ha!
And yes, it's true. I feel like I can't go to any of the social spaces I would have like to in the past because this is all the language nowadays. I live in a hyper-woke city. It's bollocks.

Bumping this...

Done

Up again

done

Done. Interesting how entirely excluded and unwelcome this inclusive language makes me feel. Even the preferred pronoun nonsense makes me want to run for the hills. Forcing me to use someone else's terminology - someone who invariably has more power and influence than I have - feels like an act of servitude.

I don’t go to stuff advertised with all the woke language. Except for one workshop on a topic I’m interested in which was all over the shop with its use of the word gender in its advertising. That was because I’d been to other such workshops at the same venue I was pretty sure it would be made up of mostly middle aged women like me. And it was! Was prepared to leave if anyone had asked about pronouns....(I also knew the venue had mixed sex toilets but female toilets too).
Stopped going to a particular theatre cos of mixed sex toilets.

There are some really insightful responses raising a lot of points I hadn’t considered. Since I bet a lot of them originate from here, thank you. :)

If anyone’s a tweeter and wouldn’t mind giving it a quick share, would be appreciated too.

Bump.

Hello again!

I would like to offer you the results of the survey.

Please feel free to use as you wish - and if you're interested in doing any further analysis on the raw data, please PM me. I don't think there's anything in there that would positively ID individuals but better safe than sorry.

Results - .docx file, 55kb

(Yes, I know the early 2000s want their formatting back. I'm not a pro researcher or creator of beautiful documents. Hopefully the outputs speak for themselves)

I am very grateful to all the women who contributed - in particular, appreciate the time you took in expanding on your answers. I didn't put every response in the pack but I did read them all. Some were hilarious ('mumtrepreneurs' events? Cringing) and some were upsetting/infuriating, but I couldn't have asked for a more insightful and informed collection of responses. Thank you all.

(the formatting has gone more haywire than I thought; may be better off downloading the file rather than trying to view it as a google-doc, so you aren't left wanting to claw out your eyes. Sorry!)

Wow, what useful work! And the formatting was fine for me.

Sure, it's not a representative sample, but it certainly highlights that no one else has even started to ask women what we think about these issues.

I didn't see the survey when it was open, but just the other day decided not to go to an event because though at first glance it was for women, it turned out to be for anyone except 'cis men'. And men who don't admit they're men and take responsibility for their behaviour as men are in my experience some of the ones to trust least.

Thank you!

THanks