Karen Ingala Smith in Parliament now on single sex refuges

[Anlaf]

She's excellent, as i think is Jess Philips. Karen's talking v movingly of the challenges in offering women only refuge services, the two boroughs where her organisation has had pushback already for not being inclusive enough, and in assessing male-born people for risk in accessing female services

Watch live:

parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/0d07ff13-636e-4b51-a946-2877e583dc4c

Lots of handwaving from one Maria Miller

Which clearly shows us Kittens that we need to complain complain and complain again, making sure it's recorded every time.

Seriously? Seriously? It is a fucking fetish. Sex toys on public transport. No mind to who else might be able to see? Pathetic

I know, right? Can’t comprehend that looking at dildos is inappropriate in a public space but is charged with speaking on a parliamentary panel about the safeguarding of women and children from sexual violence. Yeah that seems like a total legit choice.

Which clearly shows us Kittens that we need to complain complain and complain again, making sure it's recorded every time.

I hear you but how do vulnerable women, who may be at risk of losing vital assistance not just for them but for their children, if they speak out, do that?

My frustration is that we cannot expect those women to further expose themselves to potential harm, just so we have evidence of harm.

It's outrageous that women who are victims of male violence should have to explain why they want a women's space to be women-only. Maria Miller is basically expecting service users to justify the very existence of women's refuges. They shouldn't have to do that.

During the discussion about complaints, James said it wasn't uncommon for women in their refuge to fall out and said something about women arguing who has had the worst abuse. What a bizarre and inappropriate comment from a refuge volunteer!

During the discussion about complaints, James said it wasn't uncommon for women in their refuge to fall out and said something about women arguing who has had the worst abuse. What a bizarre and inappropriate comment from a refuge volunteer!

There was a lot that was wrong with James' comments about those who have need to access the Cornish Project.

James was not representing the needs of the women (adult human females) who use the service.

When the transcript is released more issues will become very clear.

That was so frustrating to listen to. I thought Janet McDermott was dreadful and was rightfully taken to task by Sarah Champion.

All this rubbish about what definition of woman is and waffle about presentation, I was already having the kind of day where I just want to let rip with a stream of expletives and rail incoherently and this has not helped.

On Diana James’ Twitter there is a complaint that when traveling to the panel, GWR’s wifi wouldn't let them access a sex toy site.

Apparently it’s “not good enough” that GWR “shames” people for looking at strap-ons in public by not letting them.

Show of hands all those women that have browsed for a new Vibrator on the bus?

Anybody? Anybody?

twitter.com/dianalouisej/status/1131224684320743425

Love Andy from GWR's "played with a totally straight bat, left elbow well up" response, though!

Handy hint for Diana (given that the watchers will no doubt be watching and reporting back): if you're in a public place where someone's four year old can peer over the seat back and see your screen (which four year olds tend to do) then no, looking at porn-related stuff isn't appropriate. That's not "porn shaming", that's having appropriate boundaries and thinking about safeguarding children.

If James said that, that's a huge issue in terms of letting service users down. Absolute disgrace.

That's not "porn shaming", that's having appropriate boundaries

Amen.

However most of this is a toddler stage lash out against any boundaries, at all, ever. No one ever saying no, about anything. Any boundary creates a tantrum, no one else is allowed to have any need or justification for a boundary.

#antisocialpersonalitydisorder #clusterbpersonalities #narcissim #transisnotamentaldisorderandIjustcamedowntheTrentonabreadboard

During the discussion about complaints, James said it wasn't uncommon for women in their refuge to fall out and said something about women arguing who has had the worst abuse. What a bizarre and inappropriate comment from a refuge volunteer!

It's projection again, isn't it? When your whole life is built around playing oppression top trumps when in fact you were born with a winning hand (white, male-bodied, middle class, born into a wealthy nation), the idea that there's genuine oppression out there - women having the shit beaten out of them simply for being women, people from ethnic minorities having the shit beaten out of them simply because of their race - kind of passes you by.

You presume that when they talk about what they've suffered, they're playing oppression top trumps as well, rather than having been genuinely oppressed in the true meaning of the word. So you project your idea that it's all a game onto them.

However most of this is a toddler stage lash out against any boundaries, at all, ever. No one ever saying no, about anything. Any boundary creates a tantrum, no one else is allowed to have any need or justification for a boundary.

Yes, this.

But also I think the tweet is a message to GC women. James must have known that this debate would drive some GC women to check out their twitter.

If you were that desperate to peruse butt plugs on the train then you would have just switched to mobile data. Somebody wants women to know that they can scatterspunk their sexual prédilections where ever and when ever they like. The faux complaint about shaming is nothing but obfuscation and reframing because anything else would be to obvious as a sexual dominance display.

What is it about public transport that leads so many of these 'advisers' to the government to think it's OK to view sex sites or act out inappropriate behaviour with no thought to the impact on nearby children or members of the public?
Grim

I am confused by Sarah Champion. I previously thought she had come out as the TWAW crowd, but I thought she said there that she's heard organisations "across the country" saying there are issues/they need guidance? (I think that's what she said).

Plus her having no truck whatsoever with Janet's "we haven't got round to finishing our draft of EA guidance in 9 years".

Has she recently switched on to the issues?

What is it about public transport that leads so many of these 'advisers' to the government to think it's OK to view sex sites or act out inappropriate behaviour with no thought to the impact on nearby children or members of the public?

As the point that Karen Ingala Smith made at the end, there is no credible evidence to demonstrate that male-pattern behaviours are affected by assumed gender identities.

So flashing, bowsing porn on public transport, voyeurism, rape, etc

I found this very interesting (but the player thing very annoying: couldn’t listen in background and forgot my place every time I used the browser for something else).

Andy from GWR is a star, short sharp and to the point.

James can take their fetishism elsewhere GWR has standards and cares about safeguarding even if James doesn't.

Thank you GWR.

The serious question here surely is why does a man want to volunteer to have access to vulnerable women?

I wonder, Jacky. [Scratches chin thoughtfully.] Nope, no idea at all. Drawing a complete blank here.

Proposed US legislation which Diana James (witness at today's meeting about Women's services) thinks,

"This will lead to the deaths of trans folk, this is not an exaggeration or hyperbole, our brothers & sisters will die, and this seems to be the aim, not a by product of disinterest or the collateral damage of legislation but pure deliberate murder."

twitter.com/dianalouisej/status/1131283713231413248

from embedded link:
"Abstract:
This proposed rule provides that grant recipients, subrecipients, owners, operators, managers, and providers (Shelter Providers) under HUD programs which permit single-sex or sex-segregated facilities (such as bathrooms or temporary, emergency shelters and other buildings and facilities with physical limitations or configurations that require and are permitted to have shared sleeping quarters or bathing facilities) may establish a policy, consistent with state and local law, by which such Shelter Provider considers an individual’s sex for the purposes of determining accommodation within such shelters and for purposes of determining sex for admission to any facility or portion thereof. The proposed rule permits Shelter Providers to consider a range of factors in making such determinations, including privacy, safety, practical concerns, religious beliefs, any relevant considerations under civil rights and nondiscrimination authorities , the individual’s sex as reflected in official government documents, as well as the gender which a person identifies with. The proposed rule does not dictate a required basis for making determinations other than that they be consistent with an overall policy. The proposed rule continues HUD’s policy of ensuring that its programs are open to all eligible individuals and families regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity."
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201904&RIN=2506-AC53

The volunteer co-ordinators of the Cornish refuge services may wish to consider training needs and review of policies.

This rolls back an Obama executive order issued late in his second term wherein any shelter accepting federal funding had to admit TW into women-only shelters. The guidance the Obama WH issued stated that shelter operators could know a TW was a women by their “appearance, behavior, and mannerisms.” Thus codifying female stereotypes as the definition of who was a woman. I’m quite sure this was a payback for Pritzker support at important moments in his rise.

There are actually very few women-only homeless shelters in the US, and I doubt I need to tell anyone here about what homeless women experience at the hands of males. There is likely not a demographic more victimized anywhere in the US.

I rather think the Women's & Equalities Select Committee is going to experience some embarrassment about accepting "Diana James" as a witness to its endeavour to explore the use of the Equality Act 2010 and its exceptions for single-sex spaces and services.

"Diana" complaining about not being able to access certain sex related sites on his train journey to the Select Committee meeting?

Surely, gaslighting a committee of women MPs involves some kind of formal repercussion?

There are actually very few women-only homeless shelters in the US, and I doubt I need to tell anyone here about what homeless women experience at the hands of males. There is likely not a demographic more victimized anywhere in the US.

Women in a US homeless project started legal action last year after being forced to shower with a male transperson who allegedly sexually harrassed them there:

abc30.com/homeless-women-harassed-in-shower-lawsuit-says/3514544/

Surely, gaslighting a committee of women MPs involves some kind of formal repercussion?
The fact that it was a website for women is a thought-stopper for Maria Miller.

Who the f tells vulnerable women to show with strangers even if they are all the same sex? Who does that help?

James said it wasn't uncommon for women in their refuge to fall out and said something about women arguing who has had the worst abuse.

This statement is one among many things that James said that didn't ring true to me. I've worked in refuges for 25 years and, while women have massive arguments about cleaning, disciplining children etc., I have never, ever heard women arguing about who's abuse was worse. On the contrary, women have told me things like "I shouldn't be here...others have gone through much worse than me".

I think I can see why James was picked for this gig though - opposite end of the spectrum to Karen IS with the jelly-belly umbrella org representative sitting between them. WAFE seriously need to step up and pick their side...

Also, if WAFE are having problems working out what a woman is, their membership will be reduced by one when our renewal invoice comes in. It's fucking ridiculous that a supposed women's organisation can't bring themselves to say "adult human female" and commit to their remit of supporting service provision by and for.

Karen was magnificent - no less than I'd expect. Me, yelling at my laptop followed by Karen making the very same point. So measured, so reasonable, fully engaged with the process - and with respect. Jess Phillips' admiration for her was evident and Sarah Champion surprised me somewhat.

Fuck knows what they're going to do with this but, as a woman working on the coalface, I'm going to write to Maria Miller.