Not women only shelters.....

[alwaysreadthelabel]

Sorry for the fail link but just read this and I find it unbelievable that people still don't see the issue with this. Words fail me.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6894599/When-man-called-Mark-locked-threatening-kill-mother-child.html

Inritatum

Your situation sounds awful. And I'm sure many women here relate to it. It's obviously not unheard-of for people who aren't women to suffer abuse at the hands of men.

I completely agree that provision needs to be made.

But when it leads to a domestic violence abuser gaming the system, well we all know the problem.

And I completely agree about Stonewall. Of course, they won't want to use their money to set up specific accommodation, that's not their raison d'etre (to actually help transwomen). But a lot of transwomen publicly pressuring them, will show up their agenda. ( i'm not suggesting this is you, I'm sure you have far too much on your plate).

My understanding is that a transwomen with a GRC can be legally excluded from both a men’s refuge and a women’s refuge. So they do suffer some prejudice and there’s not actually provision for them. Hence if Stonewall actually gave a shit about them (which they don’t) they would be campaigning for third space provision.

donajimena

"how well do you think that would go down with the TRAs? They don't want that. inritatum is a small voice of sensibility in a sea of TWAW."

Well, that was rather my point ... that those voices of common sense should maybe come together and start pressurising Stonewall for action to set up trans specific shelters. It would be for Stonewall to deal with the TRAs and explain why such services are necessary.

The problem is, that in Scotland at least, these organisations need to be trans inclusive to receive government (and probably other) funding.

This document probably played some part in bringing about the situation in Scotland.

www.scottishtrans.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/trans_domestic_abuse.pdf

Report based on an online survey of 60 trans people co-authored by James Morton.

Well, that was rather my point ... that those voices of common sense should maybe come together and start pressurising Stonewall for action to set up trans specific shelters. It would be for Stonewall to deal with the TRAs and explain why such services are necessary.

I so agree with this.

Women set up their shelters, using their front rooms and their own, unpaid time. Because they saw the desperate situation that other women were reduced to. It was done out of desperate compassion.

No one helped them, no government initiative existed.

Stonewall are appropriating women's decades-long work, their resources, and their narrative.

It can't be impossible. I understand that having one or two shelters in isolation across the country, although sufficient in terms of space, is unworkable in terms of geography.

So pick a percentage of the existing shelters, campaign for a trans wing, or a trans room. Do not suggest that men mingle with and socialise with traumatised women. Do not say that they are the same. Do not dismiss women's concerns.

Don't think there's nothing fucking wrong with a domestic violence abuser terrorising women in the only place on the planet where they should be safe.

Make Stonewall accountable.

. It would be for Stonewall to deal with the TRAs and explain why such services are necessary

Does nothing for their "victim" status campaign basis though does it.

I actually worry for these tras in a way. They have seen what they have done to lesbians. They have seen what they have done to all the old school trans people just trying to get on with their lives. Stonewall will throw you under a bus as soon as look at you and one day it will be their turn.

Who is it who will be picking up the pieces I wonder. Who will be there for all the sterile mutilated kids . Who will fight to finally get shelters and services set up to help all those screwed over.who will be looking after them. Wont be stone wall and all these men will it .

Sorry that was directed totally at Stonewall. No one else.

so basically I am stuck here in this god awful situation because of a lack of provision for trans people.

TRAs should be trying to get funding for new services for trans people. Instead they wish to colonize womens, with no thought at all for how the women would be affected.

Sorry to hear your life is like that at the moment. Hope things look up soon.

Datun

Exactly so ... I don't think any of us would object to Stonewall taking over the funding and management of at least one existing shelter in each region of the country so that it was made available exclusively for use by transitioners.

That way both transitioners and women and their children can be safe and supported in their own environments.

Great article.

Tells the story very well.

They can't be accused of exaggeration because they concentrated on this one person and laid out exactly what happened with them.

I'm guessing that they allow convicted paedophiles in to roam freely in women's domestic violence shelters as well? Where women and their children will be staying? Because "'even if they have a criminal record, if they are transitioning, they are not a risk any more because they are women now".

Or do they draw the line at giving paedophiles access to children? But will gladly allow abusers access to women?

How much money do Stonewall spread on promotion. How far would that go for services instead of totalitarianism?

Stonewall don't need to take over one shelter, they've got all of them.

And presumably they will NOT allow women who identify as men into women's domestic refuges?

Because they are men apparently. And therefore not allowed.

That excludes a whole section of biological women from services that were specifically set up to support them.

And how do they handle men who are gender-fluid? Presumably they can decide to shack up with the gals?

There are many women who would not leave their violent partner in the first place if they suspect that they will be made to share a refuge with men (women of faith for example). Better the devil you know maybe.

This has wide-ranging implications for women, some of whom will be effectively excluded from using provision for women as that provision now includes men.

I suspect that this charity has lost its way and has now grown too big and just focuses too much on business interests (£££££) and a very vocal minority group (oddly enough the groups that need the help don’t have much of a voice, eh?).

LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD

"I suspect that this charity has lost its way"

Indeed it has, since it now represents mostly heterosexual men who express autogynephilia.

We wouldn't exclude somebody from any of our existing services based on the fact that they were transgender.'

it wouldn't be because they're trans though would it, they should be excluded because they're male. Ffs.

TRAs should be trying to get funding for new services for trans people. Instead they wish to colonize womens, with no thought at all for how the women would be affected.

At about 18.25 on this clip, TRA Helen Belcher calls third spaces for transwomen 'segregation' and says transwomen don't want separate services because transwomen are women.

Exactly so ... I don't think any of us would object to Stonewall taking over the funding and management of at least one existing shelter in each region of the country so that it was made available exclusively for use by transitioners.

And it will stop the piss takers. If you are an a abuser, there is no fun in rattling around the shelter by yourself.

Because, frankly, I do think there will be hardly any need for them. (The above trans poster notwithstanding.)

I suspect there is an agenda to remove the threat posed by all of the independent grass roots organisations. That can be done by controlling their funding and changing their focus.

At about 18.25 on this clip, TRA Helen Belcher calls third spaces for transwomen 'segregation' and says transwomen don't want separate services because transwomen are women.

I suspect there is an agenda to remove the threat posed by all of the independent grass roots organisations. That can be done by controlling their funding and changing their focus.

I agree. However, it is self-defeating on the part of the state because new independent grassroots' organisations would replace them since the social gaps those organisations originally aimed to fill would still be there.

I was just about to say that. You don't end grassroots organisations for women by targeting grassroots organisations for women.

Because, frankly, I do think there will be hardly any need for them. (The above trans poster notwithstanding.)

Have a look at the Scottish trans domestic abuse report. It's ... interesting. Particularly if you've read the trans widows thread.

www.scottishtrans.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/trans_domestic_abuse.pdf

At about 18.25 on this clip, TRA Helen Belcher calls third spaces for transwomen 'segregation' and says transwomen don't want separate services because transwomen are women.

Which shows it's all about validation.

Absolutely to hands being tied by funding criteria. This has been imposed from the top down.

Inrit I hope you're posting on the relationships board and getting support there, there are many women who have been through what you're enduring and know the system.

However you're under the bus with the rest of us, because you're not hammering home that TWAW. Therefore the AWA don't care about you any more than the women in the shelter, because the central cause is about men dominating women's spaces, that's the victory point, not achieving the best way to help people in real and actual need.

There are multiple third ways as there are in all these AWA situations: trans specific refuges and shelters, the govt are hurling money and funding, this would be so easy to do. (If the organisations getting the money weren't focused as you say on erasing women and sterilising children and to hell with anyone not seeking that glorious day). Or to designate a population proportionate set number of male and female refuges as trans inclusive and give women and trans people the choice of single sex or mixed sex provision. Or to create separate units within one provision. It's not at all unsolvable, if the focus is the need and not the political take over of women.

Well this will be resolved soon enough when women realise they can just say their son is their daughter - no proof needed. I would hope most women needing a refuge would understand why this isn't okay

In all honesty, why isn't this ok? Why should women be respectful and generous and be the grown ups when zero respect and generosity or even basic human decency is being shown to them? Women aren't bloody masochists. If AWAs are gaming the system to their advantage why the fuck shouldn't women game the system to their advantage too?